Car and Driver: Giulia QV v ATS-V v M3 ZCP v C63S

[MPakE90]

Don't think this was posted yet but... One of the few reviews that prefer an M3 without the Competition Package

Surprising M3 still only got 3rd place

link: http://www.caranddriver.com/comparis...omparison-test

The last time around, the M3 eked out a slight two-point victory over a C63, but now it’s swapped its gold medal for a bronze. The C63 hasn’t changed—so what happened? This would be a good time for the Competition package’s performance review.

Even on the base 18-inch wheels, a regular M3 is firm. In our last go-round, the M3 had optional 19-inch wheels, shrinking the sidewalls and hardening the blows to the suspension. Adding the Competition package’s 20-inch wheels with hockey-puck sidewalls, stiffer springs and dampers, and thicker anti-roll bars degrades the ride even further, increases road noise, and effectively removes the veneer of refinement that makes an M3 tolerable on a daily basis. Part of the M3’s appeal is its ability to fill every need, from track-day toy to romantic-*dinner shuttle. The Competition package removes civility, and it even rejiggers the electronic modes, which means that comfort mode isn’t very comfortable anymore. After a stint in the M3, every driver stepped out and commented on the noise. At 70 mph there are 70 decibels of tire and engine racket, the loudest in the group.

Adding the Competition package does make this the best-steering M3 of its generation. The forces through the thick-rimmed wheel build naturally in every mode—we liked the lighter efforts of comfort mode the most—and the 0.98 g of skidpad grip improves upon the last M3’s 0.97. Through the slalom, the nimble and reactive M3 tied the Giulia for the *fastest speed. The M division exorcised every bit of flab from the chassis; it’s good for track use but annoying in the real world. This is an overstimulated M3, meaning jumpy, amped-up, and even*tually tiresome. Where’s the “Settle Down” button?

There’s no faulting the engine’s power, even if we wish BMW would get rid of the silly sound amplification that booms at up to 88 decibels at full throttle. The engine revs hard and fast to 7000 rpm. Throttle response is nearly instantaneous, and there are few signs that this is a turbocharged inline-six. Equipping the M3 with the $2900 dual-clutch seven-speed auto brings launch control. Unfortunately, BMW’s launch control doesn’t get the M3 off the line as well as the others manage. By 30 mph, the M3 is a tenth behind the Mercedes and two-tenths behind the Cadillac and Alfa Romeo. The launch rpm is adjustable to between 2800 and 3900 rpm, and we tried everything in between to lower the time, but its 4.0-second run to 60 is the slowest in the group and slower than an M3 without the Competition package. It did, however, pick up the fuel-economy prize with 20 mpg.

The M3 is the loudest, most hard-core of the bunch. Yet it also has this group's most spacious interior, the best outward visibility, and the greatest fuel efficiency.

There’s still plenty to love about the M3. At something closer to its $64,995 base price it offers excellent value, but pumping it up with options until it reaches $88,045 offers diminishing returns. It does remain a practical choice in the segment, bringing interior space that’s lacking in the Cadillac and Mercedes. An upright greenhouse makes it easy to see out of and place on the road, and the lightweight seats from the Competition package fit well and adjust to the perfect driving position behind large and clear analog gauges. On the outside, the sheetmetal still looks fresh, and the Competition package’s additional gloss-black trim is a welcome highlight.

But unless you spend your weekends at the track and your commute involves the Stelvio Pass, we’d skip the Competition package. A base M3 is fun no matter how you drive it. Making an M3 more extreme does make it marginally more exciting, but at the expense of its on-road contentment.

[CanAutM3]

http://f80.bimmerpost.com/forums/sho....php?t=1351835

[MPakE90]

Proves just how not very forum-savvy I am LOL

Need to search a bit harder next time

Originally Posted by CanAutM3

http://f80.bimmerpost.com/forums/sho....php?t=1351835

[jmg]

I'd still pick the M3/4...

But didn't we all?

[silverstar335]

Disable the annoying ADS and the cabin experience becomes very luxury-like, of course minus the harsh ride.

[gblansten]

While very impressed with the Quadrifoglio's performance I finally saw one in real life. It was the classic red color. I was surprised by how cheap it looked. You just have to see it for yourself and make your own impression, but it didn't look good.

[Gibson6594]

Originally Posted by gblansten

While very impressed with the Quadrifoglio's performance I finally saw one in real life. It was the classic red color. I was surprised by how cheap it looked. You just have to see it for yourself and make your own impression, but it didn't look good.

If someone offered you one for you M, would you take it?

