1st of 6 major hurdles

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by ruff

You make some good points. I do find it interesting that we are quick to compare the e92 M3 to a four door RS4 because of favorable performance numbers and again quick to compare it to to the 2+2 base 997 because of favorable performance numbers. Yet, it is probably not fair/appropriate to compare it to 997S and especially GT-R or Vette because of some unfavorable performance numbers?

A heavily modded 4 door Evo would probably run with an M3 at below 335 prices. Too many excuses about configurations of the car used as a convenient way to brush off less than stellar performance numbers. IMO, if two cars are close in price or performance then the comparison is fair.

It is not Porsche's fault that BMW chooses to make heavy four seaters and anemic two seaters. BMW themselves are quick to compare the E92 M3 to the 997. You don't see Porsche needing to compare the 997 to the M3 or Nissan comparing the GTR to anything M or for that matter Chevrolet needing to compare the Vette to anything hailing from Munich.

Good post as well. Personally I am quick to compare the M3 to both the 997 base and 997S because of nearly identical or besting numbers from the M3. I definitely agree that a fair and appropriate comparison can be made based on any criteria one finds important; this may be size, number of doors, power, price, luxury, etc. Specifically though the Z06 and GT-R will both likely be in the neighborhood of $10k+ > the M3 base. This does not mean all comparisons are void IMO but it is quite a bit more $.

Specifically the comparisons with the RS4 are obvious aren't they? The M3 has and now again will come with a 4 door variant. Even in the years when it didn't the total interior space and seating availability between S4/RS4 and M3 were quite comparable, no?

The comparisons to BMW seem to be coming from the Japanese coupe folks and other European sedans and those comparisons are typically not to M models but to base model coupes. The thing about the new M3 is that journalists are finding it appropriate and necessary to compare it to everything out there including the GT3 and R8 where is has actually won on even a price independent comparison. I think a lot of the manufacturers will be hesitant to compare to the M3 because where it shines most is it's amazing combination of performance, luxury and price.

On the Evo: If I do pull the trigger on the M3 (likely) I know it won't be fun at all when I get dusted by a modded/sleeper Evo in a little stop light battle.... Oh well the M3 is clearly more than just a car for that!

[ruff]

Originally Posted by swamp2

Good post as well. Personally I am quick to compare the M3 to both the 997 base and 997S because of nearly identical or besting numbers from the M3. I definitely agree that a fair and appropriate comparison can be made based on any criteria one finds important; this may be size, number of doors, power, price, luxury, etc. Specifically though the Z06 and GT-R will both likely be in the neighborhood of $10k+ > the M3 base. This does not mean all comparisons are void IMO but it is quite a bit more $.

Specifically the comparisons with the RS4 are obvious aren't they? The M3 has and now again will come with a 4 door variant. Even in the years when it didn't the total interior space and seating availability between S4/RS4 and M3 were quite comparable, no?

The comparisons to BMW seem to be coming from the Japanese coupe folks and other European sedans and those comparisons are typically not to M models but to base model coupes. The thing about the new M3 is that journalists are finding it appropriate and necessary to compare it to everything out there including the GT3 and R8 where is has actually won on even a price independent comparison. I think a lot of the manufacturers will be hesitant to compare to the M3 because where it shines most is it's amazing combination of performance, luxury and price.

On the Evo: If I do pull the trigger on the M3 (likely) I know it won't be fun at all when I get dusted by a modded/sleeper Evo in a little stop light battle.... Oh well the M3 is clearly more than just a car for that!

Nice post Swamp,
I enjoy responding to your posts because I think we both learn from one another. We agree to disagree at times and at the same time have mutual respect for each others differing points of view. That is what makes this type of forum so enjoyable. At times, it even beats arguing sports with the buddies. Talk about a black hole.

Let me first make a comment about the Cayman. You know how much I like it. I still find it amazing that with lower overall performance numbers due only to it's underpowered motor and lack of an LSD; it can still compete against the high powered upper echelon of performance cars boasting well over a hundred more horsepower. There is no production car you can drive faster into a corner except for maybe an Exige. It will eat up more powerful cars on a tight track. The Cayman really does everything well and in such a composed and sublime manner. I again recommend a test drive just to really experience what I talk on and on and on about. IMO, there is no reason to spend the extra bling on any of the 997s unless of course you have money to burn and you are a horsepower junkie.

