Mustang GT vs BMW 335D
Discussion
tinman0 said:
longbow said:
Surprised at the reaction TBH, I thought as 'iconic US musclecar' owners you'd be up for some straight line stuff like this. Ho hum.........................
the problem is thats it a BMW. its as interesting as watching paint dry.i'm sure its a very capable car, and i'm sure it will despatch my GT pretty easily. but is it an exciting car? nope. is it a car that makes you smile when you see it in the morning? nope. is it the car you dream about owning? i certainly hope not.
the car is devoid of character, personality, and most importantly, spirit.
I won't actually be driving the car on the day - a friend will be. I will be driving a TVR Cerbera.
TBH the Mustang really doesn't do it for me in the same way that the BMW doesn't do it for you. If I had to walk out every morning to a Mustang I would probably cringe with embarrassment at the thought of having to get in it and drive it.......it's just not my "cup of tea". The BMW serves it's purpose for me as mile munching motorway car for my work, that will double up as a "family" wagon (when the little one arrives in November). I agree that is not the prettiest car on the road, but it handles well, goes like the clappers, is comfortable, has all the gadgets I need and is averaging 43mpg. It'll never be a Cerbera replacement but right now it does the job I need it to do.
Hopefully a Mustang or two will enter Fighting Torque.
Jules.
Edited by Cyclone1 on Thursday 26th July 22:20
Cyclone1 said:
tinman0 said:
longbow said:
Surprised at the reaction TBH, I thought as 'iconic US musclecar' owners you'd be up for some straight line stuff like this. Ho hum.........................
the problem is thats it a BMW. its as interesting as watching paint dry.i'm sure its a very capable car, and i'm sure it will despatch my GT pretty easily. but is it an exciting car? nope. is it a car that makes you smile when you see it in the morning? nope. is it the car you dream about owning? i certainly hope not.
the car is devoid of character, personality, and most importantly, spirit.
I won't actually be driving the car on the day - a friend will be. I will be driving a TVR Cerbera.
TBH the Mustang really doesn't do it for me in the same way that the BMW doesn't do it for you. If I had to walk out every morning to a Mustang I would probably cringe with embarrassment at the thought of having to get in it and drive it.......it's just not my "cup of tea". The BMW serves it's purpose for me as mile munching motorway car for my work, that will double up as a "family" wagon (when the little one arrives in November). I agree that is not the prettiest car on the road, but it handles well, goes like the clappers, is comfortable, has all the gadgets I need and is averaging 43mpg. It'll never be a Cerbera replacement but right now it does the job I need it to do.
Hopefully a Mustang or two will enter Fighting Torque.
Jules.
Edited by Cyclone1 on Thursday 26th July 22:20
A diesel and one that goes like the clappers surely is not a diesel?
I know diesels can be nippy and the 335D is one of those and remapped they are quite impressive.
Still off the mark a stock Mustang GT will have it, fair enough in-gear acceleration I reckon the a remapped 335D would pull ahead.
Alternatively if you want big torque, then go up against a supercharged Mustang, the 335D simply won't stand a chance in hope.
[OcUK]Gibbo said:
Hi there
A diesel and one that goes like the clappers surely is not a diesel?
I know diesels can be nippy and the 335D is one of those and remapped they are quite impressive.
Still off the mark a stock Mustang GT will have it, fair enough in-gear acceleration I reckon the a remapped 335D would pull ahead.
Alternatively if you want big torque, then go up against a supercharged Mustang, the 335D simply won't stand a chance in hope.
I am not really bothered whether the 335D is quicker than a Mustang (GT or Supercharged), the car is competing at Fighting Torque just for comparative purposes.A diesel and one that goes like the clappers surely is not a diesel?
I know diesels can be nippy and the 335D is one of those and remapped they are quite impressive.
Still off the mark a stock Mustang GT will have it, fair enough in-gear acceleration I reckon the a remapped 335D would pull ahead.
Alternatively if you want big torque, then go up against a supercharged Mustang, the 335D simply won't stand a chance in hope.
Against a GT I would expect it to be close to 60 with the 335 pulling away thereafter.
Against a Supercharged version (450+?) then I would expect the 335d to struggle.
So the answer is that unless you have a Mustang that is pushing out inxs of 400bhp then you may get embarrassed by the BMW.
