M3 beats R8 V8 in 1 mile drag

radiantm3 wrote

Not me. Don't get me wrong, the R8 is an amazing car, but AWD just isn't my thing no matter how fast/nice a car is. It's why I have no interest in owning the GTR. For the money of an R8, I'd get a 911. I'm pretty sure a lot of people here could easily buy a much more expensive car, but choose not to for various reasons.

Dammm your car seems to look nice with those areo parts, do you have more pictures!!?

gthal wrote

Almost double the price better build quality? Falling back on build quality and tech is an excuse... it may be true, but it is an excuse nonetheless. When the two cars put in similar lap times, does the M3 owner go over to the Mustang owner and say "yeah it was close but my I have better build quality"?

Not everyone unzips their pants to see who can piss faster. Yes performance is important but so is what ur sitting in. The environment, controls, tech features etc all come into play. And when someone points out the mustang m3 analogy they should also factor in non performance related aspects. Interior design, ergonomics, intuitiveness of the controls, the quality of the leather, cabin, refunement, sound system. These all matter. The m3 nails it in all these respects where as the mustang does not. Like I said before as an overall package the m3 is second to none at its price point and when I drive my r8 back to back with my m3, I appreciate the engineering achieved in my 70k m3 with similar or superior build quality/technology of my 170k r8.

KKM3 wrote  

gthal wrote

Almost double the price better build quality? Falling back on build quality and tech is an excuse... it may be true, but it is an excuse nonetheless. When the two cars put in similar lap times, does the M3 owner go over to the Mustang owner and say "yeah it was close but my I have better build quality"?

Not everyone unzips their pants to see who can piss faster. Yes performance is important but so is what ur sitting in. The environment, controls, tech features etc all come into play. And when someone points out the mustang m3 analogy they should also factor in non performance related aspects. Interior design, ergonomics, intuitiveness of the controls, the quality of the leather, cabin, refunement, sound system. These all matter. The m3 nails it in all these respects where as the mustang does not. Like I said before as an overall package the m3 is second to none at its price point and when I drive my r8 back to back with my m3, I appreciate the engineering achieved in my 70k m3 with similar or superior build quality/technology of my 170k r8.

That's cool, but I can almost guarantee that everyone in the world (except for M3 Post apparently) would rather an R8. Personally, I like Audi's interiors more, and with a 6MT, you never get bothered by the "backwards" R Tronic. There is more to these cars than winning a 1 mile race by 2 lengths. Look at an R8, on YT there are supercar videos and the R8 is always in them. It is a supercar; while the M3 is and shall remain, a sports sedan. Again to you, M3>All.

M3takesNYC wrote

Bruce here is another example of you pulling out numbers out of your ass. I posted the link to swamp's scale measurement. How can you refute the data he posted up clearly with pictures of the scale to boot.

Must've missed that link. Can you repost? The only reference I have in regard to Swamp's car is where he posted that it weighed 3673 pounds full of gas, but nobody aboard. It's here.

M3takesNYC wrote

And you can't start adding in a sunroof as part of the weight savings from the e92 coupe was the CF roof so you compare the standard car with the standard car.

I posted as to minimum and maximum weights. Nothing at all wrong with that.

M3takesNYC wrote

Go visirt the links. No e46 m3 owner was CLOSE to 3400 pounds except one guy who stripped his car.

I'd guess that an average E46 M3 would go out the door at around 3450 or so. Our own E46 weighed in (NHRA certified scale) at 3415 if memory serves, absolutely full of fuel, minus about one mile of driving from the station to the strip. It had only the HK stereo, if memory serves.

M3takesNYC wrote

You really seem to be worshipped on this board despite posting inaccurate information all of the time.

Doubt very much that I'm worshipped, since I've pissed a bunch of people off in these forums.

Be that as it may, you opened up on me a couple of weeks back in regard to this same issue of being wrong a bunch of times. I in turn asked you to post those times, saying that I might be embarrassed but that I'd be grateful for learning something.

