john banks

1. MY00 Impreza UK turbo 4 dr with no A/C but sunroof, 6 speed box, APS FMIC & induction, TD05, Ecutek remap, fuel pump, 550s, Gruppe S small bore headers and 2.5" decat exhaust, no stereo, c.1/4 tank fuel. Gets very low 12s on 1/4 and 340 BHP at Star or Dastek. Book weight 1235kg without driver or fuel, on five speed, est weight 1360kg. Run on Optimax, gearchanges brisk, not quite flat shifting.

2. MY04 E46 M3 coupe, with SMG, 2/3 tank fuel, 30kg in the boot, fair few weighty options inc sunroof, Nav/TV, heated seats, stereo with subwoofers, 19" alloys etc. Book weight 1570kg with 75kg driver/luggage and 90% fuel tank, est weight 1660kg. Run on Optimax. Gearchanges in S5 (fastest available with traction control on).

Compared in the wet, ambient 6-8C.

With a variety of tests the Scooby always gained on the M3, we reckon it accelerated about 10% quicker, even at higher speed.

There is about 22% difference in weight, tested where not traction limited, and included a variety of tests, some designed to expose lack of instant power or low torque - e.g. 2nd gear from 20 mph. Speedo was more optimistic in the Scooby but est. 7%, so we discarded times that were 15-20% quicker in the Scooby's favour.

The M3 has surprisingly good traction in the wet, and the damping is very sensible for road use. Brakes feel very good, but this pad compound is known to fade under heavy use. The Scooby of course feels even faster than its actual advantage.

I reckon a well remapped P1 with decat would match the M3 on a roll.

The M3 will gain through no lag, fast gearchanges (although T-uk is I think just as fast), no AWD losses, loses on its weight and lack of torque. I suspect the aero is similar despite the Scooby being criticised.

Deep Singh

Hi John,

Which one do you prefer to drive/own?

john banks

For a daily hack with a turn of speed, lots of comfort and toys, the M3. For covering ground at a speed to embarrass nearly anything in all weathers, the Scooby.

banny sti

iTrader: (68)

Hi John i have an STI 3 with a full decat and apexi remap to 1.3 bar on optimax, had a go with two M3's and the results were the same. From a standing start the M3 keeps level in 1st and 2nd but once in 3rd i can pull a car length.
I assume with an aggressive launch in my car would result in a bigger margin but never tried that.

Banny

john banks

Yes, launch would get more, these comparisons were on a roll.

In normal driving the getaway is actually quicker with SMG even without launch control than the Scooby without dropping the clutch with lots of revs on it.

T-uk in his car as compared here could stick with my old 2.5/GT30R (with probably 100-120 BHP more and probably +50kg weight from A/C & ICE) car up to silly speeds by virtue of better gearchanges, better gear ratios for his setup, and a turbo with very little lag.

Deep Singh

John, I'm sort of wondering why you did this comparison. Does one car length mean anything in the real world apart from pub talk?

LG John

Was this your car or T-uk's car? I thought you had considerably more power than quoted above and had wasted a few M3s already.

I have always been a fan of the current M3 but I must admit that in this day and age its actually not quite quick enough*. BMW got it right with the new M5 producing a car that hits 100mph in a fraction under 10 seconds. I can only hope the new V8 M3 is the same although I suspect they will bottle it fearing that a 10-to-the-ton car would step on its big brothers toes. Being a V8 though it might have greater tuning options

* I have added the following as an edit before someone jumps on my comment: Of course the M3 is a bloody quick car but there are a lot more cars out there now that can be modded to beat/match it without going crazy. Scoobys, EVO's, pretty much anything with the VAG 1.8t engine and cars modded in such a manner are becoming more common place.

john banks

It was T-uk's Scooby against my M3. The Scooby was noticeably faster and the M3 was holding it up.

The reason for the comparison is that we always measure any change we ever do to our cars just for the sheer hell of it My new car choice was between an M3 and a new age STI 2.5 with 20G and 380 BHP on Optimax. I reckon those latter two would be inseparable on a roll, and 30-130mph through the gears seem similar between an FQ340/400 and M3. Lightweight classics are so much lighter that they can be made faster than an M3 on a roll.

