Car Magazine shootout: e92 M3 / GT-R / 911 turbo / R8 (16 page review)

[footie]

It's funny but I see the GTR as more of a rival to the 997tt than the M3 even though it's price is closer to the latter. Both the Nissan and the Porsche because of their very nature will be more occasional drives than something like the M3 which maybe regarded as a daily drive. Sure some people will drive them daily but chances are most will not.

The question is would someone who may be considering the Porsche now consider the GTR instead because of this new found performance? Personally I doubt it. There is a bit of snobbery and feel good factor in owning a Porsche and the only people the GTR will hold kudos with are the boyracer and real car nuts, the rest will see it as something brash and vulgar.

Sorry if this offends anyone.

[SteelTorque]

Originally Posted by footie

It's funny but I see the GTR as more of a rival to the 997tt than the M3 even though it's price is closer to the latter. Both the Nissan and the Porsche because of their very nature will be more occasional drives than something like the M3 which maybe regarded as a daily drive. Sure some people will drive them daily but chances are most will not.

The question is would someone who may be considering the Porsche now consider the GTR instead because of this new found performance? Personally I doubt it. There is a bit of snobbery and feel good factor in owning a Porsche and the only people the GTR will hold kudos with are the boyracer and real car nuts, the rest will see it as something brash and vulgar.

Sorry if this offends anyone.

+ 10

I respect the GT-R's performance, but thats about it...and I will never own one.

[enigma]

Originally Posted by e36jakeo

I still say the 911 Turbo's suspension was not designed for the track (less so than the M3's, let alone the GTR's).

The Z06 is definitely the bang for the buck champ. I drove one at Infinion. It had well-used slicks, but other than that was stock. I ran a 1:49 (5 seconds faster than the owner of the Z06 was able to manage) on my first session ever, and there was a LOT left on the table. For comparison I run a 1:50 in my 3000 lb E36 M3 with full track suspension, 240 WHP and R-compounds. I'm pretty sure on new tires and with a bit more seat time I could turn a 1:45 or better.

I can vouch for this. The z06 is a hella-fast car and pretty easy to drive (when the seat stays latched in place). If I were trying to buy a pure performance car at a discount price, its where I would start.

[KonigsTiger]

Well said Footie!!!! I personally would never buy a GTR simply because of its dead ugly looks!!! The stats NEVER tell the whole story. Have to drive them to actually fall in love with them.

[footie]

Originally Posted by enigma

I can vouch for this. The z06 is a hella-fast car and pretty easy to drive (when the seat stays latched in place). If I were trying to buy a pure performance car at a discount price, its where I would start.

I agree with what you are saying enigma, but I feel people are falling into two separate camps here. The ones which value great performance whether to track the car or not and the others which value performance, quality and image.

Both are right but both are totally different, the person considering a 997tt would never ever consider either the GTR or the hill-billy Z06, great car that it is.

[ArtPE]

UNLADEN includes 75 kg driver and 90% fuel by definition...it's an EC standard

Originally Posted by gbb357

I've always thought that the e92M3 was under 3600lbs, so i don't understand why the BMWusa.com website would list the e92M3 at 3704lbs unladen weight and 3740lbs for the e90M3. Obviously there has got to be a difference between the U.S. spec and Euro spec. models.

[footie]

In the BMW UK site things are a little different

http://www.bmw.co.uk/bmwuk/pricesand...-bmwuk,00.html

Here you will see the M3's weight is 1655Kgs which is 3641Lbs. Clearly someone is wrong or is it both of them.

[KonigsTiger]

Same in Mexico, weight is 1,655 kgs. We get the European spec car!!

