# BMW M3 vs Challenger SRT8



## 5150 BMW (Oct 23, 2008)

Hey guys, I'm in a fight with my friend. I argue that a stock E92 M3 would beat a stock 2009 challenger SRT8 on the track or in urban environment. Which would be better? Please respond!

BMW M3 :roundel:

Challenger SRT8 :gay:


----------



## BmW745On19's (Aug 12, 2005)

M3 is faster on a track but the Challanger would beat it in a straight line.

There is no replacement for displacement.


----------



## Edev (Nov 24, 2007)

the challenger is a beast though. i like them both.


----------



## HW (Dec 24, 2001)




----------



## Seven11 (Mar 10, 2008)

the challenger got 425hp vs 414 in the m3 so straight line acceleration could be very close


but the challenger does have more torque


----------



## da geez (Nov 27, 2007)

Bench racing is always ridiculous. Bench racing these two cars is absurd.


----------



## Subcrtical (Sep 11, 2008)

What's the 0-60 / 1/4 mile time on the Challenger? I honestly think it'd be a closer straight line race than you think... Around a track however, there's no question the M3 would devastate.


----------



## jaaX3 (Oct 31, 2005)

Subcrtical said:


> What's the 0-60 / 1/4 mile time on the Challenger? I honestly think it'd be a closer straight line race than you think... Around a track however, there's no question the M3 would devastate.


According to Car and Driver:
4.8 seconds to 60 and on through the quarter in 13.3 seconds at 108 mph


----------



## Fast Bob (Jun 4, 2004)

jaaX3 said:


> According to Car and Driver:
> 4.8 seconds to 60 and on through the quarter in 13.3 seconds at 108 mph


Which is almost the exact 0-to-60 and quarter-mile time of the *E46* M3....I would think the new M3 would take a smokin` dump on those times....


----------



## Excitmnt94 (Jun 6, 2006)

E92 M3 FTW...in all environments. The SRT-8 would get spanked.


----------



## BM2W (Aug 9, 2007)

Well, there's an apples to pomegranites comparison. A few minutes at _Carp & Drivel _or _Road & Toad _ websites should answer the question on paper. Do you or your buddy actually own the cars in question, and how good a driver are you (or are you just ppulling your pud?)?

The reason talk is cheap is because the supply always exceeds the demand - go driving & find out -


----------



## Ryan M (Dec 20, 2006)

The Challenger would get smoked in a straight line. Motortrend tested the car to something like 13.5 seconds, and the M3 was well into the 12's. No contest.


----------



## gtxragtop (Feb 25, 2008)

The Challenger will run you 20K LESS than the M3 for the same equipment. 
The SRT8 puts out 420 ft/lbs of torque vs 295 on the M3. No doubt the heavy Mopar is not going to hold a candle to the M3 in the corners, but the M3 is not going to smoke the tires like the Challenger. AND the maintenance costs are cheaper on the Challenger, and I bet it will hold it's value better over time but only time will tell if this is true or not.


----------



## Ryan M (Dec 20, 2006)

gtxragtop said:


> The Challenger will run you 20K LESS than the M3 for the same equipment.
> The SRT8 puts out 420 ft/lbs of torque vs 295 on the M3. No doubt the heavy Mopar is not going to hold a candle to the M3 in the corners, but the M3 is not going to smoke the tires like the Challenger. AND the maintenance costs are cheaper on the Challenger, and I bet it will hold it's value better over time but only time will tell if this is true or not.


Who cares about smoking tires? The Challenger would get raped. I understand it's much cheaper, and don't really think that these 2 cars are a fair comparison. And the M3's 300 ft/lbs of torque is more than enough to light the tires up.


----------



## gtxragtop (Feb 25, 2008)

Ryan M said:


> The Challenger would get smoked in a straight line. Motortrend tested the car to something like 13.5 seconds, and the M3 was well into the 12's. No contest.


Motortrend M3:
EST DATA
Acceleration to mph
0-30 1.7 sec
0-40 2.4
0-50 3.3
0-60 4.3
0-70 5.5
0-80 7.0
0-90 8.5
0-100 10.1
Passing, 45-65 mph 1.9 sec
Quarter mile 12.7 sec @ 111.3 mph
Braking, 60-0 mph 105 ft
Lateral acceleration 0.97 g (avg)
MT figure eight 24.8 sec @ 0.76 g (avg)

Challenger SRT8
0-60 mph 4.6 sec (man), 4.7 sec (auto)
Quarter mile 13.1 sec @ 108.4 mph (man), 13.1 sec @ 108.3 mph (auto),
Braking, 60-0 mph 121 ft (man)/117 ft (auto)
Lateral acceleration 0.87 g (avg, man), 0.87 g (avg, auto)
MT figure eight 26.7 sec @ 0.67 g (avg, man), 26.4 sec @ 0.69 g (avg, auto)


----------



## FenderBender (Apr 3, 2008)

Who would take a Challenger over an M3?

I'd probably take an E36 M3 over a Challenger

Overweight pigs that can't corner better than a Cobalt shouldn't win any competition.


----------



## 5150 BMW (Oct 23, 2008)

thanks guys. Now i got some good feed back to agrue with him about


----------



## 98_328i (Dec 18, 2007)

FenderBender said:


> Who would take a Challenger over an M3?
> 
> I'd probably take an E36 M3 over a Challenger
> 
> Overweight pigs that can't corner better than a Cobalt shouldn't win any competition.


Are they overweight? Yes. Could they perform much better? Yes. Does it turn you on when that Hemi fires up? Absolutely. 

With some VERY simply bolt ons the SRT8s turn into monsters too.


----------



## jaaX3 (Oct 31, 2005)

I wonder what kind of upgrades you can do on an SRT8 with the money you save from buying the challenger instead of the M3 (not that I would ever, ever do that).


----------



## 98_328i (Dec 18, 2007)

jaaX3 said:


> I wonder what kind of upgrades you can do on an SRT8 with the money you save from buying the challenger instead of the M3 (not that I would ever, ever do that).


Well, Vortech has a blower kit out that puts out 560hp and 510lbs of torque @ 6.5psi. I think that would be a great start  Also, the SRT8 has a fantastic set of brakes and their seats are phenomenal. The only thing missing is suspension and Chrysler has answered that with their Stage 2 coilover kit from KW Suspensions (They are the manufacturers anyway. It's officially a Mopar product). I think it would be a pretty well rounded vehicle once you get those monster wheels and tires tucked up to cut down on the body roll.


----------



## FenderBender (Apr 3, 2008)

Don't forget the crappy interior design and materials.

I love the look on the outside and what it stands for, but it's too big, too heavy, and not for me.

Now, if all we're doing is dragging then sure, it'll do, but other than not, not my cup of tea.


----------



## 98_328i (Dec 18, 2007)

FenderBender said:


> Now, if all we're doing is dragging then sure, it'll do, but other than not, not my cup of tea.


Good thing they make more than one kind of vehicle huh?


----------



## X3-terrestrial (Aug 27, 2008)

FenderBender said:


> Who would take a Challenger over an M3?
> 
> I'd probably take an E36 M3 over a Challenger


:thumbup: Me too! :rofl:


----------



## Fast Bob (Jun 4, 2004)

98_328i said:


> Well, Vortech has a blower kit out that puts out 560hp and 510lbs of torque @ 6.5psi. I think that would be a great start  Also, the SRT8 has a fantastic set of brakes and their seats are phenomenal. The only thing missing is suspension and Chrysler has answered that with their Stage 2 coilover kit from KW Suspensions (They are the manufacturers anyway. It's officially a Mopar product). I think it would be a pretty well rounded vehicle once you get those monster wheels and tires tucked up to cut down on the body roll.


Yes, HP can be pumped up, but I don`t think this is the time or place for cars that only get 9 mpg (and the new M3 is`nt much better when driven with a heavy right foot). I have a feeling that our current crop of muscle cars may be the last of their kind in our lifetimes....better enjoy `em while you can....


----------



## gtxragtop (Feb 25, 2008)

Fast Bob said:


> Yes, HP can be pumped up, but I don`t think this is the time or place for cars that only get 9 mpg (and the new M3 is`nt much better when driven with a heavy right foot). I have a feeling that our current crop of muscle cars may be the last of their kind in our lifetimes....better enjoy `em while you can....


Nine MPG?? Where do you get that figure from? If you hammer on it all the time then sure.
It's easy to get 20+MPG on the highway at 75-80


----------



## gtxragtop (Feb 25, 2008)

X3-terrestrial said:


> :thumbup: Me too! :rofl:


I'd rather pay the price for a Challenger over the price of an M3.:thumbup::thumbup:


----------



## Edev (Nov 24, 2007)

id take an e30 M3 over the challenger because i think the e30 M is way better looking and probably handles better. hey, i just dig e30s :thumbup:


----------



## gtxragtop (Feb 25, 2008)

Actually to be fair, let's compare an 550I which is similar in size and a better match.
A loaded Challenger is around 44K compared to nearly 70K for the 550. At 
60K miles you still driving the challenger while your spending thousands on 550 maintenance. The M5 weighs nearly the same as the SRT8 Challenger and will run you around twice the price of the Challenger. Another point is that the comments on the heavy pig also apply to the 5 series.

550I:
Curb weight 3963 lb
0-60 4.8
Quarter mile 13.3 sec @ 105.1 mph
Braking, 60-0 mph 108 ft
Lateral acceleration 0.88 g (avg)
MT figure eight 26.1 sec @ 0.70 g (avg)
Top-gear revs @ 60 mph 2050 rpm
CONSUMER INFO
Base price $59,275
Price as tested $69,670
Stability/traction control Yes/yes
Airbags Dual front, front side, f/r curtain
Basic warranty 4 yrs/50,000 miles
Powertrain warranty 4 yrs/50,000 miles
MT fuel economy 16.1 mpg
Recommended fuel Unleaded premium

Challenger SRT8
Curb weight 4146 lb (man), 4137 lb (auto) (+172 Lbs)
0-60 mph 4.6 sec (man), 4.7 sec (auto) (.2 sec faster)
Quarter mile 13.1 sec @ 108.4 mph (man), 13.1 sec @ 108.3 mph (auto), (.2 sec/ 5MPH faster
Braking, 60-0 mph 121 ft (man)/117 ft (auto) (+13 feet longer)
Lateral acceleration 0.87 g (avg, man), 0.87 g (avg, auto) (-0.01 G)
MT figure eight 26.7 sec @ 0.67 g (avg, man), 26.4 sec @ 0.69 g (avg, auto) (+.3 sec)
EPA city/hwy fuel econ 14/22 mpg (man), 13/19 mpg (auto)


----------



## a572mike (May 22, 2005)

gtxragtop said:


> Nine MPG?? Where do you get that figure from? If you hammer on it all the time then sure.
> It's easy to get 20+MPG on the highway at 75-80


+1

A friend of mine just got an 09 SRT8 6 speed. Not even broken in, he's getting easy mid 20's on the highway.


----------



## PhilipWOT (Feb 26, 2006)

I was hoping for a video or something. This is dumb.


----------



## Fast Bob (Jun 4, 2004)

gtxragtop said:


> Nine MPG?? Where do you get that figure from? If you hammer on it all the time then sure.
> It's easy to get 20+MPG on the highway at 75-80


I would bet a stack of Benjamins that most owners will be hammering it through the gears on a *regular* basis....why else would you buy a car like this ????
My ZHP gets less than 9 mpg on the track....


----------



## kp335i (Oct 16, 2008)

challenge this!


----------



## 5150 BMW (Oct 23, 2008)

I showed my friend all your posts and he stoped arguing with me about.


----------