[gblansten]

Originally Posted by Gibson6594

If someone offered you one for you M, would you take it?

Hell no.

[MPakE90]

Originally Posted by gblansten

While very impressed with the Quadrifoglio's performance I finally saw one in real life. It was the classic red color. I was surprised by how cheap it looked. You just have to see it for yourself and make your own impression, but it didn't look good.

Agreed. Sat in one last week at the Chicago Auto Show.

Did feel sporty but felt very cheap with all the plastic bits. Felt like some pieces might fall off lol

[bruce.augenstein@comcast.]

Originally Posted by 996ttelise

Are you trisomy 21 or something? I never compared anything. I was simply amused by several posts on here stating that the ZCP was too harsh . . . and stated that I find ZCP even in sports + to perfectly comfy for daily driving. That's not a comparison. That's what I experience when I drive the car.

That said, most C&D journalists have beginner to intermediate skill set and from a completely different background than I. I saw one review a while back where they reviewers listed their personal vehicles as being something like Prius, Accord, Camry and etc. I am in a completely different market than these guys and they only get limited (few hours) access to or no access to the weekend toys that lands in my garage from year to year.

The only one I watch with some interest is my long time buddy Randy Pobst wringing these things out. He and Chris Harris are about the only guys I have seen involved in these reviews that have the skill set to jump from car to car and drive them at or near the limits with limited seat time.

FWIW, I neither read the OP article nor knew the Bimmer came in third until it was pointed out on page 4 . . . These types of reviews are just meaningless to me.

Just got the latest Road & Track, and yup, there it is. They also think the bimmer suspension is harsh (on rough roads). Guess these professionals are also wusses, compared to you and your bride.

You don't get it, and perhaps never will. These are comparison tests, with all that entails.

[jmg]

Originally Posted by Germanauto

I feel the Bimmer should have finished ahead of the Merc. First C&D complains about the M3 not being hardcore enough, then when it is they complain it's not comfortable enough. Aside from the interior the Merc has a grand total of 0 advantages over the M3.

But I must say that these M3s are getting awfully expensive. It's difficult to find one at a dealer below $80K. That's a TON of money for something that's still in the 3-series range. Not worth it to me. The Alfa has the advantage as far as MSRP is concerned, but I fear it's leases will suck cause of poor residuals.

After owning two F30s, I can say for certainty that it's nowhere near the 3-series range. My fully loaded top of the line 340 was $65k MSRP. $15k for a wide lighter body, faster engine, sports tuned, bigger brakes, DCT, CF roof, etc etc is worth it to me.

[Jim B]

Originally Posted by gblansten

Hell no.

+1

[996ttelise]

Originally Posted by bruce.augenstein@comcast.

Just got the latest Road & Track, and yup, there it is. They also think the bimmer suspension is harsh (on rough roads). Guess these professionals are also wusses, compared to you and your bride.

You don't get it, and perhaps never will. These are comparison tests, with all that entails.

Oh my, you are obsessive. While you sit around reading magazines, I actually sit behind the steering wheels of these cars and enjoy every minute of it.

I can unequivocally say without any hesitation whatsoever that not once during the last week can I recall driving my ZCP, which remains in Sports + 100% of time, and thinking to myself that the ride is harsh or uncomfortable, not once . . . and I hit a few pot holes here recently that I was worried could damage rims and did not even get a jarring impact that I was expecting.

Perhaps get out and drive one for yourself so you can then formulate and INFORMED and EDUCATED first-hand opinion on the subject . . . then if its too harsh for you by all means keep and enjoy your mini-van.

[e92_m3]

Good read indeed. Seems like the Alfa is a formidable foe after all.

[bruce.augenstein@comcast.]

Originally Posted by 996ttelise

Oh my, you are obsessive. While you sit around reading magazines, I actually sit behind the steering wheels of these cars and enjoy every minute of it.

I can unequivocally say without any hesitation whatsoever that not once during the last week can I recall driving my ZCP, which remains in Sports + 100% of time, and thinking to myself that the ride is harsh or uncomfortable, not once . . . and I hit a few pot holes here recently that I was worried could damage rims and did not even get a jarring impact that I was expecting.

Perhaps get out and drive one for yourself so you can then formulate and INFORMED and EDUCATED first-hand opinion on the subject . . . then if its too harsh for you by all means keep and enjoy your mini-van.

I'll explain one more time.

Off point, but comparing track pedigrees between us, I lose, having only been a BMW CCA instructor, plus I haven't been on track since 2009.

However, what in the heck does that have to do with anything in this context. Answer: Nothing. Nothing at all.