We nearly got round to comparing a 262 BHP MY05 STI just to see the difference the other way.

LG John

You dirty old dog! When did you get that?! Is it brand new? (still might be tight). Pics man, we want pics! Oh and next time I see you I want a pax run - love them but never been in one and don't have the guts to try and blag a dealer drive. Have you kept the scooby or are you getting rid?

Edit: Just noticed its an 04 so nearly new - makes sense given initial first year losses on such a vehicle.

LG John

Surely an FQ400 would dust an M3 from 30-130mph. They are laggy as **** but once blowing they have monster acceleration do they not?

rr_ww

Id always have the M3. RWD NA has a certain purity to it that I prefer. Not knocking the Scooby, they are hugely capable.



Especially if you're not a very good driver

Aztec Performance Ltd

iTrader: (234)

Good write up John. I found even on my old spec TD04 it was very well matched (sometimes quicker) even from a roll. Maybe this was down to them auto shifty things or poor driving but either way I wouldn't feel out of my depth.

TD05 is a fair bit quicker in all respects.

I think a good 340/340 in a classic makes a nicely balanced road car.

Would much rather be sat in a M3 for motorway driving though.


Bob

terryb

John

Your statement re the P1 is spot on. I can verify that a P1 with 300/300 performs exactly the same as an E46 M3 from say 60mph - 130mph. Nothing in it at all. Would love to see them both on a standing quarter mile.

Cheers

Terry

john banks

--------------340/400/M3
40-70mph 3.8/3.6/3.6
70-100mph 5.7/5.4/5.7
40-120mph 15.8/14.9/14.7
100-120mph 6.3/5.9/5.4

Kenny, through the gears times with timing gear. M3 (manual not SMG) by Autocar, 340 and 400 on the MLR test you can read on the site which shows that the one to buy is the 340 not the 400 IMHO.

M3 with just standard options weighs just 60kg more than the FQ 340 and FQ400, many are up to that again, but the difference is still under 10%, no lag, no AWD losses etc. The FQ400 has a large turbo and the torque is detuned for reliability I believe. Didn't strike me that the acceleration of either were worth the compromises.

None of these qualify as "better" than the others. People say they aren't comparable, but if you are looking for a newish daily driver with some practicality and 300-400 BHP, they are all knocking on 1400-1500kg range.

EvoCarl

Think a stock FQ400 turned upto the MLR 30-130 day.

40-70 3.27
70-100 4.52
40-120 13.00
100-120 5.21

mind you I could be reading all this vbox data stuff wrong

john banks

I don't have all the vbox data as I'm not a member, but the 30-130 time was 17.97s for duran's FQ400 as listed if this is the same car. 19.2s for the M3 on an Evo test with a manual gearbox. The 40-120 is more in the Evo's favour, presumably the gearchange points are what is making the difference. I reckon the 1250kg 340 BHP Scooby with a really wide power band from 3000-7000 RPM (like the FQ340 but lighter) would give the laggier FQ400 a heck of a lot of trouble.

Apologies earlier, figures were Evo not Autocar.

john banks

Kenny, only had the M3 for 2 days You are welcome to a run. I think you'd appreciate the RWD, high revs, and especially the SMG.

Re the gearbox, it does take some getting used to. If you leave it in auto mode you tend to put it on softer settings to let it use higher gears for economy and refinement when cruising. If you then want to accelerate hard it is slower to kick down more like a conventional auto. I got left by a 306 GTI for about 3 car lengths before it kicked down the other day then I nearly ran over it so you do need to plan ahead a bit If you use a more aggressive mode it is a very different. It doesn't do anything brilliantly, but it does most things quite well.

LG John

Its such a doctor/dentist car

I expect to own an M-car at some point and have always tussled with the SMG debate. I'm convinced it has many advantages not least that you can go into 'lazy' mode. I do like a clutch in a car though - I like the fact that there is a pedal to detach the engine from the wheels. If I recall the SMG is a manual first and foremost - it would be good if they did it with a clutch pedal that worked off an actuator although the market for such a thing is probably limited to me and a few random others. At least with a clutch you could totally turn the system off when the mood takes you.

