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

[Eau Rouge]

Originally Posted by myzmak

Exactly. The excellence of the E90 (and the volume it sold) has caused the rivals to up their games considerably. F80 losing a head to head doesn't make it bad or worse than E90, it means there is much better competition.

(which for any gear head/petrol head/car lover can only be a good thing)

History anyone?

Correct me if I'm mistaken, but if IIRC, there were some 80+k E46M3's built & sold. That number was at least ten thousand more than the number of E9xM3's built & sold.

Fast forward: Looking forward to the F8xM3/M4 retaining the crown against more pricey models like the GT-R and the Porsche 911TT. It's naturally aspirated predecessor did quite well when C&D pitted three against each other.

C&D M3/GTR/997TT test, summation:
Every other manufacturer should give up on building their own cars and just make M3's instead.

Comparison with the base 991 or even the 991s are nice, but we can hope for more; at least I do given recent history.

[M4TW]

Originally Posted by coloradoe92m3

Wow, I could not have said it better myself! Finally a respected reviewer has the idea here and verbalizes it so well. I sum up what he says as simply a lack of soul. F80 does everything better than the e92 terms of numbers ( or low end torque for those who like that) but wasn't the point of the M3 always to excite and provide a unique "experience" that offered a taste of race car excitement? How does the m4 really do this? IMO it doesn't. No sound, no rewarding you for really. Working the engine and no razor sharp race car throttle response or intake noise.

Boring car IMO

Losing races can cause one to lose spirit too. The unique experience of that mad final rush to redline that supposedly gave the outgoing ///M it's racing soul almost caused it to be taken down by a Mustang (as per the onion skin win cited above).

So, shockingly good on the road course, but enough to beat the M3? Perhaps, because the first thing out of Randy's mouth after lapping the BMW is, "I missed the mid-range torque of the Mustang. The BMW ramps up more slowly and is skewed toward high rpm whereas the Mustang has a much broader, flatter torque curve."

The lack of mid-range trust is something I didn't like about the old model and the mid and low range pow has me pining for the new one. If what gives a car it's soul is a ultimately a performance flaw, do we engineer flaws into engines just to make them endearing or "special"? I would also add that the vast majority of reviewers found the new ///M's to be not boring at all.

In fact, most found them to be very very interesting.

[myzmak]

Originally Posted by Eau Rouge

History anyone?

Correct me if I'm mistaken, but if IIRC, there were some 80+k E46M3's built & sold. That number was at least ten thousand more than the number of E9xM3's built & sold.

Fast forward: Looking forward to the F8xM3/M4 retaining the crown against more pricey models like the GT-R and the Porsche 911TT. It's naturally aspirated predecessor did quite well when C&D pitted three against each other.

Comparison with the base 991 or even the 991s are nice, but we can hope for more; at least I do given recent history.

Yeah, I think that there were more E46 than E90 sold (could be because of the recession that hit just after E90's launch too....). But compared to AMG, either way it is huge. The C55 (E46 competitor) sold like 1/10 of the E46. With the major battle between the two companies to be #1 luxury brand, my guess is there is some interest in making 'performance editions' of their regular cars that are competitive too. It started with W204 c63 (which improved enough post LCI to beat the E90 at times) and I fully expect it to continue with the W205.

.......all of which would be very, very good.

[SOM3]

Originally Posted by coloradoe92m3

Wow, I could not have said it better myself! Finally a respected reviewer has the idea here and verbalizes it so well. I sum up what he says as simply a lack of soul. F80 does everything better than the e92 terms of numbers ( or low end torque for those who like that) but wasn't the point of the M3 always to excite and provide a unique "experience" that offered a taste of race car excitement? How does the m4 really do this? IMO it doesn't. No sound, no rewarding you for really. Working the engine and no razor sharp race car throttle response or intake noise.

Boring car IMO

While you already said so yourself about F8X being better in every category I'll tell you what I won't be bored of doing...passing you in your "race car" on the track. Besides aren't F1 engines force induced? Wouldn't that mean that the new M3/4 is what a taste of a race car is about?

Get with the times already although I know turbos aren't anything new (just outlawed in the 80s for producing too much power).

