Re: 2002 BMW M3 Vs 2002 Pontiac Trans Am Firehawk

Discussion in '2001 BMW M3' started by BMW M, Aug 9, 2002.

  1. say what you want, my arguement consists of alot more than what you claim. maybe if you could read and interpret properly, you'd know that. i am not going to argue with you overly cocky BMW freaks anymore, you think BMW is God's gift to the road and refuse to see other viewpoints. if you wish to remain that close minded, fine by me, I freely admitted several times that the BMW M3 is a good car and has excellent handling. but i'll still be laughing at your a$$ when I dust you on the street, hope to see you there soon so you can catch a glimpse of my tailights going by (and I don't drive a firehawk, though i'd love to sometime). <!-- Signature -->
  2. YES, the Firehawk is faster than the standard corvette, not the Z06. Car and driver, which I believe was your source, claims the Firehawk has a 4.6sec 0-60 time, which I believe was the same time for the M3. How is that better acceleration? The firehawk also has options somewhat comparable to the BMW, like a limited slip differential and 500w Bose stereo system (Bose is the best stock stereo I've ever heard, not in this car, but in others). The luxury of the BMW is obviously greater considering they build luxury cars, pontiac's firehawk was not designed to be a luxury car, but the bonneville was designed to be a moderate luxury car and includes things such as seat memory and gps navigation, like a BMW. If pontiac had meant luxury to be a part of the Firehawk, I'm sure it would be fairly comparable relevant to price. A stock Firehawk will hold its own on the skidpad with .88g, not too far from the M3, especially considering the price and size difference. But I already admitted that the M3 has better handling. I personally don't care about speeding around turns, I just want to win at the light. And with the Firehawk, I probably would in most cases, if I didn't, I'd upgrade it using the money that I saved by getting it instead of an M3. I'll give you the brakes, Firehawk only stops in 196ft from 70 to zero, which isn't bad, but it isn't all that great either. Honestly, I thought it stopped better(all above stats are car and driver). I like the firehawk myself, I also like the M3, and as I said before I will no longer argue b/c you refuse to accept other viewpoints and you act is if an M3 is the best thing on four wheels. I'd just like to say this, Motorweek says, The firehwawk "delivers a remarkably smooth ride for such a highly tuned car," and "Either way, the buyer will get a machine that takes the traditional American muscle car to a new level, that's still well short of bankruptcy." Car and driver says,"The overall presentation is tasteful and fairly restrained" and "The last meal, and it's a good one." I know you can flood the forum with M3 reviews and already have, I just hope I have shown you that Americans can build a good car, and do. The Firehawk isn't even the top of the rim, I would contend that right now the Z06 is, which will definitely outperform BMW's M series(at least in a straight line, which is what i like ). <!-- Signature -->
  3. BMW M, i think you posted somewhere on here about low reliability ratings from car and driver, well, i just found a car and driver rating on the Z06 where they gave it 5 out of 5 possible stars for reliability. Just wanted to let you know. <!-- Signature -->
  4. #29 MrMetalHead82, Aug 9, 2002
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016
    Hi folks...just dropped by to say that the E46 BMW M3 rocks.

    I'm all for argument and freedom of speech and all the rest of it, but I'm sorry, it's pretty hard to see the point of an argument such as this one. Sure, the two cars might be pretty evenly matched speed-wise, but that makes up a very small part of an entire car. Having driven a number of American-built cars as part of my car detailing business, including some of the most recent models, and also having driven almost as many BMW's (most of which have been much older and in need of a brighten up) I can only say that BMW has very little to fear from companies such as GM. Sure, you do save a pretty penny buying a locally manufactured car, and some of these may be able to compete with some Euro models, but I'm sorry to say that, as far as American and Australian cars are concerned, the build quality just isn't there, neither is the engineering or the attention to detail. Probably the best recent example of a decent GM-based car I've seen is the Aussie-built Holden Monaro (coming to the U.S. soon as the Pontiac GTO.) But, unfortunately, even this car is out of its league when pitched against cars such as the M3 or M5, even if you do save a lot of money. This isn't to say that the Monaro/GTO is a bad car; I would happily own one!! But there are cars, and then there are CARS. Any motoring journalist will tell you that, as far as a car such as the BMW M3 is concerned, there is very little to be desired. Sure, it might not be the fastest car in a straight line, (although around the racetrack it's beaten only by the Porsche 911 GT2 in a recent comparo: but, as said before, a fantastic car isn't necessarily the fastest. Overall, it's all very well to debate the superior car as far as performance stats, (although this arguing over 0.1 seconds in 0-60mph is ridiculous, as it varies from driver to driver,) but you have to look at the big picture, and I'm sorry to say that even though the M3 is the more expensive car by quite a margin, it is also in a class of its own; a class which is definately above and beyond that of any 2002 Pontiac.
  5. I've stayed out of this but you just had the balls to call the 3.2 inline 6 in the M3 RICY?? WHAT THE **** are you on! If you actually knew a thing about this car you'd know it was nominated (and i think it won) engine of the year, it's argued it's the best 6 cylinder engine in the world and the electronic computers capable of 25 million calculations a second.