It really would be good if any of you guys/girls could enter a Mustang for Fighting Torque, the more Marques there the better. As a car enthusiast I am really looking forward to the event. TVRs are my main passion but I admire anyone who is a Petrolhead regardless of taste in marque.
Jules.
I had a tuned BMW 535d, 334 bhp and 506 lbs-ft., which was very, very good and very fast, (it did 176 mph GPS), but i agree that there isn't too much sense of occasion with the car. Compared to a Mustang or Corvette.
It did, however, cruise at 135 mph at just 3000 rpm in top.
The (fairly) narrow power band, 1750 rpm-5000rpm, is irrelevant, with the fast-changing and efficient auto-box.
My car had 300 lbs-ft at tickover, remember!
375 lbs-ft at 1750 rpm.
506 lbs-ft at 4200 rpm.
The lighter 335d will be more nimble than my 535d but even so, it will never be incredibly interesting.
A Mustang forum isn't the best place to ask if people prefer diesel Beemers!
In fairness to the BMW, i have had several American cars and the BMW takes the lot of them to the cleaners in some respects, particularly build quality, cabin design/quality and finish.
It did, however, cruise at 135 mph at just 3000 rpm in top.
The (fairly) narrow power band, 1750 rpm-5000rpm, is irrelevant, with the fast-changing and efficient auto-box.
My car had 300 lbs-ft at tickover, remember!
375 lbs-ft at 1750 rpm.
506 lbs-ft at 4200 rpm.
The lighter 335d will be more nimble than my 535d but even so, it will never be incredibly interesting.
A Mustang forum isn't the best place to ask if people prefer diesel Beemers!
In fairness to the BMW, i have had several American cars and the BMW takes the lot of them to the cleaners in some respects, particularly build quality, cabin design/quality and finish.
To answer another post, BMWs certainly CAN be interesting and exciting.
My 2003 M3 CSL left almost every American car behind at the Nurburgring last year and i am not a particularly quick driver. (8m 32s was my best lap).
The only USA car which passed me that day, of over 30 around me, in 5 laps, was a 2006 Corvette 7011cc model and a totally built Mustang which reportedly had 550 bhp.
The M5, the last two models, are superb, the stock M3 is terrific and you can find decent BMW M models all the way back to the first ever one!
The 335d and 335i are brilliant, but best discussed on the BMW forum!
My 2003 M3 CSL left almost every American car behind at the Nurburgring last year and i am not a particularly quick driver. (8m 32s was my best lap).
The only USA car which passed me that day, of over 30 around me, in 5 laps, was a 2006 Corvette 7011cc model and a totally built Mustang which reportedly had 550 bhp.
The M5, the last two models, are superb, the stock M3 is terrific and you can find decent BMW M models all the way back to the first ever one!
The 335d and 335i are brilliant, but best discussed on the BMW forum!
swerni said:
Cyclone1 said:
tinman0 said:
longbow said:
Surprised at the reaction TBH, I thought as 'iconic US musclecar' owners you'd be up for some straight line stuff like this. Ho hum.........................
the problem is thats it a BMW. its as interesting as watching paint dry.i'm sure its a very capable car, and i'm sure it will despatch my GT pretty easily. but is it an exciting car? nope. is it a car that makes you smile when you see it in the morning? nope. is it the car you dream about owning? i certainly hope not.
the car is devoid of character, personality, and most importantly, spirit.
I won't actually be driving the car on the day - a friend will be. I will be driving a TVR Cerbera.
TBH the Mustang really doesn't do it for me in the same way that the BMW doesn't do it for you. If I had to walk out every morning to a Mustang I would probably cringe with embarrassment at the thought of having to get in it and drive it.......it's just not my "cup of tea". The BMW serves it's purpose for me as mile munching motorway car for my work, that will double up as a "family" wagon (when the little one arrives in November). I agree that is not the prettiest car on the road, but it handles well, goes like the clappers, is comfortable, has all the gadgets I need and is averaging 43mpg. It'll never be a Cerbera replacement but right now it does the job I need it to do.
Hopefully a Mustang or two will enter Fighting Torque.
Jules.
Edited by Cyclone1 on Thursday 26th July 22:20
....and your point is?
