Not much of a mystery, less torque made higher in the band, more expensive tires, allows better hook up off the line, on stock rubber...now add some serious rubber to the GTO and all bets are off.!...
(..traction control won't help by killing power, either..)

 

My "babbling" quite obviously went right over your head. You don't do much racing, do you?

www.bmw.com. Perhaps those are 2006 numbers?

Remember that comment I made about liking torque....especially when multiplied by rpm?

You are correct that the M3's motor makes nowhere near the torque of the LS2 (or LS1, or LSanything else). However, when talking about acceleration and/or speed (0-60, 1/4, top speed), that makes little difference. If we were pulling trailers or racing from 0 - 4000 rpm, then you would have a case. Otherwise, you don't. Quite simple.

I didn't say anything about "traffic". "Traffic" could be zero to above highway speeds. I said it feels good from a stoplight....which it does. Unfortunately, the "seat of the pants" is one of the world's biggest liars. For evidence, go look up current M3 and GTO 0-60 times in your favorite magazine.

And when it comes to rpm, "reasonable" is quite relative.

A testimony to the excellent LSx series of engines.

I'm a big fan of the LSx, and I believe they are best mass-produced performance engines in the world. Bar none.

Doesn't make me a blind GM nutswinger though.

Quite possible, and agreed.

Again, agreed - which is why I felt quite confident in my earlier statement about the LS2 being about the same weight as the M3's engine.

BDnD seems to have forgotten that this was the original point, but I digress.

 

It is pointless to argue with BigDarknDense. I learned that a while ago.

 

This is true

I've concluded - there are some who are simply jealous of my substantial enthusiasm for GM's cars

 

You're quite the 'quite' user, aren't you? What is that, your favorite word?
No. You don't do much engineering, do you?
I suppose that's possible. But edmunds.com lists the 06 at 333 hp, and autobuyguide.com plus automotive.com list the 05's at 333 hp. Maybe it's another situation like when Ford recently over-rated the power of the SVT Mustangs and the owners got all irate and embarrassed
Maybe you have an invention idea here! (I guess I should PM you about this!) You apparently know how to get more torque than the peak shown on an engine curve! Heck, who needs engineering. We've got magic now! (Before your lecture begins. Yes I am aware of the 'torque multiplying effects' of devices like torque convertors... but I'm speaking of the relative advantage of one ENGINE over another, all else and all such devices being equally available)
Lots of 'cafe encounters' are over by 4000 RPM (at least, if one of the participants has an LS2 ). Maybe you are not familiar with the history of the term 'cafe racing'... IIRC it began in Europe where vehicles, such as motorcycles, would race just a block or less from one cafe to the next. BTW what's special about 4000? Maybe you should have chosen 5000 just to be safe
Yea... why in the world would they ever have stoplights where there's... traffic
My point being, there are lots of situations INVOLVING stoplights besides going from a stop when it turns green. Another example is when it's red and you are approaching at say 5 MPH, and it suddenly turns green. The vehicle with more torque (IN IT'S ENGINE'S OUTPUT CURVE) and a flatter torque curve is more responsive, if both vehicles are otherwise the same.
I'm amazed you even said this, without comprehending the M3's 300+ curb weight advantage! You're getting rusty Bob!
There you go again with the desperate measures
Where's this statement? The last I saw, you were 'curious' about the relative weights. If so, it's all the more amazing what the LS2 can do. And at least we (apparently) agree on that.

 

When BDnD's enthusiasm is actually warranted, its great. But the biggest issue appears to be that facing reality can be a little difficult. In another thread, you said the UAW was 80-90% of GM's problem.

That's like saying Iraq is 80-90% of the reason why I can prove George W. is an idiot. There are soooo many more reasons that BOTH are in the hot water they're in

 

BINGO!!!!!!!!!!!

That's kinda the point of the past few pages of this thread.

 

Well gosh... if weight's all that matters, get a sport bike and RULE THE STREETS
For me though there's a *slight* problem with such ideas... both the BMW M3, and all sport bikes I know of... are not practical for carrying my two tykes
I've already faced reality, and made more than one note about GM's obvious challenges to be dealt with (guess that's not enough for some, unless I jump into the GM-bashing pool all the way, with the rest of the herd ). My point all along has simply been, GM's got a ton of advantages already in their holding pen, as is clear by some of the fine vehicles they already turn out today... and all it will take is a release from the UAW ball and chain for them to be sailing proudly in a broad sea of success once again

That is GOING to happen IMHO. Just takes a little faith, hard work and some smart moves by their leadership and that appears to me to have already begun

 

Hmm. Appears at least one person here is 'quite curious' (I love that phrase ) about knowing a detailed breakdown of the whole 100%. So here you go:

85% - - UAW's decades-long, totally self-centered, money grab in the name of 'workers rights and equality' ( ). Result: GM's entire sales, production, and marketing strategy is crippled and warped to meet the urgent needs of the UAW (INSTEAD of the customers and shareholders)
8% - - Poor decisions by previous GM leadership, such as underestimating the importance of high quality and reliability in the 1980's and early 1990's, alienating many customers (UAW was involved here too! )
3% - - Overly kind international trade agreements, allowing other governments to impose tarifs on GM imports (eg Japan Inc) while the USA covets the 'high ground' on free trade
2% - - Cynical, GM-hating modern media like the LA Times, Consumer Reports (up til just recently) and bitter internet forum posters with an ax to grind
1% - - Liberals in government continually adding regulations and rules because they hate big, powerful vehicles
1% - - Mistakes made by the current GM leadership such as the Fiat fiasco

There you go

 

Ok, this is getting alittle silly........

 

I would hope you wouldn't feel the need for the Camaro to all the sudden become more practical, at the cost of added weight. The Camaro has never been a car of true practicality, and I don't think the 5th gen should start this trend.

 

I'd eject if I were you

 

Oh I don't know... I drove my two tykes around since 1999 in LT1/LS1 Firebirds. They were eminently practical, for that... but now one of my kids is 8 and had begun to outgrow the rear legroom so that was a factor (along with better view for my kids out the windows) in getting a GTO. Maybe I won't get a 5gen Camaro? I do hope however that it has a usable pair of back seats. The fact that such a constraint brings a weight penalty with it doesn't bother me in the least.

 

That's sad when an 8 year old is too big for the back seats.

 

He still fit... but part of the problem is I have long legs for my height and I like having my seat run back all the way. And strangely, both my 5 yr old and my 8 yr old are nearly the same size.