Quote:
Originally Posted by geoff2010
OK... first, I would like to say that the comparison does NOT seem biased. Everything they said about the M3 is true. It does, in fact, have pretty low torque compared to the competition. This generation of M3 clearly take its queues from the F1 world as opposed to the muscle car world. I think that is very much in line with what the M3 stands for.
As Mr Shelby once said: Horsepower sells cars, Torque wins races.
The M3 is an interesting beast. You really do need to wind it up before it comes to life. The other cars (especially the merc) have TONS of down low torque which will not only improve their 0-60 and 1/4 mile times, but it will really crank up the ass-dyno.
The bottom line is that the M3 has a really special motor. Pretty much anyone can make a torque beast... and if you can make lots of torque, you can make lots of HP, not too tough... look at the vette  Not many people can make an engine which generates peak HP at 8300 RPM. It is really an amazing experience to tap redline in this car.
And to quickly go back to our roots for a quick minute here... the M3 has never been about max HP or peak torque. The M3 (at the core) is about handling before anything. Anyone who has driven this car in the twisties knows they have nailed that goal 120%!!! Perfectly balanced, nimble, quick, amazing...
If you are really most concerned with HP/Tq, 0-60, 1/4 mile, then maybe the merc or the lexus is the right car for. If you are most concerned with feeling 100% connected to the road while roaring through back country mountain roads... I'd stick with the ///M3. |
Yes, but if you look at the actual numbers on the back of the article you will notice that, other than acceleration, the M3 lost in subjectivity areas (except for steering feel...funny). He is simply saying that this is the first time a Mag has taken points away in the subjectivity areas and hence his dislike for R&T....
And PS, R&T rated the Merc engine the highest which makes no sense due to the points you made...
Jason