M3 to Z06

[amerlemans]

Originally Posted by muskamatt

Lets be honest, the M3 has trouble keeping up with a c5 z06.

Negative. A C5 Z06 is slower than an E92 M3.

http://fastestlaps.com/comparisons/b...te_c5_z06.html

[swanson]

Originally Posted by amerlemans

Negative. A C5 Z06 is slower than an E92 M3.

http://fastestlaps.com/comparisons/b...te_c5_z06.html

The C5 Z will destroy the M3

[amerlemans]

QUOTE=swanson;13521038]

The C5 Z will destroy the M3[/QUOTE]

If you got a stock C5Z06, bring it. You wouldn't be the first one I've beat in my stock E92 DCT M3.

You are smoking the good stuff if you think a C5 Z06 will destroy an E92 M3.

[swanson]

[amerlemans]

I agree......the C5 is

[krnnerdboy]

I agree that the c5z would destroy an m3 on track, straights, and under the sheets but that's in the hands of a good driver, otherwise the c5z is much harder to drive to the limits then the m3, which is what makes the m3 so appealing. And your statement about beating c5z has too many variables. I've passed many c6z's and a 458 in my z4m. Certainly doesn't mean the z4m is quicker than those stated cars.

[1MOREMOD]

Originally Posted by krnnerdboy

I agree that the c5z would destroy an m3 on track, straights, and under the sheets but that's in the hands of a good driver, otherwise the c5z is much harder to drive to the limits then the m3, which is what makes the m3 so appealing. And your statement about beating c5z has too many variables. I've passed many c6z's and a 458 in my z4m. Certainly doesn't mean the z4m is quicker than those stated cars.

Correct. A standard c5 with tires and brakes well driven is a match for the m3.

[amerlemans]

Originally Posted by krnnerdboy

I agree that the c5z would destroy an m3 on track, straights, and under the sheets but that's in the hands of a good driver, otherwise the c5z is much harder to drive to the limits then the m3, which is what makes the m3 so appealing. And your statement about beating c5z has too many variables. I've passed many c6z's and a 458 in my z4m. Certainly doesn't mean the z4m is quicker than those stated cars.

You are dead wrong on your times. Go look at any track times (Willow, Road Atlanta et al) and the two cars are either within 0.5 second of each other (save for the 'Ring where the DCT M3 has never been tested) or the M3 wins. From 0-150 the M3 kicks the C5Z06's ass by getting there 3 seconds faster (24.6 vs 27.6). The C5Z06 is 12.6 in the quarter and the M3 DCT is 12.4.

Lastly..........the c5z is one butt ugly ass car

Now where is your proof that a c5Z "DESTROYS" an E92 M3?

[swanson]

Originally Posted by amerlemans

You are dead wrong on your times. Go look at any track times (Willow, Road Atlanta et al) and the two cars are either within 0.5 second of each other (save for the 'Ring where the DCT M3 has never been tested) or the M3 wins. From 0-150 the M3 kicks the C5Z06's ass by getting there 3 seconds faster (24.6 vs 27.6). The C5Z06 is 12.6 in the quarter and the M3 DCT is 12.4.

Lastly..........the c5z is one butt ugly ass car

Now where is your proof that a c5Z "DESTROYS" an E92 M3?

Please GTFO. You obviously dont understand whats going on. The M3 with either tranny is no match for the C5Z on the street or track. The C5z can run much better then your posted 12.6. I'd like to see the M3 run 12.4. And dont go quoting C&D, Motortrend or anyone else. Trap speeds alone favor the C5Z. Please, scram

[w00tw00t]

I love internet forum racing ... who cares guys.. get what is fun for you.. we're not winning any prizes at the track for the .5 second... for me, my m3 is the best fun i've ever had .. at the track.. and on the street..

[amerlemans]

Originally Posted by swanson

Please GTFO. You obviously dont understand whats going on. The M3 with either tranny is no match for the C5Z on the street or track. The C5z can run much better then your posted 12.6. I'd like to see the M3 run 12.4. And dont go quoting C&D, Motortrend or anyone else. Trap speeds alone favor the C5Z. Please, scram

You just can't handle the truth. I've run my buddy's c5Z06 tons of times. It's 100% stock and it loses by 1.5 car lenghts every time we run. He gets it to hook and we are pretty even to 60 (he may be a foot or two ahead) at 100, he is behind by over a car length. The higher we go towards 150, the smaller he gets. And no, there ain't a damn thing wrong with his car.

Speaking of GTFO -- go look at your post history. Your sole purpose for being here is carry Corvette's water. Pssst, you're on an M3 forum dummy. You don't offer jack sh!t. For Christsake all you get done doing is giving this stupid fcuking sign after anyone that posts a positive comment about that plastic fantastic that you adore. I'm not a Vette hater (save for the piss poor build quality). I've owned a C6Z06 and C6 Grand Sport. They are great performing cars (the C6 versions). The C5Z06 IS NOT a faster car than the M3.

