BMW M3 Forum (E90 E92)

BMW Garage BMW Meets Register Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


Go Back   M3Post - BMW M3 Forum > M3 (E90 / E92 / E93) > M3 vs....
 
PYSPEED
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      07-12-2011, 07:33 PM   #45
GotM
Second Lieutenant
 
GotM's Avatar
 
Drives: 2013 Subaru BRZ 6MT
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Chandler, AZ

Posts: 232
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by shift@red View Post
How about 60-130 mph?
How about 0-100?
0-80?
100-150?
With the modeling I have created that compares the 1M to a M3(6Mt), assuming best gear for acceleration is being used:
60-130 ->M3 wins ~0.4s delta
0-100 -> ~tie
0-80 ->1M wins ~0.1s delta
100-150 - >M3 wins ~0.6s delta

The model is not perfect by any means, but a way to compare using torque, weight and gearing.
__________________
13 Subaru BRZ, WR Blue, 6M
09 BMW135i, Alpine White, Sport, 6M - sold
99 BMW M roadster, Estoril Blue - sold
GotM is offline   United_States
0
      07-13-2011, 06:53 AM   #46
pbonsalb
Lieutenant Colonel
 
Drives: 08 E90 M3, 99 E36 M3 Turbo
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Concord, NH

Posts: 1,555
iTrader: (3)

Or you could use the Automobile Magazine test of the M3 versus 1M. The 1M was faster to 60 and faster to 110 (though only by about one tenth). That covers it for most daily driving and street encounters.

We will soon be reading that the M3 driver would have won "if the race had continued from 100 to 160 mph" just like we have often read that the M3 would have won "in the twisties."

If BMW had put the DCT in the 1M, the performance would have been even better.
pbonsalb is offline  
0
      07-13-2011, 09:50 AM   #47
MaxL
Captain
 
Drives: E90 M3, Cayenne T, 991 GT3
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Bay Area

Posts: 939
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by nonagon View Post
Fine, then we'll just say faster, instead of much faster.


BMW 1M
30-50mph in 3rd/4th 2.4 / 3.3 sec
40-60mph in 4th/5th 3.2 / 3.8 sec
50-70mph in 5th 4.0 sec

BMW M3 4.0 V8
30-50mph in 3rd/4th 3.1 / 4.3 sec
40-60mph in 4th/5th 4.1 / 5.2 sec
50-70mph in 5th 5.0 sec
Stupid comparison (and I almost never use such strong words on a public forum), but that's what it is. Why would anyone who even remotely cares about speed do 30-50 in 3rd or 4th gear in M3? Second goes to 71MPH, so why not use it for all ranges in the test? 40-60 in 5th in M3 is not just pointless - if someone ever does that hoping to go fast, they seriously need driving school. Comparing cars in neutral would be about as smart as this...
MaxL is offline   Canada
0
      07-13-2011, 09:57 AM   #48
Nine
Banned
 
Drives: Not ZCP, FML.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: DC, Miami, NYC

Posts: 1,925
iTrader: (2)

Quote:
Originally Posted by shift@red View Post
Ok...Im not talking about models or simulations. Lets look at the real data we have.

My info here is based on these two sources.

http://www.roadandtrack.com/var/ezfl...e4ae092da7.pdf

http://www.**************.com/1-seri...st-bmw-1m.html

60-130 - 1m= 15.9 sec M3= ~12 sec (60-120 was 9.5 sec)
0-60 - 1m= 4.6 sec M3=4.1
0-100 - 1M= 11.3 M3=9.4 (typically ~10 seconds)
0-80 - 1M=7.5 sec M3=6.6 sec
100-150 not sure on, but the m3 will be significantly faster

So it appears real world data doesnt confirm what your model is spitting out. The M3 is faster in all these metrics, and by good margin. The higher the speeds, the m3 gets stronger and the 1m falls off.
Exactly. Thank you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MaxL View Post
Stupid comparison (and I almost never use such strong words on a public forum), but that's what it is. Why would anyone who even remotely cares about speed do 30-50 in 3rd or 4th gear in M3? Second goes to 71MPH, so why not use it for all ranges in the test? 40-60 in 5th in M3 is not just pointless - if someone ever does that hoping to go fast, they seriously need driving school. Comparing cars in neutral would be about as smart as this...
Exactly. Thank you.
Nine is offline  
0
      07-13-2011, 10:20 AM   #49
ssabripo
HALA MADRID!
 
ssabripo's Avatar
 
Drives: camels & donkeys
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Plantation, Fl

Posts: 2,087
iTrader: (5)

Send a message via AIM to ssabripo
Quote:
Originally Posted by shift@red View Post
Ok...Im not talking about models or simulations. Lets look at the real data we have.

