[DTM]

I notice alot of you folk like saying:

"335 and e46 m3 have similair hp numbers so they must cost the same!!!!!"

Do you guys actually know what an m3 is?
If any of you guys have driven a 330 e46 and e46 m3, you would know the m3 isn't simply about horsepower. It's about everything else, and hp. It doesn't cost more just because of the hp.

The e46 m3 engine is about high rpm driving, while the other cars are have a far more practical powerband. That 333hp is for the track, the 335 is for the road.

Why would they cost the same because of HP numbers. Why do the 530 and 330 have different price tags?

Sorry bout the rant here and I'm sure this has been said before, but I just wanted to make this clear.

[E36_325i]

M suspension, M brakes, M steering, M engine, M appearance, ///M Power

enough said

[wahoo]

Hmmm...the M is a 'track' car??? Its actually a fat, bloated pig that understeers...but hey, to each their own. Its a fabulous touring car, with the luxuries one would expect in a BMW, coupled with a hi revving engine. It actually is fun to run about town in and I'm certain it would be fun at the track but the Boxster is a better balanced car for the track. The 335 will make more reliable hp once the tuners get a hold of it..unlike the crazy rpms turning in the e46... do you not remember the ka-boom of the S54???? One more reason for the M to be a V8. And while I'm certain the new M will be just fine on the track there are many, many more qualifed cars for dedicated track use than the new M (in price point ) Z06 anyone? The M IS NOT A SPORTS CAR but a touring coupe.

[E36_325i]

Originally Posted by wahoo

The M IS NOT A SPORTS CAR but a touring coupe.

HUH?


Wow.

E90 is a sport sedan by classification, and it's true. Sorry friend, i'm not convinced of what you say about the M. I agree there are better cars for track than the M, but to say it's not a sports car is just flat out wrong.

4.8 second 0-60...yes, it must must be a touring coupe...

The M division has outdone itself w/ the E46M. And they will do the same w/ the E90M. They have designed a car that is comfortable and for the most part practical for street use and on the flip side, can be unleashed on the highway. So it satisfies both requirements nicely.

[3aficionado]

Originally Posted by wahoo

Hmmm...the M is a 'track' car??? Its actually a fat, bloated pig that understeers...but hey, to each their own. Its a fabulous touring car, with the luxuries one would expect in a BMW, coupled with a hi revving engine. It actually is fun to run about town in and I'm certain it would be fun at the track but the Boxster is a better balanced car for the track. The 335 will make more reliable hp once the tuners get a hold of it..unlike the crazy rpms turning in the e46... do you not remember the ka-boom of the S54???? One more reason for the M to be a V8. And while I'm certain the new M will be just fine on the track there are many, many more qualifed cars for dedicated track use than the new M (in price point ) Z06 anyone? The M IS NOT A SPORTS CAR but a touring coupe.

Its obvious from your posting that you have never owned an M or spent any amount of time in one either on the track or off. The M is a track car and anyone who really knows how to race (not just someone who has taken a weekend race course) knows an M is a beast on the track. An M is not a dedicated track car, but nothing that is street legal is a dedicated track car. Your comparisons of an M to a Boxster are ridiculous. A Boxster is a convertible and would/should never be used for racing. Convertibles are not solid race vehicles and the safety aspect alone would keep me from seriously racing that vehicle.

My suggestion, buy an M (or any of the comparable cars you think are as good). Then join a racing club, or if you are good enough get on a race team. After you have some real racing under your belt come back and give us your thoughts on these cars.

I mean no disrespect but your posting can't come from real world experience.

[wahoo]

so the boxster which begat the cayman, a mid-engine car is not 'more balanced' than the M?? I almost bought a late year M/comp pkg last year but I don't want to buy the last year of the make. I'm not hear to make enemies but there is a pervasive M/e90 is king of everything mentality. The M is not a true sports car. It has room for 4 passengers..compare it to a true sports car, Z06/C6/997/987 etc is futile. You quote 0-60 times and then turn around and talk about the track. The e46 is a very, very competent 'package' and does a great deal of things extraordinarily well. Dominate the track it doesn't. If so, then why are M3's/PTG dominating GT2 in ALMS? The platform is old and simply doesn't have the agility/power that the other sports cars do, both in SCCA, ALMS and the real world. Now, I know I'm talking about professional road racing and making it anecdotal to the real world but its the same argument. The S54 has been developed as far as it can be taken. The boxster platform, low center of inertia, excellent turn-in begat the Cayman which is the gold standard for road racing. I guess you're going to tell me the CSL is a better car on the 'Ring than the Cayman too??