[gbb357]

Originally Posted by dmv section 660

The "unladen weight" of a vehicle is the weight equipped and ready for operation on the road including the body, fenders, oil in motor, radiator full of water, with five gallons of gasoline or equivalent weight of other motor fuel; also equipment required by law, and unless exempted under Section 66l, any special cabinets, boxes or body parts permanently attached to the vehicle, and any machinery, equipment or attachment which is attendant to the efficient operation of the body or vehicle. Unladen weight shall not include any load or any machinery or mechanical apparatus, such as, but not limited to, wood saws, well-drilling machines, spray apparatus, tow truck cranes, and grinding equipment. The unladen weight of a vehicle shall have no application in determining any fee under this code or the Revenue and Taxation Code other than Section 9400.

http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/d01/vc660.htm

[SCBMW02]

This is an absurd comparison. Here we have a GT car that has incredible numbers, R & T: 0-60 4.1 and 0.98 g of grip. Edmunds 60-0 in 100 feet!!
I put this car through its paces on the ring in Oct and it will hold its own against almost any sports car, esp when considering weight and everyday drivability. You are correct that BMW has had to take a little edge off to attract some Merc and Audi buyers, but those guys still can't match the total pkg no matter how much HP they throw in there. I mean you can dust off 99.99% of everyone at a red light in this car if that is what you are after, and you can outcorner and outbrake damn near everyone! Are there any potential M3 buyers that would be in the market for this Nissan instead?? The M3 is a completely different car and should not have been in this group. What point is made that the 140K 911 TT is faster? This test should have included a Z06 and a Viper, or how about an entry from Ferrari? I will take the M3. \ PS The Nissan looks like a piece of s#*t from Fast and Furious.

[ArtPE]

Originally Posted by gbb357

The "unladen weight" of a vehicle is the weight equipped and ready for operation on the road including the body, fenders, oil in motor, radiator full of water, with five gallons of gasoline or equivalent weight of other motor fuel; also equipment required by law, and unless exempted under Section 66l, any special cabinets, boxes or body parts permanently attached to the vehicle, and any machinery, equipment or attachment which is attendant to the efficient operation of the body or vehicle. Unladen weight shall not include any load or any machinery or mechanical apparatus, such as, but not limited to, wood saws, well-drilling machines, spray apparatus, tow truck cranes, and grinding equipment. The unladen weight of a vehicle shall have no application in determining any fee under this code or the Revenue and Taxation Code other than Section 9400.

that may be for vehicle code, but for EU standards...

The figures shown include a 90% tank filling, 68 kg driver weight and 7 kg luggage. Unladen weight applies to vehicles in standard trim.

http://www.angelfire.com/al/alvinsiow/tech.html

look on page 7 http://www.puffofsmokeracing.com/Car...0_2004_980.pdf

EU = DIN + 75 kg

[gbb357]

Originally Posted by ArtPE

that may be for vehicle code, but for EU standards...

The figures shown include a 90% tank filling, 68 kg driver weight and 7 kg luggage. Unladen weight applies to vehicles in standard trim.

http://www.angelfire.com/al/alvinsiow/tech.html

look on page 7 http://www.puffofsmokeracing.com/Car...0_2004_980.pdf

EU = DIN + 75 kg

I'm going by U.S. standards, since the weight is from BMWusa.com specifications. Therefore the unladen weight code that i posted is by U.S. specification from the DMV and the BMW weight on that site is by U.S. standards.

Here's the dmv's unladen weight definition. http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/d01/vc660.htm

[ArtPE]

Originally Posted by gbb357

I'm going by U.S. standards, since the weight is from BMWusa.com specifications. Therefore the unladen weight code that i posted is by U.S. specification from the DMV and the BMW weight on that site is by U.S. standards.

Here's the dmv's unladen weight definition. http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/d01/vc660.htm

BMW's US owners manuals state includes driver and fuel, ie, EU, not DOT
at least it did for the e46...

I'm sure the e9x will be the same...

that's why it says unladen, in this country curb weight means no driver, Porsche lists both

the new e9x brochure lists the weight as 3704 EU Unladen, with the footnote, includes 75 kg plus 90% fuel

btw: the doc you excerpted is for CA only... http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/d01/vc660.htm not the US DOT

[gbb357]

^^^I'm just going by dmv's definition bro. And it clearly says, "shall not include any load". I'm not saying you're wrong and i'm right, i'm just posting the definition by dmv.