Next, I drive nearly every sporty machine out there in any given year - although not on track. (Latest: A Z06. A little scary how easy it is to overpower the tires, but stupid fun. Not as scary as the Hellcat I drove last Fall, but I must admit that car gave me the giggles as well. I found the M4 I drove (with the Competition Package) to be stiff out on these PA roads, but completely acceptable, although I never drove a "standard" car for comparison. I personally would compare the ride to the 2010 C63 that graced our garage while my son was in Afghanistan. Also stiff.

Last, I have no issue at all with you and your bride finding the ride/handling compromise of your bimmer to be completely acceptable. None at all.

What I do find laughable is you calling the professionals at Car & Driver (and presumably Road & Track) wusses when they say the BMW rides roughly, in a comparison test.

At a guess, you will never, ever, understand this, but I assume you have read numerous individual road tests of various M3/M4s, with and without the competition package. Just in case you haven't, the subject of a too-tough ride hasn't come up. They might mention the ride, but not in the context of it being unacceptable.

However, in A COMPARISION TEST, it gets mentioned when the car is directly measured against competitive offerings.

Do you think the same road testers who didn't complain about non-compliant ride in an individual test have suddenly turned into wusses in a comparison test?

Get real.

It's fine to disagree, but when you feel compelled to disparage another party when doing so is a sign of intellectual weakness.

[MNoob]

I have a mental image of two 14 year old pimple poppers on their parents computer typing out angry posts of made up shit because they're all upset about being grounded. No adult would go on like this.

[996ttelise]

Originally Posted by MNoob

I have a mental image of two 14 year old pimple poppers on their parents computer typing out angry posts of made up shit because they're all upset about being grounded. No adult would go on like this.

Lol, pimple poppers is a disgusting image.

[NorCal f80]

on paper we dont look so good . but for me looks has a lot to do with my decision also . I cant stand the back of c63 or the front of alpha . I love cadillac fronts

[996ttelise]

Originally Posted by NorCal f80

on paper we dont look so good . but for me looks has a lot to do with my decision also . I cant stand the back of c63 or the front of alpha . I love cadillac fronts

Oh lawdy, a Caddie. It could have Veyron numbers and I still wouldn't drive it at its current price.

Does anyone really purchase a car like these based on a .1 second here, a .2 seconds there or a few tenths around a closed circuit track. If so, why do limits or .02 Gs matter so much in a family sedan type that will never be driven at or near its limits? Can your butt really tell the difference between 3.9 and 4.0 zero to sixty?

All of these cars are essentially the same performance wise so shouldn't the purchase decision be predicated more on the subjective, looks and feel?

[No Boost]

Originally Posted by 996ttelise

Oh lawdy, a Caddie. It could have Veyron numbers and I still wouldn't drive it at its current price.

Does anyone really purchase a car like these based on a .1 second here, a .2 seconds there or a few tenths around a closed circuit track. If so, why do limits or .02 Gs matter so much in a family sedan type that will never be driven at or near its limits? Can your butt really tell the difference between 3.9 and 4.0 zero to sixty?

All of these cars are essentially the same performance wise so shouldn't the purchase decision be predicated more on the subjective, looks and feel?

A 6 mph trap difference between the 63 and V should certainly be felt by anyone's butt.

[996ttelise]

Originally Posted by Stage IV

A 6 mph trap difference between the 63 and V should certainly be felt by anyone's butt.

There is what, a .3 second difference in the 1/4 mile. Are you going to be running 1 -120 burst every day from stop light to stop light in your sedan and can you feel a .3 second difference from 0 to 120 mph?. Is .3 seconds in the 1/4 mile sufficient reason to pick one sedan over another? It may be to some and that is cool. Personally, I purchase more based on aesthetics for street cars and would take my 458 every time over say a 991 Turbo S despite the Turbo S having a slight performance advantage.

[Paul-Bracq-BMW]

Originally Posted by gblansten

While very impressed with the Quadrifoglio's performance I finally saw one in real life. It was the classic red color. I was surprised by how cheap it looked. You just have to see it for yourself and make your own impression, but it didn't look good.

I did see one in Italy up close in a dealership and don't have the same opinion at all. I loved all the carbon fiber bits and the tri coat paint was fantastic! Panel gaps were mostly good too. The interior looked and felt special with a minimalistic and elegant design and beautiful carbon, alcantara and leather. the car had the white and green stitching and sparco carbon seats (worth ticking on the options box)... some bits looked a bit cheap such as the infotertainment controller and lower plastics but in no way a deal breaker... The display car was also a manual, non available in the US.