C55 vs M3 - Another 5 unimportant reasons ...
Super Member
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 723
Likes: 0
Imp, here's an M3 tuned with cams, diff, airbox, ECU tested by European Car at Cali Speedway (not at sea-level).
Did 0-100 in 9.6. 1/4 mile in 12.2 @ 114.
This car has run 11's at sea-level.
Surely you realise that Modd'd cars is a seperate discussion.
If you to a fast modd'd car, buy a Mustang & put NOS on it.
M3 & C55 are not about that. Their breadth of abilities is more than going fast in a straight line.
Did 0-100 in 9.6. 1/4 mile in 12.2 @ 114.
This car has run 11's at sea-level.
Surely you realise that Modd'd cars is a seperate discussion.
If you to a fast modd'd car, buy a Mustang & put NOS on it.
M3 & C55 are not about that. Their breadth of abilities is more than going fast in a straight line.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,679
Likes: 0
CLS55 AMG
Data set for stock M3s:
The two British tests monkey boy provided gave 0-100 times of 12.3 and 11.5 seconds. Car & Driver got 11.8 seconds in June 2001, and 12.3 seconds in May 2003. Road & Track ran 11.6 in this test of a six speed manual.
Here are the previous Euro tests, with 0-100 mph times for stockers provided:
E46 M3: 11.4 seconds 0-100 mph
E46 M3: 11.4 seconds 0-100 mph
E46 M3: 11.6 seconds 0-100 mph
E46 M3: 11.4 seconds 0-100 mph
and lastly, the two Monkey Boy loves to use:
E46 M3 10.9 seconds 0-100 mph
E46 M3: 11.0 seconds 0-100 mph
Data set for stock cars:
{10.9, 11.0, 11.4, 11.4, 11.4, 11.5, 11.6, 11.6, 11.8, 12.3, 12.3}
^^^ ol' red looks kinda lonely there, doesn't he?
So, we have:
1) one car out of eleven, comprising 9% of the sample, was under 11 seconds;
2) two cars out of eleven, comprising 18% of the sample, were under 11.4 seconds;
3) seven cars out of eleven, comprising 64% of the sample, were between 11.4 and 11.8 seconds;
4) two cars out of eleven, comprising 18% of the sample, were over 12.0 seconds.
So, again: the "norm", or the average, was 11.56 seconds 0-100 mph (congratulations, monkey-boy: by removing the modified cars, you got back 0.14 seconds in the 0-100 mph average time!!
). And no, repeat, NO, car in the mid 11's 0-100 mph ran faster than 17.9 seconds 0-200 km/h. Most were in the low-mid 18 range.
If your claim that a "mid-17" 0-200 time to be the "norm", i.e. the average, were valid, an increasing sample size would track this by showing more cars' acceleration in this range. It does not. As the sample size increases, the percentage of cars in this range decreases. And as anyone with a passing knowledge of statistics can tell you, a higher sample size equals more accuracy.
Here are the previous Euro tests, with 0-100 mph times for stockers provided:
E46 M3: 11.4 seconds 0-100 mph
E46 M3: 11.4 seconds 0-100 mph
E46 M3: 11.6 seconds 0-100 mph
E46 M3: 11.4 seconds 0-100 mph
and lastly, the two Monkey Boy loves to use:
E46 M3 10.9 seconds 0-100 mph
E46 M3: 11.0 seconds 0-100 mph
Data set for stock cars:
{10.9, 11.0, 11.4, 11.4, 11.4, 11.5, 11.6, 11.6, 11.8, 12.3, 12.3}
^^^ ol' red looks kinda lonely there, doesn't he?
So, we have:
1) one car out of eleven, comprising 9% of the sample, was under 11 seconds;
2) two cars out of eleven, comprising 18% of the sample, were under 11.4 seconds;
3) seven cars out of eleven, comprising 64% of the sample, were between 11.4 and 11.8 seconds;
4) two cars out of eleven, comprising 18% of the sample, were over 12.0 seconds.
So, again: the "norm", or the average, was 11.56 seconds 0-100 mph (congratulations, monkey-boy: by removing the modified cars, you got back 0.14 seconds in the 0-100 mph average time!!
). And no, repeat, NO, car in the mid 11's 0-100 mph ran faster than 17.9 seconds 0-200 km/h. Most were in the low-mid 18 range.If your claim that a "mid-17" 0-200 time to be the "norm", i.e. the average, were valid, an increasing sample size would track this by showing more cars' acceleration in this range. It does not. As the sample size increases, the percentage of cars in this range decreases. And as anyone with a passing knowledge of statistics can tell you, a higher sample size equals more accuracy.
Super Member
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 723
Likes: 0
Impro-man, if you get 11.56 as the average then that's fine. I accept that. What are we arguing about? I guess you think the 10.9 done by SPort Auto is impossible? Well, whether you like it or not, that was the time. A different mag testing a different M3 got 11.0. C&D got 11.2 for a brand new fully loaded M3. So what's the big deal?
http://www.caranddriver.com/article....&page_number=1
An M3 ordered by C&D fully loaded with almost all options, tested at 1940 miles, did 0-60 in 4.5, 0-100mph in 11.2, & 1/4 mile in 13.1 @ 107mph.
Now as you know, most cars get faster as they get more mileage. Unless something goes wrong with the car, or it needs new plugs, oil, service etc. But 11.2 for a NEW loaded M3 is close enough to 10.9 done on another continent for me to say that 10.9 is possible. An M3 with no options (moonroof, manual seats, etc) & more mileage should easily beat 0-100 in 11.2 & 1/4 mile in 13.1.
Note, I'm not saying its the norm. But if the stars are alligned & the moon is high, It's possible. (Of course its possible, its already been done).
http://www.caranddriver.com/article....&page_number=1
An M3 ordered by C&D fully loaded with almost all options, tested at 1940 miles, did 0-60 in 4.5, 0-100mph in 11.2, & 1/4 mile in 13.1 @ 107mph.
Now as you know, most cars get faster as they get more mileage. Unless something goes wrong with the car, or it needs new plugs, oil, service etc. But 11.2 for a NEW loaded M3 is close enough to 10.9 done on another continent for me to say that 10.9 is possible. An M3 with no options (moonroof, manual seats, etc) & more mileage should easily beat 0-100 in 11.2 & 1/4 mile in 13.1.
Note, I'm not saying its the norm. But if the stars are alligned & the moon is high, It's possible. (Of course its possible, its already been done).
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 403
Likes: 0
From: .
.
Originally Posted by M&M
The answer to your question is yes. A stock M3 is faster than those modd'd ones.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,193
Likes: 0
From: Bay Area SF
Silver 2002 C32, Silver 2006 CLK 350
why you gonna troll also you looser. man If you were here I'll slap you silly. I just hate your guts so bad! that why every time you post I will be there to **** you off. you troll
Last edited by Trekman; Jun 26, 2005 at 04:52 PM.
MB World Stories
The Best of Mercedes & AMG
6 Mercedes Models That Did NOT Age Well (But Are Somehow Still Cool)
Verdad Gallardo
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
Super Member
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 723
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by Trekman
why you gonna troll also you looser.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,193
Likes: 0
From: Bay Area SF
Silver 2002 C32, Silver 2006 CLK 350
dude just shut up! why dont you just leave? you dont drive a benz what the hell are you dong here. stupid a**
Last edited by Trekman; Jun 26, 2005 at 05:53 PM.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 5,475
Likes: 5
From: City with Tall buildings!
C43/55,2k11 Volvo S60 T6AWD,2k Audi B5 S4,95 Eagle Talon Tsi AWD 500+awhp
Originally Posted by M&M
Yeah, Ok, I suck. But at least I can spell the word "loser". Also, I magically can find the shift button on my keyboard & start every sentence with a caps.
Last edited by ProjectC55; Jun 26, 2005 at 09:17 PM.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,193
Likes: 0
From: Bay Area SF
Silver 2002 C32, Silver 2006 CLK 350
Why not, I challenge you M&M, bring your car @ sears point raceway and its on! no Excuses you dam troll, this is you call out, you dam chicken head.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 5,475
Likes: 5
From: City with Tall buildings!
C43/55,2k11 Volvo S60 T6AWD,2k Audi B5 S4,95 Eagle Talon Tsi AWD 500+awhp
Originally Posted by Trekman
Why not, I challenge you M&M, bring your car @ sears point raceway and its on! no Excuses you dam troll, this is you call out, you dam chicken head.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,679
Likes: 0
CLS55 AMG
Originally Posted by Compensated BMW Spokesperson & troll
Impro-man, if you get 11.56 as the average then that's fine. I accept that. What are we arguing about? I guess you think the 10.9 done by SPort Auto is impossible?
Originally Posted by Compensated BMW Spokesperson & troll
Well, whether you like it or not, that was the time.
Originally Posted by Compensated BMW Spokesperson & troll
A different mag testing a different M3 got 11.0. C&D got 11.2 for a brand new fully loaded M3.
Originally Posted by Compensated BMW Spokesperson & troll
So what's the big deal?
Originally Posted by Compensated BMW Spokesperson & troll
An M3 ordered by C&D fully loaded with almost all options, tested at 1940 miles, did 0-60 in 4.5, 0-100mph in 11.2, & 1/4 mile in 13.1 @ 107mph.
