SportAuto M4 CS against Mustang Shelby GT350

[basscadet]

Originally Posted by elitex

Owned a GT350.... great car but it lacks build quality. Terrible paint, cheap plastics. Imagine if Germans built something like the GT350 at $80-$90k price point....

They do, it's called the GT3 and it's $160,000, not $100k.

The idea that some sucker would pay $100k+ for a tarted-up M3 that can barely keep pace with a $55k Mustang is astonishing. Especially when $100k gets you into a pretty nice used 991.

[stevehifi]

I hope BMW is listening.. less M - Marketing and more M- motoring. The reason I'm pissed at these variations of the M4 - CS and GTS is thinking buyers of these cars don't see the BS that BMW is trying to feed us.
It's a competitive segment now, on the german side (Merc, Audi, Porsche) and on the domestic side (GM, Ford, FCA). Very crowded.. indeed.

Last thing BMW aficionados want is special edition cars with 10hp increase and a carbon fiber hood for an extra 30k.. as an example. We need cars that are engineered to squash the competition, where it's a 40k mustang GT or 160k porsche. Don't embarrass
us when we go out there and get stomped by a 'lowly' domestic... it's pathetic.

[adc]

Originally Posted by Dave 90TT

Not completely relevant, but a data point: recent HPDE3 with NASA (passing entire track with point bys), there was a driver in my group with a GT350 and he and I had pretty much the same driver skills.

He was driving a GT350 (not 350R) with track package. I was driving my 15 M4, with JB4 making roughly 3 extra lbs of boost. Temp was in the mid/low 90s. Both of us had R-comp tires, mine were Nitto NT-01s, can't remember what his were.

I was consistently faster than him on the track. I understand it was a DE, we were not racing, and certainly driver skill is a factor, but I think we were about the same skill, and probably he was a bit more skilled than me.

I had the same experience and I'm not chipped.

"My" GT350 was using nice lines at VIR, so I followed him to see what he is doing thinking the cars would have similar strengths in similar parts of the track, meaning similar lines.

Using the same lines as him, I was reeling him in although at that speed, small mistakes or changes can have big lap time consequences. So let's say I thought the cars were similarly fast on track, independent of drivers. He said he had the track pack.

Then he blew his oil filter cap (common fault as I understand) and had an inglorious exit from the session in smoke, then went home. Fortunately he didn't blow the engine nor crash but let's just say I was glad to be in the M3 that day.

[minn19]

Originally Posted by adc

I had the same experience and I'm not chipped.

"My" GT350 was using nice lines at VIR, so I followed him to see what he is doing thinking the cars would have similar strengths in similar parts of the track, meaning similar lines.

Using the same lines as him, I was reeling him in although at that speed, small mistakes or changes can have big lap time consequences. So let's say I thought the cars were similarly fast on track, independent of drivers. He said he had the track pack.

Then he blew his oil filter cap (common fault as I understand) and had an inglorious exit from the session in smoke, then went home. Fortunately he didn't blow the engine nor crash but let's just say I was glad to be in the M3 that day.

It probably vibrated the oil filter loose, that is a fairly common issue. So much so that they changed the design of the oil filter to a cartridge/canister type with two O rings to prevent this from happening.

It is funny, similiar anecdotes are on the Mustang forum just with the exact opposite outcome. Strange how that works isn't.

These cars go about it very differently, but they are very similarly matched numbers/performance wise on the track, it definitely comes down to the drivers skill as usual.

[adc]

Originally Posted by minn19

It is funny, similiar anecdotes are on the Mustang forum just with the exact opposite outcome. Strange how that works isn't.

Yes well, when you pass a car that is supposed to be faster, that's a "victory" or validation for your own purchase decision.

When something fast blows by you, surely that's expected and no points lost. And besides he was on slicks.

I've passed so many M3/4 on track with similar tires and various other mods (power, suspension, brakes) that I know the huge variance a driver brings to the table. And I've witnessed my track times improve by 3 seconds in a few sessions - surely there must be a few more there for the taking, if I were better.

I use the fast cars of any denomination as teaching lessons - try to stick with them for as long as I can to see what they are doing differently. Sometimes it's clear those cars are simply superior but often times the guy just drives better.

[elitex]

Originally Posted by basscadet

They do, it's called the GT3 and it's $160,000, not $100k.

The idea that some sucker would pay $100k+ for a tarted-up M3 that can barely keep pace with a $55k Mustang is astonishing. Especially when $100k gets you into a pretty nice used 991.

Not even close buddy. Lol. I am talking about NA V8, front engine, RWD, manual, 4 seat coupe with German build quality.

[tareemaa]

Originally Posted by elitex

Not even close buddy. Lol. I am talking about NA V8, front engine, RWD, manual, 4 seat coupe with German build quality.

They do, it's called an e92, take the money you save and throw in some forged internals and a blower, 550-660 hp all day.

Also, I think the fact the M4 has a DCT and the GT350 is a manual should be taken into consideration for drag and lap times.

[kitesurfer]

Originally Posted by stevehifi

cup 2 tires on the CS probably give it the edge over the stang. otherwise probably dead even on same PSS.

Thats not correct the Shelby comes with MPSC2's as well and substantially larger than the M4 with 315's in the rear & 305's in the front:

https://www.edmunds.com/ford/shelby-...ad-test-specs/

[minn19]

Originally Posted by kitesurfer

Thats not correct the Shelby comes with MPSC2's as well and substantially larger than the M4 with 315's in the rear & 305's in the front:

https://www.edmunds.com/ford/shelby-...ad-test-specs/

That's the R. This was a base GT350 so they are 295/305 PSS.

