2009 BMW M3: A Bargain If You Really Care

Compelling post, but how many Track Days per year, on average, before the M3 makes sense over the 335i? To wind that engine out, you really need a track. I would think the 335i might be glorious on commute and backroads and even a couple track days a year. Same with an S5 or G35s.

@jederino, having owned both I can say the M3 really loses nothing to the 335i on the daily commute (with EDC). I can see your point though, and that's why for at least 90% of people choosing between a 335i or an M3, the 335i would be the better choice given the cost. There are a select few enthusiasts who are going to truly appreciate every moment of being in the M3 regardless of how short the drive is. I loved my 335i, but the M makes the drive home still that much more fun. It's hard to put into words as eloquently as Mr. Sadlier did, but I can completely see where he's coming from. You can't really explain it to someone, it either means something to them or it doesn't.

Great post! Its one point of view and I'm sure its going to put a ton of people on the defensive. While I love this car and would love to own it, I could really never see myself dropping this amount of dough. Perhaps that means I'm not a connoisseurs, and that's something I can live with.

"Crunch the numbers and it doesn't make sense." Agreed

"The N54 and N55 turbo sixes nip at the mighty M-Power V8's heels"

And then if you are willing to drop some more money into the car you put a twin turbo on that V8 you will have massive amounts of power at your command.

I admit there is a level of bragging rights that you get when you own a M car and that maybe to some worth the extra money.

Does the Caddy CTS-V also give this connoisseur's car feeling? Or is it all motor and glitz?

I respectfully disagree that the E90 M3, while a stupendously capable machine, is a real value.

The E30 M3 was produced to homologate the car for Group A Touring (racing). With barely a 20% price premium over the E30 325e it handily out-performed the latter whether on the street or track.

The E36 M3 was marketed again at a 20% price premium over the E36 328is. The chasm in performance between the former and the latter again was pretty significant.

The E46 M3 saw a greater price premium about 30% over the eE46 330i still with sizeable performance benefits favoring the M.

Fast forward to 2008 and you now have an E90 M3 which now requires a 50% price premium over the 335i. And you no longer see the huge advantage in streetable performance with the M over the 335i.

And the E90 M3 returns at least 25% poorer fuel economy in normal driving.

Hence the huge discounts I've seen on the E90 M3s since they have appeared on dealer lots.

The E30, E36, E46 M3s never required discounts to sell. In fact typically you needed to get on a waiting list to buy one.

I think the honest and direct answer to this question is how many people make the sacrifice to buy one over less expensive options. The M is, perhaps, a bargain at its price, but not nearly enough of a bargain to part some folks (including me) from their (my) hard earned money.

Great car, just too expensive when competitors can swing a bat nearly as hard.

Kev

sorry, but I'm happy with my 135. all the power I could use, a kick to drive, it's semi-stealth (at least not everyone and their dog has one, and an M3 draws a little TOO much attention) as far as Bimmers go, and I can still pay my mortgage.

it's like my old 2001 S4...reincarnated!

now if only the stereo didn't suck...

"Fast forward to 2008 and you now have an E90 M3 which now requires a 50% price premium over the 335i. And you no longer see the huge advantage in streetable performance with the M over the 335i."

Actually, no.
335i sedan starts at a little over $40k.
M3 sedan starts at a little over $55k + GGT. Therefore, the price differential is abut 37%.
Except for the DCT (vs the auto box in 335i), options for these cars are similarly priced.
BMW grossly overproduced the 08 M3s and therefore you saw the large discounts. Such discounts are much rarer now after BMW slashed production. Current discounts are comparable, from a well-supplied dealer, between the 335i and M3.

@bkochuk

Stereos are overrated. If your engine doesn't drown out the radio you aren't driving hard enough.
Words cannot describe how rarely I turn on the radio... and when I do it's only for news or traffic info.

@e90_m3

I'm a creative director at an advertising agency. I often have to produce music for TV and radio. Music is my life!

If the stereo doesn't drown out the engine, I'm not listening hard enough!

The automotive press will continue to heap praise upon BMW because it makes such an awesome impression in a short period of time, especially when you are not the one paying for it!! BMW makes an awesome machine but when you compare prices to things like say .. a CTS-V .. you wonder why you are paying so much for the vehicle. Keep in mind, Edmunds M3 is 67k plus!

It comes down to cache' and brand. Hell, the car is not even reliable and no BMW is for that matter! OH and that wonderful 135 is really an overpriced and ugly vehicle. 36k and not even real leather seats, sport package, power seats or ipod cable and dont go spouting off that all that does not matter because it has rear wheel drive and 300 HP... ugh, bmw owners.

Really? A discount supercar, I dont think so.

"It comes down to cache'[sic] and brand. Hell, the car is not even reliable and no BMW is for that matter! OH[sic] and that wonderful 135 is really an overpriced and ugly vehicle. 36k and not even real leather seats, sport package, power seats or ipod cable and dont[sic] go spouting off that all that does not matter because it has rear wheel drive and 300 HP... ugh, bmw[sic] owners."

It's always nice to see another intelligent -and eloquent- automotive connoisseur posting on IL...

e90_m3

My mistake.

I meant to compare the M3 coupe to the 335 coupe. The former bases at $60K and the latter at $42K.

That price premium is about 43%.

As I stated that is still a significant premium when compared to the previous Gen M3s.

In other words all you needed to walk from an 328is in 1998 to an M3 was $8000!!!

Nowadays you need about $20,000.

The previous Gen. M3s enjoyed a significant price advantages over direct competitors like the Audi S4, Mercedes CLK AMG 55, even the Porsche Boxster.

While the M cars will likely always have a following, some connoisseurs included, the very value offered by the current generation M3 is simply not as significant as it once was.

As a former owner of an E36 M3 coupe, my opinion is not in any way offered to take away from the immense capabilities of the current E90/ E92 M3.

Hey wrinkle, I don't think many auto-journalists make the kind of money that will allow a $1000 car payment every month. That guy who owns the Ford GT is an exception however.

I'm sure it is great fun, and if I had the money to blow on a car like this, it would be a tough choice between an M3 and a CTS-V. But I don't so I won't bother thinking too hard about it.

And oenophile sounds dirty. Bunch of weirdos on the left-coast I think.

I really do appreciate the ability of the E9X M3, but I'm still drawn to the E46 M3 and E39 M5. I really like the sounds produced by the S54 and S62. And then I have a friend who gave me the right of first refusal to an immaculate two owner E30 M3 with only 54K miles on it.

hey baloo!

what are you driving these days??

"what are you driving these days??"

Whatever it is, I'm sure it's found on every enthusiast's 10 Best List....

Sorry Josh, but the E90 M3 is not in any way shape or form a discounted supercar.

The GT-R is a discounted supercar, the M3 isn't even in the same stratosphere. The GT-R plays with Porsche Turbo's, Gallardo's, R8's, and F430's. The M3 share's its roots with popular Taxi's in Germany.

The wine analogy made my day. What a joke.

@athens,

"I meant to compare the M3 coupe to the 335 coupe. The former bases at $60K and the latter at $42K.

That price premium is about 43%. "

The M3 coupe starts at $58K... or the same 37% premium as the 335i sedan vs. M3 sedan.

@baloo1983,

"Hell, the car is not even reliable and no BMW is for that matter!"

What basis do you have to substantiate that? Edmunds has recently conducted long term tests of an E90 330i, a 135i, an X5, this M3, and the 750i currently in the fleet. All of those cars have been very reliable, much more so than many other cars that have gone through the 20-30k mile ringer with Edmunds (cough GT-R cough). Compared to the CTS 3.6DI in the fleet that had multiple minor issues (intermittent rear power windows, audio/infotainment system glitches, a couple bits falling off, squeaking nav screen, random squeaks and rattles) so far the M3 has proven to be pretty much bulletproof.

"Sorry Josh, but the E90 M3 is not in any way shape or form a discounted supercar.
The GT-R is a discounted supercar, the M3 isn't even in the same stratosphere. The GT-R plays with Porsche Turbo's, Gallardo's, R8's, and F430's. The M3 share's its roots with popular Taxi's in Germany."

