S4 v M3 v C32 v STi v Evo8

[Mike Rotch]

For me the choice has to be between the S4 and STi - at my city's altitude the STi kicks both the M3's and S4's arse performance wise, although the V8 is a very big + in the audi's column

 

[GilesGuthrie]

Sorry Mike, I had to edit the thread title - it was giving me a facial tic!

I've gone off the Japanese econobox rockets, so for me the choice would be between the S4 and the M3. If you gave me one for a day, with track access and no rain, I would take the M3 every time.

However, if it came to payin gmy own money for it, and owning it long term, I would take the S4. This is because I prefer Audis in general, and the 4WD is pretty much essential for anything with over 200BHP in Scotland, where it rains a lot.

But I would like to have a good blast in an M3, which is probably ultimately the better driver's car.

 

[Mike Rotch]

Originally posted by GilesGuthrie
Sorry Mike, I had to edit the thread title - it was giving me a facial tic!

I've gone off the Japanese econobox rockets, so for me the choice would be between the S4 and the M3. If you gave me one for a day, with track access and no rain, I would take the M3 every time.

However, if it came to payin gmy own money for it, and owning it long term, I would take the S4. This is because I prefer Audis in general, and the 4WD is pretty much essential for anything with over 200BHP in Scotland, where it rains a lot.

But I would like to have a good blast in an M3, which is probably ultimately the better driver's car.

I gotta say that I have never been a M3 fan, and one point more then ever grates me. People say the M3 is a great drivers car because you need great skill to take it to the limit. Then they jump in an STi and say it is a nervous handler. A nervous handler also implies that it take driving skill to take it to the limit.

S4 is a beautiful car - why they put those funny appetures at the bottom of the doors I'll never know, but as I am generally an anti-conventionalist, that would probably factor in to the choice too.

Dont know how the prices pan out there, but here the M3 is the more expensive, then C32, then S4, then STi. The STi is 20% cheaper then the S4 and 30% less then the M3.

 

[GilesGuthrie]

Originally posted by Mike Rotch
I gotta say that I have never been a M3 fan, and one point more then ever grates me. People say the M3 is a great drivers car because you need great skill to take it to the limit. Then they jump in an STi and say it is a nervous handler. A nervous handler also implies that it take driving skill to take it to the limit.

S4 is a beautiful car - why they put those funny appetures at the bottom of the doors I'll never know, but as I am generally an anti-conventionalist, that would probably factor in to the choice too.

Dont know how the prices pan out there, but here the M3 is the more expensive, then C32, then S4, then STi. The STi is 20% cheaper then the S4 and 30% less then the M3.

There seems to be a trend amongst motoring journalists to say that any car which suffers from lift-off oversteer is nervous, and any car which suffers power-on oversteer requires skill. Frankly, I think that lift-off oversteer control is much much harder than power-on oversteer, because the latter can be controlled by simply not having pushed the throttle so hard in the first place.

I don't want to drive an M3 because I think it's more deserving of my heroic talent, I want to drive one because I think that the FR layout and Nurburgring-optimised suspension would make it ultimately more rewarding to thrash on in. However, on a day like today, when it's raining, and givent hat I live and work in a city, I know I'd rather have the 4WD car, especially if it's an Audi.

 

[kikkoman]

i always thought the audi S4 was a 2.7L bi-turbo v6

 

[///M-Spec]

Mike, I've never read or heard from any E46 M3 owner that the car is hard to drive at the limit. In fact, most owners feel that the car is very neutral and useable on the street and resolutely understeers at the track --ie safe and benign.

Low and mid speed understeeer is the first thing most people dial out of a track driven M3, via, camber plates and larger front tires. With even these modest suspension changes, better brake pads and a good, aggressive track biased alignment, the car gains signifigant ability.

I own the previous generation M3, but I've had some wheel time behind the current one-- and I have to agree the car is near idiot proof.

Can't say I'd have an easy time choosing between the cars you mentioned. I'd say it all depends on that role the car would have.

The S4 and C32 would be better choices as a daily driver, especially for urban commuting. I'd probably pick the C32 since there are easy horsepower gains available with just a set of pullies. Then again, I've read the S4 is definately a better driver's car.. plus, I think its gorgeous looking, so it swings the other way.

