Jon200

you at your best again

this might help you

www.dictionary.com

Bernanke

somebody please put this guy out of his misery.... i guess this dumbf*ck is a moderator at m3forum.com b/c i just got banned there lol . what an insecure peice of sh*t

Vader13

Typical..E thug..when people talk like this online, they are THE BIGGEST PUSSIES EVER.
OmG...this is classic..

Vader13

Someone should notify that board the havoc this guy is creating while using their name..for real...even if he is a mod..
how embarassing..

Jon200

it has been a boring day at work, so I should join some of this action

Jon200

I am actually enjoying this thread, definitely one of the best, gay-phibian came in here and stirred a **** fight

Hey M&M, is this what all M3 drivers are like?

M&M

Jon, M-phibian is actually very knowledgable & has a FAST M3. I blame Improviz for this mess. Do you know how frustrating it is when you are telling the truth & some idiot keep saying you lying. And he doesn't even have proof you lying. He keeps talking in the same circles as you "might" have been running this or that or whatever. He wasn't there so he knows Jack.

I believe Lee ran those times stock. He is an inspiration to M3 drivers as he does the times. His 60ft's speak for themselves & his trap speed proved his car wasn't modified. There is a thread on M3 forum where he has pics of his slip at the strip & he puts it next to his COnti tyres.

But as for the proof that M3's ran 12's. There is so proof of the 12.72 run excpet Lee's word. HOWEVER, there is proof of Lee running 12.80 BONE STOCK with stock tyres (& all the seats Improviz) in MM&FF magazine. They did an article on Lee as he used to drag race Mustangs professionally I believe.

M-Phibian, it would be GAME, SET & MATCH if you could post a scan of that article. They we can all go to bed & have a good sleep & put this chapter behind us.

Jon200

Were you there when Lee did his run? Are you related to Lee by any chance? If Lee did 12s in his M3, let him do the talk. Until you have done 12s in your so-called bone stock M3 backed by a timeslip and a video, shut your face and move on otherwise no one is going to believe you because of your trolling history.

He is an inspiration to M3 drivers but you on the other hand is an absolute disgrace to M3 drivers. If there is a thread in the M3 forums about what Lee did, post in THERE instead of wanking over it in here

once again, well done to Lee but what has that got to do with you, you might say you are an M3 driver too but you havn't done 12s

The mess is about Trolls, not M3 doing 12s. You pick on Improviz for not sticking to the topic, have you, this is a thread about the C32 beating the M3 three times.

Don't blame ANYONE in here buddy, you are the one that started this mess, I actually did enjoy you posting the video of you beating the C55 at the track, things turned bad as you started dissing the C32/55 by saying it will never run the times of the M3. So what if a stock M3 can run 12s? This is a Mercedes forum ffs, not the best place to post how great the M3 is isn't it?

Furthermore, look what happend when Bux/Roozy posted the vid of him beating the M3 in m3forums, he got banned within a handful of posts. You posted your M3 beating the C55, started numerous **** fights and you still not banned, you don't appreciate the amount of respect given to you by our mods. SO WHAT DOES THAT SAY ABOUT M3 DRIVERS?

The magic question you need to ask yourself is would you care if someone keeps on telling you a C32/55 can run 12s in the M3 FORUMS?

get a grip

M&M

Jon relax man. This thread is about a C32 beating an M3. I have seen the video & have no problem with it. THAT particular C32 was faster than that particular M3.

No need for anyone to get defensive when I say my experiences are the opposite. I have never lost to a C32. Have raced 4-5. Maybe one day I'll meet my match & lose to a C32.

But I don't think you guys need to get so uptight about it. The majority of the world press have got the M3 faster. That's the fact. I can post right now 5-6 mag tests where the same mag tested the M3 faster than the C32. That's all the proof I need.

PLease note I'm not saying the C32 is a bad car or calling your mama names. I just don't think the video is an accurate reflection of what how these 2 cars compare.

