Originally posted by MorningCruiser
And I know a lot about cars, and a lot about their classes. CL65 will come to north america (actually, I believe there are two in LA and four in detroit, not on the dealer's lot either), it's simply a matter of money.
Oh and as a joke, most old muscle cars came as automatics primarily, and I'm willing to bet they could kick the crap out of a similarly priced BMW In a straight line... of course.
And if your lack of knowledge about cars remark was in reference to my track/skidpad remarks, try it yourself.
Horsepower is a byproduct of torque and gearing, acceleration is also a byproduct of torque and gearing. Speed is a byproduct of horsepower. Cornering ability is a byproduct of steering design, vehicle weight and driver skill (simply put). If you can name a single race track where they have ten turns in rapid succession (back and forth) where the track is only one highway lane wide, I'll give you $10.
I also agree that the CSL is ridiculous (like I said, I think the E46 M3 is BMWs attempt at making a performance car out of a boat/pig/paperweight) in price for what you get. "Look it's an M3, with a lightweight roof, a useless trunk, and lighter wheels coupled with a cute trunklid made out of a saturn's doors!" Essentially...
Ok, I can only let this crap go on for so long before I must inject some sense (and some experience) into the discussion.
One, HP has absolutely NOTHING to do with gearing....take a basic class in physics before you start spouting off crap on the internet like every other 14 year old out there. I'll smack Jon down when he makes bone-headed claims, but he's at least willing to learn, and has largely gotten his s**t together lately.
I could tear apart the rest of your claims in that mere paragraph alone, but I'll pretty much guarantee that you're nothing but a teenager who's in love with Mustangs, and really knows jack about an M3, or driving on the racetrack for that matter. Try it sometime, you might learn something. Your comments on cornering ability were particularly laughable....best get to work on studying vehicle design and dynamics.
Two, the claims you're making about the Cobra vs the M3 are ridiculous....have you driven either, and especially, have you driven either ON A RACE TRACK? This coming from a guy who lives in Calgary, with a single, modified drag strip turned road course? (Race City Speedway). Yes, been there, done that, grew up there, threw out all the T-Shirts.
Laptimes are a function of a HUGE number of things, and can't be accurately summed up by comparing skidpad and slalom numbers, combined with 0-60 and 1/4 mile times. Given equally competent drivers, the Cobra will get it's ass handed to it on the race track, even a high horsepower track like Mosport.
A couple of problems with the Mustang's suspension design, which translates directly into cornering ability, and the ability to carry speed through the corners.
One, it's a hacked McStrut up front, with the spring being inboard of the shock. Also, the front center of gravity is sigificantly higher than the roll center...when you lower the car, you can actually lower the Mustang's roll center to BELOW THE GROUND. This means you get massive body roll in the front end, and severe camber changes as the suspension loads up on one side or the other. So, you compensate for this by upping the spring rates, which causes the front end to push, or understeer. Which means you need to back out of the throttle to get the pig to turn-in.
Two, even though it has an independent rear suspension, it's basically a bolt-on unit for the solid axle that's been used since the Ford Fairmont days. It's still subject to some of the bind that has plagued the Mustang since 1978, and still has a center of gravity that is WAY up in the air.
Three, the Mustang weighs in about 3800 lbs, in Cobra trim. It's about 400 lbs more than the M3, and on the racetrack, MASS is the enemy.
Four, the Cobra brakes, while *ok*, basically suck. Some decent pads make it a bit better, but they don't hold up well to track abuse, largely due to the excessive weight the Mustang carries around.
Five, steering feedback. The Mustang uses a loose rag joint type lower steering shaft, which provides minimal steering feedback to the driver. This also contributes heavily toward poor corner entry, as the driver can't *feel* where the car is, and what it's doing.
Six, caster, and bumpsteer. Sure, one can install caster / camber plates into the Mustang in an effort to get more caster, and thus some more steering feedback, but once you do, you develop a bumpsteer problem on the front end. It can be solved, but you're going after-market to do it. I believe you were suggesting a stock to stock comparison.
Seven, camber curves. The front camber curve on the Mustang (because of the hacked McStrut) is terribly. The car actually gains positive camber when the suspension loads up, meaning that you need to dial in a TON of negative camber when unloaded. All of this affects both straight line stability and cornering ability.
So, care to bring any tech to dispute any of this, or are you merely going to shut up about the Mustang clobbering the M3 on the racetrack?
And would I rather have an E30 M3 than an E36 or E46 M3? Nope....given the money to build a racecar to suit my needs (let me see...oh yes, I've already done that once...to an M3....probably doing it again....TO A MUSTANG). So, I know a little bit about what it takes to make either car handle, and while the Mustang might have a cheaper entry price, it's going to take a bunch more money to get it to handle anywhere even close to the BMW.