Now to the M3. Clearly a great car and bargain for the money. The thing that attracts me so much to the M3 is it's exotic engine at bargain basement price. A great engine is like a cute girl. As a whole package they can have a lot of flaws but it is easy to forgive her when she smiles at you and forgive it when you rev that baby straight past 8000 rpms on your way to the moon. I also like the decent mileage numbers expected from the M3. Heck the much slower S5 looks like it may get poorer mileage than the M3.

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by ruff

Let me first make a comment about the Cayman. You know how much I like it. I still find it amazing that with lower overall performance numbers due only to it's underpowered motor and lack of an LSD; it can still compete against the high powered upper echelon of performance cars boasting well over a hundred more horsepower. There is no production car you can drive faster into a corner except for maybe an Exige. It will eat up more powerful cars on a tight track.

I should spend some time behind the wheel of the Cayman S. I am sure it would be a real hoot. Any volunteers? Probably not until (and if) I have my new M3, then the trade at the track would be much more likely... Good analogy as well about the cute girl and the engine!

So back the the details on the Cayman S: I don't doubt that you can corner this car really fast. However, I think I am going to call you out on how fast it actually enters corners as well as the "eating up" of more powerful cars on a tight track. It looses sorely to the M3 on a high speed track like the N'ring (no surprise there) but as well on a tighter track like Hockenheim. Which track does the Cayman S best a substantially more powerful car on - a parking lot autocross? Not to dis - just looking for evidence of what seems it may be true.

Same thing on corner speeds - evidence por favor. Somthing like the evidence in this M3 vs. RS4 test from the Cars in Action mag. would be highly convincing. Thanks.

[ruff]

Originally Posted by swamp2

I should spend some time behind the wheel of the Cayman S. I am sure it would be a real hoot. Any volunteers? Probably not until (and if) I have my new M3, then the trade at the track would be much more likely... Good analogy as well about the cute girl and the engine!

So back the the details on the Cayman S: I don't doubt that you can corner this car really fast. However, I think I am going to call you out on how fast it actually enters corners as well as the "eating up" of more powerful cars on a tight track. It looses sorely to the M3 on a high speed track like the N'ring (no surprise there) but as well on a tighter track like Hockenheim. Which track does the Cayman S best a substantially more powerful car on - a parking lot autocross? Not to dis - just looking for evidence of what seems it may be true.

Same thing on corner speeds - evidence por favor. Somthing like the evidence in this M3 vs. RS4 test from the Cars in Action mag. would be highly convincing. Thanks.

I have no specific performance numbers... that is your speciality. Remember, the M3 numbers at the Ring are still speculative though I am sure they will be very close to the speculation.

However, I can tell you the Cayman weighs in the neighborhood of 600 + pounds less than the E92 M3 and has an optimal mid engine design with neutral handling. Let me repeat that - 600 + pounds less than the new M3. I think the performance numbers in the area of cornering speeds based on simple physics alone would be more than self evident wouldn't it? As I inferred before, with that big of weight discrempancy it wouldn't matter how much of a horsepower advantage the M3 had. Simply point and shoot with the Cayman. It carves up corners with surgical precision. Ask anyone who has driven both a Cayman and the substantianally lighter than e92, e46 M3 and they will tell you the mass burden of the M3 makes for easy pickings for the Cayman in the corners. Then add the superior brakes and it really becomes no contest in the bends. Now lets not also forget the negative performance effect of brake fade over the course of numerous of laps.

Now if you are talking about a track that isn't real tight and has substantial straightaways, the physics obviously favor the M3, no question about it. Like I said before, in the two comparison tests that pitted both the new E92 M3 and the older Cayman S, the Cayman S subjectively won both contests. Why is that? The M3 is clearly faster overall due to its 120 horsepower advantage. So where does the Cayman clearly outshine the M3 in these reviewers eyes to make up the huge difference of it's vastly inferior engine? Could it possibly be: substantianally less mass, superior brakes, steering response and feel; better driving dynamics and out of this world handling? You tell me? But I don't think magazine "bias" towards the Cayman S and against the M3 is a reasonable or fair start for a honest debate. You may not think what I say is accurate but until one has driven a Cayman S, one can never understand the hoopla about it.