My info here is based on these two sources.

http://www.roadandtrack.com/var/ezfl...e4ae092da7.pdf

http://www.**************.com/1-seri...st-bmw-1m.html

60-130 - 1m= 15.9 sec M3= ~12 sec (60-120 was 9.5 sec)
0-60 - 1m= 4.6 sec M3=4.1
0-100 - 1M= 11.3 M3=9.4 (typically ~10 seconds)
0-80 - 1M=7.5 sec M3=6.6 sec
100-150 not sure on, but the m3 will be significantly faster

So it appears real world data doesnt confirm what your model is spitting out. The M3 is faster in all these metrics, and by good margin. The higher the speeds, the m3 gets stronger and the 1m falls off.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaxL View Post
Stupid comparison (and I almost never use such strong words on a public forum), but that's what it is. Why would anyone who even remotely cares about speed do 30-50 in 3rd or 4th gear in M3? Second goes to 71MPH, so why not use it for all ranges in the test? 40-60 in 5th in M3 is not just pointless - if someone ever does that hoping to go fast, they seriously need driving school. Comparing cars in neutral would be about as smart as this...
THANK YOU!!

/thread
__________________

__________________________________________________ ____________
e90 M3, Interlagos Blue / M individual two-tone, ZCP, ZP2, ZCV, DCT, ED.
ssabripo is offline   United_States
0
      07-13-2011, 01:17 PM   #50
MAERD TEW
PowerShifter
 
Drives: '07 e92 335i 6MT
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: NYC

Posts: 22
iTrader: (0)

I'm a huge fan of forced induction cars, got a 335i. Let us really make this simple with 2 simple facts my dad taught me:

1) Longer wheelbase, better handling, easier to correct driving line, better power to tires (M3 Wins)

2) There is no replacement for displacement. (M3 Wins)

1M is just to get people into the feel of an M car (M=most powerful letter in the English language). The M3 is the proven car time and time again.

MAERD TEW is offline   Albania
0
      07-13-2011, 01:20 PM   #51
EuroTrip
BMW FAN
 
EuroTrip's Avatar
 
Drives: 2011 E92 M3 DCT ZCP Mineral Wt
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Laguna Beach, CA

Posts: 687
iTrader: (5)

You guys are absolutely ridiculous.

Stop comparing 0-60, 0-100, 30-100 nonsense...you sound like a bunch of MBZ fanboys and need to stfu.

These two cars are built to turn. Go assess how they handle at the track if you have something to say, otherwise don't say anything at all.
EuroTrip is offline  
0
      07-13-2011, 01:38 PM   #52
bruce.augenstein@comcast.
Lieutenant Colonel
 
Drives: Legacy GT - 13.704@99.39
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Manheim, PA

Posts: 1,881
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by MaxL View Post
Stupid comparison (and I almost never use such strong words on a public forum), but that's what it is. Why would anyone who even remotely cares about speed do 30-50 in 3rd or 4th gear in M3? Second goes to 71MPH, so why not use it for all ranges in the test? 40-60 in 5th in M3 is not just pointless - if someone ever does that hoping to go fast, they seriously need driving school. Comparing cars in neutral would be about as smart as this...
Not at all stupid, as carefully explained in note 40. Use your head. Even for track junkies (as I used to be), well over 90% of driving is not on track - and you're not going for the red line all the time on the street without eventually paying the piper.

