No, I'm right about the M3 having higher slalom speeds. R & T did get 67.7 mph for the G35c in Nov-02, but the 67.4 mph you posted for the M3 is misleading because on 2 separate occasions, they got the M3 at 68.8 mph in Mar-03 & 68.3 mph in Dec-03.

MT (where the G35 was CotY) has the G35c's best slalom test at 67.1 (Jan-03). This compared to the M3's best of 70 mph (Jan-02).

I would also point out to you that the 350Z & G35c are similar but not the same. The 350Z has a much shorter wheelbase, weighs about 200 lbs less, & has a lower centre of gravity. Also, the springs & shocks are more stiffly tuned, for more performance but less comfort than the G35c's.

 

Yeah, I heard about that 100,000 mile thing. But its only 2 additional years on the existing warranty.

I think the G35 coupe is MORE THAN ENOUGH car for me. This is going to be my first REAL car, and I think I'd start off with the G35 coupe. Im only 24 (been saving my a$$ off for this car ever since I graduated college), so I have plenty of time to "upgrade" later on in life...

I figure I'd be able to sleep easier knowing I have a car thats had nobody else touch it other than me. I would know exactly what its been through...

 

All bow to J_P, understanding the complete picture is always more important that just a small part...part of the scientific method I believe.....taking into account multiple results from multiple reviews paints a much clearer picture than a 'one time shot'. I would also agree that the Z is a much different car when you get into the details, and that's what we're doing isn't it? There's a japenese video (I'm sure I found the link somewhere here) that shows an M3, 350, and G35 all going at in on the track, simply put, the M3 started last and finished first. The 350 also gained a position so that would mean that the G35 lost 2 positions.

The reality of the situation is the average monkey fart isn't going to be able to effectively push either car to it's limits without sliding it into curb. So keep the 'pushing it to the limit' on the track, and don't kill me or my kids.

So Icy, in my humble opinion, if the performance is so close that it takes a couple of good drivers and a track to wretch out a true performance 'winner', then there's only two criteria left...your wallet and your passion. Good luck!

 

If you want a car that costs less than the M3, but will out handle and out accelerate it, get the upcoming Evo MR. 0-60 4.3, 1/4 12.9@107.6, 60-0 117, 0.98g, 70.8 slalom, ~$33k. Some people don't like the looks of the Evo, but I think it looks what it is, a sporty sedan. Now personally, if I wanted a second car for the track, I would probably get Evo MR, but it's probably not a good daily driver.

 

Very impressive about the MR. I hope they improve the durability of the clutch on this one. If they do, I'd seriously consider it. Wow.

Also, I want to say that out of the big car magazines, I respect Motor Trend the least, by a long shot.

 

There's another story somewhere (forgot if I saw it on Autoweek, Car&Driver, Motortrend, or Road&Track), but basically Mitsubishi is pulling out of the rally circuit. The engines that were made for racing will be offered by the tuner (not Mitsubishi I think) in custom version of the Evo. Estimated 500hp and (I think) not street legal. Price will probably be outrageous.

 

So down to the point, which one are you getting =) M3?


Martin
2003.5 BS G35
Nismo Aero/Sport Package
Injen CAI
B+G Springs
ADR M-Classic 19's..

 

I'm not the only person who believes the slalom to be a better measure than skidpad. In this very thread, just slightly below my previous post, another person also agreed w/ this assessment.

The fact that a Mustang GT (NOT the high-performance SVT Cobra) can get 0.86 g despite not even having an independent rear suspension is telling. The Mustang is an affordable muscle-car but its handling leaves a lot to be desired. 0.86 g is pretty close to the M3 & G35c, whereas the Mustang GT's slalom speed is nowhere near the M3's or G35c's, as it could only manage 63.7 mph. I do not believe the Mustang GT's handling is anywhere near as good as the M3 or G35c's. Dec-01 R & T

How is my data misleading? You said the G35c outslaloms the M3 & that you based this on checking R & T. Well, on 2 other occasions the M3 slalomed in excess of 68 mph from that very mag, R & T. In MotorTrend (where the G35 was CotY), the best they managed w/ the G35c was 67.1 mph, whereas the best w/ the M3 they got was 70 mph.

I believe that for most drivers, there won't be a perceptible difference. The fact is, few ever truely take their car to the limit. I do however, believe the M3 handles better but that the difference isn't relevant for me personally.

My friend has an 02 M3 SMG w/ the std 18", not the opt 19". I wish I could say the G35c handles better, but IMO, it does not.

I should not have used the word "misleading", but aside from that, I believe there was nothing wrong w/ my previous post factually, they were the facts as I saw it. We are entitled to our opinions, & we simply have differing opinions.

 

So, I once again suggest, performance is not going to be the real measure of how the cars compare as they appear to be so close on the track and as streets of everyday driving will yeild even less opportunity for gains, so price, quality, and passion remain. If they were both free, and you had to chose the keys.....which car would drive away in?

 

I'd take the M3, sell it, buy a G35c with money left over for a TT setup :P

 

Actually, I would still have money left over for a kick *** home theater setup.

 

Get a M3, but don't the 2001 instead buy 2002 or up because some 2001 M3s have engine problem issues.
M3 is just better in every way IMO especially the interior.

 

All I have to say is "black belt, schmack belt". Go hold a Kiazen and design yourself into a hole [img]/w3timages/icons/wink.gif[/img]. Personally I hate all of the industry buzzwords, it's just a waist of good money. I was forced to receive a Green Belt and believe that the whole 6 Sigma BS is only a buzzword away from being the next thing of the past. Remember Lean Processes? How about DFM and DFA? Recall Design to Cost or maybe Commitment to Excellence? Any of this sound familiar? Just ways for marketing types to waist unsuspecting businesses money.

I SAY LISTEN TO THE ENGINEERS!!!

Some marketing group has made millions of dollars pushing this. CPK=1.33 BS! Who is going to make 4 million slalom runs to prove this point? [img]/w3timages/icons/tongue.gif[/img]

Sincerely,
Grasshopper

<font color=blue>The above statements are only my take on the issue. If you disagree with anything I typed then you are 100% right!</font color=blue>

 

I currently have 2002 M3 and recently put a deposit down on an 05 G356MT. The M3 is incredible in performance, but has significant quality problems. This is my second M3. The 04 G356MT that I drove was very impressive, and I think the 05 will be even closer to the M3 in performance with increased horsepower, a better interior and better looking exterior. Differences- the M3 is faster at present, the G35 has a better shifter, equal brakes, exceedingly close handling, and the 04 interior is at least as good as the M3, and should be better in the 05 G35. My current M3 has had replaced rod bearings, replaced oil pump, replaced accelerator module, replaced trunk handle , 2 blown speakers, blown main amp, replaced door seals twice, and peeling surfaces on the door handles and center console. I work from my home office and the car is garaged 90%, so the Florida heat cannot be blamed for the door saels and peeling trim. I do not feel that the difference in price is justified at present. So, I will drive the 05 G356MT until the 07 V8 M3, or the 07 GTR comes out.

 

Wait just a sec....you're saying that the quality of the M3 is less than acceptable but you're waiting for the first year of the next iteration to plunk down 60K on car belonging to a brand you think has quality issues?