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by ruff

I have no specific performance numbers... that is your speciality. Remember, the M3 numbers at the Ring are still speculative though I am sure they will be very close to the speculation.

However, I can tell you the Cayman weighs in the neighborhood of 600 + pounds less than the E92 M3 and has an optimal mid engine design with neutral handling. Let me repeat that - 600 + pounds less than the new M3. I think the performance numbers in the area of cornering speeds based on simple physics alone would be more than self evident wouldn't it? As I inferred before, with that big of weight discrempancy it wouldn't matter how much of a horsepower advantage the M3 had. Simply point and shoot with the Cayman. It carves up corners with surgical precision. Ask anyone who has driven both a Cayman and the substantianally lighter than e92, e46 M3 and they will tell you the mass burden of the M3 makes for easy pickings for the Cayman in the corners. Then add the superior brakes and it really becomes no contest in the bends. Now lets not also forget the negative performance effect of brake fade over the course of numerous of laps.

Now if you are talking about a track that isn't real tight and has substantial straightaways, the physics obviously favor the M3, no question about it. Like I said before, in the two comparison tests that pitted both the new E92 M3 and the older Cayman S, the Cayman S subjectively won both contests. Why is that? The M3 is clearly faster overall due to its 120 horsepower advantage. So where does the Cayman clearly outshine the M3 in these reviewers eyes to make up the huge difference of it's vastly inferior engine? Could it possibly be: substantianally less mass, superior brakes, steering response and feel; better driving dynamics and out of this world handling? You tell me? But I don't think magazine "bias" towards the Cayman S and against the M3 is a reasonable or fair start for a honest debate. You may not think what I say is accurate but until one has driven a Cayman S, one can never understand the hoopla about it.

Kind of figured I might get this kind of reply...

Sure some of the physics is in the favor of the Cayman S but how much benefit is there with real numbers is simply getting to the heart of a claim. There is a lot more to cornering than simply weight and yaw moment. I think you can undersand a great deal about a car without driving one. Sure there are intangibiles and emotions and synergy where maybe "1+1>2" but the numbers still speak loudly to me. I am not going to make any claims whatsoever about the fun factor of the Cayman S, neither absolute nor relative to any other car. I simply am asking you to prove your claims, short and sweet. I have found skidpad numbers for the Cayman at .96g and the new M3 at .94g, not much of a difference. This small delta could easily be overcome by more down force or better tire grip at higher speeds. Another interesting fact would be a comparison of the ultimate lateral g's each car can obtain (M3 lubrication system desifned for 1.4g I think).

So to summarize - I certainly am not claiming the new M3 is a better handling nor more fun car than the Cayman S. I simply want you to prove your claims I highlighted/questioned above. Can I even be more bold (perhaps some may even say rude/demanding) and ask you not to reply without some real proof? I am not looking for a real drawn out flowery discussion, just the facts. Heck, even a track video of some closely matched ametuers showing the Cayman S passing faster cars in corners would be a start. I am also interested in both of those Cayman S vs. E92 M3 magazine test you mention, are those here on this fourm?

[southlight]

I already asked this some time ago, but didn't get an answer:
Can somebody please tell me how better brakes result in an advantage "in the bends"?

Best regards, south

[ruff]

Originally Posted by swamp2

Kind of figured I might get this kind of reply...

Sure some of the physics is in the favor of the Cayman S but how much benefit is there with real numbers is simply getting to the heart of a claim. There is a lot more to cornering than simply weight and yaw moment. I think you can undersand a great deal about a car without driving one. Sure there are intangibiles and emotions and synergy where maybe "1+1>2" but the numbers still speak loudly to me. I am not going to make any claims whatsoever about the fun factor of the Cayman S, neither absolute nor relative to any other car. I simply am asking you to prove your claims, short and sweet. I have found skidpad numbers for the Cayman at .96g and the new M3 at .94g, not much of a difference. This small delta could easily be overcome by more down force or better tire grip at higher speeds. Another interesting fact would be a comparison of the ultimate lateral g's each car can obtain (M3 lubrication system desifned for 1.4g I think).

