davyboy

What is the average wage now? 25k??

Maybe I am out of touch with salaries, I am happy in my job so I dont really look very often. I still dont think lots of folk earn 40k? ALthough I doubt we could ever honestly find out......would be interesting though.

I am not trying to get in an arguement BTW.

bros2

You are joking, aren't you? I can't believe that most people spend that sort of money on thier car.

I spent considerably less than 10% of my salary on my current car. Then again, I don't have a car loan - if I don't have the cash, I don't buy something (house excluded).

bros

NACRO

The M3 image is deffo not good down the golf club- its perceived as a car bought by scrap metal dealers. An aspirational car for those who haven't quite arrived. Its just too small I'm afraid, an M5 or RS Audi Avant is more the thing old fart.
M3's are for the baseball cap wearers with more cash than sense image wise! Still great cars and I think you'll find that a lot of those who buy them DO care what the baseball cap wearing stereotypical boy racer thinks about them- they like to feel a false sense of smugness.

M3 CSL will be a truly great car.

si325i

40K ha!!!
I am not trying to get in an arguement BTW..

Si

NACRO

cars/salary

I spent about 10K on my elderly Impreza as a stop gap car and ended up keeping it for 3 yrs!

Most folk I believe spend around a yrs salary on their car and take a loan to do it-not wise. Thus why I'm in waiting for that 25K M5 as I hate spending money I don't have or pay interest.

Back on topic- M3 is a performance/packaging bargain but don't try to tell me it has a good image. It just hasn't I'm afraid.

davyboy

Baseball cap wearing car timeline.

Nova/Saxo
Impreza/Evo
M3/Skyline

lol

Better add a winkie

NACRO

you said it Davyboy- it's the next step


thus the poor image of M3's and those that drive them- who cares about image anyway? Some people just can't accept that their car has a poor image- the M3, Impreza and many others have that poor image and it seems a large number of owners in denial.

tiggers

"Triggers - well, try and read the above posts. It does seem to me you don't actually read people's responses, but just stir it up a little each time you post."

Skittles,

For someone who can't even get my username right it seems to me that it is YOU who does not read the posts!!!!

You will also notice that my posts refer to things like "more than the fair share" not "all" when refering to the behaviour of BMW drivers so please practice what you preach!!!


"Well apart from the equipment levels it is more refined, much faster, nicer power delivery with no lag, has a far better ride, more comfortable, better steering (although both M3 and Impreza are a bit rubbish in this respect), is more economical and IMO more fun to drive...."

BT52b,

I asked you about capability so equipment levels, refinement, power delivery, ride etc. don't really count. You say the M3 is much faster - in a straight line it may be quicker, but A to B I'd take my chances with a Scoob thanks. I think many people have found this to be the case - just a lot of people can't bear to face up to the fact that a £25K Japanese saloon can sometimes make a German thoroughbred (sic) costing some £20K more look very ordinary.

Regards, tiggers.

NACRO

I think that "image" is a good topic to be discussed by folk on a car website. People here will care more and be better informed than Joe Public.

If people can't be objective then its hardly a surprise after all this is a SUBARU website. I suggest that those that don't like it go elsewhere.

Having said that you would be mad to say the M3 is a bad car- its a great car with a poor image- IMHO, just like a subaru and to some extent lots of other fast cars like Porsche's, Ferrari's etc.
People see someone in a fast car and make all types of assumptions about them which just are not true.

si325i

so if your just after "image" what should you buy??
seems 2 me all the fast car have a crap "image".

SMART car??
cos they aint fast.

camk

Nacro,
This is however Other Marques so some positive thoughts on other manufacturers can also be expected. I've no issue with Subaru's , I loved my Sti and would have another(although my wife wouldn't). I do however have an issue with some of the blinkered outlooks, its difficult not to laugh at some debates when folks are spouting crap like Porsches,Mercs,BMW's etc are all crap and then quantify it by a single measurement against their current preference.
See Tiggers above as an example of 'specialising' on capabilities, whatever that is. Car ownership is not as simple as a single strand of good and bad, its about looking at the whole package. Too often I see discussions being rat holed into chaos as people struggle to see that just because they don't own something then it cannot be good or they continue to focus on the single factor where possibly one marque betters another. Its just as well we don't take the same view on our partners .
The issue on bad or good image does surely stretch beyond this board .

camk

Nacro,
Tell me a car that has a good image then. Can you also identify why it has a good image ? I'd personally say new Mini , however does that in itself make it a good car....?

Old_Fart

Amongst my 'peers' in the city there are 3 camps in the 24 to 35 age bracket:
Those earning £45-£120k a year who love the M3, and can't afford a 996
Those earning £120k plus who like the M3 but who drive 996's 'because they can'.
Those who have done the 996 thing but have traded in for the M3 because it's as good, if not better, dynamically, and much more practical.
The current M3 has a fabulous reputation/image I'm afraid...but then thats amongst my 'peers', who have a similar reputation to the M3 amongst much of the 'working class' population.
Scoobs are driven by the people who make our computer screens light up monday mornings. Oh and me LOL
944's are driven as track cars in single-make racing series by all three classes as they are soo cheap yet able.
Chuck

tiggers

camk,

I didn't specialise on capability - I merely asked for an explanation of why BT52b considered the M3 a much more complete and capable car. I agree with the completeness part of it, but not the capability hence I asked for an explanation - is that really so difficult for you to understand?

