sti vs new M3 - Page 3
Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 78

This is a discussion on sti vs new M3 within the Comparison: WRX vs World forums, part of the Community - Meet other Enthusiasts category; Originally posted by DEADPOOL Uh ya buddy, maybe you should read that article to realize just how different those cars ...

  1. #31
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Oakland, CA
    Posts
    191

    Re: Re: Evo page

    Originally posted by DEADPOOL
    Uh ya buddy, maybe you should read that article to realize just how different those cars are in comparison to what we get in the states .

    The spec c is making i believe 325hp with a completely reworked engine and suspension etc etc etc. And the M3 is a lighter weight version etc with i believe the same basic engine.

    Also to the guy the stg2-3 rex how much power were you putting to the ground?

    From a roll the STI is making less whp then the M3. The STI has about 255 and the M3 has roughly 280-285whp. I believe its possible to slightly pull depending on driver but in no way are you going to put car lengths on one from a roll. The top end power of the M3 is amazing and not easily beaten.
    Uh Deadpool-san, no need to come unglued or anything....it's just data.

    So, I did read the article and can tell you that it says that the STi is different from a regular STi with improved suspension tuning (not the topic of discussion here) and 35 more HP...from a twin scroll turbo, etc. Sounds like it's basically a tuned version of the 2 liter version of the US STi motor. The M3 is a couple of hundred pounds lighter than a regular one and has another 20 or so hp.

    You seem intent on making the case that the M3 is omnipotent irrespective of what the facts say. Why, I don't know. What I do know is that an STi and an M3 are about even through the gears (per every test any of us has seen) but that the STi has a much broader powerband. The data in the Evo article make that painfully clear.

    While you can argue that the cars tested were not US-spec vehicles, the fact of the matter is that they aren't a whole lot different. None of the data published in this test is significantly at odds from that published in US mag tests of the US Sti or the US M3. The major difference here is that they published a lot more data than what the US mags publish. I think the roll on performance in each gear at varying speeds is an excellent indicator of the real-world performance of each car...much more so than just quarter mile times.

    But, I guess one would have to conclude that "the ultimate driving machine" may be less than ultimate if you accepted this data....so it just can't be.

  2. Remove Advertisements
    ClubWRX.net
    Advertisements
     

  3. #32
    Registered User DEADPOOL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Boca Raton, FL
    Posts
    2,079
    The fact remains that this is about a US spec STI and a US spec M3 nothing else. They are diff vehicles and thats what im saying. We cant compare them.
    "Celebrate we will, for life is short but sweet for certain"-DMB

    Liquid - "yes sticky! hes a god now!"

    02 WRX now JDM V8 STI (too many mods for my own good)

  4. #33
    Registered User madmmt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    104
    I thought 0-60 in a us m3 is under 5 sec and low 13 for the 1/4. a csl takes 5.3 and 13.7 in the 1/4 what gives
    well anyway if any sti want's to run my car from 60 on i am game.

  5. #34
    Registered User DeeezNuuuts83's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    199
    Originally posted by madmmt
    I thought 0-60 in a us m3 is under 5 sec and low 13 for the 1/4. a csl takes 5.3 and 13.7 in the 1/4 what gives
    well anyway if any sti want's to run my car from 60 on i am game.
    That's what I was thinking. In Euro trim, the M3 CSL has 360 hp, 273 lb.-ft, plus it's around 170-180 pounds lighter than your average M3, so I would expect low 4-second 0-60 mph times and high 12s for the quarter-mile. Maybe Vin Diesel was driving it... "granny-shifting, not double clutching like you should."

  6. #35
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    194
    I definatly believe an sti can take an M3. Look I ran a 13.22@102mph, the majority of STI's I've seen are running almost exactly the same time or very close. With that said I have pulled on my freinds M3 SMG on highway pulls, getting like a car ahead by 115mph. I havn't raced an STI yet though so i can't compare but the 1320 times match

  7. #36
    Registered User Silver04Sti's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    NOVA
    Posts
    509

    Re: Re: Evo page

    Originally posted by DEADPOOL


    Also to the guy the stg2-3 rex how much power were you putting to the ground?