So to summarize - I certainly am not claiming the new M3 is a better handling nor more fun car than the Cayman S. I simply want you to prove your claims I highlighted/questioned above. Can I even be more bold (perhaps some may even say rude/demanding) and ask you not to reply without some real proof? I am not looking for a real drawn out flowery discussion, just the facts. Heck, even a track video of some closely matched ametuers showing the Cayman S passing faster cars in corners would be a start. I am also interested in both of those Cayman S vs. E92 M3 magazine test you mention, are those here on this fourm?

Swamp,

I was expecting more from you. Simple physics doesn't cut the mustard huh? I have never seen some one as smart as you down play the negative effects of cars weight on cornering performance. Is it because the M3 is so heavy? Yet you will talk all day long about the powertrain loss of AWD and automatics. Is it because the M3 doesn't have these features? Well the GT-R seems to be running fine around the Ring with all that powertrain loss. What would the time be if it was lucky enough to sport rear wheel drive like the M3. Not a fan from physics point of view about the handling dynamics of a mid engine design, huh?

How about some more flowery discussion. Do the following numbers speak loudly enough to you? We can first start with your quoted skid pad numbers. Now lets look at the following:

This is a post from Carnage from the thread "335 beats RS4 around a track":

Cool, let's merge the 2 lists together and see what we got...

1 - Chevrolet Corvette Z06 - 2:58.2
2 - Ford GT: 3:00.7
3 - Dodge Viper: 3:01.6
4 - Porsche 911 GT3 -3:01.8
5 - Chevrolet Corvette C6 - 3:03.6
6 - Lotus Exige S - 3:04.5
7 - Audi R8 - 3:04.6
8 - Porsche 911 Turbo - 3:05.8
9 - Shelby GT500- 3:05.9
10 - Lotus Elise: 3:09.2
11 - Porsche Cayman S: 3:09.5
12 - BMW M6: 3:10.0
13 - BMW 335i - 3:10.5
14 - Audi RS4- 3:11.2
15 - BMW Z4M - 3:11.7
16 - Nissan 350Z: 3:12.5
17 - Mitsubishi Evo MR: 3:13.5
18 - Pontiac Solstice GXP - 3:15.7
19 - Mazda Speed 3 - 3:16.0
20 - Dodge Charger SRT8: 3:18.2
21 - Mazda RX-8: 3:19.0
22 - Chevy Cobalt SS: 3:20.6
23 - Ford Mustang GT: 3:20.9
24 - Mini Cooper S - 3:22.9
25/26 - VW GTI and Honda Civic Si: 3:24.6
27 - Mazda MX-5: 3:29.3
__________________

This is C&D's track test results at VIR. Notice the Cayman's time of 3:09.5. Of course M3 has yet to be tested there but look at it's competition the RS4's slower time of 3:11.2. And for interest sake now look at the 911 turbo time of 3:05.8. So you tell me, how does the 295 hp Cayman S beat the 420 hp Audi RS4 around the track and get within almost 4 seconds of 997 turbo. Is it because the Cayman S is faster than these 2 cars on the straightaways? Come on Swamp, how elementary do we need to make this?

In regards to the M3 losing to the Cayman S in comparison test how about these? Maybe your memory was a bit foggy?

http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/carrevi...ivals.html#top

http://www.autocar.co.uk/VideosWallp...AR=227669&CT=V

Remember your happy comment about: "this steering is feel-less!" The new M3 must have been having a bad day because I believe it finished 6th in the competition in the Autocar comparison.

One side note: By the way, all this this searching you are having me do is a pain.

[ruff]

Originally Posted by southlight

I already asked this some time ago, but didn't get an answer:
Can somebody please tell me how better brakes result in an advantage "in the bends"?

Best regards, south

Read above, ponder and think, read again, ponder and think....Are you going to make me quote all the reviews talking about the M3's crappy brakes for a car of this caliber. Oh ya, you and your buddies will go to your grave believing the M3's single pot brakes are better than multi pots because that is what the M3 sports, right? And less I forget, braking performance and weight has no effect on how much speed a car can approach a corner, carry through a corner, and exit a corner, right?