Just because I don't agree with you doesn't change my view that based purely on performance and capability the M3 is not worth £20K more than a Scooby. If these are the sole criteria by which you judge a car then the M3 is overpriced, if however you want a bit of luxury, refinement etc. thrown in then maybe it starts to look a better prospect.

My original point is that the average Joe has been brainwashed into thinking the M class BMW's are the ultimate performance cars bar none when there is a lot of evidence to say otherwise.

Finally just so as you know I have driven a current model M3 and I was pretty impressed, but not enough to make me want to part with the money being asked for one - simple as that really!

tiggers.

PPPMAT

I've said it before and I'll say it again, what other car offers the same build quality, performance and spec for the same money?

I agree with some that the M3 is the logical nest step from an impreza but I don't think there's anything wrong with that. Also, they are not that expensive to run. An M3 will cost me another £50 per month to run over my sti7 if I put the same money into the car at the start. This is because the residual value is better.

Forget the list price, look at the residual value. Its a bit of a bargain.

davyboy

Yep 10k buys a really good, late 250bhp Turbo.

camk

Tigger,
Quote "I asked you about capability so equipment levels, refinement, power delivery, ride etc. don't really count. You say the M3 is much faster - in a straight line it may be quicker, but A to B I'd take my chances with a Scoob thanks. "

The point I'm making is that you cannot define what capability is, can you ? Yet you argue that you prefer an Impreza, which impreza ?, the models are significantly differnt in performance terms.
You negate Ride, refinement and Power delivery, which for me would be items associated with 'Capability'. The first two allowing a car to be driven faster with less stress(fear) on the 'average' driver and the third obviously has a bearing on out of corner acceleration. Can you describe what 'factor' is missing. Please note that I continue to be civil, I expect the same in return.

NACRO

I agree most fast cars have a bad image............I'm not here to think of one with a good image however I was just pointing out image is not an M3's strong suite.

A car with a good image is indeed a Mini- especially the mini one

I also don't think a straw poll taken in a "city" office says much either as you rightly say both the working (and upper classes) tend to take a dim view of those that work in such places and their stereotypical image.

Personally I don't care what people think of my cars image its what it does for me that counts. Which is why I'm waiting for that M5- I fancy lots and lots of power oversteer.

However getting back on topic the M3 DOES have a bad image. It's a great car though.

tiggers

camk,

Thank you so much for continuing to be civil - I am truly honoured - honestly!!!

Anyway down to business. By my definition capability is very simple, but please try very hard to understand this is only my definition not stated as a FACT.

I define a car's capability as the ability to get from A to B as quickly as possible. Now in terms of our beloved M3 and a Scooby it is my opinion (just reinforcing that so you get it) that on the average A/B road conditions in the UK or on many tracks in the UK the M3 would be no faster and probably a little slower than a Scooby STI in the hands of a relatively capable driver.

Yes the Scooby may not ride as well, may not be as smooth etc. , but that doesn't matter. It is what they are capable of under the conditions I enjoy driving in that matters to me.

Taking your hypothesis that refinement, power delivery etc. are part of capability I think you'll find that Ferrari's F2002 F1 car (recently voted the greatest F1 car of all time by F1 engineers, journos etc.) is a little lacking in the refinement and ride stakes, but I'm sure it would be more than a match for the M3 (although I bet some of you brainwashed individuals don't think so ;-) ) round Silverstone i.e. immensely more capable at doing what it is designed to do - go fast on a track.

At the end of the day it comes down to what you want from a car. I am prepared to put up with poor interiors, the odd rattle, a lack of refinement etc. for the grin generated when engaging in a mad dash across the UK countryside early on a weekend morning and safe in the knowledge that I have an extra £20K in the bank that the M3 driver behind me has already spent ;-)

Got it now!!!

tiggers.

camk

If thats you being civil you probably get a lot of sore faces down the pub for being a condescending *******.
The average driver of a F1 car has a much higher tolerance for fear than the average driver, therefore requires and wants less refinement to sacrifice for all out speed(horses for courses).
BTW just to show you I'm not blinkered I'd not buy an M3 myself as I'd prefer an M5.
The BM driver may be 20K light in the bank but his car is likely to be worth 20K or so more when he trades it in so the relative difference in cost is small.
Your whole argument if summed up is that performance wise there is little in it between an STi and an M3, you are happy to put up with the difference in quality of the cars themselves regarding build quality, quality of interior, residuals and comfort for the sake of 20 grand initial outlay. There is nothing wrong with that argument but it doesn't make people who don't want to compromise on your less important factors of comfort idiot's.
If they have the 20 grand to spare then surely its just as valid, plus the residual values will relatively not be miles apart after say 3 years anyway. All you miss is the interest on the 20 grand, which either through credit or in savings is these days relatively small.

