-
M3 vs 2011 Mustang GT
:cool:[url="http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/coupes/1010_2011_2011_ford_mustang_gt_vs_2011_bmw_m3_comparison/index.html"]2011 BMW M3 Coupe vs. 2011 Ford Mustang GT Comparison - Motor Trend
[/url]
Wonder how the new Boss will do against the BMW...
-
Interesting comparo, Looks like a fun track too.
Nicely done for the mustang to do what it did.
-
I don't normally like these wildly different comparisons, but that's actually pretty cool. Congrats to the Mustang.
-
Ahhh Top Gear has ruined me. Any time I read anything about autos it comes out in my head with a british accent.
-
I think what this shows most of all is that the M3 should cost less. If enough manufacturers can beat the Germans at their own game, maybe they will get off their badge-snobbery horse and price the cars more reasonably.
However if I was in the market for an M3, which has basically designed its market segment, I think I would buy an M3. Though if I was in the market for a sports coupe, I would have to take the tire-shredding slice of apple pie.
Also, this makes me so very excited to see what the Boss can do.
-
Nevermind lap times, the Mustang must quite a lot more fun. And that's all that matters.
-
gotta say I'm quite blown away at how well that new 5.0 performs. I doubt it'll change anyone's opinion/mind on the cars they've set out to buy though. Regardless of their similarities in performance, they're still marketed towards two very different types of people. I'll have the BMW, black/black.
-
I think this article shows just how far ahead of the game BMW was when they made the E9X series M3. The car is coming up to its third birthday while still maintaining the slightest of overall advantage against a car that is completely brand new.
I think that people should consider the reason why MotorTrend and others initially thought that this comparison would be unfair/Odd/Unlikely or anything other than a completely valid comparison...
Cars are not priced by performance alone. Something that many people seem to forget. It is plainly obvious why the BMW costs more than the Ford. Marketing factors such as Brand value and Perceived quality make up a good portion of the difference as well as the fact that it costs more to make an E9X series M3 then it does to make a 2011 Ford Mustang GT, even though they literally achieve equal performance (IMO).
However none of this is to detract from the Ford. It is a great car and the engine is simply awesome. Randy Probst's comments tell of somewhat lose suspension control that ultimately leads to the Mustang requiring a larger set of brass ones to eek the peak performance out of it. However he did praise the overall balance of the car which I would say is the biggest "win" over the BMW.
According to Randy though, it looks like the BMW is safer and inspires more confidence which inevitably leads to it being easier to drive to the limit.
In summary: The Mustang is a brilliant car and with a professional driver behind the wheel it achieves performance equal to a modern M3. However in the hands of Joe Average, it is the BMW M3 that still maintains the advantage. Which is highly respectable for a car approaching its third birthday.
-
image and branding aside (they're obviously going after different buyers), that's a good comparo. well done the mustang! now sink some of that left over change you saved over the M3 into some mods.. :D
-
[quote=clutch-monkey;946195]image and branding aside (they're obviously going after different buyers), that's a good comparo. well done the mustang! now sink some of that left over change you saved over the M3 into some mods.. :D[/quote]
[URL="http://www.autoblog.com/2010/08/23/ford-racing-now-selling-supercharger-that-boosts-new-5-0-liter-v/"]You mean like this[/URL]?
-
well by the sounds of it..i'd be spending the money on suspension first.
-
Just pick up a new Boss 302, remove the flashy graphics, and call it a day.;)
-
I'm actually a bit surprised as the 5.0 suspension ain't really that much better than the old 4.6. I would have thought it would have taken some Koni/Tokico shocks and struts, and some decent springs -- at least.
[quote=clutch-monkey;946195]now sink some of that left over change you saved over the M3 into some mods.. :D[/quote]
No, don't. Really, don't even go there. Trust me.
-
[quote=Rasmus;946226]
No, don't. Really, don't even go there. Trust me.[/quote]
can of worms..opened
-
The new 5.0 is a monster... wish I could trade the Z in for one of those.