As a toy or weekend track car, The Evo is probably the sharpest one of the bunch. However, I'd probably choose the M3 for several reasons: one, I like RWD. Its simply a personal choice there. Two, its naturally aspirated, and on a track, the value of instant torque vs. waiting for boost really can't be overstated... so, out goes the STi and Evo. The S4 is out because it is too heavy to make a good track car (3700 lbs!!) The C32 is out because it's an automatic.

The price advantage of the Evo is hard to ignore (here in the States it goes for $27.5 USD). But I'd go crazy having one as a combo daily driver and track car: the interior is simply cheap. I hear the ride is rock hard as well. These qualities make for a bad daily driver, IMO. The same demerits go to the STi, with the addition of the fact the car has a deep ugliness to it that I can't ignore, no matter how well it drives. In fact, I'd take the Evo before the STi based purely on looks alone.

If I were ten years younger, I wouldn't hesitate to choose the Evo over all the others. But I need a quiet cabin, nice leather and a reasonable ride for those 6-8 hour drives with the family in tow. The more long trips I take, the better the S4 sounds, the more track days I do, the better the M3 is.


///M-Spec

 

[GilesGuthrie]

Originally posted by kikkoman
i always thought the audi S4 was a 2.7L bi-turbo v6

The previous edition was. The current one is not. Audi stated an intention some while ago to install large NA engines in all the "S" cars.

 

[Mike Rotch]

Originally posted by ///M-Spec
the car is near idiot proof.

///M-Spec

Ahem, no car is idiot proof.

No doubt, the M3 is a well-sorted car. My 3 biggest gripes:

1) Everybody who wants to be considered a "playa" drives one
2) That engine note does nothing for me
3) I consider it overrated. Yes it has outstanding performance and pleasing looks, but people think it is the bees-kanees cos it is a bimmer. Take away the "name" and it is merely in the pack.

I guess the whole "is it able to be taken to the edge" is best left to someone who has belted around the Nordschleifer in it, and the other cars. Not that you have, but I cant stand people who say it is better at the limit then the others, when they dont even have a licence.

STi: Well, I guess it boils down to personal taste. I like its rawness and that it makes no excuses for what it is. It is a racer, for the road and gives the two-fingered salute to stuck-up conservatives. It doesnt pretend to be anything its not. Yip, the looks arent to everyones liking, but then neither may the new M3's be

C32: Great for town-driving and great looks to-boot. A mid-life crisis performance car

Evo8: Cant comment, not yet released in SA.

S4: Looks just make the grade, but V8 = 👍 A consumate people mover.

 

[TS1AWD]

I have to stick with my 4G63 roots and say the EVO

 

[///M-Spec]

That's why I said near


1) I agree. The car has a certain attraction for people who feel the need to drive a badge. Sadly, nothing you can do about it and its the price of being successful and popular.

BTW, I can make the same arguments for any of the other cars, though. The sport compact craze here in the States pretty much ensures that the driver of an STi or Evo is worshipped by a throng of teenaged Eminem wannabes who think anything Japanese with a turbo and a parkbench bolted to the trunk is the last word in performance. There's a part of me that actively avoids Evo ownership because I don't want to be associated with the street racing fanboy boneheads that go along with the car.

2) Engine note is easily fixed if it displeases you. An X-pipe and aftermarket muffler will completely change the tone. Add a CAI or CSL airbox and the induction noise is pure heaven. Ever listen to an S50/S52/S54 series motor with an open intake? Its orgasmic.

3) Well, the people who believe the car is the be-all-end-all of performance cars don't really know much about cars. In terms of pure track performance, the stocker M3 is very good, but is bested by even a base Corvette and trounced by a Z06. I doubt it can shake a decently driven Evo or STi and the C32 will smack it down in a straight line. But then again, it does offer a very good balance between a good street car and a balls-to-the-wall performance car, and in the end, balance is what we care about --otherwise we'd all be driving Caterhams, right?


///M-Spec

 

[TS1AWD]

Originally posted by ///M-Spec

BTW, I can make the same arguments for any of the other cars, though. The sport compact craze here in the States pretty much ensures that the driver of an STi or Evo is worshipped by a throng of teenaged Eminem wannabes who think anything Japanese with a turbo and a parkbench bolted to the trunk is the last word in performance. There's a part of me that actively avoids Evo ownership because I don't want to be associated with the street racing fanboy boneheads that go along with the car.

Im hoping that this wasnt a direct insult towards me. I will have you know that I hate rice with a passion, I hate street racing and the fast and furious crap. I will gladly shoot Eminem first in the groin, and than in the head for free, and I hate "park benches". My talon has no external mods short of 16x7 wheels. Just because I only like Mitsubishi and Subaru im targeted as a ricer. But an import car doesnt make it a ricer. The extra 700 pounds of body kits, maaco paint, subs and stickers make an import a ricer.

