E46 M3 vs SLK 55
07-24-2006, 12:58 AM
#151
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: OC, SoCal
Posts: 2,318
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
08 S65, 06 M3 CS(stick), 02 BMW X5 4.6iS, 07 R1 Raven, 08 F-450 4x4, 08 CooperS JCW
Originally Posted by PC Valkyrie
I agree with most things you've written, but you could lose your life savings if you made that bet about the E46 M3 blowing away the C55 AMG on a race track.
Identical times of 8.22 minutes around the Nurburging for both the E46 M3 and C55 AMG as published by Sport Auto. In Evo magazine, the M3 CS (competition package) was compared head to head with the C55 AMG on their benchmark 1.8mile test track. M3 CS's laptime of 89.8 seconds was only 0.3 seconds faster than the C55's time of 90.1 seconds.
In other words, the C55 handles VERY well compared to the M3 and it is totally a driver's race between the two in a drag race AND on a track. Yes, the M3 is a more involving and confidence inspiring than the C55 at the limits, but it isn't much faster around a curvy track.
BMW owners almost never acknowledge this fact and just assume all AMG cars suck in the handling department.
Identical times of 8.22 minutes around the Nurburging for both the E46 M3 and C55 AMG as published by Sport Auto. In Evo magazine, the M3 CS (competition package) was compared head to head with the C55 AMG on their benchmark 1.8mile test track. M3 CS's laptime of 89.8 seconds was only 0.3 seconds faster than the C55's time of 90.1 seconds.
In other words, the C55 handles VERY well compared to the M3 and it is totally a driver's race between the two in a drag race AND on a track. Yes, the M3 is a more involving and confidence inspiring than the C55 at the limits, but it isn't much faster around a curvy track.
BMW owners almost never acknowledge this fact and just assume all AMG cars suck in the handling department.
Track times don't lie, and the gap is very close. M, S/RS and AMG are all good at what they do.
AndrewAZ- there's a difference between a 12 second quarter mile and a quarter mile time in the 12s. A stock M3 can achieve the latter, not the former.
07-24-2006, 01:03 AM
#152
Newbie
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Improviz
He clearly wants to lower the value of our AMG cars by posting a multitude of outright lies about our cars and about BMWs in an attempt to portray the M cars as being better than they actually are, and portraying the AMG cars as being worse than they actually are.
Last edited by Pitzi; 07-24-2006 at 01:07 AM.
07-24-2006, 01:55 AM
#153
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Arizona
Posts: 2,767
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BMW FTW
Originally Posted by transferred
All good points. The reason is that many M3 drivers, unfortunately, lack genuine car knowledge. The car itself is more focused than its rivals but its good looks and undeniably more marketable name attracts the wrong 'boy racer' crowd.
Track times don't lie, and the gap is very close. M, S/RS and AMG are all good at what they do.
AndrewAZ- there's a difference between a 12 second quarter mile and a quarter mile time in the 12s. A stock M3 can achieve the latter, not the former.
Track times don't lie, and the gap is very close. M, S/RS and AMG are all good at what they do.
AndrewAZ- there's a difference between a 12 second quarter mile and a quarter mile time in the 12s. A stock M3 can achieve the latter, not the former.
This who is faster argument is always funny to me when it involves the M3 C55 SLK 55 and especially the S4. Depending on what forum you are in the winner varies... You go to the M3 forum and they have kill stories about walking C55 and SLK 55 and S4's... Go here and the SLK >M3 &S4. Go to audi and the S4> M3 & AMG. I thought people would be better at each forum lets not be like the civic forum who brags about trashing AMG's M's and S4's.....
Last edited by AndrewAZ; 07-24-2006 at 02:03 AM.
07-24-2006, 03:54 AM
#154
Super Member
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: san francisco
Posts: 999
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C32
Originally Posted by CDN-SLK55
Guys, I own both an E46 M3 and an SLK55 and I can honestly tell you the SLK55 is much faster than my M3. I have raced my SLK with the M3 and raced the M3 with my SLK and the SLK wins easily everytime. Not to criticize the driver of the SLK but I am unclear of the driving skills here.
07-24-2006, 04:00 AM
#155
Super Member
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: san francisco
Posts: 999
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C32
Originally Posted by Improviz
Hmm, you must be very "frustrated", given the amount of time you spend pondering about my sex life. Why don't you and your sweetie-face Sherwin go get a few new issues of Roundel and do some circle-jerks to the nice BMW photos, eh?
Or, better still: post a photo of your right hand so we can see ol' Sherwin's girlfriend.
