The numbers are in and they appear to be almost dead even except in the cost category, which for a few thousand bucks, a better set of tires and struts/shocks can be added and the Mustang comes out ahead on the track and by $20,000+ left in your pocket...
Motor Trend Track Test Video - '11 Mustang 5.0 vs. '11 BMW M3
Now what do you suppose the 2012 BOSS 302 Laguna Seca is going to do to the M3? The word 'rape' come to my mind regarding that future contest 
The boys from Bavaria better step up their game...
somebody already did this thread like a month ago and the verdict was official that mustang people will always buy mustangs and bmw people will always buy bmws. theyre both awesome. there is no winner
grimmelshanks wrote:
somebody already did this thread like a month ago and the verdict was official that mustang people will always buy mustangs and bmw people will always buy bmws. theyre both awesome. there is no winner
That somebody was me, but at that time there was no independant testing matching these vehicles such as this Motor Trend video.
I'll agree they're both awesome cars, but when a American 'musscle car' matches or betters the benchmark M3 in every quantitative measurement for $25,000 less it's beyond impressive IMO and needs to be further discussed regardless of who prefers to buy which car.
OH, I forgot to mention that the Mustang matched the M3's performance with a solid rear axle; that just makes my LOL at all the Mustang haters that poo-pooed the Mustang's SRA.
mtn
SuperDork
8/24/10 1:05 a.m.
GR40RACER wrote:
OH, I forgot to mention that the Mustang matched the M3's performance with a solid rear axle; that just makes my LOL at all the Mustang haters that poo-pooed the Mustang's SRA.
Not poo-pooing, just wondering... How much better would it be with an IRS? Any better at all? Lets ignore the drag strip for this one, cause I know that they want the SRS...
mtn wrote:
Not poo-pooing, just wondering... How much better would it be with an IRS? Any better at all? Lets ignore the drag strip for this one, cause I know that they want the SRS...
Sure, it would be better and more expensive. There was a time when almost every evaluation, especially the ones from accross the pond, slammed the Mustang for it's SRA and here it is today, still with it's SRA, matching the performance of the benchmark M3, I just think it's an interesting side note considering how much crap the Mustang has received because of it's SRA.
Across the pond they have much bumpier roads. That's probably why the SRA gets slammed so much. In fairness, Evo, Automobile and even Top Gear said the Mustangs were fine on track but skittery on B-roads.
Regardless, I'd rather have a 2.0T Genesis Coupe and 7 grand in change than a 2011 Mustang GT.
MrBenjamonkey wrote:
Across the pond they have much bumpier roads.
Holy moly! Have you driven in NJ? How the heck much bumpier can they get?
RossD
Dork
8/24/10 7:06 a.m.
Yeah, you've never driven in the north, have you?
Just last month my dad hit a pot hole in the highway and blew out his front tire and bent his rim on his bmw motorcycle. (He's fine.)
I think the mustang should have the option of both SRA and IRS.
If they can afford to put IRS in the explorer, they should be able to put it in their sports car.
MrBenjamonkey wrote:
Across the pond they have much bumpier roads. That's probably why the SRA gets slammed so much. In fairness, Evo, Automobile and even Top Gear said the Mustangs were fine on track but skittery on B-roads.
Regardless, I'd rather have a 2.0T Genesis Coupe and 7 grand in change than a 2011 Mustang GT.
Granted I haven't driven either, but the Turbo Genesis is nearly as heavy as the Mustang but has HALF the power.
1988RedT2 wrote:
MrBenjamonkey wrote:
Across the pond they have much bumpier roads.
Holy moly! Have you driven in NJ? How the heck much bumpier can they get?
Many manufacturers have started using England for suspension tests in the same way all manufacturers use Abu Dabi for cooling system tests or the Arctic Canada for heaters. Never driven in either place, mind you, but that's what I've been reading.
z31maniac wrote:
MrBenjamonkey wrote:
Across the pond they have much bumpier roads. That's probably why the SRA gets slammed so much. In fairness, Evo, Automobile and even Top Gear said the Mustangs were fine on track but skittery on B-roads.
Regardless, I'd rather have a 2.0T Genesis Coupe and 7 grand in change than a 2011 Mustang GT.
Granted I haven't driven either, but the Turbo Genesis is nearly as heavy as the Mustang but has HALF the power.
My math puts it at minus 400 lbs. 3600 vs 3200. It also has the same engine as an Evo X. The ECU is the only major difference, so there's 300 hp with a chip. And you can buy an awfully nice downpipe/boost controller for 7 grand.
It's also got a better chassis/visibility/steering in my opinion, although I base that on a 07 Mustang and not the 11, which I haven't driven.
