[ragingclue]

Originally Posted by Dave07997S

That equates to over 700bhp..unbelieveable.

Dave

I think the more surprising thing is that they've gone from the previous gen with about 100 HP less at the wheels, which couldn't hook.... To this monster with more power that actually can hook. They've really done a good job of addressing all the shortcomings of the previous gen, even though it was still a great car.

Well, all the shortcomings except the interior, right?

[ragingclue]

Originally Posted by Dave07997S

Lightning Lap of America the M3 was over 4 sec. faster per lap. Laguna is just one track. Also in that MT test the M3 was on Contis while the 5.0L had the much better summer Pirellis.

However, just the fact to be so close is a major win for Ford.


Dave

Contis vs Pirellis was stock vs stock though, right? Or was that set up that way on purpose?

Dunno if I'd call 4 seconds "close", even on a long track like that. The tires can really make that much difference for the M3? That seems weird unless the Contis are the worst tires known to man.

[scflaw]

Originally Posted by Silver-Bolt

This is just horrible.

Damn, those recaros are horrible.... horribly sexy! I prefer the ones from the C63 over the m3 though, just my opinion
*edit* i know those are not from the m3, just a non relevant opinion

[itsmeek]

Originally Posted by US///M3

No need to step it up,at the race track the M3 is doin just fine even against the Boss 302 LS . You dont see a lot of E9x M3's at dragstrip for a reason...they're not designed for straight line racing.
You can get a gorgeous interior/exterior and performance at what a whatever level but you gotta pay more.
It's like If you cant afford a Porsche 911 turbo S,you can settle for a Nissan GT-R. Same performance minus character,quality,beautiful designs,Gravitas etc. The real deal ,the cars kids grow up dreaming of owning one day.

1. This is a joke, the M3 just BARELY beat the regular 5.0 around a "twisty" track. No WAY in hell it will hang w/the boss.

2. I have owned plenty of 911 Turbo's. I'll take the GT-R anyday for price/performance. I'm a car enthusiast, not a brand whore.

3. I see all kinds of m3's at dragstrips, it's just that they don't do very well unless fi.

[US///M3]

Originally Posted by ragingclue

When did C&D determine that (<-- not being confrontational, actually asking when they did, or what times they posted for both)? Didn't they run a 12.8 in the BOSS? IL ran a 12.9, MT ran a 12.3.... Not even the LS edition either.

So I guess Evo has the slowest drivers in the world...?

And how does an M3 beating the lowly 5.0 around a track by 0.1 seconds bode well for the M3 versus the BOSS? The BOSS murders the 5.0 around the track....

You do realize Evo is on an island with their results of what the BOSS does versus the M3, right? They're the exception, not the rule. But OH THEY'RE EURO SO THEY MUST BE RIGHT.

This is from C&D

here.” The result is 0 to 60 mph in 4.3 seconds—0.3 second quicker than the GT (or a Camaro SS) and only 0.2 second behind the jackhammer GT500. Once that live axle is placated . . . well, here’s the telltale statistic: From 5 to 60 mph, the Boss loses not an inch to the GT500 and is but 0.1 second behind a BMW M3."

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...ew?redirect=no

[US///M3]

Originally Posted by Dave07997S

Lightning Lap of America the M3 was over 4 sec. faster per lap. Laguna is just one track. Also in that MT test the M3 was on Contis while the 5.0L had the much better summer Pirellis.

However, just the fact to be so close is a major win for Ford.


Dave

+1

[US///M3]

Originally Posted by itsmeek

1. This is a joke, the M3 just BARELY beat the regular 5.0 around a "twisty" track. No WAY in hell it will hang w/the boss.

2. I have owned plenty of 911 Turbo's. I'll take the GT-R anyday for price/performance. I'm a car enthusiast, not a brand whore.

3. I see all kinds of m3's at dragstrips, it's just that they don't do very well unless fi.

What year was your last Porsche 911 Turbo S? I guess pretty much all car mags pick the Porsche over the Nissan because they're brand whores,not car enthusiasts. Hahaha

By the way Evo isnt the only comparison showing the M3 beating the Boss 302 around the track.

[itsmeek]

I didn't own a Turbo S (see price/performance), my last 2 Porsches were both 997.1's. And I will buy another as a track car as soon as I get out of the Viper. They are going to be in the high 50's soon enough unless I find a '12/'13 GT-R for under $70k.