-
[quote=DesmoRob;946185]gotta say I'm quite blown away at how well that new 5.0 performs. I doubt it'll change anyone's opinion/mind on the cars they've set out to buy though. [/quote]
The new 5.0 performs so good it has made me jump ship from being a lifelong camaro/chevy guy into getting a new mustang this coming may.
-
Well anyway, if anyone here wants to add a bit to their 5.0s give me a heads up. On the dyno we've seen 394 to the wheels with stock airbox, and I've seen 426 to the wheels with a Steeda CAI. Both tunes with added timing for 93 octane petrol -- or gas, if you will.
-
[quote=Rasmus;946266]Well anyway, if anyone here wants to add a bit to their 5.0s give me a heads up. On the dyno we've seen 394 to the wheels with stock airbox, and I've seen 426 to the wheels with a Steeda CAI. Both tunes with added timing for 93 octane petrol -- or gas, if you will.[/quote]
Careful Ras. I'm already flirtin' with the idea of selling my 05 for a new 5.0, but I need to try and stay financially responsible at the moment. Telling me a tune/filter 5.0 makes more power than my blown 4.6 isn't helping the issue any.:D
-
[quote=hightower99;946190]In summary: The Mustang is a brilliant car and with a professional driver behind the wheel it achieves performance equal to a modern M3. However in the hands of Joe Average, it is the BMW M3 that still maintains the advantage. Which is highly respectable for a car approaching its third birthday.[/quote]
If I'm not mistaken it was the Mustang that was faster in the hands of the writer. Personally I found that article to be horrid. My criticism is not directed at either car nor the choice to compare them. Instead it's at the editors who posted numbers but almost nothing in the way of qualitative information about either car. For instance, the feel of the motor is very important in a BMW. It's not just about power but delivery, throttle response etc. The article hardly mentioned any subjective information about the BMW engine. Heck, they didn't say much about the Ford motor either. The writing was formulaic and lacked any sort of insight. Overall it reflects the poor state of auto journalism at MT.
-
[quote=culver;946286]If I'm not mistaken it was the Mustang that was faster in the hands of the writer. Personally I found that article to be horrid. My criticism is not directed at either car nor the choice to compare them. Instead it's at the editors who posted numbers but almost nothing in the way of qualitative information about either car. For instance, the feel of the motor is very important in a BMW. It's not just about power but delivery, throttle response etc. The article hardly mentioned any subjective information about the BMW engine. Heck, they didn't say much about the Ford motor either. The writing was formulaic and lacked any sort of insight. Overall it reflects the poor state of auto journalism at MT.[/quote]
Watching the video does fill in some of the feedback that you're looking for.
EDIT: As a matter of fact, the article was merely amusing. The video was actually informative.
-
[quote=culver;946286]If I'm not mistaken it was the Mustang that was faster in the hands of the writer. Personally I found that article to be horrid. My criticism is not directed at either car nor the choice to compare them. Instead it's at the editors who posted numbers but almost nothing in the way of qualitative information about either car. For instance, the feel of the motor is very important in a BMW. It's not just about power but delivery, throttle response etc. The article hardly mentioned any subjective information about the BMW engine. Heck, they didn't say much about the Ford motor either. The writing was formulaic and lacked any sort of insight. Overall it reflects the poor state of auto journalism at MT.[/quote]
Wish that was a problem at MT only..........:(
-
[quote=ThisBlood147;946288]Watching the video does fill in some of the feedback that you're looking for.[/quote]
definitely
-
so a 67k BMW is only marginally better than a 40k Mustang.....gosh, how expensive are these propellor blades....
-
Notice the difference in fuel economy also. 14/20mpg for the M3 and 17/26mpg for the Mustang.
-
[quote=f6fhellcat13;946173]I think what this shows most of all is that the M3 should cost less. If enough manufacturers can beat the Germans at their own game, maybe they will get off their badge-snobbery horse and price the cars more reasonably.
[/quote]
What incentive do they have to price the cars "more reasonably" when people continue to buy them? It's a free market. BMW offers a car, prices it at what they think people will pay, and if people refuse, they lower the price.
