M4 to Giulia Quadrifoglio

[M3GymNut]

Originally Posted by omega2733

Then go add them! Honestly I agree 50/50 is probably the right split from reviewer preferences after watching many review videos and making up my mind.

Almost all reviewers agree both are fantastic vehicles and you really can't go wrong with either which I think is agreeable by everybody.

It's not my job to add them. I understand what you're saying, it's just allot of people on these forums are overly biased and are heavy fanboys about their cars. I drive an F80 but I realize the QV is a great car and I respect it and am neutral to it's comparisons with not just the QV but with all other cars.

[omega2733]

Originally Posted by M3GymNut

It's not my job to add them. I understand what you're saying, it's just allot of people on these forums are overly biased and are heavy fanboys about their cars. I drive an F80 but I realize the QV is a great car and I respect it and am neutral to it's comparisons with not just the QV but with all other cars.

If you're not willing to put in the work to correct it then don't bitch about it.

It's data - if you don't like the data, add your own data with references. Any data is more accurate than no data, or data without references, this is the point CanAutM3 was getting at.

Typically everyone is biased towards what they drive or own, there's a reason why they chose it and why it best suits their needs/lifestyle. I do agree some people are a bit of the hardcore fanboy here - it happens in every forum but I don't think it's the majority at all.

[M3GymNut]

Originally Posted by omega2733

If you're not willing to put in the work to correct it then don't bitch about it.

It's data - if you don't like the data, add your own data with references. Any data is more accurate than no data, or data without references, this is the point CanAutM3 was getting at.

Typically everyone is biased towards what they drive or own, there's a reason why they chose it and why it best suits their needs/lifestyle. I do agree some people are a bit of the hardcore fanboy here - it happens in every forum but I don't think it's the majority at all.

Chill chief, not bitching about it, just addressing to someone else that there's missing reviews and articles. So at the end of the day it wasn't towards you.

[Darth One]

Nope, you're bitching about it. It's an unbelievably bad look to look at someone else's work to gather facts, say "nope that's wrong", and expect people to accept your counter argument without presenting any facts of your own. And even have the temerity to say "it's not my job to provide facts to correct your facts".

I'm actually interested in any and all direct comparisons, because I'm interested in the QV. but you're not adding value here.

[kss]

Originally Posted by Darth One

Nope, you're bitching about it. It's an unbelievably bad look to look at someone else's work to gather facts, say "nope that's wrong", and expect people to accept your counter argument without presenting any facts of your own. And even have the temerity to say "it's not my job to provide facts to correct your facts".

I'm actually interested in any and all direct comparisons, because I'm interested in the QV. but you're not adding value here.

Hey, I bought an M3 Competition after lusting for an ArQV for two years, and almost every direct magazine or YouTube comparison I’ve seen favoured the AR QV. I think it’s kind of silly to ask for links, as almost all google searches that bring up comparisons, favour the Alfa - and those are by independent reviewers - not forum fan boy reviews. I think forums are great to get info on cars and help/advise on issues, but are too biased for meaningful reviews.

I actually liked the looks sound and test drive in the Alfa over the BMW, while preferring the BMW’s interior and infotainment system (with exception of being in love with the steering start button and fixed large pafddle shifters on the Alfa).

In the end my ultimate decision came down to the following 3 factors:
1) fear of the dreaded limp mode that many have reported in the Alfa. I experienced that far too often with my 2008 BMW 335xi. If it wasn’t bad enough that I had break downs on a regular basis (including a road trips to grand Tetons an Ranier national parks). But it was made worse by the incompetent bmw service department and horrible customer service. I didn’t want to take a chance on another car having a lot of reported limp mode issues. While both dealerships in town have the same owner, I did not go back to the same dealership and stayed away from BMW for almost 9 years and went with Lexus for my previous two purchases.
2) reported issues with the Alfa’s infotainment system (reportedly mainly 2017 and early 2018 models). It may sound trivial, but electronics are a big part of all cars and the reliability of the infotainment system is important for a positive ownerahip experience.
3) price. I paid less for a new 2017 M3 Competition with the ultimate package than what a new 2018 M2 costs and $18k less than what a AR QV specked out with the options I wanted would have costed.

Am I happy with my M3 competition. Yes - so far I love it (I’ve had it for exactly a month), and that’s only having driven it with winter tire. I can’t wait for the summer when I’ve got the performance tires!

Having said all that, given my past negative experience with bmw service and dealer experience, if a post March 2018 built AR QV was available for the same price, I would have gone with the Alfa. If the Mercedes C63s AMG was the same price, I probably would have went with that as well. I think the future reliability of this car and how happy I am with the dealer experience will determine if I stick with BMW in the future.

