M4 vs. 911 Performance Comparison Review in Car and Driver

[i001947]

I guess if I had to do it again, I would still ended up with the M4 simply due to costs and performance. No regrets!

[Schittenengitten]

Originally Posted by i001947

I guess if I had to do it again, I would still ended up with the M4 simply due to costs and performance. No regrets!

Best answer! Me too on my car! That's what this whole car enthusiast thing is about - otherwise we'd all drive camrys

[rngrjag]

You guys kill me with this 911 bashing. I saw someone on here bought an M3 with Carbon brakes for $91K.

$91K for an ///M3?!? Are you kidding me? The nonsense about paying "so much for a base 911" can be the same argument made against a current M3. I.e., there are MUCH "better" cars for that kind of money.

I am a diehard M fan. My E46 M had the same thing my E92 M and my crappy "base" 911 has....normally aspirated motors with manual transmissions.

When I bought my 911 I could have purchased a new GT-R for the same money that would have CRUSHED (still will) my 911 in every performance measure. If you don't understand or appreciate the simplicity and joy of a normally aspirated motor with a manual transmission driving the real wheels, your loss.

///M has lost its way. I don't give a damn if your twin turbo M5-sized M3 will crush my 911 or my E92. Driving a 911 is just plain fun. Pure and simple. I don't know how to quantify it. (997s have such bad axle-hop when trying to get max straight line acceleration that it's no fun to try and street race anyway.) I am hoping the M division knocks it out of the park with an ///M2. As for the 997 not coming with an LSD, I agree, that's crap. But it does come with factory Brembo mono blocks standard (OEM brakes). All previous Ms didn't even come with mono blocks, so pick your cost-cutting poison.

Porsches are expensive. No doubt about it. There are cheaper cars that can outperform them. No doubt. By the same token a cheap digital Casio watch will keep better time than a Rolex, but that doesn't make it any more desirable. If all you are concerned about is utility, and price for utility, then you wouldn't be buying ANY German sports/sporty car. If your rich uncle died tomorrow and you could only have a Porsche 911 or a BMW ///M3 or M4 (the name itself is an abomination of ///M tradition, forget the turbos) pretty sure the take rate on the 911 would be a hell of a lot higher than that of the BMW.

[SlashM6]

Originally Posted by gthal

3.9 in the 60
12.1 @ 119 in the 1/4

That means it's a high 11s car. When they've tested the M6 vert they said 12.3 stock I've ran 11.7s to 11.8s

[eMvy]

Does C&D not use these metrics for all comparos? What is everyone complaining about? I'm sure you'll find other mag reviews that couldn't care less about certain attributes like trunk space and the 911 would come out on top.

[phoenixbmwlife]

As great as BMW has made this new M4, we all know BMW is more Porsche oriented than any other German car maker. The closest other German Brand is undoubtedly Porsche. The fact that this comparison exists is a testament to BMW's engineering. Regardless of how ridiculous an entry level 911 compared to BMW's hallowed M4 may seem.

As a BMW fan, I look forward to a future where BMW has met or exceeded their top of the line Porsche model of Dynamic engineering success. This evolution has been long time coming, with hints and spurts of equal measure a la E46 M3Csl and E82 1M coupe. Even though BMW's model is different, their philosophy is closer than you think.

[ONEOF40 FS M3]

Originally Posted by rngrjag

You guys kill me with this 911 bashing. I saw someone on here bought an M3 with Carbon brakes for $91K.

$91K for an ///M3?!? Are you kidding me? The nonsense about paying "so much for a base 911" can be the same argument made against a current M3. I.e., there are MUCH "better" cars for that kind of money.

I am a diehard M fan. My E46 M had the same thing my E92 M and my crappy "base" 911 has....normally aspirated motors with manual transmissions.

When I bought my 911 I could have purchased a new GT-R for the same money that would have CRUSHED (still will) my 911 in every performance measure. If you don't understand or appreciate the simplicity and joy of a normally aspirated motor with a manual transmission driving the real wheels, your loss.

