Carwow Video: Giulia QV vs M3 CS vs C63 (coupe) drag race

[erind]

Alfa still going strong

[CanAutM3]

The Giulia jumped the start (or the M3 lagged), so not a true depiction.

But regardless, as I posted many times before the Giulia-Q remains the faster car in a straight line as is suggested by its better power-to-weight ratio. The gap would just continue to increase past the ¼ mile.

[///Pip]

That M3 butt though ... gorgeous

[Wills2]

What that video shows is all of them are very close and there would be nothing in it on the road, so just get the one you like the most.

Autocar have just done a full test on the QF and weighed it at 1700KG so not as light as Alfa would have you believe (if that's important to you)

Their 0-100mph time was 9.2 seconds (two up, full tank and a 2 way average)

They rank it above the C63 and M3 but then again they rank the C63 above the CP M3 so what do they know!

[doberzus]

"Not bad for a car with a vagina for a face"... *qouted straight from the comments section. it's so ugly

I am surprised that the C63 was the slowest, even in the roll race. The Quadrifuglio jumped the start on the dig. That M looks mean, and I really love the C63 coupe. Alfa pulled both from a roll though. This was a good video, wish they had more real world comparisons like this, vs track times by race car drivers.

[KevinM]

Two things seem consistent from all these comparisons:

1. Alfa really knocked it out of the park with the QV...hat's off.
2. For those of us who use these primarily as daily drivers, the performance of all of them are so close that it's a non-issue for daily use. Get what you want based on your preferences for looks, price, etc.

So, for me, only two things stand in the way of making my next DD be the Alfa - lack of MT in the US (hopefully to be remedied, but I'm not holding my breath) and reliability (hopefully to be proven). Well, there is a distant third - BMW loyalty after so many years; and an even more-distant fourth - changing R compound tires every 5K - 10K miles. Well, actually, I'd put on Michelin Pilot Sport 4Ss at the first change.

P.S. Nothing wrong with vaginas.

[Motorsportenterprise]

Alfa continues to prove at the moment, it sits atop this segment (and likely will until the M3/C63 are new generations and the Alfa is still in the old generation). Wrt the straight line stuff, seems consistent that as speed increases it only pulls away more and more.
The Afla will only get better given this it the first iteration.

[csbear]

For such a strong statement with Alfa's first (repeat: "first") try in competing with iconic cars like the M3 and C63, this can only bode well for the future of all 3 cars.

Hopefully, they tweak that front a good amount in the coming iterations. A little too busy looking.

[LLNM4]

I wanted proof and i got it!: M3 is not the King anymore.
AWD and more power, can't beat that .

[Motorsportenterprise]

Originally Posted by LLNM4

I wanted proof and i got it!: M3 is not the King anymore.
AWD and more power, can't beat that .

The Alfa QV is RWD only.

Just imagine how much faster it would be if it had a dual clutch over the (very good) ZF8.

[damnitBobby]

gawd the C63 coupe looks ugly

[CanAutM3]

Originally Posted by LLNM4

I wanted proof and i got it!: M3 is not the King anymore.
AWD and more power, can't beat that .

[CanAutM3]

Originally Posted by Motorsportenterprise

Just imagine how much faster it would be if it had a dual clutch over the (very good) ZF8.

Most probably not much more

[///Pip]

Originally Posted by damnitBobby

gawd the C63 coupe looks ugly

+1 ... saw it on the roads ... literally butt ugly

[fusionchicken]

what happened to the Merc...

[Tacoma]

Originally Posted by Motorsportenterprise

Just imagine how much faster it would be if it had a dual clutch over the (very good) ZF8.

Originally Posted by CanAutM3

Most probably not much more

You need QV fanboy glasses to be able to understand Gulia fans here. I tried them on once and saw the QV faster than a speeding bullet, more powerful than a locomotive, able to leap tall buildings in a single bound...

With a dual clutch, I'd imagine it could reach orbit and dock onto the space station.

[JonnyM3]

C63 wasn't an S, wonder if the results would've been different. Let's not forget the Alfa is also on R compound tires. It's obviously the fastest out of the cars, regardless of tires, but still helps. All of these cars are within tenths of a second in the quarter and +- 2 mph, and if you're buying any of these for straight line, son, you're buying the wrong car.

http://www.caranddriver.com/comparis...e-specs-page-6

[Motorsportenterprise]

Originally Posted by CanAutM3

Most probably not much more

With a dual clutch, it most definitely would be quicker (especially if it has LC from a stop) and lighter. Not worlds different, but certainly better.

I'll have one reasonably soon with ceramics though...

[Motorsportenterprise]

Originally Posted by JonnyM3

C63 wasn't an S, wonder if the results would've been different. Let's not forget the Alfa is also on R compound tires. It's obviously the fastest out of the cars, regardless of tires, but still helps. All of these cars are within tenths of a second in the quarter and +- 2 mph, and if you're buying any of these for straight line, son, you're buying the wrong car.

http://www.caranddriver.com/comparis...e-specs-page-6

The C63 was an S based on the video. He said "S" and it looks like the "S" badge on the rear.

Also, the Alfa does not have launch control which would have helped it on the race from a stop.

End of the day, as always, performance is close enough where it shouldn't matter, and each have a slightly different flavor while sharing many core attributes across the competition.

[CanAutM3]

Originally Posted by Motorsportenterprise

With a dual clutch, it most definitely would be quicker (especially if it has LC from a stop) and lighter. Not worlds different, but certainly better.

I'll have one reasonably soon with ceramics though...

With a torque converter auto, you don't really need launch control since it is possible to brake torque the transmission. This allows the engine to be in a more favorable rev range at launch while providing a torque multiplication effect. I seriously doubt the Alfa would be measurably quicker with a DCT.

[Motorsportenterprise]

Originally Posted by CanAutM3

With a torque converter auto, you don't really need launch control since it is possible to brake torque the transmission. This allows the engine to be in a more favorable rev range at launch while providing a torque multiplication effect. I seriously doubt the Alfa would be measurably quicker with a DCT.

Not arguing the former, but given how sophisticated (some) dual clutches LC are these days, given the choice, I'd take dual clutch LC over brake torquing an auto.

I don't think it would be a lot quicker, but certainly wouldn't be slower. I would be interested to see some evidence of cars that went from auto to dual clutch and what they results were given there was not a significant power increase.

[erind]

Originally Posted by Motorsportenterprise

Not arguing the former, but given how sophisticated (some) dual clutches LC are these days, given the choice, I'd take dual clutch LC over brake torquing an auto.

I don't think it would be a lot quicker, but certainly wouldn't be slower. I would be interested to see some evidence of cars that went from auto to dual clutch and what they results were given there was not a significant power increase.

It's a shame they didn't add a 911 to the comparison.