When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Speaking to a guy at work who has owned various cars. He went on to saying that the best car he has driven in regards to handling has been the M3 je said that it handled way better then a C5 vette.
Now I found that a bit hard to believe that the M3 would kill it so badly in that department. So the question is would anyone who has driven both care to comment?
Not sure about the M3, but I have a 3 series with the sports package and it handles pretty darn good. It is my therapy when the Vette is off the road. I wouldn't doubt the M3 handles at least as well as the Vette. Of course, non-run flat tires might change this in the Vette's favor very quickly.
I autocross a C5 coupe with the BMW club and have no problem with the M3s except those M3s that have been modified (usually at the differential and would run in SM2 in SCCA, not Stock category) and the M3 Lightweight. Stock M3s don't have the power at the lower RPMs and the M5s are too heavy to take on a C5.
But, based on my racing results last year, my driving is better than most C5 drivers, so a good driver in an M3 would probably beat an inexperienced driver in a C5. They're both good cars, but the M3s do have engine problems that BMW hides. Head to head, with comparable drivers, the C5 wins. FWIW.
A stock M3 truns aroun .91 lateral g's - It is not in (or meant to be in) the same class as the Vette. Also, it weighs about the same and has less power.
A stock M3 turns around .91 lateral g's - It is not in (or meant to be in) the same class as the Vette. Also, it weighs about the same and has less power.
I get to drive my son's M3 and I have been to BMW driving school. The BMW is very well balanced and easy to drive fast. The M3 feels easier to drive to its limits... but once the limit is reached, it becomes a handful.
The C5 is a bit more work to drive to its limit than the M3... but when pushed to its limits, its more predictable.
I'll have to agree with England. BMW makes a well-balanced car in the M3. It is no pushover. However, as England puts it, the inline six just doesn't have the torque or horsepower that the LS1 has. Unless the Vette driver is a total nimrod, I'd have to give the nod to the Vette. There - I've just deposited my .02 also!
St. Jude Donor '05-'06-'07-'08-'09-'10-'11-'12-'13-'14
Originally Posted by Neablas
whoa now .. we cant start doing that. you have to compare them stock for stock because if you dont then it's a modded vette verses a stock M3.
and you've obviously never come across a tI M3.
Neablas,
The runcraps is the major reason you can't keep up with your brother. They are a terrible compromise between convenience (run flats) and performance (very little).
My point is that if you have a suspension modded M3 and a suspension modded C5, the C5 will smoke the M3.
Stock for stock, the runcraps will keep you eating dust.
My daily driver is a 97 M3 with sport shocks and upgraded brake bads and I will say it handles real nice, stops well, and is rewarding to drive fast on a twisty road. As others have said the word balance comes to mind. Real nice car. A buddy of my has a SMG 2004 M3 and it is a nice evolution of handling compared to my car.
Now compared to my Z06 with T1 bars and 04 shocks neither of these cars can compete. The Z is razor sharp, no body roll, and is far ahead in overall capability.
To be honest I don't really think of my M3 and my Z in the same light. The M3 is a GT car and the Z is a race car for the street.
I think that the comparison would have to take into account the type of suspension on the Vette. There's a significant difference between the FE1 suspension and Z51 suspension. From my experience, I haven't found switching to non-runflats making that much of a difference...
From my experience, I haven't found switching to non-runflats making that much of a difference...
I have the Z51 and the difference is pronounced on city streets. The reason is twofold.
1. The runflat sidewall stiffness allows the car to hop sideways while traversing a high-speed corner that has irregular surfaces.
2. Each runflat weighs at least 6 lbs more than the equivalent-sized non-runflat tire. This extra weight slows the suspensions rebound ability, contributing to the "side dance" tendancy.
This is why Car & Driver testers found that a Z51 C5 coupe handles just as well as a Z06 if Z06 wheels and tires are mounted to the coupe.
The runcraps is the major reason you can't keep up with your brother. They are a terrible compromise between convenience (run flats) and performance (very little).
My point is that if you have a suspension modded M3 and a suspension modded C5, the C5 will smoke the M3.
Stock for stock, the runcraps will keep you eating dust.
EG
yeh well I'll agree to that .. the runcraps suck .. however I ditched them about 10k ago. and I do have the Z51 suspension.
Perhaps it's the driver.
also I dont know if it matters but his is a 2004 M3.
oh well. whatever. I dont care, both are great cars.
Update your suspension, gearing and change your tires and you'll sing a totally different song.
The C5 is almost 50/50 front/rear balanced and is very easy to slide the front, rear or all 4 tires in the hands of a good driver.
The M3 - for all it's hype, is a sedan first and a "sports" car second. The inline 6 does not have the torque of your C5 or the horsepower.
I'll take a C5 any day and mod the suspension/gears/tires and blow any M3 (even a modded one) out of the water at any speed on any course.
2 cents deposited.
EG
I disagree with your entire statement. You can't say upgrade the suspension, gears and tires and then race a stock M3. That's the same mentality that ricers say in regards to our beloved Corvette. "My Civic would have won if it had a turbo charger on it."
You have to compare stock vs. stock. In 1997 Car & Driver rated the E36 M3 "The best handling car at any price." That was head to head with the C5, NSX, 911, Ferrari 355 and Viper. The car is hardly a pushover. Stock vs. stock the Corvette was defeated along with the other exotics. We can love the C5 but it can't win in every department, but it sure can compete however.
St. Jude Donor '05-'06-'07-'08-'09-'10-'11-'12-'13-'14
Originally Posted by donkeykong
I disagree with your entire statement. You can't say upgrade the suspension, gears and tires and then race a stock M3. That's the same mentality that ricers say in regards to our beloved Corvette. "My Civic would have won if it had a turbo charger on it."
You have to compare stock vs. stock. In 1997 Car & Driver rated the E36 M3 "The best handling car at any price." That was head to head with the C5, NSX, 911, Ferrari 355 and Viper. The car is hardly a pushover. Stock vs. stock the Corvette was defeated along with the other exotics. We can love the C5 but it can't win in every department, but it sure can compete however.
Johnny
See thread answer #12 - I answered your statement there.
Quote "My point is that if you have a suspension modded M3 and a suspension modded C5, the C5 will smoke the M3." end quote
the M3 will beat the BAjesus out of a vette as far as hard cornering.
my brother has one and it takes sharp on ramp turns at upwards of 90 no problem.
The engineers built the car so that once the speed starts increasing the car drops down .. it's incredible to be doing 120 and feel like 60.
I love my vette dont get my wrong, it's my baby .. but in comparison I'd have trouble keeping up to him.
Totally disagree... and so do the BMW folks... just go over to the bimmerforums and see... They have great respect for the C5 especially the Z06. The Z06 has a better chassis, full frame not unibody like BMW.
No struts on the vette and the suspension is far superior to the BMW.
lower center of gravity, etc.. so many advantages over the BMW.
Life in the vette begins at 100mph... much better designed for speed than the M3... sorry.. you need to learn to how drive the vette a bit better...