Many Tried. They all Failed

[rjd598]

Originally Posted by SnakeKiller

please we don't have to take everything top gear says as the word of god.
Top gear is not a great source of performance information.

true one tv show cant be the final say in everything BUT everyother comparison has been won by the m3. its not just top gear that puts the m3 ahead.

[SnakeKiller]

Originally Posted by Crazy Bimmer

Do you have a source of the Boss 302 beating the M3 on the first try? I surely hope you arent talking about the program that was on Speed Channel that was obviously made as a commercial for the Boss 302 as well.

With that said, im sure the Boss 302 is a better performer but i just want to see a review outside of that speed channel program that aired.

theirs no need to the Boss 302 program was developed by the same people that developed the GT500FR and 302R, cars that have dominated their respective racing competitions. The M3 performance isn't untouchable, lets get something clear here, were talking about performance not "Feel" something the M3 is perfect at.

[SnakeKiller]

Originally Posted by rjd598

true one tv show cant be the final say in everything BUT everyother comparison has been won by the m3. its not just top gear that puts the m3 ahead.

i'm not saying the M3 isn't the best car out there, i was responding to the opening statement. which labeled the GT500 as a car that tried to be the M3 which its not true.

[saeedg48]

Originally Posted by Kyoshi71

What---on---Earth---are---you---talking---about?

Sex Gods?
Ugly high school girls?
Hatters?

Turn off the computer and have a cup of Ritalin

you must be an audi driver..sigh

[Templar]

Originally Posted by SnakeKiller

theirs no need to the Boss 302 program was developed by the same people that developed the GT500FR and 302R, cars that have dominated their respective racing competitions. The M3 performance isn't untouchable, lets get something clear here, were talking about performance not "Feel" something the M3 is perfect at.

In other words, no, he does not have a source for it...

[e92_m3]

Originally Posted by saeedg48

Many tried to be as superior as the M3. Much like an ugly high school girl who tries to copy the sex God.

Mercedes C63, Audi RS4 & RS5, Mustang GT500, soo on <- They all failed [add to my list]

call me a hatter but.... M3 <3

I'm with you bro, but I think you mean hater. The 2011 mustang GT came close to beating the M3 on the track, but interior wise the M3 is superior.

Hatter = Guy in Alice in wonderland.

[jonasaurus]

Originally Posted by SnakeKiller

please we don't have to take everything top gear says as the word of god.
Top gear is not a great source of performance information.

It is entertaining though and typically a good laugh. In the real world possibly both wouldn't be all that far apart to notice significantly but on a track there may well be an advantage to the M3...

[GnokGnik]

what surprised me was the normal M3 being significantly faster than the Comp. package M3. Wet track/New Stig?

[TysonRa]

I laughed so much when he said that statement with Call of Duty.

Really nice and true comparison

[spearfisher]

I want my click back

[bogdan]

Originally Posted by GnokGnik

what surprised me was the normal M3 being significantly faster than the Comp. package M3. Wet track/New Stig?

Less new Stig, more wet track conditions. Had that lap been repeated in dry condtions, I'm sure the time would have been equal to or slightly faster than the E90 M3 that turned a 1.25.xx

Originally Posted by snakekiller

theirs no need to the Boss 302 program was developed by the same people that developed the GT500FR and 302R, cars that have dominated their respective racing competitions. The M3 performance isn't untouchable, lets get something clear here, were talking about performance not "Feel" something the M3 is perfect at.

Would you like to address the fact that the Boss 302 was tested at Laguna with semi-slick (dot-R) tires versus an M3 with regular street tires?

Regardless, Ford did a fantastic job with the Boss 302!

If we're talking "feel," I would argue that anything in the 911/Boxter/Cayman lineup is way more communicative than the M3.

[SnakeKiller]

Originally Posted by bogdan

Less new Stig, more wet track conditions. Had that lap been repeated in dry condtions, I'm sure the time would have been equal to or slightly faster than the E90 M3 that turned a 1.25.xx



Would you like to address the fact that the Boss 302 was tested at Laguna with semi-slick (dot-R) tires versus an M3 with regular street tires?

Regardless, Ford did a fantastic job with the Boss 302!

If we're talking "feel," I would argue that anything in the 911/Boxter/Cayman lineup is way more communicative than the M3.

Both 302 models were tested in Laguna Seca, the LS has the R tires and is considerable faster than the M3.
MT tested the Regular 302 in Laguna Seca and found some great numbers 1.40.2 lap time, the LS was reported to do it in 1.40

agreed "Feel" should't be used as a primary argument in performance.

[theriz]

Originally Posted by Kiemyster

yeah the only problem I have with that statement he made was that Call Of Duty is really a amateur game when compared to Battlefield.

are you high? u must not have live....
COD is 10x harder.