Benefits over newer performance cars like AMG C63?

[Jockey]

Originally Posted by Patronus86

Well then it comes down to which tracks you race these cars on. Because numerous auto journalists (Top Gear, Motortrend, Fifth Gear) all did head-to-head comparisons and the BMW was universally declared the winner in terms of lap times.

Also, 8:05 is the laptime for the base M3 on the Ring. The C63 AMG Performance Package was quicker by only a few seconds...but I'd be interested in seeing how the M3 Competition package would fare against it.

Of course it depends on which track. But since everyone pretty much used the Ring as the litmus test for overall track speed and handling, the M3 loses to the C63 AMG.

And if you look at the laptimes, the BASE C63 AMG puts down the same lap time as the perf pack C63. So base car to base car, the C63 is still faster. Since the perf pck on the E92 M3 didn't really do much in terms of performance (mostly it looks prettier), I don't see it getting back those 4 seconds.

[Patronus86]

Originally Posted by Jockey

Of course it depends on which track. But since everyone pretty much used the Ring as the litmus test for overall track speed and handling, the M3 loses to the C63 AMG.

And if you look at the laptimes, the BASE C63 AMG puts down the same lap time as the perf pack C63. So base car to base car, the C63 is still faster. Since the perf pck on the E92 M3 didn't really do much in terms of performance (mostly it looks prettier), I don't see it getting back those 4 seconds.

The Ring is considered by many to be a flawed test of a car for this exact reason. The C63 AMG outperforms the base M3 on the Ring because of the long track and extensive straightaways for the C63 to take advantage of its higher horsepower. On most other tracks though, where cornering speed is just as important or more so than straight line speed, the M3 does outperform the C63. Why? Because the M3 is overall a better handling car.

Also, the M3 Competition package was noted by many to be a bit faster than the base model because the suspension and traction control were improved. I don't know if it can beat the C63 AMG and Performance package around the Ring, but I think the match would be much closer.

[Jockey]

Originally Posted by Patronus86

The Ring is considered by many to be a flawed test of a car for this exact reason. The C63 AMG outperforms the base M3 on the Ring because of the long track and extensive straightaways for the C63 to take advantage of its higher horsepower. On most other tracks though, where cornering speed is just as important or more so than straight line speed, the M3 does outperform the C63. Why? Because the M3 is overall a better handling car.

How is it flawed? Using that logic, we should just use an auto-x course to decide which car is faster.

So the racetracks that favor the M3 are less flawed?

[Patronus86]

Originally Posted by Jockey

How is it flawed? Using that logic, we should just use an auto-x course to decide which car is faster.

So the racetracks that favor the M3 are less flawed?

I'm saying that on most other race tracks besides the Ring, the M3 outperforms the C63 AMG. The fact that the C63 beats the M3 on the Ring could give someone the misconception that the C63 AMG is a better, more capable car around a track. The general consensus however is that the M3 is a better car around most racetracks.

That's why the Ring has been criticized for being a skewed indicator of a car's performance.

Yes, cars will perform differently on different tracks. But, in general, the M3 has been noted as a better track performer. I don't know why I have to explain all of this. I would think by now, a member of a BMW forum would know all of this.

[Jockey]

Ah, condescension, yeah, that'll help you prove your point to me.

[Patronus86]

Originally Posted by Jockey

Ah, condescension, yeah, that'll help you prove your point to me.

I'm just really shocked that we are even having this conversation. I think most people on this forum would acknowledge what I said about the C63 AMG vs the M3 to be true.

[Jockey]

Originally Posted by Patronus86

I'm just really shocked that we are even having this conversation. I think most people on this forum would acknowledge what I said about the C63 AMG vs the M3 to be true.

We are on a BMW forum.

[Patronus86]

Originally Posted by Jockey

We are on a BMW forum.

That's exactly my point. This forum of all places will have numerous articles that review the M3 vs C63 AMG performance. The vast majority of those articles have declared the M3 to be the better car around a track.