Or, better still: post a photo of your right hand so we can see ol' Sherwin's girlfriend.
What I fail to see is why would SB, who owns a SLK55, professes how much he got walked on by a M3. Is it really his SLK55 or another person?
Or are Pitzi, SB, and M&M the same person? The plot thickens
.
07-24-2006, 04:09 AM
#156
Super Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 723
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by ultraseven
but you see, the trolls from SA won't believe you regardless, and they are going to try very hard to convince you otherwise.
07-24-2006, 04:11 AM
#157
Newbie
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by ultraseven
ROFL ....
What I fail to see is why would SB, who owns a SLK55, professes how much he got walked on by a M3. Is it really his SLK55 or another person?
Or are Pitzi, SB, and M&M the same person? The plot thickens.
What I fail to see is why would SB, who owns a SLK55, professes how much he got walked on by a M3. Is it really his SLK55 or another person?
Or are Pitzi, SB, and M&M the same person? The plot thickens
.
07-24-2006, 08:28 AM
#160
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,679
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CLS55 AMG
Originally Posted by M&M
Hey guys, I'm the driver of the M3. You guys are correct, it is not stock. Howver, power-wise it is. It makes the same power as other stock M3's on the dyno. We have quite a few guys online here that can vouch for that as I have been to a few dyno days.
I have the 4.1 ratio in my stock diff, K&N flat panel filter, & Schnitzer backbox (which makes no power). The SLK did have a passenger but the main problem is the auto box. Rolling in auto mode, it sometimes kicks down when you stomp it which takes a few tenths.
I have the 4.1 ratio in my stock diff, K&N flat panel filter, & Schnitzer backbox (which makes no power). The SLK did have a passenger but the main problem is the auto box. Rolling in auto mode, it sometimes kicks down when you stomp it which takes a few tenths.
Originally Posted by FrankW
may want to get a stock M3 while ur at that.
Originally Posted by M&M
Yeah we know how tuneable these M3's are. M division took 2 years to make the CSL, changed a whole lot of hardware, went to Alpha N programming with the map sensor & got 15hp over a stock Euro spec.
http://www.m3forum.net/m3forum/showthread.php?t=119367
Originally Posted by M&M
Ok so I have over 20 runs recorded on the VBox at a private testing facility. After installing the 4.1 diff, I went back there. I record EVERYTHING whenever I do a run. Things like:
- Ambient temperature
- Barometric pressure
- Humidity
- Type of fuel
- Amount of fuel in the tank
- Tyres
- RPM at launch & type of launch
So I called up a run from with the stock diff under similar conditions. Here are the results.
(bunch of graphs of his vbox runs posted detailing how the rear diff made his car faster)
Well this is the most important one as it shows who will actually win in a race. In this particular race the stock car had better traction & was ahead initially. At around 3.5 seconds the cars are level. But from then on the 4.1 car slowly puts distance on the stock car & after 15.38 seconds it is 8m ahead, which is 2 carlengths.
On the 1/4 mile times, the 4.1 car was 0.2 faster & 1.4 mph faster depsite having a slightly poorer 60ft time.
- Ambient temperature
- Barometric pressure
- Humidity
- Type of fuel
- Amount of fuel in the tank
- Tyres
- RPM at launch & type of launch
So I called up a run from with the stock diff under similar conditions. Here are the results.
(bunch of graphs of his vbox runs posted detailing how the rear diff made his car faster)
Well this is the most important one as it shows who will actually win in a race. In this particular race the stock car had better traction & was ahead initially. At around 3.5 seconds the cars are level. But from then on the 4.1 car slowly puts distance on the stock car & after 15.38 seconds it is 8m ahead, which is 2 carlengths.
On the 1/4 mile times, the 4.1 car was 0.2 faster & 1.4 mph faster depsite having a slightly poorer 60ft time.
Busted again. 
Originally Posted by M&M
All the while the M3 with its instantaneous, hair-trigger throttle response (especiallly with the 4.1 diff), gets an quick jump. If often looks like the M3 is going 1st, but I wasn't. That's simple the nature of racing an individual throttle-bodied, short ratio'd, manual car with a frenetic power delivery.
Busted again. Twice in one post. One more to add to the list.
Last edited by Improviz; 07-24-2006 at 10:06 AM.
07-24-2006, 10:33 AM
#161
Super Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 723
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Improviz
Hmm, so in two separate posts, you implied, falsely it turns out, that your mods didn't make your car any faster??
BUSTED DUMBASS!
Anyway, 0.2 is not significant as most of my colleagues were saying. It's better than nothing.