Personally, I'm not up on dropping $20k plus on a car to void the warranty. Precisely why my Speed3 is staying stock.
The rest of your post is your opinion, nothing wrong with that, just saying. Mainly because the weight thing, especially on a street car is overblown IMHO.
*que endless comments about Miata/chuckability/adding lightness/steering feel/etc
It's hard to get caught tweaking the ECU if you're sneaky about it ... 
But yes you're right about the opinion thing. I drove a Mustang GT and just plain didn't like it. Couldn't see the road, felt heavy, serious front end squish and the enduring sense that somebody had spent way too much time trying to make it "muscle carish."
I actually liked the SN95s better than the current one.
It's not really "the same" engine as the Evo X. It's similar, but NOT the same motor.
I stand corrected. You are absolutely right.
RossD wrote:
I think the mustang should have the option of both SRA and IRS.
If they can afford to put IRS in the explorer, they should be able to put it in their sports car.
Yes, I agree and I'll add, if FoMoCo can put a Watts link on a Crown Vic they can do it on a Mustang for cheap, the Watts link makes a huge difference on a SRA vs. the Mustang's standard panhard bar.
BTW, a Mustang IRS design has already been done by FoMoCo on the new generation Mustang and several prototypes were built and tested, it has been done and I suspect we'll see a IRS on future special edition Mustangs, hopefully on the next genertion Cobra.
93celicaGT2 wrote:
It's not really "the same" engine as the Evo X. It's similar, but NOT the same motor.
I was about to say the same thing.
Okay, so without resorting to "every other sports car has it", explain to the dumb Mustang owner exactly what makes IRS so much better than a decent SRA setup?
Near as I know, the only real advantages are the ability to have your inside wheel hit a bump and not have that affect your outside wheel's traction, the ability to do some alignment tuning, and a reduction of unsprung weight.
However, this is countered by the IRS setup usually being heavier overall and the SRA being stronger and not changing camber under compression (it's always straight up, yo).
No one ever gives the AE86 crap for being SRA...
ReverendDexter wrote:
93celicaGT2 wrote:
It's not really "the same" engine as the Evo X. It's similar, but NOT the same motor.
I was about to say the same thing.
Okay, so without resorting to "every other sports car has it", explain to the dumb Mustang owner *exactly* what makes IRS *so* much better than a decent SRA setup?
Near as I know, the only real advantages are the ability to have your inside wheel hit a bump and not have that affect your outside wheel's traction, the ability to do some alignment tuning, and a reduction of unsprung weight.
However, this is countered by the IRS setup usually being heavier overall and the SRA being stronger and not changing camber under compression (it's always straight up, yo).
No one ever gives the AE86 crap for being SRA...
That's because it's the Hachi Roku!!!! It is THE CAR. Nothing can catch it, except maybe Devil Z.
GR40RACER wrote:
I suspect we'll see a IRS on future special edition Mustangs, hopefully on the next genertion Cobra.
Which hopefully has NO association whatsoever with Mr. Shelby. I'm sick of the high-end Mustang prices being $10k higher than they should be just because of his name being slapped on their ass.
ReverendDexter wrote:
GR40RACER wrote:
I suspect we'll see a IRS on future special edition Mustangs, hopefully on the next genertion Cobra.
Which hopefully has NO association whatsoever with Mr. Shelby. I'm sick of the high-end Mustang prices being $10k higher than they should be just because of his name being slapped on their ass.
I now have a new game plan when flipping cars. Where do i buy Shelby badges?
93celicaGT2 wrote:
I now have a new game plan when flipping cars. Where do i buy Shelby badges?
Why, from Mr. Shelby, of course. They retail for $9,999.95.
ReverendDexter wrote:
93celicaGT2 wrote:
I now have a new game plan when flipping cars. Where do i buy Shelby badges?
Why, from Mr. Shelby, of course. They retail for $9,999.95.
No, no, no, that's the cost of the CF splitter for the GT500KR, plain 'ol GT500/Cobra badges are half that price...
I love the new Mustang. I love how it is a very American answer to the world. It didn't start out great. But it's evolved, and turned into a great car. Would I own one? No way, not my cup of tea. But I still love it.
MrBenjamonkey wrote:
Across the pond they have much bumpier roads. That's probably why the SRA gets slammed so much. In fairness, Evo, Automobile and even Top Gear said the Mustangs were fine on track but skittery on B-roads.
Regardless, I'd rather have a 2.0T Genesis Coupe and 7 grand in change than a 2011 Mustang GT.
I wouldn't. Generic import styling(forgettable at best), much bigger than it has to be-compare with the Mustang GT? Talk about bringing a knife to a gunfight. Won't be any cross shopping between those two for any enthusiast with a pulse.
