Improviz, I thought we caled a truce. Athough 99% of mags all over the world found the M3 faster, I am still prepared to accept that it could go either way on the day.

A member of this board with a C32 (Dracco) as posted his experiences at the strip & he also witnessed an M3 vs C55 at the strip while he was there. It was one win each to the M3 & C55. The C55 seems to be marginally quicker than the C32.

It must be noted that that particular M3 driver did not know what he was doing & me & my buds beat him by 0.3-0.4 seconds consistently. His 60ft times are 2.2 & above.

But being the generous person that I am, I accept that he may be representative of most M3 drivers out there. Even then he is still quicker than a C32 & about even with the C55.

So can we rest this subject now?

 

so what did ur M3 pull at the track?

 

This illustrates, perfectly, what bugs me about you: you discard each and every anectode--except those which support what you believe.

Dracco posts his experience, and you believe it.

I posted in my post that I'd run an E46 three times in a row from 80-140 last week. Do you believe that?

Do you believe the testimony of the following people, whom (as this makes it three times I've pointed this out to you now) are all BMW M3/M5 owners??

E46 M3 owner vs. his Dad's CLK55: four races, four wins for CLK55

E46 M3 owner: two races, two wins for CLK55

E46 M3 owner: multiple races, M5 vs. M3 vs. CLK55; CLK55 wins all

M5 owner who switched to CLK55 reports CLK55 is just as quick

M3 owner reports runs with W210 E55: dead even race

(note that W210 E55 is about 300 pounds heavier than W208 CLK55, with same HP and gearing, so from a roll CLK should be quicker, i.e., based upon these results it would pull M3)

add another E46 M3 owner to the list:

add still another E46 M3 owner to the list:

And you keep insisting that "all" magazines in the world have shown the M3 faster. Rubbish. Again: this makes it three times that I've pointed it out to you now that this claim is false:

Motorweek's test of CLK55 AMG: 13.4@107

Motorweek's test of E46 M3: 13.5@107

Edmunds' test of CLK55 AMG: 13.48@106.3

Edmunds' test of M3: 13.5@105

And there's an explanation for this: LSD. The M3 has an LSD, 262 lb-ft of torque, and 255mm tires; the CLK55 has no LSD, 390 lb-ft of torque, and 245mm tires. Gee, M&M, which one o' them thar cars do you think has a launch advantage? The fact is that while you can dump the clutch on an M3 at 2,000 rpm and get a good launch, if you try powerbraking the CLK55 or C55 at 2,000 rpm, you'll get spin all through first gear.

Motor Trend alluded to the traction issues in both the W210 E55 and the CLK55 when they compared them to the M5 and M3:

Read the following M3/CLK55 comparison test from Motor Trend
With nearly identical curb weights and horsepower, this pair runs comparable 0-60-mph times-5.02 sec for the M3 and 5.23 for the CLK55. The difference closes slightly at the end of the quarter mile, with the M3 recording a 13.63/103.76, while the CLK55 runs a respectable 13.74/104.44. MT test driver Chris Walton noted that the CLK55 produces lots of wheelspin off the line, while the M3 stays better hooked up. The CLK's five-speed automatic transmission performs nearly perfect shifts, thanks to the Touch Shift manumatic gear selector. However, Walton found it harder to drive the M3 once it gets rolling because it's easy to hit the 8000-rpm rev limiter on the 1-2 and 2-3 shifts of the six-speed manual transmission. A possible solution is BMW's optional Sequential Manual Gearbox ($2400). Derived from BMW's F1 cars, the system uses a manual transmission, an automated clutch (no pedal to push), and steering-wheel-mounted shift paddles. Despite being down 114 lb-ft of torque, the M3 won our acceleration test by a hair, thanks to better traction and even more aggressive gearing.

Not convinced? Read Read the following M5/E55 comparison test from Motor Trend
These cars aren't quick. They're genuinely fast: The M5 blisters 0-60 mph in a 911-like 4.6 sec. The Mercedes stays in the fours by 0.01 of a second at 4.99. The BMW's approximately 4/10 advantage hangs on through the quarter mile (13.08 at 109.41 mph versus 13.46 at 106.71). The difference isn't so much the old saw about power losses with an automatic transmission as that the Mercedes was all too happy to just smoke 'em at the starting line. In spite of a clutch that takes some practice to be smooth with, Senior Road Test Editor Chris Walton actually found the M5 easier to launch.

It's not a case of being overpowered: it's the all-important 60' time. The LSD in the M cars helps their 60' time. The fact is that it takes a great deal of skill and practice to launch these AMG cars without excessive spin. But it can be done, and when it's done, the M3's go down.

