In reply to 4eyes:
In reply to 4eyes:
I love both cars. The iconic factor of the Mustang scores big points, since I fell in love with the 60s wrecks my brother used to drag home to restore. And the new one handles light years better than the outgoing, it's way tighter. But I just love the 3-series bimmers - would give body parts for a 335d. It just seems to fit, and the steering wheel feels right in my hands. Hate the impression it has of the darling of the latte crowd though. Those shiny happy folks should make the bus the new status symbol. We got stuck behind someone, dunno if they were yakking or not... while driving the new Mustang in the canyons in LA... mile after mile of total frustration at 14 mph and constant brake lights. Damn, ride an e-bike!
nderwater wrote: In reply to 4eyes:
I'm sorry - but that front lower air intake looks like ass. It looks like an afterthought. It's completely out of proportion and the lines run the wrong way... like they figured out the car needed more air just seconds before the plans went out to the injection mold guys or maybe there was a picture of a bass laying on top of the plans or something.
Chris_V wrote: Have you driven a '10 or '11 Mustang with the Track Pack on Summit?
No, not yet but I'll be there for three days next weekend. If there is one there I will endeavor to scam a drive.
96DXCivic wrote:Greg Voth wrote:I think it is because American cars look heavier and it is a left over feeling from the Muscle car days. Any way I wouldn't take either. For the money of either, there are a bunch of cars I would rather have including (for no good reason) the Dodge Challenger.joey48442 wrote: In reply to Greg Voth: I'll say it: they both are pigs! h-e-a-v-y JoeyI totally agree. I just think its funny that the american cars get labeled as such while with other cars its usually ignored.
FYI the 1965 Mustang weighed about 2600 lbs - that's heavy for a full size coupe?
The 1965 BMW 3200C thing weighed like 3200 lbs. There never was a large disparity like so many hang their hat on.
z31maniac wrote: The new M3 is heavy, no doubt. But I have to infer that those of you calling "a numb pig" simply haven't driven one.
I called it numb, And I don't mean the steering
cwh wrote: "nice low maintenance woman" Another unicorn.
tis true...
"lower maintenance woman"
is that better?
OYE!!! For all us forum racers, paper racers, etc. http://grand-am.com/schedule/results.cfm?series=k&eid=1500 http://grand-am.com/schedule/results.cfm?series=k&eid=1501 http://grand-am.com/schedule/results.cfm?series=k&eid=1503
Mustang leads 2-1 on the season so theres your comparison.
How is comparing built race cars to their street car counterparts even CLOSE to being a VALID comparison?
z31maniac wrote: How is comparing built race cars to their street car counterparts even CLOSE to being a VALID comparison?
FR500s still have SRAs.
P71 wrote:neon4891 wrote: Awsome and Awsome, but at mustang prices you can get a 135. 3439LB, 300/300 hp/tq. Hmm, the 135 would be better against a 4.6 mustang instead of the new 5.0Why not a 135 vs the new V6 Stang? Also, anybody else notice that the chart is done in Top Gear Magazine style?
The comparison to the new V-6 would much better for Ford. I had stated the outgoing 4.6 as the price point was much closer to that of the 135. If you go with the new V-6 you get very close numbers but at close to 2/3 the price.
Not that I would turn down ANY of the cars we are discussing
z31maniac wrote: The new M3 is heavy, no doubt. But I have to infer that those of you calling "a numb pig" simply haven't driven one.
Ditto on the Mustang. Until you've hustled one around in anger, I don't care what your thoughts are on solid rear axles. The thing flat moves, even in the twisty bits.
JeepinMatt wrote: It might be a very responsive and impressive pig, but it still goes "oink oink" when you beep the horn. Needs weight watchers.
Snorting milk out of nose awesome.
If any of my friends ever get a new M3, I'm totally rigging their horn to oink.
Numbers are great, I like to read them too. I don't see numbers when I'm driving though (aside from the tach and speedo of course!).
Numbers don't get the feeling of the road to you hands though. The new 5.0 Stang is awesomeness, but even though I haven't driven one I can say without much reservation that the seating position won't be right, the pedal placement will be all wrong and the steering feel will be lacking.