Sorry drewster, but if the ugly, under-engineered nissan is a discounted supercar, (because its AWD grip and overboosted, and characterless, v6 make it fast to 60), then the M3 is every bit one too. Looking at Edmunds own testing, the M loses acceleration contests, understandably, that's it; it is comparable in all other areas.

I'm looking right now at the r8's and gt-r's test on here. Funny how the 'lowly' M3 coupe, with its 'taxicab roots,' smaller tires and less exotic brake hardware, slaloms and stops just as well as those two from-the-ground-up sports cars.

Get over yourself. Discounted supercar may have been hyperbole, but either way the M is an undeniable performance machine, in coupe and sedan form.

I think its hilarious that the people jumping on the defense of the BMW have names like ... well ... you can figure that one out : )

BMW reliability is determined by my own personal experience with family and friends who have BMW's past the 30k mile mark. It is also determined by my work with them at a car dealership level. We called them money pits for a reason. They also dont offer "no cost maintenance" for no reason..its because they're cars are OUTRAGEOUS to maintain!

A GT-R is a SUPERCAR and while I do not excuse its faults, an m3 can not hold a candle to its performance, so that is a poor comparison. The cadillac is also not without faults, and the M3 is not without rattles ( check the blog)! One must also consider that the cadillac is quite a bit less expensive than a BMW and that there is no where near the brand snuff of bimmer.

@ bkochuk - I drive a mazda 3i manual. To save some money I am going to be going to a late 90's prelude sh soon : ) My favorite all time car is the Miata and in the coming year I hope to get involved in SCCA racing with one. If money was no object .. the things I would own!

I'm not sure how BMW gets a reputation for poor reliability, but I have a theory:

The vast majority of BMW enthusiasts – those that really appreciate the vehicles the company manufactures, as compared to the people who drive Beemers for social reasons – buy their vehicles second hand, often with many miles on them. They drive them hard and experience problems that result from hard driving.

These same individuals then flood the interwebs and bimmerforums and talk about the various gremlins. So I think BMW's reliability rep is partially influenced by the experiences of people who bought older generation cars second-hand (or third-hand) and beat the piss out of them.

In any case, BMW's NA powertrains should all outlast the solar system regardless. The electronic bits, maybe not. The E46 in particular had a lot of esoteric issues. But BMW's mills are stout mofos. You'd have to look at one of GM's OHV V8s or Porsche's flat sixes to find comparable reliability.

A word on IL's CTS - I don't know what they did to that thing, but it may have been a lemon. I've ridden in and driven more than a handful of CTSs from just about every generation, including vehicles owned by people that didn't take care of them, and never noticed anything like what the long-term car exhibited. They seem to be pretty solid cars.

Maintenance costs and reliability are two very different things. BMW's are expensive to fix out of warranty but that doesn't mean they go wrong any more frequently than other premium brands. Do German dealers rape you when repairs are needed? Absolutely! Those not smart enough to find a good indy mechanic when their car goes out of warranty probably shouldn't own a car like this. The next few months should be interesting as we will be able to compare the reliability of the "new" Z06 relative to the old E46 M3.

More BMW worship that ignores the pricetag from a familiar source. I like the question posed by the first poster. If this car is so great (current and prior models) why do so few journalists own one> Sadlier says $60K is more than reasonable (not like the car is loaded at that price) but he doesn't own a new or used M3. Why is that? If the costs are reasonable, the reliability and maintenance costs are reasonable and this car is as practical as a camry why doesn't every single IL editor drive this car? Put your money where your mouth is or acknowledge this is a very nice but very expensive compact car that is only attainable by a small number of mostly SINGLE males. No matter how many posts we see about the adequate backseat and trunk this is a compact car. An expensive compact car with terrible mileage.

The new 335is model makes this car even more superfluous which makes me wonder by BMW is even bringing that model to the US. Sadlier (and others in denial) refuse to recognize that the C63 and CtS-V offer the same thrills for the same money. The M3 is great but its not the only game in town anymore so I fail to see why it alone gets so much praise heaped on it. If you have never lived with a CTS-V or C63 for a year than go add both to the longterm fleet.

If the M3 is a supercar than so is the Corvette, CTS-V, C63 and S4, The level of performance these cars deliver is supercar-like by 90s standards but not by today's standards. None of these vehicles can touch a GTR or ZR-1 or R8.

baloo- " To save some money I am going to be going to a late 90's prelude sh soon : ) "

YOU FOOL. You hopeless fool. The 5th gen SH is a disasterously seductive mistress. As someone who owned one for several years; I can tell you that they are gaping, leviathan money pits. They're worth every penny if you've got the cash, but you'll be ridiculed mercilessly by those who don't agree with what Sadlier writes above.

Which is pretty much everybody.

"Get over yourself. Discounted supercar may have been hyperbole, but either way the M is an undeniable performance machine, in coupe and sedan form."

No different from the similarly priced IS-F, C63 or CTS-V. A car would be a bargain if it offered more performance than anything else with a similar price. Not the case for the M3. Its priced as it should be relative to its competition.

"Compared to the CTS 3.6DI in the fleet that had multiple minor issues (intermittent rear power windows, audio/infotainment system glitches, a couple bits falling off, squeaking nav screen, random squeaks and rattles) so far the M3 has proven to be pretty much bulletproof."

Look up reliable in the dictionary and then tell me how any of the items you mentioned relate to reliability. As for pieces coming off the 7 series and FX50 have had the same issue. I believe the M3 also had some interior carpet near the door that detached for no reason. The CTS had some annoying glitches, it was not reliable and to my knowledge never spent a day away from the IL staff in the shop. And considering this M3 is about $22k more than the CTS they had I'm glad its been more trouble free.

"But why is it that so few editors not perched atop the managerial chain actually own one of these? "

Because as great as the car is, it is a compromised design--like all engineering products.
It handles great, but not quite big enough as an all-purpose family car. The front and side skirts give the car a meancing look, but make owners cringe every time they approach steep driveways. The power and exhaust note are intoxicating, but the gas bill sombering. $1000/mo financing payment is do-able for many with a good job and willing to forgo other luxuries, but quite a burden for a 2-car family, i.e. most families.
I chose one because I am willing to live with its inherent shortcomings. I do not commute in it so its bad-weather performance is not my concern and neither is gas mileage (I average 4000 miles/year). I only have one car so the car payment is kept manageable. I live in NYC therefore small cars are always preferred. I decided that since I can only have one car, it may as well be fun as heck to drive.
These super-sedans are never intended to sell in great volumes and by all account they sell very well given the economic climate. I see E9x M3s everyday even though it came out not too long ago.

I agree with the original post. It's like a Rolex - they don't do much more than a Timex, and nobody really needs them. But people with the means want finer things. Whether the M3 is best in class or reliable enough for the coin, is debatable. I would probably get a less intense 335, or another brand altogether, even if money were not an issue. But some are willing to forego the cost/benefit analysis and just enjoy the best they can get, and as a capitalist I have no problem with that whatsoever.

Recall Dan's suspension walk-around on this car....they spared very little on the design and hardware underneath this car. Not quite like looking at all the bits and pieces that make up a Ducati but along those lines - for me at least.

I and others have said this before, but I'll say it again. The M3 is a great car, but probably not $30k better than a 135i or 335i. Sure, I love me a well equipped M3 coupe, however when I follow one I'm only doing so for the looks for the first few minutes and the sound for a few more. After that its about its about a good old fashioned showdown. 3-series are a dime a dozen.

e90_m3,

You've hit on the real problem with Sadlier's post: you are capable on owning an M3, with it's eccentricities and a hefty $1000/month payment. According to Josh's logic, then, you are the only connoisseur here. Not even he owns an M3.

That's the problem with his post. He equates auto enthusiasm with having enough money to buy expensive luxury sedans, which is an appalling argument coming from someone that draws his paycheck from an online magazine – an online magazine about cool cars read by people that, by and large, can't afford them.

Automobile enthusiasm isn't about being rich. That's why Sadlier's post was stupid. Not because the M3 is stupid, because the M3 is brilliant. But because not being able to afford the M3 doesn't make a person any less of a connoisseur.

Hybris wrote: "I admit there is a level of bragging rights that you get when you own a M car and that maybe to some worth the extra money."

