And you should experience the "visceral thrill" of a 662 hp GT500. It's everything the GT is, except a few notches higher.
The cars are a blast!
S.

 

Nonsense - but an entertaining attempt to take a defensive position in the face of facts concerning BMW's poor showing in competitive racing. For everyday driving as you call it, by 85% of motorists out there, the Honda Accord delivers the finest street driving experience one can have. It is safe, secure, roomy, reliable, and cheap to own and operate - the very definition of good street driving. That leaves the other 15% who might aspire to drive a BMW. While I actually do appreciate the BMW's driving dynamics and that is the reason I put up with their substandard reliability and value (also, my wife won't drive anything else), the other 90% of that 15% only buy the car because it is a status symbol.

If one must have 4 doors, and when you consider technical merits and driving experience only, the BMWs and particularly the 3er continue to be one of the finest sedans out there, managing to have very sporty driving and practicality. But that should never be confused with the requirements for a real sports car, which is completely out of BMW's league, M3 included.

The Corvette since the C5 has nailed every aspect of the sports car segment, and on good tires (yes, it is the ONLY car in the segment where the manufacturer knowlingly equips the vehicle with a substandard tire due to union contracts with vendors), is un-beatable stock for stock, on a race track.

 

No, you obviously didn't read the article!:

"A 911's supposed to be an everyday car," Kim muses. "Those other two, I'd never even dream about owning either.

I've never read anything like that about a Vette with their mild understeer!

Anyway, now that the GTR has proved it can make ANY Porsche numbers anywhere(The Ring too) hopefully the stretched turbo will be a game changer. I would like to see a -7:20 Ring street Porsche!

 

The M3? You can't be serious.

 

When their backs are up against the wall they start moving the rear wheels back! Finally, and hope it works with the Turbo!

 

The M3 is a far better street experience than any Mustang. And the "track " has nothing to do with why that is true.

What do you mean "as I call it "? What do you call driving that is not done on a track?? And I'd wager that the number of people who drive their street legal cars on the street is very close to 100%.

The

 

No I have not driven there. But is Sebring not in fact a closed course in which the participants do know the layout? You will not answer this, so I'll do it for you: Of course it is. Your point, mooted again.

Driving hard != exceeding the 10/10ths limits for the conditions.
I never said any such thing. I said some cars will do this a lot better than others.

And how many GT500s did Ford sell? Not much. BMW will probably sell that many in just well-equipped 3-Series convertibles. Are you telling me Ford can sell 10s of thousands of Mustang GTs per year at $60k prices? Please, do tell me, if there is such a market, why Ford is so dumb as to not take advantage of such profits?

If you like gigantic pieces of hard plastic, a rear seat treated as a mere afterthought, relative dirth of options and amenities, and interior design by straight edge, then that's your prerogative. The marketplace has voted and it indicates I'm not entirely off-base.

You have an obvious bone to pick, and that's with anyone who would dare compare the objective bang/buck performance of the M3 vs the Mustang (which, as I've said, is rather pointless when comparing non-premium brands vs premium brands). Besides, I would say that journalists who have driven all of these cars (some even back to back over the same roads) have a far better understanding, and are more forthright, than random people on an interweb forum.

Car and Driver and Motor Trend both picked the M3 over the CTS-V Coupe. The CTS-V has very good steering, but overall it's just not as involving to drive as the M3, and falls down in any discussion of automated transmissions (the Cadillac's simply isn't as good as the M3's dual-clutcher). The fit & finish isn't quite there either. And, like the Mustang, it's not as well-engineered from a packaging standpoint: A car that long and nearly 3 inches wider should offer more space inside. And that's from American writers; what do you suppose the result looks like in UK/Euro tests? And, using your argument, isn't the CTS-V an overpriced POS compared to a GT500?
M3 vs Grand Sport: Corvette fan Larry Webster already did that test, and he proclaimed the M3 to be better. 3LT still has the same puffy leather, the same gigantic one-piece slab of plastic comprising the console, the same switchgear that looks OK on a $15k car, the same dated head unit. It still doesn't offer genuine CF or aluminum.
If it were so easy to do what BMW has done with the M3, why doesn't GM just add extra seats to the Corvette? Anyway, the comparison was made for like vs like vehicles. I never said the M3 was a competitor to the C6; indeed, I even posted an article in which GM admits German car customers don't cross-shop them.

Not necessarily. Porsche has its own iconic design and the Corvette has its own too. Underneath, where Porsche has done better, GM would do well to study it and see where they can improve. And thus it is explained by Juechter in the article. As for interior, GM has already publicly stated the aim in benchmarking Audi (they also looked at the 911's seat). It's not by coincidence people have seen the wraparound dash that ends in a grab handle down by the console and mentioned cars like the R8 or Murcielago. (The Lambo was designed by Luc Donckerwolke, who joined Audi Design in '92.) Combined with the stitching, real metal and carbon fiber, smooth leather, etc, this is clearly not a step into traditionally American interior design.

