FrankW

try to get next to the SLR and beat that shiithole they call "gearbox"

it wasn't doing much for your old car because it was a CLK320 w/ CLK55 badge on it.

AMG FANATIC

I just have to reply to this thread. I think I can clearly say I have the strongest C32 in SA. I have raced an E46 M3 from 50kph to 180kph and beat it by about 2 cl. I did a 600m sprint event at Wesbank raceway with a topspeed of 204. There were about 4 E46 M3's and I think 2 older models. They fastest M3 did 201. I did a high speed oval at Gerotek. I did a 238 and the fastest E46 did a 235. There was a M3 CSL which did 250, which i put down mostly to traction. My ESP light was flashing the whole corner (about 400m). I entered the corner at 248(indicated) and exited it at 238(indicated). So what does all this means? I don't really know or care. All I'm trying to say is that are always people who will say the M3 is quicker and some will say the C32 is quicker. One thing though, I do not post that the C32 is quicker than the M3 on the BMW forums, because I don't care what they think, and I don't honestly think they care what I have to say. So M&M, stop posting here, unless you have something meaningfull to add to the AMG scene.

BenzC32

Magazine skilled driver runs 13.6 on C32 but i run 13.2 with esp off on it. Both M3 and C32 will be very close on 1/4mile. For the track, I DO agree that M3 is a better car.
I have friends who drive E46 M3, i don't hate BMW, i just hate those BMW drivers who think their car is the fastest on the world. :p

Ahmed

how did i know that was coming?

M&M

AMGfanatic, I don't think your car is stock. But anyway, at Gerotek Sergio Jorge did 250 in a stock M3. 2ndly, if your 600m speed in 2km/h higher doesn't mean that you will be faster to that distance. And with the M3 losing 17% power to altitude I would expect more than a 2km/h (1.25mph) difference in trap speed over 1/2 mile.

But, if you are game, pitch up to Wesbank raceway this Sunday 17 October. My buddy with a C55 is coming. I will race you & get it on tape for everyone here to see. What say you?

Jon200

Jon200

it is not a manual but it is still a gearbox, to say it will never stand a chance against the M3 is a bit of an understatement isn't it?

M&M

Hey Jon, you are totally wrong about the Gt2 vs GT3. GT2 is a stripped out, RWD, more powerful version of the 911 turbo. Has different suspension & wheels & there's even a CLubsport version with rollcage, etc. It's a 911 turbo for the track. Look it up. But it can't beat its less powerful, less torquey NA little brother. Why?

BTW, this has nothing to do with BMW or MERc, just a theoretical question.

FrankW

the GT2 is heavier than the GT3. there isn't much advantage from the GT2 over the new GT3. Unlike the last 993 GT2, the 996 GT2 is built as a street super car. Sure you can argue that it has the Clubsport version, but it's still more of a street stormer than a track car. Granted the GT2 is a faster on the straight, but its torque and heavier *** doesn't make it easier for it to go around the corner like the GT3 is setup to do from the start. And personally, I'd take the new GT3 over the GT2 anyway.

Ahmed

5 speed automatic vs a 6 speed sequential gearbox! You do the maths!

FrankW

let's see. MB AMG 5spd auto top speed in 5th 155mph (electronically limited) BMW SMGII top speed in 5th&6th 155mph (electronically limited).

so which one's faster??

Jon200

Totally wrong? so the GT2 isn't significantly more powerful than the GT3 now is it?

Jon200

read whats the M3 tops speed in 6th gear and whats the C32/C55 top speed in 5th gear?

Improviz

One: the GT3 is 77Kg lighter, and has a stiffer suspension, it will carry more speed through the turns.

Two: the GT3 will also stop faster: click on the details tab for the page you linked to and compare the two cars' braking distances. The GT-3 goes from 200-0 Km/h in 4.7 seconds, whereas the GT-2 takes 5.0. Multiply that by the number of high-speed stops you'll be making on a race track, and that alone could explain the difference.

Three: the cars' weight/horsepower ratios are very close, so the GT-2's superior acceleration is not sufficient to outrun the GT-3.

In other words, if pure, brute acceleration was the sole determinant of a car's performance on the race track, then the SL65 would have the fastest 'ring times of any German car produced. But it won't, now will it? Because it's a heavy beast, at 4,300 pounds or so, and simply can't compete with the lighter Porsches in terms of braking and corner speeds. There's a reason why they try to shave weight off of race cars, in other words.

To summarize: physics still works.

And to try and twist this around into a simple argument about horsepower at higher RPMs, utterly ignoring the weight differences and braking performance differences of the two cars, demonstrates quite convincingly that you are either extremely intellectually dishonest, or quite ignorant of the physics of racing.