 

[1X83Z]

Without money as an object, S4 is my winner - 343bhp for $45700; AWD is standard and there's a wagon. Sweet. It's a tad short on spec, though, but a $1650 premium package gives it just about everything it needs.

The C32 is second - I realised the other day that Mercedes has nothing to offer for value because all their cars are overpriced, but without money as a factor, the C32's pretty sweet - it's got 349bhp, and everything's standard on it that's optional on other C-class models. Unfortunately, there's no wagon model.

M3's third - it's only a 2-door, and the backseats aren't hugely inviting. $46500 for 333bhp is pretty nice, and so's the availability of a convertible model - but still, I'd love a sedan again. Not quite the performance of the S4 or the AMG, in my opinion.

STi's a clear fourth, followed by Evo. Without money as a factor they're simply outclassed.

With money as a factor, my order would be STi followed by Evo followed by S4 followed by M3 and then C32. Nobody takes AMG models seriously anymore...

 

[///M-Spec]

Originally posted by TS1AWD

Originally posted by ///M-Spec
Im hoping that this wasnt a direct insult towards me. I will have you know that I hate rice with a passion, I hate street racing and the fast and furious crap. I will gladly shoot Eminem first in the groin, and than in the head for free, and I hate "park benches". My talon has no external mods short of 16x7 wheels. Just because I only like Mitsubishi and Subaru im targeted as a ricer. But an import car doesnt make it a ricer. The extra 700 pounds of body kits, maaco paint, subs and stickers make an import a ricer.

Nope. Its obvious you're not the type of person I was talking about. Fast, stock looking DSMs totally rock in my book. The guys I'm talking about are the ones making people like you look bad. You know, the guys with the high 15 second N/A Eclipses that think and act like they can kill LS1s.


///M-Spec

 

[///M-Spec]

Originally posted by M5Power
M3's third - Not quite the performance of the S4 or the AMG, in my opinion.

The M3 exceeds the S4 in many objective performance catagories. Look it up.

Originally posted by M5Power
STi's a clear fourth, followed by Evo. Without money as a factor they're simply outclassed.

I'd have to disagree. I doubt a well driven M3, S4 or C32 can get away from a well driven STi or Evo. They are much lighter than the three Germans, and come with stickier OE tires. In fact, I'd wager the Evo is faster around your average track than any car here and the STi a dead tie with the M3.

Originally posted by M5Power
With money as a factor, my order would be STi followed by Evo followed by S4 followed by M3 and then C32. Nobody takes AMG models seriously anymore...

Um, have you seen the video of a bone stock E55 taking out a 450+ rwhp '03 Cobra? I'm sure that Cobra guy took it seriously.


///M-Spec

 

[1X83Z]

Originally posted by ///M-Spec
The M3 exceeds the S4 in many objective performance catagories. Look it up.

I haven't driven the new S4, but I've driven several M3s and on paper the S4 certainly looks better.

I'd have to disagree. I doubt a well driven M3, S4 or C32 can get away from a well driven STi or Evo. They are much lighter than the three Germans, and come with stickier OE tires. In fact, I'd wager the Evo is faster around your average track than any car here and the STi a dead tie with the M3.

I'm not focusing wholly on performance, here - without price as a factor, the Germans walk all over the Japanese cars with spec.

Um, have you seen the video of a bone stock E55 taking out a 450+ rwhp '03 Cobra? I'm sure that Cobra guy took it seriously.

E55 has a 5-speed automatic. Yeah, I love it otherwise, but let's look at some other AMG Mercs - the CL55 has the same horsepower and less torque than the CL600; same for the S55/S600. The CL55 and S55 are also cheaper than the CL600 and S600. That really cheapens the AMG name. Then there's the G55, which I don't even think I need to mention. There's also the CLK55, which, at $68800, is hugely overpriced for just 362 horsepower. And of course there's also the ML55; $65900 for 342bhp. Weak line, in my opinion, and absolutely horrible on value.

 

[///M-Spec]

Originally posted by M5Power
I haven't driven the new S4, but I've driven several M3s and on paper the S4 certainly looks better.