I have already owned 2 GT-R's (one was wrecked at the track when an idiot in a 911 thought he could outbrake me) and the other was sold for a pretty decent profit. Hands down the best track cars I've ever owned after a few minor upgrades (brake pads/rotors, transmission cooler, non rfts on 18's)

[ragingclue]

Originally Posted by US///M3

By the way Evo isnt the only comparison showing the M3 beating the Boss 302 around the track.

Who else did?

BTW, the last GT500 with SVTPP was pretty even with the BOSS. The new Shelby is going to poop on the BOSS's face at the track (for quite a few laps anyway depending on soak). It's pretty insane that you can get this thing for the price of an M3.

[US///M3]

Originally Posted by ragingclue

Who else did?

BTW, the last GT500 with SVTPP was pretty even with the BOSS. The new Shelby is going to poop on the BOSS's face at the track (for quite a few laps anyway depending on soak). It's pretty insane that you can get this thing for the price of an M3.

The last GT500 was pretty even to the Boss. Ok then check out these numbers,the M3 is 2 sec faster than yhe GT500.

http://www.caranddriver.com/features...to-2011-page-8

[ragingclue]

You can't accurately cross-compare different years of the LL. Notice the '07 GT500 beat the '10 by a second and a half (??WTF??). And anyway, the M3 is 2 seconds faster than the iron block, non-SVTPP '10 GT500, but the M3 is still 1.4 seconds behind the aluminum block GT500 tested at LL2011 in your own list (<-- This is the one I was referring to in my previous post).

Only same day, same driver comparison of previous Shelby and BOSS (along with GT and V6 for good measure). That's usually the metric I use to differentiate track times between the cars, as I can't seem to find any other same-day, same-driver comparisons on the track. I think Ford was hell-bent on pushing the BOSS as the track car that it overshadowed the changes made to the '11 GT500 which actually made it also a great track car (again, minus heat soak and slightly more front end push).

[US///M3]

Originally Posted by ragingclue

You can't accurately cross-compare different years of the LL. Notice the '07 GT500 beat the '10 by a second and a half (??WTF??). And anyway, the M3 is 2 seconds faster than the iron block, non-SVTPP '10 GT500, but the M3 is still 1.4 seconds behind the aluminum block GT500 tested at LL2011 in your own list (<-- This is the one I was referring to in my previous post).

Only same day, same driver comparison of previous Shelby and BOSS (along with GT and V6 for good measure). That's usually the metric I use to differentiate track times between the cars, as I can't seem to find any other same-day, same-driver comparisons on the track. I think Ford was hell-bent on pushing the BOSS as the track car that it overshadowed the changes made to the '11 GT500 which actually made it also a great track car (again, minus heat soak and slightly more front end push).

Okay then you win,the Boss 302 is faster around the track and in the 1/4 mile than the engine M3. Comparisons that show otherwise are a fluke.
The RWD, 444 hp, 3,800lbs Boss 302 with a live axle rear suspension cant possibly lose to the high revving 8,400 rpm s65 M3 in a straight line or around the track.
I can take numbers taken from different years and determine the GT-R is fastrr than an M3 for example.
This is like arguing with my ex,even when she's wrong, she has to have the last word.

[HotIce]

http://www.caranddriver.com/photo-ga...t-drive-review

[HotIce]

Originally Posted by US///M3

No need to step it up,at the race track the M3 is doin just fine even against the Boss 302 LS . You dont see a lot of E9x M3's at dragstrip for a reason...they're not designed for straight line racing.
You can get a gorgeous interior/exterior and performance at what a whatever level but you gotta pay more.
It's like If you cant afford a Porsche 911 turbo S,you can settle for a Nissan GT-R. Same performance minus character,quality,beautiful designs,Gravitas etc. The real deal ,the cars kids grow up dreaming of owning one day.

The M3 boards are full of 16 year old kids that have M3's because daddy decided it would be a good idea. The day kids 'dreamed' of owning an M3 are over. The M3 is as popular as a Honda Civic.

[ragingclue]

Originally Posted by US///M3

Okay then you win,the Boss 302 is faster around the track and in the 1/4 mile than the engine M3. Comparisons that show otherwise are a fluke.
The RWD, 444 hp, 3,800lbs Boss 302 with a live axle rear suspension cant possibly lose to the high revving 8,400 rpm s65 M3 in a straight line or around the track.
I can take numbers taken from different years and determine the GT-R is fastrr than an M3 for example.
This is like arguing with my ex,even when she's wrong, she has to have the last word.

