Doctodd33

just wanted to open this to anyone who has driven both....id like opinions. The M3 seems to be much cheaper and lighter, but is it worth it?

Doctodd33

M3 has a weight of 4740....this is GVWR based on a pic of the door which i think includes four 200lb people. So the vehicle weight is 3940?....correct me if im wrong.

T

LZH

What does the weight have to do with anything ?? Not sure what your are getting at. The BS is in a different league....

DFW01E55

According to some source or another, the '09 M3 weighs 3,648.

If they use the same scales as MB, they're probably 200lbs light.

55 ON IT

Try comparing the M3 to the C63 instead.

SMP

I agree that the M3 is much cheaper than a Black Series, but for sure is not a light weight. Keep in mind that Mercedes adds a driver, luggage and an almost full tank of gas to the total weight of the car. In my opinion the M3 doesn't compare to a BS, the one that does is a Porsche GT3 or GT3 RS. Both cars were designed to perform on the track as well as on the street. The M3, unless BMW is going to built a CSL, was not really designed for the track. I have driven the E92 M3 only once, but owned the E46 M3, so I'll give you my opinion based on the M6 that I have now. The BS has torque, so right above idle it pulls and keeps making power all the way to red line. The M6 in comparison, starts to come alive at 5000 rpm. If you keep it in the rev band between 5000 and 8000, it is fun to drive and has plenty of power. However below that, it feels uninspiring and numb. The BS is more of an effort to drive, especially when driven fast, it requires your 100% attention. The suspension is much firmer, the steering more direct and is all together more involving. The brakes are better too, I've never experienced brake fade, not even on the track. The M6 is much better suited as a daily driver. Even in the firmest shock setting, which can be adjusted via iDrive, it is still "soft" compared to the BS. When it comes to the transmission, the M6 shines. I really do like the SMG. Altogether, the M6 is a very nice car, but it does not stir the emotions the way the BS does.

Doctodd33

LZH......weight is pretty important in a street and track car dont u think?

SMP....that is the type of info im looking for. After i posted i did some more searching and besides 1 liter and 100HP differences in the engine, and not much of a weight difference, the M3 left me with a "blah" sensation. The only thing i really like now is the way the pano roof blends in with the windshield.

SMP

SMP....that is the type of info im looking for. After i posted i did some more searching and besides 1 liter and 100HP differences in the engine, and not much of a weight difference, the M3 left me with a "blah" sensation. The only thing i really like now is the way the pano roof blends in with the windshield.[/QUOTE]

You mean the carbon fiber roof?

Frankster

the only similarity between the BS and the M3 is the coupeness. Everything else is very different. A better comparison would be the M3 and C63

PC Valkyrie

It's great to see many CLK63 Black Series owners enjoy/talk about the track capabilities of their cars. However, I can't help but point out that the E92 M3 does offers fairly impressive track performance capability. Even though the M3 is priced as a competitor to the C63, it offers on track performance which is more similar to the CLK63 Black Series.

Some of you may know about the German magazine Sport Auto and their "Supertests", where they use the same pro driver for many years now to do hot laps around the Nurburgring and Hockenheim (along with all the usual instrumented tests of acceleration and handling).

Here are the laptimes for various cars of interest, all driven by Mr. Horst von Saurma, and all on R-compound tires.

Nurburgring/Hockenheim

CLK63 BS (Pirelli P Zero Corsa)- 8.05/1.13,8
E92 M3 (Michelin Pilot Sport Cup) - 8.05/1.14,3
911 C2S with PDK (Michelin Pilot Sport Cup) - 7.50/1.13,4
911 GT3 (Michelin Pilot Sport Cup) - 7.48/1.11,7

The 997 GT3 (and even the new 997 Mk2 C2S with PDK) are a clear step above the CLK63 BS when it comes to on track performance with a pro behind the wheel, likely at the limit.