Stock for stock, the M3 is the better performer. Not by a huge amount, but definately faster, quicker, grippier, etc. Do the math:

At 3400 lbs, the M3 checks in with 10.2 lbs/hp. At 3870 lbs, the S4 lugs 11.05 lbs/hp. Factor in the additional drivetrain loses for the S4's AWD system, the extra traction advantage the S4 enjoys from a stand-still evaporates by the time 100 mph comes up. FWIW, the fastest time slip I've seen for a stock M3 is 12.89 @ 108.3, at sea level on a cool day. That's not saying every M3 driver can get his car into the 12s, but I don't see any stock S4s breaking below mid 13s.

We can get into skidpad and slalom times, but given how heavy and under-tired the S4 is, I don't think its nessessary.

Originally posted by M5Power
I'm not focusing wholly on performance, here - without price as a factor, the Germans walk all over the Japanese cars with spec.

Oh, I figured when you say the Japanese are "outclassed" I naturally presumed performance. But if you mean comfort goodies, then hell yes, the STi and Evo have interiors that would embarass a Kia to have. But, given that you can buy 2 Evos for the cost of a single option-laden M3, S4 or C32, I would hope that's the case.

Originally posted by M5Power
E55 has a 5-speed automatic. Yeah, I love it otherwise, but let's look at some other AMG Mercs - the CL55 has the same horsepower and less torque than the CL600; same for the S55/S600. The CL55 and S55 are also cheaper than the CL600 and S600. That really cheapens the AMG name. Then there's the G55, which I don't even think I need to mention. There's also the CLK55, which, at $68800, is hugely overpriced for just 362 horsepower. And of course there's also the ML55; $65900 for 342bhp. Weak line, in my opinion, and absolutely horrible on value.

C'mon now. You're ready to dismiss an entire brand because of pricing strategy, a truck and a single underpowered model? That's more than a little flippant.


///M-Spec

 

[sn00pie]

Originally posted by M5Power
...the backseats aren't hugely inviting.

SO BUY A DAMN BED!!!

That aside, I think I'd definitely go for the M3. I've had the cool opportunity to drive an RS4 once, and 4WD bugs me to death. And the C32 is ugly!

 

[Quattro]

A quattro demands a totally different approach to driving

 

[1X83Z]

Originally posted by ///M-Spec
Stock for stock, the M3 is the better performer. Not by a huge amount, but definately faster, quicker, grippier, etc. Do the math:

At 3400 lbs, the M3 checks in with 10.2 lbs/hp. At 3870 lbs, the S4 lugs 11.05 lbs/hp. Factor in the additional drivetrain loses for the S4's AWD system, the extra traction advantage the S4 enjoys from a stand-still evaporates by the time 100 mph comes up. FWIW, the fastest time slip I've seen for a stock M3 is 12.89 @ 108.3, at sea level on a cool day. That's not saying every M3 driver can get his car into the 12s, but I don't see any stock S4s breaking below mid 13s.

We can get into skidpad and slalom times, but given how heavy and under-tired the S4 is, I don't think its nessessary.

You're taking performance as the only factor! The S4 starts $1000 cheaper and has a sedan and wagon body style, to the M3's less practical coupe style. The S4 also has slightly more spec, and a very smooth 6-speed automatic.

C'mon now. You're ready to dismiss an entire brand because of pricing strategy, a truck and a single underpowered model? That's more than a little flippant.

Um, AMG? I looked at every one of their vehicles and mentioned my opinion. I'll do it again, but more in-depth:

- the C32 AMG is $4000 more expensive than an M3 and $5000 more expensive than the S4; it offers neither a wagon nor all-wheel drive, and it's not to the performance caliber of either vehicle.
- the CLK55 is extremely overpriced - $68800 for 362bhp probably makes it one of the worst non-supercar (car) values ever, at $184.53 per horsepower (the best cars get slightly more than a third of that; the Z28 Camaro used to be around $70 per horsepower). It isn't even all that great considering performance, as it's outclassed in value and nearly performance by the CLK500.
- the E55 kicks ass. My only gripe is the automatic transmission with no manual option.
- the G55 is terrible - one of the worst SUV values ever, surely, at $89900 for 347bhp ($259.08 per horsepower). Utterly awful.
- the ML55 is equally pointless, at $192.69 per horsepower, and it's outclassed by its own lesser car, the ML500 (ML500 is $21k cheaper and has just 54 less horsepower).
- S55 and CL55 are horribly stupid - S55 begins at $106500 and has a 493bhp V8. Meanwhile, the non-AMG S600 starts at a higher price and gets the same horsepower from a larger V12, which also gets 74 lb-ft more torque than the AMG! Same deal for the CL55 and CL600 - I can say pretty surely that BMW would NEVER allow an M model to be less expensive and a worse performer than a non-M model. It'd be anarchy.
- No complaints about the SL55 except the automatic.
- SLK32 is another horrible value, plus the basic design is horribly outdated. Still, it has no competitors, so it isn't terrible.

 

[///M-Spec]

Originally posted by M5Power
You're taking performance as the only factor![/B]

Of course I am! Because you wrote this:

Originally posted by M5Power
M3's third - Not quite the performance of the S4 or the AMG, in my opinion.

Do you read what you write?

Originally posted by M5Power
Um, AMG? I looked at every one of their vehicles and mentioned my opinion. I'll do it again, but more in-depth:

- the C32 AMG is $4000 more expensive than an M3 and $5000 more expensive than the S4; it offers neither a wagon nor all-wheel drive, and it's not to the performance caliber of either vehicle.
- the CLK55 is extremely overpriced - $68800 for 362bhp probably makes it one of the worst non-supercar (car) values ever, at $184.53 per horsepower (the best cars get slightly more than a third of that; the Z28 Camaro used to be around $70 per horsepower). It isn't even all that great considering performance, as it's outclassed in value and nearly performance by the CLK500.
- the E55 kicks ass. My only gripe is the automatic transmission with no manual option.
- the G55 is terrible - one of the worst SUV values ever, surely, at $89900 for 347bhp ($259.08 per horsepower). Utterly awful.
- the ML55 is equally pointless, at $192.69 per horsepower, and it's outclassed by its own lesser car, the ML500 (ML500 is $21k cheaper and has just 54 less horsepower).
- S55 and CL55 are horribly stupid - S55 begins at $106500 and has a 493bhp V8. Meanwhile, the non-AMG S600 starts at a higher price and gets the same horsepower from a larger V12, which also gets 74 lb-ft more torque than the AMG! Same deal for the CL55 and CL600 - I can say pretty surely that BMW would NEVER allow an M model to be less expensive and a worse performer than a non-M model. It'd be anarchy.
- No complaints about the SL55 except the automatic.
- SLK32 is another horrible value, plus the basic design is horribly outdated. Still, it has no competitors, so it isn't terrible. [/B]

Doug, you really need to chill out with this dollar per horsepower thing. Its almost as worthless an argument as horsepower / liter. If horsepower / $ was the most imporant thing to people, then we'd all be driving Fox bodies Mustangs.

A McLaren F1 is 627 hp at a cool million (if you can find anyone that will sell theirs to you for that amount). That's $1,594 / horsepower.

Your average fixed up old Mustang or Camaro with a $9,000 crate motor starts at 500 hp. Add a blower and for under 25 grand including the price of the car, you'd be putting 700-750 to the wheels and smoking the F1 in the '1320 for 1/40th of the price.

Does this make the F1 stupid? Using the horsepower/$ argument it does. It makes every other new car stupid too.


///M-Spec

 

[Sage]

Originally posted by sn00pie
And the C32 is ugly!

So true, Krabè! I like most of MB's designs (especially the E55 AMG), but the C32 isn't my cup of tea.

As for those choices, the S4 would win, hands down, if I had the money. Budget-wise, it's a hard choice between the WRX STi and Evo, mainly because the Evo has the better handling (important!), but the WRX has more power and I'm just naturally biased towards Subaru, because let's face it: Mitsubishi has some really stinky-poo cars, while Subaru has a very solid lineup.

 

[1X83Z]

Originally posted by ///M-Spec

Do you read what you write?

What the hell? You left out everthing else, where I mention practicality, value, and the convertible's availability. Very out of context. Odd

Doug, you really need to chill out with this dollar per horsepower thing. Its almost as worthless an argument as horsepower / liter. If horsepower / $ was the most imporant thing to people, then we'd all be driving Fox bodies Mustangs.

I won't chill out on dollar per horsepower when the value is this bad, especially because AMG Mercs are losing out in value to their own lesser models. It's crazy, and there is no non-supercar line of vehicles anyplace else that has such a poor value. I'm depressed with AMG buyers for being so stupid, though I really see very few AMGs around.

Mitsubishi has some really stinky-poo cars,

Some. Certainly not all. And stop being manufacturer-biased; it's how people become stupid. Everybody realised Hyundai was **** in 1986 when the Excel was all the rage, and now those same people are boycotting a very nice line of cars (sans the Sonata, which is inexcusable mediocrity).