In So Cal where I live (and probably many other places), that is the whole deal right there. I could go off on a huge rant right now but I'll spare you. :)

I think several people on here just completely escaped Sadlier's point about being a connoiseur.

There are lovers who swear by French wine and will buy it for hundreds of dollars a bottle. There are those who swear by Italian reds and will find the great deals at $30 a bottle.

And then there are those bargain hunters like a good friend of mine who buys Pacific Peak for $3 a bottle and enjoys it.

Are any of these people "wrong"? Do any of them get more or less "value"?

It's about what you personally care about. The M3 is for the person who cares about specific things and represents a solid choice for that person.

A $60k car is out of the ownership of most people making less than $150k a year and that are grown ups. But why don't we ask how many editors have ever owned an M3? That'd be a more fair question. Have you ever owned a e30, e36, or e46 m3? All of those became affordable for the $40-100k crowd awhile back.

Regarding the supercar argument:

Can you be any more ridiculous? Is a supercar only "super" because of it's capabilities referenced against only the most modern of cars and their rag numbers?

Is a late 90s ferrari or NSX less of a supercar because of it? How about the first corvette Zr1?

Of course not. They are simply supercars that present themselves with less performance capabilities than modern cars. It's like comparing Ariel Atoms with different powertrains....the base model isn't a supercar because the top model offers SOOOO much more acceleration????

Foolish argument.

...

Lastly, many of these cars are different from their lower-priced alternatives because they can literally be tracked out of the showroom and then driven home. The 335i can try to do that, but is more likely to have failures (like brakes). Same with the CTS DI v6 and many others. These "everyday supercars" like the M3 and CTS-V are expensive and expensive to own and maintain (i.e. brake rotor replacements are higher in cost) because they are built to lower volume and to meet a higher standard of use.

If you don't understand that, then talking about the price differentials is showing your own ignorance.

I can sure understand why someone would want the performance and driving feel of a BMW.....and I think they are reliable for what they are..I.E. a finely engineered high performance machine that needs more than the average amount of servicing to perform as intended. It takes a highly trained and expensive tech to work on one. That being said my best friends have a 323 that has had 3 trannys in 65K and FOUR power window motors to the tune of 300$ a pop to fix....along with sensor after sensor going out ....that means lots of diagnostic hours to run down the glitches. Will the engine run a long time even when run hard WITH proper mant.? I think so.....but the after-warranty expense of keeping it running at peak performance is stupidly high. Their "experience" with BMW has not been that good, but they still love to talk about how much they love it when it is not in the shop.......and I think that is more the typical ownership attitude. Add that to the fact that people that love and are passionate about the cars they pay so much money for tend to brush over the real problems they have so as to not look foolish for spending so much money. That goes for the CTS-V and Corvette owner as well as the BMW or Mercedes owner.

As for the looks......well at the very best BMWs are inoffensive looking and at the worst, just plain boring for that much money.

The BMWs in the IL fleet have performed fine, but no better than the Fords or the current Dodges in the fleet. So should not such an expensive car be held to a higher standard? I think so, no matter how much those that protest such a thing think. A car like the Grand Caravan was trashed (and rightfully so) for so many little detail items that it had, and it had few people defending it. The GT-R was a complete service and reliability nightmare and folks lined up to make excuses for it.....so should they not complain the same about a vehicle that gave so many problems? Of course not since the GT-R (when it ran) was a supercar that was fun to drive while the Dodge was a Dodge and nobody in their right mind would drive a Dodge, right? So the Dodge was universally derided and the GT-R was defended (not by some of us) by its lovers and owners. So when an owner of a really expensive car talks about its stellar reliability, I tend to take it with a grain of salt. Meercedsfan and Bimmerjay I am not talking about you as I have found your posts to be honest and revealing about your cars.

Fair points, bodyblue... though the opposite can also be true. People spend lots more money on a premium car and may hold it to an unreasonable standard, though I would say more are likely to make excuses for an expensive car's problems.

Several in this thread have referenced why more journalists haven't purchased M3's if it really is "the best car in the world". Other than the head-honchos like Karl Brauer I'd think it would be strange that a person whose job involves driving a different car home every day - and has the ability to take them on road trips and what-not - would drop so much money on a personal car like the M3. It would rarely be driven and those are big payments. Some of the editors have revealed their personal rides, and by and large they are humble 'second' cars, probably just for those occasional times when a tester isn't available. Makes sense to me.

Gotta love all the speculative arguments..."Oh I'm sure it's not x amount more than y car blah blah blah"..."OMG it's so plain looking for the money...it's just another 3 series...335i is almost as quick.."

Within the span of a few months I test drove all of the following cars:
135i
335i
M3 (two of em: six-speed sedan and DCT coupe)
RS4 (for the record I own an A4)
Ever Mercedes AMG model with the 6.2

And you know what? The M3 is the only car I can say I loved driving. It was not the fastest, or the best looking, but overall the experience in every category was fantastic. Never have I driven a car that can go from comfy and cushy on the highway to hardwired into your nerves on a backroad blast.

Now looks are a subjective thing, but I think the M3 looks great. It's subtle yet aggressive. Certainly enough in my mind to distinguish it from a regular 3 series. But I'm not an image guy. I just think it is a bloody great car to drive.

Do I feel it is better than any of those cars? Yes. Do I feel it is worth $20k more than a 335? $30k more than a 135? HELL yes. I have no interest in the 135 or 335. But I have nothing but lust for the E9x M3.

I'll be putting my money where my mouth is, once the limited edition Frozen Gray color is available in the states.

For reference I have driven a Ferrari 360. An astonishing car. Only the M3, with performance parameters at their most aggressive settings, has come close to thrilling me the way the Ferrari did. Yet it can carry four in comfort. I can't think of much higher praise than that.

And no, I have not test driven a CTS-V. Been refused to do so every time.

I would love to hear from those who have actually driven the M3 and its rivals, and the twin turbo Bimmers, and see what you have to say.

"More BMW worship that ignores the pricetag from a familiar source."

You say that like Josh is the only journalist to ever point out the M3 as something pretty special. On paper, the M3 occupies a fairly crowded segment, but that's the whole reason that comparison tests exist. The idea that the M3 transcends the rest of the usual sport sedan crowd is nothing new...I'll let Motor Trend take it from here:

"The Lexus and the Mercedes feel like performance versions created out of something else. The M3 feels like it was born this way." Ed Loh's summary is even more succinct: "The Lexus and Mercedes are great hot-rod sedans. The M3 is a race car with four doors."

"Recall Dan's suspension walk-around on this car....they spared very little on the design and hardware underneath this car. Not quite like looking at all the bits and pieces that make up a Ducati but along those lines - for me at least."

You think its competitors skimped on impressive hardware? I don't.

"Automobile enthusiasm isn't about being rich. That's why Sadlier's post was stupid. Not because the M3 is stupid, because the M3 is brilliant. But because not being able to afford the M3 doesn't make a person any less of a connoisseur."

It always amazes me when automotive writers praise expensive cars for delivering performance, features and luxury as if customers would expect anything less. Delivering high levels of performance for cheap a la GTI or Mustang GT is much more impressive in my book. There arent any bad $70k cars on the market so the fact that this $70k compact goes fast and corners well isn't exactly a revelation. What else should an expensive V8 powered 3 series do?

"If you don't understand that, then talking about the price differentials is showing your own ignorance."

No Joe, everyone gets that. The point is that on everyday roads (i.e. not the track) the performance gain you get with an M3 vs a 335i isn't worth the extra money. While M cars and the CTS-V do have substantially upgraded hardware that is ready for the track the reality is these cars will spend 99% of their time on public roads. On those roads an owner would be hard pressed to exploit any real performance difference between an M3 and 335.

""The Lexus and the Mercedes feel like performance versions created out of something else. The M3 feels like it was born this way." Ed Loh's summary is even more succinct: "The Lexus and Mercedes are great hot-rod sedans. The M3 is a race car with four doors."

