Lexus better get on their horse...

3366 Views 139 Replies 11 Participants Last post by TEG, Oct 30, 2000

S38

Discussion Starter · Oct 26, 2000

If they want to build a competitor to this in the near future:

Motor Trend quotes the new M3 as...

"The World's Best Sports Sedan...Again"

"It's a tach-pegging, tire-abusing, power-sliding, apex-hitting, ear-pleasing, ultra-precise high-speed thrill"

0-60 = 4.8 (est)
1/4 = 13.2/109.0 (est)

Damn, I want one.

------------------
S38
91 M5

Status: Not open for further replies.

41 - 60 of 140 Posts

Young

· #41 · Oct 27, 2000

Of course I know. So tell us, Mr. Genius, how did it beat a 993 Bi-Turbo with more horsepower around the track? That RS4 must have been HEAVILY modded. Note that there's another entry for the RS4 that's 5 seconds slower than the M5...that's more like it. And note that there's a second entry for the M5 that is 6 seconds SLOWER than the E46 M3.

[This message has been edited by Young (edited October 27, 2000).]

LexusIS300

· #42 · Oct 27, 2000

Originally posted by Daniel:
I am not taking on any side regarding this issue, but I am hoping Young is right on this issue. If E46 M3 is really slower than the M5, then I think I may reconsider the direction BMW is heading with their cars, and I may not want to get an M3 once I saved up enough money. I hope they are not cave into the "let's take out a little performance and satsified those rich people who want a luxury coupe that can kick Corvette's butt" thing.

I suppose BMW has NO choice for the moment, because the I6 engine of the E46 M3 is already maxed out. They need a completely new design to leap forward. If a 2-seater is practical, try the new M coupe. It is ~300 lb lighter at ~320 HP. It would beat both the M3 and the M5. The 0-60 time from Evo [yeah right, stars and planets........

] is 4.3 s for the Euro version at 321 HP.

See less See more

LexusIS300

· #43 · Oct 27, 2000

2

Originally posted by Young:
Of course I know. So tell us, Mr. Genius, how did it beat a 993 Bi-Turbo with more horsepower around the track? That RS4 must have been HEAVILY modded. Note that there's another entry for the RS4 that's 5 seconds slower than the M5...that's more like it. And note that there's a second entry for the M5 that is 6 seconds SLOWER than the E46 M3.

[This message has been edited by Young (edited October 27, 2000).]

I suppose you have never been passed by some Civics or Miatas on the track. Go there more often and you will know. It is getting under your nerve. You really hate to lose an argument, do you?........

Keep on cherry picking and seeing only what you want to see. You are on your own. Keep a check on the blood pressure, though........

See less See more

Young

· #44 · Oct 27, 2000

Originally posted by LexusIS300:
You must attend the horse track very often. I make a living on speculation. I move 7 figures in and out of the markets everyday........

Open your eyes and observe the evidence instead of arguing just for the sake of it. The E39 M5 beats the E46 M3 in a straightline as well as on the track, according to ALL reported times so far. Either BMW did a godly job for the E39 M5 (a high-speed cruiser) or they under-engineered (relatively speaking) the E46 M3 (a sports coupe). But it is fact that the E39 M5 is better all around. I did test drive an E39 M5 several times before I placed the deposit. It is awesome and you should try too. As far as the understeer is concerned, it is tunable, otherwise how did the car perform so well on the track at 4,024 lb. I have already said, the E46 M3 should be more agile. But it is a little heavy as a sport coupe and hence, losing to a top-of-the-line high-speed cruiser on the track. As far as the straightline is concerned, I have already calculated the acceleration times and top speeds with the published gear ratios, HP numbers, RPM limit, torque numbers, wheel diameter,........ etc. They revealed that the E39 M5 (as long as traction holds) should be ~6 % more accelerative at any speeds plus the top speed is ~10 MPH higher. And they are consistent with the reported numbers so far. I do NOT need any popular support........

This is NOT to say the E46 M3 CANNOT be improved. But once again up-to-date, the E39 M5 is better all around.

Nope, I've never been to a horse track. I only bet on sure things.

Yes, I'm sure they can tune a M5 to be a track monster. Remove everything but the driver's seat. Yank the A/C. Give it God's own suspension. Etc. But they can tune an E46 M3 as well. Why do you think BMW is using a tuned E46 M3 in the American LeMans series and not a tuned M5?

As for straightline speed, they're very close. I'll reserve judgment until we can compare apples to apples (e.g.., C&D's numbers for the M3 vs. C&D's numbers for the M5) as to which is actually faster. At any rate, the big factor that makes the M3 better than the M5 for the track (unless its a NASCAR or USAC oval), is the weight and cornering. 500 pounds is a HUGE difference.

