///M3 just arrive at the dealer ...

[ZeroG]

I just got a text from my parts guy at the local BMW dealer Center BMW in Sherman Oaks, CA.

It's white sticker reads $70K prior to the dealer mark up. I knew people were dreaming of that $57K sticker..

[M3_2010]

Originally Posted by ZeroG

I just got a text from my parts guy at the local BMW dealer Center BMW in Sherman Oaks, CA.

It's white sticker reads $70K prior to the dealer mark up. I knew people were dreaming of that $57K sticker..

Porsche 911, here i come.... 70k for a 3 series...

[par4bmw]

Originally Posted by M3_2010

Porsche 911, here i come.... 70k for a 3 series...

Enjoy it, the 911 is a great car.

How come there is surprise to the $70K.. Prices have been released for ages now. Dealers always load up their first demos of a hot car.

[Insider]

I totally agree. Crazy price for a 3-series.

[RandyB]

The base price is in the mid $50s. Mine will MSRP right at $62k with GGT. Still a lot of scratch for a 3 series though, but worth it to me.

[Keto]

Originally Posted by M3_2010

Porsche 911, here i come.... 70k for a 3 series...

BMW's are too expensive! So I choose a more expensive car!

[Jack's dad]

A comparable 911, i.e. a 911S with similar equipment, would cost $20-30K more, go slower, carry fewer people and less cargo, and would not offer Bluetooth or sat radio. Granted the brakes are probably better, as is handling in some scenarios. Porsche's are great cars too (I have owned two of them) but they do not offer more bang for the buck - far from it in my opinion. The M3 is a bargain by comparison.

[jtown]

Originally Posted by M3_2010

Porsche 911, here i come.... 70k for a 3 series...

See ya.

[RandyB]

Originally Posted by Keto

BMW's are too expensive! So I choose a more expensive car!

Lol! Great logic, huh?

The only Porsche I like is a little more than I want to spend, and then you can't get it without a sunroof for some GD reason - GT3.

[KonigsTiger]

Originally Posted by Jack's dad

A comparable 911, i.e. a 911S with similar equipment, would cost $20-30K more, go slower, carry fewer people and less cargo, and would not offer Bluetooth or sat radio. Granted the brakes are probably better, as is handling in some scenarios. Porsche's are great cars too (I have owned two of them) but they do not offer more bang for the buck - far from it in my opinion. The M3 is a bargain by comparison.

This is 100% accurate!!! I’ve taken on several Porsche 911 S’s in the F1 track and the M3 handles just as well on curbs and maybe a tad faster on the straights but does have all the other amenities. Plus, I love the look of the coupe!!! And the 911S is considerably more expensive!!!

[asaulo1]

just called Center BMW in Sherman Oaks.... they have an AW E92 Coupe in the showroom. I will probably cruise on by tonight to take a look and take some pics. I will go ahead and post them when I get back. I will surely take my kids to have them check the space in the rear seats although I already know they will definitely think its an upgrade from the mini cooper's rear seat.....

[devo]

Originally Posted by Jack's dad

A comparable 911, i.e. a 911S with similar equipment, would cost $20-30K more, go slower, carry fewer people and less cargo, and would not offer Bluetooth or sat radio. Granted the brakes are probably better, as is handling in some scenarios. Porsche's are great cars too (I have owned two of them) but they do not offer more bang for the buck - far from it in my opinion. The M3 is a bargain by comparison.

Hardly slower. Who cares about cargo and useable rear seats, it is a sports car first. A new one may be $17k - $20k more (discounts are easily found), but 5000 mile 2006 C2S's are going in the mid $70's. Which car do you think is going to depreciate faster? Hint: it will not be the used 911S.

[asaulo1]

Originally Posted by devo

Hardly slower. Who cares about cargo and useable rear seats, it is a sports car first. A new one may be $17k - $20k more (discounts are easily found), but 5000 mile 2006 C2S's are going in the mid $70's. Which car do you think is going to depreciate faster? Hint: it will not be the used 911S.

I see your point although rear seats are a necessity for me since I have 2 small kids. Also, for me, to spend $60k for a car, it has to be new... I'm sorry... personally, for me to plunk down that much $$$, I would want to be the 1st one on it. Also, another sticking point would be maintenance. I have several family members that drive 911s and its scary what they pay for regular maintenance. Here in the states, 4 years free maintenance is a deal maker. I also need the trunk space for my golf clubs

[par4bmw]

Originally Posted by devo

Hardly slower. Who cares about cargo and useable rear seats, it is a sports car first. A new one may be $17k - $20k more (discounts are easily found), but 5000 mile 2006 C2S's are going in the mid $70's. Which car do you think is going to depreciate faster? Hint: it will not be the used 911S.

Yes, and you can wait an buy a used M3 for $20K less. If you want a 911, just go for it, they are tremendous cars.

[devo]

Originally Posted by asaulo1

I see your point although rear seats are a necessity for me since I have 2 small kids. Also, for me, to spend $60k for a car, it has to be new... I'm sorry... personally, for me to plunk down that much $$$, I would want to be the 1st one on it. Also, another sticking point would be maintenance. I have several family members that drive 911s and its scary what they pay for regular maintenance. Here in the states, 4 years free maintenance is a deal maker. I also need the trunk space for my golf clubs

I understand that the need for cargo room and rear seats is a huge consideration. I have owned a few 911's and never had any issues with maintenance. As long as you are under warranty or an extended factory warranty (CPO), then there are no concerns with costs other than the obvious routine stuff. By comparison, how many free oil changes will you really get, considering that BMW only pays for them every 15k miles. Most or all of us here will pay for several more than that. Porsche only requires 20k intervals, however, who will wait that long. So, the way I see it is that there will be a handful more customer pay changes for the 911, which does not really mean much considering the likely intervals. Brakes are another story, but even BMW is very selective about what and when they will repair. Porsche brakes by comparison last quite a bit even with a lot of track use. The M's will not likey fare very well under repeated track use. Also, consider that the fuel consumption is much worse on the M.

I am not trash talking the car as I am getting one, but I re-think it all the time.

[devo]

Originally Posted by par4bmw

Yes, and you can wait an buy a used M3 for $20K less. If you want a 911, just go for it, they are tremendous cars.

Agreed, but we are talking about contemporary pricing. It will be quite a while before you see $20k off a used M.

[SteveMondragon]

Originally Posted by ZeroG

It's white sticker reads $70K prior to the dealer mark up. I knew people were dreaming of that $57K sticker..

Quite a few So Cal dealerships got some E92 M3's in last night. My co-worker is going to pick his up later this afternoon. We've checked a few places and yeah the M3 has a MSRP of $70k, but after the dealership markup you're looking at a $90,000 price tag for a M3 if you didn't pre-order.

[skierman64]

I would never buy a car above MSRP. That's absurd.

[Jack's dad]

Originally Posted by devo

Hardly slower. Who cares about cargo and useable rear seats, it is a sports car first. A new one may be $17k - $20k more (discounts are easily found), but 5000 mile 2006 C2S's are going in the mid $70's. Which car do you think is going to depreciate faster? Hint: it will not be the used 911S.

Is slower according to the tests I have seen, but I take your point - it is splitting hairs. I care about cargo and usable rear seats, as they allow me to drive the car all of the time instead of some of the time; my 911 was parked a lot because I needed to bring a couple of kids with me. You are absolutely correct that the used Porsche will depreciate less than a new BMW, but the reverse is equally true. I have owned both cars and they are both great, with different strengths. My primary point is that from a "value" perspective a $65K M3 has nothing to apologize for vs. $90K C2S.

[a burrito]

First of all, anyone who has a 911 doesn't use it for their primary daily driving. Or at least my family doesn't.. if your going to compare the m3 to any 911, you might as well compare it to a gallardo or a f430. many people just don't drive the 911 everyday so of course the m3 is going to be more practical. as far as performance goes, the previous generation sti could give the m3 a run for its money. so all in all, you buy a m3 because its a m3. it can be driven everyday and can be used according to your everyday lifestyle.

its just not fair to say that the m3 is inferior to the 911 because you buy a m3 for X reason and the 911 for X reason.

[GregW / Oregon]

Originally Posted by M3_2010

Porsche 911, here i come.... 70k for a 3 series...

What a stupid post. You'll pay more because it's a P-O-R-S-C-H-I-A. Enjoy.

[BCMPOWER]

70k is a base for a 911, with some options you'll be well north of that, and don't forget the maintenance costs. A decently loaded caymen s already goes for 70K. But hey if it's you cup of tea go for it