[tallshortguy]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

It wasn't sudden, it took BMW a while. It wasn't a tangent; it was spot on .

Ford forgot what the Mustang was too with the Gen 2 back in the '70s and then almost with the what-was-to-eventually-become the Probe. And by the way, the 3-series really became "luxurious" only after the debut of Lexus and Acura. The E21, E30, and E36 were no more luxurious than a Honda at the time.

It was a tangent because you didn't follow up on your original statement about M cars, instead heading into another direction

Also, who are you responding to in terms of how luxurious the early 3 series were? I only mentioned price-performance which has long been in American muscle's favor. It's not a new development that luxury/upscale european cars cost more for about the same performance.

[Brunotheboxer]

Originally Posted by tallshortguy

They just released a critically acclaimed, by all accounts, M car. They definitely know how to make a proper M car, if you're one of those people who thinks making one car not in the traditional M hierarchy negates all cars made with the M badge, then there's nothing to talk about because that's simply silly nonsense.



American muscle has and will likely always be the best performance for you dollar. When has it ever been the case than BMW or any luxury/upscale maker undercut an American model on price while in the same performance class? I have, nor have others, ever doubted if you want the best performance for the dollar get a camaro Z/28 which is faster than a GTR on a track. People are suddenly acting like this is some sort of new development. What makes an M car better is it's handling, finish, and how all the parts come together to make a special driver's car. The new mustangs look pretty good (besides the aesthetics imo) and serve a great cause in terms of giving access to good performance on the cheap.

Also, what are you talking about most people want a bare bones car? No, most people want a car they can live with, besides the mustang is not a bare bones car and will be available with new technologies. Just because it comes with a non-luxury interior does not make it bare. Very few people actually buy bare bones drivers cars contrary to what you may think, go to any BMW/Merc AMG/Porsche forum if you think most people want to order bare cars with no amenities.

Fine by me except when ever someone starts a thread about a mustang or any other decent car BMW fanbois always bash it.

"It's a mustang". Etc.

[Vigilante375]

Go to any Chevy/Ford/Subbie/Maza/whatever forum and see what they want for a road course car. Its not going to be a M car, RS car or AMG car. Most people could care less than they can DD their ZOMG M/RS/AMG to the track and back home. Those are the people that just go out and say I have the capability to do those things but hardly ever go to the road course, like ZL1 fan boys.

Its hard, now a days, to find a "bare bones" car since car manufacturers are making more and more useless stuff standard (or have to because of the NHTSA) when it should be an option.

A true drivers car doesn't have all the crap cars come with today.

And yes, being on a BMW forum someone will always throw a M car into mix because nothing beats an M car!

[tallshortguy]

Originally Posted by Brunotheboxer

Fine by me except when ever someone starts a thread about a mustang or any other decent car BMW fanbois always bash it.

"It's a mustang". Etc.

You're on a BMW enthusiast forum, of course most people on here prefer BMW's. I'm sure mustang forums will have it's fair share of detractors in German car threads.

Originally Posted by Vigilante375

Go to any Chevy/Ford/Subbie/Maza/whatever forum and see what they want for a road course car. Its not going to be a M car, RS car or AMG car. Most people could care less than they can DD their ZOMG M/RS/AMG to the track and back home. Those are the people that just go out and say I have the capability to do those things but hardly ever go to the road course, like ZL1 fan boys.

Its hard, now a days, to find a "bare bones" car since car manufacturers are making more and more useless stuff standard (or have to because of the NHTSA) when it should be an option.

A true drivers car doesn't have all the crap cars come with today.

And yes, being on a BMW forum someone will always throw a M car into mix because nothing beats an M car!

Forum members can say what they want but the truth is in what they're actually paying. Yeah you have plenty of people on here who say they want a stripper M4 and end up getting the exec package, full leather, etc. The same with those enthusiasts. Mustangs, camaros, WRX's, and mazda3's are usually not bought bare by these forum goers. Besides, having modern options does not make a car not a driver's car, that's just a silly way of thinking. Unless it's a dedicated track car, there is little detrimental effect to having modern amenities. The only real one is fixability and reliability of electronics, but that was always going to happen.

[Brunotheboxer]

Originally Posted by tallshortguy

You're on a BMW enthusiast forum, of course most people on here prefer BMW's. I'm sure mustang forums will have it's fair share of detractors in German car threads.



Forum members can say what they want but the truth is in what they're actually paying. Yeah you have plenty of people on here who say they want a stripper M4 and end up getting the exec package, full leather, etc. The same with those enthusiasts. Mustangs, camaros, WRX's, and mazda3's are usually not bought bare by these forum goers.

I agree but this section (non BMW) used to be one of the best around. Not so much anymore.

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by tallshortguy

It was a tangent because you didn't follow up on your original statement about M cars, instead heading into another direction

Also, who are you responding to in terms of how luxurious the early 3 series were? I only mentioned price-performance which has long been in American muscle's favor. It's not a new development that luxury/upscale european cars cost more for about the same performance.

I honestly thought it really needed no other elaboration, seriously. See the posts after mine, some guys understood the comment.

I'd maybe consider BMW's 3 series a luxury car if they didn't sell them as taxis and police cars... I was responding to Vigilante375 I guess.

I really was just trying to compare two cars, sport coupes, that weigh the same, but one has far better performance at the same price point. If a slightly better interior adds to the on-street/track performance in some fanboi's mind then so be it. if you want a performance car, is the interior build quality THAT important? I think it's the Roundel and an attempted justification for the extra bucks that go with it.


Peace.

[ragingclue]

I only got the Brembos and Recaros on mine, nothing else. I loooooooooooooove the cloth Recaros. BMW should offer cloth seats like that. I'd much rather have that than leatherette or even leather.

Oh and maintenance/parts/mods feel practically free after owning a 335. Plus it's been reliable as hell, so that's good too.

I don't think you can compare anything but performance between the two cars because that's the only thing that's really comparable. Can't compare price or options or stereotypes, etc...

[tallshortguy]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

I honestly thought it really needed no other elaboration, seriously. See the posts after mine, some guys understood the comment.

I'd maybe consider BMW's 3 series a luxury car if they didn't sell them as taxis and police cars... I was responding to Vigilante375 I guess.

I really was just trying to compare two cars, sport coupes, that weigh the same, but one has far better performance at the same price point. If a slightly better interior adds to the on-street/track performance in some fanboi's mind then so be it. if you want a performance car, is the interior build quality THAT important? I think it's the Roundel and an attempted justification for the extra bucks that go with it.


Peace.

You said that BMW doesn't know what an M car is despite them releasing a widely praised M car last month and don't elaborate on why the new M3/4 is not a real M car. None of those posters who agreed with you has told me why the new M3 is not a real M car either. That's what I would like some elaboration on.

No one has argued that luxury marques give you as much bang for your buck performance wise as American muscle. Of course the germans will charge you more, their luxury is more expensive than the koreans and americans who generally do luxury on par. Their performance is better and more refined but charge you almost twice as much for it. The point is many people consider the refinement of the entire package worth it despite the "badge tax", I think for many people who want performance cars the refinement and interior/amenity quality of the car is important given that very few people actually choose bare bones cars or have dedicated track cars. Sure, if you were only interested in performance the interior shouldn't be a big issue.

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by tallshortguy

You said that BMW doesn't know what an M car is despite them releasing a widely praised M car last month and don't elaborate on why the new M3/4 is not a real M car. None of those posters who agreed with you has told me why the new M3 is not a real M car either.

No one has argued that luxury marques don't give you as much bang for your buck performance wise as American muscle. Of course the germans will charge you more, their luxury is more expensive than the koreans and americans who generally do luxury on par. Their performance is better and more refined but you change you almost twice as much for it. The point is many people consider the refinement of the entire package worth it despite the "badge tax", I think for many people who want performance cars the refinement and interior/amenity quality of the car is important given that very few people actually choose bare bones cars or have dedicated track cars.

If I were to replace my e90 (barebones 325i w/ sport package, HIDs and bluetooth - ordered it with just the stuff I needed), I'd get a Cadillac ATS 2.0T with just a manual trans and sunroof. Really hard to find one like that.

[Vigilante375]

Meh, whats the point of arguing anymore. The new Mustang is ok but some of the exterior bits looks meh. I'll have to wait to see one in person to make a judgement call on it.

Why doesn't someone just make a thread about BMW vs everyone and argue in there.....I'm done. But with this last piece of info.....it took BMW how long to make a M car actual perform? For every other manufacturer to build something that trumps it, thats why. Even with a lowly $30k base car......

[MisterSkiMask]

Originally Posted by Brunotheboxer

I agree but this section (non BMW) used to be one of the best around. Not so much anymore.

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by tallshortguy

You said that BMW doesn't know what an M car is despite them releasing a widely praised M car last month and don't elaborate on why the new M3/4 is not a real M car. None of those posters who agreed with you has told me why the new M3 is not a real M car either. That's what I would like some elaboration on.

No one has argued that luxury marques give you as much bang for your buck performance wise as American muscle. Of course the germans will charge you more, their luxury is more expensive than the koreans and americans who generally do luxury on par. Their performance is better and more refined but charge you almost twice as much for it. The point is many people consider the refinement of the entire package worth it despite the "badge tax", I think for many people who want performance cars the refinement and interior/amenity quality of the car is important given that very few people actually choose bare bones cars or have dedicated track cars. Sure, if you were only interested in performance the interior shouldn't be a big issue.

The E30 M3 was about $30K back in 1988 when a regular 3-Series went for around $25K. A decent regular 3 series nowadays can be had for around $40K, an M3 is now around $70K - $75K. That's what I mean. I thought most BMW enthusiasts knew this.

[tallshortguy]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

The E30 M3 was about $30K back in 1988 when a regular 3-Series went for around $25K. A decent regular 3 series nowadays can be had for around $40K, an M3 is now around $70K - $75K. That's what I mean. I thought most BMW enthusiasts knew this.

What are you referring to? Where did I speak about the price difference between an M and regular series car?

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by tallshortguy

What are you referring to? Where did I speak about the price difference between an M and regular series car?

Jesus Christ, this isn't about you; it's about BMW. The original M3 was not much more expensive than a regular 3-series, but was more of a pure sports car than the regular 3-series. The M Brand now includes SUVs and M-brand packages that are nothing more than dress-up/aero packages. That is why BMW has forgotten what an M car is. You must not be old enough to understand. The M3 is now 100% more expensive than the regular 3. BMW has over exposed the f'ing M-brand, get it?

[tallshortguy]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

Jesus Christ, this isn't about you; it's about BMW. The original M3 was not much more expensive than a regular 3-series, but was more of a pure sports car than the regular 3-series. The M Brand now includes SUVs and M-brand packages that are nothing more than dress-up/aero packages. That is why BMW has forgotten what an M car is. You must not be old enough to understand. The M3 is now 100% more expensive than the regular 3. BMW has over exposed the f'ing M-brand, get it?

You quoted my post and then proceed on about pricing that has nothing to do with how M makes cars. You mentioned nothing about SUV's or overexposure, how dense are you? Also, where did I say this is about me? You quoted me with a random comment that has nothing to do with even your own argument and then get mad at me for asking what you're talking about? Saying the price difference between a regular 3 series and an M3 has nothing to do with BMW not knowing what an M car is, unless you're suggesting the price difference is a key component of M cars. I do remember when there weren't M-sport packages so try that age card nonsense with someone else, that doesn't mean I have to think the newer M3s aren't M cars.

Once again, I'll pose you the same question I did the other poster who made the same argument. Do you not consider the new M4/3 real M cars? That's what they do, they make track capable cars from regular series cars. Regardless of whether you like the SUVs or M-sport packages, unless you're saying all their current cars aren't real M cars then they certainly know what a real M car is. If you define an M car by non-proliferation of the name and focus entirely on non-SUV's then that's certainly your opinion. I simply disagree those things are the only defining traits of M and as long as they make a true M3 then BMW still knows what an M car is.

Also, the original M3 was a homogolation special, of course it was going to be more different than successive M3's. It was certainly the most raw and drove like it.

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by tallshortguy

You quoted my post and then proceed on about pricing that has nothing to do with how M makes cars. You mentioned nothing about SUV's or overexposure, how dense are you? Also, where did I say this is about me? You quoted me with a random comment that has nothing to do with even your own argument and then get mad at me for asking what you're talking about? Saying the price difference between a regular 3 series and an M3 has nothing to do with BMW not knowing what an M car is, unless you're suggesting the price difference is a key component of M cars. I do remember when there weren't M-sport packages so try that age card nonsense with someone else, that doesn't mean I have to think the newer M3s aren't M cars.

Once again, I'll pose you the same question I did the other poster who made the same argument. Do you not consider the new M4/3 real M cars? That's what they do, they make track capable cars from regular series cars. Regardless of whether you like the SUVs or M-sport packages, unless you're saying all their current cars aren't real M cars then they certainly know what a real M car is. If you define an M car by non-proliferation of the name and focus entirely on non-SUV's then that's certainly your opinion. I simply disagree those things are the only defining traits of M and as long as they make a true M3 then BMW still knows what an M car is.

Also, the original M3 was a homogolation special, of course it was going to be more different than successive M3's. It was certainly the most raw and drove like it.

Okay, not that I really care much about this subject so I'll expend just a few more joules of energy on it. I had to use your post as the basis of my statement, it wouldn't have made any sense if I had just made such a post; it wasn't personal attack. The M-brand has become just that, a Brand. It's a brand within a brand to allow Roundel-hounds who never really have appreciated BMW for what BMW was, now have a sub-sect status-symbol in what has already become status symbol, to show how cool they are that they can afford and even more exepensive BMW; which they'll still never appreciate other than the sticker price. I never said a current M3 isn't an "M car". I've said the M division doesn't stand what it originally stood for (i.e. BMW forgot); it'd be nice if it still did. Nothing I say will make you happy, so stop trying to get there. It really wasn't a personal attack, just my opinion about BMW (shared by others obviously). Stop taking offense to any of this, its just cars and opinions about cars. Relax.