LexusIS300

· #45 · Oct 27, 2000

Originally posted by Young:
Nope, I've never been to a horse track. I only bet on sure things.

Yes, I'm sure they can tune a M5 to be a track monster. Remove everything but the driver's seat. Yank the A/C. Give it God's own suspension. Etc. But they can tune an E46 M3 as well. Why do you think BMW is using a tuned E46 M3 in the American LeMans series and not a tuned M5?

As for straightline speed, they're very close. I'll reserve judgment until we can compare apples to apples (e.g.., C&D's numbers for the M3 vs. C&D's numbers for the M5) as to which is actually faster. At any rate, the big factor that makes the M3 better than the M5 for the track (unless its a NASCAR or USAC oval), is the weight and cornering. 500 pounds is a HUGE difference.

Like you said, BMW can tune both the M3 and the M5. And yet the M5 won. You just hate the outcome and try to deny its existence. Argue all you want. The fact, as supported by the numbers, is the M5 better all around, whether you like it or NOT.

Young

· #46 · Oct 27, 2000

Originally posted by LexusIS300:
I suppose you have never been passed by some Civics or Miatas on the track. Go there more often and you will know.

My point EXACTLY. Those numbers have to be taken with a HUGE HUGE grain of salt. A good driver in a Daewoo can beat a bad driver in an M3 around a tough track...particularly a track as tough as Nurburgring. All I am saying is that with driver and conditions and mods being equal, the M3 is a better track car. This argument is indeed getting to me...because you are too dense to get that simple point.

Young

· #47 · Oct 27, 2000

Originally posted by LexusIS300:
Like you said, BMW can tune both the M3 and the M5. And yet the M5 won.

Do you actually have ANY IDEA of what mods were made to the M5 and M3? For all we really know, the M5 may have been modded to the max while the E46 M3 was totally stock. Do you claim to know better? I don't.

LexusIS300

· #48 · Oct 27, 2000

Originally posted by Young:
My point EXACTLY. Those numbers have to be taken with a HUGE HUGE grain of salt. A good driver in a Daewoo can beat a bad driver in an M3 around a tough track...particularly a track as tough as Nurburgring. All I am saying is that with driver and conditions and mods being equal, the M3 is a better track car. This argument is indeed getting to me...because you are too dense to get that simple point.

You are making empty arguments after empty arguments without any support. Cherry picking only on what you want to see. I am too dense to do the same........

See less See more

LexusIS300

· #49 · Oct 27, 2000

Originally posted by Young:
Do you actually have ANY IDEA of what mods were made to the M5 and M3? For all we really know, the M5 may have been modded to the max while the E46 M3 was totally stock. Do you claim to know better? I don't.

Whenever you win, it is fair and square. Whenever the other side win, they must be cheating. Does it sound familiar? You must be desperate........

See less See more

Young

· #50 · Oct 27, 2000

Somehow I tend to believe current M5 owners, including a race instructor, over you. We shall see.

Meanwhile, why not put your money where your mouth is? If you're moving 7 figures around on a daily basis, losing a measly M5 slot is nothing to you.

Young

· #51 · Oct 27, 2000

Originally posted by LexusIS300:
Whenever you win, it is fair and square. Whenever the other side win, they must be cheating. Does it sound familiar? You must be desperate........

Who said anything about cheating? I'm saying that your "evidence" is no evidence without context, as the RS4 numbers indicate. You have to compare apples to apples and with those numbers we have very little indication of what is being compared. Do you actually disagree?

By the way, why do arguments ad hominem support your case? Who's desperate here?

LexusIS300

· #52 · Oct 27, 2000

2

Originally posted by Young:
Somehow I tend to believe current M5 owners, including a race instructor, over you. We shall see.

Meanwhile, why not put your money where your mouth is? If you're moving 7 figures around on a daily basis, losing a measly M5 slot is nothing to you.

Believe all you want, instead of opening your eyes. But I shall repeat here, the reported numbers so far revealed that the M5 is better all around. There could be a better M3 in the future, but who knows. I do NOT gamble........

And you only want to save face because of a bruised ego. Grow up. Like I said, you are on your own........

See less See more

LexusIS300

· #53 · Oct 27, 2000

Originally posted by Young:
Who said anything about cheating? I'm saying that your "evidence" is no evidence without context, as the RS4 numbers indicate. You have to compare apples to apples and with those numbers we have very little indication of what is being compared. Do you actually disagree?

By the way, why do arguments ad hominem support your case? Who's desperate here?

If you have gone to the track, have you heard of the phrase, "you run what you brung"? Win is win, lose is lose, NO excuse. Every entry has the same fair chance to prepare. And you can keep on cherry picking what you want to see.

TEG

· #54 · Oct 27, 2000

Man you guys are really going at it!!!

