Howcome the M3 CSL isn't faster?

[oohhh yeah]

M3 CSL specs:

0-60: 4.6
1/4 mile: 13.2 @ 111mph
weight: 3218lbs
Max Power: 360 bhp @7900rpm
Max Torque : 290 lb/ft @4900rpm


STi specs (USDM)

0-60: between 4.5 and 5.2 from various sources/magazines
Power 305 bhp (227 kW; 309 PS) and 290 ft·lbf (390 N·m)
weight: 3373
edit: quarter mile: approx 13.5 @ 99mph


The M3 has a lot more horsepower, and is lighter. On top of that, it looks a lot more aerodynamic, and has SMG, instead of a manual. Why isn't it faster?

 

[xNEVER-ONEx]

AWD vs RWD.

 

[disinfected]

It's not all wheel drive, for one thing...that is, if you are asking why (insert year here) STI has a faster 0-60 time. And where did you mention what is "fast" in your mind?

This simple question can be said about a lot of cars...

 

[Keef]

I see you've conveniently neglected to post the 1/4-mile time for the STi.

The reason the STi beats the CSL to 60 is because it's AWD. You just rev it up and dump the clutch and it rockets away because all four tires are giving grip. Same reason the GT-R and 911 Turbo beat all those fancy rear-drive supercars off the line.

 

[hawkeye122]

I reckon the M3 does better in Mid and High Speed corners.

 

[Endless-Wilso]

If it where like 3000lb's and had atleast 430hp it would be alot better off. I didn't know the scooby was quite that low in the hp spec's though .

 

[Zenith]

The M3 would win in pretty much any acceleration test with a rolling start.

 

[oohhh yeah]

Thanks guys:tup:

 

[lebes14]

If I remember correctly the csl has significantly better ring time, I could be remembering incorrectly.

 

[MarinaDiamandis]

If I remember correctly the csl has significantly better ring time, I could be remembering incorrectly.

Yup, you certainly pay over the odds for the extra performance though!