C63 vs e90M3 vs IS-F: Motivemagazine comparison

[808MGuy]

Originally Posted by hks786

M3: very bulky looking rear and ugly lights. the facelift should make it look a lot better in real-life

C63: very lazy rear lights, bumper and quads are cool though.

IS-F: nice lip spoiler, but needs more interesting bumper and needs to lose those ugly quads!

Overall, it terms of design it would be between the C63 and M3. C63 has the better interior but I'm not sure which looks best from the outside. I havent seen the C63 yet to make a comparison, that's why I'm leaning towards the M.

I found the exact opposite regarding the interiors of the M3 and C63. I didn't like the overall layout of the C63 and the styling is rather bland. The M3 interior is much more functional and while the styling doesn't exactly get people excited, it's still a lot better than the C63.

[Krueger///M3]

Originally Posted by Keto

Wow, the first review I've read that claims the C63 is the most "comfortable" -- general consensus from other reviews is that the C63 is harsh compared to the M3.

As for the best first try, clearly the IS-F loses to the E30 M3 in that regard.

I totally agree that the E30 is better, but for this segment, Lexus still did good with their first try jumping in with the BMW, Merc, and Audi competition. So maybe not the "best" but for this generation they did pretty good.

[M3WC]

Originally Posted by PowerLex

Kind of sad if you ask me.

No your just not an enthusiast.

What is sad is how far behind the IS-F is on a 2.74 mile course. 4.4 seconds a lap slower than the M3 sedan.

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/.../photo_16.html

IS-F was so over-hyped. It keeps racking up the last place finishes in the comparos.

[footie]

How much slower was the IS-F compared to the C63?..............Yeah that's right, a whole 0.6s. The IS-F isn't a bad first attempt, in most cases it all but matches the Mercedes, the simple fact is that the M3 on a track at least is in a different class, it can enter, go through and leave any corner quicker than either of them.

But there is much more than purely figures that makes someone chose the M3 over any of the others (well intelligent people in any case), in many of the reviews including the ones carried out in the UK, the IS-F has shown itself to fair very well, it might not be the last word in chassis finesse but at 7/10th it's every bit the match of the mighty M and it's the match of the C63...period.

It's a good car, it's only the M3 is a bit better.

[PowerLex]

Originally Posted by JetBlack5OC

No your just not an enthusiast.

What is sad is how far behind the IS-F is on a 2.74 mile course. 4.4 seconds a lap slower than the M3 sedan.

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/.../photo_16.html

IS-F was so over-hyped. It keeps racking up the last place finishes in the comparos.

Man, I wish I would've read that article before I bought my car. That changes everything now. My life is ruined

I don't think the car was overhyped at all. I just didn't feel like spending the extra $$ for an LSD and the name. If anything was overhyped it has been the M3.

I may not be your definition of an "enthusiast" but I bet 99% of M3 owners aren't either and aren't buying it b/c it went around a track faster. In fact most won't ever even see a track. So quit hiding behind magazine articles.

[TH3DAN]

Originally Posted by PowerLex

Man, I wish I would've read that article before I bought my car. That changes everything now. My life is ruined

I don't think the car was overhyped at all. I just didn't feel like spending the extra $$ for an LSD and the name. If anything was overhyped it has been the M3.

I may not be your definition of an "enthusiast" but I bet 99% of M3 owners aren't either and aren't buying it b/c it went around a track faster. In fact most won't ever even see a track. So quit hiding behind magazine articles.

Actually, I bought the M3 (my first ever BMW) after pulling my deposit on the IS-F exactly b/c of the track differences. I'm not going to track it 20 times a year, but IMHO, only the track shows the overall balance, braking, and accel in a car. Other tests can only look at a single function (i.e. 1/4 mile, stopping, lane change, skidpad). I wanted a 4 door car that functioned more like a sports car, and less like a GT, or touring car.

I think the ISF is an excellent car, but I was looking for something more nimble. IMHO, the biggest difference btwn the performance of the cars is the bimmer's ability to handle in another class of vehicles (as exemplified by about 20 or so mag comparo's so far). I agree with a number of people here, in that only drivers who car about that are going to truly enjoy their M3 more than a Lex or the C63.

Just my $.02

[Keto]

Originally Posted by PowerLex

I may not be your definition of an "enthusiast" but I bet 99% of M3 owners aren't either and aren't buying it b/c it went around a track faster. In fact most won't ever even see a track. So quit hiding behind magazine articles.

Most drivers of all 3 cars will never need anything more than a 328, IS250 or Cwhateverthebasemodelis for the driving that they do. This is a useless argument for actually comparing the 3 cars. Your car came in last, live with it. Clearly there are other characteristics (price, make, ???) that are more important to you, and that's fine. Quit trying to justify your decision by calling M3 drivers posers.

[addy85]

Originally Posted by PowerLex

Man, I wish I would've read that article before I bought my car. That changes everything now. My life is ruined

I don't think the car was overhyped at all. I just didn't feel like spending the extra $$ for an LSD and the name. If anything was overhyped it has been the M3.

I may not be your definition of an "enthusiast" but I bet 99% of M3 owners aren't either and aren't buying it b/c it went around a track faster. In fact most won't ever even see a track. So quit hiding behind magazine articles.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA The M3 was overhyped? BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA You sir obviously have never drove one


SKIT at an AA meeting:
Hi, my name is PowerLex and I drive a really expensive Toyota.....



edit, no offense to anyone who attends AA meetings

[PowerLex]

Originally Posted by TH3DAN

Actually, I bought the M3 (my first ever BMW) after pulling my deposit on the IS-F exactly b/c of the track differences. I'm not going to track it 20 times a year, but IMHO, only the track shows the overall balance, braking, and accel in a car. Other tests can only look at a single function (i.e. 1/4 mile, stopping, lane change, skidpad). I wanted a 4 door car that functioned more like a sports car, and less like a GT, or touring car.

I think the ISF is an excellent car, but I was looking for something more nimble. IMHO, the biggest difference btwn the performance of the cars is the bimmer's ability to handle in another class of vehicles (as exemplified by about 20 or so mag comparo's so far). I agree with a number of people here, in that only drivers who car about that are going to truly enjoy their M3 more than a Lex or the C63.

Just my $.02

I agree completely, the M3 is your car if you are looking for the true elite performance. Hands down. I just don't really buy into magazine reviews and such.

[PowerLex]

Originally Posted by addy85

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA The M3 was overhyped? BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA You sir obviously have never drove one


SKIT at an AA meeting:
Hi, my name is PowerLex and I drive a really expensive Toyota.....



edit, no offense to anyone who attends AA meetings

I've driven plenty of new M3's. You sure have a lot of input on the M3 for someone who drives a 335i. Why so defensive??