If you think Lexus make performance cars you're even further off the mark than you appear.

You seem to take people's comments very personally. As per the thread title the discussion here relates to the comparison between the M3 and R34. For your benefit I amend my earlier comment thus;

...if one knows how to drive, one doesn't need flexible power.

For the purpose of clarity, I emphasise that the above comment is not an aspersion on your driving skills, nor is it an attemt to suggest that you're lacking in, or in need of, anything.

Oh, and since you're feeling all sensative and all, what's wrong with a Corsa? I'm sure many Corsa boys would be a little upset at your little (don't take it personally) comment about their beloved cars. :)

umm i'm afraid lexus do make performance cars...

lexus es300 vertex edition (twin turbo)
lexus soarer 2.5gt (twin turbo)

both will mince an M3

Neither will 'mince' an M3.

Don't know anything about the es300, but I have driven a the Soarer. More of a grand tourer than what I'd call a performance car. However, I stand corrected.

WHAT UTTER DRIBBLE I READ HERE!!!!
Cossy you are a fully fledged ****.
You remind me of my brother who happens to be running an E46 now.
I have had to drive all the way into London with him today and listen to him telling me how its the best car on the road blar blar blar.
I had one too for 8 months.
Track dayed it in the wet I might add.
A great car but donr even try and start to compare it to an R34 which I also have ragged to within an inch of its life.
My mate has a genuine 450 and will wank all over most cars on the road.
In standard spec is about the only time the bimmer will even get close.
Forget it.

Lexus engines are Toyota engines,and Toyota make fast cars(all the fastest are turbo powered).

Cosworth has got a very good point IMO.
A NA engine requires very high tuning/technology to produce 1bhp per 10cc,where as compressing the air into any engine can give more than 1bhp/10cc.
The M3 (along with the s2000) are the highest output N/A engines available from the factory (AFAIK).

I personaly find Turbo cars a little annoying at times,and although I dont recall trying 30 mph in 5th,there are times that the turbo lag has put me in a dangerous position.
Once at a give way I missjudged the speed of an oncoming
car as I turned left, I had to double cluth to get going by which time I had a very angry looking man in my rearview.A few seconds later and he was a dot.
This is just the sort of thing that you wouldnt get in a highly tuned high displacement NA engine,ok fine you might not leave people behind as quickly,but you can get out of situations quicker when the power is instant and your not waiting 0.5 secs for it to get a move on.

In every day driving a turbo car is a propper pain in the back side.
In a hurry to get to work?Jump in and warmn up the engine first,ok in a hurry,then just for 20 seconds and drive on little boost,Ok warm now so fast and furious down the A road and got there.Right just another minute or so to let it idle down.Wish you could just jump in and drive?

Powerfull non turbo cars like the M3 are a more practical choice for a much wider variety of people,
especially for numpties who know nothing about tuning but know how to make £££s .People like this dont want to be stuck under the bonnet every so often fiddling with things.They would rather go to a reputable company and buy a sports car that comes with everything done ready to drive like a normal car but with the power to slay majority of boy racer cars who are gonna keep trying it .Also turbo cars require more frequent oil changes(top quality oil is extremely important),and in my experience fuel consumption is much higher on Turbos not to mention wear and tear on clutches,brakes,prop/cvs etc.

That said,I would still go for a Skyline because its more important to be able to stay on the road,than drifting sideways with a big grin as you get closer to the tree (or as your nsr wheel comes towards the round about).
I know all 'Drivers cars are meant to behave in the old fashioned way,but at the end of the day the skyline just soaks everything else in pure 'Datsun Urine'.

Alot of people are putting the M3 down,but to me its just jealousy.
It reminds me of the sort of thing I used to do in junior school when I would make fun out of a girl saying she was ugly and smells ,when inside I was crazy about her.

Grow up guys.
If you dont like the M3 because of image then fine ,but that is all that can be said to put it down.
Cosworth ,why dont you just admit that the skyline is a better performance car than the M3 ,even if difference is marginall.

Image DR seems to have the right idea though.

Just my tuppence

Hhahaha - I think I might like you coz you're REALLY FUNNY.

Firstly, your pub talk is so far off the scale in terms of a real world performance discussion, it simply becomes a game of Top Trumps. You may be adept at understanding intermediary engine dynamics, but I don't drive my car on an engine dyno so frankly, I don't think anyone other than you gives a crap about the 0-20 time in a car in 6th gear.

