Posted by Tino on November 14, 1998 at 02:48:57:
In Reply to: 95 M3 has 3.0L engine. 96 has 3.2L and >HP. posted by D. Milano on November 13, 1998 at 19:04:25:
Although the 3.0L and 3.2L motors both have the same HP, the torque and HP curves are
somewhat different (BTW the torque is a bit more in the 3.2L and belive me, you CAN feel it). This is quite noticeable when you compare the both after a lap or
two. The 3.0L has a "Transformation" at about 5200 RPM and just starts pulling like
crazy but does lack the low end. The 3.2L has a ton of low end torque to get you out of
the hole faster but has a flat spot right at about 5900 RPM where it feels quite, how shall
I say.... Unproductive?? Well, my honest opinion is just get a 3.2L and get the Conforti
chip to level out the flat spot and your done. This way you have the best of both worlds...
Top end where you need it for track driving and low end for city driving. As far as the
handling is concerned, the 95 M3 does seem to sit about an inch lower than the 98 M3.
Is this due to regular wear? Not sure but they seem to handle pretty much the same. If I was to do it all over again, I would buy the 3.2L for sure considering most of
my driving is in the city. BTW, on a test between my 98 M3 and my friends somewhat
modified 95 M3 (Chip, Exhaust, Airflow meter etc...) on the freeway, neither one of us
could pull away from the other in a few sprints from 55MPH to @95MPH in third gear.
So I think that they are both great!