[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by ruff

Read above, ponder and think, read again, ponder and think....Are you going to make me quote all the reviews talking about the M3's crappy brakes for a car of this caliber.

...At the same time you can find reviews that state the opposite. The same applies to the steering. I'm sure the brakes are just fine!

Originally Posted by ruff

Oh ya, you and your buddies will go to your grave believing the M3's single pot brakes are better than multi pots because that is what the M3 sports, right? And less I forget, braking performance and weight has no effect on how much speed a car can approach a corner, carry through a corner, and exit a corner, right?

Granted brakes matter in overall performance, but I don't understand how "carrying and exiting the corner" has anything to do with the brake system at that particular moment.

[southlight]

Originally Posted by ruff

And less I forget, braking performance and weight has no effect on how much speed a car can approach a corner, carry through a corner, and exit a corner, right?

Ok, I'm asking it another time and don't turn my words:
I didn't talk about weight (its benefit is obvious) and you didn't talk about approaching a corner before.
So the question remains and you failed to answer yet:

Regardless of a specific car, how do better brakes result in an advantage in the bends?

Do you have an answer at all?


Best regards, south

[Garrett]

Originally Posted by ruff

Read above, ponder and think, read again, ponder and think....Are you going to make me quote all the reviews talking about the M3's crappy brakes for a car of this caliber. Oh ya, you and your buddies will go to your grave believing the M3's single pot brakes are better than multi pots because that is what the M3 sports, right? And less I forget, braking performance and weight has no effect on how much speed a car can approach a corner, carry through a corner, and exit a corner, right?

Hello guys,

Man I give this board a rest for a few weeks and you guys go and bust out a conversation like this..! Well, i guess I going to have to chim in

The Porsche Cayman S does carve like a knife, it an absolute hit of acid on your body's G's. My Z06 just wasn't a Porsche, and this cars feedback allowed you to read the manufacturers label of the utility chordyou just backed over in the garage. It's a mind-meld!


Now, I do beleive the M3 will achieve great track numbers and probably hold right up there with the Cayman S, if not better on some curves. I think Ruff might be underestimating this new M3's ability. Yet, I have driven a Cayman and I can't get it out of my head.

The difference is that the M3 offers more. It's a touring car and perfect for weekend trips, backseat, better ride, luxury and refined environment. Though, as good as the Porsche is, the car starts to get tiring after about an hour and a half. Anything more than a 3 hour trip and you'd wish you took the suv instead.

Not so in the M3 ...!






-Garrett

[Garrett]

Originally Posted by southlight

Ok, I'm asking it another time and don't turn my words:
I didn't talk about weight (its benefit is obvious) and you didn't talk about approaching a corner before.
So the question remains and you failed to answer yet:

Regardless of a specific car, how do better brakes result in an advantage in the bends?

Do you have an answer at all?


Best regards, south

What..? C'mon south, it allows you to enter the corner at a higher rate, because you can brake harder and pass in the corner, or just plain reduce your lap times.

This is fundemental driving techniques.






-Garrett

[southlight]

Originally Posted by Garrett

What..? C'mon south, it allows you to enter the corner at a higher rate, because you can brake harder and pass in the corner, or just plain reduce your lap times.

This is fundemental driving techniques.



-Garrett

I was under the impression that the "fundamental driving technique" is to first brake and then to corner. If you're braking "into" the corner, you were late on the brake. Some bend combinations allow also to be still on the brakes while cornering, but that's an exception IMHO.
Again, I'm not talking about braking on a straight before entering the corner (this advantage of a better brake is obvious, again).

Best regards, south

[ruff]

Originally Posted by Sedan_Clan

...At the same time you can find reviews that state the opposite. The same applies to the steering. I'm sure the brakes are just fine!




Granted brakes matter in overall performance, but I don't understand how "carrying and exiting the corner" has anything to do with the brake system at that particular moment.

Ya the M3 brakes are fine on the track for the first lap. Then all bets are off.


I know that one can find the opposite. If you have read my posts you will know I argue that point more than anyone else on this forum. Swamp wanted his numbers, so I gave him numbers to prove my point.