The power is great, it always has been. I like going fast too, but no Stang I've ever driven has made me buy one. I still want a Foxbody to get arrested in some day though.
That said, if I HAD to buy a brand new Stang or M3, I'd go with the Stang because I can't afford the M3. Grab one a few years used vs. a Stang at the same price, no question.
I'd go with the 'Stang. It's a hell of a lot cheaper, has similar performance (yes, on paper, I know), and I bet it's 10,000,000x easier to wrench on. The aftermarket will be a lot bigger on the 'Stang too, so the sky's the limit here, no matter what you would use the car for. I'll take mine in either that Grabber Blue color or some sort of dark grey, thanks. 
miatame wrote: even though I haven't driven one I can say without much reservation that the seating position won't be right, the pedal placement will be all wrong and the steering feel will be lacking.
Just curious, but what is the latest Mustang you've driven? The interiors and ergonomics were greatly improved for the '05s, and I've heard a similar improvement was made again for the '10s.
aussiesmg wrote: Actually from the GRM point of view a comparison is easy, (slow chat) "Stig, Stig, Stig, Stig"
Probably should let Per drive. I don't think Stig is old enough to see over the wheel yet.
I could be swayed other way. The first manufacturer to send me one their cars for "evaluation" will win.
Internet forum comparisons are always a bit comical. One car is not better than the other, but you are always free to like one better than the other even if your justifications are skewed.
Seriously BMW/Ford, send me one.
GI_Drewsifer wrote: I've seen this comparison before. It makes a little sense. But I think these are just too different. Although it is awesome that an American car can run with the big boys.
Corvette has been thrashing 'the big boys' for how long now? I'm taking it you're new to cars...
that sounded hostile unintentionally...
Comparisons to the Koni Challenge cars or whatever it is called this year are not really valid. They are so far removed from the street stock versions they used to race that they border on what the World Challenge cars used to be years ago. You can seam weld your car now, and most are built up from bodies in white or are totally stripped and started over. There are also tons of competition adjustments made to equal the field.
Back when we ran the Supra TT, we had to use less than stock boost and smaller than stock wheels and tires, and it's waaayyy beyond that now.
Back to the topic at hand though, the new M3 is just plain sweet to drive, I promise you don't notice the extra weight! But if I had to choose, the Mustang would be in the drive simply because I can't afford the M3 and the upkeep on the Ford will be less.
I got a brief drive in a 500 version and that thing is awesome, but not quite the total overall package the M3 is though. One thing nobody has mentioned is that the M3 has possibly the best brakes I've ever experienced.
I'm currently doing some front end work on an 04 Mustang. The interior is breaking apart already, the clearcoat is peeling, the cats went out on it. I have done some other work on this car over the past few months as well. I happen to own a BMW, it is a joy to work on. Even better built than the Toyota's I am used to. I would have to say you get what you pay for. The Ford is a freakshow of BAD engineering and cost cutting. I would still recommend the BMW even though they look the same on paper. Plus there's no such thing as a 4 door Mustang. I have driven the M3 BTW, if Ford wants to give me a chance to change my mind without trying to sell me one I'm game.
As far as chassis I believe other than shocks, springs and bushings the 2005/2011 are the same. Funny how much press new car is getting maybe it's the extra 100 hp!!!
Sam Stano has stated he believes '11 parts will WOuld bolt on an 05.
Well everyone is comparing "bmwgayness" to just owning a Mustang, so I figured I'd bust out the race versions of the cars. Why not? It's still comparing the same two cars, just in race prep, correct? Yes. Are the Mustangs beating up on the BMWs in race form? Yes.
In reply to nderwater:
http://images.thecarconnection.com/lrg/2010-toyota-camry-hybrid_100182914_l.jpg http://s2.desktopmachine.com/pics/BMW_M3-sedan_988_1024x768.jpg
take the argument back a step. Which would you rather have (have had)...an '86 E30 M3 or an '86 Mustang GT? Both were comparable on paper with the Stang likely having the edge in acceleration.
It's an easy question for most of us
You'll need to log in to post.
