Video: Eclipse vs M3 [Archive]

No_Brakes23

Tue 10/14/03, 11:36PM

I still don't understand how he trashed his engine, it didn't sound like he was thrashing it that hard.

Oh, and I love BMWs, but I don't look down on Japanese cars. If you took the price of a new M3, ($47,195 with no options,) you could make a pretty fast Japanese car. You cold make a very evil Evo or WRX Sti for that kind of loot. you can buy a nicely equipped 'vette coupe for less tha $46,000.

The BMW website brags about the 333hp and "staggering" 0-60 time of 4.9. 15 years ago GMC sold a truck, [A TRUCK!] that hit 60 in 4.5 seconds. The Evo also hits 60 in a "staggering" 4.9 seconds for almost $20,000 less. You could drop $10,000 into it and embarass the M3. The WRX Sti hits 60 in 4.8 seconds.

hmmm...those ricers just can't keep up, can they?

So, yeah, its the ultimate driving machine, but for the price, or even less, lots of cars can whip it.

ward

Wed 10/15/03, 8:39AM

Originally posted by No_Brakes23
I still don't understand how he trashed his engine, it didn't sound like he was thrashing it that hard.

Oh, and I love BMWs, but I don't look down on Japanese cars. If you took the price of a new M3, ($47,195 with no options,) you could make a pretty fast Japanese car. You cold make a very evil Evo or WRX Sti for that kind of loot. you can buy a nicely equipped 'vette coupe for less tha $46,000.

The BMW website brags about the 333hp and "staggering" 0-60 time of 4.9. 15 years ago GMC sold a truck, [A TRUCK!] that hit 60 in 4.5 seconds. The Evo also hits 60 in a "staggering" 4.9 seconds for almost $20,000 less. You could drop $10,000 into it and embarass the M3. The WRX Sti hits 60 in 4.8 seconds.

hmmm...those ricers just can't keep up, can they?

So, yeah, its the ultimate driving machine, but for the price, or even less, lots of cars can whip it.

Umm, sure you could get an EVO or WRX STI which would give an approximation of a M3, but instead of a nice interior you have the same interior as the kid working at Mcdonalds with a 12,000 dollar econobox. And the small turbo motors wouldn't be as fun to drive as an M3 since they have so little torque down low. I drove a regular WRX and it just felt DOG slow since it has ZERO power off the line. Maybe if you drop the clutch at 5 grand it'd go pretty good but that's not a good policy to do to your own car.
It's probably a safe bet that if you don't abuse the car it probably won't get to 60 till about 6 seconds!
also the WRX had sloppy handling with lots of body roll, (I hear the EVO's sposed to be pretty good though)

I'm not even gonna start with the whole white trash corvette thing, I drove one of those at a GM test drive event awhile back, it's quick and has high cornering limits..... but it's a big friggin car and it is not nimble and also has a similar interior to any GM car EVER built.

GM sold a truck in 1988 that did to 60 in 4.5 seconds???
how many of those did they make?? like 300
and how much were they??? not cheap I'm sure

You can argue whatever you want but the BMW is always going to be a good value, it's the fact that it does EVERYTHING well. You certainly can't say that about the Japanese cars, and you sure as HELL can't say that about the american junk

bwarbiany

Wed 10/15/03, 9:59AM

Not to mention the new top-of-the-line performance WRX comes standard WITHOUT A RADIO, to reduce weight...

Now, I'm sure with all the speakers/radio/wiring, that might drop 10-15 lbs (high estimate, I know)... But if I want to buy a kickass car, I want a radio. In fact, I'd probably be the kind of guy that puts in a decent sound system just because with a kickass car, I'd want a kickass radio...

BMW certainly isn't going to do something like that with their cars, although I know the Germans seem to be behind the times by offering tape decks in their cars up until recently, despite the fact the CD revolution happened a LONG time ago...

Golden_Eternity

Wed 10/15/03, 10:03AM

Originally posted by Broughbeater
Maroon, to match his paint job?

How about moron, you maroon...

Brough is cartoon deprived... :(

http://www.wavrunner.com/cgi-bin/download.cgi?rec=2516

smolvar

Wed 10/15/03, 10:08AM

Originally posted by bwarbiany
Not to mention the new top-of-the-line performance WRX comes standard WITHOUT A RADIO, to reduce weight...

BMW certainly isn't going to do something like that with their cars,

I'm sorry I must disagree...The previous M3 came in a lightweight version for the "enthusiast" which deleted radio, A/C, sound deadening, etc.

Weight obsessed car buyers are in all classes of vehicle. Sooner or later when you are serious about speed it becomes necessary to delete creature comforts.

Link to M3 CSL info (http://www.bmwworld.com/models/m3_ltw.htm)

ward

Wed 10/15/03, 10:29AM

Originally posted by smolvar
I'm sorry I must disagree...The previous M3 came in a lightweight version for the "enthusiast" which deleted radio, A/C, sound deadening, etc.

Weight obsessed car buyers are in all classes of vehicle. Sooner or later when you are serious about speed it becomes necessary to delete creature comforts.

Link to M3 CSL info (http://www.bmwworld.com/models/m3_ltw.htm)

the lightweight M3 was an option, a very rare and hard to get option.

the subaru has no option, they're all the stripped version

smolvar

Wed 10/15/03, 10:47AM

Originally posted by ward
the lightweight M3 was an option, a very rare and hard to get option.

the subaru has no option, they're all the stripped version

Cmon the CSL was a trim level just like the STI. The Subies are all Imprezas and the BMW's are all 3 series.

The STI is the only "stripped" version.
You can get a WRX if you want a radio or a wagon for that matter. The STI is a "rare" and "hard to get" trim level for a Subaru.

Essentially the Impreza RS, WRX and STI are all the same car in varying degrees of tune and features just like the 325,330 and M3.

Arguing semantics is fun!

BTW after checking the Subaru website, an AM/FM 6disc in-dash changer is an available option on the STI.

GsxrGregor

Wed 10/15/03, 11:10AM

Originally posted by bwarbiany
Not to mention the new top-of-the-line performance WRX comes standard WITHOUT A RADIO, to reduce weight...

Now, I'm sure with all the speakers/radio/wiring, that might drop 10-15 lbs (high estimate, I know)... But if I want to buy a kickass car, I want a radio. In fact, I'd probably be the kind of guy that puts in a decent sound system just because with a kickass car, I'd want a kickass radio...

BMW certainly isn't going to do something like that with their cars, although I know the Germans seem to be behind the times by offering tape decks in their cars up until recently, despite the fact the CD revolution happened a LONG time ago...