[RMB]

Originally Posted by coloradoe92m3

Wow, I could not have said it better myself! Finally a respected reviewer has the idea here and verbalizes it so well. I sum up what he says as simply a lack of soul. F80 does everything better than the e92 terms of numbers ( or low end torque for those who like that) but wasn't the point of the M3 always to excite and provide a unique "experience" that offered a taste of race car excitement? How does the m4 really do this? IMO it doesn't. No sound, no rewarding you for really. Working the engine and no razor sharp race car throttle response or intake noise.

Boring car IMO

Each person enjoys something differently. The V8 in my Cayenne S sounds better than the E92 M3 from an exhaust note perspective. Louder exhaust, more full bodied with nice crackles and pops.

I bought a 2012 LMB E92 M3 fully loaded new, kept it for a year or so, sold it last September, and my SS M4 is currently crossing the Atlantic to be delivered to me by the same dealership. My old M3 was very special and I love the induction noise from the engine (definitely beats the Porsche in this aspect, but not torque or exhaust note). However, when I am not on a track (99% of my driving time), to have to rev or downshift to get to 5 k rpm and above to feel any appreciable speed was not "special" for me. It is not enjoyable for me to have to wind my engine out in traffic in order to get in front of a Honda accord v6.

This might not be the best analogy, but if someone has to strain and blow a nut trying to put up 300 lbs vs. the person who lifts it with minimal effort (no grunting, or an explosion of blood from the pelvic area) I think that is even more impressive. It might not have the theatrics of a frenzied attempt, but it is not boring either. This is just my opinion and I am happy with the vehicles I have purchased in the past and that I currently own.

[Wolfinwolfsclothing]

Originally Posted by YungDro

So the M4 is the far better car out of the two and it comes second.. wtf

No it wasn't. The 911 was the far better car of the three, hence why it won.

Originally Posted by coloradoe92m3

We need a poll to predict how many total comparo wins the f80 mounts vs e92. I don't think e92 seriously ever lost a single comparison! Even to 997 carrera non s when e92 came out

Don't think there were any comparos of the 997S/997.2S vs the e92 m3…only vs the non S which IMO wasn't worth buying a base 911 until the 991 came out. THe m3 did lose handily to the boxster in the best handling car under 100K though.

Originally Posted by Eau Rouge

History anyone?

Correct me if I'm mistaken, but if IIRC, there were some 80+k E46M3's built & sold. That number was at least ten thousand more than the number of E9xM3's built & sold.

Fast forward: Looking forward to the F8xM3/M4 retaining the crown against more pricey models like the GT-R and the Porsche 911TT. It's naturally aspirated predecessor did quite well when C&D pitted three against each other.


Comparison with the base 991 or even the 991s are nice, but we can hope for more; at least I do given recent history.

Retaining what crown? LOL

This comparo was a joke. The m3 only won bc of back seats and a trunk. As far as performance and handling go, it got owned. The 911 turbo is still the single best daily drivable super car…don't see the King (911 turbo) losing. Then again, I don't see them doing a comparo like this, its just unfair to the m3/4. Look the m3/4 aspires to be like the 911…thats why BMW always benchmarks it against the 911 (or should I say the lowest level 911).

[FogCityM3]

Go to 18:30 of this interview where Dinan begins a discussion of power & torque in racing. Also a few minutes later, he gives an example of detuning BMW engines' mid-range torque but extending the torque band farther out in order to make more power up top to better compete with the higher torque cars such as Chevy and Ford.

http://dinancars.com/steve-dinan-int...-tire-podcast/

Everyone has preferences that need to be respected but some of us do love the unique experience of the E9x M3s not only because it has "soul" but because in high -rev applications, you can control the power so well and the engine keeps making more power right up to redline.

Let's not forget that the M division did not want to make a turbocharged engine, but the mother ship forced this upon them (and actually the head guy who said this, did end up retiring)

Think the question should be did M now give us the best engine they could with the F80? For TT application I think yes, but looking at the big picture they could have stayed NA with DI (a-la porsche) and cylinder de-activation, could have done FI with supercharger (which would keep very similar characteristics to NA), or could have done an NA and electric combination. I personally think all these options would have made an already great car untouchable.

