• Car and Driver compares the 2015 BMW F82 M4 to the Porsche 991 Carrera... and picks the M4

      Porsche 911 and BMW M3/M4 comparisons are nothing new. The M3 traditionally offered Porsche 911 level performance but at a lower price point of entry with greater daily usability. The Porsche 911 of course offered the Porsche prestige and the driving dynamics of a lighter two seat sports car. Not much has changed although the M car now offers much more brute force than the 911. The power, torque, and performance gap is the greatest it has ever been.

      Now Car and Driver chose a 7-speed manual Porsche 911 to compare to the BMW M4. The M4 has a dual clutch transmission and this would be closer if the Porsche had the optional PDK transmission. It is what it is though and the BMW M4 simply has the 911 overmatched. It has more power at 425 horsepower (which is severely underrated to begin with) to the 911's 350 horsepower. It has more torque at 406 lb-ft to the 911's 287 lb-ft.

      The straightline contest is no contest. The M4 runs through the 1/4 mile in 12.1 @ 119. The 911 Carrera completes the 1/4 in 12.7 seconds at 113 miles per hour. It makes efficient use of its 350 horses thanks to its roughly 400 pound lighter curb weight but even if this was the 400 horsepower Carrera S with a PDK transmission the M4 would still win. This is the largest the acceleration gap between the 911 Carrera and M3/M4 has ever been.

      Speaking of weight the M4 comes in at 3581 pounds. It just is not as light as we were made to believe. Car and Driver's own weight figures place the F82 M4 30 pounds lighter than a comparably equipped E92 M3 and that sounds about right. BMW did try to make the M4 lighter but it is mostly to mask the added weight of the turbo powerplant and associated plumbing. If the M4 actually hit the 3300 pound figures BMW was throwing around... well, no point dreaming. Also take a look at the front to rear weight distribution figure. BMW no longer is building 50/50 balanced cars in the turbo era despite what they claim.

      Car and Driver states that the 911 steering is more precise and offers a better feel. They also state the 911 is more fun to drive. Basically, Car and Driver calls the M4 the muscle car to the 911's more nimble sports car character. The handling performance between the two is actually about even with the M4 and 911 both pulling .98g on the skidpad. What is odd though is that the 911 is not equipped with a limited slip differential. Seriously Porsche? For an $85k base price that is asking too much?

      Really what this comes down to is price for performance. The M4 offers more performance for less money with greater usability. The 911 is the better sports car of the two, no question. It is more fun to drive as well. That said, Car and Driver nails the conclusion. 'The M4 is more challenging to drive at the limit, but it's far easier to drive faster beneath it. It's the quintessential German muscle car to Porsche's quintessential German sports car. Is one design more right than the other? That's a matter of opinion. But it's hard to argue with a car that delivers more performance for less money.'

      The M car has more of a muscle car character than a sports car character? Welcome to the new M.









      This article was originally published in forum thread: Car and Driver compares the 2015 BMW F82 M4 to the Porsche 991 Carrera... and picks the M4 started by Sticky View original post
      Comments 68 Comments
      1. Itsbrokeagain's Avatar
        Itsbrokeagain -
        I dont really find this to be of any value. Comparing the M4 against a base model Carrera, of course the M will win.

        Its like running a regular 3 series to a C63 and going 'the C63 mopped the 3 series'. Put the M4 against the S with the PDK and have at it, and I bet it will be much more evenly matched or the 991 might come out on top. Both cars are at the top of their model series, makes sense to compare those right?

        Porsche was never about max horsepower, but run them around the 'Ring and you will see how close they are.
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Itsbrokeagain Click here to enlarge
        I dont really find this to be of any value. Comparing the M4 against a base model Carrera, of course the M will win.
        It was a lot closer with previous generations.

        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Itsbrokeagain Click here to enlarge
        Its like running a regular 3 series to a C63 and going 'the C63 mopped the 3 series'.
        It is not because the 911 is a sports car to begin with.

