C32 vs M3 in straight line
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 437
Likes: 0
From: SOUTH AFRICA
Nothing
Quote: "You haven't lived until you've gone down the mineshaft". I have been down the mineshaft many a time: I used to race in the VW Challenge for about 4 years, and did many track days as well. My e-mail is golfwagen@mweb.co.za.
Cheers
Cheers
Thread Starter
Super Member
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 723
Likes: 0
Sweet, but actually I think the mineshaft isn't the most challenging corner at Kyalami. Once you have overcome the mental side you can take it flat. I think the Vodacom sweep is more daunting. Have you been around the new Gosforth track yet?
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 1,038
Likes: 1
C32 AMG
Hey, what the hell's going on here? All I was asking about is straight line speed, not which car is better. Each person know what he/she wants from a car & what may be a better car for some person may be worse for another.
Second, this topic has been beaten to death over a number of years. If you simply did a search, you would of found the answer to your question.
Most of previous threads covering this topic ended up in mudslinging, so to us you are just another troll trying to steer up some emotion.
Here are several examples:
Thread #1
Thread #2
Thread #3
And there are many more..............
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,256
Likes: 1
From: North Cuba/West Bimini
Cars and boats!
funny but true... C32 Vs M3 has been a very touchy subject over the years...... we had a rivalry (what started out as friendly ending up very unfriendly) going on here b/w owners of a couple of E46 M3s in south FL and my cousins Stage 1 RENNTech C32.....
at the end of it, I got jumped at a car hangout by some punk kids who love to hit people with who have their backs turned walking away and then one night their fastest E46 M3 was raped by the C32!!! Some of you might know these kids from other forums!!! And some of you might remember that fight that went on b/w us!!! Not to bring up ancient history but what happend happend!!! Its what happens when people get c0cky!!!
at the end of it, I got jumped at a car hangout by some punk kids who love to hit people with who have their backs turned walking away and then one night their fastest E46 M3 was raped by the C32!!! Some of you might know these kids from other forums!!! And some of you might remember that fight that went on b/w us!!! Not to bring up ancient history but what happend happend!!! Its what happens when people get c0cky!!!
Last edited by BenzoAMGpower; Apr 8, 2004 at 12:51 AM.
Member
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
C32, M3 SMG, VR-4, MR-S
M/AMG and Auto Magazines
Hi guys,
I own a Euro Spec C32 and M Coupe. I have tested both of them on quarter mile and these are the best timings I've got:
M Coupe: 13.7s @ 106mph
C32: 13.8s @ 106mph
I'll say they are pretty equal on qtr mile, however it's not easy to duplicate the best time on the M coupe as you need a perfect launch to get this kind of timing. A bad launch can be as bad as 14.0-14.2. (Pls don't question my skill. I had done some drag competitions before and most of my cars are/were manuals.)
C32 on the other hand is very consistent on every run because of its auto tranny. If an auto and a manual had the same performance, the auto will be the faster car in real life street driving. I know someone who owns a E39 M5 and 540i. Believe it or not, he claims the auto 540i is faster in daily driving.
Take all magazine's reviews with a pinch of salt. I have came across Autocar Nov 2001 posting C32 quarter mile in 13.0s and 0-160km/h in 10.8s and M3 in 11.5s. They claimed C32 is faster in the straight. EVO has tested a M coupe with 0-60mph in 4.6s but I can't get mine to do better than 5.2s.
M and AMG are two different animals. They each have their own merits, so don't compare them. A M/BMW lover will probably never like an AMG/MB and vice versa. But I'm quite sure most of us didn't buy M or AMG just for it's performance. I enjoy their comfort, luxury features, prestige etc as well. Else might as well get a Japanese sports like WRX, EVO or GTR instead.
I own a Euro Spec C32 and M Coupe. I have tested both of them on quarter mile and these are the best timings I've got:
M Coupe: 13.7s @ 106mph
C32: 13.8s @ 106mph
I'll say they are pretty equal on qtr mile, however it's not easy to duplicate the best time on the M coupe as you need a perfect launch to get this kind of timing. A bad launch can be as bad as 14.0-14.2. (Pls don't question my skill. I had done some drag competitions before and most of my cars are/were manuals.)
