UrBaN wrote: Hex_Rated, Agreed on the handling, the Mercs generally suck quite a bit in that department. That said - and again to use a rather informal, if accurate, measurement - if you have a looky at the Top Gear leaderboard...there is no BMW in sight.
Top Gear? Don't think they are accurate at all... Wet track, dry track, warm track, cold track. 1 Lap. They even changed the track at a point. It's entertainment, not a realistic measurement. Here is one that's accepted as the benchmark, someone suggest a better one if you think it's not good enough (too technical, long, etc)...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordschlei ... _lap_times
Standard M3 CSL 7:50s. The production Mercs don't do too well, besides the McLaren SLR, which is 10s quicker than the CSL while the CLK63-AMG Black is 12s slower than the CSL, even with 100hp+ more and 5 years of future tech - tells you something doesn't it? Anyone seen the CLK-DTM-AMG Merc in SA on the road? It doesn't do too bad, 4s slower, but considering only 160 exist and it has just under 500hp, it isn't even in the same class even though it's slower... I've seen a few M3 CSLs driving around JHB, not really a sensible car for the road but they aren't extremely rare.
The only car faster than the CSL in it's weight - power category is the Nissan GT-R 2009, 2010 and test was conducted by Nissan, so they used the best of the best drivers. The 2008 GT-R and Skylines are much slower than the new ones (and the CSL). So are the older Porche 911 Turbos, the Porche GT2 is a few seconds faster, the Gallardo is slower, the list of extremely quick cars bested by the aging CSL is long - including the E92 M3 and RS4.
Mercs are luxury cars that happen to be quite fast, BMWs are fast cars that happen to have some luxury. Well the production cars at least. Audi is in the middle.
Here's an example of what a CSL can do with some power behind it:
http://www.m3forum.net/m3forum/showthread.php?t=260662
20,832 m (68,350 ft) 7:22 BMW M3 CSL Supercharged Richard Göransson
20,832 m (68,350 ft) 7:22 2009 Dodge Viper SRT-10 ACR Tom Coronel 18 August 2008
20,832 m (68,350 ft) 7:24 Maserati MC12 Marc Basseng August 2008
20,832 m (68,350 ft) 7:24 Pagani Zonda F Clubsport Marc Basseng August 2008
20,832 m (68,350 ft) 7:25 Ferrari Enzo Marc Basseng August 2008
20,832 m (68,350 ft) 7:26 2009 Chevrolet Corvette C6 ZR1 Jim Mero 27 June 2008
20,832 m (68,350 ft) 7:27 Pagani Zonda F Clubsport Marc Basseng
20,600 m (68,000 ft) 7:28 Porsche Carrera GT Walter Röhrl 2 July 2004
20,832 m (68,350 ft) 7:29 2009 Nissan GT-R Toshio Suzuki 16 April 2008
20,832 m (68,350 ft) 7:32 2008 Porsche 911 GT2 Walter Röhrl 2007
20,832 m (68,350 ft) 7:33 Koenigsegg CCX Marc Basseng August 2008
20,600 m (68,000 ft) 7:34 Koenigsegg CCR Horst von Saurma 17 October 2005
20,832 m (68,350 ft) 7:24 Lexus LF-A manufacturer test driver 28 December 2007
20,832 m (68,350 ft) 7:25 Nissan GT-R V-Spec Toshio Suzuki 7 May 2008
Zonda, Enzo, Koenigsegg, Carrera GT, MC12 all left in the dust. Not a fair comparison since it is uprated (apparently only moderately - besides the engine) but gives you an idea of how well the car is designed for the track.
The M5 and M6 aren't really fast cars. Well, not around a track. The next CSL will be a monster, although they aren't making an E92 apparently - but I'd be surprised if they don't come out with something faster than their 6 year old design.
