BMW Announces pricing for the M3 Coupe and Sedan - Official Price: $57,275 / $54,575
#46
01-16-2008, 12:28 AM
10 track days.
If you seriously cannot tell when your M3 is a quarter tank or less versus full, I don't know what you were doing during those 10 track days.
#47
01-16-2008, 12:32 AM
Right, there is a long list of cars for 65k I would rather have than the new M3.... such as..... uh... how long is that list again? Mine seems to be empty. I like how you are able to predict the reliability too. Not only are you an expert and a fortune teller, but modest as well!
The guy who can tell the world of difference between an empty tank and a full tank doesn't need to drive the car to know how it feels? I am truly impressed. Not only are your senses in tune when inside the car, you even know how a car feels without having ever sat in it. My hat off to you sir.
I have had 4 BMW's over the past 6 years, but why does that matter? I don't need to drive them to know what they are like right? I will just wait for you to tell me.
The guy who can tell the world of difference between an empty tank and a full tank doesn't need to drive the car to know how it feels? I am truly impressed. Not only are your senses in tune when inside the car, you even know how a car feels without having ever sat in it. My hat off to you sir.
I have had 4 BMW's over the past 6 years, but why does that matter? I don't need to drive them to know what they are like right? I will just wait for you to tell me.
Until you drive a car with real brakes that doesn't weigh so damn much on a hot track, like THill in August, Vegas in May, or Button Willow in July in fast group, you just won't get it.
I would take the Z06 over it anyday. I never used the back seats to carry passengers in the M3 when I had it.
I would also take a CPO 996 Turbo for the same price any day. Other than not being able to fit 10 bags of groceries (it can fit 5 to 6), it is a better car in every way.
Oh hell, I would also take a CPO 996 GT3 for the same price, but well, you can't get NAV or sunroof in it, so maybe you are not interested.
So, how many of those BMW's were stickshift M3's?
#48
01-16-2008, 12:36 AM
The point is, for 65K, it is inexcusable that I can't take a stocker to the track without completely destroying the brakes in the fast group, when anyone in a lowly Coxster can show up with his car, drive for two days even in July at Button Willow, then drive home without having to do emergency brake bleeding, futzing with the pafds, etc.
10 track days.
If you seriously cannot tell when your M3 is a quarter tank or less versus full, I don't know what you were doing during those 10 track days.
10 track days.
If you seriously cannot tell when your M3 is a quarter tank or less versus full, I don't know what you were doing during those 10 track days.
Exactly how hard would you have to push a car on the street for the amount of fuel in the tank to matter?
The thought never crossed my mind as to how "different" the car felt as the tank winded down. Sure you can feel something to a certain extent, but lets not act like its night and day. How do you know what you are feeling isn't a head wind dying down or more rubber being left on grooves in the track as the track day progresses?
I had my best drag racing times at california speedway with the M3 on a full tank as well...
#49
01-16-2008, 06:26 AM
I have had three M3's, and I have zero interest in this one.
3600 pounds? Why? For what?
Single piston caliper brakes that fades after one session of tracking? Laughable especially since the 135 has better brakes than this sorry car.
The E36 was great because it was nimble, with great handling, and reasonably quick.
The E46 was great because it finally had some power without gaining severe amount of weight.
3600 pounds means that it is no longer a sports sedan, but a GT like everybody else. There is no longer anything special about the M3.
A sad day really. I had hoped that it would come with 400HP in a 3400 pound package like the E46 M3, and this time, with real brakes.
I don't know why anyone would get this sorry car over a nicely kept 2002 996 Turbo 6 speed.
3600 pounds? Why? For what?
Single piston caliper brakes that fades after one session of tracking? Laughable especially since the 135 has better brakes than this sorry car.
The E36 was great because it was nimble, with great handling, and reasonably quick.
The E46 was great because it finally had some power without gaining severe amount of weight.
3600 pounds means that it is no longer a sports sedan, but a GT like everybody else. There is no longer anything special about the M3.
A sad day really. I had hoped that it would come with 400HP in a 3400 pound package like the E46 M3, and this time, with real brakes.
I don't know why anyone would get this sorry car over a nicely kept 2002 996 Turbo 6 speed.
#50
01-16-2008, 06:29 AM
heres something about reliability...on m3forum, theres already at least one case of someone having their motor replaced due to a bad crankshaft IIRC. prob in the same fashion as the e46, e60 m6 and e63 m6, there are going to be plent of problems.
#51
01-16-2008, 09:04 AM
You know what I was doing those 10 track days? Enjoying myself, enjoying my car, enjoying using it to a far higher level than I would ever do on the street. Crazy, isn't it?
Exactly how hard would you have to push a car on the street for the amount of fuel in the tank to matter?