Last edited by bruce.augenstein@comcast.; 07-13-2011 at 01:48 PM.
bruce.augenstein@comcast. is offline  
0
      07-13-2011, 02:11 PM   #53
Mr.Metak2you
Brigadier General
 
Mr.Metak2you's Avatar
 
Drives: LEXUS LS(DailyDriver)
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Astral Projecting: ∞ 23.516 -122 02.625 0242.101 ĕv'rē-hwr'

Posts: 4,746
iTrader: (15)

Garage List
Quote:
Originally Posted by shift@red View Post
Ok...Im not talking about models or simulations. Lets look at the real data we have.

My info here is based on these two sources.

http://www.roadandtrack.com/var/ezfl...e4ae092da7.pdf

http://www.**************.com/1-seri...st-bmw-1m.html

60-130 - 1m= 15.9 sec M3= ~12 sec (60-120 was 9.5 sec)
0-60 - 1m= 4.6 sec M3=4.1
0-100 - 1M= 11.3 M3=9.4 (typically ~10 seconds)
0-80 - 1M=7.5 sec M3=6.6 sec
100-150 not sure on, but the m3 will be significantly faster

So it appears real world data doesnt confirm what your model is spitting out. The M3 is faster in all these metrics, and by good margin. The higher the speeds, the m3 gets stronger and the 1m falls off.
That is a stupid comparison. Two totally different publications, different methods and equipment in which the metrics you are spouting of were obtained. One uses a 1ft rollout the other does not. etc. etc.

Here is the CARandDriver data. Different days but at least same testing methods. It shows the cars perform is almost identical when pushed to there respective limits. But there is no denying the 1M has 'more useable' power. The 'in gear' numbers reflect that. It is a meaningful test because 99.9% of the time when you are driving your car, you are in the 2-6k RPM range.


1M

0-30: 1.8
0-60: 4.5
0-100: 10.9
1/4mile: 13sec@109
30-50: 6.6sec
50-60: 5.6sec
05-60: 5sec
M3
0-30: 1.7
0-60: 4.4
0-100: 10.3
1/4mile: 12.9sec@111
30-50: 7.7sec
50-70: 7.1sec
05-60: 5.1sec


Just look at the dyno graph below. From 2k-6.4k the 1M has more hp and tq, the M3 obviously comes alive at that point and has more from 6.4-8.4k. One car has more power over 4,400rpm range the other over a 2,000rpm range, plain and simple!

__________________
Mr.Metak2you is offline  
0
      07-13-2011, 04:26 PM   #54
Mr.Metak2you
Brigadier General
 
Mr.Metak2you's Avatar
 
Drives: LEXUS LS(DailyDriver)
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Astral Projecting: ∞ 23.516 -122 02.625 0242.101 ĕv'rē-hwr'

Posts: 4,746
iTrader: (15)

Garage List
Quote:
Originally Posted by shift@red View Post
....but can you personally confirm that both cars has the same amount of tread...?......I could even go as far as to say one might have even had more downhill slope helping one car over the other.
I don't know if you are joking or not...?

Anyways, I just read this in the recent Automobile's Full test and M3zcp Comparo Same day, same driver, same testing methods, same "slope"...

The results:
0-60
1M: 4.5s
M3: 4.7s
0-100
1M: 10.8s
M3: 10.8s
1/4 mile
1M: 13.1s @ 110
M3: 13.2s @ 110

Like I said, both VERY similar results.

__________________
Mr.Metak2you is offline  
0
      07-13-2011, 04:29 PM   #55
nirvanayoda
Second Lieutenant
 
Drives: 2011 e92 M3
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Houston

Posts: 245
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by ///Metak View Post
That is a stupid comparison. Two totally different publications, different methods and equipment in which the metrics you are spouting of were obtained. One uses a 1ft rollout the other does not. etc. etc.

Here is the CARandDriver data. Different days but at least same testing methods. It shows the cars perform is almost identical when pushed to there respective limits. But there is no denying the 1M has 'more useable' power. The 'in gear' numbers reflect that. It is a meaningful test because 99.9% of the time when you are driving your car, you are in the 2-6k RPM range.


1M

0-30: 1.8
0-60: 4.5
0-100: 10.9
1/4mile: 13sec@109
30-50: 6.6sec
50-60: 5.6sec
05-60: 5sec
M3
0-30: 1.7
0-60: 4.4
0-100: 10.3
1/4mile: 12.9sec@111
30-50: 7.7sec
50-70: 7.1sec
05-60: 5.1sec


Just look at the dyno graph below. From 2k-6.4k the 1M has more hp and tq, the M3 obviously comes alive at that point and has more from 6.4-8.4k. One car has more power over 4,400rpm range the other over a 2,000rpm range, plain and simple!