I'd rather install my own radio. That's their other justification for doing that - the rep I talked to at the LA Auto show said that most people who'd buy one of those would take out the stock radio for a better one (of their personal preference) anyway.

gamehaus

Wed 10/15/03, 11:26AM

Originally posted by ward
I drove a regular WRX and it just felt DOG slow since it has ZERO power off the line. Maybe if you drop the clutch at 5 grand it'd go pretty good but that's not a good policy to do to your own car.
It's probably a safe bet that if you don't abuse the car it probably won't get to 60 till about 6 seconds!
also the WRX had sloppy handling with lots of body roll, (I hear the EVO's sposed to be pretty good though)

this is obviously the opinion of an inexperienced driver forever doomed to the uninitiated and uninformed. tell me one thing, if the wrx had zero power off the line did you consider that the engine was not turned on? how did you get anywhere, fred flintstone? or would daddy have been upset if he found you playing with his toys in the garage?

you know, if you push the gas too many times when the motor is not running you'll flood the engine. next time you drive the wrx, turn it on, and please use the seatbelt.

GsxrGregor

Wed 10/15/03, 11:37AM

Originally posted by gamehaus
this is obviously the opinion of an inexperienced driver forever doomed to the uninitiated and uninformed. tell me one thing, if the wrx had zero power off the line did you consider that the engine was not turned on? how did you get anywhere, fred flintstone? or would daddy have been upset if he found you playing with his toys in the garage?

you know, if you push the gas too many times when the motor is not running you'll flood the engine. next time you drive the wrx, turn it on, and please use the seatbelt.

Actually, you can't flood the engine in a fuel-injected car with the engine off - it doesn't have accelerator pumps like a carburetor, hence no fuel will be pumped into the cylinders. (You can't flood it when it's on either, for that matter, since it's all controlled by the computer.) :p

gamehaus

Wed 10/15/03, 11:39AM

i was just having fun, mario.

smolvar

Wed 10/15/03, 11:40AM

Originally posted by glsvs2002
Actually, you can't flood the engine in a fuel-injected car with the engine off - it doesn't have accelerator pumps like a carburetor, hence no fuel will be pumped into the cylinders. (You can't flood it when it's on either, for that matter, since it's all controlled by the computer.) :p

Is it hot in here....?
Gamehaus got burned.

ward

Wed 10/15/03, 11:56AM

Ha

I guess it'd be safe to say they're both fast cars,
but you can't compare a WRX to an M3,

the WRX may be fast but lacks refinement,
I don't think many people that are considering an M3 also think about a WRX and vice versa
it's a whole different market

and the stock WRX (non STI) does feel really friggin slow off the line

smolvar

Wed 10/15/03, 12:12PM

Originally posted by ward
Ha

I guess it'd be safe to say they're both fast cars,
but you can't compare a WRX to an M3,

the WRX may be fast but lacks refinement,
I don't think many people that are considering an M3 also think about a WRX and vice versa
it's a whole different market

and the stock WRX (non STI) does feel really friggin slow off the line

Ward, I cant disagree with any of your statements above. I'm betting people who are in the market for a 30k STI arent the same ones looking for a 50k M3. The M3 is my pick for best all around "haul-a$$-mobile"

Subaru, #1 car choice of lesbians everywhere!

" After recognizing a loyal base of lesbian owners--Subaru says its research shows they are four times as likely to own a Subaru as the general market--the automaker decided to launch a campaign from Mulryan/Nash, New York, in gay newspapers nationwide." -- AdAge.com

PasCaTT

Wed 10/15/03, 12:13PM

The wrx does have some juice off the line, and it's geared low to give it a decent 0-60. Where the wrx falls down is after 60. It's a dog 60+.

Have to agree about the interior though. I was really disappointed in that when I went to test drive one. But at the same time, at the price point its at with a turbo engine it's not too bad a car and they had to cut costs somewhere. And hey...at least it looks better than the Lancer. Though in Mitsu's defense at least the Lancer doesn't come w/ a lame station wagon option.

Personally the no radio option is nice to have. I'd much rather put my own system in my car. With most cars, even if you pick the premium stereo system, it's still a "no highs, no lows, must be Bose" system or something equivalent.

chukiechz

Wed 10/15/03, 12:19PM

Just to throw something else in the mix.....

If I was gonna spend 50K on an M3, I would buy the AMG C32 instead. 4 door sedan with an automatic that can do the quarter mile close to, if not faster than the M3. Its got Brembo brakes, and its a total sleeper.

Dont start flaming me on the automatic thing. Im just tired of driving my car with a heavy clutch because of the heavy duty clutch, as well as one moment in time where my wife and I were somewhere far, and I had to drive home even though I was completely drunk cause she couldnt drive a manual.

ward

Wed 10/15/03, 12:21PM

I may be a bit biased about having low end torque,
my weekday car I've been driving for 8-9 years is an old BMW 325e
the e motor is a 2.7 with LOTS of torque and little horsepower
120hp,170ft*lbs stock
140hp 190 ft-lbs according to Dinan after the chip and premuim gas

with a 4500 redline

everything I drive outside of a truck has low torque compared to that car

chukiechz

Wed 10/15/03, 12:23PM

torque is wonderful. This is my car (daily driver unless its in the shop) running 8 psi and 91 octane

http://members.cox.net/blown325/32dyno.jpg

ward

Wed 10/15/03, 12:24PM

Originally posted by chukiechz
Just to throw something else in the mix.....

If I was gonna spend 50K on an M3, I would buy the AMG C32 instead. 4 door sedan with an automatic that can do the quarter mile close to, if not faster than the M3. Its got Brembo brakes, and its a total sleeper.

Dont start flaming me on the automatic thing. Im just tired of driving my car with a heavy clutch because of the heavy duty clutch, as well as one moment in time where my wife and I were somewhere far, and I had to drive home even though I was completely drunk cause she couldnt drive a manual.

I won't flame on the automatic, ,,

but how bout the sequential box on the M
that from what I hear isn't as smooth as an auto, but it works in a pinch while still being cool

I'd be concerned about AMG dialing in the suspension as well as the M people. I can't speak firsthand never driving an AMG car but mercedes in general aren't as sporty as BMW's

ward

Wed 10/15/03, 12:25PM

Charles your car is truly bad-ass!

that things gotta be some fun

chukiechz

Wed 10/15/03, 12:28PM

ward, I thought about the SMG....but Im still digging the sedan. Especially with a baby on the way, getting the little bugger out behind a coupe will be a PITA. Plus, Im tired of sporty suspension. I got so many rattles and squeeks. I think IM ready for plush now. :D

My Dyno got maxed out at 5500 RPM cause of my HFM. I need to upgrade to a larger one, and that should theoretically put me at about 360 hp to the wheels. Just no desire at the moment to mess with it.

ward

Wed 10/15/03, 12:30PM

cool,
I forgot about the 4 door thing,
that mercedes is pretty much the good way to go then,
unless you start thinking audi S4
but I'd probably prefer the benz too

gamehaus

Wed 10/15/03, 1:46PM

hey smolvar.. why don't you tell everyone about your svt contour?

smolvar

Wed 10/15/03, 2:42PM

Originally posted by gamehaus
hey smolvar.. why don't you tell everyone about your svt contour?