So where do brakes matter in performance, the straitaways? Do you think it is only when a car is approaching a corner that good brakes are a benefit allowing the car to carry more speed for a slightly longer period of time? If that was the only benefit of good brakes, would brakes be of such vital importance on the track. It should be noted, that while in a corner, good brakes allows one to slow down quicker, thus allowing one to get on the gas earlier, near the end of a corner, and thus upon exit.

[ruff]

Originally Posted by Garrett

What..? C'mon south, it allows you to enter the corner at a higher rate, because you can brake harder and pass in the corner, or just plain reduce your lap times.

This is fundemental driving techniques.

-Garrett

Good luck explaining anything to South in regards to fundemental driving techniques. Maybe if you take him to a track and take him for a hot lap or two he will come around, but I am not so confident. And maybe take him to watch the Koni series where the Porsches tend to pass the M3's in the corners and the M3's make up ground on the straigtaways. This is not brain surgery we are talking about. Does South have a bias favoring BMW's?

[southlight]

Originally Posted by ruff

This is not brain surgery we are talking about.

Why did you fail to try an explanation, then?

Care to comment on my answer to Garrett's post? Oh, I forgot, you're not answering questions, you're just being ironic...

Best regards, south

[ruff]

Originally Posted by southlight

Why did you fail to try an explanation, then?

Care to comment on my answer to Garrett's post? Oh, I forgot, you're not answering questions, you're just being ironic...

Best regards, south

Mate, first of all, it was your response to Garrett's post not mine. Garrett will do just fine answering your question if he chooses to but I suspect his answers would not be what you want to hear so it wouldn't be good enough for you. Secondly, did you read my response to Sedan Clan? Responding to you directly tends to get very detail tedious and overly frivolous and it still never seems to make a difference. How many times do I need to keep answering your questions before you give it a rest?

[southlight]

Originally Posted by ruff

Mate, first of all, it was your response to Garrett's post not mine. Garrett will do just fine answering your question if he chooses to but I suspect his answers would not be what you want to hear so it wouldn't be good enough for you. Secondly, did you read my response to Sedan Clan? Responding to you directly tends to get very detail tedious and overly frivolous and it still never seems to make a difference. How many times do I need to keep answering your questions before you give it a rest?

C'mon, you're never answering and you know that. Don't act like you would. I say "One doesn't brake while cornering (there are some exceptions)." You say, "better brakes are better in the corner." You never tried to explain that to me and my guess is you never will. We would need a map of race tracks with drawn brake zones in it to "judge" this...

BTW: Did you notice the harsh attitude you're showing? I'm trying hard to keep this factual (which doesn't work always I have to admit), would be nice if you could try also. Suggesting I have no clue about fundamental driving techniques isn't a good start...

Best regards, south

[ruff]

Originally Posted by southlight

C'mon, you're never answering and you know that. Don't act like you would. I say "One doesn't brake while cornering (there are some exceptions)." You say, "better brakes are better in the corner." You never tried to explain that to me and my guess is you never will. We would need a map of race tracks with drawn brake zones in it to "judge" this...

Yes I have answered you over and over on many threads, but you obviously don't like my answers as evidenced by your total lack of acknowledgement that your answer to this question (let me repeat myself again), is in my response to Sedan Clan...please, do you need me to cut and paste for you to understand this. No I don't have "a map of race tracks with drawn brake zones in it to "judge" this..." Maybe a bit Tedious do ya think?....Still like ya though.

Originally Posted by southlight

BTW: Did you notice the harsh attitude you're showing? I'm trying hard to keep this factual (which doesn't work always I have to admit), would be nice if you could try also. Suggesting I have no clue about fundamental driving techniques isn't a good start...

Best regards, south

Fair enough, I guess I am not patient enough when it come to repeating myself.

[southlight]

Originally Posted by ruff

Yes I have answered you over and over on many threads, but you obviously don't like my answers as evidenced by your total lack of acknowledgement that your answer to this question (let me repeat myself again), is in my response to Sedan Clan...please, do you need me to cut and paste for you to understand this. No I don't have "a map of race tracks with drawn brake zones in it to "judge" this..." Maybe a bit Tedious do ya think?....Still like ya though.