Improviz

Again: IN RESPONSE to M-phibian bring up this magic 12.7 "stock" run, I posted a link to a thread. Mr rutter started this thread. In this thread, he posted a video, for which I provided a link, of him running the 1/4 mile. In this thread, he ALSO stated, flat out, in response to a question, that the only mod to his car was a pulley mod. And yet in the video, from which I posted photos earlier, it can be plainly seen that the car has other mods that he conveniently neglected to mention:

It does not have stock wheels.

It does not have a front seat.

Period.

And what did the knowledgeable M-phibian do when confronted with simple facts that a child could see by reading what rutter wrote and watching his video:

The same thing you do: shoot the messenger.

He called me a "retard" and other names, refused to address any of the facts I'd presented, and tried (as you do) to change the subject, or attack the intelligence of anyone who questioned his claims or presented contrary evidence.

But the facts are there, and they are irrefutable.


What did the knowledgeable M-phibian do when OmeyHomey pointed out that he was there, had witnessed the runs, and that in his experience the C32 was faster?

The same thing you do: shoot the messenger.

He, who had not personally witnessed nor filmed the race, said that OmeyHomey, who had personally witnessed and filmed the race, had "no credibility".

Attack, attack, attack. Whenever the facts aren't on your side, as always you try to change the subject or shoot the messenger--as does M-phibian.

Unfortunately, in this case, the messenger was mr. rutter. All *I* did was post his claim, his video, and photos from his video which called his claim into question.

And you can't refute them, because they're there for you and everyone else to see.

And so you attack, attack, attack. Not mr rutter, no, me, for simply pointing out what a schoolchild could see.


You can believe the sun is purple if you'd like, but you cannot prove it.

The video link is in MY post. The photos from it are in MY post. The quotes from mr. rutter are in MY post.

Why don't you address these facts, hmm???


mr rutter gave his word in the thread he started that his only mod was a pulley. And yet the facts, which you refuse to address, are, again, for the 100th time:

- the car did not have stock wheels.

- the car did not have a front seat.

As I said: I personally read this article, and it was neither an instrumented test NOR a feature on this M3.

As I said: I personally read the article. You are wrong, and simply making things up as usual, like your "dusty airfield" claim that I showed to be false the other day. Had I known the false claims which would have been made on behalf of it, I would have purchased the mag right then and there. But it does not say what you think it says. It mentions rutter's run in passing, in one paragraph.

It was not a road test.

It was nothing more than a reporter doing what you are doing: repeating a claim someone else had made.

There have been dozens of tests of stock M3s by dozens of magazines all over the world. NONE has hit the 12's, let alone a 12.7. This ALONE makes the claim suspect. Add the video and the claims to the mix, and it gives new meaning to the word "gullibility" to accept these claims as prima facie true.


Let's examine this for a moment. For months, you repeatedly claimed, in the M5 forum, that Autocar and other European magazines test their cars on "dusty airfields". You repeatedly claimed that Autocar's test of the M5 was done on a "dusty airfield", which explained its slower 1/4 mile time. You repeately claimed that they did NOT perform their tests on a track, which was why the tests were slower than the American magazines. I repeatedly challenged you to produce a single article verifying this claim; you declined.

Here is a prime example. In this trolling thread you started in the M5 forum, you stated:
And later, in the same thread you stated:
I did. More on that in a moment, but first I want to point out that these were not isolated instances. Again and again and again you made the claim; again and again and again I asked for proof, only to be ignored each and every time.

So I did something novel: I went to Autocar's website and read the M5 test in question

Guess what? Here's what it said:


So, were you telling the truth there? I notice that you kinda, sorta vanished from that thread after I pointed this out.

You claim that I'm frustrating you. So were you telling the truth there, friend?? Was that frustrating for you? Perhaps you might try dealing in facts for a change rather than simply making stuff up...it might be far less frustrating for you.

M&M

SO let's get this straight. Someone is a liar if they say their car is stock except for pullies, but they take out a seat? Did you stop tio think that maybe Lee converses with people on the forum often & they knew about the seat. Does he have to write a disclaimer after every post? Obviously he meant his only POWER mod was pullies. Because he didn't actually say he took out the seat (But can be seen in the video) he's a liar? You are one insecure idiot.

