M3 vs RS3 vs Civic Type R track battle

[Powerslide]

Originally Posted by Powerslide

How do you explain that on 8 tracks - the M3/M4 were faster on 5 of them than the Civic Type R (quite a bit faster). M4 was faster on 4 out of 6 tracks, and the M3 was faster on 2 out of 3. Of the three out of eight combined where the Civic Type R was faster - jackass Sutcliffe was the driver on one occasion, one of the other occasions it was the wet handling circuit (where the M4 got a truly atrocious time) - and the last was the Nurburgring (where Sport Auto did the lap)? So - for people who claim the Civic Type R is "faster" in absolute terms are wrong - the majority of the time the M3/M4 are faster - and significantly faster at that... yet the haters make the exception seem like an absolute, unqualified fact (typical hater behavior - exaggerate the exceptional facts that allow you to troll, while flatly ignoring the majority of the evidence to the contrary)...

Sutcliffe lost all credibility with me when he "raced" and M3/M4 against an Alpina D3 - you could see in the video that he had the throttle in efficient, shift mode S1, and full traction control on - all the least aggressive performance settings possible - how can anyone take him seriously - if he truly wanted as "objective" of a comparison as possible, he would drive all the cars in question to their maximum. Instead - he drives every competitor to its max - and then does something which fully reveals his lack of objectivity by stacking the deck against the M3/M4 because he has some weird - unexplained personal hatred for and agenda against the car - whether driving in the least aggressive settings, extra drifting of the M3/M4, lifting foot off gas right before finish line in M3/M4 but not other cars - why???

From Fastestlaps.com - Civic Type R vs. M4:

Honda Civic Type R (FK2)
310 ps (306 bhp)
1382 kg (3047 lbs)
224 ps / tonne
Picture of BMW M4
BMW M4
431 ps (425 bhp)
1497 kg (3300 lbs)
288 ps / tonne
Lap Times (6)
Civic Type R M4
Autocar Wet Handling Track 1:16.10 1:25.70
Contidrom (3.8 km) 1:36.70 1:34.41
Sachsenring 1:41.16 1:37.22
Nürburgring Nordschleife 7:50.00 7:52.00
Autocar Dry Handling Track 1:16.10 1:12.50
Hockenheim Short 1:15.80 1:12.60
Performance
Civic Type R M4
Top speed 269 kph (167 mph) 280 kph (174 mph)
0 - 50 kph 2.4 1.7
0 - 100 kph 5.7 4
0 - 130 kph 8.5 6
0 - 200 kph 20.5 12.9
0 - 100 mph 12.4 8.5

Fastestlaps.com - Civic Type R vs. M3:

Honda Civic Type R (FK2)
310 ps (306 bhp)
1382 kg (3047 lbs)
224 ps / tonne
Picture of BMW M3 (F80)
BMW M3 (F80)
431 ps (425 bhp)
1520 kg (3351 lbs)
284 ps / tonne
Lap Times (3)
Civic Type R M3
Llandow 0:46.50 0:46.70
Hockenheim Short 1:15.80 1:13.10
Sachsenring 1:41.16 1:37.83
Performance
Civic Type R M3
Top speed 269 kph (167 mph) 262 kph (163 mph)
0 - 50 kph 2.4 1.6
0 - 100 kph 5.7 4.1
0 - 100 mph 12.4 8.5

Strange how excluding the wet handling test and the Sport Auto Nurburgring - the only remaining test driver who couldn't beat the Civic Type R in an M3/M4 was Sutcliffe - why is that? Not to take anything away from the Civic Type R - it is obviously a great car. But when you get a few trolls like Sutcliffe and ///MPossible going out of their way to distort objective facts - it's always fun to set the record straight... It's no different than EffEightyM3 saying that the Porsche 911 991.1 base is "faster" than the M3/M4 by citing to one track (Anglessy) where the 991 was in fact faster - but then he (like ///MPossible) ignores the totality of the evidence by only focussing on the few exceptions or outliers - then misrepresenting such outliers as "absolute" facts - seriously... no credibility at all...: Again - Fastestlaps OBJECTIVE data - M4 faster on 4 out of 7 tracks:

Porsche 911 Carrera (991)
350 ps (345 bhp)
1400 kg (3086 lbs)
250 ps / tonne
Picture of BMW M4
BMW M4
431 ps (425 bhp)
1497 kg (3300 lbs)
288 ps / tonne
Lap Times (7)
911 Carrera M4
Anglesey Coastal 1:17.80 1:19.20
Vairano Handling Course 1:17.40 1:17.45
Tsukuba 1:05.44 1:04.80
Nürburgring Nordschleife 8:02.00 7:52.00
Autocar Dry Handling Track 1:14.20 1:12.50
Autocar Wet Handling Track 1:13.80 1:25.70
Hockenheim Short 1:13.10 1:12.60

Nobody has to "like" every car out there - whether the M3/M4 or anything else - but if you want to maintain credibility - at least base your statements on something rational (substituting factual data with just irrational hate is not very persuasive, in case you didn't know).

Another point - Sutcliffe barely "beats" the M3 by 0.2 seconds after drifting all over the place and letting his foot off the gas at the end - yet on the other two tracks - the M3 convincingly beat the Type R by over 2 full seconds (gee - what a coincidence - not an Auto Express comparison and no Sutcliffe driving - hmmm)...

[///Mpossible]

Originally Posted by Powerslide

How do you explain that on 8 tracks - the M3/M4 were faster on 5 of them than the Civic Type R (quite a bit faster). M4 was faster on 4 out of 6 tracks, and the M3 was faster on 2 out of 3. Of the three out of eight combined where the Civic Type R was faster - jackass Sutcliffe was the driver on one occasion, one of the other occasions it was the wet handling circuit (where the M4 got a truly atrocious time) - and the last was the Nurburgring (where Sport Auto did the lap)? So - for people who claim the Civic Type R is "faster" in absolute terms are wrong - the majority of the time the M3/M4 are faster - and significantly faster at that... yet the haters make the exception seem like an absolute, unqualified fact (typical hater behavior - exaggerate the exceptional facts that allow you to troll, while flatly ignoring the majority of the evidence to the contrary)...

Sutcliffe lost all credibility with me when he "raced" and M3/M4 against an Alpina D3 - you could see in the video that he had the throttle in efficient, shift mode S1, and full traction control on - all the least aggressive performance settings possible - how can anyone take him seriously - if he truly wanted as "objective" of a comparison as possible, he would drive all the cars in question to their maximum. Instead - he drives every competitor to its max - and then does something which fully reveals his lack of objectivity by stacking the deck against the M3/M4 because he has some weird - unexplained personal hatred for and agenda against the car - whether driving in the least aggressive settings, extra drifting of the M3/M4, lifting foot off gas right before finish line in M3/M4 but not other cars - why???

From Fastestlaps.com - Civic Type R vs. M4:

Honda Civic Type R (FK2)
310 ps (306 bhp)
1382 kg (3047 lbs)
224 ps / tonne
Picture of BMW M4
BMW M4
431 ps (425 bhp)
1497 kg (3300 lbs)
288 ps / tonne
Lap Times (6)
Civic Type R M4
Autocar Wet Handling Track 1:16.10 1:25.70
Contidrom (3.8 km) 1:36.70 1:34.41
Sachsenring 1:41.16 1:37.22
Nürburgring Nordschleife 7:50.00 7:52.00
Autocar Dry Handling Track 1:16.10 1:12.50
Hockenheim Short 1:15.80 1:12.60
Performance
Civic Type R M4
Top speed 269 kph (167 mph) 280 kph (174 mph)
0 - 50 kph 2.4 1.7
0 - 100 kph 5.7 4
0 - 130 kph 8.5 6
0 - 200 kph 20.5 12.9
0 - 100 mph 12.4 8.5

Fastestlaps.com - Civic Type R vs. M3:

Honda Civic Type R (FK2)
310 ps (306 bhp)
1382 kg (3047 lbs)
224 ps / tonne
Picture of BMW M3 (F80)
BMW M3 (F80)
431 ps (425 bhp)
1520 kg (3351 lbs)
284 ps / tonne
Lap Times (3)
Civic Type R M3
Llandow 0:46.50 0:46.70
Hockenheim Short 1:15.80 1:13.10
Sachsenring 1:41.16 1:37.83
Performance
Civic Type R M3
Top speed 269 kph (167 mph) 262 kph (163 mph)
0 - 50 kph 2.4 1.6
0 - 100 kph 5.7 4.1
0 - 100 mph 12.4 8.5

Strange how excluding the wet handling test and the Sport Auto Nurburgring - the only remaining test driver who couldn't beat the Civic Type R in an M3/M4 was Sutcliffe - why is that? Not to take anything away from the Civic Type R - it is obviously a great car. But when you get a few trolls like Sutcliffe and ///MPossible going out of their way to distort objective facts - it's always fun to set the record straight... It's no different than EffEightyM3 saying that the Porsche 911 991.1 base is "faster" than the M3/M4 by citing to one track (Anglessy) where the 991 was in fact faster - but then he (like ///MPossible) ignores the totality of the evidence by only focussing on the few exceptions or outliers - then misrepresenting such outliers as "absolute" facts - seriously... no credibility at all...: Again - Fastestlaps OBJECTIVE data - M4 faster on 4 out of 7 tracks:

Porsche 911 Carrera (991)
350 ps (345 bhp)
1400 kg (3086 lbs)
250 ps / tonne
Picture of BMW M4
BMW M4
431 ps (425 bhp)
1497 kg (3300 lbs)
288 ps / tonne
Lap Times (7)
911 Carrera M4
Anglesey Coastal 1:17.80 1:19.20
Vairano Handling Course 1:17.40 1:17.45
Tsukuba 1:05.44 1:04.80
Nürburgring Nordschleife 8:02.00 7:52.00
Autocar Dry Handling Track 1:14.20 1:12.50
Autocar Wet Handling Track 1:13.80 1:25.70
Hockenheim Short 1:13.10 1:12.60

Nobody has to "like" every car out there - whether the M3/M4 or anything else - but if you want to maintain credibility - at least base your statements on something rational (substituting factual data with just irrational hate is not very persuasive, in case you didn't know).

Hey bud, are you drunk or what, how am I going out of my way here!?

All I posted was the Youtube comment from Auto Express that explains that the footage was not from the actual timed lap, if this is too much for you, I don't know what to tell you, maybe you should just leave the internet for those who can handle the truth!

[minn19]

Originally Posted by ///Mpossible

Hey bud, are you drunk or what, how am I going out of my way here!?

All I posted was the Youtube comment from Auto Express that explains that the footage was not from the actual timed lap, if this is too much for you, I don't know what to tell you, maybe you should just leave the internet for those who can handle the truth!

So they admit to deceiving their viewers in one way. Why would they do this? And we are supposed to believe they are deceiving us in just this one way, not the actual results? I guess, sounds very odd.

Why not just show the way the timed lap went down like almost every other video. This plus their past and I'll be nice......inconsistencies, leads me to not really buy anything they say personally. Not that it really matters to me, as I don't by my cars based solely on Internet or magazine reviews. Fun to talk about though.

[///Mpossible]

Originally Posted by minn19

So they admit to deceiving their viewers in one way. Why would they do this? And we are supposed to believe they are deceiving us in just this one way, not the actual results? I guess, sounds very odd.

Why not just show the way the timed lap went down like almost every other video. This plus their past and I'll be nice......inconsistencies, leads me to not really buy anything they say personally. Not that it really matters to me, as I don't by my cars based solely on Internet or magazine reviews. Fun to talk about though.

I personnaly never expected any of the magasines who are doing these kinds of test to only show the actual timed lap. I always assumed they needed/wanted to do more than one lap to get the very best out of a car and that it was simply easier, cheaper and better for the viewings to show some less drama free footage. From what I remember, even the Stig was often drifting out of corners in some of Top Gear episodes, and I'm sure he knew the fastest way around a track.