Ah, ok, Freak....I dont actually have a Ford Contour, but in its defense the engine was a nice package from none other than Yamaha (boat division I think) and it did fine in that heap of shit chassis they put it in.

If we got the Focus RS in the USA I'd drive it with pride, other than that "just say no" to the blue oval.

BTW I'm gunna flood my Honda in the garage tonite by pumping the gas :D :D

Thread Hijack?? WTF?

chukiechz

Wed 10/15/03, 3:02PM

did yamaha make the contour engines also? I know they made the SHO engines. I've seen some SHOs that have put down a TON of power while waiting to get mine on the dyno.

Tillers_Rule

Wed 10/15/03, 4:02PM

If I was in the market, i'd spend the $31K and get a Lancer EVO, those things are bad ASS:monkey:

bwarbiany

Wed 10/15/03, 4:12PM

Originally posted by chukiechz
Dont start flaming me on the automatic thing. Im just tired of driving my car with a heavy clutch because of the heavy duty clutch, as well as one moment in time where my wife and I were somewhere far, and I had to drive home even though I was completely drunk cause she couldnt drive a manual.

Yeah, I got my truck, which has, as most manual trucks have, a very LONG clutch throw... Not a problem normally, but when you're sitting in traffic, you just want the ability to toss it into "D" and go...

I once had to travel from the west suburbs of Chicago down to Indianapolis, in rush hour, on the Friday before Memorial Day (which in Indianapolis is the Indy 500)... This was in my old Ford Probe GT, stickshift... By the end of that trip I could barely walk, my left leg hurt so much... 7 hours to make a 3.5 hr journey...

ridley

Wed 10/15/03, 4:51PM

Have any of you thought about the Audi RS 6. a 450hp Audi.

http://www.audiusa.com

I am pretty sure that this thing would slap the M3 and STi silly. Its all wheel drive, has all the creature comforts of the M3. I think its twinturbo. You can find it at the website above. Audi also has an A4 model with a 350hp V8.

GsxrGregor

Wed 10/15/03, 5:03PM

Originally posted by Tillers_Rule
If I was in the market, i'd spend the $31K and get a Lancer EVO, those things are bad ASS:monkey:

I've driven one - it's a little weak at low RPM, but as soon as the boost hits @ 3500.... hang on! Corners like a go-cart, and has a trunk and room for 5! :D

Originally posted by ridley
I am pretty sure that this thing would slap the M3 and STi silly. Its all wheel drive, has all the creature comforts of the M3. I think its twinturbo. You can find it at the website above. Audi also has an A4 model with a 350hp V8.

[edit] The RS6 would out accelerate them, but it costs about $80k

ridley

Thu 10/16/03, 9:39AM

Yea its costs a little/lot more but I guess that would be the next step in a car that you could scare the bejesus :eek: out of your kids in on the way to pick up milk eggs and fabric softner. regardless of cost I still think its top notch and I want it:D .

smolvar

Thu 10/16/03, 9:53AM

Originally posted by glsvs2002

It would, but it costs about $70k

As long as we are dreaming, how about the new CL65 AMG?

604hp and 714 ftlbs of tq, talk about scaring the crap out of your kids, and as a bonus it looks like a nice classy coupe sleeper. 0-60 in 4.2 secs! Its also an "auto-tragic" transmission, but I'd make an exception for that beast.

God bless the 60's rejuvination spirit of big ass motors and high horsepower into cars that look normal and carry things.

Bad news is that the benz is estimated with a price tag of $175k, but whatever we are all dreamin here anyway.

CL65 Article (http://www.autoweek.com/cat_content.mv?port_code=autoweek&cat_code=coverstory&loc_code=index&content_code=06373789)

ridley

Thu 10/16/03, 1:31PM

Yea that benz is no Joke. Not only will it scare the kids, but it will trick the rear tires into believing they are the front. I think stock in a tire company should be included with the vehicle. I want one of those too.

Tillers_Rule

Fri 10/17/03, 4:42PM

Damn, and it says the engine is DE-tuned, capable of 700hp and 885 ft lbs of torque:eek: but the chassis couldnt handle it. DIZAMMMMNNN.

smolvar

Fri 10/17/03, 5:44PM

Originally posted by Tillers_Rule
Damn, and it says the engine is DE-tuned, capable of 700hp and 885 ft lbs of torque:eek: but the chassis couldnt handle it. DIZAMMMMNNN.

Whats even more mind blowing is that a mere 40 years ago, during the "muscle car revolution" this same sized engine would have made 325hp on a good day.
When you see how far we have come its even more amazing.

No_Brakes23

Fri 10/17/03, 8:53PM

draggin this thread back into "BMWs might be overrated" land,

The GMC Syclone was made in 1991. They sold 2,995 units at $24,000 to $26,000. Not dirt cheap, but cheaper than the M3 of the time, and comparable to a loaded SUV price.

My point wasn't to bash BMWs, (Which I love, almost just bought, and will someday own,) certainly not in favor of American cars. I was just irritated by the tone of derision coming from M3 lovers/owners who apparently have their vehicles performance figures mixed up with that of a Supercar.

My point in comparing it to American cars was just that, to demonstrate that vehicles so low on the esteem ladder could do the same or better than the BMW. Would I rather own an M3, (I actually prefer the M5, 3 series are too small and spartan,) or a Corvette? No contest, The Bimmer is a better all-around vehicle.

But it was annoying to read that BMW thinks a 0-60 time of 4.9 is "Staggering." I brought up the Syclone to point out that 5 second 0-60 times weren't even staggering a decade ago, not to say that a hopped up truck was better than a BMW.

Yes, BMWs do everything well, (I think ward said that,) they are exceptionally well-rounded vehicles, but they are not the be-all end all of performance.

GaRn

Thu 11/6/03, 7:56PM

i love bimmers, but dont talk shit about imports if you dont know anything about em..

DSM's are VERY capable cars.. 11's are even possible on the FACTORY turbo.. with a lot of tuning of course.. tuning is the key..

theres a difference between rice and true import tuners.. slow and hilarious ruined the import scene, and now everyone refers to ANY import as rice, its so retarded, people are so uneducated..

No_Brakes23

Thu 11/6/03, 9:14PM

theres a difference between rice and true import tuners
I tend to refer to them as Sport Compacts and Rice Racers, because,

A. There is a huge difference between a Civic with a wing and a rez-can and truly hotrodded compact.

and

B. Japan is not the only country producing good examples of Sport Compacts, the big three are finally starting to pull there heads out of their asses, and the Europeans have been doing it for years.

It's like the difference between Street Squids and Riders.

BioTek

Mon 11/17/03, 10:09AM

These clips gave me SUCH a smile. :D

Rocko

Mon 11/17/03, 10:52AM

haha this tread kinda reminds me of these letters to the editor i read in "road and track" this weekend. Most of them were from these guys who were like "hey wasn't that a typo where you said the tricked out honda civic beat the camaro z whatever in 0-60?" or "my mustang can beat that (enter european car here)!"

I think it's pretty sad that so many people seem to tie their life's worth to their car's performance, and that to them "performance" means 0-60 in a straight line and nothing more.

somebody invent a pill that makes your dick bigger already so that these people can move on...

P.S. - don't buy a daimler chrysler unless you buy the full manual transmission. Their auto-manual transmissions suck!!!!

BioTek

Mon 11/17/03, 12:13PM

Theres a guy in my apartment building that owns a 911, a sweet car that he left covered for 2 months when he went outta town. He got home to a flat right rear courtesy of a nail imbedded in between the tread, and a battery so drained (drained by the alarm) it wouldn't jump start.
He saw me refitting my nice shiny new BT020 on Saturday and wanted to borrow a 14mm socket. I obliged and helped him pull out the battery, as I did that he started checking out my SV and was like, "Thats a sweet bike, it'd kick my ass in the Porsche." I loved the compliment but had to admit his top end speed far outreaches the SV's so he gave me another pearl and told me, "Yeh but 0 to 60 you'd win hands down."
"Oh okay, you may well be right on that one buddy." (Should I set up a show down? :p )
Reminds me that for only 5 grand I got a whole lotta bike and for that amount it will give me plenty of smiles as I blast from the lights. :D

pzzamakr80

Wed 3/3/04, 10:12AM

Did anyone actually notice the kids pinky finger fingernail. What the hell is up with THAT. That guy is a retard. What the hell was he doing trying to race an M3.

Oh Yeah, M3's kick ass. If i had 50 grand i would buy one.

I own a WRX. I love it. I don't think its slow. Interior does kinda suck though

I own a tricked out 91 Toyota Truck V6 TT (Yes-twin turbo). Its fast. I love it. It's got 200,000 miles on stock block, worked heads. I does 0-60 in about 6 seconds. I pull a boat too. AND cow manure.
***DO THAT WITH YOUR M3's***

No_Brakes23

Wed 3/3/04, 6:37PM

lol, pizzamaker, would you say that your truck "Hauls", then?

pzzamakr80

Thu 3/4/04, 11:33PM

Hell yeah. And boy, let me tell you, with 600 pounds of car manure loaded that things handles like a dream. Theres nothing like some hot shit, or cold shit for that matter, to make your car cool

moforose3

Fri 3/5/04, 3:11PM

Originally posted by gamehaus
this is obviously the opinion of an inexperienced driver forever doomed to the uninitiated and uninformed. tell me one thing, if the wrx had zero power off the line did you consider that the engine was not turned on? how did you get anywhere, fred flintstone? or would daddy have been upset if he found you playing with his toys in the garage?

you know, if you push the gas too many times when the motor is not running you'll flood the engine. next time you drive the wrx, turn it on, and please use the seatbelt.

I am definatley a Japanese fan, but you are wrong about the WRX. Without a hard launch they are turds off the start. That is how they get there decent 1/4 mile and 60 second times. They pull half decent after that, but nothing to brag about. An Sti has some ass to it, but a WRX is a joke anymore.

ward

Fri 3/5/04, 5:10PM

Originally posted by moforose3
I am definatley a Japanese fan, but you are wrong about the WRX. Without a hard launch they are turds off the start. That is how they get there decent 1/4 mile and 60 second times. They pull half decent after that, but nothing to brag about. An Sti has some ass to it, but a WRX is a joke anymore.

Finally someone with some sense!!!!

yeah it's quick, but ONLY if you wind the damn thing up

No_Brakes23

Sat 4/3/04, 4:48AM

Ward you know I am a BMW fan, but at least Subarus aren't so damn overweight. I know "well-appointed" = "heavy" but I'd really like to see what an M3, M5, or M6 on a serious diet would be like.

nefarious-az

Sat 4/3/04, 9:56AM

I've been a Euro fan my entire life..proably because I lived in spain for half of it. I grew up on stories of my dad's old tricked out Seats and Renaults. Anyhow as for the BMW's being too expensive, yes you could go get somethin cheaper and make it go in a straight line faster. Sure ya could But after having done Chicago to Florida to Cali to Chicago in 2 weeks in a 98 M3. I couldn't possibly think of doing it in anything else. Maybe it hast to do with breeding. Some people just can't stand to be in things that don't have $4000 interiors or that don't cost more then a vette. And for the LOVE OF GOD. STOP CALLING ANYTHING WITH AMG oN IT A SLEEPER. AMG AUTOMATICALLY Says HELLOOO!!! I'm Fasssst! I'm NOT A SLEEPER!. Granted you can easily shave off the AMG tags but whats the fun in that. And another car you guys are missing is the 96 BMW 540I With the sport packaged 6 speed.

Wadeo

Sat 4/3/04, 1:58PM

I think a big reason DSM's and their 'rice burner' friends are so popular is because of their modablility. If I pop the hood on a M3 all I see is plastic enshrouded power. Where the hell, if I wanted to would I even begin to work on that thing. With a DSM and shop manuals your mechanically inclined individual can do 90% of his own maintence and do whatever sort of upgrading he might want. I think that is the big appeal of Jap cars and thier followers. The idea of everything done to the car to make it that fast was done by your own two hands. Yes those cars lack refinement but they defineatly dont lack personality.
Props to the M3, amazing car.
Props to DSM's and their brothers, Amazing cars in their own way.

moforose3

Sun 4/4/04, 11:22AM

Most fuel injected cars work the same, they all have the same basic concept of tuning. The main reason people buy Japanese is because its cheaper. Cheaper to fix and modify. Like you said alot of euro cars have plastic convering the engine, but thats all it is is plastic. Take it off and there everything is.

smokescreen

Thu 5/20/04, 9:46PM

it's a little sad to hear people who drive one of the cheapest bikes on the market arguing that the more expensive car is better caus it's more comfy and the suby saved dollars in the wrong place. i am guessing you are uninformed and have no idea the the sti is faster than the m3 out of the box. but maybe you don't notice things like the fact that the m2 has twin piston slide calipers for front stopper compared to the price slashing sti's brembo 4pot calipers in the front and twin pots in the rear. or the fact that the subaru has the lighter racier rims of the two. you know...... the forged bbs. (i heart a lot of cheap cars come with bbs forged rims?)

just to put things into perspective though, i guess you would have to know how to drive to make a suby go fast...... i beat my first m-roadster while i still had stock rims and no boost controller on my wrx. i was only going from 0-60 in 5.7 seconds then. now on (cheapy) OZ superleggerra 18x8 track rims, boost, intake, exhaust, and 65,000 boosted miles (without ever having to take my car in for actual payed service intervals) i can't say i've had any engine troubles. or trouble beating bmw's.......at half the price....... i would have waited for the sti, after all i drive sports cars, not luxury cars...... see i have to buy my own cars........... poor me. it is sorta fun to smoke people and then politely ask them how much they payed for their cars though.

smokescreen

Thu 5/20/04, 9:49PM

and that's why they are turbo-chargew dude..... so you can "wind them"

svspete

Thu 5/20/04, 10:43PM

Originally posted by ward
Finally someone with some sense!!!!

yeah it's quick, but ONLY if you wind the damn thing up

Dear Mr. High and Mighty,

Can you point me to something that performs as well as a WRX in handling and accelleration, while maintaining utilitarianism, functionality, and price?

