[BimmerMat135]

Originally Posted by Chipped B6

Sorry to break it to you buddy.. but besides the M2 prestige. The GT350 will run CIRCLES around an M2.

GT350's run high 11's. Most trap 118-119mph.

The only thing the M2 does better is be smaller, better fit and finish and that's about it. You seem to bring up the 1M as if it's a comparison model to the GT350? It's not.

The GT350 will be the rarer vehicle. With better sound. Subjectively better looks IMO. It will be faster. Brake harder. Hold more speed in any corner thanks to 295/305 Super Sport tires. It will faster in a straight line. It will have a 8200+ RPM V8. 526hp vs 365hp. More torque (although not as immediate).

I mean I could go on all day. There is a reason there's a 54 page M4 vs GT350 thread on the M4 forums.. because it's faster than the M4. Which is faster by elimination than the M2.

http://www.caranddriver.com/comparis...e-specs-page-4

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...ank-v-8-page-2 Since when the GT350 is faster? And for the record the GT350R times are irrelevant as the real competition for this car would be the M4 GTS. I call BS on the 11's high unless the car has drag radial and even there a 117mph trap speed is far from a 11's time in a manual rwd car.

I bring the 1M in the comparaison to estimate the speed of the M2 as it should be a bit better than the 1M across the board and for the record the 1M was doing 4.4 on the 0-60 and 12.8 in the 1/4 0.97g in the skipad dangerously close to the Super, magnificient and wonderful GT350 which is much more modern. So now imagine what the M2 will do. The M2 will have much lower running cost better DD capability, more prestige, will be much more pratical and will be quicker for daily drive.

I agree that an high reving V8 sound better but i don't see much advantage appart from that. The skinier tires of the M2 will have 400lbs less to deal with so I don't think that the handling will be worst in the M2.

As the M2 is loaded for 61000cdn$ I went and built a Loaded GT350 for 72500$ for a FORD!!! That is over 13000$ with taxes and an extra 115$ luxury taxe. Paying that much for a mustang is like buying a 1000000$ home in Detroit.

Conclusion the M2 will be a much better DD.

[auf Deutsch]

Originally Posted by M3 Adjuster

If you would like a direct comparison, perhaps consider the BMW 1M and the Laguna SECA edition Boss 302.

Both were produced in figures of around 750 for 2011 and the mustang also was made in other years also.

Which one is still relevant today ?
Which is worth more today ?

And yes. I am sure the 302 is still "
Faster" today , but I don't hang out at dragstrips

You're in the wrong forum if trap speed is all you think of. I've never been concerned about my 1M being slower than an E9x. I'm concerned that it's smaller, more nimble, and weighs 300 lbs less and a helluva lot more fun to drive !

The E30 M3 is " slow as molasses " compared to the E36 M3, but only one of those two is truly magic in the corners. The E36 M3 is impressive but no way is it as nimble or as fun as the E30M3.

A true M2 buyer admires the M4 but doesn't want a vehicle the size of an E28 5 series.

In the same fashion, while the mustang may be faster than an M4, I don't want a vehicle as big as an M4 . So Who cares if it's faster ?!

In all fairness, the M4 tested is DCT. Regardless, you're right. 6MT M4's and 350's are low 12s cars trapping high hundred-teens, pulling a g on the skidpad. Honestly, when the 526HP figure was announced, I thought the 350 would be an easy 11s, 120+ car. Then the weight was announced and I understood why it isn't.

Edit: sorry, I meant to quote BimmerMat135

[rcoccultwar]

Having a hard time adjusting to the new Mustang vs. BMW M comparison.

Always been used to assuming $40,000 Mustang V8's are identical performance to $60,000 V8 M3's.

I suspect Car and Driver bogged their testers a bit, maybe were accelerating on a slight incline or weren't broken in yet.

The neighborhood Ford sales guy informed me today, they finally have a showroom GT350 now! The all new Chevy Camaro dealer hasn't called me yet so swing by there tomorrow as well.

[baege]

Originally Posted by rcowboy

Having a hard time adjusting to the new Mustang vs. BMW M comparison.

Always been used to assuming $40,000 Mustang V8's are identical performance to $60,000 V8 M3's.

I suspect Car and Driver bogged their testers a bit, maybe were accelerating on a slight incline or weren't broken in yet.

The neighborhood Ford sales guy informed me today, they finally have a showroom GT350 now! The all new Chevy Camaro dealer hasn't called me yet so swing by there tomorrow as well.

are you in the gta, which ford dealer? I would be interested in seeing the gt350 and sitting in it to see if it really is too big for my britches...