Fair enough, I guess I am not patient enough when it come to repeating myself.

Would you be so fair to tell me if you can agree with the following:
After going straight you have to brake approaching a corner, at the end of the "brake zone" you start cornering. That's the case in most of the corners...Agreed or not?

Best regards, south

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by ruff

Swamp,

I was expecting more from you. Simple physics doesn't cut the mustard huh? I have never seen some one as smart as you down play the negative effects of cars weight on cornering performance. Is it because the M3 is so heavy? Yet you will talk all day long about the powertrain loss of AWD and automatics. Is it because the M3 doesn't have these features? Well the GT-R seems to be running fine around the Ring with all that powertrain loss. What would the time be if it was lucky enough to sport rear wheel drive like the M3. Not a fan from physics point of view about the handling dynamics of a mid engine design, huh?

How about some more flowery discussion. Do the following numbers speak loudly enough to you? We can first start with your quoted skid pad numbers. Now lets look at the following:

This is a post from Carnage from the thread "335 beats RS4 around a track":

Cool, let's merge the 2 lists together and see what we got...

...

This is C&D's track test results at VIR. Notice the Cayman's time of 3:09.5. Of course M3 has yet to be tested there but look at it's competition the RS4's slower time of 3:11.2. And for interest sake now look at the 911 turbo time of 3:05.8. So you tell me, how does the 295 hp Cayman S beat the 420 hp Audi RS4 around the track and get within almost 4 seconds of 997 turbo. Is it because the Cayman S is faster than these 2 cars on the straightaways? Come on Swamp, how elementary do we need to make this?

In regards to the M3 losing to the Cayman S in comparison test how about these? Maybe your memory was a bit foggy?

http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/carrevi...ivals.html#top

http://www.autocar.co.uk/VideosWallp...AR=227669&CT=V

Remember your happy comment about: "this steering is feel-less!" The new M3 must have been having a bad day because I believe it finished 6th in the competition in the Autocar comparison.

One side note: By the way, all this this searching you are having me do is a pain.

Nice recovery ruff, sorry the searching was so painful. I appreciate the links and evidence.

The Cayman S by nature of its mass and a variety of other excellent chassis and handling traits clearly best some more powerful cars at VIR. It looks like it will be close to where the M3 will probably end up on this course but my bet is actually for the M3, even on this track. Again it is not that I use physics selectively, it is just much simpler to argue the effect of power to weight ratio on accleration than weight on cornering speed! I do accept weight as the major enemy of the M3. However, weight is probably more important in turn in and transistion rather than ultimate cornering speed per se. I think the M3 should have been lighter, but again the M boys are awfully good at compromise and I certainly could not have done better myself. There is an amazing amount of weight lowering trickery in the M3 for sure.

The links were good as well. Had seen the second but not the first. The second did not declare the Cayman S as a victor over the M3, it simply said that the 911 has better steering feel. The first link I had not seen so thanks again for that. I don't argue that the Cayman S may best the M3 in some tests given some sets of criteria and weighting. However, do note the quote from that test,

"It’s not that the new car handles poorly – far from it. The M3 turns in more incisively than the Cayman S, has colossal grip and great poise and agility. But you don’t feel part of the experience as you do in the Porsche."

So here again it is "fun factor" or other subjective reasons that the Cayman S handles "better".

I'd still like to see some actual Cayman S cornering speed data , the VIR evidence (since it is way down on power to weight) proves that the cornering speed is indeed better than some impressive and more powerful cars.

[southlight]

Originally Posted by ruff

No I don't have "a map of race tracks with drawn brake zones in it to "judge" this..." Maybe a bit Tedious do ya think?....Still like ya though.

OK, I have to apologize, that was unfair:

Heres the racing line for the Ring as it was published by Sportauto and BMW M (completely biased racing line you may say). The color line is the racing line, the black boxes are the brake zone and the yellow dot is the point "where to start cornering." You can see that in most bends the cornering start point is at the end of braking. As I said there are some bend combinations in which you're braking while cornering (no yellow point on the map). But in the other bends you see that there's no to very little curve in the braking zone.

Best regards, south