Beemer-5 said:
To answer another post, BMWs certainly CAN be interesting and exciting.
My 2003 M3 CSL left almost every American car behind at the Nurburgring last year and i am not a particularly quick driver. (8m 32s was my best lap).
The only USA car which passed me that day, of over 30 around me, in 5 laps, was a 2006 Corvette 7011cc model and a totally built Mustang which reportedly had 550 bhp.
The M5, the last two models, are superb, the stock M3 is terrific and you can find decent BMW M models all the way back to the first ever one!
The 335d and 335i are brilliant, but best discussed on the BMW forum!
I'm not against BMWs, they just don't "interest" me, even if they travelled at the speed of light, because they are from the "generic" school of design that starts with a corporate face and little individuality (although of it's type the last M3 was almost ideal and a good design). I quite admired the last M3 (the new one just has no style to it at all) but it costs at least £10-20k more than a supercharged Mustang and three times as much to service. As for track times, I simply offer you these two times from Top Gear:My 2003 M3 CSL left almost every American car behind at the Nurburgring last year and i am not a particularly quick driver. (8m 32s was my best lap).
The only USA car which passed me that day, of over 30 around me, in 5 laps, was a 2006 Corvette 7011cc model and a totally built Mustang which reportedly had 550 bhp.
The M5, the last two models, are superb, the stock M3 is terrific and you can find decent BMW M models all the way back to the first ever one!
The 335d and 335i are brilliant, but best discussed on the BMW forum!
BMW M3 CSL 1.28.0
Roush Mustang 1.28.0
Now the Mustang has about 420hp, granted, but is a touch heavier and doesn't enjoy the CSL's shaved tyres. In other words, it can clearly do the same job for half the price without VANOS (although it does have those new-fangled overhead cams and variable camshaft timing), shaved tyres or a carbon fibre roof. If the Mustang was made in Europe, the Roush Mustang would be "the product" but because it's from the USA, it's built down to a dollar price which is criminally cheap for what you get.
I won't deal with which looks better as that's a matter of taste but, you know, park them in a car park and watch where the crowd settles which deals with public perception only since that's not the reason I bought mine and I can appreciate both for different reasons.
The fact is you can put a new supercharged Mustang on the road, in the UK, with proper suspension for a figure well this side of £30k. If you started with a used example, well under £20k. So we should really avoid the "like for like" that Top Gear seem to revel in and get real on comparative costs. Strictly speaking, the BMW is too expensive to bear any comparison at all. When they can do it for the same price as a Mustang then more power to their elbow.
Edited by LuS1fer on Friday 27th July 18:58
Beemer-5 said:
How would you get a supercharged Mustang with proper suspension for well under £20K?
Can't see that!
Also a mint E46 M3 can be got for £25K.
By importing a used 2005 one from the US at over $2 to the £. They're currently very affordable even after adding on import duty and VAT.Can't see that!
Also a mint E46 M3 can be got for £25K.
swerni said:
Cyclone1 said:
swerni said:
Cyclone1 said:
tinman0 said:
longbow said:
Surprised at the reaction TBH, I thought as 'iconic US musclecar' owners you'd be up for some straight line stuff like this. Ho hum.........................
the problem is thats it a BMW. its as interesting as watching paint dry.i'm sure its a very capable car, and i'm sure it will despatch my GT pretty easily. but is it an exciting car? nope. is it a car that makes you smile when you see it in the morning? nope. is it the car you dream about owning? i certainly hope not.
the car is devoid of character, personality, and most importantly, spirit.
I won't actually be driving the car on the day - a friend will be. I will be driving a TVR Cerbera.
TBH the Mustang really doesn't do it for me in the same way that the BMW doesn't do it for you. If I had to walk out every morning to a Mustang I would probably cringe with embarrassment at the thought of having to get in it and drive it.......it's just not my "cup of tea". The BMW serves it's purpose for me as mile munching motorway car for my work, that will double up as a "family" wagon (when the little one arrives in November). I agree that is not the prettiest car on the road, but it handles well, goes like the clappers, is comfortable, has all the gadgets I need and is averaging 43mpg. It'll never be a Cerbera replacement but right now it does the job I need it to do.
Hopefully a Mustang or two will enter Fighting Torque.