[Darth One]

I appreciate the input based on your experience.

As for the statement "almost all direct comparison favors the QV" - again, I can't trust that statement without corroborating data. Why? Because my eyes say otherwise. I did a google search of "bmw m4 vs alfa romeo giulia quadrofoglio" and the articles I pulled up were the same cited in the linked bpost thread. So QV wins some, loses some. I don't have time to watch/fast forward the YT videos because I'm on my way to work, but I'll watch those that seem to be true h2h, instrumented tests (I.e. not randos) later.

Anyway, it's not worth arguing about what the actual scoreboard says. I don't think anyone would tally up that count and simply buy the car with more tick marks anyway. I was just pointing out to the other guy that he's making a poor job of arguing his case.

[omega2733]

The funniest part about "reviewers favor the QV" most of them are talking about acceleration or either chassis handling. A little horsepower is easy to overcome with turbos...

Chassis feel is irrelevant when the QV comes with much stickier tires than the F8x as this affects about 80% of what your limits will be on a modern chassis in terms of handling.

If you want a truly un-biased review let's slap on identical tires in OEM sizes - which I have yet to see a single review do yet (only 1 of the reviews I watched even mentioned it). So honestly to me, they're all irrelevant anyway by that one fact alone as it's not really apples to apples.

The fact that a lot of reviewers still say they're within spitting distance of each other while the F8x has this disadvantage during reviews says it's a wash if they were identical tires when it comes to actual chassis handling. I believe this was also done on purpose to win over reviewers by Alfa (good move).

[minn19]

Originally Posted by omega2733

The funniest part about "reviewers favor the QV" most of them are talking about acceleration or either chassis handling. A little horsepower is easy to overcome with turbos...

Chassis feel is irrelevant when the QV comes with much stickier tires than the F8x as this affects about 80% of what your limits will be on a modern chassis in terms of handling.

If you want a truly un-biased review let's slap on identical tires in OEM sizes - which I have yet to see a single review do yet (only 1 of the reviews I watched even mentioned it). So honestly to me, they're all irrelevant anyway by that one fact alone as it's not really apples to apples.

The fact that a lot of reviewers still say they're within spitting distance of each other while the F8x has this disadvantage during reviews says it's a wash if they were identical tires when it comes to actual chassis handling. I believe this was also done on purpose to win over reviewers by Alfa (good move).

Oh now you've done it, here comes round two of the great tire wars!

[kss]

Originally Posted by omega2733

The funniest part about "reviewers favor the QV" most of them are talking about acceleration or either chassis handling. A little horsepower is easy to overcome with turbos...

Chassis feel is irrelevant when the QV comes with much stickier tires than the F8x as this affects about 80% of what your limits will be on a modern chassis in terms of handling.

If you want a truly un-biased review let's slap on identical tires in OEM sizes - which I have yet to see a single review do yet (only 1 of the reviews I watched even mentioned it). So honestly to me, they're all irrelevant anyway by that one fact alone as it's not really apples to apples.

The fact that a lot of reviewers still say they're within spitting distance of each other while the F8x has this disadvantage during reviews says it's a wash if they were identical tires when it comes to actual chassis handling. I believe this was also done on purpose to win over reviewers by Alfa (good move).

For a performance vehicle, IMO the OEM tires should be the best tires for the car. It’s fine to say that if you put stickier tires on the M3 the cars are equivalent. But that’s on BMW for not going with a better tire. I also don’t like the fact that some F80/82’a come with the Michelin’s and others like mine come equipped with Continentals and there is no ability to even choose.

[kss]

Originally Posted by Darth One

I appreciate the input based on your experience.

As for the statement "almost all direct comparison favors the QV" - again, I can't trust that statement without corroborating data. Why? Because my eyes say otherwise. I did a google search of "bmw m4 vs alfa romeo giulia quadrofoglio" and the articles I pulled up were the same cited in the linked bpost thread. So QV wins some, loses some. I don't have time to watch/fast forward the YT videos because I'm on my way to work, but I'll watch those that seem to be true h2h, instrumented tests (I.e. not randos) later.

Anyway, it's not worth arguing about what the actual scoreboard says. I don't think anyone would tally up that count and simply buy the car with more tick marks anyway. I was just pointing out to the other guy that he's making a poor job of arguing his case.

I’ve watched probably 15 YouTube videos and while quite a few reviewers had statements like “these cars are so close”, “you can’t go wrong with either choice”, “it’s like splitting hairs”, MOST selected the Alfa if they had to chose one. There was even one review that had two reviewers, one of whom owned the m3, said he couldn’t believe it, but he was picking the Alfa.

