what would u prefer

[thormx 353]

lancer evo-|-BMW 325/330-|-BMW M3

what would u rather want. or think is better in any way at all

[NISSANSPDR]

Question becomes, which Evo and which M3?

If it's an Evo III vs. E46 M3...then there's no contest IMHO, it goes to the M3.

But if we are talking Evo VI RS vs. E36 M3...then I take the Evo VI RS.

[drunken monkey]

and if it's about personal preference, then I'd take an EVO V over any other and i'd be wnting a M3 CS (uk model - manual please) over that if it were up to me.

[kman10587]

I'll assume he's talking about the newest version of each...in which case, I'll take an Evo 9 GSR or MR, please

[Polygon]

Originally Posted by kman10587

I'll assume he's talking about the newest version of each...in which case, I'll take an Evo 9 GSR or MR, please

Yeah, I would bet he is comparing the latest generation of each. If that is the case I'll take the Evo as well.

[thormx 353]

why the evo? and wats better about the m3 uk model

[porscheguy9999]

Well, The Evo MR (euro) is as fast around a track as the Lambo Mucielago. As Top Gear showed. But I'd take the euro only M3 CSL. I just like it more.

[kman10587]

Originally Posted by thormx 353

why the evo? and wats better about the m3 uk model

1. It's about twenty grand cheaper.
2. It's got more torque at a lower RPM range, and the stock turbo is capable of a lot more.
3. Firmer suspension tuning - it's a sports car, not a luxury-sports car.
4. All-wheel-drive.

[crayzayjay]

I'd take any version of the E46 M3, whether it be M3, M3 CS, or M3 CSL over any Evo.

[9ball]

Originally Posted by crayzayjay

I'd take any version of the E46 M3, whether it be M3, M3 CS, or M3 CSL over any Evo.

Absolutely. I would rather have an E46 M3 ten fold over any Evo. It's more expensive than an Evo, but that's because it's a much much nicer car. Not everything has to do with lap time when we're talking about which car we'd rather own. Aside from that, I don't believe the Evo's sold here in America are as fast as the M3 anyway. We don't have the FQ and I'm not sure about the MR or whatever it is.

[crayzayjay]

I wouldn't even want an FQ. It looks like it was designed by a 15 year old comic-book fan. As do all evo's for that matter.

Besides, where's the fun in driving a computer? Don't fool yourself into thinking you're a good driver in one of those.

[kman10587]

Originally Posted by 9ball

Absolutely. I would rather have an E46 M3 ten fold over any Evo. It's more expensive than an Evo, but that's because it's a much much nicer car. Not everything has to do with lap time when we're talking about which car we'd rather own. Aside from that, I don't believe the Evo's sold here in America are as fast as the M3 anyway. We don't have the FQ and I'm not sure about the MR or whatever it is.

It's not about lap time, it's about having fun. To me, loads of torque, a high-psi turbocharged engine, and pure performance-oriented suspension tuning and interior design is tons of fun. I don't need, or want, luxury features, a high-class interior, or a supple ride, I want the closest thing to a street-legal race car I can get. And that's where the M3 will never be able to beat the Evo.

Originally Posted by crayzayjay

I wouldn't even want an FQ. It looks like it was designed by a 15 year old comic-book fan. As do all evo's for that matter.

Besides, where's the fun in driving a computer? Don't fool yourself into thinking you're a good driver in one of those.

It looks bad ass is how it looks. And I can think of plenty of "sports cars" that are far more computerized than the Evo is; the USDM model doesn't even have Active Yaw Control, last I checked.

Why am I defending the Evo anyways? I'm an Impreza owner. I guess the Mitsubishi guys are all busy replacing their transmissions, so I have to fill in for them

[drunken monkey]

Originally Posted by kman10587

I want the closest thing to a street-legal race car I can get.

caterham, ariel, radical, westfield etc etc....

on the other end of the scale:
mosler, saleen.....

i'm not entirely convinced that just because the WRC prepped cars are sucessful and based on the road car, that it makes the road cars automatically, close to being a road legal race car, not to mention that the most succesful race aren that those cars feature in (rally) doesn't equate much to real world roads anyway.

then again, i'm not a big fan of the whole road legal race car tag as in most cases it's just the usual sound-bite that is fed to kids who lap it all up.

[Rand Race]

Actually, the rally races on tarmac are as close as you'll get to authentic racing on real-world roads except, perhaps, tarmac hill climbs. And most hill-climbs hook in with a rally as a stage.

Before 1998 the road going Evos and WRXs and such were much closer to the race cars than they are now. The homologation rules were changed then and the road-going versions started getting bigger, more powerfull (2.5L engines in the STIs for instance) and less harsh due to less stiff chasis and suspension components.

Heck, before 1998 all homologated rally cars had the anti-lag misfire exhaust sytems equipped from the factory except for the computer to run it. That, and some other things, made them impossible to get past American emmissions laws and that's why we didn't get Evos or WRXs until after the 1998 rule change... and never got those freakin hawt ST205 Celica AllTracs either.

[drunken monkey]

then i stand corrected.
one thing though that might say something about my stance on this,
as said by a police friend of mine:
driving a impreza doesn't make you colin mcrae.