|
|
12-23-2007, 04:42 PM | #1 |
Private First Class
8
Rep 132
Posts |
RS4 12.883 1/4 mile m3 13.2??
Surely the claims of BMWs 13.2 are a little gay....it must be quicker huh?
RS4 here did a 12.883 stock is it the power to just the rears = loses tracton...? |
12-23-2007, 05:01 PM | #2 |
Reincarnated
245
Rep 4,227
Posts |
BMW didn't float a 13.2s run.
__________________
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-27-2007, 12:00 AM | #6 |
Lieutenant General
609
Rep 10,407
Posts |
Nice list of performance figures here (or look for the most recently posted master list in this thread). The good thing about this list it is shows the real world variation in mag/journos testing and gives you a good idea of averages and outliers in both directions (too fast and too slow). Any reasonable competitors to the M3 can and should be added and it can be updated/modified by any memeber. Enjoy.
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-27-2007, 10:44 AM | #7 |
Captain
17
Rep 658
Posts |
The definition of reasonable competitior being any car that is slower than the M3 or more expensive but close to the M3. Cars that are the same price and destroy the M3 need not apply. Otherwise the GTR and Z06 need to be on that list.
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-27-2007, 11:29 AM | #8 |
Captain
68
Rep 706
Posts |
Agreed. 997S i believe starts just under $80k. That should be just around the Z06 price range. The GTR should be in there as well base on it's $70k msrp, but realisticly nobody is going to get it at that price, more like $80k-$85k after dealer mark up. Since the R8 is included in there even with the price of $130k, then the GTR should'nt be a problem being in there as well. Come to think of it, the regular Vette should be in there as well at "only" $46k starting msrp and the Z06's msrp starts at $71k.
Last edited by gbb357; 12-27-2007 at 12:03 PM.. |
Appreciate
0
|
12-27-2007, 01:43 PM | #9 | |
Lieutenant General
609
Rep 10,407
Posts |
Quote:
EDIT THE LIST YOURSELF! Note: Please follow the community extablished rules of providing embedded links for your sources and make only the added material in blue font. Last edited by swamp2; 12-28-2007 at 02:25 AM.. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-27-2007, 02:03 PM | #10 |
Captain
17
Rep 658
Posts |
easy swamp, I think everyone knows how the GTR and Z06 stack up. I just find it funny that despite all the edits you've done, you never thought those two should be added.
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-28-2007, 02:55 AM | #11 | |
Lieutenant General
609
Rep 10,407
Posts |
Quote:
Lastly I still challenge you to name a car in the same size and class that is about the same price or less expensive than the consensus base price of the M3 ($60k +/- $2k) that "destroys" it. The GT-R is quite close in price if you get a loaded M3 and can get the GT-R for base price, but both of those are fairly important caveats. Also the Z06 with a large below MSRP discount might be a good call as well but most paid over or at MSRP on that car, so this too is a fairly large caveat. The base Corvette is a different story. On performance it absolutely belongs on the list, on price it does as well. However, being a somewhat lower fit/finish/interior/build quality and a true 2 seat sports car it doesn't. The R8 on the same calls does not really belong either, I just think most M3 shoppers would consider and R8 and vice versa long before a Corvette, just my reasonably educated guess/speculative opinion. Either way you see these things post up as many cars and specs as you like and thanks in advance for contributing. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-28-2007, 05:12 AM | #12 |
Major General
1072
Rep 8,008
Posts
Drives: i4M50
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: No where fast
|
Totally agree with swamp, if you have chosen an M3 then you have clearly turned your back on wanting home grown muscle like the Corvette etc. I are wanting something either European or Japanese and to me the only cars I see as a true competitor are the IS-F, C63, RS4 and the GTR as all of these have decent boots, four seats and aren't American.
I do disagree on the tight price bracket swamp has placed either side of the M3 (+ or - $2K), that is very tight and would exclude the RS4 which everyone knows is the M3's closer rival and competitor in this sector along with the C63, I think + or - $10k would be more realistic. |
Appreciate
0
|
12-28-2007, 09:00 AM | #13 |
Captain
68
Rep 706
Posts |
That price bracket is very tight and that's if the M3 is priced at $60k. Which also means the S5 does not belong there. The only car around that price range that could destroy it is the C63, but only in a straight line. And that's also if the C63 is priced around $62k, i have a feeling the C63 will be a lot higher than that, probably close to $70k. The regular Vette like Swamp had mentioned is definitely right there with the M3 if not better, but again it's not really apples to apples in terms of type of car and quality and of course the huge $16k price difference.
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-28-2007, 12:36 PM | #14 | ||
Captain
17
Rep 658
Posts |
Quote:
actually swamp I said the list consited of cars that 1)the M3 beat or 2) if the M3 had lost to, were more expensive. Quote:
With that (definitely speculative) point in mind, I think its only fair to compare an M3 and GTR with similar equipment. That means the M3 should have DCT and nav, plus upgraded stereo and leather. With the base of 62, I think those options could put the M3 OTD price beyond the GT-R. Sure they would probably consider the R8 before the vette, but a small percentage of the M3's potential buyers could actually afford the R8. |
||
Appreciate
0
|
12-28-2007, 07:01 PM | #15 | |
Colonel
755
Rep 2,736
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-28-2007, 07:22 PM | #16 |
Major General
374
Rep 8,033
Posts |
I say go easy on Swamp here. He does deserve credit for taking the time--together with other members--to maintain the list. I don't think people have been intentionally leaving cars out although the list is certainly made up of cars that people on this forum "see" as the competition. I don't recall seeing published performance data until recently for the GTR, so that's probably why it was not on there. I agree that it should be added, which I think happened already...
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-29-2007, 12:18 AM | #17 |
Lieutenant General
609
Rep 10,407
Posts |
footie/gbb: By the +/- $2k what I meant was that this is probably the uncertainty of the price of the M3, not the price that something must fall within to be appropriately compared to the M3.
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-29-2007, 12:28 AM | #18 | |||
Lieutenant General
609
Rep 10,407
Posts |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
On the GT-R vs. M3 the comparisons are really valid both ways, base vs. base and equipped equally. It really depends on the buyer. Certainly the absolutist price to performance ratio person will argue that comparing minimum entry price (base MSRP) is the most applicable. Those who are really comparing two specific cars and have/will spend the $ on the less expensive car to bring it to the level of the more well equipped car will find the equally optioned prices more appropriate. I want my cake and want to eat it too! I like the base vs. base comparison even though I likely will not be buying a stripper. A bit inconsistent, but at the same time more of an agrument "for the people" - i.e. what can you really get for a certain price. |
|||
Appreciate
0
|
Post Reply |
Bookmarks |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|