[rcoccultwar]

Originally Posted by baege

are you in the gta, which ford dealer? I would be interested in seeing the gt350 and sitting in it to see if it really is too big for my britches...

Actually, the gva SA told me it is in the showroom today. Didn't want to even touch it because told the dealer, I'm a bit territorial. Told him I'd be pissed if some guy off the street sat in my brand new ordered car.

It took him a moment to figure it out, but told him the dealership owner is a cheap ass. "If I were the owner, I'd have a showroom one".

At least he had a sense of humor.

[zenmaster]

What was the Nurburgring lap time of the GT350 (not the GT350R)?

[MTHRAR]

Originally Posted by zenmaster

What was the Nurburgring lap time of the GT350 (not the GT350R)?

As far as I know, the times have never been "officially" released. I sometimes venture over to mustang6g forums just to get some info on the GT350 because I was cross shopping at one point. I really like the S550 chassis, however, I find it too big for my tastes. Although, I wouldn't mind a GT in a few years if I can get it on the cheap ($15K) just to cruise around in on the highway.

[zenmaster]

Originally Posted by MTHRAR

As far as I know, the times have never been "officially" released.

Wouldn't that be like BMW withholding Ring times for the M3 and only publishing those for the M3 CSL?

[oolas3]

Based on this review, there is plenty of room for the M2 to be the better car:

http://www.caranddriver.com/comparis...omparison-test

[GhostyM]

Originally Posted by m3m3mr

Based on this review, there is plenty of room for the M2 to be the better car:

http://www.caranddriver.com/comparis...omparison-test

The GT350 won that magazine review.

LOL.

[oolas3]

Originally Posted by Chipped B6

The GT350 won that magazine review.

LOL.

Yes but because of the price factor. It will not have that price advantage over a M2.

[GhostyM]

Originally Posted by m3m3mr

Yes but because of the price factor. It will not have that price advantage over a M2.

You do realize a base GT350 is cheaper than even a M2?

[oolas3]

Originally Posted by Chipped B6

You do realize a base GT350 is cheaper than even a M2?

Not by 15k difference like the Corvette in this review. And if you want options like the track package, the gt350 becomes more expensive than the M2. C&D gave the gt350 20 points for price and the Corvette got 15 points for price. The gt350 only won by 2 points. The gt350 was slower in both a straight line and on the track.

[GhostyM]

Originally Posted by m3m3mr

Not by 15k difference like the Corvette in this review. And if you want options like the track package, the gt350 becomes more expensive than the M2. C&D gave the gt350 20 points for price and the Corvette got 15 points for price. The gt350 only won by 2 points. The gt350 was slower in both a straight line and on the track.

You do know the GT350 will destroy a M2 around a track and in a straight line? the Z51 is a fast car.

[oolas3]

Originally Posted by Chipped B6

You do know the GT350 will destroy a M2 around a track and in a straight line? the Z51 is a fast car.

Not a DCT M2 in a straight line. BMW is publishing M2 as 4.1 to 60 and they tend to be on the conservative side. I'm surprised how slow the gt350 is for 526hp. 4.3 to 60 and 12.5 in the 1/4 just isn't that fast these days. I'm also not sold that the base without the track package will be that great. The trick shocks in the ford track package as well as the firmer springs will make a big difference.

[GhostyM]

Originally Posted by m3m3mr

Not a DCT M2 in a straight line. BMW is publishing M2 as 4.1 to 60 and they tend to be on the conservative side. I'm surprised how slow the gt350 is for 526hp. 4.3 to 60 and 12.5 in the 1/4 just isn't that fast these days. I'm also not sold that the base without the track package will be that great. The trick shocks in the ford track package as well as the firmer springs will make a big difference.

You literally quote magazines.

Many stock GT350's are running high 11's at 118-119mph. Tuned 1M's with like 420hp would do like 114 or 115 trap speeds. You are talking about an M2 with 365hp. Not even WHP. But to the crank.

Secondly, I promise you are incorrect in your assumptions that a M2 is faster.. DCT or not. It's called power to weight ratio. It's no faster than a M235i with a stage 1 burger tune.

Also, the trick shocks you are talking about, even without them ride firm with not a lot of body sway. But that's besides the point.

This is a 135i (lighter than M235i) with a 500whp (aka 615hp) N54/N55 running the same time as a STOCK GT350.

So please get your facts straight before you compare two cars (one of which is in a COMPLETELY different performance category) albeit for the same price.

