No. (archive)

The new M3, according to numerous sources, will weigh 1550 kg = 3410 lbs. No surprise really, given that the last Euro version weighed around 1510 kg. Also, it is said that the US version, which will have the same engine, etc, will have only around 330 hp for emissions reasons.

: Your assuming that the M3 and M5 are at the same RPM. If the M3 driver is going to "gun it" he will downshift first and take advantage of the extra 1500 RPM of useable power band the M3 has over the M5.

: Again, you assume the S2000 driver does not downshift and take advantage of the extra 2400 rpm of useable power band. That is a very poor assumption, since as you say, the cars are "at speed". The reason I questioned your use of "at speed" was because it has no quantifiable value, and therefore has no real significance in this case. Perhaps your background in rocket science has blinded you from the fact the the S2000 has run 13.8 @ over 100 in Motor Trend? Almost identical to their times for the M roadster. The high 14 second and low 15 second times you quoted were for pre-production prototypes. I haven't seen a production S2000 run worse than 14.4 @ 98. In fact these two cars illustrate my point perfectly, huge torque disparity, nearly the same horsepower to weight, nearly the same performance.

Even if the S2000 driver downshifted at 3000 rpms, it would likely not put him in useable powerband. The M roadster would not really need to downshift, but if they both did, the M would still have a bit of an advantage.

According to C&D, in order to achieve the numbers they got in their most recent test (5.8, 14.4), they had to drive the car "like they stole it." They also point out the techniques required to get a 5.8 0-60 time are so extreme that doing them will mean you will be pretty well acquainted with your parts dealer. Dropping the cluth at 7500 rpms is not something most drivers would do, and even if they would do it in a race against an M roadster, they would have to practice it beforehand to get the timing right. Not likely. The 14.8 posted by R&T was NOT a preproduction model, sorry. And, I'd be careful quoting Motor Trend, as they tend to give lower numbers than other magazines, especially for cars they like. Usually their numbers are not believed, however, as few major manufacturers use them in their literature.

: I conceeded your point at off peak-power acceleration. Clearly more torque means more power at a given RPM (hp=torque*RPM/5252). Look at the S2000 acceleration shifting at 5500, according to MT, about 11 seconds to 60!

Yikes!! That IS slower than a Neon.

Mark G

Follow Ups:

[ Follow Ups ] [ E46 M3 Message Board ] [ Msg. Board FAQ ]

Questions, comments, or problems, please visit the Roadfly help desk.