Have you driven, let alone owned, both an M3 and an R34 GTR? And I don't mean been a 'passenger' in one? If you have (which I doubt, hence my "my mate with a 1000BHP Skyline" pub talk reference) then you're gonna have to respect the fact that there may be others out there with a much more experienced view. Theory is one thing, but seat-of-the-pants feel is something much more valuable - a reason why magazines like Evo excel in this world!

So I'll continue to 'dream' on about my Skylines. I'm saving up so one day I hope to own one ;)

As for 'condecending' you, well I'm sorry you can call it a form of defence as you started out on this thread on pretty much the worst foot imaginable. I suppose we give as good as we get ;) As for turbochargers in a car being responsible for the amount of credibility I generate, well I've got a GT3 arriving any day now and, well, I don't suppose you can get any less turbocharged a car - am I now credible? :D

So I'll finish this by giving you my thoughts on both cars - from an experienced point of view.

M3
Incredibly well built
Fantastic interior and ergonomics
Feel good factor
Lovely engine - full of sprite and energy but can feel a little out of breath
Great looks, oh and that CSL!!!
Classic drive layout, perfect car to learn proper driving in
Poor rep.
Sounds awful
Cheap(er) running costs
Super SatNav/TV

GTR
Incredible kudos factor and street cred
Immense performance potential - 450BHP easily attainable
Lovely handling with a progressive, oversteery nature
Looks like a mean sumbiatch
Immense after market catalogue
Zero aftersales and warranty
Massive Autobahn eating performance
One of best sounding cars on planet
Excellent 6 speed gearbox
Invaluable Multi Function Display
Track/Drag/Street friendly

In short, don't buy one without driving the other. But be aware of this. A standard R34 hasn't even started its life yet. But an M3 is maxed out already in terms of potential. If you're a tuner, go for the GTR, but if you like out of the box cars, M3 may be for you. I think both are delicious and are superb examples of how manufacturers can just sometimes get it so bloody right.

Love the M3 and love the GTR. If I was buying again? The answer you'll find here. ;)

Cem

I don't have to admit something that isn't true. There is nothing about the R34 in standard form that the M3 can't do. The M3 does it better, power & torque at any gear, responsive to the throttle, and the power delivery is linear. Again...what is there to admit??

Some of you turbohead hooligans (ARRON, DavidBrown, SlowBoy) keep up your "thrash it in every gear" mentality, I'd stick to driving my cars responsibly on the road.

Again, get inside your Skyline (if you have one), try accelerating in 4th or 5th at 30 MPH. If you think my information is "pub talk", then go and do that simple thing next time you drive your r1ce rocket. All that power you see on the dyno won't yet exist, not for a long time after you apply the throttle.

Where's the flexibility?

This is why I prefer a performance na car. The flexibility in whatever gear I am in. You have no right to tell me I should be shifting down to 1st just to overtake a Mondeo up some mild hill.

"Feel" and being actually quick in real time are two different things. Quit playing "oh you need to *drive* my 500 HP HKS special, otherwise you know nothing about turbocharged cars." as some kind of replacement for the fundamentals and facts.

Untill YOUR turbocharged Skyline can build speed quickly upon applying throttle at a variety of gears and hill gradients, then I'll shut the hell up, but untill then (probably never), I'll stick to my experience and experiences of others who design and build performance cars of various types.

Thanks.

:rolleyes:

You should stop hanging around the Saaafend cruizes, fanboy. Go learn how to type/write/drive before you waffle anymore garbage.

I disagree with that, and I aint even owned a turbo of any sort yet. I dont disagree with the turbo lag statement, but I disagree with the highly tuned NA statement about them having instant power.

Vtecs, S2000, Civic Type R etc all have engines with power in the upper bands. My current steed is very similar, and with these type of engines you can still get bogged down at low revs when in 4th or 5th. Many a time in mine I have gone for a reaction move in a higher gear and had no power until 3500 rpm. I always have to change down for quick acceleration (i mean quick, not acceptable acceleration), this is the same in any high revving 16v 2 litre modern engine - hondas, toyotas etc.

Cossie - you need to see Cem's carography ;)

Cosworth
If all you are trying to say is that a factory spec skyline is not as flexible throughout the rev range as the M3 then point taken,but if you drive a turbo car and you have become acustommed to the way the engine behaves then there is no problem.This is not about what you should prefer to drive,everyone drives what they want to for whatever reason.

A few people have tried to point out that the immense torque after spool up,more than makes up for any loss from turbo lag.
If dropping gears is too much hassle then why drive a 6 speed man ?

An M3 can be left the way it is and its a good car.
A skline however,is destined to be tuned.Why else would it be so easy to get an instant 150 BHP increase (or what ever the exact amount is)?

I had a little go with a couple of M3s (old and new shape) in my Sti 5 decat+induction,and I realised that the M3 is no joke although I was able to get ahead at certain speeds.

Tried something similar against an R32 skyline and I felt like crying.
There is a chap round my area who has a very nice R34 with with a flaming popping exhaust (dont know the BHP),and one day whilst in my mates supra TT (450 bhp)we had a little cruise.Once again came back soaking in 'Datsun urine'.

Im not sure if the 280 ps rating of the s gtr is just bull or if its detuned coz of some law in Japan,but it seems to be common knowledge that the skyline is supposed to be 350bhp +.

Sorry cosworth but you will have to agree with some of that.Perhaps you havent had a propper chance against a skyline,if you have then Im sure you will know what it feels like to get pissed on by a Daksun.

This discussion can carry on forever if its about where/how the power should come in but you are going to have to admit that The skyline is the ultimate.

Errrm, ever regretted starting a post???

After all this I'm still none the wiser although the general consensus seems to be Skyline.

DREAMWEAVER
Vtecs, S2000, Civic Type R etc all have engines with power in the upper bands. My current steed is very similar, and with these type of engines you can still get bogged down at low revs when in 4th or 5th. Many a time in mine I have gone for a reaction move in a higher gear and had no power until 3500 rpm.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

I know what youre saying but the point I am making is to do with a 3.2 engine with lots more torque than the honda engines,and this is about moving off from standstill.A turbo car will always fall behind a NA car for the first part (how far is dependant on what cars) untill the compression builds and then the turbo car will catch up and 'unzip' as it passes.

I have tried it off the lights with an E46 M3 and even though I launched my scooby I still fell behind .

I have had an S2000 ,and its not very good below 3500 and then it gets going
and then gives you a final surge after 7k up to the red.It almost feels like a turbo car,so what you have described is exactly what I am talking about except the change from little power to lots of power is more dramatic in a turbo.

Oh no
so sorry forgot what this was all supposed to be about.

Best thing is go and test drive both.

You have more than enough info (too much for your own good probably),
so the rest is up to you.

You could ask a loved one to help you with the choice,then again how about tossing a coin?

Cosworth, sorry but you are totally wrong, the F40 is a 2.9 V8 not a 3.5.

Hi Mate!

Not getting dragged down to your level, but to reitterate:

1) Your argument for flexibility is totally irrelevant as it focuses on a scenario we're seldom likely to encounter. Why full throttle acceleration at 30MPH in 5th gear is so relevant to you in a performance car I do not know. I think you need a big torque auto box - get yourself an RS6 :)

2) You can say what you like. Unless you've experienced something first hand you have no right to be subjective about it. End of.

Cem

In my opinion, stock to stock, the M3 E36 and E46 beats the Skyline in every possible category. The M3 is a whole package, and is usable off the peg with quality to boot.

I enjoy using all the revs at WOT for the best performance, but I also want power available at the top cruising gears at lower engine speeds when I needed it for the road. Don't include me in to the "we seldom" elite. I often have to do 30 - 35 MPH on a road, when the opportunity arises to build speed, all I need to do is apply more gas and the car complies quickly. Hill climbing?? Not a problem with a flexible natural aspirated car.

The M3 revs to nearly 8000 RPM, I love the sound of the straight six at WOT. I can enjoy all of its performance by shifting down, or take advantage of it's low end power reserves without shifting down for non-competitive overtaking. The M3 offers that flexibility, the Skyline sadly doesn't. Period. So QUIT telling me to change my preference.


Again, you do not have any right to dictate how I want my power delivery and performance from a road car. I don't need an RS6, or E55 AMG or a damned Corvette for low RPM power. Something like an M3 is enough to do that.

It just proves my point of your 1 car, 1 engine, ignorance.

Dude, just get whatever car suits your own needs. Not mine, not Mr Gran Turismo over there, and not Blow Dog and his Southend massive. All I stated is the vastly different power deliveries of the two cars.

You, sir, are a very rude man.
Enjoy your solitude.

Cem

:rolleyes:
Clearly anotherone who knows far more about these cars than anyone else.
M3 is a great car but no comparison here I`m afraid.
been there done that and got the t-shirt.
Hi Cem how`s it going??
Had a good night Thursday mate.
Ragged Murketts new Gallardo..
Very nice.
Pete has purchased the allaboard from the fat boy and he only lives across the road from me.
I ragged that again on Thursday night 165 in 5th!!!
it also has a speed limiter as it seemed to hit one at 180 on the clock the other day???
That was 6000 in top with 2000 to go!!!
Skyline would still kick its arse tho I`m afraid but hey its a Lambo so i`ll leave it there and Steve`s Noble....well what can I say!!!!
You got your Porka yet?