Jules.
Edited by Cyclone1 on Thursday 26th July 22:20
....and your point is?
That BMW's don't start? If it was that obvious then it would be more commonly known, but it isn't, but if that's your opinion and your contribution to this thread then so be itBeemer-5 said:
It still seems like comparing a dartboard with a coat, they are just far too different.
But it's just as easy to pick holes in a Mustang as a Beemer. I have owned and like both.
Most 330d/335d/535d/M3/M5 owners wouldn't be seen dead in Yank iron.
True but mainly through prejudice. Having had a flat out ap and dap with a BMW M5 V10 on a PH run, I think we both gained a mutual respect for each other's cars even if we still wouldn't necessarily swop. I don't like Bangle BMW styling and that's pretty much an end to it (I like the back of the Z4 Coupe but that's pretty much it) but I can appreciate the way they go and handle. It's like comparing a bright yellow coat to a grey raincoat.But it's just as easy to pick holes in a Mustang as a Beemer. I have owned and like both.
Most 330d/335d/535d/M3/M5 owners wouldn't be seen dead in Yank iron.
LuS1fer said:
Beemer-5 said:
To answer another post, BMWs certainly CAN be interesting and exciting.
My 2003 M3 CSL left almost every American car behind at the Nurburgring last year and i am not a particularly quick driver. (8m 32s was my best lap).
The only USA car which passed me that day, of over 30 around me, in 5 laps, was a 2006 Corvette 7011cc model and a totally built Mustang which reportedly had 550 bhp.
The M5, the last two models, are superb, the stock M3 is terrific and you can find decent BMW M models all the way back to the first ever one!
The 335d and 335i are brilliant, but best discussed on the BMW forum!
I'm not against BMWs, they just don't "interest" me, even if they travelled at the speed of light, because they are from the "generic" school of design that starts with a corporate face and little individuality (although of it's type the last M3 was almost ideal and a good design). I quite admired the last M3 (the new one just has no style to it at all) but it costs at least £10-20k more than a supercharged Mustang and three times as much to service. As for track times, I simply offer you these two times from Top Gear:My 2003 M3 CSL left almost every American car behind at the Nurburgring last year and i am not a particularly quick driver. (8m 32s was my best lap).
The only USA car which passed me that day, of over 30 around me, in 5 laps, was a 2006 Corvette 7011cc model and a totally built Mustang which reportedly had 550 bhp.
The M5, the last two models, are superb, the stock M3 is terrific and you can find decent BMW M models all the way back to the first ever one!
The 335d and 335i are brilliant, but best discussed on the BMW forum!
BMW M3 CSL 1.28.0
Roush Mustang 1.28.0
Now the Mustang has about 420hp, granted, but is a touch heavier and doesn't enjoy the CSL's shaved tyres. In other words, it can clearly do the same job for half the price without VANOS (although it does have those new-fangled overhead cams and variable camshaft timing), shaved tyres or a carbon fibre roof. If the Mustang was made in Europe, the Roush Mustang would be "the product" but because it's from the USA, it's built down to a dollar price which is criminally cheap for what you get.
I won't deal with which looks better as that's a matter of taste but, you know, park them in a car park and watch where the crowd settles which deals with public perception only since that's not the reason I bought mine and I can appreciate both for different reasons.
The fact is you can put a new supercharged Mustang on the road, in the UK, with proper suspension for a figure well this side of £30k. If you started with a used example, well under £20k. So we should really avoid the "like for like" that Top Gear seem to revel in and get real on comparative costs. Strictly speaking, the BMW is too expensive to bear any comparison at all. When they can do it for the same price as a Mustang then more power to their elbow.
Edited by LuS1fer on Friday 27th July 18:58
Well I think you would agree I had my Saleen in a great state of tune and suspension setup. It was running 530BHP from a twin-screw blower, so plenty of low-down torque (400Lb-Ft at 2000rpm, peaking 510Lb-Ft at 4400rpm). Then with the Saleen and several Steeda suspension upgrades the car handled very well and finally to stop the car it had the GT500 brake kit. All in all she was an amazing machine.
However I sold the car last week and after test driving many cars, 911 GT3, Z06, C6 Z51, RS4, EVO 9 FQ360, Audi S5 and BMW M3 CSL.
