Car Magazine Comparison test: M4 VS 911S VS F-type S (Scans)

[svc0x80]

So..for $40k more, I can get an decently optioned 911 S which is better than the M4?
For that price I could get a ZR1 Corvette which will KILL the 911 S.

You know what, I'll just save that money, rip out the cat's, add bigger turbos and push the closed deck i6 to its limits

[Jockey]

Originally Posted by M4TW

I’d say that I optioned my M4 with the pussy magnet..

This pussy magnet you speak of, how much?

[aus]

Originally Posted by svc0x80

So..for $40k more, I can get an decently optioned 911 S which is better than the M4?
For that price I could get a ZR1 Corvette which will KILL the 911 S.

You know what, I'll just save that money, rip out the cat's, add bigger turbos and push the closed deck i6 to its limits

All valid points.
Go to 8:00 minute mark if you don't want to watch the whole thing.
Obviously, the GTS is not nearly as useful as an M3, and not as fast, but this is an example of how it's not all about numbers.

http://www.m3post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=596608

.

[M4TW]

Originally Posted by Jockey

This pussy magnet you speak of, how much?

As mentioned, it comes standard. However, you can upgrade to a lighter carbon ceramic pussy magnet for an addition $8,500, but it hasn't been shown to make an appreciable difference in performance.

[myzmak]

Originally Posted by M4TW

As mentioned, it comes standard. However, you can upgrade to a lighter carbon ceramic pussy magnet for an addition $8,500, but it hasn't been shown to make an appreciable difference in performance.

....which is still a deal, because Porsche would charge you $11,500 for the same magnet and you would still have to pay another $750 for the embossed "Porsche" crests on the damn thing.

...and another $600 if you wanted to change the colour.

[Lups]

Haha, never going to work, especially with the wife who sees the invoice. Canada's F8x club will be the one of old horny men.

[YungDro]

Originally Posted by Wolfinwolfsclothing

Wrong again.

We already know the M3 isn't in the same league on the Ring (its off the pace by around 10-15 seconds), and from the specs we've seen (granted from different sources)..0-100 mph 991S 8.4 sec and m3/4 0-100 mph 8.8 sec.

If you're going just by manuf specs, lol. The 991S has recorded 0-60 mph in 3.5 and 1/4 in 11.8@118.4. I doubt we'll see those numbers from the m3/4 unless BMW puts out a press car like the did the m5 with very understated numbers.

And looks are subjective…and I don't agree at all.

Let's also not forget that even without the limited the m3 only has a top speed of around 177 mph whereas the 991S is approaching 190 mph. Big difference there as well.

lmfao 3.5 for the porsche? bullsh*T the max its ever reached is 4.2 it cant get under 3sec the M4 can.

M4 wins in every aspect.. and the porsche only sounds nice with an IPE exhaust.

and your current E92 M3 is way better than the 911 tbh. that v8 poops on it.

[Lups]

Originally Posted by YungDro

lmfao 3.5 for the porsche? bullsh*T the max its ever reached is 4.2 it cant get under 3sec the M4 can.

M4 wins in every aspect.. and the porsche only sounds nice with an IPE exhaust.

Haha, we all have gone trough this with him, just let it be.

Now we just scratch behind wolfies ears. It keeps him happy.

[M4TW]

Originally Posted by Lups

Haha, never going to works, especially with the wife who sees the invoice. Canada's F8x club will be the one of old horny men.

Naw, she'll never figure out what CCPM means on the invoice and true about us being horny and old - but it could be worse, we could be in the Corvette club.

[bimmerj]

Originally Posted by myzmak

....which is still a deal, because Porsche would charge you $11,500 for the same magnet and you would still have to pay another $750 for the embossed "Porsche" crests on the damn thing.

...and another $600 if you wanted to change the colour.

Correct on the 911, but not the comparable Porsche (Cayman). The ceramics brakes on the cayman S are cheaper than the M3/M4. The 911 is in whole different category to be compared to an M3/M4.

[Lups]

Originally Posted by M4TW

Naw, she'll never figure out what CCPM means on the invoice and true about us being horny and old - but it could be worse, we could be in the Corvette club.

Hey I'm 31, a female and bought one of these. With those specs I really should just buy the bloody plastic boat, since here they truly are the last attempt!

I get to make fun of everyone, since I'm the living joke of the buyers club. And no, I have not told at home the final cost of this baby, that would ruin every chance I'll ever get in life.

[myzmak]

Originally Posted by bimmerj

Correct on the 911, but not the comparable Porsche (Cayman). The ceramics brakes on the cayman S are cheaper than the M3/M4. The 911 is in whole different category to be compared to an M3/M4.

ummm, you know we werent talking about brakes, right?

(on the serious point you make, I agree with you completely)

[CSBM5]

Originally Posted by JoeFromPA

P.s. I'm not an e90 m3 owner, and I know it's more of a religion than an ownership experience, but I find the e90 to be a nice car - but not exactly the true race bred m3 that earlier models were. If you want feel above all, experience above all, I would never point you to an e90 m3. Sure, the motor is a gem. But so is the motor in a c6 'vette.

You need to sample *stock* versions of all the M3s and then come back with an opinion. The E36 and E46 understeer by design significantly more than the E90 (stock as delivered from the factory), and also have older design suspension (obviously), simply the camber characteristics under compression and the location of the spindle on the E90 design is clearly noticeable when driven back to back, in anger, with an E46 or older. Don't even bother comparing it to a *stock* E30 M3. Have you actually driven a totally stock E30 M3? (i.e. with large levels of 1980s body roll and a rear suspension with plenty of toe change on bump and rebound, etc) I eagerly drove the very first E30 M3 my dealer got in stock in 1987, and was immediately disappointed at all the mods I knew I'd do on it to get close to the 3 BMWs I owned at the time in the handling department.

Having had huge seat time in an E46 and E90 along with a lot of seat time in an E36 M3 race car, the E90 M3, a totally stock one, is an incredibly impressive car. I've only been a BMW fanatic since 1971, but for a completely stock from the factory car, the E90 M3 is the best BMW that's ever been built (i.e. measuring by the standards that BMW used to stand for before all the uber luxury, heft and lard took over).

[Sapper_M3]

Originally Posted by CSBM5

You need to sample *stock* versions of all the M3s and then come back with an opinion. The E36 and E46 understeer by design significantly more than the E90 (stock as delivered from the factory), and also have older design suspension (obviously), simply the camber characteristics under compression and the location of the spindle on the E90 design is clearly noticeable when driven back to back, in anger, with an E46 or older. Don't even bother comparing it to a *stock* E30 M3. Have you actually driven a totally stock E30 M3? (i.e. with large levels of 1980s body roll and a rear suspension with plenty of toe change on bump and rebound, etc) I eagerly drove the very first E30 M3 my dealer got in stock in 1987, and was immediately disappointed at all the mods I knew I'd do on it to get close to the 3 BMWs I owned at the time in the handling department.

Having had huge seat time in an E46 and E90 along with a lot of seat time in an E36 M3 race car, the E90 M3, a totally stock one, is an incredibly impressive car. I've only been a BMW fanatic since 1971, but for a completely stock from the factory car, the E90 M3 is the best BMW that's ever been built (i.e. measuring by the standards that BMW used to stand for before all the uber luxury, heft and lard took over).

Well said, and thanks for the input. I always appreciate comments from gents like you in the M3Post fold who actually have the real-life experience to contextualize the evolution of our cars. It seems there are far too many bench-racer, forum "fact" regurgitators these days...

I don't have the depth of experience personally to make an assessment like you have made, but your sentiments are frequently the same offered to me by some of my "more experienced" (let's not say "older," but you get the idea) instructors at road course track-days. Granted, many of these same instructors choose to drive E36 or E46 M3s (some due to preference for a lighter car....which also helps keep the cost of consumeables down, and all due to these cars being cheaper "toys" to risk on-track), but they have nothing but high praise for the E9X M3's perforance on-track.