        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Itsbrokeagain Click here to enlarge
        Put the M4 against the S with the PDK and have at it, and I bet it will be much more evenly matched or the 991 might come out on top.
        That is what I wrote but the M4 would still mop up the Carrera S too. The 991 S would need its performance package and, well, for an extra $17k on top of the already high price it would still lose.
      1. onisyndicate's Avatar
        onisyndicate -
        Not to go off subject here. But i can't wait for the new mustang vs M4 comparison. The last stand off the mustang lost but still almost had M3 stats.

        I want to see what the new m4 can do with a tune. 12.1 from the factory a tune might put it with m5/m6 territory if not faster.
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by onisyndicate Click here to enlarge
        12.1 from the factory a tune might put it with m5/m6 territory if not faster.
        Browse the S55 forum and you can see some Vbox results. With a tune and bolt ons the car should be good for ~500 whp and numbers around a performance package M6.
      1. hnic357's Avatar
        hnic357 -
        But how would the M4 compare to the 911 turbo?
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by hnic357 Click here to enlarge
        But how would the M4 compare to the 911 turbo?
        It would be comparatively a value.
      1. klipseracer's Avatar
        klipseracer -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Itsbrokeagain Click here to enlarge
        Its like running a regular 3 series to a C63 and going 'the C63 mopped the 3 series'.
        I'm not for or against your argument, but I will say your analogy isn't the same. Putting a regular 3er vs a C63 is a cheap car getting beaten by a more expensive car.

        A M4 vs a Carrera is a cheaper car beating on a more expensive car. Now this isn't the whole story as we've seen civics and mustangs etc etc beating up BMW's for as long as I can remember. Just wanted to point that out.
      1. Mr. Boost's Avatar
        Mr. Boost -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by onisyndicate Click here to enlarge
        Not to go off subject here. But i can't wait for the new mustang vs M4 comparison. The last stand off the mustang lost but still almost had M3 stats.

        I want to see what the new m4 can do with a tune. 12.1 from the factory a tune might put it with m5/m6 territory if not faster.
        LOL mustang doesn't stand a chance
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Mr. Boost Click here to enlarge
        LOL mustang doesn't stand a chance
        Uh yeah it does.
      1. sahyoun's Avatar
        sahyoun -
        Wow what a beast. Thats a great lb/hp and thats not even with the actual power figures with the real power output the lb/hp is around 7.2 vs the e92 m3's ~8.5 lb/hp which is a huge improvement. As for the weight distribution. How is it not 50/50? obviously its gonna be near impossible to make it 50.00/50.00. The weight distribution is actually the same (actually a little better) than the e92 m3 based off these individual's vehicles