Furthermore, I love how when confronted with evidence which showed you were wrong, you simply change topics rather than admit it...which is what, after all, you've been doing ever since you came to this forum.

M&M

Well, 77kg is nothing. Its the weight of a full tank of fuel. The Gt2 has almost DOUBLE the torque.

They have the same suspension & the GT2 has BIGGER brakes. They are both track versions of the regular Porsches. Don't give me that bull that the GT2 is a street car. Why did they take away the 4WD then? Go to the Porsche page & see what they say.

SO to recap, the weight diference is minimal, the GT2 has bigger brakes & same suspension, has 100hp more & double the torque.

So now tell me why the NA car wins?

IdriveFast

cause too much torque actually handicaps a car in the corners.

but the C32/C55 is still faster in a straightline than the M3


BOOYAA

IdriveFast

77kg is still alot, thats like the difference between the weight of a C32/C55 and the M3.

M3 owners claim the M3 is sooo much lighter than the AMG, but now that we're talking about porsches 77kg isnt alot....

i see how it is

M&M

SO you're saying that 100hp & 200lb/ft more is not enough to pull 77kg more weight?

IdriveFast

im saying its harder to balancer heavier cars to make them handle well than it is to balance a lighter car and make that handle well

and the extra torque makes it easier for the rear tires to break out from under the car, which causes the car to lose traction, which makes it slower, which is why torque can actually hurt a car in the corners.

the GT2 has almost 80% more lbs of torque than the GT3, but it does not have 80% more traction, which is why the GT2's laptimes are not substantially better than the GT3, but actually slower.

AMG FANATIC

First off: my car is as stock as they come. I bought it Nov last year and haven't touched it. I am not gonna pay R520000 for a car and then starting to modify it. I don't have the money if something breaks on the car and MB refuse to pay because of the mods. But why would you say my car is not stock - maybe because I beat a couple M3's at Gerotek and Wesbank. BTW, that M3 that did 250 was a CSL - nothing stock about that, or maybe you consider the R400000 that BMW spent on that car stock.

Secondly : I was in Durban last week. My car pull much harder at sea level than up here - so I don't think the result would be any different.

Thirdly: I don't care to race you at Wesbank. As you yourself had said - you are an expert at drag racing - I have never done a drag race in my life. And also, I am going to Zwartkops on Saturday, Audi has invited me to be a driving instructor ib their cars for there customers.

M&M

AMGganatic, Sergio did 250 at Gerotek in a STOCK E46 M3. Is in the results for Speed & Sound a year ago.

Mark Andrews did 250 in a CSL but he has done 248 in his stock M3 as well.

But like you say, you beat M3's, I beat C32's. It would be perfect to get the "champions" from each corner together, but I understand if you choose to decline.

Jon200

The GT2 has no AWD and PSM traction control system.

And I remember read from the EVO two years ago about the GT2, I don't think it has the same suspension set up as the GT3, Porsche wouldn't be foolish enough to have the same suspension setup with a car that is more powerful and has twice the torque of the GT3.

Because of its sheer torque and power, Porsche engineers gave the suspenions on the GT2 a more understeer-biased setting. The GT2 does not enter corners as like the GT3 does and that's why it doesn't handle as well as the GT3.

Yes, ur right, the GT2 was made to be a track car but Porsche hasn't done a very good job in the weight saving department, air-con, power windows, central locking, 4 air bags are still there.

The GT3 winning on the track isn't ALL ABOUT it being NA, Porsche hasn't pit as much track effort into the GT2 like they did with GT3

Jon200

LOL

M&M

Jon, please do me a favour. Go to the Porsche website & see what they say the difference between the turbo & GT2 is & why. And if they wanted understeer, they could have left in the 4WD. The suspension is different but it is tuned for the track. The fact that it has no PSM should be a clue as to what the GT2 was designed for.

Jon200

I love it how you change the direction of your argument whenever you can't defend your own. You were asking why the NA beats the turbo on the track

Where in my last post did I say the GT2 wasn't AT ALL for the track? I was simply trying to suggest why the GT3 wins when it is up against the GT2 which also happens to be your so-called NA vs turbo on the track argument



100% wrong

I assume you can't read ALL the car mags in the world, not every mag in Sydney said the M3 was quicker that isn't 100% of all car mags already

wrong again, you think you know it all dont ya?

Can you see the directions you have taken with your arguments now? They get nowhere and once ur beaten, u move on to another small window and blow it off from there where u'll eventually get beaten again

had enough fun with you, good luck in whatever ur trying to defend in your next post