    I'll call your Pontiac V8 a dinosaur then by your measurement knob. The Pontiac's out of its class its pretty much that simple, im sure its a nice car and all, but it's not in the same league as an E46 M3. I suppose Porsche's flat 6 in the 911 sounds ricy as well according to you?

    The LS1 isn't a great engine. I know we've just ordered an SS commodore (I live in Oz) that comes standard with the LS1 in it, they sound like the engine's choking and can't breath, even the HSV's are kind of like that (the 255kw ones.) So a Pontiac with only 240 or so is bound to be like an SS commodore. The exaust and inlet manafold's are too restrictive. Were not taking delivery of the car till Holden do their factory upgrade available at some dealers that takes the car up to 270-280kw.

    Apart from the restrictiveness (which we've sorted) its a nice motor, it's a revvy engine though, but nice. However its an art to get power out of a smaller capacity engine with less cylinders, that's where engineering figures into it, not that theirs anything wrong with big displacement 8s, Im looking forward to smoking the back end and seeing if its capable of a better tyre fry than my car, but it comes down to the art of building engines and the M3 is bound to be more reliable than the V8. A few of the first batch of LS1's melted and HSV and Holden had to replace them but eh, manafactueres fault and ya get a new engine. But what your saying is like comparing an Evo VI to an E55 or M5 because they offer simular performance. Its a no brainer.

  6. 1q2w3e, I don’t know how you can say the LS1 sounds bad to you. If you don’t give the LS1 any credit, at least admit that it is one of the best sounding engines, unless you’ve heard a mustang with flows <IMG SRC="">

    I don’t know what’s up with the luxury stuff. I don’t see what is so damn luxurious about ‘em. Sure they’re decent, anything is better than a f-bodies interior, but it’s not like they’re any better than they’re competition, ie. Corvettes.

    BMW_M, there is more than 0-60. M3’s have the advantage because they launch better than f-birds, but there is more to acceleration than 0-60. The firebird has a better quarter et and mph. Admit they are both pretty equal, considering the beamer costs nearly 2x as much. Can't beat America in price performance.<!-- Signature -->
  7. i said stock they sound iffy. Too restrictive in the exaust and inlet manafold how they come from holden. Though your right with an exaust they do sound awesome just rumbling along at low revs. Im still waiting for us to get the car so we can get it modded, it should turn up tomorrow or thursday. It was leaving the factory build end of last week or early this, then were getting it tuned up. Should offer good smokie action.
  8. If by RICY you mean like a rice-burner (correct me if I'm wrong) then you must have only seen M3's in videos. I have a seen a lot of M3 vids, and for some unknown reason the engine note sounds like a 2 stroke! Standing behind or sitting inside one, however, it's a vast, VAST improvement. I can't explain why it sounds ricy when recorded in some cases, but I guess that's one of life's mysteries.

    As far as the LS1 goes, in stock form it's not at its best. A local mob called CSV take the LS1 and manage to get 330kW (approx. 449HP) out of honourable feat in itself. On top of that, the exhaust system they add makes it sound GREAT. And it's no sloth either...far better than the standard LS1.<!-- Signature -->
  9. <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from 1q2w3e</i>
    <b>i said stock they sound iffy. Too restrictive in the exaust and inlet manafold how they come from holden. Though your right with an exaust they do sound awesome just rumbling along at low revs. Im still waiting for us to get the car so we can get it modded, it should turn up tomorrow or thursday. It was leaving the factory build end of last week or early this, then were getting it tuned up. Should offer good smokie action.</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->

    You know, I don't recall hearing a stock LS1. Basically, whenever someone buys a mustang or camaro, the first thing they do is exhaust, and I think they sound so sweet. Can't really comment on stock LS1's or the Australian ones, the Holden's though.<!-- Signature -->
  10. I don't understand why people compare two so very unalike cars. The M3 is and expensive German car while the Trans Am is an American piece-o-shit that would probably crumble into several indistinguishable pieces if it tried to take on the BMW. What sorta event are we talking about here anyways, or are you just blankly comparing the two??<!-- Signature -->
  11. Only read page one of this long thing, dont mind me<!-- Signature -->
  12. <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from BMWspd</i>
    <b>I don't understand why people compare two so very unalike cars. The M3 is and expensive German car while the Trans Am is an American piece-o-shit that would probably crumble into several indistinguishable pieces if it tried to take on the BMW. What sorta event are we talking about here anyways, or are you just blankly comparing the two??</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->