The M will be great pulling away from a BoxS but the twisties the S will make up ground...faster corner entry/exit due to turn-in...but, hey I'm no expert.

I don't track race but I have driven every marque and can talk from seat experience. I'd be in the M/comp if I didn't have a 2mo old. For what its worth, I'm waiting to see the 335/M3 in the new format before making a purchase.

I'm also looking into a Superformance in lieu of a new BMW..keep the bimmer for the commute.

[3aficionado]

First, I never quoted 0-60 times. Second, its obvious you read about racing but have no real/solid experience with track racing (If I'm wrong please let us all know what team or club you race with and what car you use). Third, no one here thinks an M is the end all but your comparisons make no sense in the real world amateur/semi-pro racing community (Pro is a whole different game with cars that can’t be used for comparison).

EDIT: I see you changed your posting... Since when is the Caymen the gold standard in racing? It just came out. I see you claim to have driven all the great race cars out there but I still don’t see that you really now how to race. In which case I don’t think you really know what your writing about when you are making these claims. Keep in mind, I don’t think the M3 is the end all and I know there are better vehicles out there... just not the ones you are listing.

[wahoo]

3, we're splitting hairs. No, I have no real track experience but know many that race SCCA. Regardless, my 'real world' driving experience with the M vs the Porsche and seat of the pants told me what I just said. The M, while I'm not johnny weekend racer, pushed in hard turns with big throttle..I don't see why my opinion isn't valid. Its STILL a great damn car but if you drive a M and P-car back to back its silly to say the M is of like ilk with respect to handling. Do I have to post pics or something..jaysus. The M is a front engine car. Pcar is rear/mid. Physics. IRL seat of the pants, whatever you want to call it..the M isn't as nimble. Its like arguing about the M vs a S4. The degree of separation isn't as large but the S4 pushed like a bitch at 8/10s. Now, the M is much, much more 'precise' if you will. The P-ar even more so. Take a 30mph sweeping curve at 70 between them and tell me different.

The Cayman will be the gold standard in track racing. Wait til the tuners get a hold of it. Everyone at Rennlist is salivating over it..and no I haven't driven one but the 'ring times show that over the course it makes up for its lack of hp with its agility. The Cayman is simply a hard top BoxS. The Box S drives like a damn go cart...fun as hell but impractical for daily driving for me.

Claimed to have driven all the great race cars???? I said there ARE better race cars. Have driven P-cars and Ms...no C6z06 nor C6....I know folks that have tracked their 'vettes. I make no claim that its Better but simply a true sports car. You're misreading my post. This is getting tedious...

[3aficionado]

Sorry but I feel like I may be debating racing with a high schooler. No offense if your not. My time is worth too much to continue this discussion. Someone else with more patience and a racing background can pick up this discussion.

To get back to the discussion of this thread, I agree with e36 and DTM about M vehicles. A 335 is not intended to be an M or compared to an M.

EDIT: Why do you keep tweaking your posts after I post my response? Another reason I have little patience for this debate.

[akhbhaat]

Are we to take these comments within the context of today's M cars, or those of yore? I assume the former.

Originally Posted by E36_325i

M suspension,

Understeer.

M brakes,

Fade.

M steering,

Numb.

M engine,

No complaint here.

M appearance,

Who cares?

///M Power

I'm sure AMG has something to say about that.

Do mind the fact that I use a general frame of reference for all the above. Things are quite a bit more favorable when comparing the modern M only to the modern competition. Oh, and don't get me wrong - I'm talking about the M3. The M5 is still as brilliant as ever, even in contrast to its predecessors. Of course, the M5 didn't start life as a homologated race car, now did it?

That 333hp is for the track, the 335 is for the road.

If that were true, why would BMW saddle the thoroughly brilliant (if unrefined) S54 with such a heavy, awkward chassis? At least they still give you a working LSD.

Still waiting to drive the M roadster/M coupe. I suspect this car could finally offer the platform and chassis that the S54 truly deserves. I hear they actually tossed out the base Z4's electronic steering for these cars...

[E36_325i]

Akhbhaat,
My argument was that the M components I listed are superior to those of non M cars. Thats all.

The ZCP components are the answer to all your rebuttals. Another M specific option.

Again, my argument was toward the OP..nothing more.

[Dizzy330i]

Great points, akhbhaat.

Sigh, this is another debate that will never die.

Aren't track cars vehicles like the Atom? Or any Radical? There is no way those could be used for anything else, even if you register them as "kit cars" for use on the street. Even a Lotus is more of a stripped-down track car than an M3.

It's like calling an AMG car like the CLS55 a track car. Or the M5. They are simply not built with the track in mind. (Yes, they AREN'T.)

