m3 or c43?
08-12-2007, 10:56 PM
#2
MBWorld Fanatic!
Depends where you like to run. I'll give you the numbers and you can decide:
This is from a comparo in September of 1999 in Car and Driver:
0-60:
C43 6.1 seconds
M3 6.0 seconds
0-100:
C43 14.9 seconds
M3 16.0 seconds
0-130:
C43 29.2 seconds
M3 33.2 seconds
1/4 Mile:
C43 14.6 @ 99 mph
M3 14.6 @ 95 mph
5-60:
C43 6.4 seconds
M3 6.3 seconds
Top gear 30-50:
C43 3.5 seconds
M3 7.1 seconds
Top gear 50-70:
C43 4.1 seconds
M3 7.1 seconds
My favorite number:
70-0 braking:
C43 159 ft.
M3 167 ft.
As you can tell, the M3 is quicker off the line, but the C43 will dust it up top. For me, I like the looks of the C43 better and I wanted a V8. I didn't necessarily want an auto, but that was the only downside for me. I like everything about the C43 over the M3 except for the transmission. I think a C43 would beat an E36 M3 in all areas of acceleration if it had a manual box.
This is from a comparo in September of 1999 in Car and Driver:
0-60:
C43 6.1 seconds
M3 6.0 seconds
0-100:
C43 14.9 seconds
M3 16.0 seconds
0-130:
C43 29.2 seconds
M3 33.2 seconds
1/4 Mile:
C43 14.6 @ 99 mph
M3 14.6 @ 95 mph
5-60:
C43 6.4 seconds
M3 6.3 seconds
Top gear 30-50:
C43 3.5 seconds
M3 7.1 seconds
Top gear 50-70:
C43 4.1 seconds
M3 7.1 seconds
My favorite number:
70-0 braking:
C43 159 ft.
M3 167 ft.
As you can tell, the M3 is quicker off the line, but the C43 will dust it up top. For me, I like the looks of the C43 better and I wanted a V8. I didn't necessarily want an auto, but that was the only downside for me. I like everything about the C43 over the M3 except for the transmission. I think a C43 would beat an E36 M3 in all areas of acceleration if it had a manual box.
08-13-2007, 09:09 AM
#3
Super Member
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 674
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
1999 C43
Awesome info. dude! Thank you very much.
Depends where you like to run. I'll give you the numbers and you can decide:
This is from a comparo in September of 1999 in Car and Driver:
0-60:
C43 6.1 seconds
M3 6.0 seconds
0-100:
C43 14.9 seconds
M3 16.0 seconds
0-130:
C43 29.2 seconds
M3 33.2 seconds
1/4 Mile:
C43 14.6 @ 99 mph
M3 14.6 @ 95 mph
5-60:
C43 6.4 seconds
M3 6.3 seconds
Top gear 30-50:
C43 3.5 seconds
M3 7.1 seconds
Top gear 50-70:
C43 4.1 seconds
M3 7.1 seconds
My favorite number:
70-0 braking:
C43 159 ft.
M3 167 ft.
As you can tell, the M3 is quicker off the line, but the C43 will dust it up top. For me, I like the looks of the C43 better and I wanted a V8. I didn't necessarily want an auto, but that was the only downside for me. I like everything about the C43 over the M3 except for the transmission. I think a C43 would beat an E36 M3 in all areas of acceleration if it had a manual box.
This is from a comparo in September of 1999 in Car and Driver:
0-60:
C43 6.1 seconds
M3 6.0 seconds
0-100:
C43 14.9 seconds
M3 16.0 seconds
0-130:
C43 29.2 seconds
M3 33.2 seconds
1/4 Mile:
C43 14.6 @ 99 mph
M3 14.6 @ 95 mph
5-60:
C43 6.4 seconds
M3 6.3 seconds
Top gear 30-50:
C43 3.5 seconds
M3 7.1 seconds
Top gear 50-70:
C43 4.1 seconds
M3 7.1 seconds
My favorite number:
70-0 braking:
C43 159 ft.
M3 167 ft.
As you can tell, the M3 is quicker off the line, but the C43 will dust it up top. For me, I like the looks of the C43 better and I wanted a V8. I didn't necessarily want an auto, but that was the only downside for me. I like everything about the C43 over the M3 except for the transmission. I think a C43 would beat an E36 M3 in all areas of acceleration if it had a manual box.
08-13-2007, 09:23 AM
#4
MBWorld Fanatic!
08-13-2007, 11:09 AM
#6
Super Member
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 674
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
1999 C43
Trending Topics
08-13-2007, 11:51 PM
#8
Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Monument, CO
Posts: 128
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
95 Bronco w/351 V8 & 2003 Mustang MACH 1
I'm thinking manual b/c in the April 1995 issue of Sports Csr International there is a BMW ad advetising the M3 automatic hitting 0-60 in 6.9 seconds.
08-14-2007, 08:29 PM
#9
MBWorld Fanatic!