///M has lost its way. I don't give a damn if your twin turbo M5-sized M3 will crush my 911 or my E92. Driving a 911 is just plain fun. Pure and simple. I don't know how to quantify it. (997s have such bad axle-hop when trying to get max straight line acceleration that it's no fun to try and street race anyway.) I am hoping the M division knocks it out of the park with an ///M2. As for the 997 not coming with an LSD, I agree, that's crap. But it does come with factory Brembo mono blocks standard (OEM brakes). All previous Ms didn't even come with mono blocks, so pick your cost-cutting poison.

Porsches are expensive. No doubt about it. There are cheaper cars that can outperform them. No doubt. By the same token a cheap digital Casio watch will keep better time than a Rolex, but that doesn't make it any more desirable. If all you are concerned about is utility, and price for utility, then you wouldn't be buying ANY German sports/sporty car. If your rich uncle died tomorrow and you could only have a Porsche 911 or a BMW ///M3 or M4 (the name itself is an abomination of ///M tradition, forget the turbos) pretty sure the take rate on the 911 would be a hell of a lot higher than that of the BMW.

N/A and MT all the way...

[Crnamacka]

Originally Posted by cs4444

The M4 kills the base 911 even with 400 extra lbs and 2 usable rear seats, its 1.5 seconds quicker to 100mph, and 2.5 to 130mph.. They just used a base 911 to keep the price down, so they could keep the score close to the M4's. If they used a comparably equipped 911 S it would have been $120K easily. Which would have lowered the score, and the 911 S's performance would most likely barely match the M4.

[pkimM3r]

they give the nod to the quieter exhaust? i want LOUDER!

[daberlin]

I own both a 997.2 911 Carrera PDK and an F30 335i. The comparison in this thread is a joke. The top of the line loaded M4 vs. a stripped 911? Nailed on points for lack of rear seat comfort? Please. Who intentionally buys a 911 worried about the rear seats.

There is no doubt both machines are great. However a loaded 991 Carrera S with PDK and Sport Chrono is a much better comparison to the M4 from a performance standpoint (and yes, the Porsche would win) From a price point, it's apples to oranges as a loaded Carrera S with PDK is pushing $130K. But one thing remains clear for this owner of both brands. If I had to buy either brand, and price wasn't a factor. I'd only have Porsches in my garage.

[The long haul]

Originally Posted by rngrjag

You guys kill me with this 911 bashing. I saw someone on here bought an M3 with Carbon brakes for $91K.

$91K for an ///M3?!? Are you kidding me? The nonsense about paying "so much for a base 911" can be the same argument made against a current M3. I.e., there are MUCH "better" cars for that kind of money.

I am a diehard M fan. My E46 M had the same thing my E92 M and my crappy "base" 911 has....normally aspirated motors with manual transmissions.

When I bought my 911 I could have purchased a new GT-R for the same money that would have CRUSHED (still will) my 911 in every performance measure. If you don't understand or appreciate the simplicity and joy of a normally aspirated motor with a manual transmission driving the real wheels, your loss.

///M has lost its way. I don't give a damn if your twin turbo M5-sized M3 will crush my 911 or my E92. Driving a 911 is just plain fun. Pure and simple. I don't know how to quantify it. (997s have such bad axle-hop when trying to get max straight line acceleration that it's no fun to try and street race anyway.) I am hoping the M division knocks it out of the park with an ///M2. As for the 997 not coming with an LSD, I agree, that's crap. But it does come with factory Brembo mono blocks standard (OEM brakes). All previous Ms didn't even come with mono blocks, so pick your cost-cutting poison.

Porsches are expensive. No doubt about it. There are cheaper cars that can outperform them. No doubt. By the same token a cheap digital Casio watch will keep better time than a Rolex, but that doesn't make it any more desirable. If all you are concerned about is utility, and price for utility, then you wouldn't be buying ANY German sports/sporty car. If your rich uncle died tomorrow and you could only have a Porsche 911 or a BMW ///M3 or M4 (the name itself is an abomination of ///M tradition, forget the turbos) pretty sure the take rate on the 911 would be a hell of a lot higher than that of the BMW.

Have a drink on me, couldn't agree more with everything you said!