Even if the Mustang were 3 whole seconds faster, Ford still wouldn't have beaten BMW at this game with the Mustang. It's about a lot more than just numbers.
-
[quote=Guibo;946498]What incentive do they have to price the cars "more reasonably" when people continue to buy them? It's a free market. BMW offers a car, prices it at what they think people will pay, and if people refuse, they lower the price.
Even if the Mustang were 3 whole seconds faster, Ford still wouldn't have beaten BMW at this game with the Mustang. It's about a lot more than just numbers.[/quote]
Well said. I think your average BMW buyer doesn't care that there are better or just as good cars out there for half the price. They want to be able to wear the popped up collar pink polo shirts, 100$ sunglasses, tight jeans and say "I drive a BMW" (joking about the first three points, serious about the "i drive a BMW" part).
Also, as far as "picking up chicks" goes. Which as far as I know, is top priority for at least 60% of BMW buyers. The BMW will beat the mustang by at least five to six dinners or shots (depending on what kind of girls the buyer likes to goes with).
Disclaimer: let the record show that i am guilty of the same sillyness/irrationality. The mustang is a much better car than a camaro. But the hardest part of the decision making process for me was getting over by "chevy" bias and getting comfortable with saying (with a straight face), "I drive a mustang". As a lifelong two time Camaro owner, this is like converting from Islam to Southern Fundamentalist inbred-hick-redneck Christian. Luckily for me, cooler heads, thus far have been able to prevail. Of course, beating/nearly beating an M3 helps a lot. So does the BOSS 302.
-
[quote=roosterjuicer;946507]Well said. I think your average BMW buyer doesn't care that there are better or just as good cars out there for half the price. They want to be able to wear the popped up collar pink polo shirts, 100$ sunglasses, tight jeans and say "I drive a BMW" (joking about the first three points, serious about the "i drive a BMW" part).
Also, as far as "picking up chicks" goes. Which as far as I know, is top priority for at least 60% of BMW buyers. The BMW will beat the mustang by at least five to six dinners or shots (depending on what kind of girls the buyer likes to goes with).
Disclaimer: let the record show that i am guilty of the same sillyness/irrationality. The mustang is a much better car than a camaro. But the hardest part of the decision making process for me was getting over by "chevy" bias and getting comfortable with saying (with a straight face), "I drive a mustang". As a lifelong two time Camaro owner, this is like converting from Islam to Southern Fundamentalist inbred-hick-redneck Christian. Luckily for me, cooler heads, thus far have been able to prevail. Of course, beating/nearly beating an M3 helps a lot. So does the BOSS 302.[/quote]
Despite the image and everything BMWs are still brilliant cars to drive. Also, there's a part of the story that the cold numbers can't tell and it's the feel of the thing. I haven't driven any Mustangs, by BMWs have adriving feel that is hard to beat, independent of the speed you drive at.
-
[quote=Ferrer;946511] Also, there's a part of the story that the cold numbers can't tell and it's the feel of the thing. I haven't driven any Mustangs, by BMWs have adriving feel that is hard to beat, independent of the speed you drive at.[/quote]
Thats the difference between the mustang and the camaro. The camaro feels like an appliance with a powerful engine, the mustang feels like a sports car.
-
[quote=roosterjuicer;946512]Thats the difference between the mustang and the camaro. The camaro feels like an appliance with a powerful engine, the mustang feels like a sports car.[/quote]
Having driven neither a Mustang nor a Camaro, i have to say that i like the Camaro a bit more (exterior-wise).
Ford has improved a lot over the last few years, as has the american auto industry. First proof was the ZR1, the second one the CTS-V, and now the new Mustang. I think that's a good thing, mainly because I hope that the european manufacturers will be forced to improve their offerings as well. BMW is a good example because it's the company that disappointed me the most over the last few years. They have once been was those american companies are looking to become, and i really hope that they will wake up from their sleep to make better, enjoyable cars once again.
-
I actually think BMW would be fine pricing the M3 where its priced at if they would just put the v10 out of the m5 in it!!!
