New M3 impressions - Page 2
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 58

This is a discussion on New M3 impressions within the Comparison: WRX vs World forums, part of the Community - Meet other Enthusiasts category; my sister has a 02 m3 its one of the best cars i have ever driven a corvette cant touch ...

  1. #16
    Registered User JBLSWRX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Fort Worth, TX
    Posts
    168
    my sister has a 02 m3 its one of the best cars i have ever driven a corvette cant touch it my dad used to have a c5 and now has a 911 and the m3 out runs it to. Theyre all amazing cars.
    Stage 4 (vf34) + tmic + mbc

  2. Remove Advertisements
    ClubWRX.net
    Advertisements
     

  3. #17
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Oakland, CA
    Posts
    191
    Originally posted by glepko
    Thanks for the viewpoint. It's good to hear some differing opinions. I too agree that power oversteer is no correction for understeering issues. I've planned on buying an M3 as my first brand new vehicle but the more I read, the more interesting the Vette becomes. It's all gonna come down to a good long test drive.
    I'm surprised at the degree to which folks are defending this car. I was considering buying one but had concerns about the engines blowing up, excessive oil consumption, and poor fuel economy. After all, wouldn't it be great to have a car that had all the performance of a Vette with the practicality of a WRX. The bottom line is that it doesn't. All I can say is I'm glad I didn't.

  4. #18
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Oakland, CA
    Posts
    191
    [QUOTE]Originally posted by DEADPOOL
    [B][QUOTE]Originally posted by dangrass

    Ride: my Corvette (and any late model Porsche 996 or an NSX) outsticks and outhandles the M3, yet the ride is downright pleasant by comparison. My observations exactly reflect those mad by R & T.[Quote]

    Question- Did youre friend have springs put on his car, if so then this would be the reason you found the ride harsh, in stock form its not harsh except when comparing it to a range rover. My best friend has one, and hes had it for over 2 years now, and i would rather have it then i would a C5, mainly becouse of practicality(the vette doesnt have it, id like to see you fit a mountain bike in a vette like we did in the M3).

    Stock everything. A C5 Coupe can accomodate a mountain bike much more easily than an M3 due to the large hatch. It can't seat 4 however.

    [Quote]Electronic intervention: one can turn off TC, but it's there for a reason. When compared to the "active handling" system in a Vette, the TC in the M3 is downright prehistoric. You pretty much have to turn it off to drive the car fast, this would imply that it doesn't really work very well. By comparison the Vette's is superb...a genuinely useful safety feature.[Quote]

    Thats funny, if you were to have read the R&T article fully you would have seen how there conclusions are the exact opposite of yours. Heres another note, the vette in the R&T was not the C5 but instead it was a Z-06(correct me if im wrong).

    Read the whole thing...and several others. Consistent complaints about the M3's traction control intervening too early.

    [Quote]Real world performance: for those who are convinced that a new M3 is the cat's meeow (as I was) I suggest you take one for a real drive.[Quote]

    Its not meant to be the greatest sports car etc, its a all around sports car and i believe it to be the best all around one(practicality handling etc etc)

    I agree that it's a great sedan...but the previous generation was a far better car. This one is too heavy, too top end power weighted, and not well balanced.

    [Quote]One final observation that I failed to include in the original email, this thing is downright twitchy at high speeds. I took this one to ~125 and found it to be very nervous as compared to the WRX or Vette. I was genuinely surprised by this, I suspect this is related to the fact that it's sprung way too firm.[Quote]

    I consider it to be just very responsive, point and go. Ive always found american cars to have a rather dilluted steering response(feeling to them). They just dont have what my porsche has nor what the M3 has, youre just not used to it prob.

    I've driven all manner of fast cars, but I found this one to be unusually twitchy. By comparison a 996 (another German car) feels much more stable.

    [Quote]So what you have is a $65k car that for most intents and purposes in inferior to the prior generation version, is 2.5x the cost of a car that has similar real-world performance (a WRX), and is not in the same league as a $50k performance car.[Quote]

    $65k????????? . What are you smoking the M3 only cost $47.

    Not in this part of the world. My partner just bought this vehicle out of state (to get it at just MSRP) and it cost something close to $65k. I just "built" one on the BMW website...came out to $54,170 (a fairly typical config, but far from loaded). Add the gas guzzler tax, the luxury tax, the sales tax, and the registration and you're in the $60's.