[JoshuaKM]

I just watched the video on how Porsches are made and I'm obsessed... I loved seeing how they put the cars together in the factory. Is there a similar recent video for the BMW M divison's production of the M3 or M4. #carporn.

[pkimM3r]

Originally Posted by rngrjag

You guys kill me with this 911 bashing. I saw someone on here bought an M3 with Carbon brakes for $91K.

$91K for an ///M3?!? Are you kidding me? The nonsense about paying "so much for a base 911" can be the same argument made against a current M3. I.e., there are MUCH "better" cars for that kind of money.

I am a diehard M fan. My E46 M had the same thing my E92 M and my crappy "base" 911 has....normally aspirated motors with manual transmissions.

When I bought my 911 I could have purchased a new GT-R for the same money that would have CRUSHED (still will) my 911 in every performance measure. If you don't understand or appreciate the simplicity and joy of a normally aspirated motor with a manual transmission driving the real wheels, your loss.

///M has lost its way. I don't give a damn if your twin turbo M5-sized M3 will crush my 911 or my E92. Driving a 911 is just plain fun. Pure and simple. I don't know how to quantify it. (997s have such bad axle-hop when trying to get max straight line acceleration that it's no fun to try and street race anyway.) I am hoping the M division knocks it out of the park with an ///M2. As for the 997 not coming with an LSD, I agree, that's crap. But it does come with factory Brembo mono blocks standard (OEM brakes). All previous Ms didn't even come with mono blocks, so pick your cost-cutting poison.

Porsches are expensive. No doubt about it. There are cheaper cars that can outperform them. No doubt. By the same token a cheap digital Casio watch will keep better time than a Rolex, but that doesn't make it any more desirable. If all you are concerned about is utility, and price for utility, then you wouldn't be buying ANY German sports/sporty car. If your rich uncle died tomorrow and you could only have a Porsche 911 or a BMW ///M3 or M4 (the name itself is an abomination of ///M tradition, forget the turbos) pretty sure the take rate on the 911 would be a hell of a lot higher than that of the BMW.

[Jadar]

Originally Posted by damnitBobby

everything in the review was as expected

M4 passive suspension ride is rougher than the 911.. i wonder how the adaptive suspension would have been like in comparison

carbon ceramics are indeed overkill for most people that will own this car

i would rather take the cayman s over a 911.. the 911 looks kind of meh here where as the cayman has to be one of the sexiest cars in its price range

And there it is!!! I was waiting for someone to say it!!!

Cayman S is a way more driver oriented car, feels better and it definitely LOOKS better then a 991!

I know this comparison is with a 911 but the cayman s price point and overall performance is a better fit. IMO.

I tested a cayman s 2 months ago and it was amazing! I'd never pick an M car over it. When I walked on the lot, it was clear the car has made great strides from the previous generations and it blew the 911's looks out of the water hands down the sexiest Porsche.

[KevinM]

Originally Posted by gthal

Not really relevant IMO. Besides, the 991 is WAY better than the 997.

Ha ha if you've got some time and a bunch of popcorn (even more than needed for this thread!) post this on the 997 board at 6speedonline.

As for the review, I thought it was pretty balanced and fair. Clearly both great cars with somewhat different goals, strengths and methods of delivery.

I'm still surprised that, for the first time in recent memory, car magazines' 0-60 mph and 0-100 kph times are pretty much spot-on what BMW claims. Usually the mags (esp. C&D, R&T) seem to post much faster times (witness M235i 0-60 of 4.3 sec by C&D). I'm guessing this is traction-related for the M3/4?

[Bemo]

I'm a die hard BMW fanatic but the article made me laugh especially the reason due to which Porsche lost points (seats, cost, practicality). Are the editors serious? Look at the "chassis" category where the M4 was obliterated, handling, steering feel, braking, ride...I think that says enough for those with basic reading abilities. We love our BMWs but Porsche is the real winner here.

Flame suit ON....