I seriously don't get all the drama about this video, who cares if the M4 got beat by a smaller car on a smaller track, the F8x is a "luxury" sport sedan, not an all out track car. It also should'nt be that much of a shocker since the F8x has'nt demonstrated to be the fastest thing around a track, just think of the Mustang GT that runs very close lap times behind it, or the C63 and ATS-V who ran considerably faster laps in the Motortrend comparo.

People can hate on Sutcliffe all they want but in the end, many people(including other journalists) have shared his view on the F8x since it came out. He may not exactly like the car but this does'nt mean he has an agenda, it simply mean he has an opinion and he's paid to share it with its viewers, I like him.

[minn19]

Originally Posted by ///Mpossible

I personnaly never expected any of the magasines who are doing these kinds of test to only show the actual timed lap. I always assumed they needed/wanted to do more than one lap to get the very best out of a car and that it was simply easier, cheaper and better for the viewings to show some less drama free footage. From what I remember, even the Stig was often drifting out of corners in some of Top Gear episodes, and I'm sure he knew the fastest way around a track.

I seriously don't get all the drama about this video, who cares if the M4 got beat by a smaller car on a smaller track, the F8x is a "luxury" sport sedan, not an all out track car. It also should'nt be that much of a shocker since the F8x has'nt demonstrated to be the fastest thing around a track, just think of the Mustang GT that runs very close lap times behind it, or the C63 and ATS-V who ran considerably faster laps in the Motortrend comparo.

People can hate on Sutcliffe all they want but in the end, many people(including other journalists) have shared his view on the F8x since it came out. He may not exactly like the car but this does'nt mean he has an agenda, it simply mean he has an opinion and he's paid to share it with its viewers, I like him.

Many of the credible ones do show the actual timed lap. They show the fun warm up drifting lap and the real one. Like I said, I couldn't care less and am not going to lose sleep over this or if so and so doesn't like my car. But, it is something to talk about.

For whatever reason it does seem like Sutcliffe has an agenda or the magazine does. If they put out a test saying the M3 beat the RS3 and Civic Type R at xyz track, most people are going to say "no shit" and move on. But, doing it this way generates much more traffic to their sight and hence more revenue for each party. It also looked and sounded like he lifted at the end. More creative editing? What are we to believe? Credibility should be a high priority for these journalists and that seems to be severely lacking a lot with quite a few of them lately IMO.

In the end it is entertainment to me and I take it for mostly what it is. Fun to banter about and pick apart here.

[Powerslide]

Originally Posted by ///Mpossible

Hey bud, are you drunk or what, how am I going out of my way here!?

All I posted was the Youtube comment from Auto Express that explains that the footage was not from the actual timed lap, if this is too much for you, I don't know what to tell you, maybe you should just leave the internet for those who can handle the truth!

No bud.. I was totally sober bud.... 4 out of 6 for M4, 2 out of 3 for M3 - that's the truth bud... if you can't handle the truth bud, maybe you should not troll the forums anymore bud...

[CRtoE92]

Originally Posted by rr006rbc

It's truly a sad day when an M3 is compared to a Civic.

Its a Type R!!

[Powerslide]

Originally Posted by BlackJetE90

LOL at all M owners that hate Sutcliffe, ever since his first video vs the W204 C63.

See my last few posts in this thread... LOL at the people who ignore the facts (including Sutcliffe)..

So - BlackJetE90 - anything positive to say about the F8x? If not, why are you here?????

[hellrotm]

Originally Posted by Powerslide

See my last few posts in this thread... LOL at the people who ignore the facts (including Sutcliffe)..

So - BlackJetE90 - anything positive to say about the F8x? If not, why are you here?????

Going all out on those posts. Should I say ///Mpressive....

I honestly don't care that much. Although I do enjoy Sutcliffe's video reviews. Actually just finished watching his new video of LP580-2.

[Powerslide]

Originally Posted by BlackJetE90

Going all out on those posts. Should I say ///Mpressive....

I honestly don't care that much. Although I do enjoy Sutcliffe's video reviews. Actually just finished watching his new video of LP580-2.

Haha!!! Yes I am!!! Glad you enjoyed the LP580-2 video...