Nothing back from you, proving you're blowing smoke. If not, respond with all my errors, please, or just shut up if you can't substantiate what you're saying.

Of course, if you don't respond, it turns out you're lying.

Speaking of lying, how's that pointer to the "many" times the M3 has beaten the RS5 on a road course coming? Good? Looking forward to it.

M3takesNYC wrote

Click on the links I posted than refute the data. I am sure you will somehow.

Nope, I think the average shipped E46 comes in at well over the minimum of around 3400 pounds.

M3takesNYC wrote

Bottom line is a e92 coupe weighs within 100-130 pounds of the e46 m3 with similar interior options (sound system, nav etc)

Well as I said, it's not quite apples and oranges between us, but as you just recommended, standard car to standard car, we're looking at something closer to 150 pounds, with a bigger difference than that if both cars are loaded.

Repost that pointer showing how Swamp's car is light, would you?

Bruce

M3takesNYC wrote

Well in reality the R8 V8 is a well-considered a poor mans R8 and a disapointment in performance from any enthusiast familiar.

I personally don't like to own the botton model of any car but more power to you. More show than go is something everyone I have heard talk about the v8 and why audi quickly put a v10 in the car to actually make it perform as well as it looks.

You bought yours used and the used market is a different market in terms of pricing, exclusivity etc so this really only applies to new car buyers

I'd like to weigh in here. I recently had an opportunity to drive a V8 R8 on a very technical track. I didn't even want to drive the R8, I had paid to drive a Gallardo, but didn't fit in it, and so "settled" for the R8. I have NEVER liked the R8. I was totally taken by surprise, and absolutely love it. It was consistently the fastest car on that track. It was WELL ahead of Ferarri's, Lambo's, and and SLS. It just begged to be pushed harder. I am by no means an expert driver, but the R8 just inspired confidence.

track_warrior wrote

I hate how car makers are focusing on huge HP numbers and cars are getting fatter and loosing feel. Its ridiculous how much fatter the M3 has gotten over the years. Kind of reminds me why i sold the R35 GT-R, sure it can go very fast but requires minimal effort and skill from the driver to deliver results, i find the M3 more involving even though its still fat. After a while the GT-R got so boring to drive i was fed up with it, the only time it would bring me a smile would be when i punched the accelerator from a stop, i stopped dreaming about driving it and thats when i sold it. Next gen M3 and M4 will surely come standard with 20 inch wheels and the next generation will come with 22 inch wheels and 1000 unusable HP. I really hope car manufacturers cap the HP at what we have right now and focus on making a lighter more precise car.

Could not agree more!!! Just look at what a bloated barge the M5 has become. Seriously, I sat inside one and it felt bigger than my Porsche Cayenne. And the amount of hp is ridiculous. You can't even properly get that power to the ground until you are well into 3rd gear. Think about an M5 that is the size of an e39 M5, with all the lighter materials used today, and a 5 liter NA V8 tuned to about 470hp and like 420lb-ft of torque. That is what the M5 should be. That would be a fantastic car.

CptSlow wrote

I'd like to weigh in here. I recently had an opportunity to drive a V8 R8 on a very technical track. I didn't even want to drive the R8, I had paid to drive a Gallardo, but didn't fit in it, and so "settled" for the R8. I have NEVER liked the R8. I was totally taken by surprise, and absolutely love it. It was consistently the fastest car on that track. It was WELL ahead of Ferarri's, Lambo's, and and SLS. It just begged to be pushed harder. I am by no means an expert driver, but the R8 just inspired confidence.

This is what I've been trying to say all along in this thread. It has a great feel in the drivers seat and I know it outperforms the M3, just not in a straight line. Thanks for your input

LarThaL wrote

Could not agree more!!! Just look at what a bloated barge the M5 has become. Seriously, I sat inside one and it felt bigger than my Porsche Cayenne. And the amount of hp is ridiculous. You can't even properly get that power to the ground until you are well into 3rd gear. Think about an M5 that is the size of an e39 M5, with all the lighter materials used today, and a 5 liter NA V8 tuned to about 470hp and like 420lb-ft or torque. That is what the M5 should be. That would be a fantastic car.

