BMW M3 vs. Camaro SS?

[returnofcc]

Originally Posted by MrIcky

I believe it's the reverse of this. Porsche has used PDK transmissions since the 80s in their racing cars and has finally developed it for street use. I believe their racing versions use straight cut gears and so they weren't suitable. The current PDK isn't a copy of the VW design.

Porsche was actually going to try to get controlling shares in VW but then VW did a reversal when Porsche overextended. It's pretty interesting if you like corporate takeovers.

I meant in production cars. I'm pretty sure they wanted to test dual clutch transmissions in the consumer market first in audi's and vw's, before moving it to porsche just to see how it would be received by the public. I could be wrong though

[returnofcc]

Originally Posted by DGthe3

its all about the quality of the plastic and what the surface is like. Is it hard or soft touch? Is there a leather cover over it? This is all critical because the feel of the dash material is vitally important, since you are in constant contact with it while driving. Wait a minute ... I never touch my dash unless I'm cleaning it off. Steering wheel? Yes. Shifter? Yes. Radio/HVAC controls? Yes. Actual dash ... not so much.

Then why even bother getting a car wash. Why not leave it covered in mud? It's not impeding upon your driving abilities in any sort of way, unless the mud is covering up your lights...

[carfansince73]

Originally Posted by returnofcc

And how would you feel paying 60k for a plastic box with an engine?
See, two can play at this game. Why are you comparing the two, one's an exotic, one's a muscle car...

I don't think it's fair to call the Camaro a box, especially sitting next to your oh-so-aerodynamic VW. Also, you could make a similar argument to your purchase, a, I don't know, leather box with hardly an engine. I guess it all comes down to what you want. I wanted a good looking car (I realized that's in the eye of the beholder) that was quick and had a decent looking interior, and the Camaro fit the bill and my price range. You bought your VW that has nicer interior materials but not much under the hood. In this end of the price range, there are trade offs. You get into M3 territory and you can get both if you want.

For those who can distinguish an M3 from a regular 3 series, I'd agree with you and the others that the M3 gets lots of looks , just not next to a Camaro.

[SSchase]

Originally Posted by returnofcc

Then why even bother getting a car wash. Why not leave it covered in mud? It's not impeding upon your driving abilities in any sort of way, unless the mud is covering up your lights...

um reread his post hes talking about the interior. i didnt see anywere in the post about the exterior of his car being dirty. im not trying to start anything im just saying.

[KoTToN]

Originally Posted by 2SSARME

You'd laugh at someone with a ZR1?



This quote is good enough for my sig.

lol join the club, i ran outa of sig room but if i didnt trust me there would be a lot more.

It looks like you shoulda have waited though because if you look a couple posts up, you could have had a quote that had him comparing a car wash to dashboard materials

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by returnofcc

Then why even bother getting a car wash. Why not leave it covered in mud? It's not impeding upon your driving abilities in any sort of way, unless the mud is covering up your lights...

I can tell a car is dirty by looking at it. I can't tell if a dash is soft touch or rock hard plastic by looking at it. Complaints about interior plastic is almost completely about how it feels not how it looks. The main complaints about how the interior of the Camaro looks are that it is claustrophobic, rather spartan, and doesn't feature things like a navigation screen.

By the way, in addition to being unsightly dirt does hurt fuel economy. Extreme cases can result in a 10% reduction in highway fuel economy

Originally Posted by KoTToN

lol join the club, i ran outa of sig room but if i didnt trust me there would be a lot more.

It looks like you shoulda have waited though because if you look a couple posts up, you could have had a quote that had him comparing a car wash to dashboard materials

Try editing the quote so it doesn't have the quote box and just linking the name, like this:

returnofcc: Like I said before, there is a dealership that is 4 miles away from my house that has 3 2SS's just sitting on their lot. And this is a very small dealership, it's not a high volume dealership in a populated area. Come early summer, when 2011's are coming out, the camaro will be offered for 0%. I guarantee it

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by DGthe3

I can tell a car is dirty by looking at it. I can't tell if a dash is soft touch or rock hard plastic by looking at it.

[a_Username]

Originally Posted by DeathChill

Just curious what the interiors of most cars are made of. I honestly don't think I've ever been in a vehicle that didn't have a plastic dash, so I am curious about what other materials are used (seriously).

BMW and other German based automotive manufacturers use Gold and Silver as their interior materials. Not only do you get the "ultimate driving machine" you also get an automatic ticket into Heaven, because you just sit inside it.

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by DeathChill

Just curious what the interiors of most cars are made of. I honestly don't think I've ever been in a vehicle that didn't have a plastic dash, so I am curious about what other materials are used (seriously).

