e92 M3 vs Gt350

[Billj747]

On a road course, the GT350 (non-R) is faster than a F8X M4 and will blow the doors off an E92 M3.

[baege]

[
I don't agree that the E92 M3 is a dated car, I think its still one of the best looking cars on the road today. Its clean, simple and more compact. The S550 Mustang is a big car, to much for my liking. That being said I love the GT350, and would consider one. Just not with a 10k+ADM attached to it.[/QUOTE]


I too prefer the look and dimensions of the e92 m3...still think it looks beautiful. It is a cleaner look than a gt350 which is a little boy racer...

the s65's lack of low end torque is what makes me wonder about it since that is one of the things that I find missing in my 981CS....

[Jive]

[u2b]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GbbNlkP-ZSM[/u2b]

Was watching Motor Trend's overview of the 350R. They go in-depth with the motor and the crankshaft and apparently it weighs in at 50 pounds. I don't know the weight of the OEM S65 crank, but I've seen numbers of stroker cranks weighing in at ~40 lbs?

While I will admit the car sounds lovely due to the flat plane crank, seems to me like they shoved a flat plane in the car 'because why not' rather than building the car around the engine (I know with limited resources and capital, this doesn't make business sense). Based on the video, the flat plane crank created issues and resulted in it being heavier than usual because of intake limitations, which resulted in a wonky firing order, and thus they had to reinforce the crank. Kinda defeats the purpose, no?

[HadesM3]

The GT350 is fairly impressive on the race track too.

According to Car and Driver, a gt350r lapped VIR in 2:51.8 versus 3.05.4 in an e92 m3, which is an eternity. Albeit it was the R version, but I doubt a standard 350 would be that far behind. Bottom line, a gt350 will destroy an m3 around a track.

However, the gt350 is $20k over my budget and overall I still prefer the e90m as my daily driver.

[swanlake]

My dad has a gt350 which I've spent quite a bit of time behind the wheel of. The two cars feel similarly capable to me, although my e92 is roughly 30whp over stock and DCT with 275/305 hankook ventus compared to 295/305 michelins. In a drag race they ended up being exactly tied when we did it a couple of times. The GT350 feels more electronic in every way, from the steering feel to the magnetic ride and all of the info available on the cluster. My biggest complaint with the GT350 is the (by comparison) lack luster throttle response. It literally feels like turbo lag every time you put your foot down (hesitates... hesitates... and then it surges on. On the street, the GT350 is a very comfortable car and the magnetic ride soaks up bumps amazingly well. They're really just two different approaches to achieving the same goal.

[dparm]

Originally Posted by Boo_went_blu

My dad has a gt350 which I've spent quite a bit of time behind the wheel of. The two cars feel similarly capable to me, although my e92 is roughly 30whp over stock and DCT with 275/305 hankook ventus compared to 295/305 michelins. In a drag race they ended up being exactly tied when we did it a couple of times. The GT350 feels more electronic in every way, from the steering feel to the magnetic ride and all of the info available on the cluster. My biggest complaint with the GT350 is the (by comparison) lack luster throttle response. It literally feels like turbo lag every time you put your foot down (hesitates... hesitates... and then it surges on. On the street, the GT350 is a very comfortable car and the magnetic ride soaks up bumps amazingly well. They're really just two different approaches to achieving the same goal.

Have you had both out on the track? I had always suspected that the cars would feel fairly similar on the street where you can't really extract their full performance.

[swanlake]

Originally Posted by dparm

Have you had both out on the track? I had always suspected that the cars would feel fairly similar on the street where you can't really extract their full performance.

I haven't had them both on track, however I've taken the GT350 up Angeles Crest at speed and I had it go into limp mode after 15 minutes which was pretty disappointing. Later learned that the tech pack equipped cars don't have the necessary cooling equipment. The brakes are quite a bit better than the M3s, as they should be, they're 6/4 pot brembos compared to 1pot front and rear

[philmeister4]

Can't add too much more perspective here as some good analysis has already been provided. My father has one, and is a former E63 M6 owner. He loves it and I too. It's a special car for many reasons and looks great. It is still a Mustang, no matter how unique of a car it is. That gets under some guys' egos. My guess is that if you're considering an 4-8 year old car as the alternative, you might not care that more simple minded folk will only see "Mustang". I think it's the coolest car south of $200k.

Performance wise, he beats me but not by as much as he should with the engine performance it has. It's a blast to drive and I've come to discover that the emotional connection you have with a car is the most important. I used to chase Car and Driver's instrumented tests and comparisons winners (helps that the E9x is a poster child of its day) but, anymore, I care more about how the car makes me feel each time I drive it; I don't care if new cars blow my 0-60 out of the water or anything else bc I have a wall to wall smile and feel like Tom Cruise each and every time I drive mine or my dad's cars.

[anerbe]

Curious if you get an e9x with a bbk, upgraded suspension and fat high tech rubber how it would fare against the gt350 stock (in reality updating the m3 suspension and brake parts to be on same level as gt350). Considering the GT350 is 300 lbs heavier, could be interesting.