[oolas3]

Originally Posted by Chipped B6

You literally quote magazines.

Many stock GT350's are running high 11's at 118-119mph. Tuned 1M's with like 420hp would do like 114 or 115 trap speeds.

Secondly, I promise you are incorrect in your assumptions that a M2 is faster.. DCT or not. It's called power to weight ratio. It's no faster than a M235i with a stage 1 burger tune.

Also, the trick shocks you are talking about, even without them ride firm with not a lot of body sway. But that's besides the point.

Not on stock street tires or street gas is it 11s. No independent review will come up with that number. None. Good try. I trust C&D and other major reviewers' numbers more than made up internet theories and unverified you tube videos. The numbers may not be everything but they don't lie either.

[GhostyM]

Originally Posted by m3m3mr

Not on stock tires is it 11s. No independent review will come up with that number. Good try. I trust C&D and other major reviewers' numbers more than made up internet theories. The numbers may not be everything but they don't lie either.

So wait, a 135i with 500whp on Drag radials.. vs a stock GT350 on drag radials.. means one has an advantage in tires?

LOL.

Sorry to burst your bubble, but the M2 is NOT fast stock.

It's probably dead even with a slightly modded E92 M3.

Also to add, you literally see video proof of the 11's being ran by otherwise stock GT350's.. yet dismiss it for one magazines review who also destroyed their brakes (as seen in their review of the car's braking performance).

[oolas3]

Originally Posted by Chipped B6

So wait, a 135i with 500whp on Drag radials.. vs a stock GT350 on drag radials.. means one has an advantage in tires?

LOL.

Sorry to burst your bubble, but the M2 is NOT fast stock.

It's probably dead even with a slightly modded E92 M3.

Also to add, you literally see video proof of the 11's being ran by otherwise stock GT350's.. yet dismiss it for one magazines review who also destroyed their brakes (as seen in their review of the car's braking performance).

You can see whether the car has stock tires, a tune, intake, street gas, pulleys by a video? Don't believe everything you see or read on you tube. This must be a great conspiracy with R&T too because they could only get 12.3 with cup tires on the R. I guess all these respected reviewers are lying.

[GhostyM]

Originally Posted by m3m3mr

You can see whether the car has stock tires, a tune, intake, street gas, pulleys by a video? Don't believe everything you see or read on you tube. This must be a great conspiracy with R&T too because they could only get 12.3 with cup tires on the R. I guess all these respected reviewers are lying.

Do you not understand what trap speeds are?
Seriously?

I could run a 15.0 at 140mph.. and destroy anything that traps less than 140mph.

Everyone knows that GT350's are geared towards a track, not straight line performance. It goes to about 54mph in FIRST gear. Which makes launching it extremely tough, and here they are.. still getting 11's and extremely low 12's.. with a manual.

The R's trapped 120mph.. on a slow run. Which if you knew.. is what F10 M5's trap thereabout.

Including mine, which trapped 121mph. Guess what time I ran? 12.0. You know why? Because it's almost impossible to launch DCT cars without either DR's or a good track prep. Neither of what I have here locally.

But if I met a little M2 on the freeway (95% of situations). He'll be dusted.

Sorry to hear that numbers don't make much sense to you. LOL.

[oolas3]

Originally Posted by Chipped B6

Do you not understand what trap speeds are?
Seriously?

I could run a 15.0 at 140mph.. and destroy anything that traps less than 140mph.

Everyone knows that GT350's are geared towards a track, not straight line performance. It goes to about 54mph in FIRST gear. Which makes launching it extremely tough, and here they are.. still getting 11's and extremely low 12's.. with a manual.

The R's trapped 120mph.. on a slow run. Which if you knew.. is what F10 M5's trap thereabout.

Including mine, which trapped 121mph. Guess what time I ran? 12.0. You know why? Because it's almost impossible to launch DCT cars without either DR's or a good track prep. Neither of what I have here locally.

But if I met a little M2 on the freeway (95% of situations). He'll be dusted.

Sorry to hear that numbers don't make much sense to you. LOL.

The word "stock" doesn't make much sense to you. Stock is not drag radials. Lol. The STOCK M2 will be faster 0-60 and 1/4 mile.

[GhostyM]

Originally Posted by m3m3mr

The word "stock" doesn't make much sense to you. Stock is not drag radials. Lol. The STOCK M2 will be faster 0-60 and 1/4 mile.

So... a 3505lb car with 365hp at the crank.. will be faster than a 3781lb car with 526hp?


9.60 lb/hp vs 7.18 lb/hp



Edited: accuracy of my numbers