Leathers and suede or imitation suede in higher-priced vehicles like the CTS. Some wood in cars like Bentley. Aluminum, and chrome for trim. Other cars of a more affordable price point feature plastics (both rubbery in feel and hard), metals, and chrome accents.

Then you get into stupid-expensive cars like the Bugatti Veyron, where the directional lever is made out of magnesium and costs a few thousand dollars alone....

Cars like the Camaro and Mustang have to be affordable to sell. So costs get allocated to what really matters: performance. I say this often: they could have spent a few thousand on a leather or rubber-wrapped dash...but they we may not have an LS3, or Brembo brakes.

Originally Posted by a_Username

BMW and other German based automotive manufacturers use Gold and Silver as their interior materials. Not only do you get the "ultimate driving machine" you also get an automatic ticket into Heaven, because you just sit inside it.

[DeathChill]

Originally Posted by a_Username

BMW and other German based automotive manufacturers use Gold and Silver as their interior materials. Not only do you get the "ultimate driving machine" you also get an automatic ticket into Heaven, because you just sit inside it.

So you're saying I need to go on a test drive in a BMW immediately before I die? Hmm, a life of sin it is!

[Kurt_OH]

It seems to me that to be in the "VS" forum, we should start by talking about performance. In that regard, the fastest stock Camaro VS fastest stock M3, it's not much of a contest. The M3 dominates the Camaro in high performance, winning even at the M3 (or any sports car's) worst event: 0-60 or 1/4 mile. Braking is closer than most measurements, but handling is night and day.

As some folks said, the price diff is huge. You could have a spare SS for the price of the M3 if you shopped carefully.

Oh yea, M3's gas mileage is significantly worse.

As for the subjective stuff - looks, interior, speculation about quality/reliability, why argue it? I say Ginger, you say Mary Anne - so what?

What would I rather have if someone else was buying? M3. It's a great car, even at it's quite high price. It'll run with a 911, while still able to haul adult passengers out back. Not much that's cheaper can make that claim.

Still, that's no slam on the Camaro. When the Z/28 comes out, my guess is it'll spec out $15k less than a comparably equipped M3, and be a bit faster on a road course, and much faster in a straight line.


Right now, M3 is too expensive and therefore out of consideration. Camaro SS is at the top of my list.

BIG bang for the buck.

[ffrcobra_65]

Originally Posted by 13F20

Sorry guys and girls but I have owned a BMW M3 form 2005 and have driven the new M3 V8 and I am sorry to say BMW M3 will take the SS all day.

I owned a 2001 M3 with SMG and it consistently ran 4.7 0-60 stock. Stock performance vs stock performance (not price comparison) the new M3 will outrun the 2010 SS allllll dayyyyy longgggggg. On the track, not even close.

[a_Username]

Originally Posted by Kurt_OH

It seems to me that to be in the "VS" forum, we should start by talking about performance. In that regard, the fastest stock Camaro VS fastest stock M3, it's not much of a contest. The M3 dominates the Camaro in high performance, winning even at the M3 (or any sports car's) worst event: 0-60 or 1/4 mile. Braking is closer than most measurements, but handling is night and day.

As some folks said, the price diff is huge. You could have a spare SS for the price of the M3 if you shopped carefully.

Oh yea, M3's gas mileage is significantly worse.

As for the subjective stuff - looks, interior, speculation about quality/reliability, why argue it? I say Ginger, you say Mary Anne - so what?

What would I rather have if someone else was buying? M3. It's a great car, even at it's quite high price. It'll run with a 911, while still able to haul adult passengers out back. Not much that's cheaper can make that claim.

Still, that's no slam on the Camaro. When the Z/28 comes out, my guess is it'll spec out $15k less than a comparably equipped M3, and be a bit faster on a road course, and much faster in a straight line.


Right now, M3 is too expensive and therefore out of consideration. Camaro SS is at the top of my list.

BIG bang for the buck.

Basically sums up the whole comparison. M3 > SS, you get what you pay for.

[Mr. Wyndham]

Not that I care...because I don't. I really, really, really, really don't...but I was browsing around Motor Trend's site and found some relevant info:

Laguna Seca lap times:
2008 BMW M3 -- 1:42.96
2010 Camaro -- 1:45.72

I decided, for kicks and giggles to go online and build myself an identically-equipped M3 and Chevy Camaro. I recognize the more advanced technologies built into the M3...it's the German way to make things more complicated than they need to be...but all I'm concerned with here is the bottom line:

BMW M3: $63,000
Camaro: $36,000
Difference: $27,000

So, for $27,000, you get a whole...2.76 seconds around a track. Or...$10,000 a second....yup....sounds worth it to me. Besides, 2010 was Chevy's first attempt. In the coming years, the Camaro will be further refined to reduce that gap significantly...