M1 vs competition

[Guibo]

Originally Posted by Spartikus

All this tech translates into a very tied-down ride motion at normal speeds and over rough roads.
http://www.insideline.com/ford/musta...and-video.html

Which is to say it has just as good behavior at abnormal speeds as the M3? Nobody can conclude that at this point.

Here's edmunds on the V6 Mustang with the upgraded suspension package:
"Around town, the car feels tied down, with ride motions reminiscent of a muscle car. Cool. At speed, however, especially around tight turns on bumpier roads, the live rear axle walks out on you just at the wrong time."
http://www.insideline.com/ford/musta...and-video.html

Also, you might want to check the editorial 2nd opinion to the article you posted:
"I don't care if you've built the best beam axle rear suspension that money can buy. It's 2010, and the inherent handling compromise is intrusively noticeable on all but the smoothest of corners. Doing a good beam axle is something like making the best-tasting casserole that money can buy — if you're lucky, it might taste as good as a half-assed cheeseburger."
http://www.insideline.com/ford/musta...gination_top_1


Remember, when the first M3 reviews came in, many journalists felt it was lackluster. In isolation. Then they drove it against competitors and reached a different conclusion.

[jmunro]

Originally Posted by Spartikus

The S65 is absolutely marvelous. I'm not sure what we're debating here.

"So in essence the mustang(MY 2011) is 3 years behind the M3(MY 2008) in terms of development. When the next gen M3 comes out, the story will go back to how it is."

I understood that as the a newer engine is behind an older one in development. That made no sense.

The point being that BMW developed a car with similar performance 3 years prior to the development of the mustang. When the new mustang GT is finally released, the new M3 will follow shortly after and I'm speculating will outperform the GT by a *small* amount. Hence the performance/technology lag of Ford.

[BBK]

Seriously.... can we give up on the muscle car talk? Muscle cars, are their own catagory, in which BMW does not fit.

Do they even sell Mustangs in Europe?

[BrokenVert]

Originally Posted by BBK

Seriously.... can we give up on the muscle car talk? Muscle cars, are their own catagory, in which BMW does not fit.

Do they even sell Mustangs in Europe?

Older Aston Martins are considered muscle cars of sorts.

[Spartikus]

Originally Posted by Guibo

Which is to say it has just as good behavior at abnormal speeds as the M3? Nobody can conclude that at this point.

Here's edmunds on the V6 Mustang with the upgraded suspension package:
"Around town, the car feels tied down, with ride motions reminiscent of a muscle car. Cool. At speed, however, especially around tight turns on bumpier roads, the live rear axle walks out on you just at the wrong time."
http://www.insideline.com/ford/musta...and-video.html

Also, you might want to check the editorial 2nd opinion to the article you posted:
"I don't care if you've built the best beam axle rear suspension that money can buy. It's 2010, and the inherent handling compromise is intrusively noticeable on all but the smoothest of corners. Doing a good beam axle is something like making the best-tasting casserole that money can buy — if you're lucky, it might taste as good as a half-assed cheeseburger."
http://www.insideline.com/ford/musta...gination_top_1


Remember, when the first M3 reviews came in, many journalists felt it was lackluster. In isolation. Then they drove it against competitors and reached a different conclusion.

I wasn't stating it was as compliant as an M3 over rough surfaces. The C63 and IS-F sure as hell aren't. I would bet that the GT isn't. . From what I understand its not nearly as bad as it use to be. Nobody should be taking a car to its limit on bad pavement either, especially on the street. We are also talking about a 29k car here. I've only read that complaint on the V6 and not the GT. It would be fair to say that more tuning went into the GT. M/T did the comparo with the Challenger and Camaro and didn't have an issue on those backroads. All of these cars have flaws and the M3 is no exception. The car definitely needs to ditch the live axle. It clearly is the only way to move forward from here. Ford says the next gen will be a "world" car on a global platform so hopefully it will. Numbers wise it matches the E9X M3. That speaks volumes. I can't think of any car costing less than 50k that does stock. Notice I didnt get into how most of the rags raved about the Premium package interior. Stock? Forget about it.

Originally Posted by jmunro

The point being that BMW developed a car with similar performance 3 years prior to the development of the mustang. When the new mustang GT is finally released, the new M3 will follow shortly after and I'm speculating will outperform the GT by a *small* amount. Hence the performance/technology lag of Ford.

I understand. Everyone has performance/technology lag at some point so thats fine. I dont think it applies as much here since they aren't direct competitors even though they compete performance-wise. The C63, RS4, IS-F is a director to the M3. The Mustang GT's existence is for the Camaro and company. It's just entertaining to see it leap over those and compared to cars of a higher class.

Originally Posted by BBK

Seriously.... can we give up on the muscle car talk? Muscle cars, are their own catagory, in which BMW does not fit.

Do they even sell Mustangs in Europe?

Why? I live in America.

[Guibo]

Originally Posted by Spartikus

I wasn't stating it was as compliant as an M3 over rough surfaces. The C63 and IS-F sure as hell aren't. I would bet that the GT isn't. . From what I understand its not nearly as bad as it use to be. Nobody should be taking a car to its limit on bad pavement either, especially on the street. We are also talking about a 29k car here. I've only read that complaint on the V6 and not the GT. It would be fair to say that more tuning went into the GT. M/T did the comparo with the Challenger and Camaro and didn't have an issue on those backroads. Numbers wise it matches the E9X M3. That speaks volumes. I can't think of any car costing less than 50k that does stock.

Being "not as bad as it used to be" could mean something else (ie., the old one wasn't that great to begin with).
I don't think you will have to be driving the M3 at 10/10ths pace to notice a difference in ride quality on bumpy roads.
The 2nd opinion passage I quoted up there comes from the GT review that you posted. It might very well be that the V6 is actually the more compliant of the two. Another review stated it was better balanced than the GT.
The M/T comparo could have been done on very smooth roads. According to what I've seen on biker forums about that road, that appears to be the case.
If all you're after is performance (at the expense of most of the other things that usually affect a buying decision), then matching the numbers wouldn't be hard. A Corvette costs less than $50k, and I have no doubt it will show its heels to the M3 in a straight line and on a track. Numbers without context mean very little.
If all you're after is performance/$, then even that Corvette looks like poor value compared to what you can get on the used car market, what you can get from any number of kit car makers, or even motorcycles. If you exclude such vehicles on the basis of not being brand new, warranty, seating capacity, weather protection, etc, then you've admitted that your arbitrarily chosen 2-parameter litmus test (performance vs $) is exceedingly narrow in scope and tells us really nothing what each company has brought to the market.

[Trier Germany]

Originally Posted by Guibo

Being "not as bad as it used to be" could mean something else (ie., the old one wasn't that great to begin with).
I don't think you will have to be driving the M3 at 10/10ths pace to notice a difference in ride quality on bumpy roads.
The 2nd opinion passage I quoted up there comes from the GT review that you posted. It might very well be that the V6 is actually the more compliant of the two. Another review stated it was better balanced than the GT.
The M/T comparo could have been done on very smooth roads. According to what I've seen on biker forums about that road, that appears to be the case.
If all you're after is performance (at the expense of most of the other things that usually affect a buying decision), then matching the numbers wouldn't be hard. A Corvette costs less than $50k, and I have no doubt it will show its heels to the M3 in a straight line and on a track. Numbers without context mean very little.
If all you're after is performance/$, then even that Corvette looks like poor value compared to what you can get on the used car market, what you can get from any number of kit car makers, or even motorcycles. If you exclude such vehicles on the basis of not being brand new, warranty, seating capacity, weather protection, etc, then you've admitted that your arbitrarily chosen 2-parameter litmus test (performance vs $) is exceedingly narrow in scope and tells us really nothing what each company has brought to the market.

How about getting back on track here! All this comparison going on! And I bet none of you guys have any expierence behind the wheel of an E9X M3 or 2011 mustang GT! So you guys are all relying on magazine articles, specifications, ETC. I have a challenge for ford! take the 2011 mustang GT to the Nordschleife this year give it to Sport Auto to ring it's neck out and the Nordschleife will dictate how good this car really is until then it's all specualation!

I bet the Nordschleife will prove this car is not ready to compete with BMW!

[BBK]

Originally Posted by BrokenVert

Older Aston Martins are considered muscle cars of sorts.

Point being? Old Astons aren't competitors for the M1 either...

[Jaguar66]

The Energizer thread. Just keeps going.......

Originally Posted by BForbes

Official Warning for rule breakers on this page

[manuelf]

Originally Posted by Spartikus

That's fine. Half the cars driving around Europe and Germany is UNACCEPTABLE for Americans too. These are very different markets. You will never see a $65,000 police car like you see over there(M3's, IS-F, etc). That is unacceptable here. You will never see a gutted BMW or Mercedes taxi here. That is unacceptable. It is different markets. Just because it's unacceptable there does not make it bad. These cars have American history and that is very important. Ignorance really is bliss. Everyone teased the Japanese when they introduced Lexus 20years ago. They didn't see it as a luxury threat to steal sales. Look at it now. Never underestimate or dumb down something so obvious as a competitor. All of this talk about refinement but absolutely none of reliability and cost to own. There is a lot of documented facts about that. Yes, I said it.

Sorry - I think you didn't get the point I was trying to make....
Basically we have the discussion here, whether for example a mustang is the better car compared to an M1 or M3, because it is much cheaper and delivers about the same performance levels (I don't like to discuss who may be faster in which conditions - that's cumbersome).

Obviously in your opinion people buying an M1 or M3 are totally crackbrained, because they waste money.... I ask you to consider that the complete package that includes the overall musle car/look and feel of a mustang is not what the majority likes.
Why do you think Ford sells the mustang for the given price point instead to earn much more money with it when it is that adorable as other twice as expensive cars? Because they are just do-gooder to mankind?

... and to your first paragraph ... there is obviously a huge difference in the acceptance of german cars in the US and US cars in germany: Many rich and successful people in US drive Mercedes/BMW/Porsche/Audi - these are status symbols. Sorry that I have to say this that blunt: No US car is a status symbol in germany. US Sportcars (Corvette/Viper/Mustang) are considered more or less cars for people working in red-light-district. US Sedans you do not find at all. Maybe you should have a look at import/export statistics concerning premium cars between US and germany to get a clue

[BMW269]

Boring thread, maybe not for the Americans, but for the Europeans. Every European would take a European (German, Italian, English) car over an American, even it is a Mustang, Corvette or Viper. American cars are not enough refined for us, European.
PS: Sorry for saying this, but it is fact. Don't think I don't like America/Americans....

[jeremyc74]

Originally Posted by Levi

Boring thread, maybe not for the Americans, but for the Europeans. Every European would take a European (German, Italian, English) car over an American, even it is a Mustang, Corvette or Viper. American cars are not enough refined for us, European.
PS: Sorry for saying this, but it is fact. Don't think don't like America/Americans....

I'm not sure what's stopping you from offering up something else for discussion.

Fact of the matter is, when it comes to performance American cars are leaders in several classes. For automotive enthusiasts who are concerned with performance, they're perfectly good options, as you can see from this thread. I don't really see anything else in the M1's price range from Europe that's serious competition.

[sparoz]

Joy is Refinement.
Joy is Balanced.
Joy is Indulgence.

[Spartikus]

Originally Posted by manuelf

Obviously in your opinion people buying an M1 or M3 are totally crackbrained, because they waste money...

Not fair! I did not say that. BMW's have their place. I vastly prefer them to any other tangible luxury make and we all know they have a ton of direct competitors.

[Vintage]

Originally Posted by Levi

Boring thread, maybe not for the Americans, but for the Europeans. Every European would take a European (German, Italian, English) car over an American, even it is a Mustang, Corvette or Viper. American cars are not enough refined for us, European.
PS: Sorry for saying this, but it is fact. Don't think I don't like America/Americans....

I am an American and agree with you and MANUALF 100%. This discussion is entertaining though . . . I also would not own an American Motorcycle - my 1977 BMW R100S Cafe is amazing and timeless.

[BMW269]

I think Mustang vs. BMW M is just a question of culture and mentality.

[BrokenVert]

Originally Posted by BBK

Point being? Old Astons aren't competitors for the M1 either...

That's very true. I would buy an Aston Martin way before I bought an m1

[dmboone25]

Originally Posted by BrokenVert

That's very true. I would buy an Aston Martin way before I bought an m1

I wouldn't ever think of an Aston as a muscle car? Just doesn't fit that sort of bill....it is on an even higher level of luxury and refinement over a BMW....

[dmboone25]

Originally Posted by jeremyc74

I'm not sure what's stopping you from offering up something else for discussion.

Fact of the matter is, when it comes to performance American cars are leaders in several classes. For automotive enthusiasts who are concerned with performance, they're perfectly good options, as you can see from this thread. I don't really see anything else in the M1's price range from Europe that's serious competition.

All I know is that I have seen enough of my family and friends have significant trouble with their American cars--and I am an American. I wouldn't buy one....

Now I know that the level of quality has risen over the last couple of years--you can see the difference...and most people are having better luck with them than say 5-10-15 years ago....

But it will take a couple of cycles of this continued improvement for me to ever consider one--the Germans and Japanese haven't had the same sort of "dip" in quality or performance or reliability that GM (and Ford to a lesser extent) screwed themselves with.....

I think that is the crux of this discussion--yes, the 2011 Stang looks to be a great performance car, but is it on the same overall "level" as a BMW? No. Won't ever be in my opinion....doesn't mean it won't be a great car for the money or beat my M1 on the track--I don't really care. I have had my doors blown off by modded Civics too--doesn't mean that I want one. Make sense?

I just look to the other brands typically in competition for BMW as serious "competitors" for the M1--let's see what Audi, MB, and Lexus have up their sleeves for me to get interested....

[BrokenVert]

Originally Posted by dmboone25

I wouldn't ever think of an Aston as a muscle car? Just doesn't fit that sort of bill....it is on an even higher level of luxury and refinement over a BMW....

Astons from the 70s and 80s were small cars with big engines that couldnt handle their way out of a straightaway.

Sounds like the classic Muscle car formula to me

[dmboone25]

Originally Posted by BrokenVert

Astons from the 70s and 80s were small cars with big engines that couldnt handle their way out of a straightaway.

Sounds like the classic Muscle car formula to me

Fair enough--I guess I am thinking more in terms of the DB9, etc....

[adc]

Originally Posted by manuelf

Good that someone from the US is saying this
I (as a german) didn't have the guts to say it in an US forum
I totally have to agree with you. Irrespective what merits a mustang or camaro might have performance/handling wise in the meantime (their handling/chassis/suspension in the past was bad as had been proved) for most people here in germany its "musle car" style/design is completely unacceptable. The attributes you mentioned is exactly what the majority of people think in europe seeing this kind of car.
Sure - one can answer "why care for what all other people are saying about my super duper bang for the buck car"... But that is not realistic in my opinion. I am not living in a evacuated room - even I (with some self-confidence) have to communicate with "fellow human beings" and would be soon tired with defending myself for driving an immature/prole car like this. Perhaps this is one of the reasons you see nearly none of these car in europe/germany although Euro/dollar exchange was perfect in the last years and everyone could get very cheap re-imports.

I have presented a few arguments against the Mustang in this post, but I think you are missing a few key points here:

1. Germany is not the entire Europe, other people might not be as conservative as you. Ex., Ferrari is not considered in best taste in Germany, quite the opposite of Italy.
2. The Mustang might not be so competitive in Europe once you add import duties and the 19.6% VAT. It is within grasp of many more people in the US.
3. If the Mustang is not officially imported in certain markets, service becomes a problem which may be unacceptable to a lot of people.
4. The 1 series Coupe is not the prettiest flower either.
5. Gas is very very expensive in Europe, so the market for cars that get Mustang-type of fuel economy is very very small, comprised of mostly affluent people. The only other M3's (or 335) I've seen during my last Euro Delivery were at the Ring. No 135i whatsoever. Many middle class people in Europe would never contemplate a Mustang - or an M3 - based on fuel consumption/tax/emissions reasons alone. For those with considerable disposable income who are contemplating an Eur 70K+ M3, saving Eur 20K to get the cheaper Mustang simply might not mean anything (they would want the best product, not the cheapest).
6. National pride is apparent everywhere. People will tend to favor the local brand over an import when everything else is roughly the same. You see more German cars in Germany, French cars in France etc. The Mustang being quintessential American also has to overcome the occasional dislike of many things American that sometimes manifests in Europe.


So while the Mustang has to overcome more hurdles for European acceptance, I don't get the feel that the bad "muscle car" connotation is the biggest one.