I just want to remind you both that this is a Lexus IS300 forum...

See less See more

Young

· #55 · Oct 27, 2000

I'm off to bed, but here's a short summary of my arguments.

1. The M3 is significantly better at cornering by virtue of its weight.

2. The M3 is very close if not better than the M5 in 0-60 acceleration, according to BMW itself. We'll have to wait on more numbers though to see which is actually faster.

3. All of the M3 and M5 owners (including a race instructor) I've talked to say that the M3 is better for the track.

4. I concede that the M5 edged the M3 at Nurburgring, but we really have little idea as to whether the road conditions, mods, and drivers were equal.

Note that I'm not making the argument that the M3 is a better car. The better car is the car that suits your particular needs. My need is to have a blast on the track. Your needs may be different. To each his own.

[This message has been edited by Young (edited October 27, 2000).]

See less See more

LexusIS300

· #56 · Oct 27, 2000

2

Originally posted by Young:
I'm off to bed, but here's a short summary of my arguments.

1. The M3 is significantly better at cornering by virtue of its weight.

2. The M3 is very close if not better than the M5 in 0-60 acceleration, according to BMW itself. We'll have to wait on more numbers though to see which is actually faster.

3. All of the M3 and M5 owners (including a race instructor) I've talked to say that the M3 is better for the track.

4. I concede that the M5 edged the M3 at Nurburgring, but we really have little idea as to whether the road conditions, mods, and drivers were equal.

Note that I'm not making the argument that the M3 is a better car. The better car is the car that suits your particular needs. My need is to have a blast on the track. Your needs may be different. To each his own.

[This message has been edited by Young (edited October 27, 2000).]

Sure, when you fail to support the empty arguments for a car, you can always say "To each his own"........

Once again, open your eyes and check the reported numbers. The E39 M5 is better all around so far. I hope BMW would improve the E46 M3. But until then.

TEG, you are still awake?........

See less See more

Young

· #57 · Oct 27, 2000

Okay, one last post...

Huh? What additional support do I need? You've all but conceded point one, as for point two, BMWUSA gives 4.8s for 0-60 for both cars, as for point three, you'll have to take my word for it (or find an M3 or M5 owner who agrees with you), and surely you don't disagree with point four, that the M5 has the faster time, but we have no idea as to the whether the tests were under equal or even similar conditions?

How are these empty arguments? And what makes you, someone who's never driven an M5 on the track, a better judge of the car than those who have? I concede I haven't, but I trust the word of the folks who have.

Young

· #58 · Oct 27, 2000

Okay, one last post...

Huh? What additional support do I need? You've all but conceded point one, as for point two, BMWUSA gives 4.8s for 0-60 for both cars, as for point three, you'll have to take my word for it (or find an M3 or M5 owner who agrees with you), and surely you don't disagree with point four, that the M5 has the faster time, but we have no idea as to the whether the tests were under equal or even similar conditions?

How are these empty arguments? And what makes you, someone who's never driven an M5 on the track, a better judge of the car than those who have? I concede I haven't, but I trust the word of the folks who have.

LexusIS300

· #59 · Oct 27, 2000

2

Originally posted by Young:
Okay, one last post...

Huh? What additional support do I need? You've all but conceded point one, as for point two, BMWUSA gives 4.8s for 0-60 for both cars, as for point three, you'll have to take my word for it (or find an M3 or M5 owner who agrees with you), and surely you don't disagree with point four, that the M5 has the faster time, but we have no idea as to the whether the tests were under equal or even similar conditions?

How are these empty arguments? And what makes you, someone who's never driven an M5 on the track, a better judge of the car than those who have? I concede I haven't, but I trust the word of the folks who have.

Hi Good morning........

As far as you are concerned, dream on. We have run through the reported numbers many times on this thread. Others can just read back. And you can just keep on cherry picking what you want to see. I wrote about point 1 at the very beginning of my posts. I showed you point 2. Point 3 are opinions. Reported numbers is a better gauge. And many people already know about point 4. You just found out after I mentioned it. All in all, you have virtually NO point........

See less See more

Young

· #60 · Oct 27, 2000

Okay, speaking of reported numbers...

BMW International (www.bmw.com) "reports" 5.3s for 0-100 km/h (~62mph) for the E39 M5. Autocar magazine reports 5.3s for 0-60 for the M5. Tell me, how do the "reported" numbers demonstrate that the M5 is faster than the M3? You say somebody got a 4.6s in an M5, but that's one driver under one set of road conditions and the same magazine hasn't tested the M3 yet! You have one Nurburgring number that is meaningless without context and a bunch of 0-60 numbers that are all over the map. What have you proven??? Stick to financial speculation because logical proof is not your bag.

41 - 60 of 140 Posts

Status: Not open for further replies.