Now, onto my statement that some Euro mags test on airfield's. Well some of them do Just watch Topgear & see for yourself. E55 did 13.0 there in the Autocar test. I was mistaken when I said on ONE PARTICULAR TEST that the traction was bad due to the dust. On THAT PARTICULAR DAY, the traction was bad due to the cold surface. So that makes me a liar?

There are ohter people that have run 12's in stock M3's. There's a guy in Bahrain that did it. I've seen 2 M3's do it here as well.

Improviz

Attack and dodge...attack and dodge....

No, he doesn't have to write a disclaimer; an honest response to the question "what MODS have you done" would be quite enough.

Obviously, the person who asked him what mods he had done to his car was NOT familiar with the mods he had done, or he wouldn't have posed the question in the first place.

And it is relavent info. Perhaps you should take Jon's advice and spend some time at dictionary.com: STOCK means UNMODIFIED. MODDED means MODIFIED. Removing a seat is MODIFYING the car, as removing weight makes the car FASTER than it would be WHEN IT WAS STOCK. MODIFYING the car by dding lighter WHEELS reduces the ROTATIONAL MASS of the wheels, which ALSO makes the MODIFIED car FASTER. And those are only the mods we can SEE.

It is a safe bet that if he took out the front seat, he took out the rear seat and made other extraordinary weight-savings MODIFICATIONS to the car, which would make the vehicle FASTER than if it were UNMODIFIED, i.e. STOCK.

And please, spare us the sanctimonious blather; if someone over here had done this and you got wind of it, we'd never hear the end of it. In fact, your very *REASON* for being IN THIS THREAD is to cast aspersions on the C32's victory, so it's ridiculously hypocritical of you to whine about our challenging your posts when YOU CAME INTO THE THREAD FOR THIS EXPRESS PURPOSE.

Unfortunately, this false claim and classic M&M dodge is easily rectified by looking up. When confronted with what you say, you always try to subtly change your argument to make it sound as what you originally said was more moderate than what you actually said. You did not say "SOME" mags test on "dusty airfields". You stated this:

This is not "some"; you *clearly* stated that the *EURO* mags "normally" perform acceleration testing on "dusty airfields". You have made this claim *repeatedly*, and I'd be happy to--and will, in fact--provide multiple links of your doing so if you continue to deny it. You aren't going to back away from this one, dude...it's cut and dried.

And that's not all you said: you also stated explicitly that the M5 test was done on a dusty airfield, and that I should "read it" for verification:

I did read it, and very cheerfully exposed you. Why is it that *I* had to do this? Why is it that you, who delight in posting data, did not respond to my repeated requests to do so, in this case? Perhaps because you knew this to be untrue?

Again, there is no ambiguity here: this is cut and dried. You wrote what you wrote, and a lame attempt to back away from it now isn't going to work.

We are not discussing Top Gear, we are discussing, as you put it, "EURO" magazines. You did not state that "Top Gear performs their tests on dusty airfields"; you stated that EURO mags do this as a matter of routine ("normally" as YOU put it), AND that the M5 test was conducted on a dusty airfield, AND THAT Euro mags all test with a passenger. Further, you, who are normally not shy about presenting
data to support your arguments, remained mysteriously silent when I repeatedly asked you for proof of these claims.

One can draw their own conclusions as to your motivations for remaining silent...I believe that they're clear enough, particularly when one considers the outright falsehood of the claim.

And the article does NOT say "dusty" or "airfield", it says a cold TRACK. This puts the lie to two claims:

- that they tested the M5 on a "dusty airfield";
- that they do NOT test on a track.

Given your standards of proof and history of false claims--particularly my busting YOU, PERSONALLY, teling us that you were "bone stock" when you did your 13.0 run ONE WEEK AFTER you were boasting on the South Africa Audi Forum about having mounted drag radials on your car (shall I link this too?) and how they had given you "quattro-like" 60' times--I'll take these claims with the bucket of salt that I take all of your other claims.

In fact, I think the time has come to spend a bit of time collecting some of these claims and putting them on a list. Stay tuned; I'll detail them in an upcoming post.

M&M

I cannot believe you go through all this effort just because I said they tested the M5 on a dusty airfield when instead they tested it on a cold surface. WTF? Does that make me a liar? I have read lots of of reviews where they complained about the dust. OK, so on this particular test, there was no dust, but the track was so cold that they couldn't use launch control.