[mkoesel]

Originally Posted by Stevens21234

What is the M3's edge besides brand loyalty and possibly weight?

By the way, lower weight can be a huge advantage since it helps with handling, braking, and acceleration. Adding more power to a car without addressing weight, by comparison, just improves acceleration.

The lower weight of the new car, minor as it might seem, could be what keeps the M3 on top this time. We'll have to wait and see if the competition is able to drop weight too or if they can manage to compete through other means.

[Jockey]

Originally Posted by Patronus86

That's exactly my point. This forum of all places will have numerous articles that review the M3 vs C63 AMG performance. The vast majority of those articles have declared the M3 to be the better car around a track.

Thanks for completely missing the point.

I'm done with you on this. Keep up the good work.

[ybbiz34]

Originally Posted by Patronus86

Where did you hear that? All the reviews I saw pegged the E9X BMW M3 as the faster car around a track.

To the OP, I would say you should wait for reviews to come out on all these cars and then decide...there is no use speculating which car is faster or has better handling until journalists, or yourself, can review them.

The RS4 sedan hasn't even been announced yet.

The E9X M3 beat the pre-LCI version of the C63.

Once the LCI C63 came out (new suspension, new transmission, etc.), the C63 started to win some of the comparison tests. The LCI version of the E9X received mostly exterior/interior cosmetic improvements.

The reviews you posted all involved pre-LCI C63s. Mercedes makes big changes with their LCI/facelift cars.

Here is a review where the LCI C63 takes down the E92 M3:

And another review demonstrating the improvements found on the LCI version of the C63:

[ybbiz34]

Originally Posted by Patronus86

The Ring is considered by many to be a flawed test of a car for this exact reason. The C63 AMG outperforms the base M3 on the Ring because of the long track and extensive straightaways for the C63 to take advantage of its higher horsepower. On most other tracks though, where cornering speed is just as important or more so than straight line speed, the M3 does outperform the C63. Why? Because the M3 is overall a better handling car.

Also, the M3 Competition package was noted by many to be a bit faster than the base model because the suspension and traction control were improved. I don't know if it can beat the C63 AMG and Performance package around the Ring, but I think the match would be much closer.

The standard LCI C63 is the car that turned in the faster lap time around the 'ring.

On fast tracks filled with long straights and plenty of high-speed sweepers, the C63 will likely be the faster car. On tighter, more technical tracks, I would expect the M3 to have the advantage because of it's slightly lesser weight.

In the hands of highly skilled drivers, I would alternating outcomes, irrespective of venue.

[ybbiz34]

Originally Posted by Patronus86

The LCI C63 AMG (the performance package) posted the same nurburgring time as the base C63 AMG (8:01). So if the pre-LCI M3 could beat the base C63 around those tracks used for the Top Gear, Motor Trend and Fifth Gear comparisons, I'm guessing it would be able to beat the LCI C63 as well.

From what I understand, the LCI M3 was more than just cosmetic upgrades. It came with a lower ride height, and modifications to the suspension, Dynamic Stability Control and Electronic Damper Control.

Also, I'd be interested in seeing those comparisons where the LCI C63 AMG beat the M3. I'm not trying to play devil's advocate here; I am genuinely interested in seeing them since I have not come across any myself.

This is just a video review of the LCI C63. Other than the reviewer stating that he has a preference for the C63 AMG over the M3, it doesn't actually compare the C63's track performance to the M3's.

I don't understand why you're equating LCI with PP; they're two entirely separate things. There were both pre and post-LCI cars offered with various performance packages. The most recent PP is the 507 Edition, which is available on the LCI model.

The standard LCI C63 set the 8:01 lap time. There's only one lap time. That car did NOT have any PP version (which is why it was listed with 457 horsepower, as opposed to 480+ or 507+).

And I haven't found a single source setting forth performance-based improvements for the LCI E9X. I'm aware of new taillights and a new iDrive. That's it as far as major design changes.