I actually think it’s a good thing though. With Alfa coming out of no where and Mercedes upping the game with the C63s AMG, it means BMW will definitely up their game in the next G model.

One thing I don’t like about BMW and Mercedes is that they are watering down their M and AMG cars. With Mercedes almost every model now has an AMG version. With BMW it’s even worse. First they have M packages with every car now, but aren’t true M cars. Now it’s even worse, when the initial M car isn’t good enough, so they intoroduce an M competition or M CS. Just have the “M” badge reserved for their best model - like has the green Quadrifoglio only on their top models. I also like how Audindiesnt have an RS version of every model and how they differentiate between the S and the RS.

[omega2733]

Originally Posted by kss

For a performance vehicle, IMO the OEM tires should be the best tires for the car. It’s fine to say that if you put stickier tires on the M3 the cars are equivalent. But that’s on BMW for not going with a better tire. I also don’t like the fact that some F80/82’a come with the Michelin’s and others like mine come equipped with Continentals and there is no ability to even choose.

Because it's silly to replace tires every 5k miles on something 95% of people are daily driving or street driving not even close to the limit of the tires. It's not "on them" they made a better choice for 95% of people who aren't only tracking the car to provide a better value for what the vehicle is intended on being used for.

My point is, you can't directly compare the two and expect an accurate review unless you normalize.

[SonicJlee]

The M3/M4 CS comes with Michelin Pilot Sport Cup2 - would love to see a professional review of a M3/M4 CS against a QV.

[JibSTir13]

Originally Posted by SonicJlee

The M3/M4 CS comes with Michelin Pilot Sport Cup2 - would love to see a professional review of a M3/M4 CS against a QV.

IMO the CS is not a direct competitor to the QV.

The standard or ZCP F8X is the one to compare to the QV.

[mcc3456]

Originally Posted by omega2733

Because it's silly to replace tires every 5k miles on something 95% of people are daily driving or street driving not even close to the limit of the tires. It's not "on them" they made a better choice for 95% of people who aren't only tracking the car to provide a better value for what the vehicle is intended on being used for.

My point is, you can't directly compare the two and expect an accurate review unless you normalize.

Have not heard of a single AR QV person only getting 5K miles on the Corsa R tires. I personally had 15K miles before discarding them at the end of the season, yet could have gotten another 800-1,000 miles out of them. My M3 with MPSS only got 17K before they were completely undriveable. Surely, firsthand experience counts for something.

[SonicJlee]

Originally Posted by JibSTir13

IMO the CS is not a direct competitor to the QV.

The standard or ZCP F8X is the one to compare to the QV.

The M3 CS has tires comparable to the Giulia QV, a significant variable according to posts on this forum - that variable essentially goes away with the CS. The QV has a carbon fiber hood and roof just like the CS. The record Nurburging time for the M3 CS is 7.38 and 7.32 for the QV. I think it is a good comparison.

[kss]

Originally Posted by SonicJlee

The M3 CS has tires comparable to the Giulia QV, a significant variable according to posts on this forum - that variable essentially goes away with the CS. The QV has a carbon fiber hood and roof just like the CS. The record Nurburging time for the M3 CS is 7.38 and 7.32 for the QV. I think it is a good comparison.

In Canada the CS is around over $20k more than the QV (assuming no CC brakes on either). IMO with that kind of price difference the QV is a no brainer as the choice to go with.

[CanAutM3]

Originally Posted by SonicJlee

The M3 CS has tires comparable to the Giulia QV, a significant variable according to posts on this forum - that variable essentially goes away with the CS. The QV has a carbon fiber hood and roof just like the CS. The record Nurburging time for the M3 CS is 7.38 and 7.32 for the QV. I think it is a good comparison.

In all indepependent testing, the M4cs has trumped the QV in lap times by a significant margin, they were not even close. The only place where the QV beat the CS is on the factory ‘ring time. I’ll believe that time only when Alfa agree to let AMS supertest the QV, which they have so far declined to do.

As a tidbit, BMW have been able to beat the original M4CS factory time and reisedd it to 7:35.

[M3GymNut]

Originally Posted by kss

Hey, I bought an M3 Competition after lusting for an ArQV for two years, and almost every direct magazine or YouTube comparison I’ve seen favoured the AR QV. I think it’s kind of silly to ask for links, as almost all google searches that bring up comparisons, favour the Alfa - and those are by independent reviewers - not forum fan boy reviews. I think forums are great to get info on cars and help/advise on issues, but are too biased for meaningful reviews.

I actually liked the looks sound and test drive in the Alfa over the BMW, while preferring the BMW’s interior and infotainment system (with exception of being in love with the steering start button and fixed large pafddle shifters on the Alfa).

In the end my ultimate decision came down to the following 3 factors:
1) fear of the dreaded limp mode that many have reported in the Alfa. I experienced that far too often with my 2008 BMW 335xi. If it wasn’t bad enough that I had break downs on a regular basis (including a road trips to grand Tetons an Ranier national parks). But it was made worse by the incompetent bmw service department and horrible customer service. I didn’t want to take a chance on another car having a lot of reported limp mode issues. While both dealerships in town have the same owner, I did not go back to the same dealership and stayed away from BMW for almost 9 years and went with Lexus for my previous two purchases.
2) reported issues with the Alfa’s infotainment system (reportedly mainly 2017 and early 2018 models). It may sound trivial, but electronics are a big part of all cars and the reliability of the infotainment system is important for a positive ownerahip experience.
3) price. I paid less for a new 2017 M3 Competition with the ultimate package than what a new 2018 M2 costs and $18k less than what a AR QV specked out with the options I wanted would have costed.

Am I happy with my M3 competition. Yes - so far I love it (I’ve had it for exactly a month), and that’s only having driven it with winter tire. I can’t wait for the summer when I’ve got the performance tires!

Having said all that, given my past negative experience with bmw service and dealer experience, if a post March 2018 built AR QV was available for the same price, I would have gone with the Alfa. If the Mercedes C63s AMG was the same price, I probably would have went with that as well. I think the future reliability of this car and how happy I am with the dealer experience will determine if I stick with BMW in the future.

This^

But there are some individuals here that choose to be blind. Exactly what you say, more often than not comparisons always favored QV's way. All you need to do is research.

[M3GymNut]

Originally Posted by kss

In Canada the CS is around over $20k more than the QV (assuming no CC brakes on either). IMO with that kind of price difference the QV is a no brainer as the choice to go with.

To a certain extent you can because the CS is just way overpriced to begin with. Better to compare the other intangibles of the cars. For those that are comparing the CS to the QV then are you subsiding to the fact that the QV is superior to the M3/4 ZCP since the CS is the best model?

[M3GymNut]

Originally Posted by Darth One

I appreciate the input based on your experience.

As for the statement "almost all direct comparison favors the QV" - again, I can't trust that statement without corroborating data. Why? Because my eyes say otherwise. I did a google search of "bmw m4 vs alfa romeo giulia quadrofoglio" and the articles I pulled up were the same cited in the linked bpost thread. So QV wins some, loses some. I don't have time to watch/fast forward the YT videos because I'm on my way to work, but I'll watch those that seem to be true h2h, instrumented tests (I.e. not randos) later.

Anyway, it's not worth arguing about what the actual scoreboard says. I don't think anyone would tally up that count and simply buy the car with more tick marks anyway. I was just pointing out to the other guy that he's making a poor job of arguing his case.

You don't have time to watch the youtube videos but have time to google search and go through comparisons coming from a BMW forum no less...

[Darth One]

Originally Posted by M3GymNut

You don't have time to watch the youtube videos but have time to google search and go through comparisons coming from a BMW forum no less...

No, I couldn't watch YouTube videos at 8 am on a workday. At the time, it was a lot easier to open webpages and scroll down to the "winner"

After work I did look at YouTube. My god, that place is a mess. You get people who don't know what the hell they're talking about, people more concerned with being goofs than providing info about the cars, one dimensional "reviews" like drag races...and then when you get a full test some reviewers just recite platitudes for both cars and don't actually communicate their preferences. The best so far is Motor Trend, who prefers the Alfa - but that fact is already on the bpost thread so even that wasn't something new. But I'll keep watching. That Alfa looks like a really exciting car.

Well, what do you know...i spent all this time doing research. Maybe it actually would have been better if I pulled facts out of my ass, called it a day, and went to the pub.

[M3GymNut]

Originally Posted by Darth One

No, I couldn't watch YouTube videos at 8 am on a workday. At the time, it was a lot easier to open webpages and scroll down to the "winner"

After work I did look at YouTube. My god, that place is a mess. You get people who don't know what the hell they're talking about, people more concerned with being goofs than providing info about the cars, one dimensional "reviews" like drag races...and then when you get a full test some reviewers just recite platitudes for both cars and don't actually communicate their preferences. The best so far is Motor Trend, who prefers the Alfa - but that fact is already on the bpost thread so even that wasn't something new. But I'll keep watching. That Alfa looks like a really exciting car.

Well, what do you know...i spent all this time doing research. Maybe it actually would have been better if I pulled facts out of my ass, called it a day, and went to the pub.

Well there you go, you're the genius.