Say what did my alleged bosses have to say?
07-24-2006, 10:36 AM
#162
Super Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 723
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Improviz
Hmm, so in two separate posts, you implied, falsely it turns out, that your mods didn't make your car any faster??
Originally Posted by M&M
Hey guys, I'm the driver of the M3. You guys are correct, it is not stock. Howver, power-wise it is. It makes the same power as other stock M3's on the dyno.
Go back to school & learn that power & faster are 2 different words p0es.
07-24-2006, 10:37 AM
#163
Super Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 723
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Improviz
People can watch the video and see for themselves, and it's audibly and visually clear that you jump on it first in the video that was being referred to.
Busted again. Twice in one post. One more to add to the list.
Busted again. Twice in one post. One more to add to the list.
POES!
07-24-2006, 11:50 AM
#165
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Southern Cali (Ontario)
Posts: 3,466
Likes: 0
Received 10 Likes
on
10 Posts
here we go again with the E46 M3...
the car is mid 13's car on every single respectable magazine.
The SLK55, is a high 12's car with a higher trap speed on every single respectable magazine.
This video is just one example of a possible outcome. Let's take it for what it is.
the car is mid 13's car on every single respectable magazine.
The SLK55, is a high 12's car with a higher trap speed on every single respectable magazine.
This video is just one example of a possible outcome. Let's take it for what it is.
07-24-2006, 01:28 PM
#166
Super Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 723
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by TopGun32
here we go again with the E46 M3...
the car is mid 13's car on every single respectable magazine.
The SLK55, is a high 12's car with a higher trap speed on every single respectable magazine.
This video is just one example of a possible outcome. Let's take it for what it is.
the car is mid 13's car on every single respectable magazine.
The SLK55, is a high 12's car with a higher trap speed on every single respectable magazine.
This video is just one example of a possible outcome. Let's take it for what it is.
07-24-2006, 02:20 PM
#167
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,064
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
C55 AMG, 135i, 911 GT3, GLE43 AMG
Hey M&M. Can you tell me what exactly your "ACS backbox" and "4.1 gears" mods are? I've asked this m3forum, but you haven't replied.
Sorry if this is common info, but I want to know what you did to your car to allow it to pull away so fast from from a stock SLK55.
Sorry if this is common info, but I want to know what you did to your car to allow it to pull away so fast from from a stock SLK55.
07-24-2006, 02:27 PM
#168
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,645
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
2002 C32 Black/Charcoal
My C32 is "stock engine-wise" and I have four E46 massacres (the races lasting longer than 10 seconds involved bus-lengths), including my neighbors Dinan E46.
Oh, BTW, although my "engine" is stock, the supercharger pulley is not, nor is the ECU, nor are the spark plugs, nor are the wires, air intake, filters, Optima battery, lightweight wheels, etc.
I just thought that, since we are splitting hairs on definitions, I would get with the program.
Let's call this whole thread what it is. . . A couple of cool videos reflecting a biased race and 1/2 truth description of the E46 involved. I find it highly unlikely that the very carefully chosen words of "stock engine-wise" were "just coincidentally" used by the poster without any intent to deceive. I know that if my "faster on paper" $60K SLK55 just got beat by a "slower on paper" car, I would be asking the owner of the car that beat me a million questions about what mods he has done. The claimed ignorance of the poster is disingenuous. While Improviz is a little "over the top," he is more right than wrong in his assessment of the "honesty factor" of the original post.
My personal perception of the vids was that, without the second passenger in the SLK, the runs would've been dead even. This makes sense, if you think about it. M&M's E46 with the mods that it has should be running a high 12 in the 1/4 mile, just about the same as a stock SLK55.
Stock v. Stock, the average stock SLK55 should walk the average stock E46. However, I could see a "ringer" stock E46 running with a slower-than-average stock SLK55, or a talented E46 driver pulling on a SLK55 piloted by a retard.
Oh, BTW, although my "engine" is stock, the supercharger pulley is not, nor is the ECU, nor are the spark plugs, nor are the wires, air intake, filters, Optima battery, lightweight wheels, etc.
I just thought that, since we are splitting hairs on definitions, I would get with the program.
Let's call this whole thread what it is. . . A couple of cool videos reflecting a biased race and 1/2 truth description of the E46 involved. I find it highly unlikely that the very carefully chosen words of "stock engine-wise" were "just coincidentally" used by the poster without any intent to deceive. I know that if my "faster on paper" $60K SLK55 just got beat by a "slower on paper" car, I would be asking the owner of the car that beat me a million questions about what mods he has done. The claimed ignorance of the poster is disingenuous. While Improviz is a little "over the top," he is more right than wrong in his assessment of the "honesty factor" of the original post.