All subjective. Any lifelong BMW fan that writes for MT or any other magazine is going to say the M3 is better. I'm sure most that buy a CTS-V or C63 or IS-F have driven an M3 and if it were true that the M3 was UNDENIABLY superior in every way as some magazine writers would suggest they would all buy the M3. The real story is that the average person (even one wealthy enough to buy these cars) isn't going to be able to tell the subtle differences between these cars. If you forced an M3 driver to drive a C63 or CTS-V they wouldnt suffer at all.

bimmerjay:

I'm sorry but considering how much everyone seems to adore the M3 I cant imagine your excuses for not owning one hold water. first of all, not every test drive of a car involves taking it home. MAny of the first drives we see here are held at designated locations. Secondly, they seem to have a pretty big staff so I doubt every editors has a new car or LT car every time they leave work. Even if you could only drive the M3 a few times a week it would seem to be worth it considering how perfect the car is in every way. I respect that they cant afford a new one, but plenty of used ones are out there. Sadlier revealed his current and previous vehicles and I don't believe a BMW is amongst them which I find interesting considering how much praise he lavishes on them. At least C&D said the 3 series is the #1 vehicle owned by its biased editors so they are indeed supporting the brand with their own hard earned money.

@ 1487

Why do you think C&D's staff owns more 3 Series than anything else? Could it be that they are exceptional automobiles? hmm

I tested the 135i, 328i, and Camaro SS in a recent car-shopping expedition. The two BMWs handle identically, which is to say, fantastic.

The Camaro isn't in the same league. While it may put up similar test numbers, it's lazy, ponderous, and utterly undesirable from the driver's seat. The lesser BMWs felt poised and alert.

This M car seems to be same with the volume turned to 11.

Is it worth the difference? "Worth" is a relative concept. If you're pulling in $150K a year, another $15K for a car that lights you up isn't such a bad deal. The thing is, though, you really need turns to justify the M over the 335i, especially given the piggyback mods that turn the latter into something monstrous. Just pounding the throttle on the highway won't give you an inkling of what this BMW is about.

"The real story is that the average person (even one wealthy enough to buy these cars) isn't going to be able to tell the subtle differences between these cars."

...and there is the crux of Josh's post. The M3 is a connoisseur's car, not a car for magazine racers. I notice things like steering feel, shift effort, clutch engagement, brake feel, etc. Sorry if you don't.

"All subjective. Any lifelong BMW fan that writes for MT or any other magazine is going to say the M3 is better."

First of all, subjective evaluations are the whole reason auto news outlets write reviews. If all you care about are numbers, just read the spec sheet. Saying that subjective evaluations don't matter is like saying that two steaks are the same because they both contain 12 oz of meat. Secondly, do you have proof that every automotive editor that praises the M3 is a biased life-long BMW fan? You previously shrugged off Josh's post saying something to the effect of "more BMW praise from a familiar source," so I offered a separate source (Motor Trend), and you claimed bias (without proof) again. Are you so childish as to suggest that every review that disagrees with your own personal narrative of the automotive landscape is biased?

I'm late to the party, but a few comments:

1) The argument that if its a great car, lots of people (including editors) should own it is flawed. There are lots of cars that are 'great' for a variety of reasons, but are not mainstream because of their design (ie coupe, smallish 4 door, etc) or their price. In the case of the M3, Josh and the other editors can write all day long about how great it is and how its a discount super car, but that doesn't mean they can AFFORD one. They don't have to love only cars they can afford.

2) Regarding the M3's competition, I think one of the best recent comparisons of vehicles in this price range was on a recent series of Top Gear - 12 or 13, I believe. They had an RS4, C63 and M3. They all were driven around a track in Spain by the Stig, but the time really wasn't all that relevant. Each presenter (May = RS4, Clarkson = C63 and Hammon = M3) really got into the soul of each vehicle and what made it tick. At the end of the segment, I wasn't think about which is CLEARLY the superior car...I was thinking how I would love to have all three but each for a very different reason.

So, I don't buy the argument that the M3 is necessarily better then any other competing vehicles - its just different. It is, however, faster then most (except for our shiny friend the CTS-V) so if all you care about is track time, then its a clear winner.

Nice post.

I think it's pretty obvious that after a certain price you start paying more for more quality. The relationship between quality and price is not linear, it's more like an exponential one. A 335i may be good at 42000, but an M3 at 57000 is not good, it's great.

A slightly better turn in, better suspension, better brakes, better body control, etc etc etc. That is what makes the M3 truly special.

Regarding whether or not the M3 is something different than its competition or not, we can see that many different car mags all vote the M3 as one of the best cars in the world. Motortrend clearly called it "The best car in the world" and in Car and Driver it has beat the 997(2), the 997 Turbo and the GTR, along of course with all the rest of its competition.

The people who see a Camaro SS and think it's almost as fast as an M3 are missing the entire point. For those people, a 335i chipped is the same as an M3. Reality, however, is different. The Camaro SS is a failed opportunity because of it's lackluster handling, and a chipped 335i may be faster in a straight line but that is completely besides the point. The M3 is one of the greatest driver's cars out there because it transmits feeling, a connection between you and the road. Whether or not it's faster than car X is not the question. The question is whether it feels better. The answer is generally a resounding yes even when other cars are faster.

Shadow

"Are you so childish as to suggest that every review that disagrees with your own personal narrative of the automotive landscape is biased?"

YES! he is! After you read a few of his nutty rants you will see that anybody that does not agree with 1487 is unreasonable. Obtuse to the max is his mantra. But I still enjoy him posting because it is so easy to push his buttons and have him appear and start ranting. It is great free entertainment!

I have driven the 328i with the sport package, and I thought that was very good. Does the M3 feel worlds different in term of handling and chassis communication on public roads? I just didn't expect the M3 to be compared favorably to the 997!

Also, I read glowing reviews of the 335i motor on this website. Is it just not very sporting compared with V8 in the M3?

The last time I talked to Csaba Csere he had recently purchased a CPO 335i. As for me, I guess I'll continue to risk catastrophic bankruptcy by using my BMWs as daily drivers(shudder).

This argument will never end it seems.

I'm sure that ANY M3 is a pleasure to drive.. amazing, religious, impeccable even.
I completely disagree with the fact that not "understanding" an M3 does not make one an automotive connoisseur. I think the greater enthusiast would have an E30 M3, a pure vehicle devoid of all driver aids and attainable by the average Joe. Bottom line: You dont need a freakin 70k dollar car to love cars or appreciate them!

I think the post is arrogant in its supposition of exclusivity and that the strong reaction is a result of us average joes feeling a little less valid. I think this is also due to the fact that he is a vehicle test editor and that carries with it some inherent arrogance and lack of "average" focus.

Its about how it makes you feel and a REAL enthusiast does not need a 70K BMW to show his love for cars or appreciation for them.

Nuff Said.. but thanks for all these great posts..they are quite entertaining!

"I think the greater enthusiast would have an E30 M3, a pure vehicle devoid of all driver aids and attainable by the average Joe."

Believe me, it's tempting- my friend's E30 M3 is immaculate- and he's putting a Dinan suspension on it prior to sale. The only thing is that I hate to use an E30 M3 for my daily driver- but there's no way I could treat it like a garage queen; it's way too much fun. I just need to unload my despised MS3...

"Why do you think C&D's staff owns more 3 Series than anything else? Could it be that they are exceptional automobiles? hmm"

There are dozens of exceptional automobiles on the market today. C&D is so in love with the 3 series that nothing will ever been considered its equal. They are the same way with the Accord. The 3 series has been a compact RWD sports sedan for a lot longer than its competitors but that doesn't mean its competitors haven't caught up. The beauty of being obsessed with the 3 series is that you can dismiss all criticisms or any competitors by simply suggesting that anyone who doesn't share your opinion is too unsophisticated or ignorant to understand why the 3 series is head and shoulders above everything else on the road.

"...and there is the crux of Josh's post. The M3 is a connoisseur's car, not a car for magazine racers. I notice things like steering feel, shift effort, clutch engagement, brake feel, etc. Sorry if you don't"

Give me a break. You are pathetically gullible. Anything that mentions "feel" is SUBJECTIVE so its pointless to argue which car has better steering feel. Magazine editors prefer BMWs so any car that doesn't mimic a BMW is "wrong". I don't think everyone who owns a C63 or CTS-V would necessarily agree that they have inferior steering feel. Clutch engagement and anything else that applies to a traditional manual is increasingly becoming irrelevant. The AMG cars dont even have manuals and I'm sure a huge percentage of CTS-Vs are sold with the automatic. According to your narrow and silly definition of a "connoisseur" (such big words) anyone who owns a performance car with a DSG or auto would not qualify as such because they don't care about shift effort or clutch engagement. What about those who get the M3 with the DCT? Do they count as savvy enthusiasts or are they "magazine racers" like me. You have no clue what you're talking about and it becomes more and more evident every time you post.