    If you read the whole thing and hide your stereotypical attitudes, you won't sound so ignorant.<!-- Signature -->
  13. f-body=discontinued

    m3=sold out and selling for $20000 over list price
  14. I like both cars for what they are, but they are something completely different. I agree that the M3 is an amazing work of technology stemming from BMW's experiments in racing. The Firehawk is just a grand am on steroids. If any person who actually thinks the Firehawk is in the same league as the M3 would take an M3 and a Firehawk, and have them disassembled piece by piece to see how the neanderthal engineering of the Pontiac compares to the precision technology, they would be convinced that there is no comparison. Isn't the Firehawk still leaf sprung? Still has a pushrod V8. I could probably take a small go cart and put a 4 cylinder engine from 1965 in it and it would outhandle and out perform any production car, but it would not be a precision piece of equipment. Let's compare 340+horses from a 3.2 liter engine to about the same from a 5.7 liter. GM could not build a car with this kind of specific output, it's a mark of engineering prowess. No turbos, small engine, big power. Now I like the Firehawk for what it is. It's a fast bucket of bolts. The M3 is nice, too, but I'm not gonna compare them to human beings or make judgments about IQ. The man is right. One car is better because you might prefer it. If you drive both of them and know both of them, but still prefer the Firehawk, it must be better for you for some reason. Styling or other. I would prefer to drive the car Michael Shumacher drives every other Sunday. Does that make me any smarter or stupider? Don't try to convince one another that one car is "better" because you're buying into what BMW or Pontiac is selling you. The image and none of it exists. Even women vomit and shit, there are no barbie dolls.
  15. If a Firehawk driver would just take a drive in an M3, he would see the light. "....Damn, I get it......."
  16. What is it he is getting?
  17. I wouldn't say there's a definate winner when these two cars are compared. However, the fact that the M3 is neck-and-neck with cars such as this and the Z06 proves that there's a deep, deep chasm between BMW and GM as far as their engineering abilities are concerned. GM can only dream of getting 252kW from a NA 3.2 litre six.
  18. HP/Liter means JACK SH! sound like a goddamn honda lover. As far as speed, the m3 is neck and neck with the Trans Am. The z06? Not a chance in hell.
  19. He's getting the FEEL of a well-refined, solid, "tight", powerful car that is known by BMW M-car owners. It is a feel that is very hard to describe, and nearly impossible to match. Almost no one will ever take a ride in an M-car and come out saying "it's just a car...". I should know. I used to be one of those people who despised BMW. Now I own an M-Coupe. The word "car" could never define it, unless someone with only a 2nd-grade mentality was attempting to describe it. Don't worry, I still love my Mustang, but after driving the BMW, it just feels a whole lot chincy-er than it used to and it would do the same to the F-body cars as well.
  20. You sound like a commercial.
  21. So u need the M3 to get laid eh. <A BORDER="0" HREF=""><IMG BORDER="0" SRC=""></A>

    I like the M3, its a really nice ride, but on the strip the Hawk, WS6, and even the Camaro SS would beat it.

    On the track Stock VS stock the M3 would have the advantage. It really does handle great.
  22. Honda lover? Hardly, I wouldn't touch any Honda with a barge pole. KW/Litre does have its place, as long as we're not talking about four-bangers. And the reason why neither the Trans Am nor the Z06 measure up is because the LS1 was probably developed when Ben Hur worked on the assembly line, and the LS6 is a far-too-late upgrade. It's a prehistoric POS.
  23. Since you've started talking about me now, I'll assume my point has been taken.
  24. All evidence shows the M3 to be quicker in the quarter-mile. Car and Driver Dec 2000 issue - M3 13.5sec SLP Firehawk - 13.6sec. Motortrend Top-Speed shootout had the Firehawk at 13.3, but their quarter-mile time for the M3 (in a later issue) was 13.1. I believe the Firehawk is the quickest of the 3 mentioned F-bodies.
  25. Obviously you have not driven a new f-body. I've driven both of these cars. The m3 is nice and all, but there is no replacement dor displacement. As far as comparing a car in it's price range, as well as luxory you should look to it's big brother the corvette. It has enough than luxory and power to put this car in it's place. Just remember that the m5 uses a bigger more to obviously increase power.

Share This Page