C32 on the other hand is very consistent on every run because of its auto tranny. If an auto and a manual had the same performance, the auto will be the faster car in real life street driving. I know someone who owns a E39 M5 and 540i. Believe it or not, he claims the auto 540i is faster in daily driving.
Take all magazine's reviews with a pinch of salt. I have came across Autocar Nov 2001 posting C32 quarter mile in 13.0s and 0-160km/h in 10.8s and M3 in 11.5s. They claimed C32 is faster in the straight. EVO has tested a M coupe with 0-60mph in 4.6s but I can't get mine to do better than 5.2s.
M and AMG are two different animals. They each have their own merits, so don't compare them. A M/BMW lover will probably never like an AMG/MB and vice versa. But I'm quite sure most of us didn't buy M or AMG just for it's performance. I enjoy their comfort, luxury features, prestige etc as well. Else might as well get a Japanese sports like WRX, EVO or GTR instead.
MBworld Guru
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 22,058
Likes: 18
From: Diamond Bar, CA
W206 PHEV AMG
Re: M/AMG and Auto Magazines
Originally posted by 1313
Hi guys,
I own a Euro Spec C32 and M Coupe. I have tested both of them on quarter mile and these are the best timings I've got:
M Coupe: 13.7s @ 106mph
C32: 13.8s @ 106mph
I'll say they are pretty equal on qtr mile, however it's not easy to duplicate the best time on the M coupe as you need a perfect launch to get this kind of timing. A bad launch can be as bad as 14.0-14.2. (Pls don't question my skill. I had done some drag competitions before and most of my cars are/were manuals.)
C32 on the other hand is very consistent on every run because of its auto tranny. If an auto and a manual had the same performance, the auto will be the faster car in real life street driving. I know someone who owns a E39 M5 and 540i. Believe it or not, he claims the auto 540i is faster in daily driving.
Take all magazine's reviews with a pinch of salt. I have came across Autocar Nov 2001 posting C32 quarter mile in 13.0s and 0-160km/h in 10.8s and M3 in 11.5s. They claimed C32 is faster in the straight. EVO has tested a M coupe with 0-60mph in 4.6s but I can't get mine to do better than 5.2s.
M and AMG are two different animals. They each have their own merits, so don't compare them. A M/BMW lover will probably never like an AMG/MB and vice versa. But I'm quite sure most of us didn't buy M or AMG just for it's performance. I enjoy their comfort, luxury features, prestige etc as well. Else might as well get a Japanese sports like WRX, EVO or GTR instead.
Hi guys,
I own a Euro Spec C32 and M Coupe. I have tested both of them on quarter mile and these are the best timings I've got:
M Coupe: 13.7s @ 106mph
C32: 13.8s @ 106mph
I'll say they are pretty equal on qtr mile, however it's not easy to duplicate the best time on the M coupe as you need a perfect launch to get this kind of timing. A bad launch can be as bad as 14.0-14.2. (Pls don't question my skill. I had done some drag competitions before and most of my cars are/were manuals.)
C32 on the other hand is very consistent on every run because of its auto tranny. If an auto and a manual had the same performance, the auto will be the faster car in real life street driving. I know someone who owns a E39 M5 and 540i. Believe it or not, he claims the auto 540i is faster in daily driving.
Take all magazine's reviews with a pinch of salt. I have came across Autocar Nov 2001 posting C32 quarter mile in 13.0s and 0-160km/h in 10.8s and M3 in 11.5s. They claimed C32 is faster in the straight. EVO has tested a M coupe with 0-60mph in 4.6s but I can't get mine to do better than 5.2s.