08-18-2007, 12:05 AM
#10
Member
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Iowa
Posts: 117
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
98 C43, 86 Porsche 951, 98 Volvo S70 T5M
Auto e36 M3 vs C43 = C43 by a huge margin.
5sp e36 vs C43 = pretty close and faster to 60 with a great driver.
However the C43 has way more power and it shows. Once the lighter weight and advantage of the 5 speed get you off the line the C43 catches up quick and will blow right by it. With over 60 more hp the M3 can't keep up without mods. Though the M3 can be easily modded to take a C43 for cheap.
I've driven an M3 with all the boltons and they are very quick. Not snap you back in your seat, but definitely big top end rush. I've also driven a bone stock one and they aren't terribly impressive as a fast car unless you know how to shift well and hold gears to redline. They don't make a ton of torque and need to be driven well to really be fast. i.e. you can't just mash the gas and go fast in an M3. Kinda like a Prelude, you need to get it revved up and shift right to get it to go.
Both handle really well and are somewhat of a sleepr car. Both are really fun. Either one is a blast to drive. If you want neck snapping torque at about 3K rpm the C43 is for you. If you can wait for a top end charge at 5K rpm then an M3 might be more your style. Though the C43 has a huge top end charge at 5K rpm as well due it its dual length intake runners and ligher internals. Just not as many people slap headers on a C43 for 3-4K like they do M3s for a lot less $$$.
If there was a C43 manual it would rock an e36 M3 and probably an e46 as well. The tweaked 4.3L is a beast and is only held back by the tranny.
5sp e36 vs C43 = pretty close and faster to 60 with a great driver.
However the C43 has way more power and it shows. Once the lighter weight and advantage of the 5 speed get you off the line the C43 catches up quick and will blow right by it. With over 60 more hp the M3 can't keep up without mods. Though the M3 can be easily modded to take a C43 for cheap.
I've driven an M3 with all the boltons and they are very quick. Not snap you back in your seat, but definitely big top end rush. I've also driven a bone stock one and they aren't terribly impressive as a fast car unless you know how to shift well and hold gears to redline. They don't make a ton of torque and need to be driven well to really be fast. i.e. you can't just mash the gas and go fast in an M3. Kinda like a Prelude, you need to get it revved up and shift right to get it to go.
Both handle really well and are somewhat of a sleepr car. Both are really fun. Either one is a blast to drive. If you want neck snapping torque at about 3K rpm the C43 is for you. If you can wait for a top end charge at 5K rpm then an M3 might be more your style. Though the C43 has a huge top end charge at 5K rpm as well due it its dual length intake runners and ligher internals. Just not as many people slap headers on a C43 for 3-4K like they do M3s for a lot less $$$.
If there was a C43 manual it would rock an e36 M3 and probably an e46 as well. The tweaked 4.3L is a beast and is only held back by the tranny.
08-18-2007, 09:35 AM
#11
Super Member
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 674
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
1999 C43
What i don't get is, how BMW's M3 engine can do all this without supercharger or turbo charger? I considered 99 M3 for years..
any ideas?
any ideas?
Auto e36 M3 vs C43 = C43 by a huge margin.
5sp e36 vs C43 = pretty close and faster to 60 with a great driver.
However the C43 has way more power and it shows. Once the lighter weight and advantage of the 5 speed get you off the line the C43 catches up quick and will blow right by it. With over 60 more hp the M3 can't keep up without mods. Though the M3 can be easily modded to take a C43 for cheap.
I've driven an M3 with all the boltons and they are very quick. Not snap you back in your seat, but definitely big top end rush. I've also driven a bone stock one and they aren't terribly impressive as a fast car unless you know how to shift well and hold gears to redline. They don't make a ton of torque and need to be driven well to really be fast. i.e. you can't just mash the gas and go fast in an M3. Kinda like a Prelude, you need to get it revved up and shift right to get it to go.
Both handle really well and are somewhat of a sleepr car. Both are really fun. Either one is a blast to drive. If you want neck snapping torque at about 3K rpm the C43 is for you. If you can wait for a top end charge at 5K rpm then an M3 might be more your style. Though the C43 has a huge top end charge at 5K rpm as well due it its dual length intake runners and ligher internals. Just not as many people slap headers on a C43 for 3-4K like they do M3s for a lot less $$$.
If there was a C43 manual it would rock an e36 M3 and probably an e46 as well. The tweaked 4.3L is a beast and is only held back by the tranny.
5sp e36 vs C43 = pretty close and faster to 60 with a great driver.
However the C43 has way more power and it shows. Once the lighter weight and advantage of the 5 speed get you off the line the C43 catches up quick and will blow right by it. With over 60 more hp the M3 can't keep up without mods. Though the M3 can be easily modded to take a C43 for cheap.
I've driven an M3 with all the boltons and they are very quick. Not snap you back in your seat, but definitely big top end rush. I've also driven a bone stock one and they aren't terribly impressive as a fast car unless you know how to shift well and hold gears to redline. They don't make a ton of torque and need to be driven well to really be fast. i.e. you can't just mash the gas and go fast in an M3. Kinda like a Prelude, you need to get it revved up and shift right to get it to go.