        Besides quite a few other reviewers praise the m3/m4 chassis as one of the best sports chassis. Nothing was said about "muscle" in other reviews. Besides the reason the m4 is so insane to drive and so tail happy is because it makes over 200ftlb more than the e92 at a much sooner rpm with around the same or less weight.
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by sahyoun Click here to enlarge
        The weight distribution is actually the same (actually a little better) than the e92 m3 based off these individual's vehicles
        First of all, don't link there. Edited. Secondly, the weight distribution is 52.6/47.4 which is very poor for an M car.
      1. sahyoun's Avatar
        sahyoun -
        Sorry about the link but in one of them the m4 weights at 51.5/48.5 all the other people weighing theirs are around the same weight distribution the e92 m3 was at and in some cases its better. I don't know how comfortable I am with car and drivers numbers on weight distribution. I trust an actual picture of a member's car on a scale a lot more. A members e92 m3 in the second link i had posted weighed in at 52.3/47.7 Same with the C&D power/torque outputs which we all know are off so I would rather go with an actual dyno of the car.
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by sahyoun Click here to enlarge
        Sorry about the link but in one of them the m4 weights at 51.5/48.5 all the other people weighing theirs are around the same weight distribution the e92 m3 was at and in some cases its better. I don't know how comfortable I am with car and drivers numbers on weight distribution. I trust an actual picture of a member's car on a scale a lot more. A members e92 m3 in the second link i had posted weighed in at 52.3/47.7 Same with the C&D power/torque outputs which we all know are off so I would rather go with an actual dyno of the car.
        I've seen independent weights and the turbo cars from the M5, M6, to the M3/M4 all seem to have more weight on the nose. The M5 in particular and this weight distribution is also fairly poor for an M car.
      1. sahyoun's Avatar
        sahyoun -
        Im strictly talking m3/m4. Besides the e92 has more weight on the nose as well. The turbo engines do weigh more than if they were not turboed obviously but the s55 does weigh around 20lbs less than the s65 with 85 more hp and over 200 ft/lbs of torque more. All I am correcting is that the m3/m4s are just as balanced as the outgoing m3 which is completely true.
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by sahyoun Click here to enlarge
        Im strictly talking m3/m4. Besides the e92 has more weight on the nose as well. The turbo engines do weigh more than if they were not turboed obviously but the s55 does weigh around 20lbs less than the s65 with 85 more hp and over 200 ft/lbs of torque more. All I am correcting is that the m3/m4s are just as balanced as the outgoing m3 which is completely true.
        The S65 is lighter than the S54. BMW hasn't even stated how the S55 weight stacks up to the S65 which makes me think it's much heavier when you include all the supporting parts especially. Especially considering how BMW made such a huge deal about the V8 being lighter than their previous generation I6 yet not a peep about the engine weight this time around.

        I do not think the M4 is as balanced as the E9X M3 especially considering the E90 was 50/50 from what I remember from Road and Track. The turbo cars have shown more weight on the nose. They are supposed to be 50/50 and they aren't, not even close.
      1. sahyoun's Avatar
        sahyoun -
        The e92 is not perfect 50/50 as stated previously. The f10 m5's weight is 52.4/47.6 where the e60 is at 48/52, which obviously is rounded and could very well have been around the same as the f10. The e39 m5 was around 48/52 as well.

        http://www.gtplanet.net/forum/thread...ibution.88979/

        The s54 was an iron block I6 with itbs which is mostly why it was so heavy and outweighed the s65. And bmw did not release the actual s55 weight numbers but they did say it was 20lbs lighter than the s65 in an official release which I can't post the link to.
      1. leveraged sellout's Avatar
        leveraged sellout -
        ^Also read that the S55 was lighter than the S65, which would make sense to me.

        Look, for all the hand-wringing, the M3/4 are amazing cars. They just are, there's no getting around it. A 2/4 door 4 seat sedan is always going to be a "muscle car" compared to a 911...the old M3 was a muscle car compared to a 997 that's for sure. The weight is a disappointment, but the weight distribution is not a big deal. My old BMW is so far off of 50/50 weight distribution its comical. It's still fun to drive, and "enthusiasts" all over seem to pine for the days when BMW made these cars...so I'm not too worried.
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by leveraged sellout Click here to enlarge
        the old M3 was a muscle car compared to a 997 that's for sure.
        No it wasn't.
      1. spool twice's Avatar
        spool twice -
        those 5-60 times show very minimal lag with the M4, so a floor-it-n-go method might be almost as effective as using LC. That 5-60 time in the Porsche shows how reliant it is on a higher RPM clutch drop to get good terms. MPG for both cars are acceptable too, with a new M4 owner already registering 32mpg steady state highway cruising, so not so bad after all! 119mph trap speed is wonderful, right in line with an V10 era M6 w/ SMG III (IIRC, car & driver tested that to be 120mph back then).
      1. Group.america's Avatar
        Group.america -
        M4 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Carerra 4S IMHO

        Only Porkers to buy have BOOST or are called GT3/GT3RS