Quote:
Originally Posted by kyriian
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmack123
FYI, for those whining about "physics", here is an example of an SUV (see Porsche Cayenne) setting a better lap time than the new (G80) M3, which is obviously a serious performer. So the idea that because of "physics" an SUV can't be a worthy performance vehicle is absolute nonsense:
https://www.caranddriver.com/feature...ning-lap-2022/ |
an 180k SUV wearing R-compounds beating a car worth 100k less on street tires, got it 
The M5CS , 60k less wearing the same Pirelli Pzero Corsa also beat this 180k SUV, so your point is... what |
Point is that the idea that SUVs can't perform like performance sedans is nonsense, figured you'd be able to figure that out. You do realize the XM will be > $180k correct? Therefore it will likely stand a good chance of having M3-level performance. And in this price range, customers are not exactly price sensitive, so the cost relative to performance is irrelevant, what really matters is absolute performance capability.
By the way, a lower-lighter vehicle lacks UTILITY, which is something you "purists" seem to forget. Unless you are competing professionally with your M car (which no one is), utility will always have a value. Why the hell would I car about getting a car with FAR less utility for a second or two on the track when I am not using the vehicle to compete? Makes literally zero sense.