That's almost what it's going to be except for the N/A V8 and it's gonna cost a lot less and it's gonna be call the F30 M3!

And with a tune 500+hp, 500+torque!!

Giggs wrote

This is what I've been trying to say all along in this thread. It has a great feel in the drivers seat and I know it outperforms the M3, just not in a straight line. Thanks for your input

If I, to quote the great Ferris Bueller, "had the means, I would pick one up"...an R8 that is, and a V8 at that.

Giggs wrote

This is what I've been trying to say all along in this thread. It has a great feel in the drivers seat and I know it outperforms the M3, just not in a straight line. Thanks for your input

What year is your r8 and how much did you pay for it if you don't mind me asking?

Alex07M3 wrote

That's almost what it's going to be except for the N/A V8 and it's gonna cost a lot less and it's gonna be call the F30 M3!

And with a tune 500+hp, 500+torque!!

The M5 should be the M3 size wise. The modern M3 is the size of a E39 M5 now days

I really dont care for hp, i prefer a more nimble lighter car, 414 hp and 2900 pounds would = sex to me.

LarThaL wrote

Could not agree more!!! Just look at what a bloated barge the M5 has become. Seriously, I sat inside one and it felt bigger than my Porsche Cayenne. And the amount of hp is ridiculous. You can't even properly get that power to the ground until you are well into 3rd gear. Think about an M5 that is the size of an e39 M5, with all the lighter materials used today, and a 5 liter NA V8 tuned to about 470hp and like 420lb-ft or torque. That is what the M5 should be. That would be a fantastic car.

The 5 series is the size of an old 7 series and probably weighs more as well. I cant believe how big the F30 3 series is, it looks like a 5 series for god sakes.

track_warrior wrote

The M5 should be the M3 size wise. The modern M3 is the size of a E39 M5 now days
I really dont care for hp, i prefer a more nimble lighter car, 414 hp and 2900 pounds would = sex to me.





The 5 series is the size of an old 7 series and probably weighs more as well. I cant believe how big the F30 3 series is, it looks like a 5 series for god sakes.

Well I don't consider that as a problem, I just think it means that you want an M3, not an M5!

Alex07M3 wrote

Well I don't consider that as a problem, I just think it means that you want an M3, not an M5!

I would actually want a 1M 2 or 4 door that weighed under 3000 pounds and featured a N/A high revving engine with around 360 hp around the size of the original E-30. The 1 series is more closely related to the 3 series original size. Sadly they stopped producing the 1 series M and all the used ones are way to over priced hence why i own a E-92. Its a great car dont get me wrong but i feel like i own a 5 series not a 3 series if you know what im saying.

Im weird btw.

Why would people think that the M3, which is based on a sedan platform, is designed to carry 4-5 people, has a higher center of gravity/high seating position, front-engined, and is based on the standard chassis of a practical passenger car, could out-handle a dedicated sports car that seats two, has lower center of gravity, wider track, mid-engined, and was designed from the ground up as a sports car. There are limiting factors such as the laws of physics that just can't be overcome, no matter how good the engineering.

LarThaL wrote  

track_warrior wrote

I hate how car makers are focusing on huge HP numbers and cars are getting fatter and loosing feel. Its ridiculous how much fatter the M3 has gotten over the years. Kind of reminds me why i sold the R35 GT-R, sure it can go very fast but requires minimal effort and skill from the driver to deliver results, i find the M3 more involving even though its still fat. After a while the GT-R got so boring to drive i was fed up with it, the only time it would bring me a smile would be when i punched the accelerator from a stop, i stopped dreaming about driving it and thats when i sold it. Next gen M3 and M4 will surely come standard with 20 inch wheels and the next generation will come with 22 inch wheels and 1000 unusable HP. I really hope car manufacturers cap the HP at what we have right now and focus on making a lighter more precise car.