[elitex]

Originally Posted by tareemaa

They do, it's called an e92, take the money you save and throw in some forged internals and a blower, 550-660 hp all day.

Also, I think the fact the M4 has a DCT and the GT350 is a manual should be taken into consideration for drag and lap times.

Holy crap. I give up. They don't make E92 M3 anymore and it's slowwww... I am not talking about modding either. New M4/M3 is a great car. Too few understand it.

[dmboone25]

Did that center console in the Stang get sent in from the 1980s?

I know that's not the "point" of these cars (and I don't care for the cardboard door panels on the CS either) but that looks really dated IMO...

[stefan]

Originally Posted by elitex

Holy crap. I give up. They don't make E92 M3 anymore and it's slowwww... I am not talking about modding either. New M4/M3 is a great car. Too few understand it.

You're starting to sound a bit like a fanboy. I get you have a bias and I do as well but don't dismiss the achievement of this mustang. I would not call the M4 a great car. I am not sure bmw makes great cars anymore. They make a good car. But great was the e46 M3 when it debuted in late 2000. Similar with the e39 m5 once the fastest 4dr sedan on the planet.

I actually get this comparison and I think these are two cars people would actually consider cross shopping. That said the build quality in all ford's is quite bad. They also have a tendency to not rust proof most of the chassis parts for whatever reason. The body pinch welds aren't sealed either. Lots of corners cut to stay at 55K

[dmboone25]

Originally Posted by basscadet

They do, it's called the GT3 and it's $160,000, not $100k.

The idea that some sucker would pay $100k+ for a tarted-up M3 that can barely keep pace with a $55k Mustang is astonishing. Especially when $100k gets you into a pretty nice used 991.

BMW has shown this sort of pattern in recent memory, by releasing "special" (or to use your word, tarted up) editions at the end of a lifecycle. Remember all the "special" E92 M3s that came out at the end? IIRC, those were simply aesthetic changes - at least they gave the CS a small power bump.

The comparisons are good fun from my point of view, but don't matter too much (good or bad for the car you prefer) because they are created to sell magazines or papers...

[IB M]

CS looks good. Reading this makes me hope that the M3CS rumors are true.

[IS3andME]

Originally Posted by gmd2003

They picked a base 350 with no track package( Ford from the beginning even says must have this to track ) to compare to the more track oriented M4 CS on a hot day where the various oil coolers would be necessary. Talk about stacking the deck to get a desired outcome lol . How about compare the M4CS to a GT350R which would still be 40,000 cheaper oh wait it would lose badly so can't do that ( 350R beats the M4GTS handily on every track ) .Heck they could have at least gotten one with the track package , and not had a worthless test .

German mags want to keep that idea of German Superiority. Just like Japanese mag/reviewers. And Italians---you think that they would even talk about all the things wrong with the Giulia? And American mags as well. Even though all the major American mags and car enthusiast reviewers have been accused of shilling for BMW, they still tend to always talk about the "bang for the buck" in one sentence, and cheap materials in another, when talking about American performance cars. About the only truly middle ground reviews you will get are from the British. Probably one reason is because most of their major car companies are owned by foreign companies. And another is probably because they know how to give "semi" unbiased reviews.

[TunedM2C]

Wonder how the '18 Mustang GT with performance pack and magna ride would fair because performance per dollar, it's a screaming deal.

[ONEOF40 FS M3]

More BMW M-arketing...and little substance...

[Motorsportenterprise]

Originally Posted by basscadet

They do, it's called the GT3 and it's $160,000, not $100k.

The idea that some sucker would pay $100k+ for a tarted-up M3 that can barely keep pace with a $55k Mustang is astonishing. Especially when $100k gets you into a pretty nice used 991.

What? Unless I am reading out of context, a GT3 is of the highest quality (materials, fit, finish, paint) and engineering. It is not at all in any way, shape or form cheap like a mustang is.
The mustang has great bang for your buck...the American do this best, but quality is not quite at the bar for the good Euro cars (Porsche, Audi, Mercedes, Lambo, etc)

[mcc3456]

Originally Posted by AlexZTuned

Has North American pricing been released for the CS yet?

Odd that they would test the CS against the GT350 and not the GT350R. Seems like the M4 CP would be a more appropriate match against a non-R.

It's not that odd when it is a biased german magazine seeking a car they know the CS can beat.

[StealthFish]

Going back to earlier, the M4 has an air to water cooled IC. The GT350 will definitely be affected by the heat more.

I think this is a pretty good comparison between cars though.

[rmedeir1]

It's always nice to have articles that build your ego around your purchase BUT we all know this was not an apples to apples comparison. It's probably just publication filler for lack of new content.

This series of M has me disappointed as well, but only after 2 years of ownership. I love my M4 but it is now a love hate relationship because of traction and even with all the m performance parts minimally distinguishes my car from a 3 or 4 series. I would have paid extra from factory a more aggressive suspension, better exhaust notes, wider fender flares (m4 only), and better traction. However my needs don't align to bmws strategy for selling volume and limiting costs. I think I have outgrown the quasi daily/sport car and looking for a true non-daily sports car, which will be $160k min and greater. So I am thinking some of you who are complaining about the m3/4 and CS are in my situation and really just need to determine if this platform is right for them anymore even though it's a great car. That's my opinion.

[Bosozoku]

Originally Posted by Phatcat

... the tuning of the chassis such as differential lock and the ABS have been specially adapted to the CS ...

So making the M4 better requires only minor suspension tweaks and differential + brake firmware updates?
Why doesn't BMW apply those changes to all M4s?