For the S65/85 and S54, M did give us pretty much the best NA engine they could at the time. And this is what we all love, a close to maxed out engine with some of the most sophisticated technologies available (was actually considered by many to be the most sophisticated road car engine in the world given the ECU processing power at the time). This is why I personally believe the BMW NA engines are so special and you can feel it!

In terms of daily driving preference, I guess it depends where you live and what your commute is. I live within 20 minutes of some of the best driving roads imaginable and within 1.5 hours of a legendary track, and I don't have any traffic on my commutes, so I'm in hog-heaven with an NA motor that makes it so gratifying to rev and rev and rev!

So much is personal preference, but to really know what you would prefer, try to experience all the potential applications of road cars by trying out different ones (know you have, but this is more directed at others in this thread). Remember going to the M school and a couple of father-son teams went there with the sons dead set on getting 1Ms. After driving them back to back with the M3s, one of them changed his mind and the other was really on the fence. I asked them why and it was because they loved the high-revving nature of the S65 and the super-smooth application of throttle during difficult maneuvers.

Originally Posted by RMB

This might not be the best analogy, but if someone has to strain and blow a nut trying to put up 300 lbs vs. the person who lifts it with minimal effort (no grunting, or an explosion of blood from the pelvic area) I think that is even more impressive. It might not have the theatrics of a frenzied attempt, but it is not boring either. This is just my opinion and I am happy with the vehicles I have purchased in the past and that I currently own.

[Eau Rouge]

Originally Posted by Wolfinwolfsclothing

Retaining what crown? LOL

This comparo was a joke. The m3 only won bc of back seats and a trunk. As far as performance and handling go, it got owned. The 911 turbo is still the single best daily drivable super car…don't see the King (911 turbo) losing. Then again, I don't see them doing a comparo like this, its just unfair to the m3/4. Look the m3/4 aspires to be like the 911…thats why BMW always benchmarks it against the 911 (or should I say the lowest level 911).

In your opinion, right, but perhaps time has clouded your memory?

Nope.

The M3 offers an unparalleled mix of hassle-free livability and performance at a price that undercuts those of the *Nissan and the Porsche. For that, it wins in our book. We say its performance deficit is made up by the near perfection and sophistication of the rest of the package. And before you think we’ve gone soft and are too old for a wildcat like the GT-R, know that the average age of the test drivers (and the voters of the comparison test) was 29.5 years. Moreover, we’re the only three C/D staffers who dream of having a Lotus Elise as a daily driver. Trust us, we can put up with a lot of crudeness—you should have heard our dinner conversations. But if you can have it all without the pain, who would vote against that? And until that Elise thing happens, the M3 is the car we’d take home forever.

Wrong again.

As one test driver put it, “The M3 is the car that the driver has the most control over.” Oversteer, understeer, and neutrality are all on the M3’s resume, but they’re dependent on the driver’s inputs. The chassis has no surprises, no snap reactions, no bad habits—even midcorner bumps are sopped up without drama. Strong brakes have excellent initial bite and didn’t fade even after many, many laps. The BMW’s lap time lagged 1.5 seconds behind the 911 Turbo’s, but that translates to an average speed throughout the lap that was only 0.3 mph slower than the far more powerful Porsche. Thus the BMW, though suffocated by the thin air at 4200 feet, managed to make up most of the difference by cornering faster.

It is immediately obvious (especially at altitude) that the M3 isn’t as quick as its turbocharged competition, but 0 to 60 mph in 4.4 seconds is nothing to scoff at, either (other M3s we’ve tested have been slightly quicker). A naturally aspirated 4.0-liter V-8 can’t deliver the massive torque of the blown sixes, but the M3 delivers its 414 horsepower in a linear and consistent manner from idle to its 8300-rpm redline. No lurching, no drama, no sudden explosions of boost. And the sound the BMW V-8 makes is due a Grammy. It’s a V-8 note not often heard outside racetracks, while the Nissan and the Porsche both sound as though they could wear a Dyson label.

I don't know many auto enthusiasts that would characterize a 911TT as a "supercar"; probably because it isn't. Now the CGT certainly is acknowledged as such.

http://www.caranddriver.com/comparis...mw-m3-page-4-1

P.S. I would expect the F8xM3/M4 to acquit itself quite well against similar pricier models, but hopefully the C&D staff will ignore negative comments.