Of course, this may not be the same situation on your typical lapping track days with non-pro drivers. My guess is that the CLK63 BS would be easier to drive fast for the average driver because of it's huge torque and power advantage. Nonetheless, I think laptimes from Sport Auto give decent estimation of the cars' capabilties relative to each other.

LZH

What times and exact tracks are these ?? Sure the M3 will turn A fast lap. But will it turn them all day long without failure, overheating, cooking the brakes etc ? I doubt it...

ET550

Supercars.net which does a compilation of Nuburgring lap times for high performance vehicles confirms the Sport Auto time of 8:05 for the M3 but has the BS at 7:45 which makes a lot more sense to me then the exact same 8:05 time you have posted for the BS above. Link below
http://www.supercars.net/PitLane?vie...ID=0&tID=10073

SMP

Not only the M3, but every M car is quiet capable of good lap times. But it was not purpose built for extended track use. The Porsche on the other hand, especially the GT3, was. The key here is that at the track, especially if ambient temperatures are high, every liquid will start to boil in the M3 after less than 10 laps. Now if you take a closer look at the Black Series, you will find all kinds of upgrades made specifically for track use. I'm not aware of any M car having a seem welded and triangulated chassis, nor oil coolers for steering, transmission and differential. There are many more upgraded components, actually too many to list in the Black Series, that can be seen if you take the time to do so. I'm not saying that the BS is the best track car, but it is on par with a GT3. The only advantage that the Porsche has is that it weighs less. I do like M cars very much and owned quiet a few, but they don't come close to a BS or GT3.

LZH

Great post SMP - the bs fills the gab between luxury and performance that has never really been filled before. luxury, refinement, driveability, performance, endurance....only the bs does them all. as i said, the bs series is in a different league. have you ever looked at the rear calipers on an M6 ??? No way they would handle extendeed trak use

Doctodd33

i agree the BS is a better track car and it was designed for such. The M3 is more of a mass produced street car and was designed as such.......and could easily have brake lines and transmission coolers upgraded and still have enough money left over. Im just talking bang for the buck.

PC Valkyrie

For comparative purposes, I only go by the times put out by Sport Auto for Ring laptimes.....an independent, non-manufacturer source with the SAME DRIVER for each test. That list you post is a big mish mash of laptimes from ANY source with different drivers. You do also know that there are various configurations of the Nurburgring, so that list doesn't take any of that into account.

transferred

Perfectly said, and with the facts to back it up. Due to weight and Porsche's braking experience, it doesn't take a GT3 to out brake and out lap the overweight BS, it just takes a C2 with a good driver. Yes, the BS is a better buy for those who are average or want the safety net of a front engine layout but the better drivers will prefer the lighter car. Whoever said "what does weight have to do with it," well the less they say the better.

As regards the M3, all the E92 (or M3 pp) needs to compete in braking are track pads and fluid, possibly lines if it's an all day session. Now, it will still fall short of the P-cars and even the BS but it certainly has enough. Steering feel, brake feel and chassis competence come for free in M cars and the 6-speed or SMG will take a prolonged beating and still come back for more. The dual clutch is too new to tell so I won't comment on that.

I am faster around the track in my E46 than I was in my 996 GT3. That is because I'll admit to being far from a pro-driver and I feel more confident extracting 10/10ths from the little M. It seems certain BS owners should drop the bravado ("our car is too expensive to compare to an M3") and defensiveness ("look at this time...") and add humility ("good comparison OP, but at least the BS is more rare") to their wheel house.

clkwork

I was considering an E92 M3 before I bought my BS. I can't speak to track performance but from what I've heard they are pretty evenly matched. That's a great accomplishment and I don't think anyone is trying to downplay that but that doesn't tell the entire story.

When I took an E92 out for a test drive I was very underwhelmed with the power, the engine has so little torque it's pathetic. You honestly have to rev the **** out of it to get moving at all. Below 4000 rpm it's no better than any other economy car which just isn't fun for me. By comparison any 63 V8 is a beast with tons of power on tap from the moment you press the accelerator.