I'm done with you on this.....take your ass over to Corvette Forum with your nonsense.

[krnnerdboy]

Ok, if we must mag race...

Ringtimes
E92 m3 8:05
C5 z06 7:56
M3 gts dct 7:48

It took 300 less pounds, 6 piston brakes, Corsa r comps, aero, chassis stiffening, fully adjustable suspension, 0.4l displacement bump, and the magical m-dct tranny to cover 17 seconds on the nurburgrung. And how much of the time saved would you like to credit to the m-dct? Then again, if you haven't been on track don't answer that....

[amerlemans]

http://fastestlaps.com/comparisons/b...te_c5_z06.html

On top of my empiricle evidence, read it and weep. The M3 is NOT the DCT and the c5Z06 is a 2003.

[krnnerdboy]

Apparently I was wrong to say that the c5z would destroy the m3 in every performance category. Ill reword and say that it has the edge. Btw cd has clocked a 0-150 in 24.1 for the 02+ c5z. And the 1:30 streets of willow time had bad tires by there own admission.

However once you start even entry level mods(tires, brakes, intake) the c5z will destroy mod for mod m3's

But who cares since the op is not looking at getting a c5z

[Mookster]

Originally Posted by konaforever

If he has DCT, could be driver error to his buddies manual vette.

OF course he has a DCT cuz he cant drive manual!

Manual C5Z06 is faster than DCT E92, if his buddy cant drive...we cant account for that

[1MOREMOD]

I feel I would be faster around the track in a dct but also know I am faster than others who have dct. If I had to do over I still don't think I would switch trannys.

[LarThaL]

Originally Posted by 1SICKM

Don't waste your money on a ZO6??? I dont understand that comment at all. Sure go ahead and spend 120k on a ZR1 or 90k on used one. You can buy a Z06 for 45k-50k used and put 10k into it and it will rape a ZR1 all day long!

So why spend $75k on an M3 when for $15k you can buy a Honda Civic, put $15k worth of mods into it, and it will rape an M3 all day long?

[krnnerdboy]

Originally Posted by LarThaL

So why spend $75k on an M3 when for $15k you can buy a Honda Civic, put $15k worth of mods into it, and it will rape an M3 all day long?

Not the same concept, the z06 vs zr1 is comparable to boss 302 vs gt500. Not like the 335 vs m3. More like m3 vs m3 gts, which apparently is a joke :/

[KKM3]

Originally Posted by gthal

The competition package and DCT would not combine to take 10 seconds off the 'Ring time. I'm not saying which car is faster (I don't know) but the DCT car will be faster than a 6MT but no where near 10 seconds faster... maybe with a novice driver but not with someone who is very experienced. Also, I believe that the M3 time quoted was on Pilot Sport Cup tires which means on OEM tires, the car would have been slower... I need to check that fact.... anyway, I digress.

Anyway, I owned both a 6MT and a DCT M3 and I was faster in the DCT but not dramatically faster. The DCT will make an inexperienced driver much faster but an experienced track driver just a bit faster.

The C5Z06 might be comparable to an E92 M3 but it is also a REALLY old platform and car. Two generations old at this point... it is E46 vintage!! The C6Z06 would literally wipe the mat with an M3 and even it is now a generation old. The C7Z06, when it comes out, will be in a whole different league than even the M4 IMO. Remember, the Corvettes are MUCH lighter cars and more purpose built and will be a better track car than the M3 which, by default, is a compromise car (albeit an amazing compromise) given its daily driver status for most and everything that comes with that (sound proofing, gadgets, softer suspension, weight, etc).

Doesnt matter if the c5z is older. That car was purpose built for the track. The fact that a car based off a luxury sedan can compete with a purpose built production track car is pretty amazing, considering the c5z has about about 100 more torque and weighs 700 pounds less, 2 seats, track tires...

[krnnerdboy]

Originally Posted by KKM3

Doesnt matter if the c5z is older. That car was purpose built for the track. The fact that a car based off a luxury sedan can compete with a purpose built production track car is pretty amazing, considering the c5z has about about 100 more torque and weighs 700 pounds less, 2 seats, track tires...

I will have to agree to that! But those times were also based off of 12 year old tire designs. Give it some fresh rubber and see the times fall...nonetheless pretty impressive that 500 more lbs and rear seats still keep it competitive to that chassis.

[gthal]

Originally Posted by KKM3

Doesnt matter if the c5z is older. That car was purpose built for the track. The fact that a car based off a luxury sedan can compete with a purpose built production track car is pretty amazing, considering the c5z has about about 100 more torque and weighs 700 pounds less, 2 seats, track tires...