My personal perception of the vids was that, without the second passenger in the SLK, the runs would've been dead even. This makes sense, if you think about it. M&M's E46 with the mods that it has should be running a high 12 in the 1/4 mile, just about the same as a stock SLK55.
Stock v. Stock, the average stock SLK55 should walk the average stock E46. However, I could see a "ringer" stock E46 running with a slower-than-average stock SLK55, or a talented E46 driver pulling on a SLK55 piloted by a retard.
07-24-2006, 02:57 PM
#169
Super Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 723
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If the SLK55 was 1 up, I think it would have been a bit closer.
PC, ACS backbox is the AC Schnitzer backbox BMW sell which you can buy & have fitted off the showroom floor. More for sound that anything else.
4.1 gears means you replace the stock ring & pinion (which are 3.64) for ones which work out to 4.1. What you lose on the swings you gain on the roundabouts, so when you in the sam gear you pull a stocker, but when you shift he's in the lower gear & catches up a bit. Overall I believe it does make the car a bit quicker, up to 0.2 seconds gain on the 1/4, but these were not tested side by side on the same day so it's impossible to tell exactly what the gain is.
PC, ACS backbox is the AC Schnitzer backbox BMW sell which you can buy & have fitted off the showroom floor. More for sound that anything else.
4.1 gears means you replace the stock ring & pinion (which are 3.64) for ones which work out to 4.1. What you lose on the swings you gain on the roundabouts, so when you in the sam gear you pull a stocker, but when you shift he's in the lower gear & catches up a bit. Overall I believe it does make the car a bit quicker, up to 0.2 seconds gain on the 1/4, but these were not tested side by side on the same day so it's impossible to tell exactly what the gain is.
07-24-2006, 03:09 PM
#170
MBWorld Fanatic!
I havnt read threw the whole thread but I have a few points I want to add on why the us M3 is weaker than the euro specs.
First the c32 will beat the m3 almost everytime here in the states.Sorry guys I have lost almost everytime(STOCK)
When I was visiting my cousins in Greece I got to drive one of there buddies 01 e46 m3 and was suprised on how much more low end punch it had.After searching around I have found out that the usa cars have cats in the headers and a whole different mid section than the euro specs.
there is a good amount of power to be made if you install the euro specs headers,mid on our cars.I think its some where of about 20ft lbs across the whole power band.
Second believe it or not are cars are tuned slower now than they were when they first came out.
I remember seeing bone stock 01 m3's putting down 280-285 whp and now brand new M's are putting down 265-270 whp.
The reason is well known that these engines were tuned to the max and were blowing up left and right when they first came out.These engines with the latest updates and recalls done have updated software with a less aggressive tune.
there were plenty of people complaining that there cars felt slower after the recalls done back in the day.
I remember the first specs of the m3 were in the 4.6-4.7 0-60 and were all trapping 106-107 in the 1/4 even the CSL M3 is now where near that now.
so if you guys want a true ballz out race try to find a 01 ticking time bomb M3 that has never had any updates or recalls done and have him throw on the euro spec headers and mid pipe and see how that race turns out(If the M3 dosnt blow up lol)
First the c32 will beat the m3 almost everytime here in the states.Sorry guys I have lost almost everytime(STOCK)
When I was visiting my cousins in Greece I got to drive one of there buddies 01 e46 m3 and was suprised on how much more low end punch it had.After searching around I have found out that the usa cars have cats in the headers and a whole different mid section than the euro specs.
there is a good amount of power to be made if you install the euro specs headers,mid on our cars.I think its some where of about 20ft lbs across the whole power band.
Second believe it or not are cars are tuned slower now than they were when they first came out.
I remember seeing bone stock 01 m3's putting down 280-285 whp and now brand new M's are putting down 265-270 whp.
The reason is well known that these engines were tuned to the max and were blowing up left and right when they first came out.These engines with the latest updates and recalls done have updated software with a less aggressive tune.
there were plenty of people complaining that there cars felt slower after the recalls done back in the day.