The car I went with was the M3 CSL! The reason I went with the car is because in the corners it not only feels far better than all the above but is no doubt quicker too and my CSL is running normal road tyres. In a straight line its no Z06 but saying that its not slow. The SMG-2 gear changes help speed things up and do remove any human error.
In comparison to my Mustang the CSL is definetely a better handling car, it also inspires a lot more confidence and is just generally far easier to drive quick and the car gives great feedback.
On the Top Gear times you mention you forget to mention that the CSL is a wet track time wheras the Roush was in the dry. Also when Top Gear tested the CSL it had CUP tyres, yes the ones that will kill you in the wet and considering the track was wet is why the CSL put in a rather poor time. On a dry track with those CUP tyres you could expect the CSL to do circa 1:24 and with normal tyres no doubt circa 1:25 in the dry. At the ring the CSL manages to do a lap in 7:50 which puts it quite a bit ahead of vastly more powerful cars.
I will agree sorted Mustangs handle very well, I've owned one of the best afterall but the CSL on a back road will leave a Mustang based on equal drivers. On a smooth race track I'd suspect a sorted Mustang with over 400 horses would not be too far behind at all, probably very close in fact.
Thats my oppinion from having owned a highly tuned and sorted Saleen Mustang for 18 months and now into a few days ownership with an M3 CSL.
The thing with Mustangs (and many other US-cars) is not to expect it to be 'everything to all men'.
(I have had many German cars and also Yank iron going back to my 500 bhp 454ci Corvette, of 1969 make.
Something like a Shelby GT500, is a car full of character, arguably looks the absolute business, sounds great and has good power and torque.
But it's also cheaply made, has an awful interior, questionable build quality and finish and is lardy, compared to a finely honed German sports coupe such as the M3 or M3 CSL.
(I have had many German cars and also Yank iron going back to my 500 bhp 454ci Corvette, of 1969 make.
Something like a Shelby GT500, is a car full of character, arguably looks the absolute business, sounds great and has good power and torque.
But it's also cheaply made, has an awful interior, questionable build quality and finish and is lardy, compared to a finely honed German sports coupe such as the M3 or M3 CSL.
Fair enough but I suspect you put a lot of money into your Mustang, my guess is probably rather too much in search of ultimate power. Ultimately at the nth degree, the CSL probably does handle better but the Roush Mustang was only just behind the M3CS in EVO's PCOTY in 2005 and if you're saying the CSL put in a bad time because the tyres it was sent on don't work in the wet, then that's BMWs fault for trying to get an unfair advantage which backfired. Even giving it 2 seconds, it's still slower than a base C6 and it still comes down to cars of comparable cost and what did your CSL cost you?
I'm afraid that my experience is that on public roads, once you get past a certain power level, the differences aren't very great in any car - we have had some great runs with M5s, TVRs, a GT2 and even a Murcielago. In the final analysis, at the end of every run where nobody really lost anybody, it comes down to what you want to spend and what you want to drive and whether you're still over the moon to drive home in what you came in. I know I am. I'm also happy with my servicing costa and fuel consumption and just about everything else. My guess is that in 10 years time, the BMW won't be worth any more than the Mustang either because they depreciate more.
Having said all that, it's not mere times is it, otherwise you'd have bought the C6 Z06 which does it in 1:22.4 and even the stock C6 did it in 1:26 so the new 430hp base C6 should be faster still.
Why did you go for an automatic though? I was offered an SMG M3 when I was selling the C5 Z06 and had no trouble not even considering it. I can't see that matching the times of the manual.
Anyway, to save some time, think this topic has aired before:
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?f=48&...
I'm afraid that my experience is that on public roads, once you get past a certain power level, the differences aren't very great in any car - we have had some great runs with M5s, TVRs, a GT2 and even a Murcielago. In the final analysis, at the end of every run where nobody really lost anybody, it comes down to what you want to spend and what you want to drive and whether you're still over the moon to drive home in what you came in. I know I am. I'm also happy with my servicing costa and fuel consumption and just about everything else. My guess is that in 10 years time, the BMW won't be worth any more than the Mustang either because they depreciate more.