Both handle really well and are somewhat of a sleepr car. Both are really fun. Either one is a blast to drive. If you want neck snapping torque at about 3K rpm the C43 is for you. If you can wait for a top end charge at 5K rpm then an M3 might be more your style. Though the C43 has a huge top end charge at 5K rpm as well due it its dual length intake runners and ligher internals. Just not as many people slap headers on a C43 for 3-4K like they do M3s for a lot less $$$.
If there was a C43 manual it would rock an e36 M3 and probably an e46 as well. The tweaked 4.3L is a beast and is only held back by the tranny.
08-18-2007, 02:00 PM
#13
MBWorld Fanatic!
) It also just has to do with modern engine technology. The Lexus IS350 makes over 300 hp on a six cylinder and the 350Z is somewhere close and neither of those cars are in the high end market. Technology will continue to evolve and moderns cars will make cars from the previous decade look like dinosaurs.
08-18-2007, 05:23 PM
#14
MBWorld Fanatic!
Auto e36 M3 vs C43 = C43 by a huge margin.
5sp e36 vs C43 = pretty close and faster to 60 with a great driver.
However the C43 has way more power and it shows. Once the lighter weight and advantage of the 5 speed get you off the line the C43 catches up quick and will blow right by it. With over 60 more hp the M3 can't keep up without mods. Though the M3 can be easily modded to take a C43 for cheap.
5sp e36 vs C43 = pretty close and faster to 60 with a great driver.
However the C43 has way more power and it shows. Once the lighter weight and advantage of the 5 speed get you off the line the C43 catches up quick and will blow right by it. With over 60 more hp the M3 can't keep up without mods. Though the M3 can be easily modded to take a C43 for cheap.
I've driven an M3 with all the boltons and they are very quick. Not snap you back in your seat, but definitely big top end rush. I've also driven a bone stock one and they aren't terribly impressive as a fast car unless you know how to shift well and hold gears to redline. They don't make a ton of torque and need to be driven well to really be fast. i.e. you can't just mash the gas and go fast in an M3. Kinda like a Prelude, you need to get it revved up and shift right to get it to go.
Though the C43 has a huge top end charge at 5K rpm as well due it its dual length intake runners and ligher internals. Just not as many people slap headers on a C43 for 3-4K like they do M3s for a lot less $$$.
If there was a C43 manual it would rock an e36 M3 and probably an e46 as well. The tweaked 4.3L is a beast and is only held back by the tranny.
If there was a C43 manual it would rock an e36 M3 and probably an e46 as well. The tweaked 4.3L is a beast and is only held back by the tranny.
I own a 99M3 and an M332i and I endorse everything that you have said.
Last edited by ProjectC55; 08-18-2007 at 05:30 PM.
08-18-2007, 06:52 PM
#15
Super Member
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 674
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
1999 C43
Very good information, thank you
Well, in regards to the E36 M3, nothing really special about the stateside version. The C36 made a good bit more power. In regards to the E46 M3, that is a much higher strained engine in comparison to something like a C43. If Ferrari can make 493 horsepower out of 4.3 liters, I think MB can make more than 302 hp. However, the Ferrari requires regular valve adjustments and pretty rigorous maintenance in comparison to the Benz. The Benz engine will probably last longer (notice that the tranny usually dies first so we'll never know ) It also just has to do with modern engine technology. The Lexus IS350 makes over 300 hp on a six cylinder and the 350Z is somewhere close and neither of those cars are in the high end market. Technology will continue to evolve and moderns cars will make cars from the previous decade look like dinosaurs.
) It also just has to do with modern engine technology. The Lexus IS350 makes over 300 hp on a six cylinder and the 350Z is somewhere close and neither of those cars are in the high end market. Technology will continue to evolve and moderns cars will make cars from the previous decade look like dinosaurs.
08-20-2007, 12:37 AM
#16
Member
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Iowa
Posts: 117
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
98 C43, 86 Porsche 951, 98 Volvo S70 T5M
What people don't realize about e36 M3s is they don't feel as fast as thier numbers would indicate. In fact I'm pretty sure most M3 drivers couldn't pull a 14.9 let alone a 14.1 with them. Because a lot of the drivers nowadays are getting to be punks and wannabes. The price of the e36 M3 has gotten down to where I saw Vanilla Ice driving one today. Must have been all of 17 years old with hat backward. It was truly a shame. Most enthusiasts are moving on the the e46 and for good reason. I'm not knocking e36 M3 drivers, but the talent pool of owners seems to be getting diluted nowadays.
It takes a lot of driving skill to get the M3 to reach the performance numbers it is capable of. Which is one reason they are so sweet. It is a very precision car and if you drive them right they can run like crazy. Only car enthusiasts need to apply.
The auto e36 M3 may as well be just a 328 with a body kit. That is an e36. The e46 with SMG is sweet. Drove one with a bunch of Dinan stuff on it and it flew. The e46 look so sweet as well. I'm still more partial to the sleeper look of the e36 as it doesn't scream performance car like the e46 does.