    [Quote]My purpose in writing this was to provide an unbiased opinion of a car that I am fortunate enough to have access to, that I can compare in an unbiased way to a car that is near and dear to all of us and to another that is also frequently mentioned as a performance benchmark.

    Its impossible for you to give an unbiased oppinion on this becouse you own a vette. I on the other hand can give an unbiased report on an M3 v C5.
    Not true. I'm not interested in defending what I own, but in this case I can certainly rationalize the decisions I made. I would buy a current generation M3 in an instant if I thought it were a better car, but I don't.

  5. #19
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    202
    Originally posted by dangrass
    I'm surprised at the degree to which folks are defending this car. I was considering buying one but had concerns about the engines blowing up, excessive oil consumption, and poor fuel economy. After all, wouldn't it be great to have a car that had all the performance of a Vette with the practicality of a WRX. The bottom line is that it doesn't. All I can say is I'm glad I didn't.
    To each his own, ya know?

    That’s cool. M3 owners are probably glad they got their car instead of a corvette, Porsche, etc… That’s the beauty of this great country, personal choice. If you want it and can afford it, you can get it.

  6. #20
    Moderator MidKnight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Bergen, NJ
    Posts
    4,711
    I Support ClubWRX
    Yes, the traction control can be turned off, but the car still has a serious understeer problem. Power oversteer is not a solution to a fundamental handling imbalance.
    While I agree, you sometimes have to understand the relativity of things and the compromises that companies make. I know that just from reading reviews in various car magazines, you can see the trend that auto-makers are making cars understeer rather than be more neutral or oversteer. This is because, for the average driver, understeer is substantially easier to control than oversteer. Now, I understand that the M3 is supposed to BMW's ultimate sports coupe or whatever, but we would all be kidding ourselves if we said that all M3 drivers are capable of driving the ultimate sports anything! So yes, the car may understeer. And yes, I agree that power-oversteer should not be the fix to this "fundamental ahndling imbalance." I simply feel that a car like the M3 makes it substantially easier to deal out understeer (via TC off and Power-oversteer) in stock form than say a WRX.
    '03 WRX
    '01 2.5RS
    MODS | PICS | Dyno
    "Stuff sold by the gram is always going to be more exciting than stuff sold by the pound." - Jeremy Clarkson

  7. #21
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Oakland, CA
    Posts
    191
    Originally posted by MidKnight
    While I agree, you sometimes have to understand the relativity of things and the compromises that companies make. I know that just from reading reviews in various car magazines, you can see the trend that auto-makers are making cars understeer rather than be more neutral or oversteer. This is because, for the average driver, understeer is substantially easier to control than oversteer. Now, I understand that the M3 is supposed to BMW's ultimate sports coupe or whatever, but we would all be kidding ourselves if we said that all M3 drivers are capable of driving the ultimate sports anything! So yes, the car may understeer. And yes, I agree that power-oversteer should not be the fix to this "fundamental ahndling imbalance." I simply feel that a car like the M3 makes it substantially easier to deal out understeer (via TC off and Power-oversteer) in stock form than say a WRX.
    Well stated. One of the points I've been trying to make (which has remained unadressed) is that the previous version was a fantastically neutral handling car with a really nice powerband, great brakes, a stiff body, and a firm but compliant ride. The only thing the new car does better is go faster on top, while in every other area it appears to be inferior. I am seriously considering trying to pick up a really nice used one while they are still available.

    BTW, I've raced both a 36 and a 46 (?) in the hills around here in the Vette (maybe soon in the WRX), and found the 36 to be a tougher adversary due to better handling and better low RPM power. The 36 seemed to do a great job of putting the power down while the 46 alternated between major understeer and major oversteer...not the way to go fast.

  8. #22
    Ike
    Ike is offline
    Registered User Ike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Milwaukee, Wi.
    Posts
    764
    Did you ever turn the TC off when you drove it, sorry to beat a dead horse, but I got the feeling you did not. I drove in a C5 Vette with the traction control or whatever they call it and had the same disappointing feeling.

    By the way have any of you guys that have driven the E46 driven the new S4, seems that it's the new top dog as far as the press is concerned.


    Ike

  9. #23
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Oakland, CA
    Posts
    191
    I didn't and I'm sure it's possible to get a whole lot wilder with it off. I wanted to see how well it worked. If I owned the M3 it would be off all the time, while I leave it in the full on position on the C5 almost all the time....even on the racetrack (sometimes competition mode). It's a whole lot more intrusive than on the C5. With the C5 you can hang the tail out pretty nicely with active handling on, and the power comes back quickly when it is cut. Most of the time it simply does it's one wheel braking thing, which works really well. Power cuts only happen when you get really wild. The M3 seems to cut power almost immediately and turn it back on more slowly than the C5. It's not clear that it is capable of individually braking a wheel. Is it?