Having said all that, it's not mere times is it, otherwise you'd have bought the C6 Z06 which does it in 1:22.4 and even the stock C6 did it in 1:26 so the new 430hp base C6 should be faster still.
Why did you go for an automatic though? I was offered an SMG M3 when I was selling the C5 Z06 and had no trouble not even considering it. I can't see that matching the times of the manual.
Anyway, to save some time, think this topic has aired before:
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?f=48&...
Beemer-5 said:
The thing with Mustangs (and many other US-cars) is not to expect it to be 'everything to all men'.
(I have had many German cars and also Yank iron going back to my 500 bhp 454ci Corvette, of 1969 make.
Something like a Shelby GT500, is a car full of character, arguably looks the absolute business, sounds great and has good power and torque.
But it's also cheaply made, has an awful interior, questionable build quality and finish and is lardy, compared to a finely honed German sports coupe such as the M3 or M3 CSL.
and thats the problem with BMW owners. they simply can't see past BMW. theres is a BMW for every occasion, which is great, but we've bought into something different - get over it.(I have had many German cars and also Yank iron going back to my 500 bhp 454ci Corvette, of 1969 make.
Something like a Shelby GT500, is a car full of character, arguably looks the absolute business, sounds great and has good power and torque.
But it's also cheaply made, has an awful interior, questionable build quality and finish and is lardy, compared to a finely honed German sports coupe such as the M3 or M3 CSL.
if a Shelby owner wanted a BMW, he'd buy one. and theres nothing much more than that.
LuS1fer said:
Fair enough but I suspect you put a lot of money into your Mustang, my guess is probably rather too much in search of ultimate power. Ultimately at the nth degree, the CSL probably does handle better but the Roush Mustang was only just behind the M3CS in EVO's PCOTY in 2005 and if you're saying the CSL put in a bad time because the tyres it was sent on don't work in the wet, then that's BMWs fault for trying to get an unfair advantage which backfired. Even giving it 2 seconds, it's still slower than a base C6 and it still comes down to cars of comparable cost and what did your CSL cost you?
I'm afraid that my experience is that on public roads, once you get past a certain power level, the differences aren't very great in any car - we have had some great runs with M5s, TVRs, a GT2 and even a Murcielago. In the final analysis, at the end of every run where nobody really lost anybody, it comes down to what you want to spend and what you want to drive and whether you're still over the moon to drive home in what you came in. I know I am. I'm also happy with my servicing costa and fuel consumption and just about everything else. My guess is that in 10 years time, the BMW won't be worth any more than the Mustang either because they depreciate more.
Having said all that, it's not mere times is it, otherwise you'd have bought the C6 Z06 which does it in 1:22.4 and even the stock C6 did it in 1:26 so the new 430hp base C6 should be faster still.
Why did you go for an automatic though? I was offered an SMG M3 when I was selling the C5 Z06 and had no trouble not even considering it. I can't see that matching the times of the manual.
Anyway, to save some time, think this topic has aired before:
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?f=48&...
Hi thereI'm afraid that my experience is that on public roads, once you get past a certain power level, the differences aren't very great in any car - we have had some great runs with M5s, TVRs, a GT2 and even a Murcielago. In the final analysis, at the end of every run where nobody really lost anybody, it comes down to what you want to spend and what you want to drive and whether you're still over the moon to drive home in what you came in. I know I am. I'm also happy with my servicing costa and fuel consumption and just about everything else. My guess is that in 10 years time, the BMW won't be worth any more than the Mustang either because they depreciate more.
Having said all that, it's not mere times is it, otherwise you'd have bought the C6 Z06 which does it in 1:22.4 and even the stock C6 did it in 1:26 so the new 430hp base C6 should be faster still.
Why did you go for an automatic though? I was offered an SMG M3 when I was selling the C5 Z06 and had no trouble not even considering it. I can't see that matching the times of the manual.
Anyway, to save some time, think this topic has aired before:
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?f=48&...
Yep a lot of money went into the Mustang and I don't regret it one bit. At first the car could not handle the increased power, but with some well thought out research and planning the new suspension parts I added cured the lack of traction to the point I could even floor the car in 1st gear and she just hooked up and went, so there was no issues with traction on a dry warm day. The brakes needless to say were fantastic. I was very pleased with the result, the car a truly superb car to drive and the suspension mods even improved the car vastly over more bumpier surfaces.