BT52b

Sorry, I didn't focus on the capable side did I.

I still say it is more capable thanks to a less understeery chassis far superior power delivery and more power.

However, I'm not convinced myself that it is quite enough of a difference for me.
It's kind of a jack of all trades car. Which is why our plan is to keep the Scoob and get either a 911C4S or TuscanS in addition.

By the way, I was certainly not talking about an STi!, it's more of an Exige rival IMO (but without the Lotus's decent ride quality...)

The STi is too uncompromised to be compared to the M3, and I still say the M3 is more capable than a WRX.


Mark

tiggers

camk,

Regarding the civility thing - you started it so you got a little bit of a retort - if you take offence at that then so be it - I shan't be losing any sleep. The fact is I just want to make you realise the difference between my opinion and you thinking I'm stating what I consider to be facts - still I think you've finally got it so that's a good thing.

To come back to the discussion as I have already said I agree that if people do factor in refinement, ride etc. the M3 is a better prospect. Incidentally I don't buy the build quality bullsh1t - another myth that has been created by the marketing men as far as I am concerned.

My overall point is that most people don't factor these in - they just believe that the M series BMW's are the fastest things on the road as somehow the marketing men for BMW have managed to convince them of this. My point is that it's not necessarily true.

Personally when I drive a Scoob the lack of refinement, ride quality etc. does not bother me, but then again it might bother someone else.

tiggers.

chrispy200+

iTrader: (2)

you cannot compare an M3 to an imprezza, they are in different leauges. Yes the imprezza is very capable car, but they are hardly what i would call solid well built cars.

I have a view on M3 drivers in general, E36 shape, but my mate has just bought an e46 m3 with the tiptronic option/launch control and just about every other optional extra.
bit over priced though when you think what else you could get for 45k
Was very impressed with the launch control, it flew from a standing start and the interior and build is of top quality.

I'm looking at either an E30 M3 or an E36 M3 Evo as my next car, i've done the rattly car, i'm looking more for refinement with a bit of speed now and rwd

NACRO

BMW build quality is no myth


I've been in the new M3 and also the M5 they really are very well built cars with great ergonomics and perfect driving position (crap position on pedals though).

They DO have an image problem though being viewed as driven by thrusty w*nkers. Ask a BMW owner no sod wants to let them out of turnings!

True confession time- I've had 3 BMW's of various types and didn't give a hoot what others thought. I used to get severely ragged at work for the old 6 series I ran. Similarly when family rag me about the Impreza being for baseball cap wearers I don't care either.

Witchfinder

Sorry to ressurect this fairly awful thread, but I'm interested to see how the "anti-BMW" people feel about, say, AMG Mercs or S series Audis.

Skittles

Thats is an interesting question - I would also be very interested to hear the answer!

tiggers

No probs with any of those or for that matter the M series BMW's.

I'm not anti the cars themeselves just the somewhat undeserved reputation they have as being the fastest thing on the road and many of their drivers who seem to enjoy being ******** whenever the opportunity arises.

The way some people go on about the M series BMW's you'd think Ralf and Juan would be better off ditching their FW25's and doing the GP's in an M3 - actually with this year's Williams that might not be a bad idea ;-)

tiggers.

MR2 Rob

I think that the AMG's and some of the more bespoke Audi's are too pricey aswell.

However, with the Audi's I believe you are getting a much better package than Merc or BM. At a recent car show I went to (new cars) the Audi's were in a league of their own in terms of build quality - they were faultless and put Mercedes to shame. Audi's are also more understated with a lot less arrogant drivers. I'm certainly not suggesting that anyone here driving a BM is arrogant, but there seems to be quite a few out there with attitude problems. Never had any probs with an Audi driver.

I guess it must just be an image thing, and sadly that is why Audi's tend to depreciate more as people will happily pay silly money for 2nd hand BM's.
Like I said in a previous post - my friend could have got a F355 Targa for 1K less than her 2nd hand BM. For me, that shows how ridiculous the obsession about BMW's has got. Sure they are good cars, no doubt about that.....but an F355 hmmmm Italian Supercar for me

camk

Sorry I do not believe that peoples driving habits are shaped by the manufacturer of the car they own. Come on....thats just pure BS. Or self re-inforced opinion, e.g. you just look for the trait in BMW drivers. There is no cachet to BMW over Mercedes or Audi, how could there be and how could anyone believe that? Who on earth thinks a BM is better image wise than an Audi or a Mercedes, for goodness sake.



[Edited by camk - 5/13/2003 9:24:05 PM]

^Qwerty^

I could throw this the other way around and say "How have Subaru done this?"

Come the day when I hand the keys back to the lease company for my WRX and think "thank **** for that". I was sold, hook, line and sinker(sp?) on what a great car the WRX is. I knew I'd made a mistake when I drove it back to Yorkshire after picking it up in Bristol

My own fault I guess, but for doing any kind of mileage, the car is a nightmare. Shame really. Great for short blasts, but I find you've got to be in the mood for it. Driving to work and back is just a non-starter.