|
Nice points Bruce. I get a little frustrated seeing all the M-loving worshippers on this Board get offended by any question as to the supremacy of their M's, but in truth revah has posted a valid point. I don't know why people get so defensive about comparisons between the 335 and M3. It's obvious that with a chip and exhaust the 335 will be very similar in terms of straightline performance with the upcoming M, and the 335 has already proven itself to be a fairly respectable track handler (though it will obviously be a bit slower than the new M3).
The comparison is between a 2 different versions of BMW 3 series so I see no reason to toss it out. This is nothing like an M3 vs. Civic w/turbo, supercharger, etc. argument. Revah has specifically noted his respect for the M (as do I) and is just wondering about people's opinions on the justification for the price difference. I agree that if the car comes at a base price of over $60K there is reason to question whether the add'l price is worth it. Obviously, if you are loaded and money does not matter, than be happy with the M3. I personally wouldn't mind spending 4-5k on a 335 to add a chip, exhaust, and coilovers to have very decent performance just shy of an M3's.
Also, to say that the M3 hasn't been fairly evaluated yet is absurd. Sure, all the exact performance figures are not out yet, but go look at any major car magazine website and see what's at the top. I highly doubt the car will get a "significantly" better 1/4 or 0-60 time than what C&D posted. They implied that marginally better times should be possible w/better track conditions. All in all, a 12.9 sec. 1/4 is pretty impressive to me, but do I really want to shell out $65K+ for this (if it comes out at that price)? No thanks.
|