I get your point but I do think age of the design does matter if for no reason other than context. Family sedans of today are as fast as sports cars of years past. A Lambo Countach is slow by comparison to MANY modern performance cars (not even true sports cars). I agree that the M3's ability is amazing for what it is but you can't simply discount the age of the cars. Also, the tires on the C5 would be nowhere near as good as what is available today and that does absolutely contribute to measured performance.

[nitrojunky]

Originally Posted by Mookster

Biotch, exhaust me for a second(i saw you like to post mag times in a few posts below).

Check this out
http://www.zeroto60times.com/BMW-Bim...mph-Times.html

2009 BMW M3 Sedan 0-60 mph 4.2 Quarter Mile 12.5
2011 BMW M3 Competition Package 0-60 mph 4.4
2012 BMW M3 Coupe 0-60 mph 4.4

vs

2001 Chevrolet Corvette Z06 0-60 mph 4.5 Quarter mile 12.4
2002 Chevrolet Corvette Z06 0-60 mph 4.0 Quarter mile 12.3

Thats not even comparing to 03/04 C5 Z06...i myself have seen my friend run 12.1 seconds in his 04 Z06 on stock car with stock tires.
So where do you see 1.5 CLs advantage to the M3?

the '02 C5Z will be equivalent to the 03 and 04 in a straight line. 02+ engines got a little hotter cam than did the 01's and more likely made 425hp as opposed to the claimed 405hp. the only important difference i can think of for the '04 is going to be the better shocks, which is correctable for ~400$.

as a guy whose owned a C5Z and C6Z and has some seat time in a couple e92M's, and presently owns a 335i (wife's) and 330ci DD... my two cents:

C6Z will flat out wipe the floor with an e92M from a performance perspective. any performance perspective. it's just not close at all. in a straight line, i wouldn't be able to tell if the M missed a gear or not. there is a very big difference between a mid 11 second car that traps mid 120's and a mid 12 second car that traps in the mid teens. i disagree with those who say it's very hard to drive at or near its limits; i find it very natural and balanced. power delivery is extremely predictable, the big fat power curve is very nice for non-straight-line work, and it's very neutral at its cornering limits. oversteer and understeer can be dialed in at will and once pushed past its limits, it's very easy to recover. brakes are spectacular. flip side: its limits are very high and it will bite you if you're stupid with the throttle. at any legal speed. also, ditch the runcraps. pilot super sports completely changed the personality of the car. i can actually hook it in first (through its torque peak!) on some pavement, and there's the obvious cornering prowess. with older GY runflats, i was having trouble hooking at under 80 mph on almost any pavement.

C5Z is a great sports car, but the gap will be a lot closer performance wise. regarding the drag race between an M3 and the C5Z, the achilles heel for both the C5 and C6Z's has been traction. without very good tires, decently warm temps, a person who knows the car, and grippy pavement, good luck hooking first or second. sometimes third in the C5Z (geared a lot shorter than the C6Z). this problem was mostly solved for me with pilot super sports. but the C6Z still has problems hooking when temps drop below 65F.

e92M is a phenomenally nice car. i am extremely impressed with its seats, engine sound, and the DCT transmission. i'm actually considering consolidating my 330ci and C6Z into a single e92M and will be shopping them this weekend. not sure if i'm willing to give up the outrageous performance of the C6Z tho. also not sure if i want to take such a big step down in fuel mileage. i see >=26 mpg on road trips and around 19 mpg in mixed.

wish 'vettes had the DCT and some actual seats. seriously, their fat man lazboy cush seats are a long running joke for the 'vette guys. looks like they may have finally addressed this issue with the C7's optional seats, but i'll believe it when i sit in a set. except for the seats, i don't find the C6Z interior to be all that horrible: doors close nicely, everything's laid out well, driving position is great, the shifter placement is especially good, the electric doors are pretty awesome, it has true keyless entry + ignition, and even though it's colored like what i'd expect from a 1980's fighter plane, the HUD is so functional that i rarely look down to my regular gauge cluster. but the e92M interior >> that of the C6Z. and the e92M interior vs the C5Z interior is a more extreme beating than a would be a C6Z vs a corolla around the 'ring.

perhaps if i pick up an e92M, i'll line it up with my old (now my mom's current) bolt ons C5Z and we'll see what's up. i expect the C5Z to have a slight advantage in a straight line and probably also around a road course. but not a huge advantage. if i don't pick up an e92M and decide to stick with my present mix of cars, i will likely be picking up one in a few years to replace the e46. except for the fuel mileage, i'm very impressed with them. but one parting shot: i think you guys should be comparing a C6Z with the e92M. the C5Z is a completely different price point (low 20's or even high teens) than is the e92M whereas the C6Zs are a lot closer. and so it becomes outrageous performance vs very very good performance and 'meh' interior vs. very nice interior.