 

Keep telling yourself that. Maybe you'll even start to believe it.

 

That is absolutely not true.

 

That just means the GTS is a better street car than the track-honed versions. It also probably says something about a journalist who can't afford a GT3 RS. People who are non-journalists and buy their GT2/GT3 for street purposes might think differently.
The Vette vs GT3 RS comparo I'm thinking of doesn't really address mild understeer.

 

I don't need to keep telling myself anything; I've driven all the BMWs and Mustangs that we're discussing.

 

I seriously doubt you've ever driven an M3, if that's how you truly feel about it. If numbers are so important to you, provide me with some in-gear acceleration times for the M3 vs Camry. Show me any Camry that has the presence, sound, and adjustability of the M3. Here's just a taste:

Notice how quick-revving the V8 is. Think you'll get the same feeling of lack of inertia from a GT500?

Please keep deluding yourself that 10/10ths on-track performance differences are so important to road driving, and that you somehow know better than Gordon Murray, Tadge Juechter, BMW, Ferrari, Lamborghini, Jaguar, James May, Ben "the Stig" Collins, etc.

 

Why don't you take this BS to Other Cars??

 

Porsche won't do better underneath until they abandon the 50 year old VW beetle derived engine in the rear as they hoped to do with the 928. Even now, the Nordschleife obsessed engineers have resorted to 4 wheel steering on the GT3 because after all this time, it's the only way to get the rump to finish a turn when it wants to push, or stop it from over rotating when you don't. Amazing that after all this time, after all the uber expensive tech and controls, a simple pushrod motor front engine coupe with gated shifter remains its chief nemesis at half the price. And don't tell me they don't care about Nordschleife times. Porsche have gone to extraordinary lengths to avoid admitting the 928 engineers were right.

 

Because it is being brought up here, and this forum is as good as any other (and better than some) to voice the opinion that outright objective performance should not come at the expense of subjective feel in a sportscar.

Are you talking about the 928 that died?
I'm sure Porsche cares about Nordschleife times, to the extent that they can say "new GT3 is faster than old GT3." As to whether they do so to say they are faster than a Corvette, that's something neither you nor anyone else has presented with any compelling evidence.
I never said the engine placement was better; in fact, I'm arguing to the contrary. In other words, you don't have to adopt wholesale an entirely different car's setup when you benchmark. That's not what benchmarking means. I would be utterly amazed if anyone is using the Corvette as a steering feel benchmark. My point is that Tadge already conceded the Porsche does at least some things better underneath (the steering); and all these years, Corvette die-hards were saying it was just a myth. (Ditto his concession that those who drive aggressively find the seats to be lacking in support.)
The Corvette is half the price, but do you think it's only half the profits? Check that link I posted about the top profitable cars (a list that does not include the Corvette). The Corvette has to be half the price; otherwise, they would never hit their production volume goals. Meanwhile, Porsche has built a car that more accurately reflects the driving preferences of more people throughout the world, more closely matching the needs on the kinds of roads they drive on. I'm sure they could have put on giant gumballs like the Corvette, with little to no consideration that some people might actually drive these cars in the rain or moderately icy/snowy conditions, and said to hell with displacement taxes. They might even trade some of the structural rigidity of a unibody for the lightweight advantages of a composite body-on-frame car like the Corvette. They might even downgrade their image by not offering such a vast array of customization and options, a la carte. But they have chosen to work with what they have, refining it, and have been rewarded quite handsomely for it. I seriously doubt they are so short-sighted as to trade a few seconds on the Nordschleife for this all-around appeal (and resultant sales).
And other cars have 4-wheel-steering too, even ones with engines in the front.
The GT3 is a funny example, as I was led to believe (in discussions with cars like the GT-R, M3, 997, etc) that a true driver's car must have a manual transmission. Yet, now we see the GT3 with PDK. What next, an AMG from Mercedes with AWD?!

 

I agree Babe. I've asked the mods to move parts of this now to OT OC, or close it as 100% off topic. It's a shame a C7 thread has to be ruined by a couple of Porsche and BMW posters.

 

This is a C7 forum. What part of that don't you and a few others get!

 

Are you saying that Porsche is thus only in competition with itself for Porsche customers? Then I disagree and the only evidence I need to present is the banter taking place right here, on CF.

 

The only competition to this C7 is the current vette in my garage.

 

Banter taking place on an interweb forum is not necessarily indicative of anything. I'm sure there is internet banter between people regarding Civics vs M3s or Koeniseggs vs Veyrons, but that is not indicative of a competition Honda and BMW or between Bugatti and Koenigsegg. Some people have both. Some people even have multiple Veyrons, as many as 8. And that goes some way in underscoring my point. I am saying as Tadge Juechter says: Few people cross-shopped Corvette vs the Germans. This was at least true up through the C6. The C7 may pose a different situation, but it has almost nothing to do with the marginal on-track performances between these cars at 10/10ths.
I am saying that subjective feel matters, and the Corvette's main engineer agrees. If you have some reputable source that disputes this, I'd like to see it.