John@Motorcepts

exactly my point

I would actually take a C63 AMG over an M3 if C63 came in manual tranny. Of course an M5 over the E63. I would absolutely take a C63 AMG Black Series over ANY M3.


And when people are talking about the car's handling, it's all personal preference and the ability to push the car. I may be able to push a Civic Type R farther than I am able to push an M3 due to the price.

gwf545

M5

Kzang

studavis

I would only like to contribute that the foundations of the BMW company was in aircraft, and that this demands a higher level of engineering, construction, and effort than MB and Audi seem to put into their autos. Tolerances are higher, weight savings/distribution considerations, material composition, and efficiency all go into the brain trust of the engineering "theme" of BMW. Hell, I would bet most of the MB engineers got their starts designing components for motor homes and boats.

Stu

v_therussian

Stu, M-B's three pointed star means that the company is "to reign in the air, on the water and on land".

As for Audi, you have to dig into the roots of Auto Union, Porsche and so on, but they all - BMW, M-B and Audi have roots in precision engineering. So, between us, bud, that was a bit of a jackass statement you made there ^ but its ok, I won't tell anyone

What is true, however, is the simple fact that BMW is a privately owned car company. M-B and Audi both have "bean counters", as opposed BMW, who simply makes "the ultimate driving machine" and makes a damn successful business out of it. Come to think of it, that's probably one of the primary 2 or 3 reasons I own a BMW. And in case you're wondering, the only other companies that come close in dedication to building great cars are Porsche, Honda (yes, Honda!) and Lotus. That's about it, really - all others are basically just contributing to the economic crisis in one way or another...

E60714

This thread was on handling, which I feel, relies heavily on the strength of engineering. It's about finding a balance between power and handling. That seems to be what gets the higher time on the 'ring. The Elise doesn't have power, atleast not high end power i.e. a high top speed. Isn't there a 4 mile straightaway on the 'ring? I think an M5 would start to dust the Lotus after about two miles due to its high end speed. Then the handling maybe a bit better on a Lotus, but pulling out of the turn the M5 will take it again. That's why the Viper is beating the GT-R. The GT-R is fast, but the American engine in there is for tearing it up in straight-line performance. That's where the balance part comes in.

v_therussian

dude, Viper's 8.4 liters of friggin' internal combustion - that's like borderline external combustion, already! Of course, it beats anything! Its actually too powerful for its own chassis stock, that's why, if you look closely, the actual fastest production car on the 'ring is not really "production" - its a modified version of the Viper. As for that Radikal car, its not really a road car, so I'll go ahead and discount that one from this discussion (unless you guys wanna talk about BMW F1 cars circling the ring...)

DD_545i

No Look at the subject title. It's about handling, which is about how the car "handles" around corners. A Lotus handles better than an Audi R8, which handles better than any standard road BMW, which handles better than the Viper being referred to that blasted the Nurburgring. Despite this handling hierarchy, the Lotus would come last when up against an R8 and a powerful BMW. Even the Audi R8 which handles way better than a Viper would be blown away by the Viper's power on those long straights.

You're agreeing with me

craigm1841

Totally agree. i guess somewhere along the way it got into engineering and my ADD kicked in

studavis

Well, jack ass statements aside, BMW is the only one of the three mentioned in the OP that has any sort of link to aviation engineering/design. BMW built some of the best aircraft engines in the world, including the world's first production turbojet that powered the ME 262 in 1944-45. Of the three companies, I was trying to make the argument that because BMW designed and built aviation components and powerplants, that the focus on engineering was from a vastly different perspective than that of MB and Audi and this is one of the reasons the BMW's handle better. I may be somewhat guilty of dumping on the talents of MB and Audi engineers, and for this I apologize.