And from a roll, you see, or in the 99% of cases wherein the M3 driver doesn't launch perfectly, it is different, as the testimony of myself, and other C55/CLK55/C32 drivers, shows to those who are willing to listen.

Now you claim that in your case, you have pulled the C55 handily from a roll. Fine. This certainly doesn't gel with my experience, but maybe your car is a factory freak (or maybe mine is), but that hardly means that myself and the BMW owners whose posts I linked to above are liars.

So, you want a truce? Fine. Start by saying, for the record, that you accept my account, those of the BMW owners above, and the Edmunds/Motor Week tests I cited.

 

in defense of M&M how do we know whether the stories are BS , or if tests were controlled etc!!! so we can usually only go on our own personal experiences and appartently he's a gun driver or whatever. If you can beat M3's in your CLK then why care about his personal experiences.

 

Because his implication seems to be that I and the other people whose posts I linked to are lying. Plus, there is (or was, before it was pulled down) video of two M3/CLK55 runs in one of those posts, and I have it, and it was a tie in one, and the CLK55 won in the other, which is independent of my experience.

Further, the guy in the first post I linked to took a lot of flak from his BMW owning peers for stating that he lost to his dad's CLK55, but he stuck to his guns. And there were a lot of people who'd met him on that board...the guy who ran the W210 E55 vs. the M3 and M5 was also a longtime poster on that board.

 

It's Car & Driver's test of the C55: . Their test results: The C55 hit 60 in just 4.7 seconds and covered the quarter in 13.3 at 108 mph

Car & Driver has also tested the E46 M3. From their June 2001 article: As it does, the M3 pulls like a demon, passing the 60-mph mark in 4.7 seconds and tripping the quarter-mile lights in 13.4 seconds at 106 mph.

They also tested it again in May 2003: In its 4.8-second sprint to 60 mph, it showed taillights to the others, and it stayed ahead all the way to 150 mph, albeit with a tight margin; quarter-mile time is the same for all at 13.6 seconds. (all being the S4, C32, and M3)

Note that even though it was faster to 60 (thanks, as I noted previously, to its LSD and wider tires' traction), the C32 tied it in the 1/4 at 13.6.

Also note that the C55's 1/4 time is faster than both times C&D obtained in their tests of two different six-speed manual M3s.

So much for "all mags showing the M3 faster than the C55".

 

so its 99% not 100% now? Welcome back M&M

I would love to see you put a thorough response to Improviz's posts

 

SO do I rally have to go through all this again? I have posted all the links from Track-challenge, SPort Auto, Autocar, Evo, Spanish, Greek, South Africa, Australian mags that all got the M3 quicker. What about my video where I beat a C55 by 0.5 seconds 4 times in a row?

But I have no problem with Improviz's post. Its probably true. Problem is, I could go through BMW forums & dig up even more posts where the opposite has happened. Actually if I had time that is exactly what I would do. There was a guy on the one forum that bought an M3 & his dad had a C32. They went & tested ont he highway & he walked his dad easily. Then they swapped drivers & his dad walked him with the M3. What does that prove?

I have run 13.0 @ 108 bone stock. Lee Rutter had run 12.72 with a bone stock e46 M3. His exit speed wat 107 & his 60ft was 1.71. Those speeds prove the car was stock. Anyway his car now has minor mods & runs 12.4 @ 112. Who want links?

HEre's a guy with a stock SMG M3 that ran 13.0:

http://www.m3forum.net/m3forum/showt...ight=post+pics

What does a stock C32/55 run. Definitely not better than 12.72. Why don't you guys just show some intelligence & concede that its possible for a strong stock M3 with a good driver to beat a C32/55?

 

i must say that times at the drag strip are not the best for a comparison (definatelty not for magazine test numbers atleast) as the track may or may not be prepped and there are so many variables to consider, unless the two cars run together but even then they are on a different strip. You may think i'm pedantic but the launch is where it won or lost with the M3 and people are arqueing 0.1 sec differences (about a car length) and we all know how easy it is to lose a car length off the line.

There are things that can be done with the tyres on a stock car (if the engine really is stock that is, it'd be eay to put in a chip and no one would know) than can improve the launch, but these don't influence a rolling run.

Anyone who says the M3 will walk a C55 from a roll is well a bit optimistic IMHO, but the M can win from a standstill as proven by various magazines.

 

nope

 

ur missing the point once more, no one denies the M3 can be quicker.

hv u posted links about cantonese mags showing the M3 is quicker?

lession for u once more, dont be so dramatic when you show how quick ur ride is

 

Agreed, which is why I posted the video of me vs C55. Problem is a manual car can rev higher & use the clutch to control wheelspin. Therefore you will be leaving the line at higher rpm with less wheelspin. Not a fair contest when both cars are evenly matched. I suspect the max a C32/55 can leave the line at is 2000rpm with some wheelspin which you have to ride out. A good driver in a manual M3 can leave the line at 4000rpm plus with minimal wheelpsin (if he's prepared to slip the clutch). On semi's one can launch even higher than than.