I remember the first specs of the m3 were in the 4.6-4.7 0-60 and were all trapping 106-107 in the 1/4 even the CSL M3 is now where near that now.
so if you guys want a true ballz out race try to find a 01 ticking time bomb M3 that has never had any updates or recalls done and have him throw on the euro spec headers and mid pipe and see how that race turns out(If the M3 dosnt blow up lol)
07-24-2006, 03:37 PM
#171
07-24-2006, 03:51 PM
#172
Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: london
Posts: 234
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
996 C4, previously owned 996 c2, c32 amg, 350z, R33 GTR, R34 GTR
ive raced 2 m3`s (euro spec) im my 3.6 996 and whipped them.
raced an slk55 and he pulled 2 cars on me 2 sixty (i fluffed the start)
Based on this slk will have no probs with a euro m3
the vid shows the m3 pulling almost straight away - his car must be heavily modded or the slk was rigged
raced an slk55 and he pulled 2 cars on me 2 sixty (i fluffed the start)
Based on this slk will have no probs with a euro m3
the vid shows the m3 pulling almost straight away - his car must be heavily modded or the slk was rigged
07-24-2006, 03:59 PM
#173
Holy crap more b.s.
Does it matter which car is faster? The E90 M3 is coming out soon and the W204 should be here soon as well.
Less lies, more time slips and high resolution pictures of the cars!
Does it matter which car is faster? The E90 M3 is coming out soon and the W204 should be here soon as well.
Less lies, more time slips and high resolution pictures of the cars!
07-24-2006, 03:59 PM
#174
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Arizona
Posts: 2,767
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BMW FTW
[QUOTE=skratch77
Second believe it or not are cars are tuned slower now than they were when they first came out.
I remember seeing bone stock 01 m3's putting down 280-285 whp and now brand new M's are putting down 265-270 whp.
The reason is well known that these engines were tuned to the max and were blowing up left and right when they first came out.These engines with the latest updates and recalls done have updated software with a less aggressive tune.
there were plenty of people complaining that there cars felt slower after the recalls done back in the day.
I remember the first specs of the m3 were in the 4.6-4.7 0-60 and were all trapping 106-107 in the 1/4 even the CSL M3 is now where near that now.
so if you guys want a true ballz out race try to find a 01 ticking time bomb M3 that has never had any updates or recalls done and have him throw on the euro spec headers and mid pipe and see how that race turns out(If the M3 dosnt blow up lol)[/QUOTE]
Another out of the *** statement... Some of the early M3's had defective rod bearings.... They where replaced problem fixed some of the early M3's didnt get this done... This is the first time of anyone complaining about the car being slower after having a rod bearing replacement... I have been an M3 fanatic my whole life my dad has had every M3 since the E30 M3 and I have driven all of them and am lucky enough to have an E46... So far the only update I have had done to the car that made it felt slow for a few days was an SMG update which flashed the SMG system so it forgot how I like to drive.
Again with the C AMG VS M3 you are not going to pull a bus length unless the M3 driver gave up... You can find the videos of the C55 vs M3 racing from 0-125 and doing rolling starts and at most the C55 barley walked away for the M3 and at 125mph the C55 was no more than 5-6 feet ahead of the M3. I still dont get it you go to the M3 forum and they all beat C55's come here and its the opposite.
Second believe it or not are cars are tuned slower now than they were when they first came out.
I remember seeing bone stock 01 m3's putting down 280-285 whp and now brand new M's are putting down 265-270 whp.
The reason is well known that these engines were tuned to the max and were blowing up left and right when they first came out.These engines with the latest updates and recalls done have updated software with a less aggressive tune.
there were plenty of people complaining that there cars felt slower after the recalls done back in the day.
I remember the first specs of the m3 were in the 4.6-4.7 0-60 and were all trapping 106-107 in the 1/4 even the CSL M3 is now where near that now.
so if you guys want a true ballz out race try to find a 01 ticking time bomb M3 that has never had any updates or recalls done and have him throw on the euro spec headers and mid pipe and see how that race turns out(If the M3 dosnt blow up lol)[/QUOTE]
Another out of the *** statement... Some of the early M3's had defective rod bearings.... They where replaced problem fixed some of the early M3's didnt get this done... This is the first time of anyone complaining about the car being slower after having a rod bearing replacement... I have been an M3 fanatic my whole life my dad has had every M3 since the E30 M3 and I have driven all of them and am lucky enough to have an E46... So far the only update I have had done to the car that made it felt slow for a few days was an SMG update which flashed the SMG system so it forgot how I like to drive.
Again with the C AMG VS M3 you are not going to pull a bus length unless the M3 driver gave up... You can find the videos of the C55 vs M3 racing from 0-125 and doing rolling starts and at most the C55 barley walked away for the M3 and at 125mph the C55 was no more than 5-6 feet ahead of the M3. I still dont get it you go to the M3 forum and they all beat C55's come here and its the opposite.
