E92 m3 dct vs gt350

[ATLIEN]

Originally Posted by dparm

If you want a new sports car that's NA, RWD, V8, and has a DCT, get a C8 Corvette.

Anyway, getting back to the topic at hand: I shopped GT350s two years ago. The motor was pretty sweet but I could not bring myself to like the rest of the car. It felt enormous and bulky, the interior was cheap, and in the end it was still just a Mustang. Call me elitist, but I didn't really want to be associated with that crowd. IOW, it suffered from what I call "Evo syndrome" -- awesome engine in a cheap car.

What are your opinions of your vette vs your M3?

[dparm]

Originally Posted by ATLIEN

What are your opinions of your vette vs your M3?

It's a very different kind of car despite also being an NA RWD V8.

I would say that the biggest similarity is how usable the performance is. Very easy to drive it fast.

[Helmsman]

Thought there even was a specific M3 vs subforum couple of click down, no?... apparently no longer active.

The Forum Police

[neilum]

Originally Posted by dparm

For reference, a Camaro SS 1LE (6MT, same unit as the GT350) will do 0-60 in 4.1s despite being down 70hp...but also having about 30 more lb-ft of torque available at very low RPM. It's also about a hundred pounds lighter.

I did find it interesting that the 10AT isn't any faster to sixty. Probably some extra weight being carried there, and because it's shifting a few times to hit 60. However, the 10AT is a tenth faster in the quarter mile.

0-60 is largely a factor of traction and shift times (DCT vs Manual). Case can be closed right here in a nutshell.

Think about a Hellcat, F80 M3 or a Corvette and how "slow" they get to 60 MPH vs AWD cars that are much much slower overall. These Front engine RWD cars just have problems getting the power down, simple as that.

I've learned a long time ago that 0-60 is one of the silliest measures of performance. 5-60, 0-100, trap speeds any one of these should be way more important than the old school 0-60.

Without looking I'd bet the Gt350 has much better 5-60 times, 0-100, traps all that good stuff that tell the real story vs an E9x M3.

For giggles look at a WRX 5-60 time when it can't launch at redline and drop the clutch (like no one would in the real world). It's in the low 6's IIRC.

[Dave07997S]

Originally Posted by neilum

0-60 is largely a factor of traction and shift times (DCT vs Manual). Case can be closed right here in a nutshell.

Think about a Hellcat, F80 M3 or a Corvette and how "slow" they get to 60 MPH vs AWD cars that are much much slower overall. These Front engine RWD cars just have problems getting the power down, simple as that.

I've learned a long time ago that 0-60 is one of the silliest measures of performance. 5-60, 0-100, trap speeds any one of these should be way more important than the old school 0-60.

Without looking I'd bet the Gt350 has much better 5-60 times, 0-100, traps all that good stuff that tell the real story vs an E9x M3.

For giggles look at a WRX 5-60 time when it can't launch at redline and drop the clutch (like no one would in the real world). It's in the low 6's IIRC.

Funny thing is the 0-100mph time is not that great of a difference either. The GT350 has been clocked from 0-100 in 8.9-9.3 while E92 M3s have done it in 9.7 seconds. Granted it still lost but come on only .5-.8 seconds with an additional 100+hp. A lot of it is the weight difference as well as the gearing.

Dave

[Chromey]

Driven both cars as I was ready to buy a GT350 but couldn’t get my trade in value on my 335i I wanted then the GT350 sold ASAP.. anyhow it’s all about power delivery and the DTC vs Manual.. if you drive both and just go off of feeling the GT350 is substantial on how much faster it feels in the upper rpm range.. also too 0-60 as most have said isn’t that great a tool to figure out how fast a car is in day to day driving.. elevation, temperature, driver, treadlife of the rear tires, road surface and type of tire all contribute.. if you were to drive them back to back as I have you would see the difference.. the main reason now I’m a little sceptical is the reviews on the net of reliability as most GT350 I see and we have been looking at the same things I assume as I’m in victoria is all have low KM yet 2016 are off warranty now or soon and that engine may rattle itself apart in future.. I love the GT350 and I’m ok with the interior , 2017 on have softer materials on the door etc that help... some people have covered the plastic in suede or leather too. For me I only own one car so it’s a daily driver and the m3 just makes way more sense long term.. if the gt350 was not a daily for you then if you will keep the km down it’s a fun car.... they certainly so far have held there value well.. they have stayed at 60k plus for years in canada with only 3 or so cars going under at 56k-58k. Last of my 2cents the Manual shifter in the gt350 is superior to the M3 manual and is arguably one of the best I’ve driven... Th dtc though is to its own credit is brilliant too. They both suck on gas but I heard the Gt350 really drinks it like my old e60 m5. Something to consider. Also 2013 m3 low km 40k Canadian , new gt350 81k plus luxury tax here... you can buy two m3 for one mustang... I went way off topic sorry but GL with your choice... they are both great cars..