Quote:
Originally Posted by Nine
I think it is now obvious to me, you don't own a c63amg. To say that Tire wear and MPG are equal to an M3, just about nullifies any semantics you care to craft. Oh and, to allude that BMW does not cover brakes, is to use unsubstantiated anecdotal stories to build some sort of argument. The fact of the matter is that the c63amg and M3 are equally priced (base msrp). But the c63 gets worse MPG, wears out tires faster, and does not come with free service. The only real argument you could come up was that the tank in the M3 is smaller than the c63, not enough to prove your point. And not enough to mount your high horse.
When you engage in discourse, you can't just walk away and quit, well you can, when you have failed to prove your point. Even your buddy Hot|Ice agrees that the c63amg is marginally more expensive, I'm willing to bet he didn't want to post that it was more expensive since he hates agreeing with me.
 |
man, you are one argumentative and annoying poster
your incessent arguments over the most insignificant of semantics issues is very irritating and takes away from the point of the thread.
both the c63 and m3 are great cars, but different. i enjoy driving the c63 more than the m3 because the fun can be had at lower speeds, where the m3 has to get ragged out to squeeze the fun out of it. I dont have the time or desire to commit to more than a few track days a year, so for me, the c63 is a more fun DD type car.
neither of these cars are remotely cost effective to run, so the minimal differences id imagine arent critical for most owners, myself included.