    From a roll the STI is making less whp then the M3. The STI has about 255 and the M3 has roughly 280-285whp. I believe its possible to slightly pull depending on driver but in no way are you going to put car lengths on one from a roll. The top end power of the M3 is amazing and not easily beaten.
    I never dynoed the 02 with that set up but the car pulled pretty hard and i've heard of guys running low 13's with a similar set up. 13's is also what you typically see in the mag's for the m3 so why are you so surprised?
    I wasn't in the guy's car so I have no clue if he went to 4th or 3rd but if he only went to 4th that's his mistake because he was trying and still got taken. He and his buddy instigated it by revving, staring as they went by, cutting me off on purpose, and looking back at me egging me on so when I saw his car squat down with an obvious downshift, I went to 3rd and proceeded to go right around him. We was trying and could not keep up.
    Now I have never timed my new Sti but to me if feels faster than my old '02 set up. Especially in the lower rpm ranges and because of the torque the car starts pulling alot faster than my old one.....I se m3's every now and then maybe I'll be the jerk next time and try to pick the fight to see how it goes.
    Volvo S60 R (as of July 05)

    Formerly ka: BlackWrx
    SOLD 7/05----04 Silver STI
    SOLD: 02 black sedan, Lots of mods

  8. #37
    Registered User DEADPOOL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Boca Raton, FL
    Posts
    2,079

    Re: Re: Re: Evo page

    Originally posted by Silver04Sti
    I never dynoed the 02 with that set up but the car pulled pretty hard and i've heard of guys running low 13's with a similar set up. 13's is also what you typically see in the mag's for the m3 so why are you so surprised?
    I wasn't in the guy's car so I have no clue if he went to 4th or 3rd but if he only went to 4th that's his mistake because he was trying and still got taken. He and his buddy instigated it by revving, staring as they went by, cutting me off on purpose, and looking back at me egging me on so when I saw his car squat down with an obvious downshift, I went to 3rd and proceeded to go right around him. We was trying and could not keep up.
    Now I have never timed my new Sti but to me if feels faster than my old '02 set up. Especially in the lower rpm ranges and because of the torque the car starts pulling alot faster than my old one.....I se m3's every now and then maybe I'll be the jerk next time and try to pick the fight to see how it goes.
    With my setup Cobb ran a 12.7 in the 1/4 (cant remember the trap) and now i have gears which should set me a little lower and i still get slightly pulled by a friends 02 M3. When going from a roll youre 1/4 isnt anywhere near as important as trap speed which is where the M3 has it.

    And the last time i checked a stage 2 wasnt making 280whp. You would need at least this much to edge out an M3 but to walk one you would need closer to 300whp. If the stage 2 makes less power then me, then either the M3 had the ****tiest driver in the world or he got cocky and left it in too high a gear thinking he would still stomp on you (drivers do this, i did it to a VR6 and my friend in his M3 did it to me). So theres a VR6 thinking he almost had a modded WRX ( if only he knew the truth hehe). The fact is you will never know what happened unless you were to find the guy again and talk with him. But my money is going with the idea that he kept it in a higher gear and underestimated you.

    Also what speed did it start and when did it end, cuz that may clear up some stuff.
    "Celebrate we will, for life is short but sweet for certain"-DMB

    Liquid - "yes sticky! hes a god now!"

    02 WRX now JDM V8 STI (too many mods for my own good)

  9. #38
    Registered User Simp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Orlando/Atlanta
    Posts
    81
    Not sure if anyone has said this, but I've heard from numerous sources on many ocasions that M3's quickness, atleast part of it, in stock form comes from its silly factory rubber and high gearing. If this is true, that would explain why you could take one from a roll. I would think the power to weight on those things along with the minor drivetrain loss when compared to an STi would take one from a roll. It's gotta be gearing. Either way, nice kill. I'm def. starting to think Sti's and LS1's have one major thing in common: they're underrated from the factory
    2000 LS1 Camaro M6

  10. #39
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Indy
    Posts
    766
    Originally posted by Simp
    Not sure if anyone has said this, but I've heard from numerous sources on many ocasions that M3's quickness, atleast part of it, in stock form comes from its silly factory rubber and high gearing. If this is true, that would explain why you could take one from a roll. I would think the power to weight on those things along with the minor drivetrain loss when compared to an STi would take one from a roll. It's gotta be gearing. Either way, nice kill. I'm def. starting to think Sti's and LS1's have one major thing in common: they're underrated from the factory
    I'm not sure exactly what you mean in terms of the rubber... you mean its not great rubber or its awsome? Sorry, I didn't understand (Its Fri. morning and comprehension is owing me right now

    Anyway, I think you might be on to something in terms of the relationship between the STI and the LS1's - if STI's in stock form are walking M3's on the highway, then I have to assume that the STI is making more than 300hp at the crank. Both cars run almost identical 1/4 mile times and with the added hp the M3 supposedly has, I'd think that would have given it a slight advantage in upper-speed roll on races...plus, I would have though that the drivetrain losses on the AWD configured STI's would make it more vulnerable at higher speeds.

    But hey, I have heard rumors of understated HP claims on the STI, so who knows?
    2005 NBP Accord EX-V6 6MT
    AEM CAI, HFP aerokit, Comptech SS
    17" Enkei RS7s on YokoES100 tires

  11. #40
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Oakland, CA
    Posts
    191
    Originally posted by smokey
    I'm not sure exactly what you mean in terms of the rubber... you mean its not great rubber or its awsome? Sorry, I didn't understand (Its Fri. morning and comprehension is owing me right now

    Anyway, I think you might be on to something in terms of the relationship between the STI and the LS1's - if STI's in stock form are walking M3's on the highway, then I have to assume that the STI is making more than 300hp at the crank. Both cars run almost identical 1/4 mile times and with the added hp the M3 supposedly has, I'd think that would have given it a slight advantage in upper-speed roll on races...plus, I would have though that the drivetrain losses on the AWD configured STI's would make it more vulnerable at higher speeds.

    But hey, I have heard rumors of understated HP claims on the STI, so who knows?
    Although at least one person participating in this thread believes the EVO data posted to be irrelevant, but I think if you look at the data the answer is pretty clear. In looking at the quarter mile times you can see that the M3 does make lotsa power, no doubt about it. 107 MPH quarter mile speeds imply 340 HP. However, if you look at the roll-on data you can also see that it makes power only at the top of it's rev range. It's just not that strong below 6k RPM while an STi is, hence the problem with roll-ons.

  12. #41
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Indy
    Posts
    766
    Originally posted by dangrass
    Although at least one person participating in this thread believes the EVO data posted to be irrelevant, but I think if you look at the data the answer is pretty clear. In looking at the quarter mile times you can see that the M3 does make lotsa power, no doubt about it. 107 MPH quarter mile speeds imply 340 HP. However, if you look at the roll-on data you can also see that it makes power only at the top of it's rev range. It's just not that strong below 6k RPM while an STi is, hence the problem with roll-ons.
    That's my biggest beef with the newer M3's...relatively speaking, no torque. I don't know how to put this, but I enjoy driving my buddies E36 M3 with I/E vs. the SMG E46 M3...I have many reasons, but the torqueness is one of them.

    Granted, the E46 is faster..its just not as fun to drive. Honestly, and this might sound funny, but to me, the E46 feels like a Honda on crack You never get the sensation of how fast you are actually going due to the "lack" of torque.

    Anyway, I hear what you're saying...I don't think the data is irrelevant, I just think that its not the 2 cars we are really talking about here. It illustrates many of your points however...but I'd like to see those types of stats for our M3 and our STI.
    2005 NBP Accord EX-V6 6MT
    AEM CAI, HFP aerokit, Comptech SS
    17" Enkei RS7s on YokoES100 tires

  13. #42
    Registered User DEADPOOL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Boca Raton, FL
    Posts
    2,079
    Ok i just talked with a friend who has an E46 M3. Everyone on the bimmer forums agrees that either something was wrong with the car in the evo test or they just didnt know how to drive that car, previous runs with it showed better times etc and the ones that evo got basically sucked.

    But either way the EVO mag no matter how you push it dangrass, is meaningless. We need to compare apples to apples here. Its like comparing a SRT-4 from a diff country with diff settings for the engine etc etc etc ( i know they dont exist) with a euro or jap spec sti or wrx, you just cant compare them. There are so many factors involved that it is no longer a fair comparison.

    We cant look at the CSL and the spec c and use them to evaluate our STI and E46 M3, it is not reliable data plain and simple. If you had some class in college etc whatever it may be and you tried to pull this comparison they would just laugh at you, they would tell you to go and grab the actual cars were comparing and not the tuned versions in order to make a proper and full evaluation.

    Im sorry im not trying to be an ass etc i just cant fathom how you can compare cars this way. The tiniest changes in a cars engine etc etc can make worlds of an improvement on performance same goes for suspension etc etc etc.

    Also im not saying the an M3 would walk an STI or the other way around. What im saying is that it would be a good race. What we need is an STI and an M3 to do a friendly race and vid tape it. I can supply the M3 if someone can get an STI. We can do this in either Orlando or down south near Boca or Ft Lauderdale etc. Ive got a driver with an M3 who is really good (first time in the 1/4 he got a 13.4, his best was a 13.3) so hes farely close to the mag times. He has added a catback exhaust though (gained roughly 8hp at the crank) but that is negligible in findin out if an STI will walk an M3 etc. Do we have any takers for this fun event (we better make it a fun event )
    -John
    "Celebrate we will, for life is short but sweet for certain"-DMB

    Liquid - "yes sticky! hes a god now!"

    02 WRX now JDM V8 STI (too many mods for my own good)

  14. #43
    Registered User 2001S4's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Posts
    845

    Re: Evo page

    Originally posted by dangrass
    Here's the page from the Evo magazine that I've cited.
    Magazine racing is THUPER

  15. #44
    Registered User Silver04Sti's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    NOVA
    Posts
    509

    enough

    Ok....enough horse s***.....this will be the only magazine racing I do on this thread but I'm sick of the "it can't be realistic to win a race with a mighty m3", let's look at some magazines I have in my possession for what its worth:

    if you look at the September 1 '03 issue of Autoweek there is a write up about the Sti....and within that article the quote is as follows: "It's also three-tenths of a second better than the BMW M3 and four-tenths of a second better than the Mercedes AMG C32, both of which we tested last year".........

    Motor Trend June 03" Sti 4.87/13.23
    It did not have road test results in that issue but the mar 03 showed the m3 at 5.0/13.4.

    Car and Driver June 03 Sti 4.6/13.2
    Car and Driver Dec 02 BMW M3 4.8/13.4

    Based on those stats, why is it sooooo unbelievable that an sti can take an m3 even if the m3 has more hp? Excluding the above, if you consider the Sport Compact thread where a stock sti ran 12.75 and 12.79 respectively in two runs, why is it such a shock? Not familiar with an m3 running 12's stock. I've seen no magazine to show stock times in that range, none!
    What you guys are missing in your "not realistic" argument is torque. Its torque that really propels a car, not hp so although the m3 has more crank hp than the sti the stats above show that an "underpowered" car can take the higher hp m3 based on torque. I would love to see a torque to torque curve comparison of the two cars. Hell, even in previous posts m3 guys complained about the low end torque of the car.
    Yes, its embarrassing that a 60K car can get beat by a car at half the cost but the statistics i've seen thus far for comparison have only supported that argument.
    So if the guy from Lauderdale can get a few takers to run his "superior" vehicle, that's great.....I hope there is some data on this match up but from what i've seen and actually done myself against the same car (in my 02) I would venture to say that its the m3 owners who will be surprised by the results.
    Volvo S60 R (as of July 05)

    Formerly ka: BlackWrx
    SOLD 7/05----04 Silver STI
    SOLD: 02 black sedan, Lots of mods

  16. #45
    Registered User Snowvert's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    513
    Posts
    2,626

    Re: enough

    Originally posted by Silver04Sti
    I would love to see a torque to torque curve comparison of the two cars.
    i'd like to see this also if possible. good call.
    03 wrx - 300whp/270wtq
    Originally posted by zoophagy
    The people that work there are, for the most part, retards. I used to work there.

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •