As they say, beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

I think they're OK.

 

In other words, BMW doesn't make a car comparable to the 911.
Mr. B

 

And Porsche doesn't make a car comparable to a BMW - excellent cars either way, just different.

If you could own some of each, I reckon that is the ideal scenario.

 

C&D has been known to have a slant towards the e92 M3 for quite a while. I recall the M3 even beating out the GTR due to trunk space, rear seating, and creature comforts

I actually bought the e92 M3 because of all the praise and my familiarity with the BMW //M lineup. I was misled by the comparos, and it lasted 6 months for me and cost me a net negative of $20k. Last time I ever trust anything I read to help me make a decision about something that has to fit my personal wants and needs.

All I can really say beyond what has been said is that the e92 M3 has dismal MPG in real life. Could not get beyond 13.9MPG on that thing even on long drives.

 

that C&D comparison is a total joke!

if they put my Cayenne Turbo in it will be an instant winner, scoring high points on rear seat room, trunk space, etc.

 

Here you go:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=33BHlQHlkFE

It's a great time to buy though, GL!

 

IIRC, the M3 had HIGHER CORNERING SPEEDS than the 911 Turbo in that comparo. I thought that was surprising, if not amazing - so did the authors. There's little room to deny that a coupe with a real back seat like that, that goes and handles like the M3 does, is a great accomplishment. It's NOT a sports car - but that only highlights it's accomplishment of such high performance. It's a GREAT car. High build quality, nice comfort/stereo/interior, free 4yr maintenance, all that utility and all that speed/handling. If you're after speed, I don't see how the GT-R doesn't go on your list if you're looking at a C2S and M3 - it's right in there price wise and crushes them on a track. It also has a back seat and heck throw in all season with the AWD.

Nonetheless, I'm surprised by all the BMW hate around here. It's easy to see from an objective point of view that the M3 is a great car - what IS all that vitriol about?

 

Huh? The performance of the two cars was essentially IDENTICAL.

PLUS the M3 offered all the other stuff you list, AND was less expensive.

It won because of ALL of that.

Perhaps you haven't checked the sticker price or track times of a Cayenne Turbo lately?

 

I know what you mean. But in real life driving experience, the performance of the M3 is very similar to the 997S. By saying that an M3 has similar performance to a 997TT is a total lie and total joke, no matter what C & D chose to publish.

The direct competitor of 997TT can be a Ferrari 430 or Lambo Gallardo. If you put these cars against the M3 then they're going to lose too as they are even less practical, less roomy and more expensive.

 

agreed. M3 is a great car and a direct comparison between the both is a bit silly IMO. I'd be happy to own the M3, it just didn't meet the criteria that i was looking for, which was a true sports car. An M3, whether a coupe or sedan, falls more into the saloon category to me.

 

A good number of people on this board have upgraded from an E92 M3 to a 997. I'm one of them. We didn't do it (and lose a lot of money on the transaction) because the performance was identical. And, as you can see in my sig, I am a current owner of an M6 cabrio, so not clear on the BMW hate comment you posted earlier.

What was being discussed is an absurd comparo between an M3, a GTR, and a 997 Turbo. What makes it absurd? Two of the 3 cars tested are purpse-built "super cars", designed to be at the top of the performance vehicle pyramid. We all know the 997 TT blows the doors off the M3 when it comes to true performance. The factors that were rated in the comparo are not real factors to most of us when comparing true performance cars. If we compared an M3 to a Honda Civic sedan, we could easily get the Civic to win by just judging the things that it exceeds the M3 in. Just imagine the comparo when the factors are fuel economy, interior space, trunk space, # of cup holders, price, cost of ownership, cost to insure, etc.. Civic wins by a wide margin. See how absurd that is? Those two cars, the Civic and the M3, are not even in the same stratosphere in real life, we all know that, but yet you suggest that we should read the garbage that some magazine printed, obviously not guaging factors that most of us care about, and decide that one car is better?

The 997 is better than the M3, in what matters to a performance car shopper. I know this from my own experience. If you can't use it to pick up groceries, that doesn't make it an inferior performance car.

 

I owned a 08 M3 DCT for about six months. Sold it for a 06 997S Aero and never looked back!!

Jason

 

 

Biggest thing will be that mileage. I think the 13mpg M3 will make the current model a dinosaur in short order. BMW has already said they are moving to turbo motors. I don't give it more than a couple more years. In the meantime, I'm going to a 997S.

 

Maybe not, but you SURE didn't do it because of the performance increment, at least not for a 997.1, S or not.

No it isn't. This thread is about a used, 2006 997.1s vs a new 2008 M3.

I agree that to compare the M3 to a 911 Turbo is nonsense. No one is cross shopping them. I think BOTH cars deserve to be compared to the GT-R though, and THAT's how they ended up in the same comparison. The BMW gets there based upon the love all the performance mags throw at it and the price similarity to the Nissan. The Porsche gets there via the challenges Nissan has thrown out about the GT-R being faster. M3 was a scrappy dog caught in a fight between lions.

It IS amazing that the M3 had faster times through the curves though, don't you think?

Yea, even the 997.1S probably is, a SPECK. But it DOES give up a TON of utility for that SPECK of sportiness.

The 997.2S is clearly a superior sports car, but again, it's NOT a crushing difference; but it's real and it's there. You do STILL give up a TON for that difference. Likely $50k in MSRP, a back seat, usable trunk, free 4yr maint, depreciation. You get a low, more responsive, slightly faster in a line, better braking and more exclusive car from Porsche. Sure, if $50k and utility is absolutely meaningless to you, then the P-car is superior and the conversation is over. To the degree those issues matter, the M3 becomes more significant competition.