    I'll bet the S4 is a much nicer car, what with torque and everything...ahh....I'd like to take one for a spin.

  10. #24
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Oakland, CA
    Posts
    191
    One final point. Although I was disappointed with the traction control what really surprised me was the huge difference in power running up a freeway hill at 110+. I really believe that my WRX would have been a lot closer to the M3 than the M3 to the C5. I expected a lot more from the M3.

  11. #25
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    santa clarita, ca
    Posts
    48
    before i got the mods for my rex, i came oh so very close to having the ok from the wife to get an e46 convertible. after i drove it, and hearing that 333hp v8, there was no comparison. of course, you can put 40k into just about any car and make it faster than an m3, but 1/4 mile times is a far cry from what the m3 is all about. despite what anyone says, i'd rather be in an m3 than perhaps anything else.
    if everything's under control, you're going too slow

    *******BUY MY '88 Mercedes 560 sel so i can get a subie!!!!!!!!!!!! ($6k excellent condition)*******

    sold
    02 sedona red wrx wagon (ESX stage IV) IHI VF-22, MRT intercooler, ESX/TRP full turbo back 3" exhaust, ESX/TRP 3200 lb racing clutch, AVO BOV, Blitz FATT digital turbo timer, piggy back computer system, ESX/TRP pulley, ESX/TRP lightweight flywheel , Injen cold air intake, Samco silicone hoses, black Enkei 18" DM5 with Yokohama AVS ES100s, STI short shift kit

    dad's car
    '04 BMW m3 convertible. 19's, 6 speed, xenon, etc

  12. #26
    Registered User DEADPOOL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Boca Raton, FL
    Posts
    2,079
    Originally posted by dangrass
    Not true. I'm not interested in defending what I own, but in this case I can certainly rationalize the decisions I made. I would buy a current generation M3 in an instant if I thought it were a better car, but I don't.
    Not true . What did i say that was false please explain. I really hope you dont think the Vette is a more practical vehicle, i will just have to shake my head.
    "Celebrate we will, for life is short but sweet for certain"-DMB

    Liquid - "yes sticky! hes a god now!"

    02 WRX now JDM V8 STI (too many mods for my own good)

  13. #27
    Registered User DEADPOOL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Boca Raton, FL
    Posts
    2,079
    Originally posted by ESXwrxguy
    before i got the mods for my rex, i came oh so very close to having the ok from the wife to get an e46 convertible. after i drove it, and hearing that 333hp v8, there was no comparison. of course, you can put 40k into just about any car and make it faster than an m3, but 1/4 mile times is a far cry from what the m3 is all about. despite what anyone says, i'd rather be in an m3 than perhaps anything else.
    Its not a V8 rather a V6
    "Celebrate we will, for life is short but sweet for certain"-DMB

    Liquid - "yes sticky! hes a god now!"

    02 WRX now JDM V8 STI (too many mods for my own good)

  14. #28
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    202
    Originally posted by DEADPOOL
    Its not a V8 rather a V6
    It's a 6, but it's not a V. It's an inline 6 my friend.
    Last edited by MOG_22; 07-15-2003 at 08:52 AM.

  15. #29
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Oakland, CA
    Posts
    191
    Originally posted by DEADPOOL
    Not true . What did i say that was false please explain. I really hope you dont think the Vette is a more practical vehicle, i will just have to shake my head.

    Sorry if I wasn't clear, an M3 is definitely more practical than a Vette...in that it has 4 seats. Of course it gets worse fuel economy and is dramatically more expensive to own and is not as relaxed a high-speed cruiser. What I was trying to say is that I am more than willing to be critical of vehicles I own. I have plenty of complaints about the Vette, but it does perform very well and is relatively inexpensive to own.

  16. #30
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Oakland, CA
    Posts
    191
    Originally posted by MOG_22
    It's a 6, but it's not a V. It's an inline 6 my friend.
    ...it's a long stroke inline 6...a configuration that does not lend itself to reliable high RPM operation...maybe the reason that there were so many catastrophic engine failures early on. The rumors are that this motor will be replaced by a small V8 soon as the current motor is way overstressed. I suspect that we will soon see something similar to what propels the new S4 in the M3.

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •