i was sat behind a new m3 convertible today. it looked ok, but not 50k ok;)
very subtle...perhaps a little too subtle.looked like a 330.

And again, I was expressing MY OWN opinion about rather owning a house than a 40k car.

I appreciate they're the mutts, but when I stretch myself to pay £13k for a second hand scooby and the appropriate insurance, the price for the M3 seems pie-in-the-sky.

Who wouldn't rather have the M3? I would, but not at that price, and under my current financial situation.

Ive only ever seen one and that was a young chap who owned it. He is only 20 and owns a yellow one while his brother who is a bit older has a black one. Both have very expensive number plates. Before these cars they had cossies, evo extremes, porches, skylines, the list is endless. Well!! Their father is a multi millionaire. He currently has a ferrari, a merc and a bentley. So i think they have quite good taste in cars. About a month back the younger boy booted his M3 past me as i was pulling into a bus bay in my MY01WRX, and it sounded like an animal, really nice.

Scrappy

I've driven the new M3 (same one Tiff drove on Top Gear, needed new rears after 2000miles!), and I must admit that it is a bloody awsome car. The most amazing thing about it is the way the engine revs.. it will rev all the way to 9000rpm and there is not a lot on the road that can match this + the torque. It has massive grunt right through the rev band and you find yourself doing 120mph with the gentlest stomp of the foot!

The reason's I didn't buy one:
A) two year wait (from my dealer in Cornwall)
B) Only available as Coupe or convertiable.. not good for wife & 3 Kids!
C) Expensive servicing costs.. expect £1000 per service.(so i've been told)
D) Although the engine sounds magic, it would become tiresome on a long motorway stretch.
E) Do you really want to be seen driving a BM?
F) Wanker factor

I could go on :-)

Dave

[Edited by DaveS6 - 03/01/2002 16:49:52]

Dennisi I reckon you would be eating a fair bit of humble pie mate.
When you fancy it;)

BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH !!!!! :D

You guys and girls on here don't half go on and on.
But keep it up I'm not slating you, I'm enjoying it, gives me something to do at work. :D (Sorry don't no anymore smilies)

Stevep

Impreza = 2.0L or 2.2L engine. (or 2.5 if your in the US)

New M3 = 3.2L engine.

I think we do pretty well for only a tincy wincy little 2.0L ... don't you all agree?

J.

Yeah, but your tincy wincy enigne has a turbo on it, that makes a little more than a tincy wincy bit of difference.

The turbo should all but even out any differences, so no, I dont agree.

[Edited by IntegraR - 03/01/2002 17:53:48]

Even if the new M3 is 0-60 in 4.8 that's only .4 sec off what Rob says he gets out of his Subaru. In a straiht line on normal roads Id seriously doubt you'd see any difference in either of these cars. Are you sure you just weren't in the wrong gear or he was already going for it before you realised.

IntergraR, Hmmmm ....

So your saying my 2.0L should be able to keep up with the M3 just because it's got a turbo?

I'd love it, if it was true ..... is it?


J.

Don't forget that a turbo is just increasing the fuel/air mix at a higher pressure giving a 'bigger bang'. By doing this it can give the same or more power output than a much bigger non-aspirated engine.

I'm sure others here know more than me

Dave

Except we're talking about BMW, makers of some of the world's greatest engines. A specific output of over 100 BHP is high for a normally aspirated lump, especially on a large engine and there isn't many manufacturers that manage it as consistently as BMW - Honda are getting there, but still only with relatively small engines (I think?). Anyhoo, 3.2 NA 340 BHP is not a valid comparison with 2.0 Turbo 210 BHP - who would think it is?

All da best,

Deano




[Edited by Beemer_Deano - 03/01/2002 18:25:43]

My point exactly!

J.

It depends really, on how much extra the Turbo is designed to give.
You can hardly state you have a 2.0l, so its doing well by keeping up with a 3.2, if your 2.0l has a turbo, as the turbo increases the 2.0l's potential torque/power by a huge amount.

Now then, if you consider that your 2.0l Turbo is only very slightly quicker than my tincy wincy 1.8, then you have something really special!! ;)

Nice argument IntegraR.

I just think for a 'Scoob' 2.0L standard engine, the BHP produced is not bad at all.

If I've guessed your car correctly ... then put a turbo on yours and you might be able to keep up with the M3 ;-)

J.

I do agree that the M3 engine is something rather special.. apparantly the pistons (at full revs) are approaching the same sorts of speed as the formula one engine? If that is true then that is really something amazing

BMW spout on about VANOS.. I'm not sure what it does exactly.. (BM's aren't my thing).. but boy.. does it work!

Dave

[Edited by DaveS6 - 03/01/2002 18:34:49]

From BMW www site

M Double-VANOS

Patented M double-VANOS provides variable, infinitely adjustable camshaft control automatically adjusting the angle of the intake and outlet camshaft. Thus on the road, the valves are operated at exactly the right time as a function of engine speed and load. Engine torque is boosted at low medium speeds and fuel consumption is reduced accordingly.