Key factors:
approx 22k price tag
reliability
comparable build quality
trunk space
interior space (4+ people -- admittedly a bit of a snug fit)
towing capacity (though little, it DOES have towing ability moreso than others in its class)

Yours Truly,

Subaru Owner

McTwig

Fri 5/21/04, 1:57AM

wow. how hard would u have to push an sv to get its engine to blow? is it even possible?

ward

Fri 5/21/04, 7:27AM

Originally posted by svspete
Dear Mr. High and Mighty,

Can you point me to something that performs as well as a WRX in handling and accelleration, while maintaining utilitarianism, functionality, and price?

Key factors:
approx 22k price tag
reliability
comparable build quality
trunk space
interior space (4+ people -- admittedly a bit of a snug fit)
towing capacity (though little, it DOES have towing ability moreso than others in its class)

Yours Truly,

Subaru Owner

simple,
used M3 anywhere from 1995-1997 would be available at that price range many are well taken care of and have extremely low miles since they're an expensive toy for many

BMW straight sixes are almost bulletproof, I'd take a 80,000 BMW motor over some Jap motor running 18 PSI of boost or whatever it takes to get that HP out of such a small motor.

BMW build quality, as well as features are well over 8 years ahead of subaru, look at body seams, door gaps. Not that subaru is necessarily awful, but not better than BMW

Trunk in the M3 is bigger than the WRX, and it doesn't have a gay ass spoiler

M3 has 5 seatbelts, (not that i'd want to be in the backseat then though)

seriously, if you need to tow shit, a sports car is not for you

so for the same money you've got a better performing car with a nicer interior and better styling, plus you'll have better resale when you decide to sell. A nice thing with BMW is they don't have to restyle their cars as often as the jap brands, a 8 year old BMW still looks nice. An 8 year old japanese car could impress no one.

There ya go subie!

svspete

Fri 5/21/04, 9:18AM

OK. How about a comparable NEW car?

It's great to think a BMW is a fantastic car. I wouldn't mind driving one. But you seem to be blind to truth. An old co-worker of mine owned several BMWs and did more driving in one year than you or I will be doing in the next 3 years. He ownership included 3 series and 5 series. He said that he wouldn't buy a BMW again. After 100k miles they need frequent, costly repair and their reliability falls considerably.

So, let me clarify that previous request with "NEW." What NEW car is comparable to a subaru WRX under the same conditions...

"handling, accelleration, utilitarianism, functionality, and price

Key factors:
approx 22k price tag
reliability
comparable build quality
trunk space
interior space (4+ people -- admittedly a bit of a snug fit)
towing capacity (though little, it DOES have towing ability moreso than others in its class)"

?

svspete

Fri 5/21/04, 9:44AM

Some interesting points. Let me reply.

Originally posted by ward
[B][A BMW is] an expensive toy for many

It's a "toy"? Ok. Suggest a daily driver for me then.

Originally posted by ward
Trunk in the M3 is bigger than the WRX, and it doesn't have a gay ass spoiler

Last time I looked, a spoiler is an option, not a standard on a WRX. Personal preference.

Originally posted by ward
M3 has 5 seatbelts, (not that i'd want to be in the backseat then though)
Good point. Well taken. For confirmation, the WRX has 5 belts also.

Originally posted by ward
seriously, if you need to tow shit, a sports car is not for you
I'm not asking specifically for a "sports car." I don't tow "shit" either.

Originally posted by ward you'll have better resale when you decide to sell.

Think so? I'm curious to know how much loss there is on a BMW for depreciation. I lost $4k on my 2002 Impreza when I recently sold it, the difference between what I bought it for and what I recently sold it for--keep in mind I drove it about 25k miles with NO repairs and only buying tires/changing oil. That disgusts me when I think about it. Buuut.... on the other hand, higher valued cars depreciate more than lower valued cars. What do you figure the typical depreciation is on a BMW--in the FIRST 3 YEARS?

Originally posted by ward
A nice thing with BMW is they don't have to restyle their cars as often as the jap brands, a 8 year old BMW still looks nice. An 8 year old japanese car could impress no one.

How many major or minor resyling events have there been for BMW in the last 20 years? I can likely find a JDM vehicle with the same number. Regardless, what are you proving? Restyling doesn't prove or disprove the success of a vehicle line.

I beg to differ on the issue of ageless style. This is a matter of opinion and personal taste. I personally think the rx7 from both the early 1990s AND the early 1980s is a great looking car. There's also Datsuns from the mid 70s and 80s that look great, too. Of course, these are only a few cars off the top of my head. BMWs from the 80s and 90s also look good.

A simple request: if you would like to bash subaru or another JDM vehicle, how about you provide some more factual based informaiton that supports a valid, acknowledged point. Again... more facts, less opinion.

DANG_13

Fri 5/21/04, 11:45AM

If you have an SV why do you even care??? - I dusted a Ferrari off the line in La jolla two days ago! two wheels are better (and much faster)

This is a ridiculous thread...

svspete

Fri 5/21/04, 12:16PM

Don't reply if you think it's rediculous. I rescind my invitation to you to read this thread. Go away.:)

ward

Fri 5/21/04, 2:35PM

Originally posted by svspete
Some interesting points. Let me reply.

It's a "toy"? Ok. Suggest a daily driver for me then.

Mine's not a toy, some folks have the cash flow to have a weekend car just for shits and giggles I meant that one of those would be a good choice for a low mileage used car.

Last time I looked, a spoiler is an option, not a standard on a WRX. Personal preference.

well, lots of folks have bad taste as that stupid spoiler is on like 80 percent of the things

Good point. Well taken. For confirmation, the WRX has 5 belts also.

cool, but yeah it would suck to be 3 wide in the back of any car this small (unless it was me and 2 cheerleaders then it'd kickass)

I'm not asking specifically for a "sports car." I don't tow "shit" either.

then why do you care about towing???

Think so? I'm curious to know how much loss there is on a BMW for depreciation. I lost $4k on my 2002 Impreza when I recently sold it, the difference between what I bought it for and what I recently sold it for--keep in mind I drove it about 25k miles with NO repairs and only buying tires/changing oil. That disgusts me when I think about it. Buuut.... on the other hand, higher valued cars depreciate more than lower valued cars. What do you figure the typical depreciation is on a BMW--in the FIRST 3 YEARS?

depends, compared to a similarly priced car the depreciation is smaller for BMW's, if you want to see shitty depeciation look at a 70000 cadilac escalade (suburban) really how much will that be worth in 5 years. I was talking about a used car, if you started with a used BMW M3 for 22-23 and a new subaru WRX, in 5 years the BMW will have more value left than the WRX. If you're comparing new to new you will certainly lose more in resale on a 55000 car than a 23000 car, but i'm pretty sure if you're looking at a WRX a new M3 is not in your price range.

How many major or minor resyling events have there been for BMW in the last 20 years? I can likely find a JDM vehicle with the same number. Regardless, what are you proving? Restyling doesn't prove or disprove the success of a vehicle line.

BMW has a few different model lines 3,5,7..............
in general they have a restyle every 7-8 years
seems like honda, toyota................. come out with a new remodel every 4-5 years , hmm so what's that mean

if you've got a 6 year old BMW you may still have the current body style, but a 6 year old jap car is almost guaranteed to be "the old body style" Just means you can have an older BMW and still be current, plus in general their redesigns are less drastic so you can have the last body style and the car still looks good. Compare an 8 year old BMW 3 series and an 8 year old subaru and which one looks more dated???

A simple request: if you would like to bash subaru or another JDM vehicle, how about you provide some more factual based informaiton that supports a valid, acknowledged point. Again... more facts, less opinion.

here's a quick fact from the back of motortrend
BMW X3 a SUV, a 4000LB suv stops from 60mph
11 feet SHORTER than a WRX

according to the same table of performance numbers the slalom speed for a WRX 65.4 is only 0.2 mph faster then the giant 2002 745i FULL SIZE SEDAN
both numbers from motortrend may 04

gosh that must be a hot little car to get outbraked by an SUV, and to slalom at the same speed as a full sized luxury car.

The wrx isn't a bad car, but it's not the best and certainly not a high performance vehicle. It's a tarted up econobox.

a couple other NEW options would be a neon SRT-4, mini cooper, saturn ion redline............

ward

Fri 5/21/04, 2:36PM

I still can't figure out this stupid quoting crap

Aeteocles

Fri 5/21/04, 2:45PM

I like the M3 =). The WRX is nice....but....I dunno....it just screams "Import Racer." And well....I'm Asian....and while I do like nice handling, agressive cars....and would never buy another American car....I can't make myself like that import racer look....especially if it means that everyone's gonna stereotype me into the same catagory as all those white-shoes-baggy-pants-spikey-hair-sit-real-low-in-your-car-drive-an-import-car-that-you-spend-all-your-money-on-but-your-family-is-still-on-welfare drivers...

And just for the record, a low price is not necessarily a good thing.

There's a difference between price and value....

and for some people...having an expensive car is more valueable to them than having a cheap one.

It's messed up...but what can we do about it?

ward

Fri 5/21/04, 2:49PM

preach on man,

this whole rant if put in motorcycle terms is some guy saying his SV650 is just as good as some other guys aprillia mille

the SV's not a bad bike, hell it's a great bike, but you can't compare it to an itallian exotic, That's my whole point, these items are not in the same league, you don't cross shop an SV with a ducati (620i excluded maybe) and you don't cross shop a BMW with a subaru.

svspete

Fri 5/21/04, 4:54PM

Originally posted by ward
The wrx isn't a bad car, but it's not the best and certainly not a high performance vehicle. It's a tarted up econobox.

a couple other NEW options would be a neon SRT-4, mini cooper, saturn ion redline............

Yes. Finally... some comparisons that make sense. Mini to a WRX. that makes a little more sense.

As far as depreciation... we need to look at CHANGE in value, NOT total value. To illustrate... (may or may not be representative of an M3) a $40,000 car that depreciates to $25,000 in two years has lost $15,000 in value. On the other hand, a $25,000 WRX (arbitrary value) that depreciates to $18,000 in the same amount of time has lost $7,000. Which has more "value"? To me, I'd like to think that the WRX in this example has more value, considering it lost almost 50% LESS in depreciation dollars. *In general, more expensive vehicles depreciate Faster.*

As far as your comparison to SUVs and full size sedans...
May as well compare the WRX to the porche Cayenne. It just doesn't make sense. Stick to apples vs apples. I can spend a fraction of the money spent on an SUV and make a WRX handle better. So... what have you proven or argued here? nothing... nothing that makes sense without confounding a comparison.

If you wanted to compare properly, you need to compare a mid 1990s bmw performance to a WRX. Clearly, you proposed a USED M3 for compaison with a NEW WRX... why change now? Why are we looking at new vs. new?

1. COMPARABLE.
2. Consistency in comparison.

To judge a BMW against a WRX, we need consistency. I suggest you present a good comparison with similar vehicles in similar price points having the same functionality--otherwise it makes no sense to bash one vehicle over another.:squid:

svspete

Fri 5/21/04, 5:00PM

Originally posted by ward
the SV's not a bad bike, hell it's a great bike, but you can't compare it to an itallian exotic, That's my whole point, these items are not in the same league, you don't cross shop an SV with a ducati (620i excluded maybe) and you don't cross shop a BMW with a subaru.

I agree.

The BMW is a nice car... sounds nice, looks nice. Never driven one, though. Ship one to me, and I'll give it a whack. The WRX is an inexpensive rip-roaring car. Lots of fun. Different market, different vehicles. To each their own preference. It's clear ours differ. I am accepting of that.

Nevertheless, bashing (or otherwise trashtalking) one vehicle over another is silly. Reminds me of dirt that presidential candidates pull.

svspete

Fri 5/21/04, 5:01PM

Originally posted by Aeteocles
I can't make myself like that import racer look....especially if it means that everyone's gonna stereotype me into the same catagory as all those white-shoes-baggy-pants-spikey-hair-sit-real-low-in-your-car-drive-an-import-car-that-you-spend-all-your-money-on-but-your-family-is-still-on-welfare drivers...

Wow. Tell us how you REALLY feel.

ward

Fri 5/21/04, 9:38PM

Originally posted by svspete

*In general, more expensive vehicles depreciate Faster.*

No shit, I already said that in my post above.

As far as your comparison to SUVs and full size sedans...
May as well compare the WRX to the porche Cayenne. It just doesn't make sense. Stick to apples vs apples. I can spend a fraction of the money spent on an SUV and make a WRX handle better. So... what have you proven or argued here? nothing... nothing that makes sense without confounding a comparison.

I proved that the "high performance" WRX has worse brakes than an SUV, and slaloms no faster than a huge luxury sedan.
also it would be nice if you spelled porsche correctly

If you wanted to compare properly, you need to compare a mid 1990s bmw performance to a WRX. Clearly, you proposed a USED M3 for compaison with a NEW WRX... why change now?

Find some stats on a E36 m3, I guarantee there's no performance figure the WRX can touch.

To judge a BMW against a WRX, we need consistency. I suggest you present a good comparison with similar vehicles in similar price points having the same functionality

I also already did compare this with the used M3
you douche

also, BMW doesn't make a cheap ass new econobox, there's no comparison between the two, that's my whole point. BMW can make a full size luxury sedan and a SUV that perform as well as subaru's "sports" car:

ward

Fri 5/21/04, 9:40PM

Originally posted by svspete
I agree.

Never driven one

go fix this, and then tell me honestly that the subaru isn't a pile of crap

smokescreen

Fri 5/21/04, 10:21PM

how about i say that i watched my roomies, bmw maintain 3 series crack up and fall apart at 8 years old. i guess buying a german crown vic is nice though. if soo many police dept.s all over the world use them they must be cheap anywhere there aren't americans to be duped into paying too much for them.

i guess we shouldn't call the wrx a performance car swince it's 2 litre engine is the homogenized version of the wrc world champ car. not like those winning bimmers. whose reliable inline six is soo powerful they had to sneak a v-8 in to even get close to competing with porsche. of coarse they couldn't homgenize that so they were expelled till they put their regular (see- slow) engine in.

i'm not saying i don't like inline sixes, maybe someday i can afford to put one in my jeep, as a rediculously priced replacement truck motor. loads of torque. not particularly fast.

oh, and the wrx runs on 13.7 lbs of boost. mine is a high boost model, at 15 lbs(1 bar) this is only a dangerous amount in underengineered motors like the bimmer's. nikosil coated pistons, like those in my econobox, have no trouble with these numbers.

ward

Fri 5/21/04, 10:28PM

Originally posted by billabong
how about i say that i watched my roomies, bmw maintain 3 series crack up and fall apart at 8 years old. .

what the hell is a BMW maintain 3 series?

moforose3

Sat 5/22/04, 10:01PM

Originally posted by billabong

i'm not saying i don't like inline sixes, maybe someday i can afford to put one in my jeep, as a rediculously priced replacement truck motor. loads of torque. not particularly fast.

oh, and the wrx runs on 13.7 lbs of boost. mine is a high boost model, at 15 lbs(1 bar) this is only a dangerous amount in underengineered motors like the bimmer's. nikosil coated pistons, like those in my econobox, have no trouble with these numbers. [/B]

There are many companys that make inline sixes, to conclude that they arent particularly fast is a gross generalzation. There are quite a few fast inline sixes.

And the bimmers engine isnt built to run high boost. Its a high compression motor. If you were to pop the top and throw in some low compression pistons and a new headgasket it would look at the wrx and laugh. Like Ive said before, I am a Japanese fan- but get your shit straight before you start yelling.

smokescreen

Sat 5/22/04, 10:14PM

another great inline six is the cummins turbo diesel, but that one is fast and reliable. the only high hp one i know of is the tvr, but if your scared of winding up an engine, you definately wouldn't like that one. as it reaches its peak power at 9k rpms.

doub1etap

Sat 5/22/04, 10:57PM

Wards automotive (the industry rag) named both the scooby sti and bmw m3 engines as the two of the 10 best in 2004.

http://subscribers.wardsauto.com/Microsites/index.asp?srid=10088&pageid=8509&siteid=26&magazineid=1004&srtype=1

Subscription may be required, I can't remember.

TonyC

Sun 5/23/04, 1:37AM

Originally posted by svspete OK. How about a comparable NEW car?

So, let me clarify that previous request with "NEW." What NEW car is comparable to a subaru WRX under the same conditions...

Key factors:
approx 22k price tag
reliability
comparable build quality
trunk space
interior space
towing capacity
?
Ans: "new" Dodge Neon SRT-4. NEXT Question.

FWIW: the Mopar Stage 2 kit tosses out 280hp/300ft-lb @ flywheel for $1600. Add that to base MSRP, Neon's still cheaper than the cheapest WRX's @ $25870

I owned a '01 Forester, pretty darn similar mechanically speaking to the Impreza you were trying to sell. There wasn't that much "quality" in the "build". After all, it's a Subaru, glorified econo boxes w/ AWD. As far as reliability is concerned... '04 Hyundai's just ranked 2nd in JD power initial satisfaction survey backed by highly tauted 10yr/100K warranties. Ask me if I'd buy one t'row. Don't get me wrong, I loved WRX's and what it meant in terms of Japanese auto niche. 3 yrs ago, the concept was refreshing and dare I say, hip. Now.... a $25K 227hp econo box is no longer that interesting, AWD or not.

moforose3

Sun 5/23/04, 1:03PM

Originally posted by billabong
another great inline six is the cummins turbo diesel, but that one is fast and reliable. the only high hp one i know of is the tvr, but if your scared of winding up an engine, you definately wouldn't like that one. as it reaches its peak power at 9k rpms.

Supra?

svspete

Sun 5/23/04, 5:04PM

Originally posted by TonyC
Ans: "new" Dodge Neon SRT-4. NEXT Question.

FWIW: the Mopar Stage 2 kit tosses out 280hp/300ft-lb @ flywheel for $1600. Add that to base MSRP, Neon's still cheaper than the cheapest WRX's @ $25870

I've driven dodges. I don't personally consider them to be of similar build quality as a subaru. Too many problems with the Dodges I've known. Transmission mechanicals, transmission controllers, engine controllers, drivetrains, to name a few. Granted, there are probably some reliable Mopar/Dodge/Chrysler/Plymouth but I don't see it. Build quality doesn't seem on par to me for drivetrain of a subaru. Interior of the Subaru for build isn't exactly "refined." I'll give you that.

Nonetheless, Given the Opportunity, I would certainly drive a Neon SRT for giggles. I'm afraid of the overpowering engine on the CV boots and driveshafts.

Originally posted by TonyC

As far as reliability is concerned... '04 Hyundai's just ranked 2nd in JD power initial satisfaction survey backed by highly tauted 10yr/100K warranties. Ask me if I'd buy one t'row.

If "initial" refers to the first 90 days, you aren't going to know much about reliability. Additionally--and here's where I leave myself open for debate by throwing this out--JD Power ratings are customer satisfaction based, not actually comparative. There are different expectations between a buyer of a toyota and a buyer of a hundai, for example. So it is extremely difficult to judge wether a hundai is a better or worse car than another based upon JD ratings. A Hundai driver may have less funs and may accept problems as part of the lesser purchase price, therefore making a hundai better.

This issue of JD ratings was a debated and when Buick ratings were above that of many other companies in recent history, even though they are a GM (stereotyped as a lesser quality than some others). Buick was rated particularly high because their demographic was older persons. People who simply wanted a less expensive vehicle and wouldn't necessarily drive it as much to care about it's reliability. Consider that my grandma has less than 50k miles on her GM boat since she bought it in the early 1980s. ...And so this is how ratings may be skewed.

BTW... my bro bought a Hundai Tiburon GT and I really like the car. Good power from a small V6. I'd drive it, too.

Crap... I gotta get off... Tornado Spotted West of where I live here in WI.:eek:

chukiechz

Sun 5/23/04, 10:43PM

Ward's on his own defending BMW. Im jumping ship. Im selling mine for an AMG C32. My car is for sale if anyone's interested in an E46 M3 killer :)

http://forums.bimmerforums.com/forum/showthread.php?t=205522

ward

Mon 5/24/04, 7:46AM

Originally posted by chukiechz
Ward's on his own defending BMW. Im jumping ship. Im selling mine for an AMG C32. My car is for sale if anyone's interested in an E46 M3 killer :)

http://forums.bimmerforums.com/forum/showthread.php?t=205522

Yeah, those mercedes are damn fine looking cars.

I know the extra 2 doors will help you out with the child seat

that mercedes is a sweet ride though

Tillers_Rule

Mon 5/24/04, 11:33AM

I like the new Cady XLR, now those are badass cars.

No_Brakes23

Mon 6/21/04, 3:11PM

Originally posted by Tillers_Rule
I like the new Cady XLR, now those are badass cars.

You are joking, right. This hideous Aztec-styled, pretending at being BMW, fat piece of shit, overpriced Chevy is a disgrace for even GM.

Tillers_Rule

Wed 6/23/04, 8:44PM

Originally posted by No_Brakes23
You are joking, right. This hideous Aztec-styled, pretending at being BMW, fat piece of shit, overpriced Chevy is a disgrace for even GM.

Actually, I wasnt kidding.

Overpriced?? Why is that? Because Chevy usually doesnt charge that much for a car?

Mercedes must not be overpriced at $130K then, since they charge $30K for their bottom of the line, Honda Civic equivelant econo-car, but its a Mercedes, so it must be good. Even though overseas you see all the taxi's and delivery trucks are Mercedes.

Same goes for BMW, just because they price their Z4 at what you can get a convertible Corvette for, people think their driving "luxury"

All cars are overpriced, bottom line.

No_Brakes23

Thu 6/24/04, 12:09AM

You might have noticed in other threads that I have referred to Mercedes as "Overpriced taxi-cabs" referring to their inexlicable prestige here in America, when they are taxi-cabs in Israel and Europe.

And whenever I refer to a car as "overpriced" version of one of its sister marques I am refering to the fact that it is more expensive solely because of the name not because of any features.

Case in point, the Lexus 300 series, (330 now I think) are overdressed, overpriced Toyota Camrys. On the other hand, the Infinti G35 bears some similarity to and shares parts with the Nissan Maxima, but it isn't much more expensive, and it gives you the option of RWD or AWD. NOT overpriced, and a viable option if you were considering a loaded Maxima.

Cadillacs have not escaped the build quality issues that have plagued GM for the last 30 years, hence my refering to it as an overpriced Chevy. Cadillac was, once upon a time, a premier mark, and a bastion of reliabilty; but now their FWD tunaboats are just gross symbols of misplased excess.

As to you liking it, Jeff, well I am sorry. I think the new Chevy trucks, the new Caddys and the Pontiac Aztecs are painful to look at. I can't believe anyone would ever buy one. But my neighbor owns one, and he isn't an idiot, so...

No_Brakes23

Tue 6/29/04, 5:22PM

Well I am certainly not convinced of its merits, and I can't get over the fact that it is, (In my eyes,) one of the most hideous vehicles on the road today.

But the Folks at Road & Track are in agreement with Tiller on this one.

http://www.roadandtrack.com/article.asp?section_id=31&article_id=1337

quicksilver

Tue 6/29/04, 7:10PM

I sell luxury and highline cars for a living. I've worked in dealerships since I graduated from high school. I worked at Toyota's HQ. So please, as you read, remember that I have a lot of experience and perspective on the issue.

I've driven nearly anything from a $2,000 trade-in POS to a $200,000 Ferrari, and everything in between. And each car is worth the dough that it gets for the most part.

My Mazda 3 was only 4K less than a nicely equipped WRX, and it is much slower. But it has leather and nav and xenons, so I can accept 160 HP.

An STI runs with an M3, but it doesn't have the fit and finish or the little badge, so lop off $20K.

A 911 will run you over $70k and after driving one you will believe it is worth every penny.

Basically it comes down to different strokes for different folks, not better or worse. To someone, a $35K Mustang Cobra is their dream car, and it is fast and fun and has no resale. Another will plop that same money down on a G35 coupe, lose 110 HP, but get Japanese quality and great styling.

This debate will forever rage, but whatever your opinion, you're right!

Oh, and I lusted after an M3, but after driving one, the Z06 is a better bang for the buck. Flame On...

Setter32

Tue 6/29/04, 7:17PM

....my Z can kick all your asses....................and your mother's too.........

.....wanna buy her?........

:D

Tillers_Rule

Tue 6/29/04, 7:24PM

Originally posted by Setter32
.......................and your mother's too.........

.....wanna buy her?........

:D

why would I want to buy my mother??

Now if YOUR mother is for sale.......:D

Setter32

Tue 6/29/04, 7:26PM

Originally posted by Tillers_Rule
why would I want to buy my mother??

Now if YOUR mother is for sale.......:D

.....shad dup...........bitch ho....

:D

Tillers_Rule

Tue 6/29/04, 7:33PM

Originally posted by No_Brakes23
Well I am certainly not convinced of its merits, and I can't get over the fact that it is, (In my eyes,) one of the most hideous vehicles on the road today.

But the Folks at Road & Track are in agreement with Tiller on this one.

http://www.roadandtrack.com/article.asp?section_id=31&article_id=1337

Hmmm. In my original post I wasnt referring to the Cadillac in the article you posted, you mustve mis-read.

This: http://www.roadandtrack.com/article.asp?section_id=3&article_id=622&page_number=1 is the one I was referring to.

Id have to agree with you on the looks of the CTS though, not to nice.

No_Brakes23

Wed 6/30/04, 7:04PM

The taillights are the main thing I can't stand, and the headlights are a close second. The convertible has the same atrocious tailights, but for some reason, it is MUCH easier to look at. From the side, it looks great. And that is Corvette power under the hood too, isn't it?

I just can't understand GMs need to sully the horizontal sheetmetal with feaux lights. Headlights and turnsignals are supposed to point out, not up, I am sure that Cesna a few thousand feet up doesn't give a shit about your lane change. I think people will look back on this stylistic treatment with the same disgust now held for the 70's 80's red reflective panel joining the functional taillights on so many cars. My '79 POS Mustang had that disgusting panel on the back. GM ruined their '03 trucks with the same riduclous "lights pointing up" treatment on the headlights.