Could not agree more!!! Just look at what a bloated barge the M5 has become. Seriously, I sat inside one and it felt bigger than my Porsche Cayenne. And the amount of hp is ridiculous. You can't even properly get that power to the ground until you are well into 3rd gear. Think about an M5 that is the size of an e39 M5, with all the lighter materials used today, and a 5 liter NA V8 tuned to about 470hp and like 420lb-ft or torque. That is what the M5 should be. That would be a fantastic car.

I second that!

I think that all M3takesNYC was trying to say is that the V8 version for it's price and being purposely built sports car is not the best performer.. He actually said that given the choice he would pick the Audi over the M3, but he won't pay to buy one brand new. And I wouldn't either. I'm sure it handles a lot better than our cars and feels more planted, but for what it is and it's price I would expect it to perform better.

Matterhorn wrote

I think that all M3takesNYC was trying to say is that the V8 version for it's price and being purposely built sports car is not the best performer.. He actually said that given the choice he would pick the Audi over the M3, but he won't pay to buy one brand new. And I wouldn't either. I'm sure it handles a lot better than our cars and feels more planted, but for what it is and it's price I would expect it to perform better.

That's why the v10 is a better choice. I got a 2011 for less than the price of a new 991 carrera s.

KKM3 wrote  

Matterhorn wrote

I think that all M3takesNYC was trying to say is that the V8 version for it's price and being purposely built sports car is not the best performer.. He actually said that given the choice he would pick the Audi over the M3, but he won't pay to buy one brand new. And I wouldn't either. I'm sure it handles a lot better than our cars and feels more planted, but for what it is and it's price I would expect it to perform better.

That's why the v10 is a better choice. I got a 2011 for less than the price of a new 991 carrera s.

Now that's a good deal and a car that performs as good as it looks.

Matterhorn wrote

Now that's a good deal and a car that performs as good as it looks.

Got an apr 91 tune and the car pulls like crazy. Raced and beat a friends stock gallardo lp550.

Matterhorn wrote

I think that all M3takesNYC was trying to say is that the V8 version for it's price and being purposely built sports car is not the best performer.. He actually said that given the choice he would pick the Audi over the M3, but he won't pay to buy one brand new. And I wouldn't either. I'm sure it handles a lot better than our cars and feels more planted, but for what it is and it's price I would expect it to perform better.

But most people here are equating straight-line acceleration with performance. That's just 1 aspect. Not to mention the build quality and materials in the R8 are huge steps above the M3. It's like when people say the M3 is no faster than a Mustang GT so why spend double on the M3? That reason is why people would buy an R8 over the M3.

I've driven both the Gallardo and R8 V10 and while they are exceptional machines, I feel like there's something lost in them with the AWD drivetrain. The Ferrari F430 stole my heart over those cars.

radiantm3 wrote

But most people here are equating straight-line acceleration with performance. That's just 1 aspect. Not to mention the build quality and materials in the R8 are huge steps above the M3. It's like when people say the M3 is no faster than a Mustang GT so why spend double on the M3? That reason is why people would buy an R8 over the M3.

I've driven both the Gallardo and R8 V10 and while they are exceptional machines, I feel like there's something lost in them with the AWD drivetrain. The Ferrari F430 stole my heart over those cars.

I guess what some are saying is that to many, the "quality" of build between the R8 and M3 is not that different. At least, not on a scale comparable to a Ford Mustang vs the M3. And I can see where they are coming from.

I myself love the R8's, but have never driven one. The price to be paid is all based on exclusivity plus looks, quality, tech, etc. Value is subjective. I don't think the base price of a V8 R8 is terribly unreasonable.

But I can also see where the OP is coming from...I don't think the quality of the M3 is THAT far off from the Audi, so the M3 is quite a bargain and an amazing total package...which is something we already all know