Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolfinwolfsclothing
How about the Ring, where the C63, again despite a worse power to weight was 4 seconds faster than the M3. Or Hockenheim where it was nearly a full second faster on not even 1:15 lap.
I am willing to bet you the C63 traps 121 and the C63S 122-123. That is in either car minimally 4 mph faster than the M4's 117.x. Either way, it will be a lot faster in a straight, and if the weight is where theyre saying, the M4s going to lose on the track too. The M3/4 are very much a handful at the limit...feels like a bigger 1M, always wanted to oversteer and not hold a line or stay planted. Also, read Randy Pobst's comments on best driver's car. Said the brakes took too much effort, the car was hesitant to turn in and didnt like to turn, and the power felt lazy near redline. And not to mention the steering is pretty numb...not that the e92 m3 had great steering feel either.
As for the C63 Black, it weighs about 4100 lbs and had 510 hp. The M4 weighs under 3600 lbs and has 484 hp yet the despite a huge advantage in power to weight, the C63 Black embarassed it on VIR and embarasses it on any track. The reason it was so expensive was because they only made 1000 of them. Mind you this, it was cheaper than the M3 GTS which it outperformed in spades. Even not taking the newly paved advantage, the M4 was light years off the pace of the C63 Black.
In addition, the M3/4 sound terrible...which is an understatement. The V8 of the Merc is going to rumble and sound great, even the 45 AMG's with AMG perf exhaust sound good for a 4 cylinder. Furthermore, the Merc is going to have so much more power potential. It wont be nearly as tapped out in terms of power as the M4 is given its still got a 4 liter. We've seen the M4s even with dp, tune, exhaust etc have not yielded much better results given they are making nearly 600 whp and can only trap 124 or so IIRC.
|
you're all over the place here
-race tires vs street tires. it makes a difference, a big one
-ring, the c63amg black is 6 seconds faster than the m4 at 7:46 and 15 seconds faster than the c63 lci. IE bigger difference between the m4 and c63 lci than between the m4 and c63 black
-laguna seca, .79 second difference between the m4 time and c63 black time, both driven by randy pobst
-black series .3 seconds faster than m4 at autocar dry testing track
-not one dct m3 has been magazine tested at 117mph, they have all been 118+
-how do you expect a slightly heavier (at best) c63 with only 50-70 more hp to trap 4-6 mph faster than an m4?
-randy pobst had very little negative things to say about the m4, I read the article too
-the c63 black is NOT more expensive because there are less made, that's preposterous. the audi ttrs was rare too, and it didn't cost that much. nor did the rs4 which is very rare. the c63 black costs more because it has a ton of extra shit on it which the c63 doesn't
Anyway, I have nothing else to say to you. You haven't supported any of your statements with facts at all, and the c63 LCI doesn't compete with the m4, and the C63 black is not that much quicker, and is on track tires and has aero parts.
The rest of your "sound" complaints and the rest are personal preference and have nothing to do with evaluating the performance of these cars.
Link to m4 track times and c63 black track times
http://fastestlaps.com/cars/merceds_...s_package.html
http://fastestlaps.com/cars/bmw_m4.html