J.

If I had £42,000 to spend on a car I would be following Blow Dog's example and wondering down to the Nissan dealers for a nice Skyline! :D

If you are comparing cars try using the same price bracket! :rolleyes:

When T_p Gear mag took one to Skye they send it felt like it insultated you from the drive... as always you pay your money you take your choice.

Nice to see A6 the Flat Cap A6 owning brigade coming over here from Audi-Sport.net :):):)

Being an ex P1 owner, and ex mildly tuned STI V owner, I would have to say that once speeds are over 80mph that this car will reel in most rice cars. Even highly tuned ones will struggle. This is mainly due to the Scooby having the aerodynamics of a Land Rover IMHO. The Scoop and wing have to create some nice drag, whilst the M3 cuts through the air.

The engine in the M3 is awesome, and the noise in the cabin makes even a tweaked scooby sound a little dull. If Arron offers a ride at a track day near you take it. If I offer you a ride, be nice and decline :).

I'd agree with a number of other replies on this thread that if you put me in my M3 on some nice twisty B roads, then even my wife could keep up in an STI.

Always happy to go into a full on M3 vs Scooby thread. Nothing better on this BBS :)

Jonathan

Oh dear P1 Fanatic....
take your pseudo sonic blue shades from your nose and take a look at what the world really looks like out there.

"the superior suspension setup of the scoob...etc"....hmmmm would that be the old macpherson strut at each corner developed by Noah for his Ark :D or do you know something different from the rest of us.
One thing the Scoob does not have on its side is sophisticated suspension me old mate, AWD may help in some situations but it sure as hell didn't help anyone driving a P1 or otherwise at Bedford last month where a poor little RWD M3 razzed allcomers in the pi55ing rain :D
Cheers
;)

:D
Also plese not that a new Skyline NON IMPORT is £54000 and in standard form( I think my mate will agree) a little disapointint in the speed stakes so then you still need to spend some wedge on it.
And no I would never consider buying a Skyline import.
Just my choice you understand;)
And yes I`d take the Skyline circa 430bhp around any track over my old German bus any day:D

For f*ck's sake people - not this old chestnut again !?
Horses for BLOODY courses!

A typical day on Scoobynet:

Scooby Owner1: "Was passed by an M3 today - quick car"
Scooby Owner2: "Yeah, but my Scoob is half the price!!"
BMW Owner: "Yeah but your build quality is a pile of cr*p!"
P1 Owner: "No M3 ever passes me, the P1 is 0.00345secs faster 0-60"

and so on....

-DV

PS: Moderator - could you just cut and paste my 'summary' into the next 'debate' on M3 vs. Scoob - it'll save everyone a load of time and energy.


[Edited by DazV - 03/01/2002 22:02:21]

One thing my little old scoob did do last thursday was help my neighbour in is new M3cab get up a slight gradient in the snow, even with my ordiary road tyres it help pull him up the hill.
the thing could barley get out its parking place. i like beemers but until they start importing there iX models in to this country i wont buy one.
so at least my little old scoob is still good for something:D

does anyone know why they dont iport there 4Wd models over here?

Arron - I fully realise the cost and power of the new Skyline. When did I say I would get a new one...? ;)

M3 = brill. If I didn't have an irrational love of my 22B I'd be in there like a shot...as it is the bugeye may make way for one anyway :rolleyes:
Chuck

The figures speak for themselves:

30-70: M3 4.1s, Sti4 4.8s (Autocar, STi4 is the fastest Scoob they've tested)
0-100: M3 11.5s, Sti4 12.3s (Autocar again)
bhp/tonne: M3 219, Impreza Turbo 177 (EVO)

EVO quote the P1 as 219bhp/tonne, but the 0-100 time is almost 2 seconds slower than the M3, according to the mag.

I'm a big fan of Impreza's, they are capable of humbling many more exotic and expensive machines, but let's not kid ourselves....

Tim

At last another realist.
Nice one NBW.
But dont forget all that "its much more expensive stuff".
I always compare my car to my old P1.
To me it can cost only £4500 less if you buy a base spec M3 which is still very capable and as fast as a specced one.
Now no-one and I mean NO ONE can say that a standard M3 at £38500 is not better value for money than my old P1.
I thank you.:D

The M3 is fast, i'm glad I bought an evo and not a scooby, I dont have to worry about M3's

I personally think that the M3 is bloody good value for money.. £38,500 for all that.. mind you BMW can't build them quick enough....

but... why oh why do they not make a four door version.. maybe it would effect sales of the M5 (of which i not in the slightest bit interested).

Dave

M5, now that's a proper car, not a w@nky 3 series.




Oh yessssssssss......