a401cj wrote: 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
Take your argument and apply GRM logic: If you bought a new Mustang GT you'd have the change to buy a E30 M3 and still have cash left over...
The parts that fall off of the BMW are much nicer than the parts that fall off of the Mustang... 
Raze wrote: Take your argument and apply GRM logic: If you bought a new Mustang GT you'd have the change to buy a E30 M3 and still have cash left over...
Or how about this, if you were given the opportunity to have either for free, which would you choose?
I think we know what the answer is.
DirtyBird222 wrote: 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.
But what mods are they allowing the Mustangs? They used to allow the E36 M3s to run euro spec cams and much lighter weight....and a cut down windshield on the CTS-V. They are not stock cars. What are the Mods?
http://www.grand-am.com/assets/Sportscarrulesforweb1.pdf
Yes, yes it is better.
Period.
Okay, maybe not. Maybe they should actually be driven first, somewhat back to back, by the same person.
4eyes wrote: In reply to nderwater:
Yeah, they're both silver sedans.
The M3 coupe looks better, even next to the Mustang:
tuna55 wrote: Maybe they should actually be driven first, somewhat back to back, by the same person.
I'd love to see GRM do a Top Gear style review. One driver, one track, and time all of their new cars and project cars.
Make it happen Per!
Raze wrote:a401cj wrote: 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 usTake your argument and apply GRM logic: If you bought a new Mustang GT you'd have the change to buy a E30 M3 and still have cash left over...
Or you could say screw both of them and buy a E30 (probably not an M3), TR6 and Saab 96 with money left over.
I would much rather the Mustang. I guess I am just that kind of guy.
The M3 may be the most satisfying and versatile street car I've ever driven. It masks it's considerable heft like a magic trick. I was able to throw one around the BMW performance center when we did our M3 comparo a couple of years ago, and it was flat out amazing. Glorious V8 music, ample thrust, extremely nicely detailed interior.....it really is the whole package. I do have a few big problems with the BMW though.
The gas mileage flat out sucks. The mileage thing really chaps my ass as M3s have always been efficient, smart cars to own, not any longer.
The proliferation of electronics is ruining all new BMWs for me. The M3 isn't as obtuse as say a new M5, but you still need to go through a laundry list of settings to get the car to perform well. There is the M// button which puts the car into full-tilt boogie, but there are still way too many electrical doo-dads for me, especially considering BMW's dubious record with electrics in the past.
Oh, yeah.... and it costs $55K and up!
The new Mustang is a kick ass car in base GT form. The more you spend the less it makes sense. I don't see any way I'd spend $50K for a Saleen, Roush, or KR-500, when a Corvette will eat the Stang alive for similar money. That said, a sub $30K Mustang GT with the track pack is an worldbeating car for the $$$. Sure it is bigger than it needs to be, the interior (although improved) is still cheap, and it has (IMHO) goofy details (sequential lights), but the Mustang is a great, affordable car. It also won't be disposable in 30 years when the BMW's computers fry.
I'd take the Ford
I'm thumbing my nose at both of them. Do not want. At all.
While we're on the subject of comparing styling...
Dont get me wrong, i love my late 80s early 90s stuff.. But i would also love to have either the new GT or the new M3. Do want.
Hurts, man. 
The Escort is ugly. The Celica is one of the sexiest cars ever made.
But styling isn't why i don't want either of these. They're pigs. The M3 is an appliance. The Mustang, meh. I'll take a foxbody first. I'm an old fart. I like my cars to be cars. I like to work to drive them. I don't like a/c. I hate leather. I'm happy without power steering.
96DXCivic wrote:Raze wrote:Or you could say screw both of them and buy a E30 (probably not an M3), TR6 and Saab 96 with money left over.a401cj wrote: 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 usTake your argument and apply GRM logic: If you bought a new Mustang GT you'd have the change to buy a E30 M3 and still have cash left over...
Finally, someone who gets it 
93celicaGT2 wrote: But styling isn't why i don't want either of these. They're pigs. The M3 is an appliance. The Mustang, meh. I'll take a foxbody first. I'm an old fart. I like my cars to be cars. I like to work to drive them. I don't like a/c. I hate leather. I'm happy without power steering.
My thoughts exactly.
How do the safety ratings compare?
mr2peak wrote: How do the safety ratings compare?
Are you from MotorTrend?
What Joe said.
Joe Gearin wrote: The M3 may be the most satisfying and versatile street car I've ever driven. It masks it's considerable heft like a magic trick. I was able to throw one around the BMW performance center when we did our M3 comparo a couple of years ago, and it was flat out amazing. Glorious V8 music, ample thrust, extremely nicely detailed interior.....it really is the whole package. I do have a few big problems with the BMW though. The gas mileage flat out sucks. The mileage thing really chaps my ass as M3s have always been efficient, smart cars to own, not any longer. The proliferation of electronics is ruining all new BMWs for me. The M3 isn't as obtuse as say a new M5, but you still need to go through a laundry list of settings to get the car to perform well. There is the M// button which puts the car into full-tilt boogie, but there are still way too many electrical doo-dads for me, especially considering BMW's dubious record with electrics in the past. Oh, yeah.... and it costs $55K and up! The new Mustang is a kick ass car in base GT form. The more you spend the less it makes sense. I don't see any way I'd spend $50K for a Saleen, Roush, or KR-500, when a Corvette will eat the Stang alive for similar money. That said, a sub $30K Mustang GT with the track pack is an worldbeating car for the $$$. Sure it is bigger than it needs to be, the interior (although improved) is still cheap, and it has (IMHO) goofy details (sequential lights), but the Mustang is a great, affordable car. It also won't be disposable in 30 years when the BMW's computers fry. I'd take the Ford
Thank you for a post that actually bring something resembling tech!
Raze wrote:mr2peak wrote: How do the safety ratings compare?Are you from MotorTrend?
ahahahahahahah now that was funny!
Just saying maybe the M3 will keep you alive longer...?
mr2peak wrote: Just saying maybe the M3 will keep you alive longer...?
Or, you know, driving in such a manner as to avoid the accident in the first place.
2010 Mustang:
NHSTA - 5 (out of 5) stars across the board
IIHS - Good (Good being best) across the board
2010 M3: Untested but based on 3 series results:
NHSTA - 4 (out of 5) stars on frontal driver and passenger rating, 5 stars for the rest
IIHA - Good (Good being best) across the board
I'm guessing they're comprable, I wouldn't say the M3 is going to keep you alive any longer...
a401cj wrote: 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
Well, lets keep hitting the way back button. 1965 GT350 or BMW 1600(or any '65 BMW for that matter)? It's an easy question for most of us.
I've driven both. The BMW is a stellar performer. However, much has been lost in the transformation from homologation street racer to overwhelming techno/gizmo/entertainment center conveyance. No relation whatsoever to one of my all time favorites-the E30 M3
The new Mustang is so improved(inside and out) from what was offered only a few years ago, that it's in another performance zip code. To those that don't think it will go around a corner, prepare to lose your lunch money. Additionally, I think the Mustang will be the more reliable of the two over time.
You'll need to log in to post.