Now, in order to catch a car that's jumped you a length or 2 off the line you need more horspower than him. If you have 1 more hp you will never catch him. You need a significant horsepower advantange to catch another fast car from behind over 400m.

On a rolling run the traction advantage of the M3 is negated & its a closer battle.

 

Hmmm, didn't i offer to run with you if you came to my town??? So, didn't you wimp out also??? It's funny how much BS comes out of your mouth.

BTW, i sold the M3 because i wanted something else...going back to my roots (off-roading and long-distance traveling).

 

I'm surprised this controversy subject comes back again and again.

I don't read much US magazines but UK Autocar clocked 343bhp Euro spec M3 in 13.7s (400m) and 0-160km/h in 11.5s and 354bhp Euro Spec C32 in 13.0s (400m) and 0-160km/h in 10.9s.

I have both E46 M3 SMG and C32 and I've pulled them side by side with a help from a friend. M3 was launched using launch control and result was both car were even at 400m. But C32 will creep away from M3 from 200km/h. Trust me both cars are quite evenly match and most of the time it's the driver that makes the difference.

Of cos I do not rule out the possibility there are some slightly faster and slower ones out of the factory. I'm sure if you pulled a few identical M3s or any other cars, you'll bound to get some faster and slower ones.

The only M3 my C32 had lost to is a 360bhp M3 CSL which is about 200lbs lighter than standard M3.

BTW both my cars are bone stock.

 

1313, you are a wise man. That is the consensus I was trying to reach here. The cars are close enought that it can go either way.

And you are right that no 2 cars (or drivers) are the same. On the thread I posted where the guy with a bone stock M3 SMG got 13.0 on 3 consecutive runs, there was mention made of another guy with some mods to his M3 SMG. he has chip, exhaust, etc. He ran a best of 12.9. So some cars are just faster stock than others.

 

My question is whether Mercedes-Benz has the technological know how to build a normally aspirated 3.2 liter engine which puts out 333hp...?? Possibly they can do it, but choose not to in order preserve engine life? I wonder why our 5.5 liter V8 engines can only match and not easily beat E46 M3 cars.. I'm assuming that the tech, now in the 3.5 liter V6 Benzes will find its way into their V8s so that output will climb in the 420hp range...
Eric...

 

would SLK55 AMG beats M3 ?

 

oh definitely... the SLK55 weighs significantly less than the C55 and has the 7-speed auto...
Eric...

 

Yeah SLK55 should beat an M3. But M3 is in its final production year. 4.5 V8 M3 with 440hp will be here in a year's time.

 

Let me get back on topic for a moment and give you some insight as to why I chose the C55 over the M3 for what it's worth... Before buying my old C32, I looked at the M3 but didn't seriously consider it because I wanted a sedan that could carry 3 extra passengers comfortably. I wanted an automatic and was skeptical about the SMG II transmission cars due to some of the failures I read about with this new technology. I also thought the engine was too high strung, making so much power from only a 3.2 liter I-6.. The other thing I didn't like was the stigma attached to the BMW (especially motorsport) logo. Is it me, or are there a lot of A-holes who drive M3s? :p In the Betheda, MD area where I live, there are a parade of BMWs that cruise up and down the pike. 3-series cars are as common as Accords.. The C-class AMG cars have more exclusivity. Lastly... Although the M3 is a beautifully designed car, it also has in your face radical styling saying "Hey look at me".. I'm more into tasteful yet elegant designs. Like the 5 Dawinian finches which lived happily in their 5 different ecological niches, there are well established niches for cars of the same class. AMG, Motorsport, and Audisport coexist very nicely because they appeal to different types of customers.
Eric...

 

:p You just had to add that last part in, didn't you? All he asked was whether the SLK55 was quicker than an M3.. Some of you BMW guys can't simply answer the question and have to end up with BMW somehow on top.. Yeah the SLK55 should beat an M3, but not for long... lol you guys crack me up sometimes..
Eric....

 

so your best run was 13.0 @ 108mph and your buddys 12.7 @ 107mph.... and you think u can beat a stock C55 under teh same conditions?

 

You didn't show. Wimped out. I offered to run you for $$$, and you didn't take it. End of story.

 

440hp and how many lb ft of torque at what RPM?

 

A cold fusion, C55 (55 gigawatts; 300 MPH) will be here in 20 years. . .

I already put a deposit down on one.

For now, I guess we will all have to drive the vehicles CURRENTLY IN PRODUCTION.