well yes everyone can get their own stats and it would be different from publication to publication but 2 things

1)most stats from publication to publication are very similar if not the same

and

2)I think stats hold more weight than "IMO this car is better, cuz I like it more"

 

The 3 series. People apparently do not know how to read.

 

ok first dont misqoute me, I never said "BMWs are crap" I said 3 series are crap

second I never changed what I said, I clarified as to why I said it, I still think that they are crap

third how am I still wrong? you never gave any evidence as to why I am wrong nor to why I am an idiot, other than you prejudge people for having different opinions than yours, which pretty much makes you the idiot.

fourth yes I would really prefer an S40 over a 3 Series, I do not care for the 3 Series at all, even at 25k I would not buy one, in fact I would rather have an Acura TSX

and finally do not respond to this by saying I am an idiot because I did not use proper punctuation, I dont care and was purposefully doing so to save time while typing

 

Haha, ooh sorry. On the record, Rrobello said, "3 series are crap," not in fact "BMWs are crap." Hear that everyone?

Also, you're wrong and an idiot because you don't think the 3 series is worth $25k (and because you would prefer an S40).

And if I can't respond to your post by saying you're an idiot because you didn't use proper punctuation, can I say you're an idiot because you misspelled "proper"?

 

We aren't in sixth grade, calling people names just shows your intelligence. Keep up the good work.

 

Well its about fricken time you heard it. I only had to repeat myself like a billion times. And you're the one calling me an idiot?

Again how does this make me an idiot? I have a different opinion then yours, so what? Big fricken deal. I don't call you an idiot because you are a liberal who prefers to go to a catholic school. I personally wouldn't spend a penny on owning a 3 Series, not worth my time nor my penny. And yes I would prefer an S40, not only because it is a comprable car in performance and asthetics, but because it is safer, more reliable and cheaper to maintain; all at a lesser initial cost as well. Boy now I get how I am an idiot. Why didn't I see it before?

Actually I guess you can call me an idiot for whatever lame **** reason you want. It will not change the fact that you will not feel better about yourself unless you overcompensate for your insecurities about yourself by belittling everyone else. I appologize for my typo and thank you for pointing it out; as I am sure you consitantly point out everyone elses mistakes so as to detract attention away from your own flaws. For instance, why is it that you are quoting me as saying PROPER instead of what I actually typed which was PROPPER? Do you not know how to quote someone? Must not since this is now the second time you have misquoted me on this page alone and the sad thing is that you originally quoted me in order to show how much of an idiot I am, but then went ahead and gave me credit for spelling it right by misquoting me. This is really not helping your arguement that I am the idiot. It only goes to the opposite of lending to the idea that you yourself are in fact the idiot. If I were you I would stop speaking your mind while you still have a chance of not forever being remembered as the moron that so badly wanted a 3 Series BMW, but alas could not afford one on PROPER gramar and spelling alone. Or perhaps it's too late?

 

Dirka, dirka...

 

muhammad jihad!

 

Lol, yo'ure right, it would be nice if mastery of the English language was a means of car payment.

 

So you could afford....what....a '73 Pinto?

 

 

I swear you all type more than I care to read

 

 

No, I've already got the Pinto. I'm pinching pennies for reupholstery.

 

For me honestly it depends on what car. I do respect Audi a lot, I believe the new RS4 is a great car (though a bit pricey, I'd say) and they have many other fine cars. However, between these two manufacturers, I'd say that there is in general a big difference in what way they approach the concept of a car: Audi is more oriented towards fwd and 4wd, while BMW is more focused on rwd. The matter of which one to choose, IMHO is mostly something that goes to the realm of personal taste. I'd take ... both

 