I don't think you understand what I wrote. We all know even though it is the same track, conditions can differ slightly from year to year. That's something to take into account. YOU said the list you posted showed the M3 was faster than the GT500 but did you bother to look at it before posting? The lower time is better, making the GT500 faster, but you said it was slower? Did you look at the wrong GT500? I'm guessing so.

And why are you posting the Shelby's weight as the BOSS's? Do you check what you write before you write it? You act like nothing in my previous post made sense, but there wasn't much subjective in it. You said your link showed the M3 was faster than the previous GT500. Based off the very list you posted, it's not. In fact the GT500 is almost a second and a half faster.... The list YOU posted, not me....

I think you've confused yourself quite badly.

[US///M3]

Originally Posted by ragingclue

When did C&D determine that (<-- not being confrontational, actually asking when they did, or what times they posted for both)? Didn't they run a 12.8 in the BOSS? IL ran a 12.9, MT ran a 12.3.... Not even the LS edition either.

So I guess Evo has the slowest drivers in the world...?

And how does an M3 beating the lowly 5.0 around a track by 0.1 seconds bode well for the M3 versus the BOSS? The BOSS murders the 5.0 around the track....

You do realize Evo is on an island with their results of what the BOSS does versus the M3, right? They're the exception, not the rule. But OH THEY'RE EURO SO THEY MUST BE RIGHT.

Do you realise some mags correct their times for non standard conditions? Car and Driver also shows the M3 being faster in a straight line.

A DCT M3 being faster than a MT 6SPD Boss isnt impossible.

Can you please show us this sea of " M3 vs Mustang Boss 302" comparisons you're talking about?

[ragingclue]

LL doesn't count now? You just used it a bunch of times to try to make a point.

MT almost beating the M3 with the 5.0 doesn't count (given the BOSS is shitloads faster than the 5.0)?

Now I don't know what's up with that crazy promo they made where it lapped LS faster than the R8 and some other notable cars, but how about that? That was the non-LS version, no less. Or are you on the Sticky bandwagon insisting they must have had sticky tires and oodles of other cheater enhancements? (If anyone hasn't read the comments on that shit house of a site, it's hilarious)

But are we talking straight line only or track only? If straight line, why are we comparing the BOSS and M3? They're both at home on the track, if I wanted straight line I'd get a 135 or 335 and tune the shit out of it, or a Shelby and mod it. Both the M3 and BOSS still do well in a straight line, but I just find it so odd; when did BMW fanatics start putting so much stock in drag times and 0-60? Back in the E36 days and before, it was all about the handling. Competitors could pump out the HP, but a Rustang keep up with the BMWs in any sort of corners without extensive mods. Seems 0-60 and 1320 are awfully close for both the M3 and the BOSS, not surprising especially when you factor in the DCT.

And you didn't bother to address why you tried to say the LL times were faster for the M3 against the GT500 or BOSS, because they're not. The M3 gets beat by both. Nor did you address the curb weight error, the Shelby is 38XX and the BOSS is 3622. The 2011 M3 DCT is what? 3700ish (Not sure, someone please post the correct number)? And you're asking how a 444HP, 380lb-ft, 3622 pound car could possibly keep up with a 414HP, 295lb-ft, 3700 pound car? I don't understand what's not to understand about the numbers here. Sure the LRA hurts the BOSS a bit, but the scales are tipped in its favor in more ways than one.

And oh yeah it avoids the GG tax, as does the 662HP Shelby. I consider that a part of engineering as well, and one helluva feat at that.

Not trying to argue, but you're saying some erroneous stuff, at times refuted by your own links, and then when it's pointed out, you glaze right over it and move on to your next attempt. You say it's like arguing with your ex, but maybe your ex wasn't so crazy after all.

[itsmeek]

Raging, I just leave people like him alone- no idea what he's talking about and just spewing whatever they can to make themselves look right. Unfortunately, I see this at the M3 forum (great cars for what they are) and it's embarrasing.

[US///M3]

Originally Posted by ragingclue

LL doesn't count now? You just used it a bunch of times to try to make a point.

MT almost beating the M3 with the 5.0 doesn't count (given the BOSS is shitloads faster than the 5.0)?