[tallshortguy]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

Okay, not that I really care much about this subject so I'll expend just a few more joules of energy on it. I had to use your post as the basis of my statement, it wouldn't have made any sense if I had just made such a post; it wasn't personal attack. The M-brand has become just that, a Brand. It's a brand within a brand to allow Roundel-hounds who never really have appreciated BMW for what BMW was, now have a sub-sect status-symbol in what has already become status symbol, to show how cool they are that they can afford and even more exepensive BMW; which they'll still never appreciate other than the sticker price. I never said a current M3 isn't an "M car". I've said the M division doesn't stand what it originally stood for (i.e. BMW forgot); it'd be nice if it still did. Nothing I say will make you happy, so stop trying to get there. It really wasn't a personal attack, just my opinion about BMW (shared by others obviously). Stop taking offense to any of this, its just cars and opinions about cars. Relax.

Looks like you plenty care to me Where did I take personal offense? I was confused that you seemed to get angry at me for asking for post clarification. You never mentioned anything about price nor did you previously elaborate before responding with a post about the price difference of current M and regular series cars. It was not even framed in such a context as you suggested, since you posed a question "I thought every BMW enthusiast knew this?" as if I already spoke on the subject.

I asked you to explain why BMW no longer understands what M is, which you did in your opinion which is certainly fine. I simply don't agree, (shared by others obviously), which is part of the debate. I never expected you to say something that would "make me happy", just a debate on cars.

M originally stood for motorsports and their road going cars are what their touring car efforts would be linked to, that's what they still do and so I, like many others, believe they fully know what M stands and has stood for.

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by tallshortguy

Looks like you plenty care to me Where did I take personal offense? I was confused that you seemed to get angry at me for asking for post clarification. You never mentioned anything about price nor did you previously elaborate before responding with a post about the price difference of current M and regular series cars. It was not even framed in such a context as you suggested, since you posed a question "I thought every BMW enthusiast knew this?" as if I already spoke on the subject.

I asked you to explain why BMW no longer understands what M is, which you did in your opinion which is certainly fine. I simply don't agree, (shared by others obviously), which is part of the debate. I never expected you to say something that would "make me happy", just a debate on cars.

M originally stood for motorsports and their road going cars are what their touring car efforts would be linked to, that's what they still do and so I, like many others, believe they fully know what M stands and has stood for.

I don't really care about M, seriously I don't. So you can have the last word...

[DieGrüneHölle]

Originally Posted by tallshortguy

M originally stood for motorsports and their road going cars are what their touring car efforts would be linked to, that's what they still do and so I, like many others, believe they fully know what M stands and has stood for.

Let me know when BMW takes the S55 racing.

[fecurtis]

Originally Posted by ///M ARMY

Its a mustang.....

Let us know how you feel when Ford inevitably has a Boss 302 or some other variant that beats you around a track, either one that's straight or one with turns.

Ford has no issue targeting M3's/M4's with their higher trim Mustangs. The previous gen Boss 302 could beat an E9x M3 around a track and the straights with minimal fuss. Don't get me wrong, I'd rather an M car over a Mustang as well, but they aren't slower than M's or anything like that. They're good cars for what they're capable of and what you get provided you spring for the nicer trim levels.

[///M ARMY]

Originally Posted by fecurtis

Let us know how you feel when Ford inevitably has a Boss 302 or some other variant that beats you around a track, either one that's straight or one with turns.

Ford has no issue targeting M3's/M4's with their higher trim Mustangs. The previous gen Boss 302 could beat an E9x M3 around a track and the straights with minimal fuss.

Kool story

[fecurtis]

Originally Posted by Brunotheboxer

"M" used to mean something now it's a marketing ploy to seperate people from more of their money. As soon as BMW started to put the M badge on suv's that was the end of it.

Before that people said BMW forgot what "M" meant when they shoved a V8 in one.

Before that people said that BMW forgot what "M" meant when they had the gall to put a SMG in one (granted, I've read nothing good about those gearboxes, but they've been replaced by the DCG units).

And while not specific to M, many people thought BMW had lost its why when they started turbocharging their cars.

Things change, usually for the better. The M SUV's aren't bad for what they are, Porsche and MB makes high performance versions of their SUV's, should BMW not want a piece of that action? They sell like crazy and make the manufacturers a ton of money.