I think M cars are simply brilliant. Particularly their suspensions. But the V10 and now V8 high revving concept engines are somewhat paradoxical. In an open road/race track setting they reign supreme over the competition from AMG, Audi RS etc.. Throttle response is precise, the lower peak torque high up in the rev range allows for the use of lighter drivetrain etc.. I think the engineers really hit their goals. But, in the real world of stop lights and overtaking, the torque rich competitors often win favor with the auto journalists. And I can see why. I just drove an M3 that a friend bought. I had to keep it under 5000 revs. The engine is magnificent, but on the sole topic of seat-of-the pants thrust, my 550 and my wife's 335 both surpass the M3 without a doubt.

Previously I thought that forced induction had no place on an M car. But since they stopped making engines like the 5.0 litre E39 M5 (which was adapted by M not designed by them like the new V10 and V8 are), I have to say that I think some more torque is needed. If low boost twin turbos can function as seamlessly and with as few drawbacks on a V8 or V10 as they do on the 335's 6 cylinder, go for it!

My two cents,
DRP

 

If the M3 wasn't broken in and with the 1200 mile service, you were missing out on its best. Every M3 owner I've heard says it gets noticeably peppier after the 1200 mile service.

 

Exactly,

Please drive your friends M3 when the breakin period is done. You will have a completely different outlook. There is a reason every M motor wins all kinds of awards.

Trust me, you have no idea what you missed not being able to rev it past 5000rpm.

Did you ever get a chance to drive the highrevving E46 M3? One of the best 6-cylinders ever made.

 

NA all the way! I drove the new M3 recently and then a 997 turbo. The M3 is so much nicer to drive , the engine is so nervous, it is sheer joy. The porsche is the fastest car I've ever driven but it is very laggy and the auto box isnt that good plus its a five speeder.

 

+1 on the NA. Don't ruin this BMW !!!

 

The 997 turbo isn't at all laggy. It uses variable geometry on the turbines - it's an awesome piece of technology and the upshot is that there's virtually no lag. Are you sure you drove a 997 and not a 996? Turbo lag really isn't an issue on the 997.

480bhp and up to 505lb/ft of torque - all from 3.6 liters, and around 3.6 seconds 0-60. Max torque from 1950 rpm.

The 997 turbo engine has in fact just won 2008 performance engine of the year, and it beat the M5 V10 and M3 V8 in the process.

http://www.ukipme.com/engineoftheyear/winn...8/bestperf.html

Off topic, but looking at normally aspirated engines only, the other jewel in the Porsche crown is the GT3/GT3 RS engine. 415bhp out of 3.6 liters and 6 cylinders, with an 8400 rpm redline. A simply magnificent engine, powering EVO's Car of the Year.

 

^I haven't driven a 997TT, but lag will still be present no matter how advanced the turbos are. Lag may not be an issue, but in stock form, lag is still there until boost builds. A simple search of 997TT owners' reviews will mention "noticeable lag." Also this comparison was made against an NA car, so the lag in this instance will be even more apparent.

It may be just me, but it seems a bit insulting to ask whether he's sure that he drove a new turbo or an older 996TT variant. Sure he could have made a mistake, but I'm pretty sure he knows what he drove. That's like asking someone if they drove an e60 or an e39. That's a huge difference and a difficult mix-up to make.

 

There really is next-to-no lag on a 997 thanks to VTG, it is however more noticeable on a 996. Hence, it's a perfectly legitimate question. I agree there is some lag, as it's essentially unavoidable on a turbo, but the engine was described by the poster as being "very laggy". It really isn't, there is next-to-none at low RPM and basically none over 2000 RPM. Do you really think an engine with the amount of lag that he was insinuating would have just won international performance engine of the year and beaten both the very same engine that he described as better in his post (the M3 V8) and also beaten the M5 V10?

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/coupes...rbocharger.html

And nope, no insults. As a Porsche owner, I know that non-owners, including enthusiasts, mix up 997 and 996 variants all the time.

 

Sorry, probably read that wrong. Didn't mean anything by my comments.

I'm not concerned with the awards, but for myself, I didn't find the lag on the 996TT to be bothersome in the least. So if the 997TT improves on this, I'm sure I would have no complaints. But anyhow, basics mods like an exhaust and ECU should help to eliminate any inherent lag.

Again, I think the lag may have been more noticeable if a car like a M3 was driven right before. However, the auto on the turbo should help to do away with lag, at least a bit.

 

Have you driven the car? Cause I have read those very same articles a thousand times. Go and drive the car and its a different story. Evo pitted the GT3 against 997 GT2, 993 GT2 and Carrera GT. Guess which one came on top? I know plenty of Porsche nuts and they all vouch for the GT3. Reason is simple- highly strung N/A engine and rear wheel drive, just like the M3

btw you carrera S from a drivers standpoint is a much better car than the turbo