-
Well I don't think of this test as being some sort of demonstration of "Hey, the new Mustang is just as good as a BMW", though the comments I've read on the net about this article show that a lot of people seem to think so. Obviously the M3 is a world class luxury sports coupe, which is why Ford chose it as the benchmark for the new Mustang's performance capabilities. There's no attempt being made here to try and paint the Mustang as some sort of "M3 at a discount price". I think this test just goes a long ways towards enlightening the automotive public that the Mustang is no longer just a straight line tank.
-
[quote=ThisBlood147;946522]Well I don't think of this test as being some sort of demonstration of "Hey, the new Mustang is just as good as a BMW", though the comments I've read on the net about this article show that a lot of people seem to think so. Obviously the M3 is a world class luxury sports coupe, which is why Ford chose it as the benchmark for the new Mustang's performance capabilities. There's no attempt being made here to try and paint the Mustang as some sort of "M3 at a discount price". I think this test just goes a long ways towards enlightening the automotive public that the Mustang is no longer just a straight line tank.[/quote]
This. They're still very different cars. If all you cared aout was track times get a Caterham 7 and you'd be faster still for even less money. Obviously a Caterham is in a different market, as are the Mustang and M3, though maybe not so markedly so.
I think something else that people are missing is that as the 3 series gets larger and more comfortable, the M3 has to sufer the same fate. It's not the hardcore little car that originally made the name so famous, it really is a luxury sports coupe. In fact if you look at the numbers at the end of the article, it's bigger than the Mustang with more interior room, too.
Still, Stangs rule, so lets end this whole live axel bashing thing.
-
I haven't thought of buying American for a long time now. I've had Audi's and Infiniti's for about 10yrs now. I'm getting close to another purchase. I thought I was set on the Camaro SS until the new Mustang 5.0 came along. I've driven the Camaro and wasn't really impressed. Going to take a test drive in the Mustang soon. But after all the magazine comparos, I think I'll be leaning towards the Mustang for the sheer sportiness and value....
-
Funny thing is that the Challenger is falling further and further behind. It was inferior to both the Camaro and the Mustang from the beginning, but now... well, we will see. There are still rumors of a new 6.4l Hemi engine for 2011.
-
[quote=Commodore GS/E;946651] There are still rumors of a new 6.4l Hemi engine for 2011.[/quote]
Problem is, for almost the price of a GT500, the SRT-8 gets beat by the camaro and the mustang gt.
they need to quit screwing around and charge 30 something for the challenger srt-8 and then just make a stinkin' SRT-10 with the viper engine priced around the GT500 and the upcoming z-28
-
[quote=roosterjuicer;946658]they need to quit screwing around and charge 30 something for the challenger srt-8 and then just make a stinkin' SRT-10 with the viper engine priced around the GT500 and the upcoming z-28[/quote]
That will do nothing - a high-priced low volume model? The SRT-8 will not cost 30 grand, because it won't make money at that price. The Challenger needs to be something it is not: good.
I predict it will die while the Camaro and Mustang will live on.
-
Given it's based on the 300 platform I imagine it'll continue as long as it can help justify that platform and its engineering. Hopefully some more sportiness/competence will be engineered into future versions of the platform to gain some market share.
-
Well the problem is that it came out basically the size/weight of the Charger, instead of competing with the Mustang. It's a better looking 2 door version of that car. Which isn't really something that will sell. If they make the SRT-10 model it will at least get that back.
-
I have to say, I know I shouldn't and I know it is wrong, but I like the Challenger rather a lot. I know it is a bad car, but it is pretty much irrelevant in this case. It just seems to have so much charisma in a way that the Mustang or the Camaro can't match.
-
[quote=wwgkd;946666]Well the problem is that it came out basically the size/weight of the Charger, instead of competing with the Mustang. It's a better looking 2 door version of that car. Which isn't really something that will sell. If they make the SRT-10 model it will at least get that back.[/quote]
I think arguably the same issues apply to the Camaro though with its Zeta underpinnings. Ford wont be repeating that mistake come 2014 and 50th anniversary by the sounds of it though.