I honestly thought that the M3 could have been the only true comparison to the Mustang GT, because all BMW 3 series but the M3, have been created without the objective of being sport cars (the M3 is the sport car of BMW as far as the 3 series is concerned). The fact that some of them have a decent amount of hp, it's just because BMW needs to keep up with what other manufacturers do in terms of hp (even the upcoming 335i, with a 3.0L twin turbo 6 cyl and 306 hp, is not a sport car, in my mind). That's why I think it's only fair to compare an M3 to a Mustang GT, while doing the same to a 325i would be totally unfair, IMHO.
In Europe, the concept of a sport car is just what a sport car is (IMHO at least), namely a vehicle that can go from point A to point B in the fastest possible time and in any road you might find in your path. To a European, driving at 150 mph on the Autobahn is not fascinating, it's just efficient (=it takes less time to get where you want to go). But to drive for example on the old Nuerburgring circuit, with its 160+ curves, in the fastest time, it is: my friend, mastering your vehicle in such a road circuit is an experience that I think cannot be even compared to drag racing (no offense, but stomping on the gas for 400 yards on a straight line is not the most exciting thing of this world, IMHO. Much less skills required than driving on a twisty road at high speed...)...
It might be more practical for US roads to compare straight line acceleration, sure. But you can't use that for defining when a car is better than another and this because something that only goes better in a straight line is not a superior vehicle because if straight line acceleration would be the only thing that matters, I guess the best vehicle in the world ought to be a shopping cart with an F16 jet engine attached to it...Do you see my point ?
I have my doubts that you could take a Mustang GT and outhandle an M3. I owned two M3s and now I own a Mustang GT, I know what I am talking about. I love my car to bits, but not in my wildest dream I would chose her in any roadcourse over an M3, trust me.

 

I think if Ford had chosen to put a proper IRS in the new Mustang, you might actually have a contest there. Even despite that, don't forget about the recent Grand Am series where the new Stang handily dispatched M3s.

 

yes the M3 would be the car BMW would compare to the Mustang GT, but I was pointing out that in all of our previous post not only were we not talking about the M3, but we also werent comparing any of the 3 Series to Mustangs, we were comparing them to other cars in its class.

I agree that straight line acceleration isnt the only thing that makes a car a good car. But you are talking about taking it to a track of which case IMO all bets are off, because now you are doing something completely different then street driving, so no need to compare street cars there, if I were gonna keep taking my car to a track, not only would I consider a different car, but it would also be heavily modified. As for street driving a daily driver I do think it is fair to say that majority of people do not push their car to the limits on public roads going through turns as they race other cars, whereas they are indeed more inclined to drag in a straight line. So for the purposes of comparing two cars that are going up against each other on a normal, public road I would say straight line acceleration is more important; I think this is why manufactuers are now more than ever focusing on how fast a car can do 0-60 and 0-100 in their advertising. This comparison of straight line acceleration does not (like you said) make a car the best car, but I do believe that for real world applications it is a comparison that might be weighed more heavily (assuming most people dont track their cars to race others). Does this make sense as to what I am trying to say here? Would you agree? (Grant it I have never driven in Europe so I do not know if their are more windy roads then there are straight roads [not including actual turns at intersections], nor do I know if people actually race through these windy public roads; I am assuming for the most part they do not)

I also wouldnt go so far to say that their is much less skill in racing in a straight line then there is around a road course, just different types of skills. Have you ever tried to keep a 1200+HP car straight as you launch down a 1/4mile strip of road in less then 6 seconds? I think this would be just as hard if not harder to do then driving through turns at speeds averaging between 80-130 mph; now I would imagine that it would be the same degree of difficulty as driving a formula car in speeds in excess of 200mph around a track, just different kind of difficulty, but this is just my opinion.

As for your doubts as to the possibilty of making a Stang outhandle a M3, it has happened many times. What my point was that the difference in price of an M3 and a mustang GT is about $20k, if not more; now you are telling me that with $20k you cant think of a way to make the GT outhandle an M3? Yes it is now a modded car compared to a stock one, but my point was for much less then the base price of a M3 you can make the GT better. Heck there is a guy in my club out here with a SN95 V6 that can outhandle a M3 any day of the week on any track, and that was all done for much less then the cost of a new GT. And while I have never owned an M3 I have driven several including a couple Dinans. I do agree if you were to go stock for stock Id take the M3 on a road course as well, its just too bad the M3 doesnt cost $27k.

May I ask as to why you bought a new GT instead of going with another M3?

 

I was gonna point that out, but you beat me to it. Also you have to remember Ford is trying to produce not only an affordable sports car but a muscle car as well (of which straight line acceleration has always been the goal) so a solid axle was the way to go when designing this car. That said, why cant the M3s beat the solid axle, slower, less powered stang in those darn races?

 

Because I don't believe that the Stang is "slower and less powered." Remember that the FR500 car makes up for the SRA with an extensive array of other upgrades.

The IRS is thus not terribly advantageous on a road course with perfectly smooth pavement. Now, get on a public roadway and hit a bump...in a corner...at high speed, and you will quickly see the drawbacks of SRA.

In a straight line...on even pavement, IRS has little real world benefits over SRA. Unfortunately, straight lines on even pavement aren't terribly representative of the "real world."