I think the problem with you is you take everything too seriously. Topgear is a Euro mag & they DO test on an airfield. DId you also stop to think that when a mag says "the track was cold", that it could mean that the Airfield's track was cold. I may be going out on a limb here but maybe Brits refer to the airfield as the track. In fact, Topgear put cones on the airfiled & time the cars around there. I guess I'm a liar again for saying that?

And you can dig up all you want on the tyres. I will simply post my slip from 3 months before I got those tyres where I ran the same time with the same 60ft. Of course, theres no way to prove what tyres I had on that run & I'm sure you will point that out. I have many slips from many different dates. There's no way you can see what times was run on what tyres.

Either way I see Roozy say that PROPER DR's didn't give him much gain in the 60ft. What about a Dunlop direzza 02G tarmac ralloy slick that has all the technology built into the sidewalls for good cornering , but not much attention paid to traction?

Mr. Vanos

Please Get This Thread Back On Track And Enough With The Derogatory And Childish Comments! If You Post For No Other Reason But To Flame And Instigate A Situation, You May Feel A Boot Lodged Very Deep Up You Rear End...Just A Courtesy Head's Up.

M&M

This thread has gotten out of hand & it didn't need to. Obviously each side is going to back their camp.

The only way to get an impartial result is to look at the press & what they say. Improviz will be here shortly with some links to info we need pertinent to the subject.

Trekman

M&M get back on track... start posting at a bmw forum we dont need you here...

Mr. Vanos

Let's remove all biases aside for a second...they are BOTH amazing cars...period! My daily driver is an AMG and I race an E46 M3. I don't care what kind of numbers, data, videos, press releases, etc. you post, there is nothing that can convince me that one is MUCH better than the other. Certainly, each has its own advantages, but anyone that can call either car a POS is either smoking something or paid a bit too much for their car and feels compelled to justify it. Whether you like it or not, the BMW 3-series is the benchmark for cars in that class/category that everyone compares themselves to...this is just reality. And if you know the history of either the M3 or AMG, you can't but help appreciate their individual heritage. Does this mean either is the BEST car in that category or for everyone? Absolutely not (and thank goodness for competition). What's best for me may not be best for you. And sorry people, 0-60 time is NOT the definitive answer on which car is faster.

Unfortunately, it's not really the cars that are being debated here, but the immature driver/owner who feels the need to extend his/her "mine is better than yours" argument. Cut the crap and grow up. Let's talk cars!

* The views above are my opinion and are not meant to express the views of this forum

Trekman

I'm Just saying that there are 2 forum members here that are causing all this problems. we Told them that we dont car and this 2 cars are different in many ways, 4 door vs 2 door, I know that the M3 are fast cars but you have a car that has a stiff suspension that has no comfort. AMG cars are also fast but I can have passengers and wont complain about the ride on long trips. both cars are great but two different cars. this guys wont listen and kept on shoving magazine stats on us. We dont care, this guys make us feel that we bought the wrong car! so there is your problem, you think you would take crap from a sales man ask your self?

Mr. Vanos

Trekman, this response is not necessarily directed at you...perhaps asking people to argue in a respectful and productive manner is an unrealistic request. I don't think your goal is to try to force anyone to change camps. Stand behind what you believe and argue about the car. I just don't understand why there needs to be personal attacks...this just wastes bandwidth and is of no value to anyone in the community. If ONE guy over the Internet is seriously making you feel that you bought the wrong car, then maybe you did buy the wrong car. I, for one, can't see how you can feel this way. And no, I wouldn't take crap from anybody, but I would also not play into his/her hands (well, maybe HER hands). Believe me, you will live longer if you don't make it personal.

Improviz

It's kind of hard not to take it personal when someone is basically making it their life to undermine the value of one of my assets. I have pointed out to you and the other mods before that M&M (as he goes by here) has been engaged in this behavior on the Audiworld forums, continuously, since the B5 S4 came out--in 2001. That's four years.

He engaged in the same behavior on the South Africa Audi Forum, for the same time period, doing the same thing, until they banned him.