Why not use the Car and Driver that got a 3.9s 0-60 and 1/4 mile time of 12.4? See attached. Unless you just don't want to make the 1M people feel bad?
Attached Images
File Type: pdf m3 comparison.pdf (4.55 MB, 44 views)
nirvanayoda is offline   United_States
0
      07-13-2011, 04:32 PM   #56
quads
Lieutenant Colonel
 
Drives: bac mono
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: racetrack

Posts: 1,644
iTrader: (3)

I was able to replicate 3.9s 0-60 with launch control in my 2011 ZCP with DCT. I have traqmate data to prove it.
quads is offline  
0
      07-13-2011, 04:38 PM   #57
Mr.Metak2you
Brigadier General
 
Mr.Metak2you's Avatar
 
Drives: LEXUS LS(DailyDriver)
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Astral Projecting: ∞ 23.516 -122 02.625 0242.101 ĕv'rē-hwr'

Posts: 4,746
iTrader: (15)

Garage List
Quote:
Originally Posted by nirvanayoda View Post
Why not use the Car and Driver that got a 3.9s 0-60 and 1/4 mile time of 12.4? See attached. Unless you just don't want to make the 1M people feel bad?

I don't bring out the 'sigh' sign for just any reason, but this is deserving of it. I don't care if it hurts the 1M owners feeling or M3 owners for that matter. Facts are facts. I used the car and driver data they got from the 6MT test. Your test was done with the 7DCT. So if you want an apples to apples comparison that is what you need to use. So, how do you like them apples?
__________________
Mr.Metak2you is offline  
0
      07-13-2011, 04:52 PM   #58
nirvanayoda
Second Lieutenant
 
Drives: 2011 e92 M3
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Houston

Posts: 245
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by ///Metak View Post

I don't bring out the 'sigh' sign for just any reason, but this is deserving of it. I don't care if it hurts the 1M owners feeling or M3 owners for that matter. Facts are facts. I used the car and driver data they got from the 6MT test. Your test was done with the 7DCT. So if you want an apples to apples comparison that is what you need to use. So, how do you like them apples?
But why is comparing a 1M to a DCT M3 apples to oranges? We are comparing the 1M to the M3, regardless of transmission. The DCT M3 is the much faster car according to the attachment I provided. Just because the 1M is crippled and does not have a DCT does not mean you get to take that advantage away from the M3.
nirvanayoda is offline   United_States
0
      07-13-2011, 06:08 PM   #59
Mr.Metak2you
Brigadier General
 
Mr.Metak2you's Avatar
 
Drives: LEXUS LS(DailyDriver)
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Astral Projecting: ∞ 23.516 -122 02.625 0242.101 ĕv'rē-hwr'

Posts: 4,746
iTrader: (15)

Garage List
Exclamation Your post has so much fail, I don't even know where to begin...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wall$treet View Post
Anyone else notice you are comparing a WHP graph on the m3 to a crank hp graph on the 1m? The 1m does not have 340 whp-this is engine HP at 330 and torque a bit higher.
WRONG, both are WHP!
Original dyno graph of the 1M:

VIDEO of the dyno:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FRKrp...layer_embedded

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wall$treet View Post
...(look)only the powerbands of each. For an m3 you look at 5.5-8.3.

1m you can look at 2-5k. Those are the comparisons.
The range I stated is correct.
Advantage: 2-6.4K for the 1M and 6.4-8.4k for the M3

