5.0 Eats 6.2 Chevy for breakfast...
09-04-2010, 11:52 AM
#51
5th Gear Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: ATL
Posts: 2,955
My mom plans on buying an S4 next year and she's definitely not an *******. She's owned an 84 camry, early 90's Plymouth acclaim, early 90's pontiac lemans, 1995 maxima, and now a 2000 ford escape. Only one that was new was the lemans and it was by far the worst POS I have ever seen.
She's definitely due for a nice car. She would by a used 2010, but they cost just a couple grand less than a bare bones 2011.
She's definitely due for a nice car. She would by a used 2010, but they cost just a couple grand less than a bare bones 2011.
09-04-2010, 03:55 PM
#55
6th Gear Member
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: California
Posts: 10,468
I was wondering the same thing. They've tainted the section!!
And on the matter of the M3, it appears some people don't understand how hp, tq, and gearing are interrelated. The M3 and 2011 GT are neck and neck basically in a drag race. On a road course the M3 wins 9/10 times, stock vs stock. The "lack of torque" is meaningless in an 8,500rpm engine that makes it back at the wheels with gearing. It's the same reason the F430 is just as fast as a Z06 despite a "lack of torque".
And on the matter of the M3, it appears some people don't understand how hp, tq, and gearing are interrelated. The M3 and 2011 GT are neck and neck basically in a drag race. On a road course the M3 wins 9/10 times, stock vs stock. The "lack of torque" is meaningless in an 8,500rpm engine that makes it back at the wheels with gearing. It's the same reason the F430 is just as fast as a Z06 despite a "lack of torque".
09-04-2010, 06:07 PM
#57
5th Gear Member
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: MO
Posts: 3,234
I was wondering the same thing. They've tainted the section!!
And on the matter of the M3, it appears some people don't understand how hp, tq, and gearing are interrelated. The M3 and 2011 GT are neck and neck basically in a drag race. On a road course the M3 wins 9/10 times, stock vs stock. The "lack of torque" is meaningless in an 8,500rpm engine that makes it back at the wheels with gearing. It's the same reason the F430 is just as fast as a Z06 despite a "lack of torque".
And on the matter of the M3, it appears some people don't understand how hp, tq, and gearing are interrelated. The M3 and 2011 GT are neck and neck basically in a drag race. On a road course the M3 wins 9/10 times, stock vs stock. The "lack of torque" is meaningless in an 8,500rpm engine that makes it back at the wheels with gearing. It's the same reason the F430 is just as fast as a Z06 despite a "lack of torque".
The M3's time was LESS THAN 1 SECOND better than the Mustang.
09-04-2010, 10:04 PM
#59
6th Gear Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 11,302
it appears some people don't understand how hp, tq, and gearing are interrelated. The "lack of torque" is meaningless in an 8,500rpm engine that makes it back at the wheels with gearing. It's the same reason the F430 is just as fast as a Z06 despite a "lack of torque".
09-04-2010, 10:22 PM
#60
Wash Rinse Repeat
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Michigan
Posts: 6,312
alright... from what I gathered from this thread and all the others like it
nobody should buy an M3..... anyone who does is an idiot
because a mustang runs neck and neck with it
ok.... well
people are still going to buy M3's...
... because buying a car isn't about being rational, it's about buying and owning what you like
was that too factual or should I have added mo' mag racing?
nobody should buy an M3..... anyone who does is an idiot
because a mustang runs neck and neck with it
ok.... well
people are still going to buy M3's...
... because buying a car isn't about being rational, it's about buying and owning what you like
was that too factual or should I have added mo' mag racing?
Last edited by Morbid Intentions; 09-04-2010 at 10:27 PM.