JaxFL

Well my stock (except for ultralight SSR Competition wheels) GS400 was darn near neck and neck with the previous version of the M3. The new one is so much faster that I agree with those who say nothing short of forced induction is going to get the job done. What would a GS need? About 300 RWHP? That's about 60 RWHP over stock, right? Hard to extract that kind of gain with basic bolt ons with an N/A engine.

Rumor has it that a guy down here will be getting video of a 2002 C32 (bone stock), 98 GS400 (stock but with light wheels) and a stock 2003 E500 doing a roll-on pull on a closed circuit soon. Once you see that vid you can imagine that the C32 is an M3 and see what kind of car lengths one needs to make up for in mods. The C32's best mag test was Autocar 0-60 4.6 1/4 Mile 13.0@107. Some owners have been seeing high 12's with nearly stock C32's. The M3's best times are probably very similar with slightly higher trap speeds(13.3@109?). The best test results I can find on the net for a GS400/430 are 14.3@98. So comparing best times to best times you need to make up at least 1 second and 9 MPH. Lighter wheels should be considered as another nice, engine-friendly way to boost performance. Strap on some 17 or 18 inch Volk TE37's with the lightest tires you can find and you'll feel the difference in performance.

Edit: Okay, did some math to match the M3's 10.25 Lbs. per HP ratio the GSs would need about 362 HP at the crank. Using the same ratio of crank to rwhp that is evident in 300 HP stock GS400's when they lay down 240 RWHP, you're 362 HP at the crank should give you around 289 RWHP. Like I said before, about 300 RWHP will probably put you next to the guy. A few more and you start to pull on him.

Kevin

rominl

iTrader: (4)

well stock gs4 shoudl be a tad faster than the old m3, if you remember back then when lexus advertise the gs400, that's how they said it, "the world's fastest sedan"

and that's why i am so sure the new m3 will kick the gs4 so badly.

DrewGS4

Everyone is right on. The M3 would eat us for breakfast. With today insurance rates....the M3 is not a wise choice.

Bliu, what is the insurance difference between the GS4 and M3?

I thought that the SMG was faster than the manual. Doesn't SMG technology theoretically shift faster than humanly possible?

Anyway, I have lost a couple of races to the new M3 and beat a older M3. Also, lost to a m5, C5 corvette and WRX STI and S4. These cars are in a whole different class and they are born racers designed by the factory. The GS4 is designed to be a luxury sports sedan. We like to mod it to handle like a like a m3 or m5, but we can never acheive the 50-50 weight ratio and balance of these cars no matter how many suspension parts you put on. We can get pretty damm close but the GS4 is just too top heavy in the front. If it were me and you want this kind of performance, the best choice would be a m5. The m3 is just too small, try fitting 3 people in the back.

apatel

I think the stock manual and the SMG equipped M3s are about the same. The SMG shifts faster but has a higher drivetrain loss due to the hydraulic actuated clutch. So SMG equipped M3s put down less whp than the stock manual tranny equipped ones do.

Hameed

Exactly my thoughts!!!!

DrewGS4

The only modded GS400 that can beat a M3 is SRT twin turbo GS
1/4 mile in 12.03 seconds.

here is the video for those who have not seen it.

http://www.swiftracing.com/pics/cars...gs400_1203.avi

rominl

iTrader: (4)

umm...... dunno, all the reviews and tech info i have read, the smg is just like the stick shift with a computer on top to control the shifting, it's nothing like our gs4 with eshift, it's a manual. and yes it shifts fast like hell, no human can match. and i strongly believe smg is faster than manual m3. go to bimmer forum and ask, they all agree

BLiu

I was about to reply but rominl beat me to it. Drivetrain HP loss due to the SMG is NOT the reason the SMG is slower because there is no such thing - besides, we are only talking a .1 - .2 second difference which is due to driving technique. It has to do with how you dump the clutch in 1st gear to get that first push and you can do it easier with a manual and the SMG has no clutch pedal. Theoretically, if you get good at the SMG, you can do the same thing as with a manual and get the same times.

It would be best if folks went to an M3 forum to gather info before making a statement. It can be misleading...

As for insurance rates, it's hard to tell for me which costs more because my GS is a 98 and my M3 is an 02. However, it's pretty obvious that the M3 would be more just because it has 2 doors instead of 4. They may be very close ~100 dollar difference/year because I think the GS430 costs a little more....

Brent

rominl

iTrader: (4)

well actually i thought there is a mode in smg where basically you just step on the gas and the smg will do all the rest for you, including sensing the grip of the tires and such? my friend with a 6 speed (no, bliu, it's not you ) tried to race his other friend with smg and he lost every single time. just off the line the smg flew away already, and my friend is a pretty good stick shift driver already

insurance wise, the m3 is super expensive i can imagine. my gs400, i think i am paying 800 every 6 months (2 drivers with all aftermarket stuff), and my is3 is 900. when i got my is3, i also quoted on the m3 and it was like 1400 for 6 months. i slipped

BLiu

Well, now that you are married, have more than one car, you try to shoot for the multi-car discount. Ir brings the rates down tremendously. The only factor is if you are under 25...that one is a killer.

Brent

rominl

iTrader: (4)

hey i AM 25 come to think about it, my wife's name is on the insurance but i didn't tell them that we are married now (i got her as a friend when i got insurance), so i should tell them about it to get a lower rate?!

BLiu

Yup, married should lower your rates - but it depends on the insurance.

apatel

I made a statement about the lower whp based on info I had read on m3 forums a while ago. Maybe that info was wrong or has been updated since. Sorry for the confusion. But I have seen a few reports in which the manual equipped cars are quicker to 60 and over the quarter mile compared to SMG. Heres one http://www.europeancarweb.com/tech/0212ec_bmwtech/

As you said, the stock manual allows quicker launches but the SMG will alway shift faster. And the SMG equipped cars will always perform better on the track

DrewGS4

Unless you marry someone who is foreign and has a foreign driver's license. Regardless, of how much driving experience this person has abroad. When you get a new license here in the USA you will automatically be classified and a "inexperienced driver" for 3 whole years which will shoot up the insurance rate.

My wife is from England and the exact same scenario has happened to me. This is the main reason I didn't opt for getting a new M3. Inexperienced operator on a M3 in NJ equates to mucho $$$$ to insure.
I decided to get a fully loaded 2004 FX instead.

chuckisc

not trying to jack the thread, but Dave, did you get the FX? how is it driving? I heard great thing about the car.... Thanks man