Quote:
Originally Posted by Guibo
Re: Motor Trend test
Edmunds tested that same M3 and commented that the tires on that particular car, Continentals, had noticeably lower grip than the PS2's that the press M3's normally have.
As to the Mustang closing the gap, this is not necessarily new. Back in the day, the old 5.0 would romp the E30 M3 in a straight line and wasn't exactly a slouch on the road course either, beating the likes of the Celica All-Trac Turbo and Eagle Talon TSi in same-day testing. It cost a bit over $12k vs $35k for the M3.
A stoplight scenario is a likely encounter between these two cars, in which case it looks like driver skill could be the deciding factor.
Another likely encounter is a highway pull, and I'm pretty sure the M3 would walk the Mustang.
Should the M3 really be noticeably faster than the Mustang on track? That would put it in Z06/R8 territory, wouldn't it? Ask yourself if that sounds realistic for a premium-marque 4-seater with 414 hp starting at around $60k.
Factor in the engineering to excel in esoteric areas of subjective performance (feedback and superior motion control), the higher feature content of the M3 (telescoping steering wheel, side curtain airbags, etc), build quality and materials, engineering to meet RHD markets, transportation and import fees, currency values (1 euro is currently $1.27US), massive differences in production volume, and then you'll see the Mustang's performance/$ isn't amazing. It's totally expected.
1M vs M3: Not so sure the 1er will necessarily be faster. The shorter wheelbase may be a liability in terms of high-speed stability. As a niche vehicle within an already niche segment, I don't see it as much of a competitor to the GT500 (limited to 5500 units for 2011). Some will cross-shop for sure, but the overall markets will be quite different.
|
Nice post! Fantastically well stated.