M and AMG are two different animals. They each have their own merits, so don't compare them. A M/BMW lover will probably never like an AMG/MB and vice versa. But I'm quite sure most of us didn't buy M or AMG just for it's performance. I enjoy their comfort, luxury features, prestige etc as well. Else might as well get a Japanese sports like WRX, EVO or GTR instead.
although I would love to have both the AMGs and the Ms
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 292
Likes: 0
2004 Mercedes G500 Black
Well, technically speaking, only half of M3's are hard to launch...the other half has SMG, which has a built-in launch control program. Launch control will provide a perfect launch everytime.
MB World Stories
The Best of Mercedes & AMG
Manual Mercedes? 6 Times Sindelfingen Let Drivers Have All The Fun
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes SLR McLaren 722 S Is Extremely Rare Example Modified by McLaren
Verdad Gallardo
8 Classic Boxy Mercedes Designs That Have Aged Like Fine Wine
Verdad Gallardo
Flawlessly Restored Mercedes 190E Evo II Heads to Auction
Verdad Gallardo
Electric Mercedes C-Class Unveiled: 11 Things You Need to Know
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes EQS Gets A Major Update: Everything You Need to Know
Verdad Gallardo
5 Underrated Mercedes-Benz Models That Don't Get the Love They Deserve
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes 300D Has Pushed Well Past 1 Million Miles and It Ain't Stopping
Verdad Gallardo
10 Most Reliable Mercedes-Benz Models You Can Buy Used
Verdad Gallardo
Super Member
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 677
Likes: 0
Originally posted by Thai
Well, technically speaking, only half of M3's are hard to launch...the other half has SMG, which has a built-in launch control program. Launch control will provide a perfect launch everytime.
Well, technically speaking, only half of M3's are hard to launch...the other half has SMG, which has a built-in launch control program. Launch control will provide a perfect launch everytime.
MBworld Guru
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 22,058
Likes: 18
From: Diamond Bar, CA
W206 PHEV AMG
Originally posted by Thai
Well, technically speaking, only half of M3's are hard to launch...the other half has SMG, which has a built-in launch control program. Launch control will provide a perfect launch everytime.
Well, technically speaking, only half of M3's are hard to launch...the other half has SMG, which has a built-in launch control program. Launch control will provide a perfect launch everytime.
this might be the only case, according to motor trend, the C32's good for 4.77 0-60mph...
, but of course you have to consider that at the same time they ran the new S4 at 4.99 0-60mph under the same condition.anyhow, these are different cars for people with different needs. I'd be glad to have both in the garage or even in the family if my sister decide to get rid of her 00 CLK320 for a new ride.
Last edited by FrankW; Apr 8, 2004 at 08:41 PM.
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 292
Likes: 0
2004 Mercedes G500 Black
Well, according to direct comparo (in the same test) in Road & Track, M3 SMGII was SLIGHTLY faster than C32. You assume that R&T got the best launch from the C32. SMG is slower than manual because the MT launches better off the line. However, SMGII is generally regarded as quicker down the road due to the lightening quick shifts (faster than professional manual shifts), with higher 1/4 mile speed.
I would only compare 0-60 times, 60-0, etc. if the cars are on the SAME test. Otherwise, you can't compare the times due to differing altitude, weather, drivers, etc..
I would only compare 0-60 times, 60-0, etc. if the cars are on the SAME test. Otherwise, you can't compare the times due to differing altitude, weather, drivers, etc..
MBworld Guru
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 22,058
Likes: 18
From: Diamond Bar, CA
W206 PHEV AMG
Originally posted by Thai
Well, according to direct comparo (in the same test) in Road & Track, M3 SMGII was SLIGHTLY faster than C32. You assume that R&T got the best launch from the C32. SMG is slower than manual because the MT launches better off the line. However, SMGII is generally regarded as quicker down the road due to the lightening quick shifts (faster than professional manual shifts), with higher 1/4 mile speed.
I would only compare 0-60 times, 60-0, etc. if the cars are on the SAME test. Otherwise, you can't compare the times due to differing altitude, weather, drivers, etc..
Well, according to direct comparo (in the same test) in Road & Track, M3 SMGII was SLIGHTLY faster than C32. You assume that R&T got the best launch from the C32. SMG is slower than manual because the MT launches better off the line. However, SMGII is generally regarded as quicker down the road due to the lightening quick shifts (faster than professional manual shifts), with higher 1/4 mile speed.
