FrankW

WTF?? just because AMG fanatic has ran down few M3s you think his car's modded?? just from the statement it's obvious that you are very bias.

Next time if I lost to a M3 I'll just say that he's car's modded.

SL BRABUS

Dammm..... ...This getting out of control... ..Who care which one faster M3 or the C55 and C32..... ....They all good cars.... .....It just which one you like cause who ever own those cars think they got the world fastest car..... ... Just be happy what you have.......

M&M

Yeah well, I've given up with the C32/55 vs M3 argument because I've said many times it can go either way on the day. I know what I do, I have the videos & timeslips. But to each, his own.

My argument with the Gt2 vs GT3 is the bomb because it takes away factors like different bodies, etc. If you have what is essentially the same car with 2 different engines & chassis's designed for the track then you can really compare apples to apples.

I know from personal experience having chosen the wrong route for the track, what my next project car would be. There are factors that some of you would not undertstand unless you do circuit racing.

Underbonnet temperatures just keep going up, lap after lap. The NA car stays much cooler. Your boost starts dropping & towards the end of the race your car feels normally aspirated. Its not like to get a chance to pull over & let it cool down every lap.

Mid-range torque doesn't help 'cos you live at high revs on a track. When your power curve is dropping off, the NA cars are in the power pand. Just compare the power curve of the Gt2 vs Gt3 to see what mean.

The additional torque of forced induction means you have beefier drivetrain components which in turn, means more drivetrain losses. A high revving NA car just needs valvetrain mods, but clutch, diff, etc don't have to be beefed up like in a FI car.

Ahmed

not faster... QUICKER!!!!!

Improviz

i.e., he would come in, post a data point, and argue a position until someone came along and posted evidence which proved his original point was wrong...at which point he'd change the argument, the same as he's doing here.

Look at the GT2 vs. GT3 case: I post data showing superior braking and lighter weight alone could account for the differences in track times, and as he always does when cornered, he refuses to address the points where he was *clearly* shown to be wrong (the braking and test data for both cars), and waves aside the others (77Kg weight difference is "nothing"--which is why race car development sweats each and every ounce, why there are weight penalties imposed on cars with horsepower advantages, etc...because physics doesn't work in racing anymore!!), then finally changes the subject.

He isn't searching for anything other than an argument. Typical Internet troll with nothing better to do....

reggid

If your talking about Sydney Australia Wheels got m3 quicker and Motor got c32 quicker and those are the only two reputable mags IMO!

The gt2 and gt3 track times arument is the most disgraceful example of adavantages and disadvantages of FI vs NA. We are talking straightline runs here so we want to cancel braking advantages and cornering abilities so track times actually show little if not nothing of straightline runs.

Run the gt2 and gt3 in the straights and the gt2 will win everytime except maybe if the start is bad, because off the line maximising traction is important.

As for the m3 being quicker than the c32/55 or vice versa there is no right answer. Under certain conditions either car can win.

For those who bought a C32/55 or M3 for pure strightline speed you wasted your money, there are far better ways to achieve this.

I also think its pretty bad that people are downgrading all of MB and BMW hard work in developing these outstanding cars which everyone is privlaged to own and are bringing it down to a my cars faster than your car highschool mentality level.

Life is not black and white, so why treat it that way?

Jon200

Reggid, my bad, I thought both Motor and Wheels got the C32 to be quicker on the straight line, anyway doesn't matter, at least NOT 100% of ALL CAR MAGS AROUND THE WORLD said the M3 was quicker

I am still waiting for Mr M&M to respond to this. I hope this thread has been a lesson for him to admit hes wrong about some of the things he said and not to be so dramatic when defending his own position

reggid

Actually come to think of it Motor is not all that reliable they don't provide numbers from the same comparison they quote the best times for the car even though they may have ran that particular car and recorded the best times 6 months before they did their head to head comparison. So the test is more or less meaningless. The times they got in Wheels was BS for the C32 way too slow a 14.4 1/4 is wrong. So i guess all mags are no good really. The fact that there are such variations means that getting a car from a to b in the shortest time possible is not a straightforward as it seems.

Personally i think the C's are quicker on average and more consistantly so but the M has the most overall speed by a smigen on its best day but its very difficult to use its potential and is not the best car if you like drag races. I think most and i emphasise most M drivers have NFI when it comes to extracting all its performance where the C is point and shoot....well almost. Lets not forget neither manufacturer designs the cars for this purpose.

Jon200

I think I know which issue ur talking about, I follow a few Oz car mags, WHeels, Motor, HPI and Speed

ProjectC55

And here is M&M and more of his ranting and some Noobie that got Banned named(NOVANOS) in the Bimmerforums :


http://forums.bimmerforums.com/forum...5&page=1&pp=25

Erik

psst, The GT3 car you are refering to is the GT3 RS and that car did use R tires.
The GT3 with normal tires did it in 7 min 54.

http://www.track-challenge.com/compa...ar1=71&Car2=61

http://www.track-challenge.com/compa...ar1=61&Car2=39

Erik

Not correct..., if we leave the GT3RS ( due to tire setup) out of the discussion the GT2 handles equally good as the GT2 and has less low speed corner understeer.

reggid

yes i would say they handle exactly the same....lol

Erik

opss sorry about that, it should offcourse be ..............

...............the GT2 handles equally good as the GT3 and has less low-speed corner understeer.

BLKM3

Why are we having this dumb discussion anyways? The C55 has a big V8 and it only 350hp? Also the C55 doesn't take any skill to drive.

Improviz

Why are you trolling our forums? Do we come over to your BMW forums and bug you, making idiotic, uninformed, statements like yours?

No. So why don't you go back there, where you belong?

ProjectC55

P.S., Wow !All of M&M's threads have been locked on bimmerforums.Damn! You guys don't play!

ProjectC55

BLKM3

marcos

I don't even think he belongs there either to be honest, they all seem pretty inteligent guys and someone here aint

SilverFox

After reading a few pages and skipping the remainder I have an answer to my question - is M & M plain or peanut?

No doubt about he is a NUT!!!