BMW M3 vs. Camaro SS?

[Zeus]

Originally Posted by Dragoneye

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...

2010 was the first Camaro?







lol jkkkkkkkk.



63k is a steep comparison to 36k if your only thinking about performance.... and around Laguna Seca at that. If I remember correctly the difference is about 20 seconds around the Nurburgring. I'd pay 50-55k for an M3, because of the great performance, but also because of just how nice the car is.

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by Dragoneye

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...

Absolute numbers don't really tell the story here, percentages on the otherhand ...

Generally speaking, the M3 is about 2.5% faster. In a straight line, its a bit less, on road course its a little more. To gain that 2.5% in performance, you need to spend roughly 75% more.

[returnofcc]

Originally Posted by Dragoneye

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...

Ok, let's make another comparison.
Nurburgring lap times:
Nissan GT-R: 7:26.70
Corvette ZR-1: 7:26.40

Prices: I realize the GT-R uses more advanced technology than a pushrod engine with a blower. It also uses awd, has more seats, has better interior, has aluminum body panels...Wait, what are the prices?
Nissan GT-R: $80,000
Corvette ZR-1: $110,000
Difference: $30,000
So, for 30k, you get a whole.... .3 seconds around a track...Or $100,000 a second....yup...sounds worth it to me. Besides, 2008 was Nissan's first attempt. In the coming years, the GT-R Spec V will be further refined to beat the Corvette...

[returnofcc]

Originally Posted by a_Username

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

Yes

[a_Username]

Obviously you don't pay for a complete performance package when buying the M3. Saying that, the price tag doesn't fully reflect performance. It also includes luxury items, and "better" materials. This type of car's main competition would be a CTS-V, in which it obviously loses to it performance wise, with having every bit of the quality and luxuries the M3 offers.

[returnofcc]

Originally Posted by a_Username

Obviously you don't pay for a complete performance package when buying the M3. Saying that, the price tag doesn't fully reflect performance. It also includes luxury items, and "better" materials. This type of car's main competition would be a CTS-V, in which it obviously loses to it performance wise, with having every bit of the quality and luxuries the M3 offers.

Man I can't wait for the new M5

[Booster]

Not many people who would shop an M3 would do so against a Camaro...

The Camaro provides awesome performance for a bargin basement price but M3 is more of a true Sports Car. The BMW provides steering feel and balanced handling that's unmatched except by some of the worlds very best sports cars. They are really in two different classes.

That being said styling goes to the Camaro all day long and it's the car I choose in my price category...sure I would rather have an M3 or a CTS-V or a Corvette (Base or ZR1...Z06 is too twitchy) or an Audi R8, my dream car would be a Ferrari F458 Italia! They just aren't realistic.

If you want to shop true competitors to the Camaro.

By car type: Mustang GT, Dodge Challenger, and maybe a Dodge Charger

By Price you can include: Mazda RX8, Nissan 370Z, WRX, EVO...

I don't think I am missing any...and for my money out of those cars only the 370Z and the Mustang come close to performance for the value...but the Camaro wins.

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by returnofcc

Ok, let's make another comparison.
Nurburgring lap times:
Nissan GT-R: 7:26.70
Corvette ZR-1: 7:26.40

Prices: I realize the GT-R uses more advanced technology than a pushrod engine with a blower. It also uses awd, has more seats, has better interior, has aluminum body panels...Wait, what are the prices?
Nissan GT-R: $80,000
Corvette ZR-1: $110,000
Difference: $30,000
So, for 30k, you get a whole.... .3 seconds around a track...Or $100,000 a second....yup...sounds worth it to me. Besides, 2008 was Nissan's first attempt. In the coming years, the GT-R Spec V will be further refined to beat the Corvette...

Lets see ... different drivers, different definitions of a lap, different games played by GM and Nissan engineers, ignoring the 7:22.4 the ZR1 was also clocked at ... sounds perfectly comparable to me

The Motor Trend laps were as equal as possible since they were done by a neutral 3rd party. By the way, they had 1:35.83 in the ZR1 vs 1:40.45 for the GTR at Laguna Seca. The Z06 ran a 1:40.92 in the same set of testing. All runs were with the same driver.

[a_Username]

Originally Posted by returnofcc

Ok, let's make another comparison.
Nurburgring lap times:
Nissan GT-R: 7:26.70
Corvette ZR-1: 7:26.40

Prices: I realize the GT-R uses more advanced technology than a pushrod engine with a blower. It also uses awd, has more seats, has better interior, has aluminum body panels...Wait, what are the prices?
Nissan GT-R: $80,000
Corvette ZR-1: $110,000
Difference: $30,000
So, for 30k, you get a whole.... .3 seconds around a track...Or $100,000 a second....yup...sounds worth it to me. Besides, 2008 was Nissan's first attempt. In the coming years, the GT-R Spec V will be further refined to beat the Corvette...

Reviewing a full performance comparison the GT-R and ZR1 also has to reflect drag strips. The ZR1 will utterly destroy the GT-R in a drag race, while still managing to defeat it around a road course. And usually raising its drag strip capabilities sacrifices its ability to go around a track and vice-versa. You can't just use one road course to justify one car being better than the other, even though you did prove the ZR1 was better disregarding price differences.

Around Laguna Seca: http://www.fastestlaps.com/track16.html , it was around 4 seconds quickers.

Around Willow Springs: http://www.fastestlaps.com/track50.html, it was around 2 seconds quicker.

Around Hockenheim Short: http://www.fastestlaps.com/track7.html, it was around 2 second quicker.

The only time I could find a GT-R defeating the ZR1 was around a very tight, technical track, which obviously greatly advantages the AWD and handling capabilities of the GT-R. IMO, these types of tracks are meaningless considering this doesn't give the full overall performance potential shown in "balanced" tracks. Also like DG stated, different companies take different routes to get to their results.

[returnofcc]

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. 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.

The point was that you were implying that since the dashboard has nothing to do with driving, that it is somehow unimportant. Then, I came back with the car wash thing, and suddenly it jumped to "Oh, well that's about looks." You also forgot that lots of car have leather on the dashboards also, something that is easily distinguishable by looking. Not to mention overall ergonomics and interior design.

[a_Username]

Originally Posted by returnofcc

Man I can't wait for the new M5

How much will this New M5 cost? It is a successor to the 3 series? I don't believe so (could be wrong), and considering the price of this M3, I'm sure BMW will price itself out of comparison.

[returnofcc]

Originally Posted by DGthe3

Lets see ... different drivers, different definitions of a lap, different games played by GM and Nissan engineers, ignoring the 7:22.4 the ZR1 was also clocked at ... sounds perfectly comparable to me

The Motor Trend laps were as equal as possible since they were done by a neutral 3rd party. By the way, they had 1:35.83 in the ZR1 vs 1:40.45 for the GTR at Laguna Seca. The Z06 ran a 1:40.92 in the same set of testing. All runs were with the same driver.

LOL, ok, so let me see, it's fair if they are the same driver? No, it's actually more fair if you have two different drivers who know the car better. That way, each car can be driven to its full potential, and the true capability of that car can be shown. As opposed to one driver, who may be a great driver of the zr-1, but a terrible driver of the gt-r. Follow the logic?
Oh, and please, where is Kotton, the man who holds the Nurburgring above all?

[returnofcc]

Originally Posted by a_Username

How much will this New M5 cost? It is a successor to the 3 series? I don't believe so (could be wrong), and considering the price of this M3, I'm sure BMW will price itself out of comparison.

The CTS-V aimed for the M5. The M5 will surely aim back for the CTS-V.
And the M5 is the M version of the 5 series...

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by returnofcc

The point was that you were implying that since the dashboard has nothing to do with driving, that it is somehow unimportant. Then, I came back with the car wash thing, and suddenly it jumped to "Oh, well that's about looks." You also forgot that lots of car have leather on the dashboards also, something that is easily distinguishable by looking. Not to mention overall ergonomics and interior design.

My mistake. I didn't know that a dirty car isn't about looks.