that's funny... I do the same to M3's as well... and it should be the case... the M3 is the "lesser" car. And I DON"T want to start a debate on that... just log in to rennlist.com and see how many M3 owners "upgraded" to 996... cheers.

 

I dont understand the 'bastard child 911' comment.

 

Most upgraded to real 911's, not the wet sump bored out Boxter engine 911.

Read, M64 engine block.

Read, GT2/3 and Turbo.

M96/7 911's are nothing special, and I would take the M3 anyday over it.

 

I can't buy that 0-100 time, because that is about the time the 997S will do.

Everyone has their opinion, based on dyno's the s54 puts down more power than the 3.4 or 3.6 period but we all know you can't just go by dynos.

Either way, here is a comparison that was done with all cars on the same day and same track featuring the SMG M3, C5 z06, 3.6 996, and 350z. The PDF provides all the info necessary and the M3 and 996 are basically neck and neck, same ET and .7 mph favor to the 3.6 which I believe a manual would beat in the M3 1/4 (also this is pretty much the same time my SMG ran at the track: http://www.roadandtrack.com/reviews/...rison_data.pdf

As far as a 3.4 keeping up with a 360 modena, it isn't possible. Not saying it didn't happen, but a 355 showed me what it could do on the freeway and decisively pulled, a 360 is much faster and will leave a 3.4 in the dust. That isn't even a debate.

 

The standard wet sump isn't bad, but in the sense of upgrading from an M3, yes, I would look into only a GT3 or a Turbo. The 997 Carrera S with X51 or without is also a good choice however it is not dry sump.

 

It's called the M3 complex.....

 

Hey Stuka... if I had 3 porches I'd b tempted to buy an M3 as wel... you malaka..

 

debate or not.. it happened... but I'm slightly modified... as far as dynos.. don't mean anything to me... it's all on the street when the car is moving... I don'g care if the M54 puts down more power... it's got more weight and different gearing and that comes into play...

as for the 0-100 time the "S" does it in UNDER 10 seconds... not 10.5... the sub 10 second time has been documented in one of the mags.. C&D or R&T.. can't remember

as for the article... I took a read... the 996 is a targa which is one of the heaviest 996's... so a non-targa... especially a 99 would take it....

check out www.track-challenge.com for fun... compares all cars... as well as different model years..

cheers
P.

 

I have to agree, you cannot really compare a traga to an m3. c2 coupe or c4 coupe or c4s s coupe even. i also agree with the under 10 sec 0-100. most show it running 0-100 in mid 9's!

 

Ok, you are modified, you need a blower to take a 360 modena. Maybe you have a blower though, I don't know your mods, so of course it is possible. The stock 99 3.4 is slower than an e46 m3 and definitely slower than any 3.6, targa, c4s, cab, whatever. Sure the m3 hasmore weight, but it also has more power and is geared shorter. Take a look at the final drive. It also has more power and torque under the curve, that is what matters, as it has 8k to play with. The 3.4 is not a very strong motor, and definitely not S54 strong, even the 3.6 isn't.

Road and Track had the ONLY 997s 0-100 time under 10 seconds. You can show me one example of a time under 10 yet there are over a dozen showing above 10. They also had an ET and trap for it faster than the 996 GT3, think about that for a second. They also had substantially different times for it in different tests. They also used GPS to calculate the trap and E.T. not an actual drag strip.

Look, I am going to leave it as you are right, what happens on the street is what matters. You have had your encounters, I have had mine, and anything can happen on the street.

 

That isn't true, most show it running mid 10's. The GT3 does mid 9's. There is only ONE test showing those numbers and it has to be put into context. There have been hundreds of posts on that road and track article on here I don't think we need to go sort through them though.

Here is a cool index of 997S related articles to check out if anyone wants to: http://coochas.com/porsche/911articles.html
Every test except for the one road and track in question has a 0-100 of above 10.5.

I am not saying the 997S is not faster than any of the cars in question, it is, it just isn't GT3 or 996 turbo quick, yet still extremely fast.

 

[quote=sticky]Ok, you are modified, you need a blower to take a 360 modena. Maybe you have a blower though, I don't know your mods, so of course it is possible. The stock 99 3.4 is slower than an e46 m3 and definitely slower than any 3.6, targa, c4s, cab, whatever. Sure the m3 hasmore weight, but it also has more power and is geared shorter. Take a look at the final drive. It also has more power and torque under the curve, that is what matters, as it has 8k to play with. The 3.4 is not a very strong motor, and definitely not S54 strong, even the 3.6 isn't.
quote]

Hey Sticky,

your smoking crack... the 3.4 is faster than the E46 M3... this is well documented on the links I posted earlier... it's also documented on www.track-challenge.com and compare lap times of those cars and acceleration times as well... more torque under the curve... I don't think so... take a look at the flat 6 torque curve vs the declining torque curve of the M3 and you'll see why the 3.4 and 3.6 are faster period.

The 3.4 is not a strong motor.... hmmm I've had mine for 7 years and 80+ K... and it still flogs M3's... I think the M3 motor definitely had its issues...

996>M3... sounds like somebody sold you an M3

 

[quote=C70Pete]I dont think this needs to get hostile between you two, or all of us, so im just going to say this. Lets not take it there. we all have our experiences, our time on the actual road, and we have all seen what mags have run. I feel the 3.4 is a stronger motor than the s54 because owning a 3.4 and having driven m3 pretty extensively i always felt the m3 just felt sluggish(comparably, and i beat on the m3 like it did something wrong) to me especially having driven one after the other several times. both 6MT might i add to clarify on transmission.

 

LOL some of you guys are in major denial

 

[quote=C70Pete]Look, I'm not smoking anything except for 3.4 carreras. The 3.4's run a low 14 / high 13, fact not fiction anyone can attest to this.

Now you think the 3.4 is stronger than the S54 and now you think you are beating 360 modenas. I am going to stick to reality you can continue to think that a flat-6 that came out before the m3 inline six that doesn't produce as much torque or as much hp is faster and stronger and doesn't have any issues such as RMS. I love this little fantasy land you are in.

Here are two dynos, one is an M3 and the other is a 3.4, please do some research before you start talking about declining curves, as the M3 has a flat torque curve most motors would kill for:

996 3.4 stock vs. with supercharger:



BMW M3 stock (mustang dyno btw, in reality where we are you can see the flat torque curve ):




Hmmm, more horsepower, more torque, over a wider curve. Do you get it yet?