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wall$treet View Post
....its not an opinion or certain tastes, its a mathmatical certainty that the m3 is faster when each car is driven in the powerband.
Obviously not so certain, when you can find several tests that show the 1M is faster and several tests in which the M3 is faster. This would indicate that the performance is very similar.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wall$treet View Post
The 1m is quicker and has more HP for "city" driving in the 1-5k range, no questions about it. So I will not lie if you are not willing to drive the car hard, an 1m is much much much easier to extract the power out of but it is much less rewarding and much less capable if the m3 is driven properly.
much less rewarding? getting into that 'opinion' territory and away from the mathematical certainty.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wall$treet View Post
There is a reason it is 10k more in cost guys. BMW is not stupid. The s65 engine is EAISLY worth 10k alone.
So now you're saying the S65 is worth $10k more than the 1M's N54 engine?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wall$treet View Post
its easily answered which is faster. We have the weight, gearing and dyno graphs of each! No need to argue
When people make statements that are not true about the above dyno chart and inject their own 'opinions', that's what spawns the disagreements...
__________________
Mr.Metak2you is offline  
0
      07-13-2011, 06:31 PM   #60
Mr.Metak2you
Brigadier General
 
Mr.Metak2you's Avatar
 
Drives: LEXUS LS(DailyDriver)
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Astral Projecting: ∞ 23.516 -122 02.625 0242.101 ĕv'rē-hwr'

Posts: 4,746
iTrader: (15)

Garage List
FIXED

Actually....
Name:  FIXED.JPG
Views: 263
Size:  68.1 KB
See graph in previous post.
__________________
Mr.Metak2you is offline  
0
      07-14-2011, 10:30 AM   #61
ssabripo
HALA MADRID!
 
ssabripo's Avatar
 
Drives: camels & donkeys
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Plantation, Fl

Posts: 2,087
iTrader: (5)

Send a message via AIM to ssabripo
Quote:
Originally Posted by ///Metak View Post
That is a stupid comparison. Two totally different publications, different methods and equipment in which the metrics you are spouting of were obtained. One uses a 1ft rollout the other does not. etc. etc.

Here is the CARandDriver data. Different days but at least same testing methods. It shows the cars perform is almost identical when pushed to there respective limits. But there is no denying the 1M has 'more useable' power. The 'in gear' numbers reflect that. It is a meaningful test because 99.9% of the time when you are driving your car, you are in the 2-6k RPM range.

1M
0-30: 1.8
0-60: 4.5
0-100: 10.9
1/4mile: 13sec@109
30-50: 6.6sec
50-60: 5.6sec
05-60: 5sec
M3
0-30: 1.7
0-60: 4.4
0-100: 10.3
1/4mile: 12.9sec@111
30-50: 7.7sec
50-70: 7.1sec
05-60: 5.1sec


Just look at the dyno graph below. From 2k-6.4k the 1M has more hp and tq, the M3 obviously comes alive at that point and has more from 6.4-8.4k. One car has more power over 4,400rpm range the other over a 2,000rpm range, plain and simple!

why are you using an old M3 number, and not the latest one:
http://www.caranddriver.com/var/ezfl...e8c595c4b5.pdf

I updated your numbers with it:

1M
0-30: 1.8
0-60: 4.5
0-100: 10.9
1/4mile: 13sec@109
30-50: 6.6sec
50-60: 5.6sec
05-60: 5sec

M3
0-30: 1.5
0-60: 3.9
0-100: 9.4
1/4mile: 12.4sec @ 114
30-50: 2.5sec
50-70: 3.4sec
05-60: 4.4sec

I'm pretty sure this is a much more accurate relation, given that I've only had my M3 for a month or so, 1800miles, and on just my very 1st LC attempt I was able to get around 4.1 0-60, and 12.7 111....

bottom line, we are debating something that is stupid: Both cars are outstanding for what they are, and it will be a driver's race for the most part!

ps- please stop with the strawman's argument of "M3 had DCT blah blah blah", because it is just that, a dumb attempt to cripple the M3 on your part to make your point a bit more "believable". The M-DCT is on the M3, it is NOT on the 1M....no need to take it out of the equation just because it doesn't suit your point. It is akin to saying don't use the "power" button on the M3 because the 1M comes with only a 6 cylinder engine with less HP, etc.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nirvanayoda View Post
Why not use the Car and Driver that got a 3.9s 0-60 and 1/4 mile time of 12.4? See attached. Unless you just don't want to make the 1M people feel bad?
__________________

__________________________________________________ ____________
e90 M3, Interlagos Blue / M individual two-tone, ZCP, ZP2, ZCV, DCT, ED.