[M4TW]

Originally Posted by FogCityM3

Go to 18:30 of this interview where Dinan begins a discussion of power & torque in racing. Also a few minutes later, he gives an example of detuning BMW engines' mid-range torque but extending the torque band farther out in order to make more power up top to better compete with the higher torque cars such as Chevy and Ford.

http://dinancars.com/steve-dinan-int...-tire-podcast/

Everyone has preferences that need to be respected but some of us do love the unique experience of the E9x M3s not only because it has "soul" but because in high -rev applications, you can control the power so well and the engine keeps making more power right up to redline.

Let's not forget that the M division did not want to make a turbocharged engine, but the mother ship forced this upon them (and actually the head guy who said this, did end up retiring)

Think the question should be did M now give us the best engine they could with the F80? For TT application I think yes, but looking at the big picture they could have stayed NA with DI (a-la porsche) and cylinder de-activation, could have done FI with supercharger (which would keep very similar characteristics to NA), or could have done an NA and electric combination. I personally think all these options would have made an already great car untouchable.

For the S65/85 and S54, M did give us pretty much the best NA engine they could at the time. And this is what we all love, a close to maxed out engine with some of the most sophisticated technologies available (was actually considered by many to be the most sophisticated road car engine in the world given the ECU processing power at the time). This is why I personally believe the BMW NA engines are so special and you can feel it!

In terms of daily driving preference, I guess it depends where you live and what your commute is. I live within 20 minutes of some of the best driving roads imaginable and within 1.5 hours of a legendary track, and I don't have any traffic on my commutes, so I'm in hog-heaven with an NA motor that makes it so gratifying to rev and rev and rev!

So much is personal preference, but to really know what you would prefer, try to experience all the potential applications of road cars by trying out different ones (know you have, but this is more directed at others in this thread). Remember going to the M school and a couple of father-son teams went there with the sons dead set on getting 1Ms. After driving them back to back with the M3s, one of them changed his mind and the other was really on the fence. I asked them why and it was because they loved the high-revving nature of the S65 and the super-smooth application of throttle during difficult maneuvers.

First off I am envious of hog heaven. Your car sounds fantastic too. I also get what you are saying about a high reving NA and the unique joy that they can bring. I think you should test drive the new M3 when you get a chance to compare. If it fails to excite you then you should stick with what you have or look elsewhere.

I don't live in hog heaven, but enjoy what I can. I'm coming to the party from a tuned 335 and so there will be less of an adjustment for me. I'm just super excited about the steps that they have taken with the S55 to improve throttle response, cooling, and stretching the fun into higher revs along with everything else.

I'm even more excited about the new chassis and the general upgrade in moving not only to a new model with all of its advances and improvements and especially about getting the /// M I've always wanted. In spite of all the bad mouthing going on here (of which I am just as guilty) I think there are more things in common than different between the previous model and this one. I want to experience the ///Magic too and hope to be a proud owner just like you.

I took the e92 M3 for a spin and never got to truly exploit/experience the mad rush to redline on public roads. Instead I just though the car felt relatively flat compared to what I was used to. It handled like an absolute dream though and nothing i did with my 335 could match. That's part of the reason why I am as excited as I am about getting my M4. The mad rush must be something special though or there wouldn't be so many reviewers and owners mentioning it.

I guess I disagree with you on the options available to BMW on the new engine. They've already gone the direction of TT with the M5/6 and so the development and technology was already there. To remain competitive they likely would have needed to go a larger displacement V8 as there probably wasn't enough to be squeezed out of the existing S65. I had joked previously about BMW entering into a block sharing arrangement with Ford, Jag, and Toyota on a 5.0 l displacement V8.

You can correct me, but I don't think that BMW have ever gone the supercharging route before. There would be some concerns about adding weight to the front as well as poor gas mileage I would expect. A NA and electric hybrid sounds great, but I don't think they are there yet and I think we are more likely to see a turbo/electric hybrid since the electric motor would improve throttle response and torque throughout the powerband.