[BMW F22]

Maybe the 335 will have E46-like suspension and characteristics??? Maybe the new M3 will be even better??? We cant speculate since we dont even know what it looks like yet.

[a burrito]

Originally Posted by E36_325i

HUH?


Wow.

E90 is a sport sedan by classification, and it's true. Sorry friend, i'm not convinced of what you say about the M. I agree there are better cars for track than the M, but to say it's not a sports car is just flat out wrong.

4.8 second 0-60...yes, it must must be a touring coupe...

The M division has outdone itself w/ the E46M. And they will do the same w/ the E90M. They have designed a car that is comfortable and for the most part practical for street use and on the flip side, can be unleashed on the highway. So it satisfies both requirements nicely.

Yes a e46 m3 is a touring coupe not a sports car. Many bmw owners believe that the m3 is a "sports car" because of the caliber that it is regarded as. A m3 is not made to be an out of the box track car but a touring car that has far more capabilities than an average coupe. It is luxurious, fast, athletic, but not a sports car.

The porsche cayenne turbo s does 0-60 in 4.8 seconds as well, does that make it a sports car? No it doesnt. 0-60 designations have nothing to do with the cars abilities, just how well a car can accelerate. On another note, does that make a Amg tuned mercedes a track car out of the box or designated as a sports car? No.....

The e46 m3 is a great car but it is not meant to be a something that would compare to the 911 carrera, lotus elise, vette c6, or even a boxster which are all classified as real sports cars But rather a car that has class and can satisfy bmw's customers who wants more of a raw car out of thier lineup.

[a burrito]

Originally Posted by 3aficionado

Sorry but I feel like I may be debating racing with a high schooler. No offense if your not. My time is worth too much to continue this discussion. Someone else with more patience and a racing background can pick up this discussion.

To get back to the discussion of this thread, I agree with e36 and DTM about M vehicles. A 335 is not intended to be an M or compared to an M.

EDIT: Why do you keep tweaking your posts after I post my response? Another reason I have little patience for this debate.

Here ill pick it up. First of all, you are biased. You drive a e46 m3 for god sakes and your telling me that a m3 is a good track car? Give me a break.. Why must you belittle wahoo's comments and assume that he is a high schooler when he has valid opinions that completely make you look dumb? High school or not it shouldnt matter. What is real is real. Im a high school student should that be the main rebuttal of your debate?

Secondly, M this M that. You are one of the few misinformed M driver's i've come across. You for one are that high schooler that flaunt the stereotype "My 65k car is better then yours."

Originally Posted by 3aficionado

Its obvious from your posting that you have never owned an M or spent any amount of time in one either on the track or off. The M is a track car and anyone who really knows how to race (not just someone who has taken a weekend race course) knows an M is a beast on the track. An M is not a dedicated track car, but nothing that is street legal is a dedicated track car. Your comparisons of an M to a Boxster are ridiculous. A Boxster is a convertible and would/should never be used for racing. Convertibles are not solid race vehicles and the safety aspect alone would keep me from seriously racing that vehicle.

My suggestion, buy an M (or any of the comparable cars you think are as good). Then join a racing club, or if you are good enough get on a race team. After you have some real racing under your belt come back and give us your thoughts on these cars.

I mean no disrespect but your posting can't come from real world experience.

You bash on the Boxster and you keep telling wahoo "your posting can't come from real world experience..." So have YOU ever driven a boxster? If you have, you would know a regular 987 boxster would eat the m3 in every aspect except in the power and top speed (drag) department. Your comment about how convertibles should not be used in tracking does not make sense. Unless you are on a track that you can reach 120+ on a straightaway (nurburging), the convertible discrepancy should not be a factor. So lets talk about how much experience you've had on the track? If so, why such little knowledge under your belt?

Oh, and you dont think "Z06/C6/997/987" are capable of performing better then the m3 on the track? Wow...

Originally Posted by 3aficionado

First, I never quoted 0-60 times. Second, its obvious you read about racing but have no real/solid experience with track racing (If I'm wrong please let us all know what team or club you race with and what car you use). Third, no one here thinks an M is the end all but your comparisons make no sense in the real world amateur/semi-pro racing community (Pro is a whole different game with cars that can’t be used for comparison).

.....So whats your point?

Originally Posted by 3aficionado

I see you changed your posting... Since when is the Caymen the gold standard in racing? It just came out. I see you claim to have driven all the great race cars out there but I still don’t see that you really now how to race. In which case I don’t think you really know what your writing about when you are making these claims. Keep in mind, I don’t think the M3 is the end all and I know there are better vehicles out there... just not the ones you are listing.