Shocked at FQ400 being close to M3 weight - its shameful the way scoobys and evo's are pilling on the pounds.

John when it comes to cars you and I are so alike in many ways. Big investment, unfamilure car and yet still within 48 hours you've got your mates round to race it Most people like to get used to a new car you know

Aztec Performance Ltd

iTrader: (234)

for comparison....a good 340/340 Classic is capable of 0-119mph in 11.7s.

Must say that I'm suprised by the FQ400s figures - expected it to be a fair bit quicker.

EvoCarl

would that be a 'good' classic or just your classic bob

You just get very very good figures with the power you have.

My friend owns a 360/340 Type R so I know what the classic scoobs go like and would be pretty suprised if he got anywhere near your figures after comparing his car to my old Evo 3 running 1.1bar

ALi-B

iTrader: (1)

Interesting. I'd say most of the scoobs advantage is down to weight, like I've always said that 3 series of late are somewhat on the lardy side. the nearly full fuel tank probably makes a difference (scoob ~60 litres - 1/4 full verses BMW's ~100litres 90% full and the fact the guages on both cars are dubious - BMW usually over reads past half way, scoobs guages tend to have a mind of their own ).

But I'm just nit picking. The biggest difference I've always found is the instant throttle response of the BMW in almost any gear at any speed, obviously the difference between the two are probably made much closer thanks to the closer ratios of the 6 speeder conversion, the mods and sticking with the TD05 (nice one ).

john banks

The M3's fuel tank is only 63 litres. The new STIs work out similar weight to a typical M3 with typical options. They are both a bit porky it has to be said. The E46 chassis does seem lardy compared with the E39, but the weight saved between the E46 and the E39 M engines and the higher revs seem to give similar acceleration.

neilsti

spot on john, i have just changed my 03 ppp sti for an m3, like all the toys, rest of the family love the bm but three weeks in i reall miss my scoob, i really could not put the bm in the same league as the subaru if you need to get somewhere fast! the subaru image put me off the car in the end, i think the new discreet sti will sell very well, just my opinion 4 what its worth!

TonyBurns

iTrader: (3)

I havnt come across an E46 M3 thats as quick as me spec c yet (funny looks on the face of the guy in the E36 evo when i passed him, he looked shocked lol), but for comfort and cruising, the M3 would beat most cars hands down.
They are stunning cars, though i think id prefer an M5
Hope you like the new car John good choice

Tony

john banks

I looked for a used M5, but they were difficult to find in good condition with good mileage, and they are all manuals, couldn't even find a dealer with one I could test drive. New one is a depreciation risk unless you were on the waiting list and were selling now. Maybe in a year or two when they've taken the inevitable hit I'll consider.

MattOz

John,

After your trials and tribulations finding the right car, I'm glad that you like it. I know it's never going to be as raw as the Scoob, but as an everyday car, it would take some beating.

All I need to do now is find one in Alpine White with Imola leather.

Matt

TonyBurns

iTrader: (3)

Are you only after the SMG version then John?

Tony

john banks

Thanks Matt, good luck. Sounds like it will look like a barber's pole

Yes I prefer SMG to manual Tony. In one of the softer auto modes on a gentle run today it did 33 mpg

Deep Singh

[QUOTE=TonyBurns]I havnt come across an E46 M3 thats as quick as me spec c yet (funny looks on the face of the guy in the E36 evo when i passed him, he looked shocked lol),

Have you ever come across a car thats as fast as your spec C?

John, would be interesting to have had the same sort of data of the Scoob against a later 3.6 996. Or even the M3 against the 996. Even though the three are very different(in more than just price) they are often a ladder used by many ie lots of people seem to have gone STi then M3(some CSL) and then 996

banny sti

iTrader: (68)

Mr Singh why do you always make snide comments towards everyone? prime example
"Have you ever come across a car thats as fast as your spec C?"