You mention M3 CS, you do realise this car is nothing like the CSL? The CS merely has the brakes and quicker steering rack from the CSL. The CSL still weighs 185kg less than the CS edition whilst also having the extra power along with other suspension improvements. I've driven an E46 M3 manual and found it not so impressive, then I drove the CSL and just had to have one, the difference is night and day.
The CSL cost me 32k, for a very good example, put a CSL on a dry track with CUP tyres and it will easily pass a C6 Corvette unless its mainly a track with long straights where the Corvette can utilise that extra power. Still the CSL takes 10.5s to hit 100mph and in-gear acceleration is very quick, so the Vette is not hugely quicker, obviously the Z06 is.
Both the Mustang and CSL make me happy to drive. However I am betting that in 5-10 years the CSL will hold its value much better, check prices over the last 6 months, CSL's are actually going up, remember they only made 422 and considering the new M3 is a bit pap, CSL's are in big demand and as such holding value and in some cases going up in price.
Nope its not all about mere times, I bought the CSL because I liked the drive so much and how focused and precise a car it is to drive. I too don't generally like automatics, but SMG-2 is not an automatic the car still has a clutch. Its very much like VW's DSG system. The gear change on the SMG-2 is quicker than a manual, even with a very good driver in the manual. The SMG is great, you can either leave it in auto or change to manual and use the paddles or the stick to change gear and it is extremely quick and I certainly enjoy it.
Well I'm glad you like it after being so vociferously vocal about the Saleen - not that as an owner you'd say any different . Still have no desire whatsoever to own one though.
I understand your point about depreciation but it's academic. If it was a question of that, I'd be in a 5.0 Parnelli-Jones Saleen Mustang and not thinking about anything else but being cock-a-hoop about having one, something that would never happen with a BMW. I'd also be guaranteed of selling it for what I paid for it whenever I sold it. Not knocking the BMW, it's just the way it is. Let's be honest, you can get the same result from an Evo 340 and they do nothing for me either.
And the C5 Z06 hits 100 in around 9 seconds before you even think of modifying it. Thank heaven we all have different tastes and choice.
. Still have no desire whatsoever to own one though. I understand your point about depreciation but it's academic. If it was a question of that, I'd be in a 5.0 Parnelli-Jones Saleen Mustang and not thinking about anything else but being cock-a-hoop about having one, something that would never happen with a BMW. I'd also be guaranteed of selling it for what I paid for it whenever I sold it. Not knocking the BMW, it's just the way it is. Let's be honest, you can get the same result from an Evo 340 and they do nothing for me either.
And the C5 Z06 hits 100 in around 9 seconds before you even think of modifying it. Thank heaven we all have different tastes and choice.
LuS1fer said:
Well I'm glad you like it after being so vociferously vocal about the Saleen - not that as an owner you'd say any different . Still have no desire whatsoever to own one though.
I understand your point about depreciation but it's academic. If it was a question of that, I'd be in a 5.0 Parnelli-Jones Saleen Mustang and not thinking about anything else but being cock-a-hoop about having one, something that would never happen with a BMW. I'd also be guaranteed of selling it for what I paid for it whenever I sold it. Not knocking the BMW, it's just the way it is. Let's be honest, you can get the same result from an Evo 340 and they do nothing for me either.
And the C5 Z06 hits 100 in around 9 seconds before you even think of modifying it. Thank heaven we all have different tastes and choice.
Hi there. Still have no desire whatsoever to own one though. I understand your point about depreciation but it's academic. If it was a question of that, I'd be in a 5.0 Parnelli-Jones Saleen Mustang and not thinking about anything else but being cock-a-hoop about having one, something that would never happen with a BMW. I'd also be guaranteed of selling it for what I paid for it whenever I sold it. Not knocking the BMW, it's just the way it is. Let's be honest, you can get the same result from an Evo 340 and they do nothing for me either.
And the C5 Z06 hits 100 in around 9 seconds before you even think of modifying it. Thank heaven we all have different tastes and choice.
