# Maybe TD is right . . .



## bmw2003325ci (Sep 17, 2002)

is there something in the air today?

Can't we all just get along?

remember:

opinions are like a$$holes... everybody has one. but not everyone wants to see it.


----------



## Mr. The Edge (Dec 19, 2001)

jk330i said:


> *I know a "POSEUR" who has 19's, bodykit, etc, running the 1/4 in low 12's with that setup. He will eat your non-posing e36 anyday. Call that a Poseur or a beast... hmmm *


but can he turn?


----------



## Guest (Jan 15, 2003)

jk330i said:


> *I know a "POSEUR" who has 19's, bodykit, etc, running the 1/4 in low 12's with that setup. He will eat your non-posing e36 anyday. Call that a Poseur or a beast... hmmm *


Where? On the street? Because anyone showing up at the track or autox with a car done up like that will get laughed at out loud.

And you haven't told me anything about this car (not even what model) to suggest that it would so anything of the sort. 19s add weight. Bodykits add weight.

The way I see it, performance mods are done for the benefit of the driver. Cosmetic mods are done to impress others (hell, you can't see most of them from behind the wheel anyway). Being concerned with impressing others is a sign of insecurity.


----------



## Mr. The Edge (Dec 19, 2001)

TD said:


> *19s add weight. *


there's lots of aftermarket 19's lighter than stock 18s or even 17s


----------



## rwg (May 10, 2002)

*pokes his head in from Autotrader.com, sees on-going bickering that has nothing to do with driving feel, is fairly certain body kits don't add driving feel, and goes back to Autotrader.com*


----------



## Guest (Jan 15, 2003)

atyclb said:


> *there's lots of aftermarket 19's lighter than stock 18s or even 17s *


And if every post covered every exception to every stated fact, we'd have to post 10 pages worth of text to convey a simple point.

Damn.

All things being equal, 19s weigh more.


----------



## Plaz (Dec 19, 2001)

TD said:


> *And if every post covered every exception to every stated fact, we'd have to post 10 pages worth of text to convey a simple point.
> 
> Damn.
> *


That seems to be the MO, in the OT section anyway.


----------



## Guest (Jan 15, 2003)

Plaz said:


> *That seems to be the MO, in the OT section anyway.  *


Actually, it's Bono Boy's preferred method of giving me shit. Nitpick.


----------



## Mr. The Edge (Dec 19, 2001)

TD said:


> *Actually, it's Bono Boy's preferred method of giving me shit. Nitpick. *


sorry volvo guy


----------



## ObD (Dec 29, 2001)

:lmao: :lmao: :lmao:    :angel: :angel: :angel:


The Ultimate Doody Machine:


----------



## srn1985 (Jan 15, 2003)

*Umm.....No*



TD said:


> *Where? On the street? Because anyone showing up at the track or autox with a car done up like that will get laughed at out loud.
> 
> And you haven't told me anything about this car (not even what model) to suggest that it would so anything of the sort. 19s add weight. Bodykits add weight.
> 
> The way I see it, performance mods are done for the benefit of the driver. Cosmetic mods are done to impress others (hell, you can't see most of them from behind the wheel anyway). Being concerned with impressing others is a sign of insecurity. *


This is probably the most ignorant response I have ever heard...first of all there are 19's that weight and tons less that smaller rims and look good at the same time...are you serious body kit weight is insignificant...some are actually built for better of the car to help force air and corespond to the design of car...people like fast cars that is why they go to the track so they might see a BMW and no expect it to run 12's but if it does they like it no matter...also to say that people do cosmetic mods just to get attention and fill an insecurity is just the stupidest and most ignorant assumption...people do things they like and do for their own benefit not cause they maybe are insecure....next time think before you speak!!.......Oh by the way fanatics are unique and are original maybe unlike some peeps!!!   :flipoff:


----------



## Mathew (Feb 8, 2002)

*Re: Umm.....No*



srn1985 said:


> *first of all there are 19's that weight and tons less that smaller rims and look good at the same time*


What the hell did you just say???????

Before all you fanatic groupies come over here and try to defend yourselves, make sure we can understand what you're trying to say.


----------



## srn1985 (Jan 15, 2003)

*Re: Re: Umm.....No*



Mathew said:


> *What the hell did you just say???????
> 
> Before all you fanatic groupies come over here and try to defend yourselves, make sure we can understand what you're trying to say. *


meant to say......there are 19's that weigh a ton less than some smaller rims while still lookin good at same time..typing to fast.


----------



## Guest (Jan 15, 2003)

ObD said:


> *:lmao: :lmao: :lmao:    :angel: :angel: :angel:
> 
> The Ultimate Doody Machine: *


Do you mind clarifying?

Was this directed at me, pdz or E36 enthusiasts in general?

Amd what, specifically, is up your ass?


----------



## jk330i (Aug 13, 2002)

oh jeez darn, my favorite car, the e46 M3 must definitely be a "POSEUR" in all your unworthy elitist bandful eyes since it runs on 18s and has an elegant style. And I guess to all of you it's just an e36 poseur wannabe although it'll leave such a fantastic drivers car like the almighty e36 M3 in the dust.

Oh and a what disgrace!! and the M3 CSL will carry 19" wheels OH MY LORD what a sad thought. It will slower the car indefinitely indeed!!! :yikes: the horror!


----------



## Guest (Jan 15, 2003)

jk330i said:


> *oh jeez darn, my favorite car, the e46 M3 must definitely be a "POSEUR" in all your unworthy elitist bandful eyes since it runs on 18s and has an elegant style. And I guess to all of you it's just an e36 poseur wannabe although it'll leave such a fantastic drivers car like the almighty e36 M3 in the dust.
> 
> Oh and a what disgrace!! and the M3 CSL will carry 19" wheels OH MY LORD what a sad thought. It will slower the car indefinitely indeed!!! :yikes: the horror! *


You are showing your ignorance. The CSL is only running 19s because the rims need to be that large to fit over the car's massive brakes. The only reason the highest performance cars have rims taht large is to fit over the brakes.

All things being equal, smaller rims weigh less. If you can make lightweight 19s, that same material/process would make even lighter 17s. Unsprung weight is bad.

19s on a 325 are strictly for show and have enough of a weight impact that they actually slow the car down.


----------



## Plaz (Dec 19, 2001)

jk330i said:


> *oh jeez darn, my favorite car, the e46 M3 must definitely be a "POSEUR" in all your unworthy elitist bandful eyes since it runs on 18s and has an elegant style. And I guess to all of you it's just an e36 poseur wannabe although it'll leave such a fantastic drivers car like the almighty e36 M3 in the dust.
> 
> Oh and a what disgrace!! and the M3 CSL will carry 19" wheels OH MY LORD what a sad thought. It will slower the car indefinitely indeed!!! :yikes: the horror! *


Dude, you must have some issues if you're getting this worked up over this. What are you trying to prove? Why are you so defensive?

Most of the people here hold a certain disdain for cosmetic-only mods. Most of the people over at fanatics hold a certain disdain for cars that appear to be stock. What's the big deal?

Personally, I'd like my car to look stock, but perform to a higher level. The only mod I have that could be considered cosmetic-only is my 35% tint... which I actually find to be quite functional as well. Oh, and debadging, if that's really considered a "mod."

:dunno:


----------



## ·clyde· (Dec 26, 2001)

TD said:


> * Nitpick. *






:bawling:

:bigpimp:


----------



## rwg (May 10, 2002)

I am not surprised that a thread that agreed with TD's often stated and much maligned beliefs regarding the e36 and e46 has caused such bickering. I am surprised about the subject matter of the bickering. I will, however, not feed the mod trolls.

I thought it was time for a status report. So far, I have located 4 CPO'd '99 M3s that are in somewhat of a close enough range to buy. Unfortunately, the one that's best for mileage and location is white. It's time to search for private sales, I think.


----------



## srn1985 (Jan 15, 2003)

rwg said:


> *I am not surprised that a thread that agreed with TD's often stated and much maligned beliefs regarding the e36 and e46 has caused such bickering. I am surprised about the subject matter of the bickering. I will, however, not feed the mod trolls.
> 
> I thought it was time for a status report. So far, I have located 4 CPO'd '99 M3s that are in somewhat of a close enough range to buy. Unfortunately, the one that's best for mileage and location is white. It's time to search for private sales, I think. *


Alpine white is not a bad color at all....see it in person(if you haven't already) and I think you will come to like it ....my next bimmer will be alpine white with Imola red interior!!! Get it you'll like it!


----------



## Guest (Jan 15, 2003)

atyclb said:


> *pay attention TD:
> 
> he was CLEARLY comparing the E36 to the E46, and he stated 400 extra pounds, falling victim to the oft-misunderstood differences between the weight of the E36 and E46 *


And so the difference is 275 not 400. Does that change the subjective impressions he expressed? Again, whether you agree with them or not, his impressions were quite clear.


----------



## Guest (Jan 15, 2003)

atyclb said:


> *oh, and difference between e36m3 (US) and e46m3 is "only" 93 HP.
> 
> "only". *


Again, quit muddying the issue. When he posted praising the E36 M3. he posted regarding feel. He fully conceded the HP edge the E46 M3 enjoys up the thread.

As you said, pay attention. The praise was for the E36 M3's feel.

If all you care about is HP to weight ratios, get a Camaro.


----------



## Mr. The Edge (Dec 19, 2001)

TD said:


> *And so the difference is 275 not 400. Does that change the subjective impressions he expressed? Again, whether you agree with them or not, his impressions were quite clear. *


His impressions would have been skewed if he had an extra passenger in the E46M3, which he implied by stating 400 pounds.

So 240 pounds, 400 pounds...you're saying that the difference shouldn't change his impressions, so I guess in a way you're saying that 160 extra pounds is insignificant.

cool :thumbup:


----------



## Mr. The Edge (Dec 19, 2001)

TD said:


> *Again, quit muddying the issue. When he posted praising the E36 M3. he posted regarding feel. He fully conceded the HP edge the E46 M3 enjoys up the thread.
> 
> As you said, pay attention. The praise was for the E36 M3's feel.
> 
> If all you care about is HP to weight ratios, get a Camaro. *


better yet, I'll get a Trans Am!


----------



## Mr. The Edge (Dec 19, 2001)

TD said:


> *
> 
> If all you care about is HP to weight ratios, get a Camaro. *


Actually I care about the whole package. One popular way of measuring overall performance is Nurburgring times. I'll try and see if I can dig up some numbers on that later. Maybe nate has them handy.


----------



## Guest (Jan 15, 2003)

atyclb said:


> *His impressions would have been skewed if he had an extra passenger in the E46M3, which he implied by stating 400 pounds.
> 
> So 240 pounds, 400 pounds...you're saying that the difference shouldn't change his impressions, so I guess in a way you're saying that 160 extra pounds is insignificant.
> 
> cool :thumbup: *


In standard atyclb fashion, you're putting words inmy mouth again.

I hear disparaging things about the E36 M3 from time to time without ever taking them personally. Why does the suggestion that the E46 M3 is something other than the perfect car seem to offend you so much?


----------



## Mr. The Edge (Dec 19, 2001)

TD said:


> *In standard atyclb fashion, you're putting words inmy mouth again.
> 
> I hear disparaging things about the E36 M3 from time to time without ever taking them personally. Why does the suggestion that the E46 M3 is something other than the perfect car seem to offend you so much? *


stop taking me so literally--nothing anyone says here about any car offends me.


----------



## nate (Dec 24, 2001)

atyclb said:


> *Actually I care about the whole package. One popular way of measuring overall performance is Nurburgring times. I'll try and see if I can dig up some numbers on that later. Maybe nate has them handy.
> 
> *


You're trying to get me into this? 

Ok, just for kicks

8:18 Z8 (400 PS, 1651 kg) 
8:22 M Coupe (321 PS, 1445 kg) 
8:22 M3 E46 (343 PS, 1584 kg) 
8:28 M5 (400 PS, 1833 kg)) 
8:32 M Roadster (321 PS, 1410 kg) 
8:34 Z3 Coupe 3.0 (231 PS, 1350 kg) 
8:35 M3 E36 w/SMG (321 PS, 1515 kg)


----------



## Mr. The Edge (Dec 19, 2001)

nate328Ci said:


> *You're trying to get me into this?
> 
> Ok, just for kicks
> 
> ...


what about the US E36 M3--that one listed is the one with the regular engine.


----------



## Guest (Jan 15, 2003)

atyclb said:


> *Actually I care about the whole package. One popular way of measuring overall performance is Nurburgring times. I'll try and see if I can dig up some numbers on that later. Maybe nate has them handy.
> 
> *


Ah, the infamous "It's faster" argument.

Who cares? Really.

Technology is always progressing to make the human aspect of any activity less relevent to the participants overall success rate. Special BIG golf drivers, oversize tennis racquets with big sweet spots, and cars that are so packed with capability, features and HP that they compensate for many driver shortcomings.

I really could not care less about comparable 'Ring times. My car will not be on it EVER. And I have no plans to ever competitively race my car.

Rather it brings me great joy every day for how it feels, not how fast it would theoretically lap the 'Ring.

And when I do autox it, I enjoy the challenge of milking it for all it's worth.


----------



## nate (Dec 24, 2001)

atyclb said:


> *what about the US E36 M3--that one listed is the one with the regular engine. *


If you much know, I would bet on quite a bit slower, maybe barely faster than a 328Ci


----------



## pdz (Nov 17, 2002)

if it were strictly about HP and, for example, one were to forego some feedback and "feel" for the sake of HP?

i would be driving a 996tt right now or a 993tt. both cars are both pigs. and the 996tt, for all of its prowess and speed? lacks the feel of the "run of the mill" c2. there is a reason why the GT2 and GT3 exist. because it is expected from that marque....and i subscribe to that school of thought.

to continue: how many instances have i seen firsthand where people have warped e46m3 brakes at the track? 3 separate track days and the temperatures were st.louis hot, not TX hot. M5's have worse brade fade.

which brings us back to why: if you ask me? it's costcutting on BMW's part firstly, and weight of the said cars secondly. weight is part of "feel". i do not have many friends who weigh 275 pounds, but i can tell you that when i have an extra passenger who weighs 200 pounds, the car feels very different in acceleration (this has been true for any of the last 4 or 5 cars that i have owned).


----------



## nate (Dec 24, 2001)

TD said:


> *
> 
> I really could not care less about comparable 'Ring times. My car will not be on it EVER. And I have no plans to ever competitively race my car.
> 
> ...


You don't think that there are many E46 M3 owners that feel the same way?

How do you know you wouldn't enjoy the E46 at auto-x or the track? You've never tried :dunno: :dunno:


----------



## Mr. The Edge (Dec 19, 2001)

TD said:


> *Ah, the infamous "It's faster" argument.
> 
> Who cares? Really.
> 
> ...


see, we agree


----------



## pdz (Nov 17, 2002)

'ring times!

i like to follow these, too.

why does a 996 with "only" 296hp run the 'ring in 8:19-8:20?

why does a 996 with "only" 320hp run it in 8:15-8:17?

or a GT3 "only" run the ring in about 8flat?

my answer? probably better brakes and lighter cars. so, there goes your HP argument. and how about feel? the M coupe with the old 321hp powerplant is right there with the e46m3......a superior chassis with a far superior engine.......and all for naught on the 'ring compared to the e36/8.......


----------



## Guest (Jan 15, 2003)

nate328Ci said:


> *You don't think that there are many E46 M3 owners that feel the same way?
> 
> How do you know you wouldn't enjoy the E46 at auto-x or the track? You've never tried :dunno: :dunno: *


In typical Nate fashion (whatever it is that Nate has is inherently better than everything else), you always argue pro-E46. The E46 is faster (ad naseum).

How many times do I have to say I don't care about faster? I doubt doubt for one second that the E46 M3 is faster. But I care about better feel. And no one will be able to convince me the E46 M3 has better feel.


----------



## nate (Dec 24, 2001)

TD said:


> *In typical Nate fashion (whatever it is that Nate has is inherently better than everything else), you always argue pro-E46. The E46 is faster (ad naseum). *






TD said:


> *
> How many times do I have to say I don't care about faster? I doubt doubt for one second that the E46 M3 is faster. But I care about better feel. And no one will be able to convince me the E46 M3 has better feel. *


Where in the quoted post did I say anything about speed? re-read and get back to me


----------



## Mr. The Edge (Dec 19, 2001)

TD said:


> *And no one will be able to convince me the E46 M3 has better feel. *


close-minded bigot


----------



## Guest (Jan 15, 2003)

nate328Ci said:


> *
> 
> Where in the quoted post did I say anything about speed? re-read and get back to me *


And where o' where am I going to get this E46 M3 to autox?


----------



## nate (Dec 24, 2001)

atyclb said:


> *close-minded bigot *


:lmao: :lmao:


----------



## ·clyde· (Dec 26, 2001)

mbr129 said:


> *Being that as much as I love cars and would like to autox a lot I have never had a fast car, my aspirations are low.
> *


You don't need a fast car to autocross...all you need is a car that will pass tech. A lot more can be learned about fast driving by using a slow car than by using a quick car.


----------



## Mr. The Edge (Dec 19, 2001)

JST said:


> *Really?
> 
> "There is no float, no light darty steering, no clunky manual transmission and no springy clutch. Whether you want to debate the e46 and it's less functional computer, single zone climate control"
> 
> ...


agreed, if steering feel was the sole reason for choosing a car, I wouldn't get an E46 M3. I'd get an E30 for sure


----------



## JST (Dec 19, 2001)

atyclb said:


> *agreed, if steering feel was the sole reason for choosing a car, I wouldn't get an E46 M3. I'd get an E30 for sure *


Which is, of course, not at all what I said.

So much for my stab at rationality.


----------



## Mr. The Edge (Dec 19, 2001)

JST said:


> *The near-universal opinion of everyone who has driven the E36 M3 back-to-back with *any* flavor E46 is that the E36 feels better. Not that its faster, or that it handles better, or that its a better overall car--those statements range from untrue to debatable. But I have yet to see anyone post that the E46 wins in the feel department.
> 
> I suspect you would reach the same conclusion if you drove one. You may still decide that the various attributes of the E46 are such that it is the better overall car, but I seriously doubt that you would be able to drive an E36 M3 and disagree with the contention that it had a more direct, connected feel than the E46.
> 
> ...


so I ask, why would TD settle for the numb unresponsiveness of the E36 M3 when the near-universal opinion of everyone who has driven the E36 M3 back to back with the E30M3 is that the E30 M3 feels better?


----------



## ·clyde· (Dec 26, 2001)

atyclb said:


> *so I ask, why would TD settle for the numb unresponsiveness of the E36 M3 when the near-universal opinion of everyone who has driven the E36 M3 back to back with the E30M3 is that the E30 M3 feels better? *


He has said a number of times that he needs a four door car. How many 4 door E30M3s have you seen?

Once again, BMW is the UCM (Ultimate Compromise Machine), no matter what your needs and wants are.


----------



## JST (Dec 19, 2001)

atyclb said:


> *so I ask, why would TD settle for the numb unresponsiveness of the E36 M3 when the near-universal opinion of everyone who has driven the E36 M3 back to back with the E30M3 is that the E30 M3 feels better? *


As I said, "You may still decide that the various attributes of the E46 are such that it is the better overall car, but I seriously doubt that you would be able to drive an E36 M3 and disagree with the contention that it had a more direct, connected feel than the E46."

Similarly, TD and I have both decided that the overall attributes of the E36 M3 make it a better overall car, as a daily driver, than the E30 M3. Plus, as Clyde points out, you can get neither a 4 door E30 M3 nor a convertible E30 M3 (in this country). But I wouldn't for a minute argue that the E30 M3 doesn't have a better overall feel, and I suspect TD wouldn't, either.

Note the critical difference: You have yet to concede that the E36 M3 has a more direct, connected feel than the E46, a point that is seen as simple fact amongst the majority of the BMW community. If you were to say, "yeah, I've driven the E36 M3, and while it does feel more connected and less isolated, the extra power, performance and comfort of the E46 really are nice to have," I would not disagree. But, for some reason, you maintain that the E46 is better in every way than its progenitor, a point that is simply incorrect.


----------



## Mr. The Edge (Dec 19, 2001)

JST said:


> *
> 
> Note the critical difference: You have yet to concede that the E36 M3 has a more direct, connected feel than the E46. *


how would I know? I've never driven one, so I'd never make that claim  

you DC boys are taking all of this way too seriously. I enjoy my car, you enjoy your cars. I really couldn't care less what people think of my car, and don't really care that much about your cars.

No big deal


----------



## mbr129 (Aug 23, 2002)

[email protected] said:


> *You don't need a fast car to autocross...all you need is a car that will pass tech. A lot more can be learned about fast driving by using a slow car than by using a quick car. *


I know... But my car is a slush box (I still regret not looking harder to find a manual, but the car was in mint shape and I got seduced:banghead: ). Anyway, my point was that I don't need an M3 even if I could afford it. In fact, as you alluded to above, the 330i may already be too much performance for me (right now), but I do plan on keeping the BMW I buy for quite some time and I don't want to feel the need to upgrade soon after.


----------



## Guest (Jan 15, 2003)

atyclb said:


> *how would I know? I've never driven one, so I'd never make that claim
> 
> you DC boys are taking all of this way too seriously. I enjoy my car, you enjoy your cars. I really couldn't care less what people think of my car, and don't really care that much about your cars.
> 
> No big deal *


Then why do you need to start with all of this crap every time it comes up. On page 2 of the thread, after pdz posted his views on the comparative "feel" of a number of enthusiast vehicles, you got very defensive. And that's what started this.

As JST highlighted, everyone concedes that the E46 M3 is faster (including all of us E36 M3 owners) yet you refuse to concede the other fact most everyone concedes, that the E36 M3 has better feel.

Knowing that arranging an E36 M3 test drive is MUCH easier than arranging an E46 M3 test drive, I really think you ought to test drive one.

*In fact, I'll make you a deal. You test drive an E36 M3 (not jsut around the block but out on some of those roads you commute on) and I promise I'll test drive an E46 M3. We will drive the cars knowing that we will both post our (HONEST) impressions, good and bad. No pride, just honesty. Deal?*


----------



## johnlew (Dec 25, 2001)

TD said:


> *
> Knowing that arranging an E36 M3 test drive is MUCH easier than arranging an E46 M3 test drive*


Why is that?


----------



## JST (Dec 19, 2001)

johnlew said:


> *Why is that? *


Used E36 M3s are thick as flies, and dealers have no compunction giving test rides. In my experience, driving an E46 M3 involves a lot of cajolling and arguing, as dealers routinely forbid even serious, repeat customers from test driving these cars (even those on the used car lot).


----------



## nate (Dec 24, 2001)

johnlew said:


> *Why is that? *


 Older, cheaper car...

On used car lots, more common...


----------



## Guest (Jan 15, 2003)

johnlew said:


> *Why is that? *


Are you asking this seriously, or are you :stickpoke:-ing again?

Various members have posted accounts of their quests to arrange test drives of E46 M3s. Many/most dealers won't let customers off the steet (even prior M3 customers from the same dealership) test drive their E46 M3s.


----------



## nate (Dec 24, 2001)

TD said:


> *
> 
> In fact, I'll make you a deal. You test drive an E36 M3 (not jsut around the block but out on some of those roads you commute on) and I promise I'll test drive an E46 M3. We will drive the cars knowing that we will both post our (HONEST) impressions, good and bad. No pride, just honesty. Deal? *


I think that's a good idea


----------



## AB (Jan 11, 2002)

You know, to watch TD so vigorously defend the E36 M3 is not much different than his railings on the SEAN PENN thread about Hollywood opinions. 

The same thing he rails on Sean Pean about can EASILY be said about himself w/respect to BMW marketing, car design, SMG (which he's never driven), the E46 and a host of other subjects on which he thinks his opinion is the end all and that we really even care. Take each of his Hollywood comments in the thread, irrelevant, delusional, who cares?, etc. and you've got him pegged by many members (not ALL, happy Plaz?) of this board.

While I agree with him about Hollywood, he fails to recognize the same in the mirror. Granted, he may have automotive expertise in certain areas, but he hardly speaks for the whole or even the majority of this forum or enthusiast car market, otherwise BMW sales would be in the tank. 

I think much of his snobbery is related to *lackaloot*; he simply cannot afford to be open-minded and vulnerable to being unable to afford his material desires. Snobbery is a veiled defense of vulnerability.


----------



## Mr. The Edge (Dec 19, 2001)

TD said:


> *
> 
> As JST highlighted, everyone concedes that the E46 M3 is faster (including all of us E36 M3 owners) yet you refuse to concede the other fact most everyone concedes, that the E36 M3 has better feel.
> * [/B]


I wouldn't know, because I haven't driven one


----------



## jk330i (Aug 13, 2002)

after reading ryan's post....
somebody got


----------



## johnlew (Dec 25, 2001)

TD said:


> *Are you asking this seriously, or are you :stickpoke:-ing again?
> 
> Various members have posted accounts of their quests to arrange test drives of E46 M3s. Many/most dealers won't let customers off the steet (even prior M3 customers from the same dealership) test drive their E46 M3s. *


I guess I missed those posts, and yes, I was asking seriously. At the dealer closest to me, I have never seen an E36 M3 on the used car lot, or even many E36s period. In fact, I rarely see an E36 M3 on the road here. I could walk into the dealer above and if they had an E46 M3 available, take it for a test drive on the spot. Must have to do with how I'm perceived by the dealer and the population of E36 M3s in this city.


----------



## Guest (Jan 15, 2003)

atyclb said:


> *I wouldn't know, because I haven't driven one *


Did you deliberately overlook my proposition?


----------



## Mr. The Edge (Dec 19, 2001)

TD said:


> *Then why do you need to start with all of this crap every time it comes up. On page 2 of the thread, after pdz posted his views on the comparative "feel" of a number of enthusiast vehicles, you got very defensive. And that's what started this.
> *


I corrected his mistake. How is that being defensive?


----------



## pdz (Nov 17, 2002)

Ryan330Ci said:


> *You know, to watch TD so vigorously defend the E36 M3 is not much different than his railings on the SEAN PENN thread about Hollywood opinions.
> 
> The same thing he rails on Sean Pean about can EASILY be said about himself w/respect to BMW marketing, car design, SMG (which he's never driven), the E46 and a host of other subjects on which he thinks his opinion is the end all and that we really even care. Take each of his Hollywood comments in the thread, irrelevant, delusional, who cares?, etc. and you've got him pegged by many members (not ALL, happy Plaz?) of this board.
> 
> ...


oh, i think quite the opposite. i think snobbery usually means some semblance of a value system and this is "positive" snobbery. the superficial snobbery is what you allude to, and could be argued for what M has become marketing versus "motorsport". for superficial snobs.

snobbery in the positive sense means a discriminating person. i fully concur with TD and share his views on the "feel" of the prior generation of cars versus the new ones. there is an element to subjectivity to this, but there is a great deal of objectivity to this as well. there is, obviously, more sound insulation, more deadened or road noise and more weight on the newer, safer cars. does this mean ultimately they cannot be driven well and enjoyed by 90% of people? not at all, but it does mean the car has lost a lot of road feedback.

have you, for example, had the opportunity to drive all 3 cars we are debating? the e30/e36/e46 m3's? it would be helpful as opposed to having no baseline, to informing us what you think so at least we can see if you're just an e46 sycophant and this is your first BMW or if you have a history and can chronologically follow the cars, too.


----------



## Guest (Jan 15, 2003)

johnlew said:


> *I guess I missed those posts, and yes, I was asking seriously. At the dealer closest to me, I have never seen an E36 M3 on the used car lot, or even many E36s period. In fact, I rarely see an E36 M3 on the road here. I could walk into the dealer above and if they had an E46 M3 available, take it for a test drive on the spot. Must have to do with how I'm perceived by the dealer and the population of E36 M3s in this city. *


Perceptions of individuals has nothing to do with this. JST (who is a clean cut, professional guy old enough to not be called a kid) got snubbed at the dealership where he bought his E36 M3 and this snub was with respect to test driving a USED E46 M3.

I don't think a more "mature" person is going to get significantly different treatment with respect to this.

It may be geographically dependent, I don't know. But it's not you, John.


----------



## Mr. The Edge (Dec 19, 2001)

TD said:


> *Did you deliberately overlook my proposition? *


no--now, which E36 M3's am I supposed to avoid? I don't want to have my impressions attacked because I test drove a bad one.


----------



## Mr. The Edge (Dec 19, 2001)

pdz said:


> *
> 
> have you, for example, had the opportunity to drive all 3 cars we are debating? the e30/e36/e46 m3's? it would be helpful as opposed to having no baseline, to informing us what you think so at least we can see if you're just an e46 sycophant and this is your first BMW or if you have a history and can chronologically follow the cars, too. *


I've driven as many of those as TD has


----------



## johnlew (Dec 25, 2001)

TD said:


> *Perceptions of individuals has nothing to do with this. JST (who is a clean cut, professional guy old enough to not be called a kid) got snubbed at the dealership where he bought his E36 M3 and this snub was with respect to test driving a USED E46 M3.
> 
> I don't think a more "mature" person is going to get significantly different treatment with respect to this.
> 
> It may be geographically dependent, I don't know. But it's not you, John. *


I beg to differ, Tom.


----------



## Guest (Jan 15, 2003)

atyclb said:


> *no--now, which E36 M3's am I supposed to avoid? I don't want to have my impressions attacked because I test drove a bad one. *


Oh come on. Don't drive a slushie or one with absurdly high miles for it's age. And try to stick to cars on dealer lots (not slimy used car lots). And if you want to compare rigidity, don't drive a convertible.

But I didn't really need to tell you any of this.


----------



## Guest (Jan 15, 2003)

pdz said:


> *oh, i think quite the opposite. i think snobbery usually means some semblance of a value system and this is "positive" snobbery. the superficial snobbery is what you allude to, and could be argued for what M has become marketing versus "motorsport". for superficial snobs.
> 
> snobbery in the positive sense means a discriminating person. i fully concur with TD and share his views on the "feel" of the prior generation of cars versus the new ones. there is an element to subjectivity to this, but there is a great deal of objectivity to this as well. there is, obviously, more sound insulation, more deadened or road noise and more weight on the newer, safer cars. does this mean ultimately they cannot be driven well and enjoyed by 90% of people? not at all, but it does mean the car has lost a lot of road feedback.
> 
> have you, for example, had the opportunity to drive all 3 cars we are debating? the e30/e36/e46 m3's? it would be helpful as opposed to having no baseline, to informing us what you think so at least we can see if you're just an e46 sycophant and this is your first BMW or if you have a history and can chronologically follow the cars, too. *


Ryan doesn't deserve this complete of a response. He feels the need to try to "expose my hypocricy" even when there is none to expose. Scroll through his posts. About 45% are lame shots at me ant the other 55% are :thumbup: s in reply to posts by others that he perceived to be shots at me.

He contributes nothing but still takes himself way too seriously.


----------



## Mr. The Edge (Dec 19, 2001)

TD said:


> *Oh come on. Don't drive a slushie or one with absurdly high miles for it's age. And try to stick to cars on dealer lots (not slimy used car lots). And if you want to compare rigidity, don't drive a convertible.
> 
> But I didn't really need to tell you any of this. *


I could have sworn you gave someone advice in another thread about driving E36 M3's and which ones to avoid. It was sometime yesterday, in fact. That's the only reason I asked.


----------



## Mr. The Edge (Dec 19, 2001)

since there's no guarantee that you can get a test drive of an E46 M3, I suggest you go first, then I will, so that you can live up to your part of the deal


----------



## nate (Dec 24, 2001)

atyclb said:


> *since there's no guarantee that you can get a test drive of an E46 M3, I suggest you go first, then I will, so that you can live up to your part of the deal
> 
> *


Does TD look too much like a young thug to get a test drive? :dunno:

We know a trendy guy like you would have no problems. 

TD, just wear your Prada loafers and you should be fine :bigpimp:


----------



## Guest (Jan 15, 2003)

atyclb said:


> *since there's no guarantee that you can get a test drive of an E46 M3, I suggest you go first, then I will, so that you can live up to your part of the deal
> 
> *


It's nice to see that you have no desire to have the perspective yourself that you so often chide me for not having. You should want to test drive the E36 M3 for your own enlightenment regardless of what I do.

Just assure me that you will and I will assure you that I will as well. I am a man of my word.


----------



## Guest (Jan 15, 2003)

nate328Ci said:


> *Does TD look too much like a young thug to get a test drive? :dunno:
> 
> We know a trendy guy like you would have no problems.
> 
> TD, just wear your Prada loafers and you should be fine :bigpimp: *


If they have a used one at VOB, I'm sure I can get a test drive.


----------



## pdz (Nov 17, 2002)

.....time may be night when it is simpler to get a demo ride in an e46m3.

sitting right at the dealer this am, whilst waiting for inspxn 1, there was an m3, an m5, a z8, a plethora of 745's, z4's.....you name it, they had it.

would bet if you caught them near the end of the month in this environment and were serious enough, it could be arranged.

...particularly if you pull up in an e36m3 looking like you might jump "up".


----------



## Mr. The Edge (Dec 19, 2001)

nate328Ci said:


> *Does TD look too much like a young thug to get a test drive? :dunno:
> 
> We know a trendy guy like you would have no problems.
> 
> TD, just wear your Prada loafers and you should be fine :bigpimp: *


actually, bad news. Unfortunately, there is only one BMW dealership within 70 miles of me, and all they have is a 1999 M3 convertible with 50,000 miles on it. Not a worthy competitor, I'm afraid.


----------



## nate (Dec 24, 2001)

TD said:


> *Just assure me that you will and I will assure you that I will as well. *


  :banghead:


----------



## Mr. The Edge (Dec 19, 2001)

TD said:


> *It's nice to see that you have no desire to have the perspective yourself that you so often chide me for not having. You should want to test drive the E36 M3 for your own enlightenment regardless of what I do.
> 
> Just assure me that you will and I will assure you that I will as well. I am a man of my word. *


Who said I wouldn't? You yourself said that even getting a test drive of an E46 M3 has proven near impossible.

Unfortunately, no E36 M3's available in my area right now. I'll keep looking.


----------



## pdz (Nov 17, 2002)

nate328Ci said:


> *Does TD look too much like a young thug to get a test drive? :dunno:
> 
> We know a trendy guy like you would have no problems.
> 
> TD, just wear your Prada loafers and you should be fine :bigpimp: *


are prada loafers too subtle?

what about those black patent leather gucci loafers with those very bling bling gold emblems on 'em.


----------



## nate (Dec 24, 2001)

TD said:


> *If they have a used one at VOB, I'm sure I can get a test drive. *


Then go for it :dunno:


----------



## nate (Dec 24, 2001)

pdz said:


> *are prada loafers too subtle?
> 
> what about those black patent leather gucci loafers with those very bling bling gold emblems on 'em. *


You're right, Gucci would be better...

Don't forget to wear your Ferragamo suit


----------



## Mr. The Edge (Dec 19, 2001)

another thing--

you have to remember that I live in a pretty trendy town. I bet most of the E36 M3's that the dealership would ever get would be automatics.


----------



## Guest (Jan 15, 2003)

atyclb said:


> *actually, bad news. Unfortunately, there is only one BMW dealership within 70 miles of me, and all they have is a 1999 M3 convertible with 50,000 miles on it. Not a worthy competitor, I'm afraid. *


As E36 M3s are almost all too old to CPO, if you did a CPO search at bmwusa.com, you wouldn't get many hits. Do you need me to do a search and find cars for you to test drive? I know you are more internet saavy than that.

An since you seem to be able to pull ANY post made by anyone over the past many years on any specific subject, I know you'd be able to easily tell me how many times you've chided me for not having driven the E46 M3.


----------



## Guest (Jan 15, 2003)

nate328Ci said:


> *Then go for it :dunno: *


I just called. They only have one E46 M3 and it's a convertible.

If that counts in the eyes of the E46 M3 boosters, I'll drive it. But I'm not going to waste my time if, after the fact, I get replies to the tune of, "Oh, that was a convertible. It's heavier and not the real performance chocie so it doesn't count."

So, you guys tell me.

(See for yourself- http://www.vobbmw.com/frameset2.asp?LINK=UsedCars&MAIN=Used_vehicle_search)


----------



## CD-55 (Dec 19, 2001)

atyclb said:


> *since there's no guarantee that you can get a test drive of an E46 M3, I suggest you go first, then I will, so that you can live up to your part of the deal
> 
> *


E46 M3's have the same piggyness plagues all other variants of the E46. The car is heavy, quiet, dampened, stable, prone to understeer, disconnected, comfortable, and most of all BORING!

Not to say I don't enjoy my E46 330i and not that it does not have a leg up on a Honda Accord, but it has none of the raw edginess and driving feel of my E30 325is. In my opinion the feel of E36's is somewhere in between E30 and E46.

E46 M3's are fast, comfortable, and confidence inspiring, but no production E46 has ever been a real drivers car.


----------



## nate (Dec 24, 2001)

TD said:


> *I just called. They only have one E46 M3 and it's a convertible.
> 
> If that counts in the eyes of the E46 M3 boosters, I'll drive it. But I'm not going to waste my time if, after the fact, I get replies to the tune of, "Oh, that was a convertible. It's heavier and not the real performance chocie so it doesn't count."
> 
> ...


There are many other dealerships in DC, find a coupe.

If you do drive the cabrio, just remember what you just said...:thumbup:


----------



## Mr. The Edge (Dec 19, 2001)

TD said:


> *As E36 M3s are almost all too old to CPO, if you did a CPO search at bmwusa.com, you wouldn't get many hits. Do you need me to do a search and find cars for you to test drive? I know you are more internet saavy than that.
> 
> An since you seem to be able to pull ANY post made by anyone over the past many years on any specific subject, I know you'd be able to easily tell me how many times you've chided me for not having driven the E46 M3. *


I checked at my dealers website of their current inventory

(and, I'd bet at least 13 times.  )

But, I have never made a criticism of the E36 M3 that could only be known to me if I test drove one myself.

You on the other hand, have made COUNTLESS posts (more than 13) about the E46 M3 that you couldn't possibly know without actually test driving one.

The onus is clearly on you here.


----------



## Mr. The Edge (Dec 19, 2001)

TD said:


> *I just called. They only have one E46 M3 and it's a convertible.
> 
> If that counts in the eyes of the E46 M3 boosters, I'll drive it. But I'm not going to waste my time if, after the fact, I get replies to the tune of, "Oh, that was a convertible. It's heavier and not the real performance chocie so it doesn't count."
> 
> ...


no wait for a manual coupe, folled by an SMG coupe


----------



## Guest (Jan 15, 2003)

atyclb said:


> *I checked at my dealers website of their current inventory
> 
> (and, I'd bet at least 13 times.  )
> 
> ...


This double-standard is getting pretty transparent.


----------



## Mr. The Edge (Dec 19, 2001)

TD said:


> *This double-standard is getting pretty transparent. *


only to you. I have no idea what you're talking about, and you didn't respond to my assertion. Very clever.


----------



## nate (Dec 24, 2001)

CD-55 said:


> *E46 M3's have the same piggyness plagues all other variants of the E46. The car is heavy, quiet, dampened, stable, prone to understeer, disconnected, comfortable, and most of all BORING!
> 
> Not to say I don't enjoy my E46 330i and not that it does not have a leg up on a Honda Accord, but it has none of the raw edginess and driving feel of my E30 325is. In my opinion the feel of E36's is somewhere in between E30 and E46.
> 
> E46 M3's are fast, comfortable, and confidence inspiring, but no production E46 has ever been a real drivers car. *


Right, that's why EVO magazine called it the best driver's BMW ever and professional drivers complain that they can't drive it without going sideways...

The non-M E36s that I have driven handle a lot like my car, just feel smaller (primarily width). But, they have same basic handling properties and are far from the "raw" bullshit that people put out.


----------



## JPinTO (Dec 20, 2001)

I'll agree that getting E46 M3 test drives is darn near impossible.

Getting E36 M3 test drives is much easier as you simply find a reasonable private one in auto trader and go look at it.

Driving dynamics on the E36 M3 are better than the E46's... but you do pay a price for it in lagging technology.... safety, lighting, chassis rigidity. 

But, by far the biggest negative for me personally is taking a gamble on a used car. Otherwise, as few CPO's are available (CPO is of dubious value anyway) ... you are left with quite a project to verify it's history. 

Still keeping an eye out though...


----------



## Guest (Jan 15, 2003)

nate328Ci said:


> *Right, that's why EVO magazine called it the best driver's BMW ever and professional drivers complain that they can't drive it without going sideways...
> 
> The non-M E36s that I have driven handle a lot like my car, just feel smaller (primarily width). But, they have same basic handling properties and are far from the "raw" bullshit that people put out. *


Hold on. You have not driven an E36 M3 after all of the shit you spew on the E36 vs E46 front?

I think you need to get your ass on a test drive as well.

You chime in in agreement when atyclb picks on me for commenting on the E46 M3's driving dynamics without having driven one now you're doing the same regarding the E36 M3.


----------



## jk330i (Aug 13, 2002)

CD-55 said:


> *E46 M3's have the same piggyness plagues all other variants of the E46. The car is heavy, quiet, dampened, stable, prone to understeer, disconnected, comfortable, and most of all BORING!
> 
> *


e46 m3 boring? For being just under a couple hundred pounds more and having the extra 93HP I'd say I want the fat PIG.


----------



## Guest (Jan 15, 2003)

JPinTO said:


> *I'll agree that getting E46 M3 test drives is darn near impossible.
> 
> Getting E36 M3 test drives is much easier as you simply find a reasonable private one in auto trader and go look at it.
> 
> ...


But we're not even talking about buying one, just being able to accurately and intelligent compare and contrast the two.


----------



## Mr. The Edge (Dec 19, 2001)

TD said:


> *Hold on. You have not driven an E36 M3 after all of the shit you spew on the E36 vs E46 front?
> 
> I think you need to get your ass on a test drive as well.
> 
> You chime in in agreement when atyclb picks on me for commenting on the E46 M3's driving dynamics without having driven one now you're doing the same regarding the E36 M3. *


again, you have made numerous claims about the E46M3 that you couldn't possibly know without actually driving one. There is a BIG difference. That should be clear (transparent, in fact) to everyone.


----------



## Guest (Jan 15, 2003)

jk330i said:


> *e46 m3 boring? For being just under a couple hundred pounds more and having the extra 93HP I'd say I want the fat PIG. *


This coming from a guy with a slushbox-equipped non-M E46.


----------



## Mr. The Edge (Dec 19, 2001)

at this rate, TD will be right behind nate at number 2 by day's end.


----------



## JPinTO (Dec 20, 2001)

TD said:


> *But we're not even talking about buying one, just being able to accurately and intelligent compare and contrast the two. *


Since I've never driven an E46 M3... I can only comment intelligently on E36M3 vs E46 non-M3's. As you know, the E36M3 is a raw,edgy version of the E46. Definitely a better driving car... but I can't make that extension to the E46M3 as it's reportedly a different animal from the non-M's.

Good luck trying to find one to test drive.


----------



## CD-55 (Dec 19, 2001)

TD, here is what I predict about your test drive.

I bet the E46 M3CIC you drive will be 99% the same as your E46 330i.

Differences will be:

-Noise, largely due to the lack of a solid roof. I can imagine it will be really annoying to having to deal with that Civic racer exhaust note! When the first M3 turned up at our autocross and I heard that pathetic exhaust sound, I knew I didn’t want one.

-The Sport button will add some appreciated peppiness.

-333HP will get you going faster!

Other than that… you won’t know it from your 330i.


----------



## jk330i (Aug 13, 2002)

TD said:


> *This coming from a guy with a slushbox-equipped non-M E46. *


And your point is? 
I test drove a silver 5 spd '99 E36 M3 coupe, before purchasing my slushbox.


----------



## CD-55 (Dec 19, 2001)

jk330i said:


> *e46 m3 boring? For being just under a couple hundred pounds more and having the extra 93HP I'd say I want the fat PIG. *


Oink Oink

It is not much more piggy that other E46's, but all E46' are piggy compared to E36's and E30's.


----------



## pdz (Nov 17, 2002)

i think that automatics should not count, and opinions based on automatic e46s or e36s are not valid in this "feel" argument.

and why? 

because you're missing out on half of the experience that is the "feel".

double-clutching, blipping the throttle, and upshifting or downshifting are important and thusly, we should preclude automatics or people who have only driven automatics in any guise from this debate. they would have almost no idea of all of the things they are missing, or how much of the fun that torque converter is sapping from the experience.

while SMG has its pro's and con's: it still does these basic things and you can feel them ongoing, i.e. blipping the throttle for downshifts and clutching. so SMG drivers still get that roadfeel.


----------



## Mr. The Edge (Dec 19, 2001)

CD-55 said:


> *Oink Oink
> 
> It is not much more piggy that other E46's, but all E46' are piggy compared to E36's. *


and all E36's are REALLY piggy compared to E30s


----------



## johnlew (Dec 25, 2001)

jk330i said:


> *And your point is?
> *


#3

Main Entry: snob 
Pronunciation: 'snäb
Function: noun
Etymology: origin unknown
Date: 1781
1 British : COBBLER
2 : one who blatantly imitates, fawningly admires, or vulgarly seeks association with those regarded as social superiors
3 a : one who tends to rebuff, avoid, or ignore those regarded as inferior b : one who has an offensive air of superiority in matters of knowledge or taste


----------



## Alex Baumann (Dec 19, 2001)

atyclb said:


> *and all E36's are REALLY piggy compared to E30s *


and all E30s are pig compared to E12s

and all E12s are pig compared to Dixi


----------



## Mr. The Edge (Dec 19, 2001)

atyclb said:


> *again, you have made numerous claims about the E46M3 that you couldn't possibly know without actually driving one. There is a BIG difference. That should be clear (transparent, in fact) to everyone. *


Did you deliberately overlook my assertion?


----------



## CD-55 (Dec 19, 2001)

atyclb said:


> *and all E36's are REALLY piggy compared to E30s *


E36's retain much more of a perceived nimbleness, but the E46's just went Boss Hog on comfort and refinement.

You could probably balance a quarter on a SMG selector knob and rev the engine without it falling off. Just one example of how numb the E46's are.


----------



## Mr Janne (Sep 29, 2002)

I haven´t driven the US M3 but I have driven the European M3 3,0 and 3,2 very much and I don´t think they feel very different. And I have also driven a couple of E46 M3´s. I think the E46 is more fun to drive. It has responds even better on the throttle, it feels more balanced and has nicer faster steering. The grip with the M-differential is amazing, much better than the E36´s, and the brakes are better. In fact one of the most fun cars I´ve driven is a Kelleners tuned M3 E46 with R-tires. Well, that´s my opinion.

If you want a fun practical 4-door with incredible steering feel, get a E28 M5. It´s so much fun to drive 

Btw, regarding the size of the brake discs that someone mentioned. Bigger isn´t always better and huge brake discs seems to be "styling" too these days. Those big discs also add weight.


----------



## nate (Dec 24, 2001)

TD said:


> *Hold on. You have not driven an E36 M3 after all of the shit you spew on the E36 vs E46 front?
> 
> I think you need to get your ass on a test drive as well.
> 
> You chime in in agreement when atyclb picks on me for commenting on the E46 M3's driving dynamics without having driven one now you're doing the same regarding the E36 M3. *


I've never driven any M3, but have driven all the non-M variants E30, E36, E46. Thats what I have been using as a comparison. :dunno:

I never said anything about the handling of the E36 M3 :dunno:


----------



## Mr. The Edge (Dec 19, 2001)

CD-55 said:


> *E36's retain much more of a perceived nimbleness, but the E46's just went Boss Hog on comfort and refinement.
> 
> You could probably balance a quarter on a SMG selector knob and rev the engine without it falling off. Just one example of how numb the E46's are. *


"Our current Car of the Year, the E46 M3 is incredibly talented. It has Porsche 911 levels of performance and driver involvement yet is over 15 grand cheaper and offers true four-seat practicality. After the disappointing dynamics of the E36 it was a weclome return to form, while the 343bhp 3.25-litre straight-six is one of the most charismatic and awesome engines in production anywhere"


----------



## Mr. The Edge (Dec 19, 2001)

and just to calm you E36 sycophants down, if I wanted to spend under $35K on a car and didn't have an aversion to used cars, I would definitely buy an E36 M3 sedan :thumbup:


----------



## nate (Dec 24, 2001)

CD-55 said:


> *E36's retain much more of a perceived nimbleness, but the E46's just went Boss Hog on comfort and refinement.
> 
> *


:lmao:

What a load of bullshit, the handling is nearly identical to an E46 :lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao:


----------



## Mr. The Edge (Dec 19, 2001)

Mr Janne said:


> *I haven´t driven the US M3 but I have driven the European M3 3,0 and 3,2 very much and I don´t think they feel very different. And I have also driven a couple of E46 M3´s. I think the E46 is more fun to drive. It has responds even better on the throttle, it feels more balanced and has nicer faster steering. The grip with the M-differential is amazing, much better than the E36´s, and the brakes are better. In fact one of the most fun cars I´ve driven is a Kelleners tuned M3 E46 with R-tires. Well, that´s my opinion.
> 
> If you want a fun practical 4-door with incredible steering feel, get a E28 M5. It´s so much fun to drive
> 
> Btw, regarding the size of the brake discs that someone mentioned. Bigger isn´t always better and huge brake discs seems to be "styling" too these days. Those big discs also add weight. *


thanks you for your insightful comments, as one of the few on the board who has driven both enough to make such comparisons


----------



## JPinTO (Dec 20, 2001)

atyclb said:


> *and just to calm you E36 sycophants down, if I wanted to spend under $35K on a car and didn't have an aversion to used cars, I would definitely buy an E36 M3 sedan :thumbup: *


I agree.. If you could find one that A) Wasn't Beaten B) Was well maintained C) wasn't overpriced. Oh look.... a piggy just flew by my office window.


----------



## Mr Janne (Sep 29, 2002)

Alex Baumann said:


> *and all E30s are pig compared to E12s
> 
> and all E12s are pig compared to Dixi
> 
> *


So the Dixi must be the most fun BMW of all?

Alpina should make a tuning-kit for it now


----------



## nate (Dec 24, 2001)

JPinTO said:


> *Oh look.... a piggy just flew by my office window. *


Since when did E46 M3s have a flying option :dunno:


----------



## ·clyde· (Dec 26, 2001)

[rant]

I've got the answer to all the problems and concerns brought up thus far in this thread:

Everyone east of the Rockies assemble (with cars) at Deals Gap for a day of playing swappy car for Tail of the Dragon runs. At the end of a day, find a bar and hoist a few while comparing observations. Return home, log on to bimmerfest.com and resume bickering, but doing so with a real world understanding of what the other guy is driving.

For those west of the Rockies, pick another place and do the same.

Come on, now...start making excuses why you (each of you) can't/won't do it.

Pheh! 

[/rant]


----------



## Alex Baumann (Dec 19, 2001)

Mr Janne said:


> *So the Dixi must be the most fun BMW of all?
> 
> Alpina should make a tuning-kit for it now *


Well, almost. Actually, BMW mountain bikes has the best drive feel ever. You are connected to the road like no other vehicle


----------



## Mr. The Edge (Dec 19, 2001)

[email protected] said:


> *[rant]
> 
> I've got the answer to all the problems and concerns brought up thus far in this thread:
> 
> ...


Oktoberfest is in Austin this year. C'mon down


----------



## nate (Dec 24, 2001)

Alex Baumann said:


> *Well, almost. Actually, BMW mountain bikes has the best drive feel ever. You are connected to the road like no other vehicle  *


Yea, and I bet the Dixi and bicycle can lap any roadcourse faster than an E46 M3, much less a 328Ci.

Probably even faster than an E21 320i! :yikes:


----------



## pdz (Nov 17, 2002)

Mr Janne said:


> *I haven´t driven the US M3 but I have driven the European M3 3,0 and 3,2 very much and I don´t think they feel very different. And I have also driven a couple of E46 M3´s. I think the E46 is more fun to drive. It has responds even better on the throttle, it feels more balanced and has nicer faster steering. The grip with the M-differential is amazing, much better than the E36´s, and the brakes are better. In fact one of the most fun cars I´ve driven is a Kelleners tuned M3 E46 with R-tires. Well, that´s my opinion.
> 
> If you want a fun practical 4-door with incredible steering feel, get a E28 M5. It´s so much fun to drive
> 
> Btw, regarding the size of the brake discs that someone mentioned. Bigger isn´t always better and huge brake discs seems to be "styling" too these days. Those big discs also add weight. *


the 6 throttle bodies on the e46m3 engine make the car night and day in terms of responsiveness compared to any other e46 engine, so we agree, it is more responsive. we all applaud the concept (maybe question the execution) of the M differential. i dunno about steering feel, though, i like the older calibration better.

as far as brakes: it is not ultimately the size, as you say. it would prefer the same sized brakes but with more clamping force, i.e. more pistons, up front and in the rear with OEM slotted rotors or cross-drilled.


----------



## JPinTO (Dec 20, 2001)

atyclb said:


> *Couldn't they hype the E46 without saying this?:
> 
> "After the disappointing dynamics of the E36 it was a welcome return to form" *


BMW Car is a UK mag, correct? So they aren't even freaking out over the difference between the neutered E36 M engine and the 333hp E46 engine.


----------



## Mr. The Edge (Dec 19, 2001)

Mr Janne said:


> *But the E46 doesn´t set new level of performance. It´s faster than the old M3 but not by much.
> 
> Actually, that is a little what happend when the E36 came out back in late 1992. Most magazines compared it to the E30 M3 and said the new car wasn´t as much fun at all compared to it. *


good point. CD was thinking of the step up from the US (240 HP) version to the E46 M3, but BMW CAR obviously was comparing the 321 HP car to the 343 HP one


----------



## Jetfire (Jun 20, 2002)

Well hey -- at least this thread is both car-related and LONGER than the pledge discussion elsewhere on the fest. 

I think both sides of this battle are getting so entrenched in their rhetoric that they've lost sight of the argument. The statement "my car is better" is not going to win anything, and yet these are the arguments I see:

"my car is better, it's lighter"
"my car is better, it's got more HP"
"my car is better, it feels better"
"my car is better, it's faster on the ring"

One car is certainly lighter and feels better, while the other is more powerful and is generally faster around the Ring. So which one is actually better? I answered this question myself here:

http://www.bimmerfest.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=9033

Note that I have not yet driven an E46 M3. But every E46 M3 owner I know (NOT a member of bf) has described the experience as driving a faster, more nimble E46...but still driving an E46. Let's face it - it's a more luxurious car and turning in a 2-minute Nurburgring time would not make one bit of a difference to someone who dislikes the sensation of driving an E46 platform.

The E36 is more direct and is NOT the most direct-feeling BMW ever made. But it's possible to declare that the E36 is far better in terms of feel than the E46 without being bludgeoned with suggestions that the poster go buy an Isetta for the feel.

Likewise, the E46 M3 is more powerful and is NOT the most powerful BMW ever made. But it's possible to declare that the E46 is faster without being told to go slap on a SC or buy an M5 or Z06 for the speed.

Sorry guys, nobody's going to win this one. Not even a full week of swapping cars will allow these camps to come to consensus. If you bought an E36 M3 because you wanted the fastest Bimmer on the block, you screwed up. I don't care if you can't afford an E46 M3, you bought the car for the wrong reason. Likewise, if you bought an E46 M3 because you wanted to feel more like Andretti and less like Jeeves, you also screwed up. I can't argue with the difficulty of finding a preowned car in good shape, but I can say that I had relatively little trouble when I allowed myself to pay above the bargain basement price for a used M3.


----------



## Guest (Jan 15, 2003)

Jetfire said:


> *Well hey -- at least this thread is both car-related and LONGER than the pledge discussion elsewhere on the fest.
> 
> I think both sides of this battle are getting so entrenched in their rhetoric that they've lost sight of the argument. The statement "my car is better" is not going to win anything, and yet these are the arguments I see:
> 
> ...


Thank you for this very sane and well-expressed summation.


----------



## AF (Dec 21, 2001)

Jetfire made some good points . . . but I've got one question for you guys

Is anyone working today or is it some type of holiday that I forgot to close my office for ? ? ? ? 

:lmao: :lmao: :lmao:


----------



## Mr. The Edge (Dec 19, 2001)

TD said:


> *Thank you for this very sane and well-expressed summation. *


I agree, #2


----------



## AF (Dec 21, 2001)

I vote that everyone here stop talking about the E36 vs E46 
M3 and go and test drive a car with REAL road feel . . . 

the M Coupe (you know the model, the funny looking Z3 coupe with the M engine)


----------



## JPinTO (Dec 20, 2001)

I think the more relevent question is... without discussing skateboards, bicycles, cars from the 80's, and E36M3's.

What 2003 production car is going to give all the safety, convenience, luxury, reasonable cost and performance everyone wants while retaining a good level of feel without being boring?

Does it exist at all? Or is the E46M3 as close as it's going to get.

When the 2007 E90 comes out... will people be reminiscing about the good old days of the E46?


----------



## AF (Dec 21, 2001)

JPinTO said:


> *I think the more relevent question is... without discussing skateboards, bicycles, cars from the 80's, and E36M3's.
> 
> What 2003 production car is going to give all the safety, convenience, luxury, reasonable cost and performance everyone wants while retaining a good level of feel without being boring?
> 
> ...


How about the Porsche 996, the Boxster, the NSX or for the under $40,000 crowd, the IS300 has some of that feel (similiar to an E36)

All of those cars I named can be used everyday, have some luxuries and are all very in touch with the road . . .


----------



## Mr. The Edge (Dec 19, 2001)

atyclb said:


> *he might just be deleting old posts, not threads. I just know he was within single digits of Alex B. when I posted my initial message about him being #2. Now he's like 95 behind.
> 
> *


still deleting...and yes, Alex's post count is going down too, so he's deleting whole threads. I'm guessing he's deleting threads where he participated the most to get the most bang for his deleting buck.

And this from a guy who chastised me so for deleting a pledge thread once...

:tsk: :tsk:

:lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao:

EDIT: TD watch: 106 posts behind alex


----------



## Mr. The Edge (Dec 19, 2001)

oops, make that 131 now


----------



## AB (Jan 11, 2002)

atyclb said:


> *I'm guessing he's deleting threads where he participated the most to get the most bang for his deleting buck.
> *


:lmao: I am *honestly* LOL'ing out loud here!


----------



## johnlew (Dec 25, 2001)

Is there shame in a high thread post count?


----------



## Mr. The Edge (Dec 19, 2001)

johnlew said:


> *Is there shame in a high thread post count? *


I can't imagine anyone would care so much that there would be shame involved. I for one never really paid any attention to them until TD kept complaining that his was so high.

:dunno:


----------



## Jetfire (Jun 20, 2002)

Alan F said:


> *How about the Porsche 996, the Boxster, the NSX or for the under $40,000 crowd, the IS300 has some of that feel (similiar to an E36)
> 
> All of those cars I named can be used everyday, have some luxuries and are all very in touch with the road . . . *


You're right, but many Porschefiles dismiss the 996 for being too piggy and luxurious. The E46 vs. E36 debate is spoken in many different languages. 

To be honest, I believe that pure performance and luxury are mutually exclusive. You can't be extracting every last drop of power from a car if it has 400 pounds of Mark Levinson audio, LCD flat screen video, champagne chiller, Kobe beef tartare maker, etc. on board. You can, however, make a very fast and nimble luxury car.

Nearly every car model tends to grow heavier with amenities as they age. Very few will actually go with a stiffer ride and fewer amenities in order to please the hardcore enthusiasts, and I can't say that I blame car manufacturers. It's just business, after all.


----------



## Mr. The Edge (Dec 19, 2001)

WOW! 214 behind now!

impressive


----------



## Guest (Jan 15, 2003)

JPinTO said:


> *
> What 2003 production car is going to give all the safety, convenience, luxury, reasonable cost and performance everyone wants while retaining a good level of feel without being boring?
> 
> Does it exist at all? Or is the E46M3 as close as it's going to get.
> ...


Your specs are still vague. 2 or 4 doors? Manual tranny required?

There are some relatively enthusiast-oriented vehicles out there, but as the 3-series has gotten softer, the new competition all are targeting the new softer E46 not the raw-er feel of the E36.

So there are a lot of cars similar to the E46 on the enthusiast scale but nothing comparable to the E36, IMO.


----------



## ObD (Dec 29, 2001)

johnlew said:


> *#3
> 
> Main Entry: snob
> Pronunciation: 'snäb
> ...


 :lmao: :angel:


----------



## Mr. The Edge (Dec 19, 2001)

TD said:


> *Your specs are still vague. 2 or 4 doors? Manual tranny required?
> 
> There are some relatively enthusiast-oriented vehicles out there, but as the 3-series has gotten softer, the new competition all are targeting the new softer E46 not the raw-er feel of the E36.
> 
> So there are a lot of cars similar to the E46 on the enthusiast scale but nothing comparable to the E36, IMO. *


How about 2 or 4 door, manual tranny RWD.


----------



## Guest (Jan 15, 2003)

atyclb said:


> *How about 2 or 4 door, manual tranny RWD. *


Of the current crop of sport sedan RWD, manual tranny offerings, most benchmarked the E46. IMO, only the IS300 benchmarked the E36.


----------



## nate (Dec 24, 2001)

TD said:


> *Of the current crop of sport sedan RWD, manual tranny offerings, most benchmarked the E46. IMO, only the IS300 benchmarked the E36. *


Have you driven an IS300?

You are probably right, the IS300 came out as the Altezza before the E46 was announced...


----------



## JST (Dec 19, 2001)

atyclb said:


> *How about 2 or 4 door, manual tranny RWD. *


If you restrict this solely to large coupes and sedans (and thus exclude the Z06 and other such vehicles), the plain and simple answer is no. On a dollar-for-dollar basis, the E46 M3 offers performance and an overall driving feel that simply blows everything similar out of the water. There is nothing else available in the United States for anything like the same money that even comes close. Every year, a raft of new competitors sporting a variety of different letters comes out, but so far none has been able to trump BMW.

This is less true with other E46s, as the competition has, overall, gotten much closer. I don't think the IS300 is that compelling, but the G35 is a hell of a car, both in coupe and (soon) in sedan flavors (when equipped with a manual, of course). Even there, though, IMHO the E46 still maintains a comfortable lead in terms of overall driving feel.

In one sense, I agree with Nate: the overall handling of the E46 M3 is very similar to that of the E36 M3, though it does feel a titch heavier. The real significant difference between the E46 and E36 M cars is in the steering and throttle, but since the driver makes most inputs through these interfaces, it is a very noticeable difference.

I like the E36. I wish they still built it. I also like the E46, but I don't like the cost increase, I don't like the lack of a spare, and I don't like the steering and throttle. The extra power is almost entirely moot in my everyday driving. So, for me, the extra power and amenities aren't moving in the right direction. For many, they are.

As I've said before, assuming that the ZHP gets close to the M suspension in terms of being snubbed down and controlling body roll, that is probably the compromise I'm looking for. It has some negatives, but it doesn't have the big cost disadvantage imposed by the M3.


----------



## AB (Jan 11, 2002)

Two hundred thirty nine.


----------



## Guest (Jan 15, 2003)

nate328Ci said:


> *Have you driven an IS300?
> 
> You are probably right, the IS300 came out as the Altezza before the E46 was announced... *


Yes. When I still had the E46. And it was another straw that helped seal my E46's fate. I drove the IS300 (w/ a slushie no less) and enjoyed it more than my 5-spd 330i SP. I drove it at the Edmunds event where you took the car out (alone) around an autox course in a stadium parking lot. You could go as fast as you wanted. I flogged that car and loved it.

If the IS300 wagon came with a manual... Who cares what it looks like? It's got good feel.


----------



## bluer1 (May 30, 2002)

Jetfire said:


> *
> *snip*
> 
> Sorry guys, nobody's going to win this one. Not even a full week of swapping cars will allow these camps to come to consensus.
> ...


I agree, but I'm still willing to give it a try.
Did somebody say "car-swapping?"
:thumbup:


----------



## Mr. The Edge (Dec 19, 2001)

JST said:


> *If you restrict this solely to large coupes and sedans (and thus exclude the Z06 and other such vehicles), the plain and simple answer is no. On a dollar-for-dollar basis, the E46 M3 offers performance and an overall driving feel that simply blows everything similar out of the water. There is nothing else available in the United States for anything like the same money that even comes close. Every year, a raft of new competitors sporting a variety of different letters comes out, but so far none has been able to trump BMW.
> 
> This is less true with other E46s, as the competition has, overall, gotten much closer. I don't think the IS300 is that compelling, but the G35 is a hell of a car, both in coupe and (soon) in sedan flavors (when equipped with a manual, of course). Even there, though, IMHO the E46 still maintains a comfortable lead in terms of overall driving feel.
> 
> ...


 I agree with all that, except your concern with the E46 M3's throttle.

:thumbup:


----------



## Mr. The Edge (Dec 19, 2001)

TD said:


> *
> 
> If the IS300 wagon came with a manual... Who cares what it looks like? It's got good feel. *


I thought you really liked how it looked?


----------



## Guest (Jan 15, 2003)

atyclb said:


> *I thought you really liked how it looked? *


With respect to the wagon, yes I do. But many others don't. Hence my comment.


----------



## Mr. The Edge (Dec 19, 2001)

TD said:


> *With respect to the wagon, yes I do. But many others don't. Hence my comment. *


I assume you'd make the same comment about the Z4 then


----------



## pdz (Nov 17, 2002)

JST said:


> *If you restrict this solely to large coupes and sedans (and thus exclude the Z06 and other such vehicles), the plain and simple answer is no. On a dollar-for-dollar basis, the E46 M3 offers performance and an overall driving feel that simply blows everything similar out of the water. There is nothing else available in the United States for anything like the same money that even comes close. Every year, a raft of new competitors sporting a variety of different letters comes out, but so far none has been able to trump BMW.
> 
> This is less true with other E46s, as the competition has, overall, gotten much closer. I don't think the IS300 is that compelling, but the G35 is a hell of a car, both in coupe and (soon) in sedan flavors (when equipped with a manual, of course). Even there, though, IMHO the E46 still maintains a comfortable lead in terms of overall driving feel.
> 
> ...


i'd rather buy the WRX STi, which would seem to be in the nebulous "GT category" of the M3, live with a cheap interior, and have fun with the $25k in pocket. it is a car done "right" and after i own that car, i would love to revisit this issue re: road feel and the E46 chassis.


----------



## Guest (Jan 15, 2003)

atyclb said:


> *I assume you'd make the same comment about the Z4 then *


Please stop with the games. It's getting old.

There is a limit to what one can look past when one is enthusiastic about a car's driving experience. I could look past the offensive traits of the IS300. I cannot look past the sheer repulsiveness of the Z4. It's Aztek ugly.


----------



## Mr. The Edge (Dec 19, 2001)

TD said:


> *There is a limit to what one can look past when one is enthusiastic about a car's driving experience. I could look past the offensive traits of the IS300. I cannot look past the sheer repulsiveness of the Z4. It's Aztek ugly. *


thanks for the clarification


----------



## JPinTO (Dec 20, 2001)

Alan F said:


> *How about the Porsche 996, the Boxster, the NSX or for the under $40,000 crowd, the IS300 has some of that feel (similiar to an E36)
> 
> All of those cars I named can be used everyday, have some luxuries and are all very in touch with the road . . . *


The 996 isn't priced reasonably... the Boxster is tiny... NSX is overpriced and equally useless as a Boxster. Notice how few pine for the MZCoupe.... which likely has more "feel" than any E36.

The IS300 isn't very competitive with acceleration performance closer to a 325 than a 330 despite the beefier engine. Perhaps the upcoming IS430 will be more competitive.

True sports cars aren't that favored around here because of the lack of practicality.

There are a lot of appealing cars coming up: CTS V8, IS430, S4 V8, S60R but each and every one of them is going to be more pig-like than the E46M3.

Perhaps the E46 M3 CSL is the "ultimate" in 2003. Ultimate in pricing also.


----------



## pdz (Nov 17, 2002)

JPinTO said:


> *The 996 isn't priced reasonably... the Boxster is tiny... NSX is overpriced and equally useless as a Boxster. Notice how few pine for the MZCoupe.... which likely has more "feel" than any E36.
> 
> The IS300 isn't very competitive with acceleration performance closer to a 325 than a 330 despite the beefier engine. Perhaps the upcoming IS430 will be more competitive.
> 
> ...


the 996 is not priced reasonably and they depreciate rather horribly. used 996s are not bad at all as cars to kick around as commuters or weekenders. and they do just fine at the track. feel is dilute compared with 993s, but the powerband is flatter. unbeknown to most, though are the gearbox and engine ills from the first 2 years which seem to haunt even the 02+ cars.

but i would still look very seriously at a 2002 or newer "used" 911 before i drove home in an e46m3. stuttgart has addressed the weight issue as the 996s are lighter yet stiffer than the 993s, and the brakes are awesome from the factory. combine that with displacement and the second gen watercoolers are nice cars. not great cars, but less compromised than the m3 which is constrained by many things (pricepoint, for example). i would gladly drive a $65k to $70k M3 if it weighed less than the prior generation, was stiffer, and had more power plus brakes. gladly.

cars and pricing are not rational, after all. they can be, but not necessarily so.


----------



## rwg (May 10, 2002)

ACK!! You go away for a few hours and look what happens!!

This is really very simple for me. I drove an e36 M3 before I bought my 330i. At the time, I thought they were similar in most aspects, but the 330 came with more luxury, more comfort (yes, those are two different things), and most of all, hadn't been abused by somebody else. So I bought one.

Since that time, I have been to several driving schools and spent countless hours enjoying my car. I LOVE my car. I love keeping it clean, I love doing the mechanical stuff I am not afraid to do, and I love driving it. I used to read posts about how much better the last generation was, shake my head, and move on to the next thread.

Yesterday, I drove an e36 m3 again. With more driving ability, more knowledge of what I like, and more focus on aspects of driving that I enjoy. Some of the comments TD has made over and over again I now agree with. I understand them. I have felt what he is talking about. It's all about the drive. I don't care about speed, lap times, auto-x times, or competive anything. I care about how much I enjoy the drive.

I am now looking for an e36 M3. I don't know that I will buy one. I don't know that the HP package on the 330i won't fix all of the characteristics that I think could be improved on the e46. I don't know that I will be able to find a CPO car that I like at the time I can realistically expect a dealer to work with my current lease. But I know that I will explore the option. Today, I hope it works out.

It's not about the e46 M3 v. the e36 M3. It's not about other people deciding they like what they have better than any aging, flexible, unsafe platorm. It's not about "mine is better than yours." It's about two similarly powered, similarly appointed, similarly priced cars that I can afford. I happen to like the driving characteristics of the one more than the other. In a big way. So much so that I am still beside myself from the drive. TD apparently likes similar qualities, as do others that have driven both.

Oh well. At least the bickering switched from mods to something relevant.


----------



## AF (Dec 21, 2001)

I've got an even better question . . . when is Nate & Aty gonna give up on this debate with Tom . . . they will NEVER open up his mind to the E46 

What I want to know is this . . . why do they need to get Tom to change his mind ????


----------



## Guest (Jan 15, 2003)

Alan F said:


> *I've got an even better question . . . when is Nate & Aty gonna give up on this debate with Tom . . . they will NEVER open up his mind to the E46
> 
> What I want to know is this . . . why do they need to get Tom to change his mind ???? *


What I really want to know is why these discussions have to always take such a venemous turn? rwg posted his observations. Yet the moment an E36 becomes the topic of discussion, it's time to post pictures of dog turds and take cheap shots. Are some of you guys that insecure in your purchasing decisions? I really don't get it.

I don't know why we cannot have a discussion of the relative strengths and weaknesses of different models without people taking it personally. Each model/generation has inherent strengths and weaknesses. Why can't we discuss them without anyone's manhood feeling threatened?


----------



## pdz (Nov 17, 2002)

TD said:


> *What I really want to know is why these discussions have to always take such a venemous turn? rwg posted his observations. Yet the moment an E36 becomes the topic of discussion, it's time to post pictures of dog turds and take cheap shots. Are some of you guys that insecure in your purchasing decisions? I really don't get it.
> 
> I don't know why we cannot have a discussion of the relative strengths and weaknesses of different models without people taking it personally. Each model/generation has inherent strengths and weaknesses. Why can't we discuss them without anyone's manhood feeling threatened? *


agree with this sentiment. good lord, if i got offended everytime the e36/8 got skewered........


----------



## Alex Baumann (Dec 19, 2001)

You could ask the E36 owners on various german BMW boards and you could read similar comments on how nimble, tossable, light the E36 is. 

So what ?. BMW's handling hasn't been beaten yet. And this has been proved thousands times in hundreds of tests. So hang in there 

I don't believe that TD is going to change his mind even after driving 10 E46M3s (Why should he anyway ?). The guy has given up his E46 after how many months ? Five ?It's not a decision that new car owners make everyday, especially after spending that much $$$$ for something. So I'm sure he had good reasons for it.

I also agree that these kind of discussions can be made without getting personal. We can give facts, compare them, list pros and cons without loosing the temper.


----------



## Guest (Jan 15, 2003)

Alex Baumann said:


> *You could ask the E36 owners on various german BMW boards and you could read similar comments on how nimble, tossable, light the E36 is.
> 
> So what ?. BMW's handling hasn't been beaten yet. And this has been proved thousands times in hundreds of tests. So hang in there
> 
> ...


For the record, I had the 330i for ~15 months and ~ 13K miles.


----------



## Hugie Wangie (Dec 12, 2002)

Why do you care that I care?



Alex Baumann said:


> *Why do you care ? *


----------



## ObD (Dec 29, 2001)

rwg said:


> * Why don't you guys blast me?*










:lmao: :lmao:


----------



## Guest (Jan 16, 2003)

TD said:


> *What I really want to know is why these discussions have to always take such a venemous turn? rwg posted his observations. Yet the moment an E36 becomes the topic of discussion, it's time to post pictures of dog turds and take cheap shots. Are some of you guys that insecure in your purchasing decisions? I really don't get it.
> *


:dunno:


----------



## Hugie Wangie (Dec 12, 2002)

Do you wanna whine a little more? :dunno:



TD said:


> *:dunno: *


----------



## AF (Dec 21, 2001)

TD said:


> *:dunno: *


oh oh . . . . I think you just broke rule # 25 . . . no quoting yourself and then leaving a comment


----------



## AF (Dec 21, 2001)

Alan F said:


> *oh oh . . . . I think you just broke rule # 25 . . . no quoting yourself and then leaving a comment *


I agree . . . you shouldn't break that rule :lmao: :lmao:


----------



## Plaz (Dec 19, 2001)

Alan F said:


> *I agree . . . you shouldn't break that rule :lmao: :lmao: *


I'm telling you... 4 guys and me. That's it.


----------



## nate (Dec 24, 2001)

TD said:


> *:dunno: *


Are you talking to me? :dunno:


----------



## Dr. Phil (Dec 19, 2001)

Plaz said:


> *I'm telling you... 4 guys and me. That's it.  *


:lmao: :lmao:

There used to be 5 but for some reason Al has disappeared


----------



## Plaz (Dec 19, 2001)

PM 325xiT said:


> *:lmao: :lmao:
> 
> There used to be 5 but for some reason Al has disappeared  *


I'm not convinced that you, Al, Alex, Mike, johnlew, Sabrina, and Ausgang aren't all the same person yet.


----------



## Alex Baumann (Dec 19, 2001)

Plaz said:


> *I'm not convinced that you, Al, Alex, Mike, johnlew, Sabrina, and Ausgang aren't all the same person yet.  *


:lmao: :lmao:

what about Ripsnort ?


----------



## Guest (Jan 16, 2003)

Alan F said:


> *oh oh . . . . I think you just broke rule # 25 . . . no quoting yourself and then leaving a comment *


Ah man, then atyclb is in BIG trouble. He quotes himself in about half of his posts.


----------



## nate (Dec 24, 2001)

TD said:


> *Ah man, then atyclb is in BIG trouble. He quotes himself in about half of his posts. *


clean your mail box


----------



## Dr. Phil (Dec 19, 2001)

Plaz said:


> *I'm not convinced that you, Al, Alex, Mike, johnlew, Sabrina, and Ausgang aren't all the same person yet.  *












Hey nothing wrong with you list, until you called me Mike  :flipoff:


----------



## AF (Dec 21, 2001)

nate328Ci said:


> *clean your mail box *


Whatever you have to say can be said here

just remember . . . we're your buds


----------



## Guest (Jan 16, 2003)

nate328Ci said:


> *clean your mail box *


Done. That ought to last a couple of days.


----------



## nate (Dec 24, 2001)

Alan F said:


> *Whatever you have to say can be said here
> 
> just remember . . . we're your buds
> 
> ...


We all live in a yellow submarine...a yellow submarine...a yellow submarine...We all live in a yellow submarine...a yellow submarine...a yellow submarine...

:thumbup:


----------



## AF (Dec 21, 2001)

Plaz said:


> *I'm telling you... 4 guys and me. That's it.  *


Plaz . . . I'm starting to agree with you . . .

Why can't we just find out who has what names ? ? ?


----------



## Plaz (Dec 19, 2001)

Alan F said:


> *Whatever you have to say can be said here
> 
> just remember . . . we're your buds
> 
> ...


That looks like siamese triplets!


----------



## vexed (Dec 22, 2001)

PM 325xiT said:


> *
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That's no way to talk about your brother:angel:


----------



## nate (Dec 24, 2001)

PM 325xiT said:


> *Hey nothing wrong with you list, until you called me Mike  :flipoff:
> 
> *


What the hell are you guys talking about

I don't get it...

I guess that I'm just slow :dunno: :banghead:


----------



## Plaz (Dec 19, 2001)

Alex Baumann said:


> *:lmao: :lmao:
> 
> what about Ripsnort ?  *


Well, if you're all Rip as well, then you must also be spidey, dred, ronrich... oh, the hits they just keep on a-comin'! :lmao:


----------



## Guest (Jan 16, 2003)

Plaz said:


> *Well, if you're all Rip as well, then you must also be spidey, dred, ronrich... oh, the hits they just keep on a-comin'! :lmao: *


Actually, spidey and dred *could* be the same guy. He's only spidey when he's ON his meds...


----------



## AF (Dec 21, 2001)

nate328Ci said:


> *What the hell are you guys talking about
> 
> I don't get it...
> 
> I guess that I'm just slow :dunno: :banghead: *


you had to be there . . . on another topic, remember when I posted the good bye thread to you


----------



## AF (Dec 21, 2001)

vexed said:


> *That's no way to talk about your brother:angel: *


ok . . . now I'm confused did you say brother or lover :lmao: :lmao:


----------



## nate (Dec 24, 2001)

Alan F said:


> *you had to be there . . . on another topic, remember when I posted the good bye thread to you
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Oh THAT thread, I just didn't look in there when it got big 

I though it might have been while I was at sea...


----------



## vexed (Dec 22, 2001)

Alan F said:


> *ok . . . now I'm confused did you say brother or lover :lmao: :lmao: *


You think they








:dunno:


----------



## Plaz (Dec 19, 2001)

TD said:


> *Actually, spidey and dred *could* be the same guy. He's only spidey when he's ON his meds...  *


:lmao:

Or before they've been consumed with alcohol, like they say not to on the label?


----------



## AF (Dec 21, 2001)

vexed said:


> *You think they
> 
> 
> 
> ...


no they don't do that . . . they do this










:lmao: :lmao: :lmao:


----------



## Dr. Phil (Dec 19, 2001)

Alan F said:


> *ok . . . now I'm confused did you say brother or lover :lmao: :lmao: *


Watch it Donny  

None of that open minded stuff for me :flipoff: :flipoff:


----------



## AF (Dec 21, 2001)

PM 325xiT said:


> *Watch it Donny
> 
> None of that open minded stuff for me :flipoff: :flipoff: *


Well at least you didn't call me Kenny . . .


----------



## Dr. Phil (Dec 19, 2001)

Alan F said:


> *Well at least you didn't call me Kenny . . .
> 
> 
> 
> ...


:thumbup:

All in fun Alan, nice to mix it up with you again. Been to long


----------



## AF (Dec 21, 2001)

PM 325xiT said:


> *:thumbup:
> 
> All in fun Alan, nice to mix it up with you again. Been to long  *


No doubt :thumbup:

I got a feeling of the good old days again . . .


----------



## ObD (Dec 29, 2001)

_Originally posted by TD on 01-15-2003_










My hijack pic has been hijacked. My usual sense of humor prevails! :lmao: :lmao: :lmao:


----------



## AB (Jan 11, 2002)

king of trolls said:


> *What I really want to know is why these discussions have to always take such a venemous turn?
> 
> Because people know how you feel about the E46. Everytime I lurk on this board, there you are, taking cheap shots at the E46. The E46 is a piggy, the E46 is this and that and so on, every month or every two weeks lately you remind some poor bastard why the E46 sucks. What do you expect?? most people in here own an E46 including myself. People could have a civilized conversation if you didn't always insult the E46. Some people work hard for their car, to some is their dream machine and to some they could give a rat's ass what others think about their car (this would be me, Plaz and others) as long as they like it. So don't be so cynical! Take it like a man! *


Great summation, which encompasses 90%+ of my beef with him. All this negative attention and shots at him are not by accident. He still does NOT get that. He asks "Why do these debates always wind up being about ME?" Duh! Look at the condescending and inflammatory posting you do. Nobody likes a smart-ass.


----------



## Guest (Jan 16, 2003)

ObD said:


> *
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That explains a lot.

:lmao: :lmao:


----------



## Mr. The Edge (Dec 19, 2001)

> _Originally posted by atyclb_
> *helloooooo...helloooooooo....helloooooooo *


huh?


----------



## nate (Dec 24, 2001)

TD said:


> *That explains a lot.
> 
> :lmao: :lmao: *


:lmao:

bimmerfest rule #254, never link from TD's webspace for fear of reprisal :lmao:


----------



## AF (Dec 21, 2001)

ObD said:


> *
> 
> 
> 
> ...


huh ? ? What happened to the hijacked pic you had on before ? ?


----------



## nate (Dec 24, 2001)

Alan F said:


> *huh ? ? What happened to the hijacked pic you had on before ? ? *


You much be a bit slow tonight

He linked from TD's webspace...TD put this pic in the place of the other one...


----------



## AF (Dec 21, 2001)

nate328Ci said:


> *You much be a bit slow tonight
> 
> He linked from TD's webspace...TD put this pic in the place of the other one...
> 
> *


oooooohhhhhhhhhhhh . . . . that's a freakin good one !!!!!


----------



## Mr. The Edge (Dec 19, 2001)

ObD said:


> *
> 
> 
> 
> ...


is it detachable?


----------



## Guest (Jan 16, 2003)

atyclb said:


> *is it detachable? *


:lmao:

Don't make me get out my King Missle CD.


----------



## nate (Dec 24, 2001)

TD said:


> *:lmao:
> 
> Don't make me get out my King Missle CD. *


 

Don't provoke him!


----------



## AF (Dec 21, 2001)

nate328Ci said:


> *
> 
> Don't provoke him!  *


yeah . . . he's a little scary today, first brings back the Gay o meter thread and now this whole penis thing


----------



## Guest (Jan 16, 2003)

ObD said:


> *This like shooting fish in a barrel. Reduced to defending the E36 with penis size?  *


Yeah. It's so juvenile. Unlike pictures of dog shit.


----------



## Hugie Wangie (Dec 12, 2002)

Go home and stop posting... you need a break.



TD said:


> *Yeah. It's so juvenile. Unlike pictures of dog shit. *


----------



## ObD (Dec 29, 2001)

nate328Ci said:


> *:lmao:
> 
> bimmerfest rule #254, never link from TD's webspace for fear of reprisal :lmao: *


Except the joke is once again on him.


----------



## ·clyde· (Dec 26, 2001)

Nothing sucks more than a good thread full of bashing and bullshit turns into dick jokes.

sheesh


----------



## Guest (Jan 16, 2003)

ObD said:


> *Except the joke is once again on him. *


You guys crack me up. :lmao:


----------



## Hugie Wangie (Dec 12, 2002)

You crack me up :lmao:



TD said:


> *You guys crack me up. :lmao: *


----------



## Plaz (Dec 19, 2001)

Hugie Wangie/Ryan/Cosmo said:


> *You crack me up :lmao: *


----------



## mbr129 (Aug 23, 2002)

I must say this thread was getting pretty vicious. What is it 300+ replies in less than 24 hours? At least it was a change of pace. Anyway, I didn't comment on this discussion because I am one to shut my mouth when I don't know anything about the topic (M3 stuff). But it was entertaining to follow it. I don't know why people jump on TD so much. I just don't see what it is about him that makes some people here want to attack him.


----------



## JST (Dec 19, 2001)

mbr129 said:


> *I must say this thread was getting pretty vicious. What is it 300+ replies in less than 24 hours? At least it was a change of pace. Anyway, I didn't comment on this discussion because I am one to shut my mouth when I don't know anything about the topic (M3 stuff). But it was entertaining to follow it. I don't know why people jump on TD so much. I just don't see what it is about him that makes some people here want to attack him. *


Some people need hobbies.


----------



## 325ci.com (Sep 23, 2002)

its not a fair comparison. comparing an e36 m3 to an e46 m3 might have been better. a "regular" e46 is no match for an M-powered car.

mostly b/c both cars have different purposes.

i like my e46-- very comfy, esp. on long road trips, nice and quiet, supple ride, but if i want to, the thing can attack corners and curves and i can occasionally take it to the track as-is, right out of the box. i like that.

for sports cars, i like mid-engined cars. as you can see, i own 2 MR2s. they are just as fun cars, but very very different from my e46. they can't do all the things my e46 does, but they do one thing well. the BMW does many things very well. hence the "ultimate" driving machine.

anyway, i wouldn't give up my e46 or modify it dramatically. i love it just the way it is.


----------



## rwg (May 10, 2002)

325ci.com said:


> *its not a fair comparison. comparing an e36 m3 to an e46 m3 might have been better. a "regular" e46 is no match for an M-powered car.*


It is a fair comparison. It is the comparison of two similarly priced cars with similar hp ratings and transmissions that both claim to be driver's cars.

But that doesn't really matter. It's a comparison of two cars that I can afford and would consider buying - and one is more fun than the other imo. I shouldn't compare two cars I might buy?

It isn't about one car "winning" over the other. It's about the drive. Some people don't want the same things out of a car that I want. Luxury and image are as imporant as performance to some people - but I don't particularly care about either of those things. How fun is it to drive? I was amazed at how much I liked the e36 and I am actively looking for one. Other people want the softer ride or more isolated feeling of the e46. That's great for them.

But there is absolutely no reason to call it an "unfair" comparison.


----------



## jk330i (Aug 13, 2002)

Don't y0u guys have anything else better to do :tsk: 



WHo actually works and earns there money here :lmao:


----------



## Mashuri (Aug 14, 2002)

Actually, if I were to get a car based on pure driving feel alone, the best I've driven is a 3rd generation RX7. It made the E36 M3 feel portly and a little clumsy by comparison. They could use better brakes though...


----------



## AF (Dec 21, 2001)

Mashuri said:


> *Actually, if I were to get a car based on pure driving feel alone, the best I've driven is a 3rd generation RX7. It made the E36 M3 feel portly and a little clumsy by comparison. They could use better brakes though... *


I had a 94 RX-7 and while the manual, clutch and overfeel was very good, I felt the car had more power then it could handle. When the turbos kicked in, it was literally too fast and I always felt like hte rear end of the car was coming out and going into oversteer.

My 95 Corvette was as fast if not faster but didn't have that feeling of being too fast


----------



## Mashuri (Aug 14, 2002)

Alan F said:


> *I had a 94 RX-7 and while the manual, clutch and overfeel was very good, I felt the car had more power then it could handle. When the turbos kicked in, it was literally too fast and I always felt like hte rear end of the car was coming out and going into oversteer.
> 
> My 95 Corvette was as fast if not faster but didn't have that feeling of being too fast *


Really? I didn't get that feeling at all. Yes, it had a lot of power but I found it quite manageable when sideways. In fact, that was the funnest part. :bigpimp: It's not just that the weight of the RX7 is so low but that it's so well centralized. It makes it easy to control when pushed past its limits.


----------



## navyblau (Jan 17, 2003)

*thoroughly confussed*

not to get back on topic, but wasn't this post started about an

automatic M3?


----------



## AF (Dec 21, 2001)

Mashuri said:


> *Really? I didn't get that feeling at all. Yes, it had a lot of power but I found it quite manageable when sideways. In fact, that was the funnest part. :bigpimp: It's not just that the weight of the RX7 is so low but that it's so well centralized. It makes it easy to control when pushed past its limits. *


I was actually talking about when i would floor it in 2nd or 3rd gear on the highway going straight, for some weird reason I always felt the power was too much for the chassis and the car was going to have the rear end loose grip and spin out . . . I can't explain quite why it would feel that way but it just made me uncomfortable . . . I don't remember how long I kept it but I am pretty sure it was less then 4 months . . . meanwhile I sold it to my friend who ended up totalling it on the highway loosing control on ice and ending up on a guardrail, 2 months after I sold it to him.


----------



## Mashuri (Aug 14, 2002)

Alan F said:


> *I was actually talking about when i would floor it in 2nd or 3rd gear on the highway going straight, for some weird reason I always felt the power was too much for the chassis and the car was going to have the rear end loose grip and spin out . . . I can't explain quite why it would feel that way but it just made me uncomfortable . . . I don't remember how long I kept it but I am pretty sure it was less then 4 months . . . meanwhile I sold it to my friend who ended up totalling it on the highway loosing control on ice and ending up on a guardrail, 2 months after I sold it to him. *


I wonder if there was something wrong with yours. I never got that feeling. In fact, I wished she had more boost once I got out of first. Hope your friend is ok.


----------



## AF (Dec 21, 2001)

Mashuri said:


> *I wonder if there was something wrong with yours. I never got that feeling. In fact, I wished she had more boost once I got out of first. Hope your friend is ok. *


this was back in late 1996 . . . he made it out fine . . . then at the time ended up getting a 97 M3 !!


----------