Last edited by ssabripo; 07-14-2011 at 10:35 AM.
ssabripo is offline   United_States
0
      07-14-2011, 10:40 AM   #62
1MOREMOD
2014 Track Days - 9|Ridge 1:52:25|Pacific 1:35:72
 
1MOREMOD's Avatar
 
Drives: Race car->
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: check your mirrors

Posts: 11,956
iTrader: (5)

do we really care?
__________________

02 Tiag e46 M3|6MT|GC plates|MCS c.o.|GC bars|GC race control arms|GC bushings & bearings|BW eng. & tran. mounts|subframe kit|BW race shifter|BW Jaffster|Euro header|BW race|K&N c.a.i.|Epic race tune|Rouge pulleys|Seibon CF hood|CSL bumper|ST-40|XR-2|SS lines|half cage|Recaro profi|Profi 2 harness|BMWpedals|BW studs|
1MOREMOD is online now   United_States
0
      07-14-2011, 11:58 AM   #63
quads
Lieutenant Colonel
 
Drives: bac mono
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: racetrack

Posts: 1,644
iTrader: (3)

Left: 1M
Right: M3


quads is offline  
0
      07-14-2011, 12:54 PM   #64
ss134
Brigadier General
 
ss134's Avatar
 
Drives: ...a hard bargain...
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Germany/UK

Posts: 3,658
iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by IAA-C63 View Post
Just a quick note that Evo magazine (July 2011) has tracked both the 1M and M3 and got essentially identical times. They also like the 1M better overall, while still regarding the M3 as a great car. One of the points they emphasize is that the flatter torque curve of the 1M is more usable on public roads.
Agree that the 1M is a great car but definately not more usable on all public roads..............here in Germany on the autobahn the S65 is insane at higher speeds - i have no doubt the 1M wouldn't stand a chance above 100mph. Would definately like to test drive one though and yes in most daily driving you can probably enjoy more of its motor more of the time.
__________________
2014 AW F80 M3 DCT
2011 AW E90 M3 DCT - Sold
2010 JZB E90 M3 DCT - Sold
2009 6MT E90 LCI 335i M -Sport - Sold
ss134 is offline   United Kingdom
0
      07-14-2011, 01:09 PM   #65
radiantm3
Apex Everything!
 
radiantm3's Avatar
 
Drives: >1000 HP in my garage
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Danville, CA

Posts: 3,783
iTrader: (6)

Garage List
2011 E92 M3  [4.80]
2013 BMW X5M  [4.33]
Quote:
Originally Posted by ss134 View Post
Agree that the 1M is a great car but definately not more usable on all public roads..............here in Germany on the autobahn the S65 is insane at higher speeds - i have no doubt the 1M wouldn't stand a chance above 100mph. Would definately like to test drive one though and yes in most daily driving you can probably enjoy more of its motor more of the time.
I still don't see how you can enjoy the motor more when daily driving. If I want to enjoy the S65 I just don't shift as early. If I'm in gear and need to move quickly, it only takes a second to downshift 1-2 gears and I'm in the power band. And personally, I consider that fun. So I guess we should correct the statement:

The N54 provides a more usable power band for the lazy driver.
__________________
(1:40 @ Laguna Seca, 2:03 @ Thunderhill, 1:52 @ Infineon)
radiantm3 is offline   United_States
0
      07-14-2011, 01:14 PM   #66
DoorKicker
Private
 
Drives: E92 M3
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Baltimore, MD

Posts: 69
iTrader: (0)

Going to be honest, I went from a wicked boxer rumble (STi) and the M3s V8 is sublimely refined to me. I've always admired F1 cars and having a V8 rev that high to me is priceless. The M3s motor is why I am an owner today. The 1M got a hand-me-down drivetrain. Not to say its not an excellent car but it doesn't have the unique design the M3 does. Maybe I'm too new but if the 1M was that close to the M3 they'd have never made it. There's a reason it costs +20,000 less.
DoorKicker is offline  
0
Closed Thread

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:21 AM.




m3post
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
1Addicts.com, BIMMERPOST.com, E90Post.com, F30Post.com, M3Post.com, ZPost.com, 5Post.com, 6Post.com, 7Post.com, XBimmers.com logo and trademark are properties of BIMMERPOST