Some of the gas saving technologies might have worked, but I doubt they would be able to achieve what they have with the new platform which is really quite remarkable. I see pressure about emissions and economy increasing and car companies will have to adapt to survive. It's not just government regulation either that's spoiling the party, it's a new zeitgeist that is affecting car buyers as well. We will see how they wallet vote when the new fantastically capable M3/4 is cross-shopped against competitors wheeling out big V8's to appease our collective thirst for more power and performance.

Meanwhile you should be happy that BMW is adapting to the times in order to continue to offer ///M's that are competitive, capable and relevant enough to still be considered the benchmark.

It can only serve to improve the resale value of your car.

Drive safe and happy trails.

[coloradoe92m3]

Sorry guys if ANY race team had their choice its a NA car revving to oblivion for making power and ability to modulate and put down the power. This article discusses the very issue.

F1 ONLY went FI due to push for fuel efficiency. Same with road cars. If there were no limits I can assure you teams would use a NA v10 or 8. Provided same HP. Torque is meaningless at engine.

Watch an f1 race this year. The low-mid range is making the cars be sloppier than I've ever seen in recent past. Putting the immense lmid range stab vs the linear progressive power through a race track.

BTW the only losses the M3 had due to Lack of torque would have zero to do with its torque # but person couldn't keep the right gear and in its power band. Anyone coming from a turbo or big v8 had this issue.

Last, even f1 drivers have complained all her about lack of sound and modulation of power.

Anyway, I may or may not add one to the stable myself and yo each his own but the fact I am so much more interested in a 991 vs new M3 vs last generation I chose to go e92m3 for the day to day fun it provided with that engine .

Maybe its down to how much you value sound. Analogous to how taste is really dependant on smell sense, enjoyment of engine character forsome is eextremely dependant on sound. And everyone has a different sense if smell!

[Never Convicted]

Originally Posted by coloradoe92m3

Sorry guys if ANY race team had their choice its a NA car revving to oblivion for making power and ability to modulate and put down the power. This article discusses the very issue.

F1 ONLY went FI due to push for fuel efficiency. Same with road cars. If there were no limits I can assure you teams would use a NA v10 or 8. Provided same HP. Torque is meaningless at engine.

Watch an f1 race this year. The low-mid range is making the cars be sloppier than I've ever seen in recent past. Putting the immense lmid range stab vs the linear progressive power through a race track.

BTW the only losses the M3 had due to Lack of torque would have zero to do with its torque # but person couldn't keep the right gear and in its power band. Anyone coming from a turbo or big v8 had this issue.

Last, even f1 drivers have complained all her about lack of sound and modulation of power.

Anyway, I may or may not add one to the stable myself and yo each his own but the fact I am so much more interested in a 991 vs new M3 vs last generation I chose to go e92m3 for the day to day fun it provided with that engine .

Maybe its down to how much you value sound. Analogous to how taste is really dependant on smell sense, enjoyment of engine character forsome is eextremely dependant on sound. And everyone has a different sense if smell!

Yes, I'll bet if you asked Vettel what he thinks about turbos he'd agree with you. But I bet Nico and Lewis love the hell out of them. Maybe you could consult with Seb and tell him what his problem is.

So thanks for posting for the 27th time that sound is more important than performance. I think we understand now. And it's been my observation that if 10% of the self appointed cognoscenti here actually did buy a P-Car, Porsche's sales would double. Just sayin'.

[Lups]

Originally Posted by Never Convicted

Yes, I'll bet if you asked Vettel what he thinks about turbos he'd agree with you. But I bet Nico and Lewis love the hell out of them. Maybe you could consult with Seb and tell him what his problem is.

So thanks for posting for the 27th time that sound is more important than performance. I think we understand now. And it's been my observation that if 10% of the self appointed cognoscenti here actually did buy a P-Car, Porsche's sales would double. Just sayin'.

Attitude, lovin' it.

[YungDro]

Originally Posted by Wolfinwolfsclothing

No it wasn't. The 911 was the far better car of the three, hence why it won.

M4 is faster look at the specs Lol. M4 = winner and by looks M4 shits on them both

[Wolfinwolfsclothing]

Originally Posted by YungDro

M4 is faster look at the specs Lol. M4 = winner and by looks M4 shits on them both

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.

[Lups]

oh, Wolfie... You need a life even more than I do.