"Are you so childish as to suggest that every review that disagrees with your own personal narrative of the automotive landscape is biased?"

I respect sources that offer some rhyme or reason for their results. MT is terribly inconsistent as evidenced by the fact that they ranked the E63 over the CTS-V even though the cars had identical performance and the Caddy was $30k cheaper. Their track record of inconsistency and Euro car worship speaks for itself. Honestly, the C63 and M3 are very close in terms of price and performance and there probably isn't any objective reason to chose one over another even if MT wont say so. When MT compared the Fusion to the Accord they really didnt have any real reasons to rank the Accord #1 so they essentially said Honda's been doing this longer and the Accord should get the nod for its superior reputation and legacy. That's the same logic they employ when they proclaim the M3 is in a different league than the C63 and IS-F. They have never compared the CTSV and M3 so I do wonder how that would turn out.

"The people who see a Camaro SS and think it's almost as fast as an M3 are missing the entire point. For those people, a 335i chipped is the same as an M3. Reality, however, is different. The Camaro SS is a failed opportunity because of it's lackluster handling, and a chipped 335i may be faster in a straight line but that is completely besides the point. The M3 is one of the greatest driver's cars out there because it transmits feeling, a connection between you and the road. Whether or not it's faster than car X is not the question. The question is whether it feels better. The answer is generally a resounding yes even when other cars are faster."

First of all there are only minor suspension differences between an M3 and 335i. The M3 gets better brakes and tires as well as a V8 which is more than enough to help leave a 335i in the dust on a track. This idea that the M3 is almost a totally different car is ridiculous and I would love to see some proof that the 335i is such a flawed handler that needs substantial improvement. While most would say the M3 is better than the 335i I have yet to see any review or comparison involving the 335 that actually complains about that cars "feel". Once the M3 enters the equation suddenly the fanboys claim its a HUGE step up from the lowly 335i.

The Camaro SS is too heavy and too stylistically compromised to be an M3 beater. The car is about style first which is why you can barely see out it. That said, the CHASSIS is capable of delivering performance that is within the range of the M3's performance. This is proven by its track times. It may be easier to get an M3 to its performance limits but that doesn't mean the Camaro isn't a capable performer. When you say the Camaro has "lackluster handling" you show that you haven't read much about the car and are too wrapped up in your BMW universe. The Camaro is based on the G8- a sedan that was lauded for its handling. The Zeta chassis was designed to go head to head with BMW and MB products in Australia and it is capable of matching up with RWD German vehicles quite well. The Camaro SS is akin to the 335 within the 3 series lineup. If a Z28 is released that is the car that should be compared with the M3.

Until someone here can tell me they have talked to actual owners of the M3s competition and verify that these people brought clearly inferior cars all of this talk of "better feel" is worthless. If you love BMW you are ALWAYS going to claim numbers don't mean anything and "feel" means everything. You are always going to argue that a BMW is MORE connected and better handling. I seriously doubt CTSV and C63 owners feel like they are missing out on anything.

"YES! he is! After you read a few of his nutty rants you will see that anybody that does not agree with 1487 is unreasonable."

I respect anyone that makes sense. Which is why I have so little for you. Ever notice how people who don't know much are quick to go off topic and venture into making jokes and hurling insults? I keep telling you aren't getting any cool points for your pile on posts but I guess you have to learn the hard way. HAve fun.

And there you have it...

"Do they count as savvy enthusiasts or are they "magazine racers" like me. You have no clue what you're talking about and it becomes more and more evident every time you post."

Backing up claims with sources is truly the mark of someone who has no clue what they're talking about. You know, sometimes I think you're more of an arguing enthusiast than a car enthusiast. You rarely talk about cars that you have enjoyed driving, but you frequently bring up past confrontations with fellow commenters. Interesting.

"Anything that mentions "feel" is SUBJECTIVE so its pointless to argue which car has better steering feel."

Subjective evaluations are pointless? So talking about how food tastes is pointless? Talking about literature is pointless? Music? With that statement, you've marked yourself out as someone who has very little experience driving different cars and observing their characteristics. Sitting in car at an auto show and reading the spec sheet is not a test drive, and I'd really like to see an expert/journalist/whoever that claims that subjective evaluations are pointless. Since I "don't know what I'm talking about" and you so clearly do, maybe you could provide me with that. In the mean time, I'll be listening to the reports of people who have actually driven the car...better yet, I'll check out the opinions of people who have driven a lot of different cars, giving them a wide range of experience.

"MT is terribly inconsistent..."
So MT is biased, Insideline is biased, C&D is biased, the commenters are biased...Please point me in the direction of a news outlet that is not biased.

"I'll check out the opinions of people who have driven a lot of different cars, giving them a wide range of experience."

Wrong. The guys who sit in the cars at the New Car Shows know best...

budget supercar? i don't think so... supercar performance, sure... but its still a big ugly sedan or sedan based coupe. even if it ran 10's, i wouldn't call it a supercar. the old ferrari was a supercar despite people thinking it'd get smoked by soccer moms in minivans.

they still make miata's... which sound right, feel right, shift right, and look far more like a sports car than a M3... and the best part is it's affordable. sure its slow, but it is fast enough to land you in jail for speeding.

on the street, there is little need for much more power. power on the street equals dangerous activities like racing or quick bursts up to illegal speeds for the pure joy of it... and cops will likely pull you over for such activities if you haven't killed someone/ yourself yet.

on the track, power doesn't matter either. they have seperate classes and even dedicated events for miata's. sure, maybe you are rich and can afford to race an M3, so that is your choice. i really don't know too many in that situation however.

so really... all this power is intended for illegal use. even in Germany, it isn't needed as not all of the Autobahn has unlimited speed limits and most just drive slow anyways.

"It's hard to put into words as eloquently as Mr. Sadlier did, but I can completely see where he's coming from. You can't really explain it to someone, it either means something to them or it doesn't."

@ BimmerJay - YES YES and YES! This is the tactile performance that numbers on paper can't explain. Some understand, most don't as they base their analysis on paper performance. The ///M series really excels in this area, and it's evident in the product especially compared to other competing high performance offerings. There is just something special about ///M.

Unfortunately, a certain % of that "refined rawness" will be axed due to emissions regulations. Who needs turbos? I don't want no stinkin' turbos!

"MT is terribly inconsistent as evidenced by the fact that they ranked the E63 over the CTS-V even though the cars had identical performance and the Caddy was $30k cheaper."

THERE IT IS....I was waiting for it! you give yourself away every time if given enough time...HOW DARE somebody not think the CTS-V is the greatest car of all time. You are so pathetic and predictable.

"and I would love to see some proof that the 335i is such a flawed handler that needs substantial improvemen"

Got ya again........you were the one that said a few weeks ago that the 3 series "is not really a drivers car" You really need to get your lies in order.

"respect anyone that makes sense. Which is why I have so little for you. Ever notice how people who don't know much are quick to go off topic and venture into making jokes and hurling insults? I keep telling you aren't getting any cool points for your pile on posts but I guess you have to learn the hard way. HAve fun."

Then nobody on here makes sense since you only agree with you. On this thread you have shown all of your traits.......disregarding facts.....accusing everybody of bias that does not agree with you....crying foul when challenged and called out for your BS. You have the ultimate persecution complex......let me give you some friendly advice.....stop being a shill for GM.....it makes you lose what small amount of credibility you have left.

"You rarely talk about cars that you have enjoyed driving, but you frequently bring up past confrontations with fellow commenters. "

Since I dont work for a car magazine (most of us don't) I dont get to drive V8 sports sedans for free. I would say that is true for most of us here. Please explain to me how the opinions of those who have either a)never driven an M3 and/or b)never driven any of its competitors are more qualified than I am to make guesses about how these cars stack up. Its interesting, the same people who hang on every word of a MT comparo that ranks a BMW first are quick to dismiss track results from magazines. Car magazines compared vehicles on a track for a reason- they want to see which vehicles can back up their advertising slogans in the real world. Every I bring up how the M3 performs relative to its peers on a track I am told numbers don't matter so we should dismiss track times. When these same magazines rank a BMW #1 without any regard for performance measurements I am told we should take their word that BMW does performance better than anyone else.

"With that statement, you've marked yourself out as someone who has very little experience driving different cars and observing their characteristics. Sitting in car at an auto show and reading the spec sheet is not a test drive, and I'd really like to see an expert/journalist/whoever that claims that subjective evaluations are pointless. "

I've driven dozens of cars including numerous BMWs including at least 3 diffferent 3 series models. Subjective opinions that are contrary to what the data shows have to be treated with a grain of salt. C&D once ranked the G35 lower than the 328 even though the Infiniti whipped the BMW in every way and was better equipped. Their rationale was that the BMW was more refined in subtle ways that they could barely identify. That makes no sense and you would agree IF the car being ranked 2nd was a BMW. A Toyota fan may tell you his Avalon "feels" better than an M3. I doubt you would take such an opinion seriously but "feel" can be whatever a person wants it to me. A Toyota owner would say an M3 feels to stiff, requires too much steering effort, has too much engine noise and is generally hard to deal with everyday. Would you accept that as an accurate description of the car? Of course not. This is why performance measures are taken. R&T is the only source that ranks cars consistently and logically and if their editors prefer a car that didn't rank #1 based on the data they are allowed to say so. Recently C&D finally dumped their "gotta have it" subjective scores because so many people were complaining to them that cars that didn't deserve to win were catapulted into first place with some bogus BS subjective score.

"THERE IT IS....I was waiting for it! you give yourself away every time if given enough time...HOW DARE somebody not think the CTS-V is the greatest car of all time. You are so pathetic and predictable."

read the comments under the story. 90% of the commenters blasted MT for results that made no sense. If ANY car can't outperform another that costs 25% less it deserves to lose a comparison. Period. See if you can follow that 5th grade logic. What is predictable is your lack of a unique viewpoint and your incessant need to shadow my posts in order to build your profile. You still have no following so I don't see your point here.

"Got ya again........you were the one that said a few weeks ago that the 3 series "is not really a drivers car" You really need to get your lies in order."

Provide a link to back up that lie or shut up. I'd prefer the latter.

"Then nobody on here makes sense since you only agree with you."

Stop trying to pretend you have all of this support. I'm only addressing my comments at you. YOU make no sense, never said anything about "everyone" else. YOU said that, not me. I would venture to say everyone else who posts here makes more sense that you do. Stand on your own statements and stop trying to pretend that you are the spokesman for the masses. No one elected you to speak for them- just represent yourself.

Wow, huyracing, never seen such vitriol from you.
1487, as usual, provides nothing of any real substance. I chuckle at the same old blather from a wanna-be enthusiast who can only point out that everyone else's opinions are subjective while his are fact. Oh my, C63 and CTS-V owners can't feel any difference in their cars, vis-a-vis the M3! It is so because Stirling Moss, oops, 1487 says! How can any of us unwashed enthusiasts know what the differences are between driving an M3, C63, CTS-V or any incredible high performance car?
I'll tell you how we know, 1487 -- it is because we're not sitting on our asses using Consumer Reports as our only source, nor do we determine how a car "feels" while it is sitting under bright lights at an auto show, and we don't bench-race based on statistics culled from magazines.
And by the way, your ridiculous rant about "biased C/D editors" was stupid -- you yourself pointed out they put their money where their mouths are. And for what it's worth, C/D has loved BMWs since I began reading the magazine in the 1970s. The fact that its writers still love the brand, even though the entire writing staff is different; speaks more to BMW continuing to make its cars amazing to drive than to their alleged "bias."
No matter what smarmy response you provide (your vault of such responses appears to be limitless, but generally runs along the lines of "provide proof of your opinion"), the fact remains you have a serious need to get over yourself.

"I've driven dozens of cars including numerous BMWs including at least 3 diffferent[sic] 3 series models. "

Who can argue with that level of expertise?

"And for what it's worth, C/D has loved BMWs since I began reading the magazine in the 1970s."

"Turn Your Hymnals to 2002" by David E. Davis Jr. is what hooked me on Bimmers. A few years ago he was kind enough to autograph my copy of the classic article.

"
"Got ya again........you were the one that said a few weeks ago that the 3 series "is not really a drivers car" You really need to get your lies in order."

Provide a link to back up that lie or shut up. I'd prefer the latter. "

HMMMM you dont remember the thread where you said the 3 series was not a true drivers car? When we were talking about the Motor Trend track testing of lots of different cars? You spout so much BS you cant remember it all. It was the thread where you said that the Camaro was comparable to the 3 series on the track. You should ask one of your other personalities about that thread.

"Stop trying to pretend you have all of this support. I'm only addressing my comments at you. YOU make no sense, never said anything about "everyone" else. YOU said that, not me. I would venture to say everyone else who posts here makes more sense that you do. Stand on your own statements and stop trying to pretend that you are the spokesman for the masses. No one elected you to speak for them- just represent yourself."

As usual your posts have nothing to do with reality. You must love the fact that a big lie is often believed more than a small one. I do represent myself......I will call you on your BS EVERY time you spout it.....dont like that???? Then dont post. I call BS on EVERY post anyone posts, not just you so get over yourself......your martyr complex is getting really boring. I notice that you did not respond to my friendly advice........so I will offer it again........STOP BEING A SHILL FOR GM .

You are indeed a very sad individual. Evidently your entire life is spent reading GM car books and magazines. You know every spec for almost any GM car foreign and domestic. If anybody states another opinion then you get ballistic and accuse the person or poster or magazine of being biased and against you and poor defenseless Government Motors. You must have stayed in bed for days in your Chevy jammies when GM went under and when the Silverado in the IL fleet dumped its tranny........and when they had problem after problem with their Aura (the same car you claim to have) I imaging your therapist charged you double. I dont think you are real, 1487. I think you are about 16 and the only experience you have had with cars is at car shows and reading car mags. You have never gotten grease under your nails or gas on your clothes. When you actually understand that people that really love cars actually touch their machines and take loving care of them, then folks on here, including me will respect your opinions......until then just keep whistling past the graveyard that was GM.

"Its interesting, the same people who hang on every word of a MT comparo that ranks a BMW first are quick to dismiss track results from magazines."

It's not a black and white world. I'm not suggesting that we throw out all track test numbers and start comparing Miatas to Ferraris, but I am suggesting that subjective evaluations of experts do have merit, even if those observations aren't what you want them to be.

"R&T is the only source that ranks cars consistently and logically and if their editors prefer a car that didn't rank #1 based on the data they are allowed to say so."

I read the RT comparison that you're referring to. The BMW came is second by roughly 1 percentage point. Here are some things that the editors had to say about the M3:

"I like the M3 because of its overall harmony, in which the engine doesn't overwhelm the chassis."
and...
"BMW continues to endow its steering systems with supernaturally clear communication."
Sounds like subjective evaluations to me.

"A Toyota fan may tell you his Avalon "feels" better than an M3."

Nice try, but someone who understands the mission of an M3 and has any experience whatsoever would not make that claim. Look, I'm not really sure why you would be in a post about the M3 picking fights unless you has some kind of agenda, so I'll just say this: You keep repeating that subjective evaluations are meaningless, but in the end, you have no evidence and no relevant experience to back up that claim.

"Look, I'm not really sure why you would be in a post about the M3 picking fights unless you has some kind of agenda"

Surely not...

""Look, I'm not really sure why you would be in a post about the M3 picking fights unless you has some kind of agenda"

Surely not...

I am stunned to think it!

sgude:

Thanks for putting in my place. Great points there. You are 100% correct, I am the only person that posts here that doesn't have extensive experience in every single car we comment on. I have been exposed! Yes, I am the only person with a job that doesn't involve being paid to drive free cars and thus I am the ONLY one not qualified to speak on these cars. My secret has been uncovered by your diligent detective work. And since you are so astute SURELY you know your entire M3 loving rant was unnecessary because I never actually said anything bad about the car. All I said was that I want to know why Sadlier or anyone else who lavishes so much praise on the car doesn't own some iteration of the car. I said put your money where your mouth is. These same people will jump down your throat if you even suggest there may be other cars on par with the M3 but when you check their driveways you can't seem to find an M3 or even a BMW model.

"Who can argue with that level of expertise?"

Exactly, because you and every other poster here has logged many hours behind the wheel of every V8 powered luxury sports sedan or coupe on the market and are qualified as experts. Hard as I try, nothing gets past that steel trap known as roadburner. The man who pops in with one sentence wisecracks but offers nothing of substance and then finds a way to work in his next potential car purchase into every thread.

roadburner/bodydude:

I know neither of you are really known for actually reading or comprehending before firing up your keyboards for a counter attack but if by chance you have time to actually read my posts in this thread you will notice that I never said anything about the M3 being subpar in any way. You two have constructed a narrative in your fantasy land about me attacking the M3 or "picking a fight" about the M3 in order to satisfy your own irrational attack posts. In the real world (where some of us dwell) there was no attack on the M3. I made a few simple statements that apparently got you two crazy kids all riled up. One point was that these people (and that includes many here) that claim the M3 is the perfect car and one of the only cars all enthusiasts should lust after should either own one or be trying to acquire one. The other point was that there are alternative to the M3 for $60k-$70k. That's pretty much all I said that sent you two off the deep end with all types of ranting and poor attempts at humorous rebuttals. So in RB/BB land anyone who says there are other compelling choices for M3 money is "attacking" the M3. You guys need to toughen up.

"HMMMM you dont remember the thread where you said the 3 series was not a true drivers car? When we were talking about the Motor Trend track testing of lots of different cars? You spout so much BS you cant remember it all. It was the thread where you said that the Camaro was comparable to the 3 series on the track. You should ask one of your other personalities about that thread."

Provide the link or shut up. Never said the 3 series wasnt a drivers car. I said the ONE SERIES (thats a different car) wasn't made for the track and proved disappointing on the track.

Still waiting for that link boss.

"I call BS on EVERY post anyone posts, not just you so get over yourself......your martyr complex is getting really boring. I notice that you did not respond to my friendly advice........so I will offer it again........STOP BEING A SHILL FOR GM ."

LOL! You call BS on every post? Really? Next thing I know you will tell me Obama doesn't get good reviews on Fox News. Of course you call BS on every post- that's what you do. That's your niche. Intelligent discussion or new information would not be your strong suit. Guess what, at Toyota headquarters they are calling BS about the coverage of the recall fiasco. Lots of people have opinions but the fact that you can type doesn't make your opinion worth anything.

Two cars I mentioned were the IS-F and C63. GM makes those vehicles? Thanks for the tip BB because that is surely news to me because I thought they were made by Lexus and MB respectively.

"Evidently your entire life is spent reading GM car books and magazines. "

Yes "GM car books" like C&D, R&T and MT. LOL. Got me again- we all know those publications are basically mouthpieces for GM. Is there no secret you wont expose here today?

"If anybody states another opinion then you get ballistic and accuse the person or poster or magazine of being biased and against you and poor defenseless Government Motors. "

Good one. Even thought i didnt mention anything about govmint motors (roadburner coined that one) in this thread. You got me again chief.

"You must have stayed in bed for days in your Chevy jammies when GM went under and when the Silverado in the IL fleet dumped its tranny........and when they had problem after problem with their Aura (the same car you claim to have) I imaging your therapist charged you double."

He's in the zone now. There is no stopping him. Problem after problem? They basically had one steering problem. But dont let the fact get in the way- never have before. Keep them coming.

"I think you are about 16 and the only experience you have had with cars is at car shows and reading car mags."

Except for my age the fact that I've driven dozens of cars over the last 11-12 years at various events you are on target. But since you are proposing we only talk about cars we have driven I suppose that means your posts will be cut down dramatically going forward. Oh wait, you don't talk about cars- you only talk about hating GM and 1487. Guess that means you can comment all you want.

"It's not a black and white world. I'm not suggesting that we throw out all track test numbers and start comparing Miatas to Ferraris, but I am suggesting that subjective evaluations of experts do have merit, even if those observations aren't what you want them to be."

I dont know what you are trying to argue at this point. The M3 has beat the C63 in a comparo but the 63 offers the same performance for the same money. The CTS-V has never been compared to the M3 but SUBJECTIVELY the CTS-V has been praised for its steering, handling and braking. The point is there are several cars in this price range that offer the same delights as the M3 so calling it a bargain supercar is just silly. It would only be a bargain if nothing else for the price could touch it. You are arguing that subjectively the M3 is hands down superior but the reality is only a handful of tests have been done between M3 and C63 and no tests have compared M3 to CTS-V even though they have the same cost. MT comparos are actually the hardest to trust because they really don't have a numerical system to show you how they reached their results. MT editors feel the M3 is better but that is not the same as them saying you are compromising by buying a C63. The C63 is bound to suffer in comparos because it lacks a manual option, its never been seen as the equal to the M3 and its engine doesn't have a stratospheric redline that auto writers worship.

"I read the RT comparison that you're referring to. The BMW came is second by roughly 1 percentage point. Here are some things that the editors had to say about the M3:"

I really wasnt referring to any test with the M3, I was saying that R&T has a logical and consistent method for conducting comparisons. I'm not shocked they are the only ones not to rank the M3 #1.

"Look, I'm not really sure why you would be in a post about the M3 picking fights unless you has some kind of agenda, so I'll just say this: "

try this sabastian, go back and read my initial posts and then explain when and where I "picked a fight" with the M3 or said anything negative about its performance. I mean you could save yourself a lot of time if you read before you starting responding. Since I really didn't insult or doubt the M3 in any way I'm a little perplexed as to what it is you are so hyped up about.

Speaking of subjective ratings, your beloved C&D magazine believes that the Honda Accord is one of the 10 best vehicles sold for under $80k. Do you buy that? Can you come up with ANY rationalization of that? Anyone who appreciates auto design and performance and claims the Accord is one of the 10 best cars sold today should have their head examined. C&Ds "subjective" rationale is that the Accord has always been on the list and it belongs there.

"The new 335is model makes this car even more superfluous which makes me wonder by BMW is even bringing that model to the US. Sadlier (and others in denial) refuse to recognize that the C63 and CtS-V offer the same thrills for the same money. The M3 is great but its not the only game in town anymore so I fail to see why it alone gets so much praise heaped on it. "

Above is the "heresy" I posted in which I supposedly vilified the M3 and provoked attacks from those who have pledged their lives to defend its virtue. That sounds like an attack on the M3?

Please note the line where I called the car "great".

On to the next round of responses from the seasoned "experts" who drive hundreds of cars per year and all well versed in the feel and performance envelopes of every vehicle pertinent to this discussion led by that intellectual titan known as Bodyblue.

Despite your attempt at sarcasm 1487, you said nothing to refute any of the points I made about your posts. Instead, you state that you have never said anything bad about the M3, which you basically do by calling out Sadlier's post (it is his opinion, but I forgot, he didn't provide the supporting evidence you always require) and by the tone of your statements when you speak of it in comparison to the other vehicles that are in the M3's class. Your TONE about the car's "value" is one of negativity or dammit am I being too subjective and don't have facts to back up that claim? You state the CTS-V offers the "same" performance for less money than the M3, but to several drivers, because of the way the CTS-V feels, it does not. The same can be said of the C63, the IS-F or the RS4. But you only seem to understand empirical data, and completely dismiss subjectivity. Now show me a post of your that counters that point.
Along with several other posters here, I have put my money where my mouth is, and so have several of C/D's editors. Have you put your money where your mouth is? Does the shadow of a CTS-V, IS-F or C63 (or even one of the less-intense versions of those cars) grace the 1487 driveway? I have always owned enthusiast cars, no matter my financial situation. I just want to know if you put you money where your mouth is, as you have so taunted Mr. Sadlier and other auto journalists.

"Hard as I try, nothing gets past that steel trap known as roadburner. The man who pops in with one sentence wisecracks but offers nothing of substance and then finds a way to work in his next potential car purchase into every thread. "

Talking about what you drive aggravates you and talking about what I drive/ might drive aggravates you...
Can't win. ;)

"That's pretty much all I said that sent you two off the deep end with all types of ranting and poor attempts at humorous rebuttals."

Always the arrogant martyr. Here are my "rants" from this thread:

"I really do appreciate the ability of the E9X M3, but I'm still drawn to the E46 M3 and E39 M5. I really like the sounds produced by the S54 and S62. And then I have a friend who gave me the right of first refusal to an immaculate two owner E30 M3 with only 54K miles on it."

"The last time I talked to Csaba Csere he had recently purchased a CPO 335i. As for me, I guess I'll continue to risk catastrophic bankruptcy by using my BMWs as daily drivers(shudder). "

"Believe me, it's tempting- my friend's E30 M3 is immaculate- and he's putting a Dinan suspension on it prior to sale. The only thing is that I hate to use an E30 M3 for my daily driver- but there's no way I could treat it like a garage queen; it's way too much fun. I just need to unload my despised MS3..."

"And there you have it.."

"Wrong. The guys who sit in the cars at the New Car Shows know best... "

"Who can argue with that level of expertise?"
(responding to your statement that you had "driven dozens of cars including numerous BMWs including at least 3 diffferent[sic] 3 series models.")

""Turn Your Hymnals to 2002" by David E. Davis Jr. is what hooked me on Bimmers. A few years ago he was kind enough to autograph my copy of the classic article. "

"Surely not..."
(responding to bodyblue)

Yes, lots of ranting to be found here...

What a day for you, 1487.....you read some things you did not agree with.....you accused the world of conspiring against you and GM. You then accuse me and others of hating you and trying to make you look bad to others. (you dont need my help for that) You just dont get it do you? You are completely helpless to understand how you appear to others. I have never accused you of not being smart as you accuse me of....I accuse you of being stubborn and obtuse and not understanding that others just might have another opinion of things than you do. I also do not understand why you are a shill and a whore (sorry for that word but unable to come up with a better description) for GM? Why are you upset when people like me rail against the crap that they have pulled and the money they have cost thousands of Americans? Why are you the self appointed defender of a corporation that cares not for you or anyone else? Just tell us why. I do not think you are stupid......I think you are slightly addled. Either you are a janitor for GM and worried about your job or you are really 16 like I assume. I have never seen such behavior twords a company one did not work for. Do us all a favor and start ranting about ummmm say....VW! yeah thats it! Just mix it up a bit so you dont get tired of the same old BS like we are.

"You state the CTS-V offers the "same" performance for less money than the M3, but to several drivers, because of the way the CTS-V feels, it does not."

Never said the CTS-V or C63 offered more for LESS. They cost about the same as the M3. And if there are trusted sources that claimed the V felt less precise or exciting than the M3 I'm not aware of them. Are you quoting a particular source? The CTS-V and M3 have never been compared by a magazine/car site. The V has beaten the C63 and M5 and XFR in comparison tests however.

"The same can be said of the C63, the IS-F or the RS4. But you only seem to understand empirical data, and completely dismiss subjectivity. Now show me a post of your that counters that point."

No I understand subjectivity just fine boss. I want you to show me ONE source beyond this one MT test that backs up your claims that the M3 is clearly far superior to the other cars I mentioned. You can't even include the CTS-V in your statement because the two cars haven't been directly compared. Let me try and explain this subjective terms in ways you might be able to comprehend. In R&T they allow editors to offer their personal opinions of cars in a comparo independent of the official results. It's RARE that all of them agree on which car is the best. One will say car A felt the best and others will say car B is the one they would buy with their own money. the fact that 30 BMW fans line up and claim that the M3 "feels" better than any other car on the road when they haven't driven it or its competitors means NOTHING. If you are a rabid BMW lover I expect you to say with confidence it destroys everything else in its class even though you really have little experience with driving cars in this class. There are no absolutes when subjectivity is involved. MT has ranked the Camry #1 in comparison tests and claims its one of the best cars in the segment. C&D feels the car is an also ran and usually places it 4th or 5th in comparison tests. MT and IL feel the Accord has been surpassed while C&D claims the car is peerless and towers over the inferior competition.This is why subjectivity can't be taken too seriously.

That is why I have to fall back on PERFORMANCE. You can talk about feel and feedback until you are blue in the face but on a track the C63 is almost as fast as the vaunted M3 and the CTS-V is faster. At the end of the day its about how well these cars deliver the goods.

"Talking about what you drive aggravates you and talking about what I drive/ might drive aggravates you..."

Only the latter bothers me because its rarely relevant. But you know how a kid who needs attention always loves to throw fits to stand out.

"Yes, lots of ranting to be found here..."

Very clever, wasn't talking about this thread only. Thought you would've picked up on that. The only threads where you contribute anything that could be considered worthwhile are BMW related as far as I can tell. In all others you drop in to remind people how you are lucky not to drive a regular car and you feel sorry for those who do. At least you retired the lame "govmint motors" stuff- I commend you.

"you accused the world of conspiring against you and GM. You then accuse me and others of hating you and trying to make you look bad to others."

your comprehension issues are staggering. Never said anything about the world conspiring against me or GM. Never said "others" hated me. I said you have nothing to talk about except your dislike of me and GM. Read and comprehend. It will simplify your life greatly. not sure why every response to YOU is interpreted as being aimed at "everyone" or the "world". No, I'm just talking you you.

"you accused the world of conspiring against you and GM. You then accuse me and others of hating you and trying to make you look bad to others."

Actually its you is usually bringing up GM. Not me. Ever notice that? Nothing I said here has anything to do with GM as a company. NOTHING.

"Why are you upset when people like me rail against the crap that they have pulled and the money they have cost thousands of Americans?"

Ah here we go again. LOL. Like a racehorse, true to form. You are going to need a new axe soon.

"Why are you the self appointed defender of a corporation that cares not for you or anyone else? Just tell us why. "

LOL, just tell me why you are talking about GM when I'm not. Once you manage to do that perhaps I can try to answer you.

"Either you are a janitor for GM and worried about your job or you are really 16 like I assume. I have never seen such behavior twords a company one did not work for. "

Got me again, I work for that major GM operation in Philly. Everyone knows Philly is a major automotive center so that must be how I got a job in the industry.

"Do us all a favor and start ranting about ummmm say....VW! yeah thats it! Just mix it up a bit so you dont get tired of the same old BS like we are."

As soon as you do us all a favor and stop basing all of your posts on mine. Based on the content you deposit here I don't think you are as adverse to "BS" as you claim. In fact, you seem to embrace it.

"But you know how a kid who needs attention always loves to throw fits to stand out. "

Yes, and you are a textbook example of such behavior.

"Very clever, wasn't talking about this thread only. Thought you would've picked up on that."

Funny thing; when confronted with proof you always fall back on the familiar refrain of "That wasn't what I said/meant/etc." Let's see what you actually said...

"I know neither of you are really known for actually reading or comprehending before firing up your keyboards for a counter attack but if by chance you have time to actually read my posts IN THIS THREAD..."
"In the real world (where some of us dwell) there was no attack on the M3. I made a few simple statements that apparently got you two crazy kids all riled up."
"That's pretty much all I said"

Well, keep up the arrogant and bitter expert shtick; its gaining you fans left and right...

Yet again you fail, 1487. Your subjectivity is beneath reproach. Not only have several other posters pointed out your brilliance and objectivity, you again demonstrate two of your favorite retorts: you state "show me proof" or you simply ignore questions and statements you cannot answer. Are you Rush Limbaugh?
I'll ask once more, and I will even directly copy the last paragraph of my previous post: "Along with several other posters here, I have put my money where my mouth is, and so have several of C/D's editors. Have you put your money where your mouth is? Does the shadow of a CTS-V, IS-F or C63 (or even one of the less-intense versions of those cars) grace the 1487 driveway? I have always owned enthusiast cars, no matter my financial situation. I just want to know if you put you money where your mouth is, as you have so taunted Mr. Sadlier and other auto journalists."