Now I don't know what's up with that crazy promo they made where it lapped LS faster than the R8 and some other notable cars, but how about that? That was the non-LS version, no less. Or are you on the Sticky bandwagon insisting they must have had sticky tires? (If anyone hasn't read the comments on that shit house of a site, it's hilarious)

But are we talking straight line only or track only? If straight line, why are we comparing the BOSS and M3? They're both at home on the track, if I wanted straight line I'd get a 135 or 335 and tune the shit out of it, or a Shelby and mod it. Both the M3 and BOSS still do well in a straight line, but I just find it so odd; when did BMW fanatics start putting so much stock in drag times and 0-60? Back in the E36 days and before, it was all about the handling. Competitors could pump out the HP, but a Rustang keep up with the BMWs in any sort of corners without extensive mods. Seems 0-60 and 1320 are awfully close for both the M3 and the BOSS, not surprising especially when you factor in the DCT.

And you didn't bother to address why you tried to say the LL times were faster for the M3 against the GT500 or BOSS, because they're not. The M3 gets beat by both. Nor did you address the curb weight error, the Shelby is 38XX and the BOSS is 3622. The 2011 M3 DCT is what? 3700ish (Not sure, someone please post the correct number)? And you're asking how a 444HP, 380lb-ft, 3622 pound car could possibly keep up with a 414HP, 295lb-ft, 3700 pound car? I don't understand what's not to understand about the numbers here. Sure the LRA hurts the BOSS a bit, but the scales are tipped in its favor in more ways than one.

And oh yeah it avoids the GG tax, as does the 662HP Shelby. I consider that a part of engineering as well, and one helluva feat at that.

Not trying to argue, but you're saying some erroneous stuff, at times refuted by your own links, and then when it's pointed out, you glaze right over it and move on to your next attempt. You say it's like arguing with your ex, but maybe your ex wasn't so crazy after all.

You guys said the boss is faster in a straight line and around the track. I linked one comparison that showd the opposite.
You didnt like the Evo comparo,you think they have the slowest drivers...and biassed Europeans.
Show me another comparison that pitts the M3 vs the Boss 302 or this sea of comparisons you were talkin about.

You know, no 2 M3's have the same 1/4 times. With the Boss and M3 having pretty much identical published times.
i think it's silly to say one is faster than the other.

I'm not putting too much stock in 0 to 60,1/4 times...just trying dispel some of the misinformation on here.

[ragingclue]

Originally Posted by US///M3

i think it's silly to say one is faster than the other.

In a straight line, I will agree with you. They're close. Especially considering the DCT. A 13.0 is not a good time in a BOSS if your profession revolves around taking cars down the track. That's why I was harping on it.

Don't get me wrong, I LOVE the M3, but the BOSS, and especially the car in the OP, are just faster on the track. I'm sure the next iteration of the M3 will kick it up a notch as well, but I'm a bit disappointed it's going to be FI, heat soak if a freaking bitch.

And if you haven't heard the BOSS sing from inside the car, it's something you have to get around to experiencing. It's pretty unique.

[US///M3]

Originally Posted by ragingclue

In a straight line, I will agree with you. They're close. Especially considering the DCT. A 13.0 is not a good time in a BOSS if your profession revolves around taking cars down the track. That's why I was harping on it.

Don't get me wrong, I LOVE the M3, but the BOSS, and especially the car in the OP, are just faster on the track. I'm sure the next iteration of the M3 will kick it up a notch as well, but I'm a bit disappointed it's going to be FI, heat soak if a freaking bitch.

And if you haven't heard the BOSS sing from inside the car, it's something you have to get around to experiencing. It's pretty unique.

12.8 seems pretty slow for a DCT car as well. Most US car mags have the DCT in the low mid 12's not 12.8 sec. And with a best 3.9 sec 0 to 60 times,
Maybe it was on a humid day, hell when the M3 came out some car mags ran 13 flat with a MT.
By the way i dont think the Boss is in the same league as the R8, the only comparison we have so far that directly pitts the boss vs. M3,shows the M3 bein faster around the track than the Boss.

Yet you keep sayin the Boss is faster around the track.

Another example is the M3 vs Porsche Cayman S, on some tracks the M3 is faster on other tracks the Cayman is faster.

[M3_WC]

For what its worth the E92 M3 has owned the Boss 302R in Continental Tire Series. M3 has won the championship the last two years and is leading the championship again this year.

Grand-Am had to give the M3 a competition adjustment, limiting rpms to 8250. Rather silly since the Boss has a full liter of displacement advantage.