And he will continue to engage in it here. Which wouldn't bother me so much, except for the fact that he's clearly engaged in a smear campaign to undermine the value of our cars. He's not here to convert people; he's here to prevent people from joining up, to market BMWs. People *do* read these forums when making a decision to purchase an automobile. If they come here, what do they see? BMW guys deluging the forums with propaganda.

If they go to Bimmerforums or the M5 board, do they see Mercedes owners doing the same thing? No, because they get banned if they even try, because the moderators over there actually recognize that this is despicable behavior, which in no way, shape, or form contributes to the forum. In fact, the mods over at bimmerforums shut M&M down pronto.

So, I'm looking for a car...in the moderated Bimmer forums, I find nothing but high praise, whereas here I find people trashing the cars left and right, and BMW guys producing the same scanned articles with the same thread titles in a deliberate, systemic effort to promote their brand and diminish the value of ours. Which car do I buy?

Does your allowing this guy to come in here, repeatedly, and make posts designed solely to undermine Mercedes' resale value and incite Mercedes owners somehow make this a better place?

Further, I know for a fact that he was warned about starting trolling posts here. So, what did he do? Stop--for a while, and then came back to test the waters. Well, so far, the water's just fine--no corrective action taken, despite earlier warnings.

Why? What does allowing people like him, gabri343, and the countless other trolls who are here not to discuss, but to incite, do to make this forum better?

Trekman

To me I dont really care, I'm here to read and to get input from fellow Mercedes benz enthusiast on how to make our cars better, what product are available, what problems we have and help for fixing it. and sometimes we BS about things. but I know for a fact the there is a Kill section on this forum, this guy are only posting on the C32/C55 section maybe also on the E55, as from what I said before 2 different cars, but they keep on trolling in here just to **** people off. Why not post on the SL65 or SLR page compare a M3 to it? we dont care if they give there opinion, what I'm saying is that they should respect the C55/C32 owners because we are the C32/C55 forum. this is not a BMW forum if it is then I'm in the wrong forum plain and simple.

Trekman

Well said Impro

Jon200

You come in here saying you M3 has never lost to a C32 and you expect owners not to get defensive?

I find is annoying that I have to keep repeating myself with you, feels like I am talking to pre school kids. Bux got banned after posting a vid of him beating an M3 and you're in still in here trolling not banned, who is uptight?

Which video are you talking about? If you are talking about Bux's video then you are one typical M3 owner, so when the C32 wins on THREE consecutive runs, it is not a true reflection of the two cars but when you beat the C55 ONCE in the video footage, you **** over it again and again

I just love it how you ignore the points I have raised, again change the subject and state how big your M3 is

I will ask you one more time: Why is it that Bux got banned within a handful of posts after posting his kill story and you're still in here not banned?

reggid

I don't have proof of testing on an airfield but my local magazine took a 911 turbo to the track and timed it with their test equipment against that used at the track and the test equipment time was approx 0.3-0.4s slower than the ET because of rollout.
I guess you can interpret this as meaning that they don't usually goto the track as they made a particular mention of it, but thats not my point.
i never compare timeslips with magazine tests and just plain don't believe any track times to be translatable (if such a word exists) to real world performance. I also don't believe anyone who says they are stock, the number of times i've heard someone say my car is stock apart from the engine......its the same deal as all used cars are immaculate.

FrankW

can't believe I'm quoting my self. One last thing to add, from a stop with good drivers the M3 will have the upper hand.

m&m, you can deny the video by saying that "paticular" car blah blah blah. That just shows you are scared and can't admit like many other M3 owners that the C32 is faster from a roll. The video didn't ask for your comment on how the car does off the line. IT showed the a stock C32 was faster than a M3 from a roll, period! IT showed the C32 catch up from behind and passed the M3 from a roll!

regarding Sticky's SMG vs that C32 on Pathfinder Rd that took place near my house. you can clearly see the driver of the C32 react much slower to the horn. And they had to stop because a stoplight was coming up. The fastest you can go from where they start to finish is about 80mph which is just about when the C32 will pass the M3 and they had to shut it down because of the traffic light.8