Hey Arron,

You know, if it wasn't for the 12 month waiting list, I'd seriously consider the Gallardo - it's looking sweeter everytime I think about it. GT3 ain't arrived yet - grrr...

Take care

Cem

125000 tho mate.
You`ll have to sell a little more London dust!!!!;)

You 100% on that? Got a friend who's just stuck one into a westie and it was waaaaay lighter than that. Like I said, about 100kg.


You are Mycroft aren't you? If you're not, then I suggest you either

a) get out a little more

or

b) go and get laid.

Theres a lot of pent up self justification in you :p

little food for thought.

EVO magazine October 2003

M3 CSL vs Impreza Spec C

M3 CSL quoted as having 255bhp/ton
Impreza Spec C has 247bhp/ton

6th gear (M3/Impreza)

20-40: -/11.1
30-50: -/8.8
40-60: 7.8/8.8
50-70: 8.1/5.1
60-80: 7.8/4.6
70-90: 7.6/4.7
80-100: 7.8/4.8

Hmm, so the Impreza seems more flexible and quicker than the M3 in that test

No, that's a completely invalid conclusion unless you quote the overall gearing each car has in 6th gear and, almost as importantly, the maximum speed in each gear. The CSL's 6th gear is a long motorway cruising gear. Is that true for the Impreza's???

I have a suspicion it might be more valid to compare 5th gear in the CSL and 6th gear in the Impreza but I'm willing to be proven wrong as I don't have the Impreza's transmission ratios to hand.

Ian.

Ian note "so the Impreza seems more flexible and quicker than the M3 in that test"

I looked through all the ratios and found that there are no comparable ratios in the 2 vehicles.

Your selective quote also misses the point I make about gearing being part of the package.

Cosworth427's point is that the M3 offers a more flexible driving experience and challenges people to drive from 30mph in top gear. In ths example, the turbocharged vehicle is quicker between any increment. Significantly, the Impreza is quicker in 6th than the M3 CSL is in 5th between all increments from 50mph up (by over half a second between 50-70) despite the Impreza's 6th being the "longer" gear. From the figures I have (R33 GT-R) Skyline gearing is closer to Spec C gearing than it is to M3 gearing.

Clearly, on road flexibility is more than just power delivery of the engine ;)

I don' think this thread would have become quite so interesting had Cosworth simply stated that the M3 is more responsive in everyday driving conditions and the GT-R more laggy, but his use of words like "gutless" are an extreme exaggeration.

It's down to personal preference at the end of the day, although my (very) laggy Impreza has never struggled to climb a hill, even in 5th at low speeds. None that I've tried, anyway. ;)

Your selective quote also misses the point I make about gearing being part of the package.

Sorry, that was definitely not intended and just a symptom of me not getting to bed until 4am :(

Can you post or PM me the gear ratios out of interest?

Cheers,

Ian.

Hi Ian,

I beleive these are the ratios for the current STi and Spec C's:

1 3.636
2 2.375
3 1.761
4 1.346
5 1.062
6 0.842
Final Drive: 3.900


Cheers ;)

And apologies not nessecary, I don't take it seriously anyway, I just enjoy a bit of "bench racing" :D

Thanks for that ...

Not sure what size wheels the Scooby has but with P1 WR 225/35/18s the overall gearing of the Scooby's 5th gear and CSL's 4th gear are identical at 17.5mph/1000rpm.

No other obvious matches in any other gears with those size wheels on the Scoob.

Also agree with the other point you made that your post was more specifically targetted at previous sweeping generalisations made elsewhere in the thread.

Ian.

Spec C times quoted with 225/45x17's:

M3 (4th Gear)/Impreza (5th gear)

20-40: 6.6/7.0
30-50: 4.8/5.2
40-60: 4.5/3.8
50-70: 4.2/3.3
60-80: 4.1/3.3
70-90: 4.0/3.4
80-100: 4.2/3.7
90-110: 4.7/4.2
100-120: 5.2/5.2
110-130: 5.8/6.6

Hmm, interesting. So that makes 30-70:

M3 (4th) / Impreza (5th)

9.0/8.3

on apparently identical gearing. Big question is: will the turbocharged car waste that 0.7 secs advantage getting on boost? I don't think it will waste all of it.

And clearly the M3 is more tractable between 20-40mph, but when are you ever in 5th in an Impreza at that speed? I wouldn't do that in my very short geared JDM WRX.