M1 vs competition

[madfast]

Originally Posted by Numb3rs

No... I am saying that is thee difference. M1 vs something (like the Mustang). There is no conjecture or debate... that is why Mustang fans are here, because there is no doubt about what I've mentioned.

So even if you COMPARE.. there is no comparison because in the end, you either want to pay for that level of refinement, or your don't!

what if you want to pay for the raw sound of a crossplane 5.0L V8 and not refinement? does that all of a sudden make me "below" you? badgewhores... gotta love their "logic"...

[BrokenVert]

Numb3rs. It seems that we are odds again, and you just dont get it.

[AlBel1214]

Originally Posted by madfast

what if you want to pay for the raw sound of a crossplane 5.0L V8 and not refinement? does that all of a sudden make me "below" you? badgewhores... gotta love their "logic"...

+1...

[Berduderunner]

Originally Posted by trahsub

I have a feeling some people are going to be dissapointed with how potent the 2011 stangs will be. And if Ford make a Boss 302? I personally can't wait for some magazine comparisons. My two dream cars that I can't decide between don't even exist yet. If the M1 turns out to be everything we expect it to be, I will have one in my driveway . . . but those that write the stang off as a chump car are in for a rude awakening.

agreed, they are gonna be 5x better than ever before... even the V6's!

[sparoz]

Each of their own, and each has their market and someone might have both in the garage .

Personally, I much prefer BMW's refinement, and I would always think anything less refine is inferior - but that's my opinion and I am not going to force it upon others. .

[dmboone25]

+1 That's pretty much how I feel as well.....there is more to the Bimmer than just driving dynamics, although admittedly, those dynamics are the reason many of us started becoming interested in the brand.

I don't have anything against the Mustang, or other competitors for that matter. I have driven so many of the cars that people would "cross-shop" the 135/335 with, and there is just something intangible about BMW that I find missing in other brands.

Not to say that these others, aka the Mustang, will not be excellent performance machines, because they will. They just lack something--not sure if refinement is the best way to say it--again, it is intangible. And that is what keeps bringing me back.

[TunedM2C]

I saw the 2011 GT500 @ the auto show and I have to say, it has me tempted.

[madfast]

Originally Posted by dmboone25

+1 That's pretty much how I feel as well.....there is more to the Bimmer than just driving dynamics, although admittedly, those dynamics are the reason many of us started becoming interested in the brand.

I don't have anything against the Mustang, or other competitors for that matter. I have driven so many of the cars that people would "cross-shop" the 135/335 with, and there is just something intangible about BMW that I find missing in other brands.

Not to say that these others, aka the Mustang, will not be excellent performance machines, because they will. They just lack something--not sure if refinement is the best way to say it--again, it is intangible. And that is what keeps bringing me back.

in all seriousness it's probably because its a BMW... im sure there is a happy medium between sport and comfort, and to most people BMW hits it just right. HOWEVER their marketing really stamps it into people's head that BMW = ultimate driving machine... that may go a long way with the placebo effect and people actually start to buy into the hype much more than physics suggests...

case in point, those hopeless fools who argue the 335xi handles better than a "shitty" S2000, well because its a bmw. riiiiiight....

[madfast]

Originally Posted by Tuned1

I saw the 2011 GT500 @ the auto show and I have to say, it has me tempted.

it's downright un-american to not like that car on some level...

[grant]

Originally Posted by jeremyc74

So now we've gone from "Mustangs suck on road courses" to "Mustangs have to be unstreetable to not suck on road courses" to Mustangs eat tires on road courses". Does that pretty much sum it up?

Let's just say that I am used to a track car that runs laps much faster and uses tires much more slowly than a Mustang.

Are you telling me that a live rear axle (which inherently cannot be aligned with negative camber) does not cause a huge compromise between roll stiffness and outer-shoulder tire wear on the track? And are you saying that a Mustang with a stiff enough track setup (stiff enough not to roll onto the outer shoulder of the tires when aligned at zero degrees camber on the track) will not create an unpleasant experience on the street?

Do you have much/any experience driving hard at a road course in a car with a live rear axle or are you relying on magazine reviews?

[jeremyc74]

Originally Posted by grant

Let's just say that I am used to a track car that runs laps much faster and uses tires much more slowly than a Mustang.

Are you telling me that a live rear axle (which inherently cannot be aligned with negative camber) does not cause a huge compromise between roll stiffness and outer-shoulder tire wear on the track? And are you saying that a Mustang with a stiff enough track setup (stiff enough not to roll onto the outer shoulder of the tires when aligned at zero degrees camber on the track) will not create an unpleasant experience on the street?

Do you have much/any experience driving hard at a road course in a car with a live rear axle or are you relying on magazine reviews?

I've owned and tracked several live axled cars, as well as a couple of BMWs, and been around dozens of each. I've never had tire wear issues or streetability issues on any of them.

Look, no one's sayinig that a live axle has no disadvantages. What we're saying is that it's not nearly as big a deal as some of you would like to make it out to be, and it doesn't automatically mean that a BMW is going to outhandle a Ford. The issues with a live axle are much more apparent on the street than they are on the track. There are VERY few people here who are going to be tracking their cars hard enough for tire wear to become an issue.

If you're looking for a serious track car, you could do a hell of a lot better with your $50k than an M1 or a Mustang. They're PRIMARILY street cars, and there's no point in denying that.

I've shown you lap times where the poor old Mustang with a live axle is lapping right behind the 911 Turbo, and you've also been show evidence that even the M3 has tire wear issues when flogged. The constant grasping at straws in order to discredit the car needs to stop.

[grant]

Originally Posted by jeremyc74

If you're looking for a serious track car, you could do a hell of a lot better with your $50k than an M1 or a Mustang. They're PRIMARILY street cars, and there's no point in denying that.

I've shown you lap times where the poor old Mustang with a live axle is lapping right behind the 911 Turbo, and you've also been show evidence that even the M3 has tire wear issues when flogged. The constant grasping at straws in order to discredit the car needs to stop.

I agree that neither an M1 nor a Mustang is going to be the perfect track car. They're both too heavy.

I am not trying to discredit the Mustang - only its rear suspension (and lack of steering feel/feedback). I am a potential customer for a Mustang if these gripes are addressed (there is already talk of a new verison of the Mustang with IRS again).

I am also a potential M1 customer. I am not looking for a track car (already have one), but I'd like a daily driver that I can drive on the track aggressively on occasion without feeling like the car is way out of its element.

Also, if you are not experiencing tire wear issues at the track, you are not going fast enough. Every car is going to have tire issues at the track - it's a matter of degree. And high performance tires are very expensive these days - so having a car that can preserve the tires relative to another car can make a large monetary difference.

[bmwzone]

You want Ford to produce for 28-32k a v8 with 410+hp, LSD, and IRS? Give me a break.

BMW doesn't even include LSD in a 40k+ car.

I'm Ford - lemme see - the .01% of people who track cars want IRS yippie friggen do dah - give me the 5.0 stang with LSD and "Live" rear axle (3.73 please) and track pack with Brembos too ... oh wait, that's what I'm getting for an utter steal of a price.

Bring on any stock M1 or 135i in the corners or straight-line. You are toast. Mod up fellas.

[grant]

Originally Posted by bmwzone

You want Ford to produce for 28-32k a v8 with 410+hp, LSD, and IRS? Give me a break.

Ford already has produced a Mustang with IRS. I would happily pay a premium to have it returned (assuming the other aspects of the car are to my liking).

If only .01% of the trackrats you know want an IRS, you need to hang with a sharper crowd.

[bmwzone]

Ford tried IRS : epic fail

.01% of buyers track a Mustang

99.999999% street their Mustang gimmie LSD baby.

[grant]

Originally Posted by bmwzone

Ford tried IRS : epic fail

.01% of buyers track a Mustang

99.999999% street their Mustang gimmie LSD baby.

I agree about LSD. Every sportscar made should have one stock (or at least optional), but given a choice, it's WAY easier to add an LSD than IRS aftermarket. In fact, even the best factory-equipped LSD's can be vastly improved upon in the aftermarket.

If Mustangs are really that rarely tracked and the track crowd ignored by Ford (my experience is quite different - I see them all the time at the track), I may not be interested in one.

[jeremyc74]

Originally Posted by bmwzone

Ford tried IRS : epic fail

.01% of buyers track a Mustang

99.999999% street their Mustang gimmie LSD baby.

We're not talking about LSDs, we're talking about IRS. The vast majority (if not all) of V8 Mustangs built in the last 20 years have had an LSD as a standard feature. BMW doesn't even give us one as an option. I'm wondering if you even know the what the two are.

Also, there's a HELL of a lot higher percentage of Mustangs that see track duty than there are BMWs.

[mtla4]

Originally Posted by bmwzone

Ford tried IRS : epic fail

.01% of buyers track a Mustang

99.999999% street their Mustang gimmie LSD baby.

Cut...Take 2...Are you serious?

[BBK]

Audi's new RS5 does 0-100 in 4.6s. The TT RS does 0-100 in 4.6s. The R8 does it in 4.5?

There is no good reason why the M1 shouldn't be as fast, in a straight line, as the M3. BMW just wants to make more money...

[bmwzone]

Originally Posted by jeremyc74

We're not talking about LSDs, we're talking about IRS. The vast majority (if not all) of V8 Mustangs built in the last 20 years have had an LSD as a standard feature. BMW doesn't even give us one as an option. I'm wondering if you even know the what the two are.

INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE

DUH

[grant]

Originally Posted by bmwzone

INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE

DUH

And the other one is really good while listening to music

[Robert]

I will take the new light weight boxster over m1

[u2b]<object width="560" height="340"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/p0mU6DIZWlQ&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/p0mU6DIZWlQ&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="340"></embed></object>[/u2b]