[ArtPE]

Originally Posted by gbb357

^^^I'm just going by dmv's definition bro. And it clearly says, "shall not include any load". I'm not saying you're wrong and i'm right, i'm just posting the definition by dmv.

that only applies for trucks in CA bro

http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/d01/vc660.htm

[gbb357]

^^ I don't think so, but if you say so, i'll take your word for it. I've always thought that unladen means no load. But it seems like for EU it's a different definition.

[OzCarfreak]

Originally Posted by umcool911ok

One thing they forgot to say is how much over
MSRP you will pay for the GT-R I know someone
over here in Nashville who paid 92,000$ U.S. for his and thats
the cheapest I have heard of so far, some are paying 100K

But thats only in the USA dude, there are like 190 odd more COUNTRYS on this earth, lol HELLO.... EARTH CALLING !!!

[dechoong]

Originally Posted by footie

The question is would someone who may be considering the Porsche now consider the GTR instead because of this new found performance? Personally I doubt it. There is a bit of snobbery and feel good factor in owning a Porsche and the only people the GTR will hold kudos with are the boyracer and real car nuts, the rest will see it as something brash and vulgar.

Sorry if this offends anyone.

Quite true.

But I would seriously take a look at the GT-R if its front was better looking (hint: Maserati Granturismo)... this car looks like a flying brick at speed though it has an impressive 0.27 Cd. After all, the 300Z was one of my favourite cars back in the 90s.

[e46e92love]

I thought this was a great review. Clearly, the GT-R is the numbers king and is the best car for the best repeatable times. But I was surprised and somewhat proud as an avid "M" fan that the M3 held its own in that company and even got recognized for some of it strengths that can't be measured with the numbers.

4 great cars that I just can't imagine you can go wrong with any of them

[gbb357]

Another thing that i realize Art, when 5th Gear tested the ISF, Tiff mentioned the the ISF being heavier buy 20 kilograms, which is about 44lbs. The point is, the IS-F is 3780lbs in their website and the M3 sedan in BMWusa.com is 3736lbs, so it is possible that the weight on the BMWusa website is accurate. Because no way that the ISF is less than 3700lbs.

[mojo]

Couple of other thoughts ... part of the reason the M3 may have done so poorly could be because the test was done in wet conditions. The other three were AWD which always does better in the wet specially in the hands of novice drivers.

The reason Porsche makes the AWD turbo is becaue too many lawyers and doctor idiots wrecked the 2WD Porsches. Again I am not dismissing that Nissan made a very quick machine but I have no doubt a properly driven GT3 RS/GT2/Z06 would run circles around the 3800lbs Nissan in dry conditions and extended testing.

Another thing this test shows (also confirmed by Z06) is that Porsche is raping its customers on price. Since Porsche is a household name there is really no premium for the brand as Ferrari has. I would be willing to pay 50% more for a 997 TT but not double! Of course the GTx are in a different league becaues nobody in the industry sells pure race cars with street plates.

As I said before all of these cars are beyond the limits of 99.999% of most drivers. You can choose any and spend the rest of your life learning how to drive one consistently near its limits. The guy that can't drive (and often is) is best off in the Nissan because its most disposable. Certainly the 2WD M3 would be the most challenging between the 4 cars.

Peace.

[Ronno111]

I am quite happy that the M3 came out #2 of the 4 cars- being considered the "cheapest" of the bunch. Unfortunately, the conditions on this track were not optimal for the M3 against AWD vehicles. Quite honestly, who drives like a nut on wet roads anyway.

4.6 sec for the M3 beats the last test of 5.3 and scored as low as 4.1 in the CD shootout. The 6mt is unpredictable and I am glad I am waiting on the DCT. I really wish BMW got their act together and released a bunch of these cars for shootout purposes.

If the DCT is all they say it is, this car can do 60 in under 4 every single time, just like the GTR. I am sorry, I don't care about the numbers but the GTR does not do it for me at all and never will. The M3 is right up there with the best and baddest. It now has a place in history and has not even come out yet. I am pumped to drive this beast, I hope to G-d that none of you changed your orders to this atrocious looking GTR based on numbers so close that us normal guys can likely ever achieve behind the wheel.