The thought never crossed my mind as to how "different" the car felt as the tank winded down. Sure you can feel something to a certain extent, but lets not act like its night and day. How do you know what you are feeling isn't a head wind dying down or more rubber being left on grooves in the track as the track day progresses?
I had my best drag racing times at california speedway with the M3 on a full tank as well...
Exactly how hard would you have to push a car on the street for the amount of fuel in the tank to matter?
The thought never crossed my mind as to how "different" the car felt as the tank winded down. Sure you can feel something to a certain extent, but lets not act like its night and day. How do you know what you are feeling isn't a head wind dying down or more rubber being left on grooves in the track as the track day progresses?
I had my best drag racing times at california speedway with the M3 on a full tank as well...
You don't need to "push" the car on the street or track to be able to tell. If you can't, you need more seat time.
How much do you think 12 gallons of fuel weigh?
Are you going to tell me that you can't tell the difference when there is even a female instructor that doesn't weigh very much in your car on the track too?
Anyway, do whatever makes you happy. If you want to spend 65K on a pig of a car with no brakes, by all means. Some of us have just been around M3's on and off the track long enough to realize that the E90 is no longer a fun car for track events.
Seriously, do yourself a favor and try a lighter car with power and brakes on the track, and you will understand.
#52
01-16-2008, 09:15 AM
Fanboi or not though, to say that the M3 will be more reliable is just well, optimistic. I brought up this point to address the whole out of warranty myth with the CPO 996 Turbo. My Turbo spent less than 3 days in the shop after 28K IIRC miles. The M3 spent weeks, yes, weeks, in the same mileage. And it was a 2002, not a 2001 either.
#53
01-16-2008, 10:37 AM
I think as a three time M3 owner, plus someone whose other daily from the GT2 is an E30, I qualify as a BMW fanboi.
Fanboi or not though, to say that the M3 will be more reliable is just well, optimistic. I brought up this point to address the whole out of warranty myth with the CPO 996 Turbo. My Turbo spent less than 3 days in the shop after 28K IIRC miles. The M3 spent weeks, yes, weeks, in the same mileage. And it was a 2002, not a 2001 either.
Fanboi or not though, to say that the M3 will be more reliable is just well, optimistic. I brought up this point to address the whole out of warranty myth with the CPO 996 Turbo. My Turbo spent less than 3 days in the shop after 28K IIRC miles. The M3 spent weeks, yes, weeks, in the same mileage. And it was a 2002, not a 2001 either.
the new m3 doesnt do much for me...rather have a 997S or cayman S. 997S is a superior car in every way except for space and straight line is about even in a non x51 997S. and other than straight line, the cayman S is better as well.
you can buy a used 997S for about the same price as people will be paying for new m3s (likely with markup). the corvette or z06 is superior as well except for space. the gtr is gonna be better, the lexus IS-F will prob be right there too. sorry, the m3s days are numbered.
#54
01-16-2008, 05:36 PM
Why is it so hard to get it through your thick head that the car is not built as a trackday car? Why is this so hard for you to comprehend? Its really not that hard...
#56
01-16-2008, 09:02 PM
the m cars are purely gt cruiser cars now. the only things that have different from amg at this point is manual transmission and higher revs.
dont worry, audi built a better car than the m3 in the r8, even tho its also fugly as sin.
#57
01-16-2008, 09:18 PM
I guess it's ironic for me to be in such support of the e92, being as I own a completely track-dedicated e36 (Seth Thomas's old car for those that keep up with the series). But I do think the e92 definitely has its merits, and I certainly expect it will more than hold its own on the track.
I remember the same massive debates upon the e46 m3's introduction and while they were still founded in reason, in the end the e46 turned out to be killer car that is a blast to drive.
I do wish the new m3 was a lightweight razor-edge monster, but these days no regular passenger (especially in the m3's category) is like this.
I remember the same massive debates upon the e46 m3's introduction and while they were still founded in reason, in the end the e46 turned out to be killer car that is a blast to drive.
I do wish the new m3 was a lightweight razor-edge monster, but these days no regular passenger (especially in the m3's category) is like this.
#58
01-16-2008, 09:56 PM
Tell me again why is there a CF roof on a car that weighs 3600 pounds?
#59
01-16-2008, 09:57 PM
Says the person that has can't tell weight difference in his car.
Do you also leave DSC on at the track too?
Do you also leave DSC on at the track too?
#60
01-16-2008, 10:00 PM
I guess it's ironic for me to be in such support of the e92, being as I own a completely track-dedicated e36 (Seth Thomas's old car for those that keep up with the series). But I do think the e92 definitely has its merits, and I certainly expect it will more than hold its own on the track.
Let me guess, Suzy's M3 list too?
