Conv cheaper than coupe

[SD-E93-11]

Really, Prince?

Actually, it's reasonable to assume that driving a convertible demands a higher-degree of security in one self; top-down is definitely not an exercise for the insecure.

It's also fair to say that attempting to flame convertible owners is a pretty much a sign of insecurity.

People seem to forget that if e93 owners had any interest in driving an e92 we would have bought one. It really is that simple.

[Prince_of_Persia]

Originally Posted by SD-E93-11

Really, Prince?

Actually, it's reasonable to assume that driving a convertible demands a higher-degree of security in one self; top-down is definitely not an exercise for the insecure.

It's also fair to say that attempting to flame convertible owners is a pretty much a sign of insecurity.

People seem to forget that if e93 owners had any interest in driving an e92 we would have bought one. It really is that simple.

No, was joking. I said it in my post too (JK)

[LucWerkz]

Originally Posted by Prince_of_Persia

No, was joking. I said it in my post too (JK)

You need to write out (sarcasm) instead of just JK. Makes it more legible.

[VMcV3y]

Originally Posted by Red_Baron

You need to write out (sarcasm) instead of just JK. Makes it more legible.

Here, let me make this more legible:


You need to write out (sarcasm) instead of just "JK." Makes it more legible.


- V

.

[fuddman]

Originally Posted by Dougeefresh

I've ...noticed that convertibles are either around the same or even cheaper than similarly spec'd (year, miles) coupes. Any particular reasons for that ....

Your observation does not square with used car appraisers like Edmunds. According to Edmunds, a base 2010 convertible is appraised higher than a base coupe by $6360. The area adjustment in no way moves the price by that amount. Options, on the other hand, do have a significant affect. But what has the most affect on price, at least in my mind, is how fast the seller/dealer wants to rid himself of the car.

[RogeM3]

Originally Posted by IronManM3

I totally disagree with your styling opinion, I have a e93 and with the top up i think it looks amazing, especially when all the windows are down and u have all that window area open and when the top is down " pure sex" you clearly hear that engine roaring and exhaust , everyone stops and looks and it's a 10+ with the ladies.. E93 ftw in my opinion

+1

[Dougeefresh]

Originally Posted by fuddman

Your observation does not square with used car appraisers like Edmunds. According to Edmunds, a base 2010 convertible is appraised higher than a base coupe by $6360. The area adjustment in no way moves the price by that amount. Options, on the other hand, do have a significant affect. But what has the most affect on price, at least in my mind, is how fast the seller/dealer wants to rid himself of the car.

Not talking about the quoted values in Edmunds or kbb. Just search for 2011 - present used M3 in Chicago region in Autotrader and you will see low mile e93s for around the same price as e92s, all similarly equipped.

I can count with one hand the number of times I dropped the top on my wife's conv or opened the moon roof on mine. Besides, the cf roof looks too cool to pass over

On a side note, I have no problem with how e93 looks with the top up. I DO have a problem with e90's rear view (brake lights) though, ugh.

[RogeM3]

Originally Posted by Dougeefresh

Not talking about the quoted values in Edmunds or kbb. Just search for 2011 - present used M3 in Chicago region in Autotrader and you will see low mile e93s for around the same price as e92s, all similarly equipped.

I can count with one hand the number of times I dropped the top on my wife's conv or opened the moon roof on mine. Besides, the cf roof looks too cool to pass over

On a side note, I have no problem with how e93 looks with the top up. I DO have a problem with e90's rear view (brake lights) though, ugh.

Then just buy a coupe and enjoy it!

[BMWFanatic2008]

I've seen some crazy deals on E93s 328/335/M3. They are def. less desirable (since they are step down in performance/practicality departments) than coupes and sedans. Also, convertibles would usually be more discounted when buying new.

As far as the looks go, conv with top down is gorgeous IMO, not so much with top up So it really depends on the climate and how much top down time you can do.

[Dougeefresh]

Originally Posted by RogeM3

Then just buy a coupe and enjoy it!

Exactly my plan

[SVH]

Never wanted a "rag top" before BMW's "hard-top" convertible came out. It's excellent engineering and works flawlessly. First class. Ladies like it. And that's important!

Besides, I have no problem with performance.....

[Vanmarsenille]

Originally Posted by BMWFanatic2008

I've seen some crazy deals on E93s 328/335/M3. They are def. less desirable (since they are step down in performance/practicality departments) than coupes and sedans. Also, convertibles would usually be more discounted when buying new.

Not down here in TX, that's for sure. The E93 is almost always priced higher, new or used.

[mlambert890]

I wonder how long this thread can go with guys in sunny/warm climates pointing out that this isnt the case in their area only to have people that live in places that get 40 days of nice weather a year chime in with "AGREED!!!! Verts are cheap b/c they're for posers!"....

As many have already said... IT IS REGIONAL!

Anyone from a year round paradise like CA, FL or TX is going to find that convertibles are at a premium. Anyone from arctic wastelands, cities where driving *any* kind of nice car is questionable, or a mixture of both, are going to find they are cheaper. Chicago in particular has some of the worst roads and driving Ive ever experienced (and I get around) and on top of that if you blink there you'll miss the nice weather. Once winter sets in its 90 feet of snow for 7 months. Not a big shock that drop top high performance cars dont command top dollar.

Its just common sense.

[ZooMMM]

Originally Posted by SD-E93-11

People seem to forget that if e93 owners had any interest in driving an e92 we would have bought one. It really is that simple.

Exactly!!! Easily more affordable.

[skins333]

Originally Posted by RogeM3

+1

+2

[Prince_of_Persia]

any more convertible user that wants to +25 one of the post here to make himself feel better? lol

[///McRae]

Originally Posted by Prince_of_Persia

any more convertible user that wants to +25 one of the post here to make himself feel better? lol

This post would only make sense if 'verts were actually less expensive than E90/E92s.

[enigma01]

Gee... we have a lot of insecure e92 owners who feel the need to bash e93 just because they have a little performance advantage. Obviously, open top motoring is a foreign concept to them, while the others value it over a few tenths in 0-60 and slalom advantage.

I have no horse in this race as my 2011 e93 M3 is being replaced with a 2013 e92 M3. I can appreciate each for its unique characteristics. At the end of the day, they are both M3 through and through.

[Dave2]

Originally Posted by Wolfinwolfsclothing

Its because the convertible M3 is the LEAST desirable model.

To some, to others it is the most desirable model.

It is unlikely so many E93 owners are paying extra to have the least desirable model.

Granted the E93 may give up a small bit of performance to the coupe or sedan; however I put a priority on open-top driving. I purchased the E93 because I found it to be the best choice in a four-seat convertible. Quite frankly, if I had been looking for a pure performance car the M3 of any configuration would not be on my list.

Oh, and to ease the anxiety of the self-righteous coupe and sedan owners I removed the M3 badge from the trunk.

[LarThaL]

Originally Posted by FVM3

coupe holds the best resale value. Convertible is heavier and noticeable slower.

Had the convertible come in a cloth top with like only 150lbs added weight, I may have seriously considered it, but not with over 400lbs added weight. I really disagree with BMW's decision to move to a hardtop for the e93.

[glockperfect]

I've had my e93m3 for a little over a year; bought her CPO in SoCal. When I was shopping though, I had a similar experience to OP - coupes and verts were about the same price. I would have bought either; just came down to finding one I liked at the right number.

There have been some good ideas above as to why this might be true, and it would be interesting to know what percentage are leased.

My other theory is that people who are in the market for used m3s are more interested in performance than the "subjective" advantages you get with a vert.

As support, I submit that you will find more e93's that are stock or close to stock, whereas e92 owners are more likely to mod. Just my observations; no data to back it up.

[mjposner]

Dear Sanctimonious E92 owners bashing E93s, as you know only the E30 M3 is the real deal so you are just electronically laden posers as well. But because we E93 owners make you so sad, I will immediately debadge my faux M3. Keeping with BMW tradition, I will purchase BMW 340ic labels to signify that my machine has been determined unworthy by the Princess of Persia (or was that prince, to busy enjoying the open sky and engine sound to check).