 

[sn00pie]

Originally posted by Sage
So true, Krabè!

Look, Olsnot, that's not how you ****ing spell it.

 

[///M-Spec]

Originally posted by M5Power
What the hell? You left out everthing else, where I mention practicality, value, and the convertible's availability. Very out of context. Odd[/B]

I am not at all taking what your wrote out of context. You are. First, you wrote:

Originally posted by M5Power M3's third - it's only a 2-door, and the backseats aren't hugely inviting. $46500 for 333bhp is pretty nice, and so's the availability of a convertible model - but still, I'd love a sedan again. Not quite the performance of the S4 or the AMG, in my opinion.

Then I wrote:

Originally posted by ///M-Spec
The M3 exceeds the S4 in many objective performance catagories. Look it up.

Then you replied:

Originally posted by M5Power
I haven't driven the new S4, but I've driven several M3s and on paper the S4 certainly looks better.

To which I countered with:

Originally posted by ///M-Spec
Stock for stock, the M3 is the better performer. Not by a huge amount, but definately faster, quicker, grippier, etc. Do the math:

SNIPPED OUT SUPPORTING EVIDENCE

Then you try to dodge the issue with this comment:

Originally posted by M5Power
You're taking performance as the only factor!

I chose to isolate your ONE comment about the S4 and C32 outperforming the M3. I felt you were wrong about that assumption and wanted to correct you.

Surely if you've been on this board for over a year, you would be used to people arguing a single point in a series of comments, especially when opinion is presented as fact.

Originally posted by M5Power
I won't chill out on dollar per horsepower when the value is this bad, especially because AMG Mercs are losing out in value to their own lesser models. It's crazy, and there is no non-supercar line of vehicles anyplace else that has such a poor value. I'm depressed with AMG buyers for being so stupid, though I really see very few AMGs around.

So stop being selective about where and when you apply your credo. Go ahead and an be consistant: You should declare that All Ferraris, Porsches, Lambos, the McLaren, Edonis, Pagani, Saleen S7, etc are terrible values because they don't deliver a good horsepower/dollar ratio.

You paid how much for your 330xi with only 225 hp??



///M-Spec

 

[Driftster]

//Mspec, you are CRAZY, how can you expect him to do such a preposterous thing as MAKE SENSE.

He says ferrari's suck, but likes some ferrari's..He will continue to do that, don't pressure him into having legitament opinions.....
-sarcasm-

 

[Jay]

Originally posted by Driftster
//Mspec, you are CRAZY, how can you expect him to do such a preposterous thing as MAKE SENSE.

 

[Frustrated Palm]

M3 - the performance, the interior, and other personal preferences.

WRX STi - I like the power numbers and acceleration. A few parts and a little work should get rid of alot of that understeer.

Audi - BIG, but nice.

EVO - I hate waiting.

Im not going to judge the C32 yet, as I dont really know much about it atm...

 

[1X83Z]

Originally posted by ///M-Spec

I chose to isolate your ONE comment about the S4 and C32 outperforming the M3. I felt you were wrong about that assumption and wanted to correct you.

Surely if you've been on this board for over a year, you would be used to people arguing a single point in a series of comments, especially when opinion is presented as fact.

Actually, no - I honestly thought you were arguing the one point alone, not correcting my one statement. You could've said as much about eight posts ago and saved all this...

So stop being selective about where and when you apply your credo. Go ahead and an be consistant: You should declare that All Ferraris, Porsches, Lambos, the McLaren, Edonis, Pagani, Saleen S7, etc are terrible values because they don't deliver a good horsepower/dollar ratio.

I agree completely - thing is, I couldn't care less about supercars. I don't waste my time finding out what they cost or how much horsepower they have. They're a waste of money and completely impractical, and I hate them.

You paid how much for your 330xi with only 225 hp??

Take into account that the base 3-series V6 begins at $34800, with a rating of $154.67. Everything else is extra - the convertible, the coupe, the AWD version - of course that's going to cost more.

//Mspec, you are CRAZY, how can you expect him to do such a preposterous thing as MAKE SENSE.

yeh ..... ! may-b i shuld talk more liek u from now on.... , !

 

[LancerEVO Boy]

I hear the M3 is heavier then the skyline...

 

[Frustrated Palm]

@ M5.


So what if the M3 is heavier? You shouldnt base how good a car is on wieght alone...