I would only compare 0-60 times, 60-0, etc. if the cars are on the SAME test. Otherwise, you can't compare the times due to differing altitude, weather, drivers, etc..
oh wellz...it's all good. that's why I mentioned even the S4 was running 4.99.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,067
Likes: 5
From: MILFORD,CT
E36M3 race car/Ferrari F355 GTS/1973 Mini 1275GT/Fiat Abarth/ML63/SLK55
my $0.02
I'm a bit late and some of what i'll say was echoed before...
M&M you said "The one major think you forget is the shape of the power curve & transmission losses. In a sprint an M3 in always between 6000-8000rpm after 1st gear. I assume a C32 is between 5000-7000rpm. Have a look at how the C32 power drops off after 5500rpm. Roots type blowers are great for low down torque but not so good at high rpm with the parasitic losses associated with them."
The c32 makes peak power at 5500 rpm, but you forget redline is 6100 rpm. It's a more efficient lysholm not a roots supercharger....if you look at area under the curve assuming redline shifts both cars then the c32 has more usable power. (ie - look at power/torque under the curve between redline and lower rpm shift point in the higher ratio).
look- these are two different cars. i deliberated for 9 months before picking the c32- based on my intended use- effortless, comfortable, quick, distance touring. if i han an m3, it would be stick and damm sure i would not be drag racing, that car is meant for lap days.. i'd be at every event NASA, SCCA or EMRA ran.
it's amazing how folks buy something and attach themself to it. guys, we're not married to the cars we own. It's a tool, use it appropriately. i wish we all had enough money so as to afford and m3 AND c32. And a bunch of other cars as well. :-)
bottom line- they are both fantastic cars.
M&M you said "The one major think you forget is the shape of the power curve & transmission losses. In a sprint an M3 in always between 6000-8000rpm after 1st gear. I assume a C32 is between 5000-7000rpm. Have a look at how the C32 power drops off after 5500rpm. Roots type blowers are great for low down torque but not so good at high rpm with the parasitic losses associated with them."
The c32 makes peak power at 5500 rpm, but you forget redline is 6100 rpm. It's a more efficient lysholm not a roots supercharger....if you look at area under the curve assuming redline shifts both cars then the c32 has more usable power. (ie - look at power/torque under the curve between redline and lower rpm shift point in the higher ratio).
look- these are two different cars. i deliberated for 9 months before picking the c32- based on my intended use- effortless, comfortable, quick, distance touring. if i han an m3, it would be stick and damm sure i would not be drag racing, that car is meant for lap days.. i'd be at every event NASA, SCCA or EMRA ran.
it's amazing how folks buy something and attach themself to it. guys, we're not married to the cars we own. It's a tool, use it appropriately. i wish we all had enough money so as to afford and m3 AND c32. And a bunch of other cars as well. :-)
bottom line- they are both fantastic cars.
Last edited by AWDman; Apr 9, 2004 at 07:59 AM.
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 292
Likes: 0
2004 Mercedes G500 Black
Originally posted by simonlam168
I raced with M3 this morning.
There were 3 people in my car. (including me) and 1 people in M3.
I dust him at least 5 cl from 65mph to 130mph.
I think his M3 is stock.
I raced with M3 this morning.
There were 3 people in my car. (including me) and 1 people in M3.
I dust him at least 5 cl from 65mph to 130mph.
I think his M3 is stock.
FIVE car lengths! Geez!
Last edited by Thai; Apr 9, 2004 at 08:42 AM.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,067
Likes: 5
From: MILFORD,CT
E36M3 race car/Ferrari F355 GTS/1973 Mini 1275GT/Fiat Abarth/ML63/SLK55
also
power aside.....the Cd for the e46 m3 is 0.32. the c32 is 0.27....this becomes a factor as speed rises..........
Last edited by AWDman; Apr 9, 2004 at 09:18 AM.