[FogCityM3]

I don't know where most people live, but in urban areas such as SF and nearby suburbs, getting a car any larger than the E90 is PITA (I actually think the E46 was the perfect size for a sedan for the city). Try to zip around traffic, get through alleyways, make u-turns, squeeze into a parking spot with SUVs surrounding you, trying to judge curbs. Even maneuvering into my own driveway and garage takes a lot of attention. In many ways the 911 is perfect for these things (save the suspension) especially if you live in the near suburbs where roads not too rough, where parking spots are still pretty tight/difficult and streets fairly narrow. In the city only, don't know if I could deal with ride quality and talk about scraping the bottom/bumper.

Also in general, I never really got the concept of a large 2-door sedan-based coupe, seems like a lot of wasted size for what you actually get practicality wise and it does give up substantial feel and handling performance potential. If you live in an urban sprawl/ ex-burb, sizes of cars won't matter much at all. A 911 has no practical seats, but is a real sports coupe (being the right size), so at least get the benefits of that, so hear where you're coming from. Also for extra $25K, seems like the price/value relationship is better for 911S and will hold their value better too when you resell. If leasing, BMWs are better value.

Originally Posted by rngrjag

You guys kill me with this 911 bashing. I saw someone on here bought an M3 with Carbon brakes for $91K.

$91K for an ///M3?!? Are you kidding me? The nonsense about paying "so much for a base 911" can be the same argument made against a current M3. I.e., there are MUCH "better" cars for that kind of money.

I am a diehard M fan. My E46 M had the same thing my E92 M and my crappy "base" 911 has....normally aspirated motors with manual transmissions.

When I bought my 911 I could have purchased a new GT-R for the same money that would have CRUSHED (still will) my 911 in every performance measure. If you don't understand or appreciate the simplicity and joy of a normally aspirated motor with a manual transmission driving the real wheels, your loss.

///M has lost its way. I don't give a damn if your twin turbo M5-sized M3 will crush my 911 or my E92. Driving a 911 is just plain fun. Pure and simple. I don't know how to quantify it. (997s have such bad axle-hop when trying to get max straight line acceleration that it's no fun to try and street race anyway.) I am hoping the M division knocks it out of the park with an ///M2. As for the 997 not coming with an LSD, I agree, that's crap. But it does come with factory Brembo mono blocks standard (OEM brakes). All previous Ms didn't even come with mono blocks, so pick your cost-cutting poison.

Porsches are expensive. No doubt about it. There are cheaper cars that can outperform them. No doubt. By the same token a cheap digital Casio watch will keep better time than a Rolex, but that doesn't make it any more desirable. If all you are concerned about is utility, and price for utility, then you wouldn't be buying ANY German sports/sporty car. If your rich uncle died tomorrow and you could only have a Porsche 911 or a BMW ///M3 or M4 (the name itself is an abomination of ///M tradition, forget the turbos) pretty sure the take rate on the 911 would be a hell of a lot higher than that of the BMW.

[tooch]

SWEET!!!!

[patbrass]

Originally Posted by Crusader

Not typo, turbo. A high performance normally aspirated engine is quite gutless at low rpms in top gear. The M4 torque curve is fat down low, the 911 non-existent.

Nope. Manual vs. Auto. "Top gear acceleration" is misleading since the auto will downshift a bunch of gears. In real life, the guy with the manual will also downshift a few gears if he needs to accelerate from (say) 50 to 70mph.

[shivaswrath]

Originally Posted by Paul-Bracq-BMW

Can't believe the LSD is optional on the 911!!!!

Asinine at that price point!

[SOM3]

Originally Posted by rngrjag

I.e., there are MUCH "better" cars for that kind of money.

.

Can you name these cars?

[FogCityM3]

Seriously, how fun is not downshifting? Even if can overtake in 6th gear (which I can at freeway speeds in most cases, I don't because it's so uninteresting..will always downshift into 3rd or 4th). Take it to the extreme, why not just go electric and save all the trouble? Makes me wonder if people really enjoy driving at all.

Originally Posted by patbrass

Nope. Manual vs. Auto. "Top gear acceleration" is misleading since the auto will downshift a bunch of gears. In real life, the guy with the manual will also downshift a few gears if he needs to accelerate from (say) 50 to 70mph.