well of course...i mean this is the supra forum right? or no...?

Well im not asking about personal pref but still 1998 m3 puts out 280 and a 1998 supra puts out like 245, so im not seeing why or how you guys can say that you would take a supra over a m3, you guys are saying id rather have my supra anyday, ofcourse you would it has mods, stock to stock what would you want? im not a m3 fan, i love supras but my friend is saying that a supra is faster stock to stock na to na

well it if were a stock na mk4 and a stock m3...i would still take the supra, to me its seems a little rarer to see one of those than an m3...maybe its just here where i am, but i would take a stock m4 no doubt, im sure there are a bunch of numbers that show 0-60 times and 1/4 times for a na supra as well as a m3 both stock, i guess u can do your comparisons on that, i like the supra's styling, i mean both have i-6 motors, but when i talk to people... theyre more surprised that i own a supra...maybe because a lot of people in teh town i live in own bmw's, theyre too common here so a japanese sports car especially one as rare as the supra will catch a lot of people's attention

great point i have seen it alot. The take off makes all the differnece

an m3 will beat a na stock. but you could buy two of those for under the price of the m3. i would compare the tt to the m3 for closer pricing and 1/4 mile times. 0-60 of an m3 SMG 03(list 47k) is like 5.0 and the 93 supra tt is 4.9 and that car is 12 years old. 1/4 m3 is 13.5 and the supra 13.4 stock

N/A is 6.9/15.2

Well the NA version puts out around 220whp.

The twin turboed version puts out around 380(someone correct if I am wrong).

Nope your wrong. The NA one does but the turboed version creams the BMW all day every day.

Also if you really want to compare them properly you must compare displacemtn to hp output. Meaning whats the ratio of liter to hp? Well the 98 M3 coupe with a 3.2L puts out 240hp whereas the supra with a 2.8L puts out at least 320hp. Gee do the math its a no brainer.

SO THEREFORE THE NUMBERS PROVE THE SUPRA TO BE RIGHT, THE CAR CULTURE PROVES IT TO BE BETTER, THE NUMBERS ON THE TRACK PROVE IT TO BE A BETTER CAR, AND THE NUMBERS AS FAR AS MODIFICATIONS PROVE IT TO BE A BETTER CAR. Hey, if you want to buy a car that will need 700bucks for a simple bolton intake then go for it. Personally I would rather buy a 400dollar boost controller to get about 100hp more.

nice post skil, i would have to agree, he put a lot of time into that post, and yes the math does show the supra to be a better car, with more power/liter, i like this guy alrdy

I appreciate that. I am no genius by no means but the facts are in the simple mathematics. If people cant understand that then its no use explaining to them simple common sensed things in a diatribe.

Lastly, ask yourself this question. How many BMW M3's have been able to accomplish 8sec quater mile times vs. how many supras have accomplished that? Thats also a no brainer too. If people cant understand these things then its pointless.

come on people.... remember this... SUPRA IS SUPRA..... N SUPRA IS ALWAYS SUPRA.... mk4 supra have a nicer body look (i think) n quicker then m3.... come on... Supra is Supra.... n Supra is aways Supra..... remeber that Supra is SUPRA.....

I dont mean to be an a$$hole or anything but your whole post made no sense whatsoever.

I mean of course a supra is a supra. I dont think the forum needed you to post that information. I am sure we the forum population could have figured out that a supra is a supra.