The porsche caymen is a great car, and yes it will perform better then the m3 on the track.

[0700700]

Originally Posted by wahoo

Hmmm...the M is a 'track' car??? Its actually a fat, bloated pig that understeers...but hey, to each their own. Its a fabulous touring car, with the luxuries one would expect in a BMW, coupled with a hi revving engine. It actually is fun to run about town in and I'm certain it would be fun at the track but the Boxster is a better balanced car for the track. The 335 will make more reliable hp once the tuners get a hold of it..unlike the crazy rpms turning in the e46... do you not remember the ka-boom of the S54???? One more reason for the M to be a V8. And while I'm certain the new M will be just fine on the track there are many, many more qualifed cars for dedicated track use than the new M (in price point ) Z06 anyone? The M IS NOT A SPORTS CAR but a touring coupe.

this is surely coming from an owner of a 328 that dreamt about having an m3 but in the end of the day didnt quite make it. there is no doubt in my mind that you have never even driven one, so i take your comments as a sign of your *&(.. anyways

[wahoo]

You're right, a 32yo architect can't 'afford' a M3. I've driven the M comp pkg numerous times. If its such a great car then why are they giving 2500-3000 off on ZCP's?? The Comp pkg was added to give the car a little freshening as it went out. A great machine, but I simply dont want to own an outgoing model. When I blow by your pompous ass in the E90 M I guess I can be an obnoxious asshole too? Maybe I'll 'list' all my cars at the bttm to let everyone know how cool I am??

If you want to debate finances maybe you can go to the Lambo boards..you'd fit in great.

[ToddPhilly]

I've owned an E46 M3 SMG for 2 years, and I've been shopping around for the past 2 months while waiting for the 335 coupe to come out. In this time I've driven 3 Cayman S's, and 2 Boxter S's. First off, regardless of what insurance companies or motortrend say about the M3, it IS a sports car. Its non-M bretheren is a touring coupe...believe me I traded the M3 for a 330ci when my business was just getting started. I tracked my M at summit's point and watkins with BMWCCA and PCCA (father in-law has a C4S) and it was fantastic. I had SMG (which is not so good for every-day driving!) and it was incredible on the track. To say that the M3 is not a sports car adn is not track worthy is just stupid.

However, I have to agree that the Porsche one-up's the M3 in terms of handling. Obviously I haven't had the opportunity to take the Cayman on a track (though I'd love to!), but the C4S was amazing. Its feel in corners just can't be duplicated by a front-engine car. Not that the M3 wasn't fantastic in corners, but the C4S was just...better. I loved the Cayman when I drove it. It just felt like a raw sports car (I would say the M3 is a slightly more refined sports car...without SMG!). I loved my M, but if price were not a factor I'm pretty sure I would take the Cayman. Since price is a factor, I didn't plop down $73k for the Cayman. I decided to wait for the 335 and MZ4 coupe to arrive before I made my final decision.

[0700700]

Originally Posted by wahoo

You're right, a 32yo architect can't 'afford' a M3. I've driven the M comp pkg numerous times. If its such a great car then why are they giving 2500-3000 off on ZCP's?? The Comp pkg was added to give the car a little freshening as it went out. A great machine, but I simply dont want to own an outgoing model. When I blow by your pompous ass in the E90 M I guess I can be an obnoxious asshole too? Maybe I'll 'list' all my cars at the bttm to let everyone know how cool I am??

If you want to debate finances maybe you can go to the Lambo boards..you'd fit in great.

3aficionado was right. im trying to debate with a school boy
what a loser... . And believe me if the e92 m3 is any good, i will have one before your order was even processed

[no1sportz]

Originally Posted by wahoo

Hmmm...the M is a 'track' car??? Its actually a fat, bloated pig that understeers....

I think you're the fat, bloated pig...who doesn't know his cars.

[yujini]

Originally Posted by akhbhaat

Are we to take these comments within the context of today's M cars, or those of yore? I assume the former.

Exactly what I thought. The first thing I'd do is replace everything else but the engine. Suspension, breaks.
I consider the e90 330 brakes better than the M3 brakes.

[Dizzy330i]

It would almost be better to talk badly about some people's mothers than to even think of badmouthing their cars. At least that's the way it seems with all the defensive backlash.

Anyhow, it's pretty self-evident why this topic can not be argued. Some people just can't see far enough past the fact that they spent a lot of money on a "trackable" car to realize what they really purchased is not a "track" car.

Don't get me wrong, I would love an M car. Let's just see what that M3 sedan is like when it comes out...