Originally Posted by Compensated BMW Spokesperson & troll
Note, I'm not saying its the norm.
Originally Posted by Compensated BMW Spokesperson & troll
But if the stars are alligned & the moon is high, It's possible. (Of course its possible, its already been done).
Super Member
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 723
Likes: 0
Impro, that's fine. We can stop arguing now. I know 1 o 2 cars have got very low 11's (& 1 in the 10's). So if the average is 11.56 then so be it.
Coolcarlski43, I jave been to the track many times & posted many videos.
Trekman, I'd love to race you at Sears Point. Unfortunately I'm on the opposite side of the world to you. But hey, we can always dream of racing each other.
Coolcarlski43, I jave been to the track many times & posted many videos.
Trekman, I'd love to race you at Sears Point. Unfortunately I'm on the opposite side of the world to you. But hey, we can always dream of racing each other.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 5,475
Likes: 5
From: City with Tall buildings!
C43/55,2k11 Volvo S60 T6AWD,2k Audi B5 S4,95 Eagle Talon Tsi AWD 500+awhp
Originally Posted by M&M
Impro, that's fine. We can stop arguing now. I know 1 o 2 cars have got very low 11's (& 1 in the 10's). So if the average is 11.56 then so be it.
Coolcarlski43, I jave been to the track many times & posted many videos.
Coolcarlski43, I jave been to the track many times & posted many videos.
Yes I've seen the video's but I think we have better drivers with those same cars that can produce better results.Let me clarify,I'm talking about the drivers of those particular AMG's that you raced so I don't want to sound so general.
Cheers!
MBworld Guru
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 22,058
Likes: 18
From: Diamond Bar, CA
W206 PHEV AMG
M&M...watch the video, STFU, and never come back 
https://mbworld.org/forums/showthrea...56#post1179056
https://mbworld.org/forums/showthrea...56#post1179056
MBworld Guru
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 22,058
Likes: 18
From: Diamond Bar, CA
W206 PHEV AMG
Originally Posted by M&M
Yeah OK, I can also post some videos that show otherwise. So who's right?
Anyway well done to that C32 guy.
Anyway well done to that C32 guy.
and the M3 looks to be SMG from the way it downshift and took off. so yeah, gratz to the driver from a ROLL! you are more pathetic than i thought...let me guess which video you want to show?? the one with clucking chicken ring tone on the cell phone right? where the driver of the c32 clearly had weaker reaction time and couldn't control the wheel from spinning off the line vs Sticky's SMG or from their slow speed roll which advantage to the better low range geared M3 and then stopped before they get to where the C32 can pass the M3 on that road named Pathfinder Road which the longest straight will probalby only let you up to 80-90mph before hitting the next stop light on a local street.
Last edited by FrankW; Jun 30, 2005 at 08:10 AM.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,112
Likes: 0
From: MB - World
Originally Posted by M&M
Yeah OK, I can also post some videos that show otherwise. So who's right?
everything started when you posted the so-called you in your I-have-done-13s-stock M3 against the C55, what so hard to take when the C32 beat the M3 from a ROLL?
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 1,367
Likes: 3
From: MA
'24 Porsche Macan
Originally Posted by FrankW
M&M...watch the video, STFU, and never come back
https://mbworld.org/forums/showthrea...56#post1179056
https://mbworld.org/forums/showthrea...56#post1179056
Rgds,
Norm
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,054
Likes: 1
From: Nashville
300SEL
I can't believe we are arguing over a few tenths here. Doesn't anyone here have a job? And the "yeah what he said, you are a troll" posts are so childish. Either ad something constructive to the debate or shut up, you sound like schoolgirls.
All I know is that a stock C32 can't turn for it's life. So what if the M3 is a fender slower, it's still the benchmark in this segment, end of story. Heck, BMW created the sport sedan segment! Not to mention that the M3 has less hp and a lot less torque, who would have thought that it was slower in a straight line.
Pointless bickering.
All I know is that a stock C32 can't turn for it's life. So what if the M3 is a fender slower, it's still the benchmark in this segment, end of story. Heck, BMW created the sport sedan segment! Not to mention that the M3 has less hp and a lot less torque, who would have thought that it was slower in a straight line.
Pointless bickering.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,193
Likes: 0
From: Bay Area SF
Silver 2002 C32, Silver 2006 CLK 350
no matter what the fact is the C32 still kick the M3 butt. so no more crying guys. I'm sure a M3 can win some race also but who said that the sun doesnt shine on a monkeys butt, it does.. So kill it C32 is still faster. Owned