Problem with the EVO's is the build quality is not that of either the Mustang, Corvettes and certainly not the BMW's. I found from driving the EVO's they were all pretty poor to drive, nothing down low then went mental for a short period. The FQ models are better and the FQ360 was the best due to the fact it has a far more usable powerband and when the turbo is at full spool it does feel quick. However even the FQ360 dies a death acceleration wise past 100mph and its gears are so short it makes motoring cruising rather tiring. Yes 0-60mph is very quick but saying that you gotta work hard for it as in lots of revs to make sure you catch the turbo spooling and not sleeping. Handling wise they are superb and considering they are a 4WD car they do give plenty of driver feedback and feel but at the same time they flatter your driving big time.
Out of all the cars I drove the CSL not only made me grin the most on back roads, but its something a little different and will hold its value pretty well in comparison to other cars I was looking at. I would still like to own a Z06 in the near future because the acceleration on that thing was mega and it cornered well too just unfortunate the steering and gearbox is not that of a sports car.
There is simply no point trying to debate the merits of a brand with those so set in their ways, or trying to convince people with firm elegancies that they should 'see the light'. Each to their own I say, what works for one may never work for the other, especially when the odd one or two seem to have such closed minds..
Tinman0 poses with his car..
I went in Gibbo's car, bloody quick it was too and it would blow the door handles of my GT3 in a straight line, and his CSL. Get it into some bends though, and even in its state of modification neither a CSL or GT3 would have that much trouble pulling away from it, no matter what Top Gear may lead one to believe, or come to think of it those on here who may not be able to make a comparison, perhaps having not owned or driven the cars in question...
He had modified his car to exploit it the best he could at the time, and did a lovely job using the right bits, but it would need further weight reduction and suspension modification to keep up with either of the afore mentioned 'Euroboxes', and if they were modified in a similar manner the distance would grow further.
My dad was a big 'Stang' fan, and I was lucky enough to travel in many of them as a child in the late 60’s and 70’s and loved the things. My dad also had a Mustang badge on all his cars for years, as his lucky charm, and built engines for them too. I have had many BMW's, Alfa's TVR's, Fords etc etc, so when I see Tinman0's stupid, and I paraphrase "all you BMW drivers are the same....sneeeeeeeeeeeaaaaaarrrrrrrrrr" I have to smile. Castigating everyone who drives a certain brand as being the same is like saying all American cars are crap on bends. It’s utter stupidity, saying more about the state of the persons mind.
Get out more I would say, love to see you at Fighting Torque too...............i'll be there, getting my arse handed to me by a TVR no doubt............my ego can take it though, I suggest the sneering approach of the odd correspondent on this thread suggests they might struggle to however. The “why would I care, they’re crap” approach is common amongst children, or those with a childish demeanour.
Tinman0 poses with his car..
I went in Gibbo's car, bloody quick it was too and it would blow the door handles of my GT3 in a straight line, and his CSL. Get it into some bends though, and even in its state of modification neither a CSL or GT3 would have that much trouble pulling away from it, no matter what Top Gear may lead one to believe, or come to think of it those on here who may not be able to make a comparison, perhaps having not owned or driven the cars in question...
He had modified his car to exploit it the best he could at the time, and did a lovely job using the right bits, but it would need further weight reduction and suspension modification to keep up with either of the afore mentioned 'Euroboxes', and if they were modified in a similar manner the distance would grow further.
My dad was a big 'Stang' fan, and I was lucky enough to travel in many of them as a child in the late 60’s and 70’s and loved the things. My dad also had a Mustang badge on all his cars for years, as his lucky charm, and built engines for them too. I have had many BMW's, Alfa's TVR's, Fords etc etc, so when I see Tinman0's stupid, and I paraphrase "all you BMW drivers are the same....sneeeeeeeeeeeaaaaaarrrrrrrrrr" I have to smile. Castigating everyone who drives a certain brand as being the same is like saying all American cars are crap on bends. It’s utter stupidity, saying more about the state of the persons mind.
Get out more I would say, love to see you at Fighting Torque too...............i'll be there, getting my arse handed to me by a TVR no doubt............my ego can take it though, I suggest the sneering approach of the odd correspondent on this thread suggests they might struggle to however. The “why would I care, they’re crap” approach is common amongst children, or those with a childish demeanour.
Edited by housemaster on Thursday 2nd August 15:57
Gassing Station | Mustangs | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff