The best thing that ever happened to the M Division

[ruff]

Originally Posted by ihyln

I find it amusing an accord driver has to come tell us this fascinating news.

Originally Posted by sayemthree

this from an Accord driver?

Originally Posted by sayemthree

i would get an Accord before I got an GTR - but only the V6 2 door accord.

Originally Posted by godora

i don't think he even has driven an a BMW, 91 accord guy telling people who have driven bmw's all there lifes that some cars are better than BMW ?? duh, they are better but most people here enjoy it for its sheer purpose to have fun and not to compete, yes competing sometimes can be fun but to what length ?? 100K is not competing no more (most of the time) its already wining.

Thanks for you reply’s. Interesting to note that in politics as in life, if you can’t come up with an educated and mature response, use the ace in the hole, the personal attack. It works quite effectively, especially with a naïve and closed minded viewing audience.

Let me tell you more about my ride. Maybe that will give you even more insight into how stupid I am for not currently driving a BMW. I usually only drive my stripped 2700 pound Accord with 215 k miles and the slickest shifting 5 speed I have ever laid hands, on weekends or long distant trips of more than 15 miles. I have another car in the family that is nicer but I don’t feel the need to promote it. Anyway, the fact of the matter is, as of late, my most frequent mode of transportation is 26 lb 89 Bridgestone MB 4 and to a lesser extent a 19 lb 03 Lemond Zurich. Now I know it isn’t a Santa Cruz or a Colnago, so right there you can see I am not drinking enough Kool aid fed directly from the cycling community and it’s marketing machine.

In 92 I decided to buy, cash on hand, a year old Accord at auction price. Now I know this is something you would never be caught dead in, at least in public or on a hip forum. I mean it is a rice burner right and a loser family sedan to boot. The Accord was a nice car for me at the time and still is. I bought my first car for $200 cash on hand, fixed it up and sold it for $800 and so on and so on with different cars until I had accumulated abut 10k. I was blessed enough to receive a scholarship to go to graduate school. I have since graduated and worked at my current job for almost 15 years. All the while graduating from a University without a single loan and no debt. For those of you who have spent numerous years t at a University you can affirm, the difficulty of getting out alive debt free. Through sweat and tears, my house was payed off a number of years ago. As one radio personality who discusses finances likes to say, getting out of debt has replaced owning a BMW as the new status symbol. I came from a family that was in the car business and I have been rigorously following the auto industry and more specifically BMW’s for 20 odd years.

Since I am the one here who should be embarrassed for driving an Accord, let me just suggest something profound my grandfather told me years ago. If you do not have the money you can’t buy it. Please Disregard the next statement if your shiny BMW is paid off by the sweat of your brow, if not, consider this. That fancy BMW in your garage is most likely owned by your bank/credit union or your stealership. It reminds me of the statement, “looking good and going nowhere.” Hey, I have owned my lowly Accord for 16 years and have the cash on hand to by your car tomorrow. If that means I am lacking, then so be it.

Unlike you, I do not drink the BMW cool aid. If you would do even a smidgen of automotive homework you would know BMW stated the e90x M3 is 8% more efficient than the E46 M3. Let me just state this again: how does BMW, the pinnacle of technological automotive engineering, build a light, efficientl, dynamic and advanced marvel such as the S85, yet it manages to get worse mileage than a Dodge v10 that more than doubles it’s litre size. How?

Maybe one of the other reason I have yet to purchased my BMW, is your responses harken me back to the BMW porcupine joke I was told by a colleague when I first professed my affinity to him for everything BMW. Quite frankly, before, purchasing my BMW, I will have to get over the embarrassment of associating with the so called knowledgeable BMW fans that wouldn’t know what objectivity was if it smacked them squarely in the face. Yet continue to promote conspicuous consumption in an economy that by some accounts may be teetering on the brink.

That being said, I am still jealous of your rides.

[watrob]

Drive a Dodge V10 as hard as we drive our M3 and see what fuel economy you get.

[ruff]

Originally Posted by Krueger///M3

I sense complete hypocrisy.

I know if one thinks concretely, it is hard to fathom that someone could actually make arguments for both sides of the same coin, sorta speak, in discussing the M3's strengths as well as it's weaknesses. This must be completely foreign to you.

[ScottyGams]

for the record, i love the GTR!

i still got an M3... your post made me think about it a bit more.

I boiled it down to "the badge, and the history"

the first part is trivial. just a boy staring at M3s, and thinking one day they would have one. The GTR never existed in my my mind till I was 17 and saw 2Fast2Furious and said, "What is that beast?"

The second part is the lineage. BMW makes the best sporty cars out there ( I think most would agree on that). Of the cars made by BMW, the 3 is the highest acclimated. Then there is the 335i, a 3 series with the engine of the year inside, and hailed as the greatest 3er ever. Now I just got the M3, the king of the 3s. The champion of sport luxury.

The Nissan GTR is a great champion itself, but there is no kin to compare to. It may be the greatest car EVER made, but Nissan is fighting to merge the identity of the car and the identity of Nissan. We in the know care, but the GTR will sit in a showroom next to a Maxima. I would walk into the service department, and sit in a waiting room with a fat chick that drives a Versa. There is no special heritage, no bloodline (in the US). It feels empty I guess.

Meanwhile, I would love to drive one! I hope that expresses why going Nissan GTR did not even cross my mind... It is an awesome car, but I went M and never looked back.

[MTROIS]

Truth is, if money would not be a factor in my life, I would probably add a few more cars to my garage (some contemporary ones like the P-GT3 RS, Bugatti Veyron, ...) and especially some classics (Aston Martin DB6, Ferrari 250 GTO, BMW 2002, ...).... but the reality is that I do not have these means and my M3 is the best deal I could get to fulfill one of my dreams... and I love every second of it even though the car is not perfect (but very close to that in my personal humble experience/opinion)!!!

[UltimateBMW]

Originally Posted by ruff

I know if one thinks concretely, it is hard to fathom that someone could actually make arguments for both sides of the same coin, sorta speak, in discussing the M3's strengths as well as it's weaknesses. This must be completely foreign to you.

While I'm still trying to understand why you made this thread, it seems your not really adding any type of fuel to the fire. If it was simply an attempt to inform us, I think most of the users here already knew most of what was mentioned in the OP. Plus, over everything else I would rather have a BMW warranty and service department to protect my $70k investment.

But in regards to your latest postings, I think you are putting too much emphasis on what other poeple think about the car that you want to drive. Who cars if poepel think you are a prick? I guarantee you that anyone that namecalls other poeple via stereotype isn't any better or classier. In fact, I'm sure after getting to know your co-worker friend one could find plenty of fault and ugliness in his personality and actions. In the end, who cares? If you are a confident person (I imagine you are, as you keep coming to the lions den with attempted controversy) then it shouldn't and probably doesn't really matter to you.

BMW's are great cars... still, and have fantastic warranties and decent reliability for cars of thier performance/luxury level. But in the end, if your looking at a car that really sparks your excitement and you get anxious just thinking about it, that is all that matters. Don't let some douchebag with a thorn in his side steer your desires through stereotypical opinions.

[UltimateBMW]

Plus, if your not really into the M3.. then don't let us talk you into it either. That is a rediculous idea even, letting a internet forum of strangers curve your appetite and spend your money for you.

I imagine you are into it though, since you keep coming back!

[Heat00]

only GT-R I saw was priced at $100k
how can you compare the two when its almost double the price?

[lugnut]

I'll post my experiences with the 3 cars that seem to be mentioned here (M3, Viper, GTR)

I sold my E46 M3 for the E92 M3. I put my name on the list June of 2006 simply for "the new M3". During my wait from that date, until the build date in Febuary 2008, I contemplated several other sports cars. A Vantage, R8, CLS AMG, RS4, and 911 were all considered, but in the end I decided to stick with the M3. Frankly I prefer RWD, 2 doors, and a 6sp to paddles and AWD. Did I think about fuel consumption? Yes, but honestly it didn't factor into my purchase, more a curiosity than anything else.

A close family friend has had several Vipers, and on multiple occasions I have gotten to drive them over the past 13 or so years. Tremendous fun, but not a very good daily driver, unless of course you are on a first name basis with your chiropractor, and don't mind scraping on every parking lot you enter/exit. The fuel consumption of them was horrific also. I could care less what Chrysler says that bad boy drinks, it drinks down gas in huge gulps. Granted, I suppose by supercar standards it may, by some, be considered "good", but not in real world conditions. Frankly a Z06 is a better car anyway.

Lastly the GTR. My local dealership here in NJ has a shiny new silver GTR Premium out front (chained off of course). I stopped in to ask about purchasing the thing, and was really bothered by the whole thing. I new that obviously I couldn't drive it, but I was shocked when I wasn't even allowed to sit in it to assess driving position. Nor would they open the door so I could at least see into the cabin (the side windows were completely obscured with window stickers). To add insult to injury at this point they told me that there was a $50k "market adjustment" on the car. So to recap: $127k for a Nissan. I walked away from my R8 because of a $20k market charge, and that was for a much nicer car (IMO).

Then I find out that you can't even drive the car w/ Launch Control on, or TSC off without voiding the warranty. More to the point, if you can not use Launch Control, the acceleration times of the vehicle rise dramatically, and put them on par with the M3 and RS4. Essentially Nissan has crafted a brilliant lie, and ended up with a nominally faster, much uglier RS4 coupe.

So in the end, I stuck with my M3...a car that I can track, take on vacations with my girlfriend, and use all of the options I paid for without voiding anything while getting 18mpg.

[Krueger///M3]

Originally Posted by ruff

I know if one thinks concretely, it is hard to fathom that someone could actually make arguments for both sides of the same coin, sorta speak, in discussing the M3's strengths as well as it's weaknesses. This must be completely foreign to you.

Ok, a little rude, but point taken. I took a look back at both of the statements and realized that they do not in fact contradict each other.

I admire your composure when dealing with some of the members of the board who discount your thoughts due to the car that you choose to drive, you show that you have confidence.

[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by Minimalization

A Z07 gets 26 mi/gal too!

An E63 AMG gets 20 mi/gal!

It would be nice if BMW M cars could get mi/gal comparable to their competitors, normalized to displacement.

I can best the E63 AMG fuel consumption in my E90 sedan, and I'm sure that I can achieve 26 MPG out of the E90 ///M3 if I baby the car. I've achieved 24mpg thus far.

While I never truly considered a GTR, it is an excellent performer (..all nannies and doo-dads engaged). I'd take an R33/R34 VSpec over a new GTR any day of the week. Passion, emotion, performance and style were a big part of the reason why I fell in love with BMW's to begin with, but I am not a 'fanboy' by any means. I reserve my fanboy behavior for brilliant Porsche GT2's & GT3's. With that being said, I know exactly what the M3 is........and is not! No overt BMW 'kool-aid' consumption or crafty marketing schemes here. The M3 is just simply the right car for me.

[ndahbar]

http://www.nagtroc.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=25361

Read post #15 among the others. Looks like their double-clutch tranny isn't up to snuff either. The poster sure sounds knowledgeable and with the tranny only providing 1 side of the system (even set of gears: 2, 4, 6) it pretty much proves that what got screwed up is the gearbox and has nothing to do with stress from launches.

Japanese reliability? Equal or pass Porsche? Uh...no.

Search it. LOTS of people having all kinds of mechanical issues.

[emperur]

Originally Posted by ruff

and for that matter the rest of the sports car world:

The Nissan GT-R.

Gotta love the outcry of incestuous whining among the car manufactures and their fanboys about this car.

Let me start with Porsche and their cult following. Porsche simply needs to shut up, step up to the plate and produce, especially given their highway robbery price points. Porsche can't beat Nissan right now, in fact they can't even compete, when comparing dollar to dollar. Porsche's hand has now been forced. The monopoly is over, thank you very much Nissan.

BMW doesn't produce any car, even a 100k one that can compete with the GT-R. This is not my opinion, this is a fact. BMW enthusiasts need to write a letter of thanks to Nissan for waking up the M Division, who have been asleep at the wheel for two too many German winters.

I find it fascinating when E92 M3 enthusiasts like to say the GT-R is not a direct competitor to the M3. They say this for one reason and one reason only, the M3 does not perform up to Nissan standards. So who is the M3's direct competitor, the four dour ISF, the four door C63, and the four door RS4, simply because it can beat them consistently on the track? Or how about the two door, four seat GT-R configured the same as the M3?

That leads to the argument about the M3 being the best all around daily driver. Answer is: it use to be. This M3 is no longer a great daily driver for one simple reason: It is a gas pig, especially for a lightweight low torque 4 litre V8. To put it in to perspective, the Viper's 600 hp 8.4 litre V10 with gargantuan levels of torque is able to attain a 13/22 mileage rating. Think about it.

Dct has been a disappointment. No real efficiency advantage as advertised and glitches that actually make it a liability at the track. On the other hand, The GT-R's dct transmission is an advantage at the track.

The M3 brakes are what they are, good stoppers but fade prone and not up to extended track work. How about the argument that multi piston are not an advancement over single piston? And what will we be saying when the M3 finally gets multi-piston stoppers? Who among us will still cling to the mantra that single piston is better? Love the argument that nice looking painted brakes are not desirable, yet these same people spend more than a grand to buy 19" bling wheels that slightly reduce performance over the standard 18s.

Thanks to the the the GT-R, the poor economy, high fuel prices, and even the CTS-V and R8, I believe in the near future, the M division is going to once again be at the head of it's class at building the best all around sports car for the money. You watch, world class engine and drivetrains + DFI and light weight materials = world beater at a reasonable price.

dude so why don't you go but a Ghey-TR and shut up already. cheez.

[rushx85]

This thread is so useless... unhonestly. I love the GTR and I truely love my M3 but they are two completely different cars. Its not only about performance and tracktimes. It is about sooo many other things when it comes down to buy a car.
Anyway there is basically just one point I want to make:
You can be sure that 99% of Porsche drivers wont sell their Porsche because of the GTR. And you can be sure as hell that Aston Martin drivers wont sell their cars even if u tell them that they get a "better" Porsche for less money.
Or maybe you can try to convince a Bugatti Veyron owner that his car is not worth 10x more than a M3 because its not accelerating 10x faster.

Just dont get me wrong, there is absolutely no offense to anyone in my comment!

Off course for most people money is the limiting factor but within your pricerange just buy the car you feel the most happy with.

Personally I can say that whenever I have to go somewhere I go there with a smile.
And I couldnt care less if a GTR overtakes me... I`m happy for him and I just hope he`s happy aswell

[watrob]

I don't know the Nissan, is a Nissan, is a Nissan, they come out and produce a car every 10-12 years then disappear. It's a bit like the Honda NSX that ran from 1990-2005.

Fine, you own one of these cars but then some one comes out and makes something better, I mean is not DD, there is always something faster out there and lets face it you drive your car for so many years (2-4yrs) and then you replace it when the warranty gets thin.

To me the GTR is a fad, here today gone tomorrow, I am not going to wait another 12 years before the next model comes out, Nissan has one sports car, where is the stable, Merc has SL AMG, CLK AMG, ML AMG, Black Series, SL, CLK, McLaren's, BMW M's, CSL, M3, M5, M6 etc as do some of the other manufacturers, no history in Nissan.

Try getting extended warranty on GTR and would you buy a secondhabd one. To me it's the car you buy if you have a little spare cash and a spare garage bay. The NSX was a big deal when it came out also but I don't see to many of them around now.

Give me a make with heritage anyday, not a one hit wonder.

[E90ice]

would you drive a ultra super-fast Honda Civic or a fast Ferrari?

Get the point?

Most of us don't live on the track and don't care about how fast it can run around Nurburing.

[ruff]

Originally Posted by Krueger///M3

Ok, a little rude, but point taken. I took a look back at both of the statements and realized that they do not in fact contradict each other.

I admire your composure when dealing with some of the members of the board who discount your thoughts due to the car that you choose to drive, you show that you have confidence.

Krueger, you are much too kind. More so than I deserve. I have responded to you a number of times because I respect your opinion. I apologize for my less than kind words in my previous response.

[TLud]

I can't believe I missed this ****storm for so long.

The GTR is a very interesting car. Nissan has essentially dropped a supercar into an artificially low price point (notwithstanding any markup). It really renders direct comparison of the GTR, as a whole, to any other car problematic. Essentially, Nissan is partially subsidizing (at least initially) the GTR to match it against competitors in this lower price range that don't stand a chance performance-wise (and to get credit for coming close to the performance of more expensive cars). Nissan is taking significant losses on each GTR they sell, even with the recent price increase. If Nissan priced the GTR at a point where they would realize a reasonable profit margin, the performance wouldn't be nearly as impressive. I don't think you'll see BMW or the M division ever take such a strategy with the M3.

Nissan is only willing to lose so much, however, so it is passing on post-sale costs to the consumer in the form of maintenance costs and warranty claim denials. I suspect that the average GTR owner has never had to think about or deal with the ownership costs of Ferraris, Lambos, Aston Martins, etc. And until recently, they wouldn't expect those costs with a Nissan. Again, this isn't the approach that BMW would take with the M3 (I think BMW's initial handling of the the E46 M3's early drivetrain issues was sort of a statistical outlier).

IMO, the point of the M3 is to be a relatively affordable and comfortable daily driver that offers owners performance just short of supercars costing significantly more. It is designed to be relatively reliable despite being pushed to its limits. And BMW is not going to take a loss in producing it.

On the other hand, the GTR is not particularly comfortable or practical as a daily driver. It is not reliable when pushed to its limits. It simply offers incredible performance at a great price to the consumer. There's another car that did this long before the GTR hit the streets: the Vette. How much did the Vette ever really push the boys at M to build a better M3?

So what effect will the GTR have on the M-division down the road? I'm sure they'll take some lessons here and there, but I think they'll also see the GTR for what it is and won't change their overall game plan much, which is a good thing IMO.

ruff, really the only point with which I disagree with you is your contention that the M3 is no longer the best all-around daily driver given its fuel economy (or lack thereof). Yes, BMW should have pursued direct injection on this engine (although I'm glad they didn't rush it), but that's only one issue, and admittedly a relatively minor one for someone spending $60k+ on a car. You will not get the best gas mileage out of a high-reving NA engine (the torque output is almost irrelevant in this regard), but that's what M3 owners love most about this car.

[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by TLud

I can't believe I missed this ****storm for so long.

The GTR is a very interesting car. Nissan has essentially dropped a supercar into an artificially low price point (notwithstanding any markup). It really renders direct comparison of the GTR, as a whole, to any other car problematic. Essentially, Nissan is partially subsidizing (at least initially) the GTR to match it against competitors in this lower price range that don't stand a chance performance-wise (and to get credit for coming close to the performance of more expensive cars). Nissan is taking significant losses on each GTR they sell, even with the recent price increase. If Nissan priced the GTR at a point where they would realize a reasonable profit margin, the performance wouldn't be nearly as impressive. I don't think you'll see BMW or the M division ever take such a strategy with the M3.

Nissan is only willing to lose so much, however, so it is passing on post-sale costs to the consumer in the form of maintenance costs and warranty claim denials. I suspect that the average GTR owner has never had to think about or deal with the ownership costs of Ferraris, Lambos, Aston Martins, etc. And until recently, they wouldn't expect those costs with a Nissan. Again, this isn't the approach that BMW would take with the M3 (I think BMW's initial handling of the the E46 M3's early drivetrain issues was sort of a statistical outlier).

IMO, the point of the M3 is to be a relatively affordable and comfortable daily driver that offers owners performance just short of supercars costing significantly more. It is designed to be relatively reliable despite being pushed to its limits. And BMW is not going to take a loss in producing it.

On the other hand, the GTR is not particularly comfortable or practical as a daily driver. It is not reliable when pushed to its limits. It simply offers incredible performance at a great price to the consumer. There's another car that did this long before the GTR hit the streets: the Vette. How much did the Vette ever really push the boys at M to build a better M3?

So what effect will the GTR have on the M-division down the road? I'm sure they'll take some lessons here and there, but I think they'll also see the GTR for what it is and won't change their overall game plan much, which is a good thing IMO.

ruff, really the only point with which I disagree with you is your contention that the M3 is no longer the best all-around daily driver given its fuel economy (or lack thereof). Yes, BMW should have pursued direct injection on this engine (although I'm glad they didn't rush it), but that's only one issue, and admittedly a relatively minor one for someone spending $60k+ on a car. You will not get the best gas mileage out of a high-reving NA engine (the torque output is almost irrelevant in this regard), but that's what M3 owners love most about this car.

Well put!

[MJC///M3]

Originally Posted by TLud

I can't believe I missed this ****storm for so long.

The GTR is a very interesting car. Nissan has essentially dropped a supercar into an artificially low price point (notwithstanding any markup). It really renders direct comparison of the GTR, as a whole, to any other car problematic. Essentially, Nissan is partially subsidizing (at least initially) the GTR to match it against competitors in this lower price range that don't stand a chance performance-wise (and to get credit for coming close to the performance of more expensive cars). Nissan is taking significant losses on each GTR they sell, even with the recent price increase. If Nissan priced the GTR at a point where they would realize a reasonable profit margin, the performance wouldn't be nearly as impressive. I don't think you'll see BMW or the M division ever take such a strategy with the M3.

Nissan is only willing to lose so much, however, so it is passing on post-sale costs to the consumer in the form of maintenance costs and warranty claim denials. I suspect that the average GTR owner has never had to think about or deal with the ownership costs of Ferraris, Lambos, Aston Martins, etc. And until recently, they wouldn't expect those costs with a Nissan. Again, this isn't the approach that BMW would take with the M3 (I think BMW's initial handling of the the E46 M3's early drivetrain issues was sort of a statistical outlier).

IMO, the point of the M3 is to be a relatively affordable and comfortable daily driver that offers owners performance just short of supercars costing significantly more. It is designed to be relatively reliable despite being pushed to its limits. And BMW is not going to take a loss in producing it.

On the other hand, the GTR is not particularly comfortable or practical as a daily driver. It is not reliable when pushed to its limits. It simply offers incredible performance at a great price to the consumer. There's another car that did this long before the GTR hit the streets: the Vette. How much did the Vette ever really push the boys at M to build a better M3?

So what effect will the GTR have on the M-division down the road? I'm sure they'll take some lessons here and there, but I think they'll also see the GTR for what it is and won't change their overall game plan much, which is a good thing IMO.

ruff, really the only point with which I disagree with you is your contention that the M3 is no longer the best all-around daily driver given its fuel economy (or lack thereof). Yes, BMW should have pursued direct injection on this engine (although I'm glad they didn't rush it), but that's only one issue, and admittedly a relatively minor one for someone spending $60k+ on a car. You will not get the best gas mileage out of a high-reving NA engine (the torque output is almost irrelevant in this regard), but that's what M3 owners love most about this car.

Very well said!

[ruff]

I need to first of all criticize my own posting history on this forum. I have been too critical of a car I love: the M3, in all its variations. So the question I pose to myself is: Why have I been so critical? I am the quintessential BMW fanboy and a long timer to boot. I drive 2 hours one way on weekends just to find an excuse to go to the dealership and soak in the whole BMW atmosphere.

This thread was never really about the GT-R. I only used it as an example of a car company without the cachet of BMW, building a supercar at quarters on the dollar in super car prices. It will having nothing but a positive long term effect on all automakers, particularly BMW and Porsche; two automakers who I believe have been resting on their accolades a bit too long.

I understand the M Division’s brilliance and their engineering prowess, particularly in the area of chassis tuning and power plants. That is why I make my case. Given the M Divisions impressive track record, I believe I have justifiably high expectations for their products. When I see others make excuses, discount and minimize the E9x weaknesses, it makes me queasy on a number of fronts.

Why have M3 enthusiasts lowered their expectations of M products and in fact now argue in favor of and defend the M3’s few weaknesses such as lack of DFI, poor mileage, high mass, lack of steering feel, fade prone brakes, and single piston calipers that you will not find on other track worthy cars. Why would M enthusiasts not be happy to see its competitors build a better car than the M3? Do they not believe competition will improve their own brand? If M enthusiasts do not criticize the M3’s weaknesses, why on earth would BMW take the time and money to improve their products and keep the M enthusiast biting at the bit to purchase their latest and greatest girl/boy wonder.

I must be in a minority that is shrinking by the day. Not many among us have expressed much concern about the M Division focusing so much time, capitol and R&D into gimmicky driving aides with a gazillion settings that in no way shape or form can avoid bugs, given their complexity. If you think there are bugs in the system now, give it a few years. When instead, the M Division could focus their time and money on lighter materials, implementing DFI (like most of it’s competitors) and getting a nice bump in horsepower as well as mileage. There are not many technologies that give you the best of both worlds. DFI is one of those technologies.

Let me ask this simple question: Who of you prefer numerous driver settings, comforts, toys and complexity to more horsepower, efficiency and reliability?

I again have appreciated all of those who have taken time to post on this thread, including the criticisms. There are not many things I enjoy more than a spirited discussion about a variety subjects while at the same time matching wits and having a bit of fun. It stimulates our thirst for knowledge for everything M.

Keep up the good work Mates.

[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by ruff

Let me ask this simple question: Who of you prefer numerous driver settings, comforts, toys and complexity to more horsepower, efficiency and reliability?


Keep up the good work Mates.

Not I! Every ///M3 that I have ever owned has been fairly minimalistic with the exception being my decision to opt for navigation; I travel enough to justify purchasing the option, and it has saved my ass on more occasions than I can count. I typically prefer my ///M3's with cloth/leather interior, no moonroof, navigation and 6MT. Never have I opted for packages, expensive/bug-laden transmissions, etc. (..although my current car has leather and Tech Package due to the stellar deal; I'm not fond of EDC though). Efficiency is a huge priority to me; I've never had an issue with ///M's reliability nor horsepower. In fact, the ///M3's horsepower ratings have been more than enough for me.