[dparm]

Originally Posted by anerbe

Curious if you get an e9x with a bbk, upgraded suspension and fat high tech rubber how it would fare against the gt350 stock (in reality updating the m3 suspension and brake parts to be on same level as gt350). Considering the GT350 is 300 lbs heavier, could be interesting.

The GT350 is 3760lbs, per Ford's website. The M3 coupe is 3650lbs, per the BMW Media Information documentation. These are obviously not exact, but the point is that it's not a 300-pound difference.

[Dave07997S]

This has been my question from the get go. The amount of rubber the GT350 has vs. an OEM M3 is an enormous edge to the GT350. Equip a E9X M3 with 275/295 rubber and a set of better brakes would go a long way to making up any deficit.

[anerbe]

Originally Posted by dparm

The GT350 is 3760lbs, per Ford's website. The M3 coupe is 3650lbs, per the BMW Media Information documentation. These are obviously not exact, but the point is that it's not a 300-pound difference.

Yeah, I've seen some conflicting information for the M3, anywhere between 3450 - 3650. I don't know what conditions are used in curb weight calculations for each vehicle (% gas, passengers, load, etc..), and I've seen some posts showing.

http://www.mustang6g.com/?p=7857
3798 with full fluids and no trunk stuff (which would probably add 20-50 lbs depending on what was taken out).

Maybe in worse case the difference could get close to 300 (zero option carbon roof E92 MT), but fully optioned will probably float closer to 100-150 lbs, either way can be considered considerable.

[dparm]

Originally Posted by anerbe

Yeah, I've seen some conflicting information for the M3, anywhere between 3450 - 3650. I don't know what conditions are used in curb weight calculations for each vehicle (% gas, passengers, load, etc..), and I've seen some posts showing.

http://www.mustang6g.com/?p=7857
3798 with full fluids and no trunk stuff (which would probably add 20-50 lbs depending on what was taken out).

Maybe in worse case the difference could get close to 300 (zero option carbon roof E92 MT), but fully options will probably float closer to 100-150 lbs, either way can be considered considerable.

The M3 figure I referenced is "weight, unladen". The definition for that is:

The unladen weight of any vehicle is the weight of the vehicle when it's not carrying any passengers, goods or other items. It includes the body and all parts normally used with the vehicle or trailer when it's used on a road.


Regardless, it's not 300 pounds.

[macdude357]

Originally Posted by anerbe

Curious if you get an e9x with a bbk, upgraded suspension and fat high tech rubber how it would fare against the gt350 stock (in reality updating the m3 suspension and brake parts to be on same level as gt350). Considering the GT350 is 300 lbs heavier, could be interesting.

I think you can get close. The GT350R did a 1:36.11 at Laguna Seca with a pro driver in the MT Best Drivers car competition. Not sure how much faster the R is than the non-R, but I've seen E9x M3's with BBK, 275 square tires, and maybe a tune hitting the low to mid 1:40's with a weekend warrior behind the wheel. If the pro driver + R is worth maybe 4-5 seconds I think you'd be very close indeed.

[dparm]

Originally Posted by anerbe

Curious if you get an e9x with a bbk, upgraded suspension and fat high tech rubber how it would fare against the gt350 stock (in reality updating the m3 suspension and brake parts to be on same level as gt350). Considering the GT350 is 300 lbs heavier, could be interesting.

I have tracked against GT350s. They are faster on the straights, but with a sticky tire (AD08R in 255/275) and an entry-level StopTech BBK, I could easily hang with them in the braking zones and corners. It's not a true apples-to-apples comparison since it's two different drivers with different skill levels, but judging by their racing line and braking points, I'd say we were fairly close.

My takeaway, after chatting with one of the GT350 drivers that day, was that in a stock-versus-stock situation with the same driver, the GT350 will beat an M3 on the track. It is faster in a straight line, has better braking endurance, and more overall grip. To answer your question, it seems like an M3 with some very mild upgrades (tires & brakes) makes a massive leap in capabilities. There's a reason you see so many M3s at the track.

[scoale]

Originally Posted by dparm

I have tracked against GT350s. They are faster on the straights, but with a sticky tire (AD08R in 255/275) and an entry-level StopTech BBK, I could easily hang with them in the braking zones and corners. It's not a true apples-to-apples comparison since it's two different drivers with different skill levels, but judging by their racing line and braking points, I'd say we were fairly close.

My takeaway, after chatting with one of the GT350 drivers that day, was that in a stock-versus-stock situation with the same driver, the GT350 will beat an M3 on the track. It is faster in a straight line, has better braking endurance, and more overall grip. To answer your question, it seems like an M3 with some very mild upgrades (tires & brakes) makes a massive leap in capabilities. There's a reason you see so many M3s at the track.

Wonder why car didn't come from factory with mild upgrades allowing for massive leap in capability?

[dparm]

Originally Posted by scoale

Wonder why car didn't come from factory with mild upgrades allowing for massive leap in capability?