I look forward to the F8X M3/M4 proving itself to be the next step forward over the next few months.

[Jockey]

Originally Posted by CSBM5

...the E90 M3 is the best BMW that's ever been built (i.e. measuring by the standards that BMW used to stand for before all the uber luxury, heft and lard took over).

That's ironic since the E90 is when the uber luxury, heft, and lard started.

[CSBM5]

Originally Posted by Jockey

That's ironic since the E90 is when the uber luxury, heft, and lard started.

Which of course is the standard Internet myths particularly with respect to weight...few of who have actually weighed a non-sunroof 6MT E90 M3 which weighs well over 100lbs less than the "quoted weights"...nonetheless comments like these often come from those who haven't owned/driven/autocrossed/etc all generations of stock M3s. Pick the course, pick the prior generation of M3, totally stock, put them all on the identical tire model, the E90 M3 will always win and at the same time be a blast driving it.

However, you have to put this in perspective. I've only been autocrossing for 39 years, doing track events for 33 years, instructing for 29 years, etc. I'm an old fart that is still PAXing in the top few percent of events I compete at, etc. I'm biased as it clearly shows in my posts. I only care about end results at the measure of the clock along with the pure enjoyment of the process.

[M4TW]

Originally Posted by CSBM5

Which of course is the standard Internet myths particularly with respect to weight...few of who have actually weighed a non-sunroof 6MT E90 M3 which weighs well over 100lbs less than the "quoted weights"...nonetheless comments like these often come from those who haven't owned/driven/autocrossed/etc all generations of stock M3s. Pick the course, pick the prior generation of M3, totally stock, put them all on the identical tire model, the E90 M3 will always win and at the same time be a blast driving it.

However, you have to put this in perspective. I've only been autocrossing for 39 years, doing track events for 33 years, instructing for 29 years, etc. I'm an old fart that is still PAXing in the top few percent of events I compete at, etc. I'm biased as it clearly shows in my posts. I only care about end results at the measure of the clock along with the pure enjoyment of the process.

How do you think the new M3/4 will stack up against its predecessor?

[paddy335]

Originally Posted by M4TW

How do you think the new M3/4 will stack up against its predecessor?

You don't need 39 years of autocrossing experience to work that one out:

It will annihilate them in all performance measures.
It won't be as 'emotional'. Whatever that means.
It will be more 'clinical'. Whatever that means.
It will be dramatically more efficient. Which some will take to mean it's not the real deal.
And it will still be purchased by the same market segment: moneyed older professionals.

[V1.47fan]

Originally Posted by ChesterM4

Bravo for the M4, now being compared to cars costing 40% more. Its also not even worth reviewing against the C63 or RS4 This 911S vs a 40% more 911 Turbo which would be better, might be the Turbo

Also what's the 0-62 of an M3/4 with DCT please Car Magazine, what's that 4.3 seconds errrmm nope?

Thanks OP for posting I enjoyed the read. All fine cars, looks great in the photos.

Too bad it didnt do as good as the E92 M3 did against the previous 911.

[V1.47fan]

The good ol days...

http://www.caranddriver.com/comparis...mparison-tests

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by V1.47fan

Too bad it didnt do as good as the E92 M3 did against the previous 911.

The new M4 is now being compared to the 911 (991) Carrera S. The prior model was generally (including in BMWs own literature) compared against the base 911 (997). It's a bit of a mixed bag in the old comparisons the M3 was generally a bit faster at the strip (drag strip) and slower at the track (depending on how tight of a track of course). This time around they will be very close at the strip but there is no way the M4 will keep up with the Porsche on the track (again this it against the S model Porsche).

[mattwhite]

This comparo seems to back up what I'm been concerned about with this new M3/M4 - it's just not enough of a leap forward. I own an E92 M3 and I've owned an 997.1 C2S. The M3 was by far the better driver's car (the 997S was an understeering pig). Porsche has made significant gains with the 991 and I'm afraid the new M3/M4 is no longer the superior driver's car. Sure there's a price difference new, but it's easy to pick up a very low mileage 991S for close to what a M3/M4 would cost.