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 411
Likes: 0
From: Hong Kong
c63
A friend of mine C32 (Only ODPS) raced with his friend Porsche 996 C4 from
0 mph to 65 mph. He dusts his friend 4 to 5 cl.
So I think I won 5 cl is resonable even though I had 3 people sitting on my car.
0 mph to 65 mph. He dusts his friend 4 to 5 cl.
So I think I won 5 cl is resonable even though I had 3 people sitting on my car.
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 292
Likes: 0
2004 Mercedes G500 Black
Ok...sure...now i believe you!
yeah, no torque...how about gearing?? Or how about the 6-speed manual ratios?? I can be in the powerband at any speed with the manual tranny...so, no torque becomes much less of an issue if i stay in my powerband + final drive ratio. Look, no matter what tests you look at, M3 is faster than C32 by A TINY BIT from any speed. 0-30, 0-60, 0-100, 0-130, 0-100-0, etc.. So, a C32 can definitely beat an M3 and vice-versa...but NOT BY 5 CAR LENGTHS...even with modified 367 HP!
yeah, no torque...how about gearing?? Or how about the 6-speed manual ratios?? I can be in the powerband at any speed with the manual tranny...so, no torque becomes much less of an issue if i stay in my powerband + final drive ratio. Look, no matter what tests you look at, M3 is faster than C32 by A TINY BIT from any speed. 0-30, 0-60, 0-100, 0-130, 0-100-0, etc.. So, a C32 can definitely beat an M3 and vice-versa...but NOT BY 5 CAR LENGTHS...even with modified 367 HP!
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,645
Likes: 2
From: San Diego
2002 C32 Black/Charcoal
I can personally verify Simonlam's claims. Getting on the15 freeway onramp today with a silver E46 today. . . we had been playing traffic hockey for 5 minutes or so. . . trying to find an opening to run the beasts. We both had to turn right onto the freeway. . . he turned and I was right behind him. He and I punched it at the same time, and I practically ran him over. I swung left into the carpool lane, which I saw ended and merged back with his lane in about 100 yards. A moment's doubt (but not enough to actually take my foot off the accelerator) while I decided whether to risk trying to pass him before the lanes merged. Figured that the emergency lane was always the last resort, and went for it. No problem at all. Even got to watch him madly rowing gears as I blew past him. . .
He was a scrawny dude with a tiny chickie in the passenger seat. Probably weighed 260-270 between the two. The Vomit-hass displaces 230, so it wasn't a huge weight diff.
Granted, my car is Evosported (Pulley, ECU, SL55 Intake, K&Ns), but my point is that a modded C32 can really open up some WOOPASS on a stock E46. Especially given Simonlam's conservative postings, I have no doubt that his description of his encounter is 100% accurate.
) while I decided whether to risk trying to pass him before the lanes merged. Figured that the emergency lane was always the last resort, and went for it. No problem at all. Even got to watch him madly rowing gears as I blew past him. . . He was a scrawny dude with a tiny chickie in the passenger seat. Probably weighed 260-270 between the two. The Vomit-hass displaces 230, so it wasn't a huge weight diff.
Granted, my car is Evosported (Pulley, ECU, SL55 Intake, K&Ns), but my point is that a modded C32 can really open up some WOOPASS on a stock E46. Especially given Simonlam's conservative postings, I have no doubt that his description of his encounter is 100% accurate.
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 292
Likes: 0
2004 Mercedes G500 Black
Ok, that story made me a believer!
EDIT: why are even talking about modded cars?? BTW, you do realize that Dinan and AA are coming out with superchargers for the E46 M3...rated at least 420 hp at the crank; Dinan claims 460 hp. They "claim" perfect tractability and good reliability...i have my doubts, but until then, it sure sounds good!
EDIT: why are even talking about modded cars?? BTW, you do realize that Dinan and AA are coming out with superchargers for the E46 M3...rated at least 420 hp at the crank; Dinan claims 460 hp. They "claim" perfect tractability and good reliability...i have my doubts, but until then, it sure sounds good!
Last edited by Thai; Apr 9, 2004 at 08:57 PM.