A valid question, but it probably had to do with keeping the car practical for street use and ensuring costs were in-line with what they knew people would pay. Yes, it's a performance-oriented car, but it's still a BMW (read: luxury car) so it needed to work for street use...which is what 99.9% of all M3 mileage is. The Mustang is a sports car so people are willing to compromise on certain things for that extra little bit of acceleration/handling/braking/etc.

[ilikebmxbikes]

Originally Posted by macdude357

I think you can get close. The GT350R did a 1:36.11 at Laguna Seca with a pro driver in the MT Best Drivers car competition. Not sure how much faster the R is than the non-R, but I've seen E9x M3's with BBK, 275 square tires, and maybe a tune hitting the low to mid 1:40's with a weekend warrior behind the wheel. If the pro driver + R is worth maybe 4-5 seconds I think you'd be very close indeed.

Randy Probst lapped laguna in 1:42.9 with an e92 and 1:36.11 with the GT350R. That is a huge gap in stock form.

The GT350 is a quicker car than an e9x on the track and is an insane deal in todays market. I am obviously a e9x fan but I cannot deny how good the gt350 is. Ford really got it right with this car and in certain spiritual regards it is more of a successor to the e9x than the new m4.

[macdude357]

Originally Posted by ilikebmxbikes

Randy Probst lapped laguna in 1:42.9 with an e92 and 1:36.11 with the GT350R. That is a huge gap in stock form.

The GT350 is a quicker car than an e9x on the track and is an insane deal in todays market. I am obviously a e9x fan but I cannot deny how good the gt350 is. Ford really got it right with this car and in certain spiritual regards it is more of a successor to the e9x than the new m4.

I agree that the GT350 is a great value and stock vs. stock is much quicker than the M3, I'd consider owning one in the future.

But I was responding to the question as to how close to a stock GT350 you could get with some mods to an M3. If you put on Sport Cup 2's on lighter 18" wheels, a decent set of coilovers, a tune/pulleys and upgraded brakes, I think that would mostly make up the 7 second difference between the two times. And that's an "R". I'd bet the R is at least 2 seconds faster than the non-R owning to the Sport Cup 2 tires, carbon fiber wheels and added aero. So there's probably only about 5 seconds difference between the non-R and M3.

[ilikebmxbikes]

Originally Posted by macdude357

I agree that the GT350 is a great value and stock vs. stock is much quicker than the M3, I'd consider owning one in the future.

But I was responding to the question as to how close to a stock GT350 you could get with some mods to an M3. If you put on Sport Cup 2's on lighter 18" wheels, a decent set of coilovers, a tune/pulleys and upgraded brakes, I think that would mostly make up the 7 second difference between the two times. And that's an "R". I'd bet the R is at least 2 seconds faster than the non-R owning to the Sport Cup 2 tires, carbon fiber wheels and added aero. So there's probably only about 5 seconds difference between the non-R and M3.

7 seconds on laguna seca is a huge gap. Those mods will not cut 7 or 5 seconds. 7 second gap is a larger gap than a Mclaren P1 and the Mustang GT350R. A 991 GT3 RS is only 3 seconds quicker than the mustang gt350R.

http://fastestlaps.com/tracks/laguna-seca-post-1988

[macdude357]

Originally Posted by ilikebmxbikes

7 seconds on laguna seca is a huge gap. Those mods will not cut 7 or 5 seconds. 7 second gap is a larger gap than a Mclaren P1 and the Mustang GT350R. A 991 GT3 RS is only 3 seconds quicker than the mustang gt350R.

http://fastestlaps.com/tracks/laguna-seca-post-1988

Found this:

http://speedventures.com/results/Def...id=-2146450800

Not sure what mods he's running but he lists the tires as Street and HP at 430 so I assume it's just FBO and not stroked or supercharged. I'm also assuming he pretty much has every other mod possible (BBK, Coils, Aero, etc.) It would be interesting to find out though. Since its the SV Cup (which I think is the old name for the BimmerChallenge), he's probably not a Pro either.

[ilikebmxbikes]

Originally Posted by macdude357

I agree that the GT350 is a great value and stock vs. stock is much quicker than the M3, I'd consider owning one in the future.

But I was responding to the question as to how close to a stock GT350 you could get with some mods to an M3. If you put on Sport Cup 2's on lighter 18" wheels, a decent set of coilovers, a tune/pulleys and upgraded brakes, I think that would mostly make up the 7 second difference between the two times. And that's an "R". I'd bet the R is at least 2 seconds faster than the non-R owning to the Sport Cup 2 tires, carbon fiber wheels and added aero. So there's probably only about 5 seconds difference between the non-R and M3.

Originally Posted by macdude357

Found this:

http://speedventures.com/results/Def...id=-2146450800

Not sure what mods he's running but he lists the tires as Street and HP at 430 so I assume it's just FBO and not stroked or supercharged. I'm also assuming he pretty much has every other mod possible (BBK, Coils, Aero, etc.) It would be interesting to find out though. Since its the SV Cup (which I think is the old name for the BimmerChallenge), he's probably not a Pro either.

Ralph Warren pilots a stripped race car with full aero. His e92 times are not really applicable but if they are, he only furthers my point if a stock gt350r runs the same time.