The M3 has a softer more comfortable ride than the BS but again that's not what I'm looking for. The E46 M3 was a lot better than the E92 in my opinion, it seemed more connected and in control. I'm still amazed that these new M3s can turn such great numbers on the track without beating you to death like the BS.

Anyway I'm not going to sit here and compare every point of the E92 M3 against a CLK BS. They are completely different animals. Sure they may have similar track performance but saying that it put the cars in the same league is like saying a turbocharged Mazda Miata is in the same league as a Ferrari because the specs and track times are comparable.

Final thoughts:
M3: lighter (?), rev-happy motor, softer ride, real 6-speed gearbox
CLKBS: torque monster, very stiff ride, 7-speed flappy-paddle slushbox

Jim Brady

High reving cars like the M3 and GT3 where you have to ring their neck to extract the performance are not much fun in the everyday world. For the 1% of the time that they see track duty they are quite nice, except at the end of the day you don't want to drive them home.
Most of the BS owners have had a wide assortment of high performance cars and thats why they bought the BS. I'm so tired of hearing the BS is too heavy fed by the porsche kool aid drinkers. Ya the porsche wins in the braking zone and loses coming out of the corners. In a 20-30 minute track session it's irrelevent as it's a drivers race with the BS winning most of the time. BTW, its far easier to drive the BS close to the limit than the porsche unless you get paid. For the time being my BS is my prefered tack day toy, as my turbo sits with the trickle charger hoping to regain my favor, which isn't going to happen.
Jimmy

LZH

Not sure who this shot was aimed at or if it's just BS envy. Regardless, I'll take a stab....

I have yet to see a BS owner in this thread claim their car is better because it costs more so you can throw that bravado argument out the door. Defensive about the fact that Autosport turned an 8:05 compared to Bernd Schneider's 7:45 ?? All that tells me is Schneider is a better driver than Mr. Horst von Saurma. And Saurma is NOT a pro driver as PC said...He had a brief racing career. Clearly from his lap times in the BS, he should stick to his day job as CHIEF EDITOR of a car mag as he was TWENTY SECONDS off Schneider's pace.
And lastly...humility ? I believe the BS owners here have been more than humble about their cars abilities when in fact comparing it to an M3 makes no sense at all. They are very, very different cars altogether. A better comparison would be between the BS and the much more expensive F430. Even then the BS still comes out on top in all categories (besides flash). Have you been behind the wheel of a BS on the track ? Have you even driven one ? The OP did ask for opinions from those who have driven both and I have...on the street and on the track. It seems certain to me that your cynicism is due largely by the fact that you own an M3.

SMP

I was born in Germany and have been many times to the Nuerburgring, but I can assure you that there is only ONE configuration around the Nuerburgring Nordschleife.

Cylinder Head

iTrader: (1)

That's not true, and you spelled Nurburgring wrong.

SMP

By reading not only this post, but every single one about the Black Series, you have nothing but negative things to say about the car. If someone asks me for a comparison between two cars, I'll base my opinion on first hand experience, and not on what some magazine or tester has to say about it. Like I said before, I like Porsche and M cars and had a few. Every one was bought brand new, and sometimes I had a Porsche and M car at the same time. You have to admit, that is a perfect scenario for a true comparison.

SMP

Since German is my first language, I think I know how to spell. I usually go once a year to Germany, let me know if you'd like to go to the Nordschleife. I'm always up for it.

ET550

Well obviously you are a porsche enthusiast that chooses to pick the numbers that best support your argument. you chose to pick a porsche 997 with PDK which was obviously tested at a much later date rather than the 997 C2S which Sport Auto also timed at 8:05 around Nurburgring. Maybe we should all be driving the paragon of track cars, the Aston Martin Vantage V8 which Sport Auto tested at 8:03. Bottom line is that the Sport Auto times are no more reliable or trustworthy than any body elses, and are subject to the limits of their drivers and the test conditions on that day.