"As far as the E92 M3 is concerned, the only difference between the LCI models that were introduced in MY11 and the pre-LCI models are the taillights. There are no other exterior changes that are LCI specific. Likewise, there was no notable price increase after LCI, so I'm not sure what you're referring to when you ask why something is more expensive."

http://www.m3post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=625369

This is the most comprehensive description I've seen regarding the LCI versions of the E90 and E92 (including the E90 and E92 M3):

"The [LCI] E90 M3 only received the new rear design [taillights] and iDrive system from the [non-M] E90 2009 model year facelift."

[Patronus86]

Originally Posted by ybbiz34

I don't understand why you're equating LCI with PP; they're two entirely separate things. There were both pre and post-LCI cars offered with various performance packages. The most recent PP is the 507 Edition, which is available on the LCI model.

The standard LCI C63 set the 8:01 lap time. There's only one lap time. That car did NOT have any PP version (which is why it was listed with 457 horsepower, as opposed to 480+ or 507+).

I misunderstood LCI; I thought it meant Performance/Competition Package.

Anyway when I said that both the base C63 AMG and C63 AMG Performance Package had the same Nurburgring lap time, I was going off of the times I saw on these sites:

http://nurburgringlaptimes.com/lap-t...times-top-100/
http://fastestlaps.com/tracks/nordschleife.html

Originally Posted by ybbiz34

And I haven't found a single source setting forth performance-based improvements for the LCI E9X. I'm aware of new taillights and a new iDrive. That's it as far as major design changes.

"As far as the E92 M3 is concerned, the only difference between the LCI models that were introduced in MY11 and the pre-LCI models are the taillights. There are no other exterior changes that are LCI specific. Likewise, there was no notable price increase after LCI, so I'm not sure what you're referring to when you ask why something is more expensive."

Yeah, to clarify, I misunderstood what LCI meant. When I was talking about all of the additional suspension tuning and DSC and EDC stuff, I was referring to the M3 Competition Package, which I now realize is different from the LCI.

[ybbiz34]

Originally Posted by Patronus86

I misunderstood LCI; I thought it meant Performance/Competition Package.

Anyway when I said that both the base C63 AMG and C63 AMG Performance Package had the same Nurburgring lap time, I was going off of the times I saw on these sites:

http://nurburgringlaptimes.com/lap-t...times-top-100/
http://fastestlaps.com/tracks/nordschleife.html

Yeah, to clarify, I misunderstood what LCI meant. When I was talking about all of the additional suspension tuning and DSC and EDC stuff, I was referring to the M3 Competition Package, which I now realize is different from the LCI.

No worries!

With all of the acronyms and abbreviations used by the various manufacturers, I sometimes make mistakes too.

[ChrisMT79]

Ditto... That is actually how I was able to get up to date on Mercedes various models/packages and offerings a while back. Once concluding no manual... it was deemed research for knowledge sake.

Originally Posted by jc05e46m3

^This. Also, I love that the M cars almost always somehow edge out the competition, even with less power and sometimes lower quality interior feel. I will stick to my M's

[jc05e46m3]

Originally Posted by ChrisMT79

Ditto... That is actually how I was able to get up to date on Mercedes various models/packages and offerings a while back. Once concluding no manual... it was deemed research for knowledge sake.

Haha, for sure. I have to say though. I have a feeling we won't have the option next time...

[ChrisMT79]

Sadly, I agree. That was my primary reason for getting the F80 in manual. My children will still be young enough that I wont need my hands free 24/7 and I'm certain the DCT will get dialed in enough to provide ample enjoyment when they finally do pull the plug on manuals.

Originally Posted by jc05e46m3

Haha, for sure. I have to say though. I have a feeling we won't have the option next time...

[jc05e46m3]

Originally Posted by ChrisMT79

Sadly, I agree. That was my primary reason for getting the F80 in manual. My children will still be young enough that I wont need my hands free 24/7 and I'm certain the DCT will get dialed in enough to provide ample enjoyment when they finally do pull the plug on manuals.

Couldnt agree more.