[M4TW]

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.

Regardless of whether the M3/4 is in the same league as the 911s in performance, it is leagues apart in price, which makes this whole debate rather pointless IMO. You could mod the M3/4 to insane levels with the price difference. I tried to build a 911s on the Porsche site and like all my other previous attempts at a P-car, it it started with "that doesn't look that bad" and soon became OMFG and I ended up feeling as though I was in the Jim Morrison song "no one here gets out alive."

[KevinM]

Originally Posted by M4TW

I tried to build a 911s on the Porsche site and like all my other previous attempts at a P-car, it it started with "that doesn't look that bad" and soon became OMFG and I ended up feeling as though I was in the Jim Morrison song "no one here gets out alive."

Ha ha, I know exactly what you mean! If I ever buy a Porsche it will probably be used, because all these options depreciate so much on the used car market. It goes beyond the money...I just feel "used" after seeing how much the reasonable options add to the price.

[Alpine F31]

Originally Posted by trinim3

Wow this quote says it all.

"The M4 is a great car to drive but it feels built to hit numbers rather than to push a driver's buttons."

Scary. This is the prevailing sentiment in every evaluation I've read or seen a video of. The M3/4 is fast and handles well, but lacks emotion/engagement.

[myzmak]

Originally Posted by Alpine F31

Scary. This is the prevailing sentiment in every evaluation I've read or seen a video of. The M3/4 is fast and handles well, but lacks emotion/engagement.

Fear not, because you can't have read very many. Check out the compilation of reviews thread. A few people have suggested that, but they are in the minority.

Also check out the Chris Harris review notes thread (including his calling out a troll in the comments section who suggested this car or engine were boring. Harris tore him a new one)

[SOM3]

Originally Posted by Never Convicted

Yes, I'll bet if you asked Vettel what he thinks about turbos he'd agree with you. But I bet Nico and Lewis love the hell out of them. Maybe you could consult with Seb and tell him what his problem is.

So thanks for posting for the 27th time that sound is more important than performance. I think we understand now. And it's been my observation that if 10% of the self appointed cognoscenti here actually did buy a P-Car, Porsche's sales would double. Just sayin'.

And if you really care that much about sound there are much better options out there for a lot less money than E9X M3.

[JoeFromPA]

If my f80 m3 beat a 911 in a racing environment in terms of feel and responsiveness, I would be a tad concerned about it being my daily driver. I'm not one of those folks who proudly declares, "I drive my gt3 20k miles a year, my left quad is 6x the size of my right, and I find it perfectly comfortable"

I want my m3 to strike the balance: close enough to the 911S to be worth the comparison, but with the comforts and tuning that says I wouldn't mind taking my 85 year old grandmother out for a sunday stroll either.

That is it's purpose and that means it will lose comparison tests to vehicles that have a greater degree of focus (and possibly a significantly higher price tag).

Anyone who thinks that somehow reflects poorly on the f80 is conflating design purposes with magazine testing.

Joe

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.

There are lots of reasons to like the e90 m3 and I'm not putting that down. But to see it as some paragon of feel and experience may be missing perspective.

[M4TW]

I get that sound is an important part of the myriad of popping sensations that go along with driving a performance car. I’d be a liar If I was to say that I shall ever tire of the baritone sonorous note trumpeted by the combo of induction and a fire breathing V8. It’s just that, well, that sound was perfected back in 1968 with a Pontiac GTO.

Naw, the new ///M makes a new sound. From the future.

It can do the bass guitar riffs. But it can also snap, crackle and pop, make a Stuka dive bomber scream, and fire up a chain saw to get the job done. If it’s all mixed together like an Allan Parsons Project gone mental, then so be it. This is music orchestrated for the nimble striker to go along with its bobbing and weaving, chucking and jiving, and flat out pin-your-ears back effin sprinting.

It makes a mofo sound for sure.

If that all sounds like cacophony to you, then there is always the stereo to drown it out. Punch my enthusiast membership card if you will, but I really only pay attention to the sound of my car when I am racing. At all other times I am rocking out tunes loud enough to mute any exhaust note within, and frequently without, the cabin.

I’d say that I optioned my M4 with the pussy magnet and the rock and roll switch - but these features come standard.