RS4 beats M3, Autocar 18 July

635CSi wrote: Sporty1 wrote: "Disagree, the BMW marketing machine is pulling another master stroke..... diluting the M3 to appeal to a bigger market and then bringing out a less is more, that includes more £, M3  i.e. a CSL/CS model for those that want a more driver orientated model." .........They did a CSL version of that which was better but not a by a significant margin and it carried too much of a premium over the regular M3...................

Having driven both standard E46 M3 and CSL I can tell you that the CSL is so much better and more driver focused than the standard car.

Don't know if you've compared the two cars but that my opinion.

They sold everyone....... eventually.

Sporty1 wrote: They sold everyone....... eventually.

True, but the market baulked at the extra cost for the marginal improvements over the std M3, hence that they sold everyone... eventually.  The reality was that the CSL dropped rather a lot of the premium it cost in the first 12 months or so when the  speculators cars came back to the market.  It was relatively poor value for money compared to the std car because the std car was so good.

I'd contend that the same will hold true of the new M3.  The performance of the 335i comes very close in many respects and the market won't pay the significant premium for the M3 for long (I'd guess 18 months or so).  This will especially hold true if the economic situation changes and/or the environmental conscience gets stronger.  Don't underestimate the effect of the latter.  For evidence look at how the market situation for petrol X5's has changed over the lifespan of the just replaced model, from lifestyle choice to social pariah.  Look also at how that is spreading to the overall market for SUV's and how they are more being considered anti-social. 

b318isp wrote: One issue Autocar had was that the M3 didn't look agressive enough compared to the RS4. I can't see that myself. The RS4 does looks good, but it doesn't look as much a sports car as the M3.

Got my copy of Evo this morning, they have done the same test, in Spain with the New M3 and their long term RS4, haven't read it fully just a quick scan through, but they seem to have found the same,

"During our time with the car's it's the Audi that attracts the most attention." Evo Magazine Sept 2007 No 108.

Folks

I have to say I am rather amused by all the speculation on internet forums about the car and how people have come to conclusions on the strength of brief introductions to the car that were not even conducted on the type of roads most of us will face.

It seems that BMW have produced a car that has moved the game on considerably from the E46 version, and yet are being slated for not producing a car that the last CSL proved is not what the market in general wants.

People need to face the fact that except for the E30, M3's are bought often by people who want a "tick all the boxes" supercar, one that will be at home pootling around getting the shopping, taking the kids to school and can also be used on the Ring or occasional track days if necessary.   It has never been the fastest car (if that was the case we would all be driving Evo MR FQ CX PV FAH 360-420 Mk V or whatevers), or the best handling, or the most spacious, but it does all of these things pretty well while providing a great level of comfort and build quality. 

And those who moan about the CSL, well theres one coming!!!  And you should be thankful because without this "base" M3 as a volume seller, your car would probably be priced far higher than most of the people complaining about the fact that this car is not raw enough proved last time around they wouldnt be prepared to pay anyway.

Picture the scenario: BMW decide to release just a hardcore CSL version of the car, to please all the "enthusiasts" but due to the development costs of the car being spread over limited production numbers it costs £75k.  The same people bleating now about this car would then balk at that and get a porsche instead, even though the last csl came within 8 seconds of the GT3 at the ring despite being £30k less. 

FInally, a guy from Evo (who has driven the car) posts regularly on M3post and has repeatedly said that he doesnt know what these mags are on about steering feel.  He has said he thinks it was down to the road surfaces they were driving on.   I can relate to this, since people said the same thing about the E46 M3 but I think its fantastic.  Also in terms of refinement or "dilution" apparently the new V8 is much more vocal when pressing on than in the E46.

Don't get me wrong folks, people are entitled to their opinion, and I will reserve judgement myself until I have test driven the car, but I don't honestly recall seeing so much nonsense written about a car since I have been browsing internet forums [not referring to anyone here btw, just forums all over the place, including pistonheads, m3forums, m3post, bimmerfest, e46fanatics etc etc etc]. 

Mick

OK, my two pennorth! *coughs to clear throat*

I have never driven a true 'M' car infact my 540 is the highest performance car I have ever driven and given I am only 28, that's not too bad, maybe when I'm old and bald (and kicked the kids out!) I will be able to afford such a car. For now, you will have to listen to an unexperienced but educational guessing point of view! (a what?? )

Firstly, you have to ask yourself, what is the driver of the new M3 going to do with his M3? Take it on track days? take his family shopping? take it on holiday abroad? business trips up the motorway? race spotty herberts in their saxo's off the lights?

The chances are, and my point being, every owner will be different. Some owners will buy it as their 'weekend car' and they will probably have an audi A4 1.9 TDI as their company car so the weekend drive will be enthralling. Then you will have the owner who can afford an M3 but only as his everyday car, which means he'll have to be able to fit his two kids and the wife as well as a bit of shopping in the boot. He'll drive it to work and show it off and race the saxo kids from the lights, i.e. the car will probably do most every day driving chores in a very satisfactory manner.

Cars like the M3 are made for the family guys who need a reasonable boot and 4 seats but crave the power of a sports car and cannot afford a Ferrari or Lamborghini as their weekend car!

The magazines, when they get a 'special car' they choose a special location, usually a winding road through a mountian with no traffic, which of course most of us drive every day

The M3/M5 are both jack of all trades type of cars and until the RS4/6 came out, who else made such a beast?

BMW, even on their base model cars, their dynamics still have to be 50/50 weight distribution which to me is not a manufacturer who takes their business lightly.

The best kind of test would be if they took say 20 people who were in the M3/RS4 market and gave them an M3 to use as their daily car for a month then the RS4 to use for a month and get them to write the report, we'd see some real life results and not just a speculative write up from a journalist who spent a few hours with the car.

There see, that didn't hurt did it!

Mike

larzyh wrote: A straight six is longer than the equivalently sized V8 and the M3 V8 is lighter than the outgoing model's six. From what I've seen in pictures the engine looks very far back in the engine bay. One aspect of car design that BMW seems to pride themselves on is the 50-50 weight distribution of most of their models. Straight six is proper BMW, in my book, but the V8 is probably a better "package".

Having driven and owned both (e28 525e, e34 530ise straight 6 and e34 540 V8) I'd have to agree. There is no denying, americans might make the best sounding V8 but BMW make the most useful!

Coasting wrote: flyingalexf68 wrote: I've yet to see an RS4 Avant. We have 3 new RS4 Avant owners over on our place.  One in Sprint Blue, one in Mugello (looks stunning) and one in Black.  There is also an RS4 Saloon owner. They rave about the cars and two of them would look at BMW's without question. I've got to say I think the new M3 is vastly overpriced though, but then I think the same of the RS4 too.  Just more good examples of BMW and Audi ripping off the high-end of the range with a ridiculous increase over previous models.  I'll not be buying either as I don't like the thought of Germany's finest getting richer without giving me proper value for money.  As someone who has had 3 consequetive new BMW's that might sound strange, but I think I'm at the end of my tether with their constant price rises and total lack of value associated with them.

TBH I've never seen the point of buying brand new unless you are getting a very prestige car made to order (like and Aston *drool*) as all cars will lose a huge chunk of money within the first year. IMO if you are in the market for buying a new car, why not buy a nearly new ex demo or a trade in which has only covered 10k? One of our customers wanted a car to drive in between selling his e46 M3 and getting his new e92 M3 (one of the first people on the waiting list in this country!) so he decided to buy himself an M6 to fill the gap (how the other half live!) He got it with only a few thousand on the clock and a good 20k off the full retail so in the time he'll have it for which will be about a year he'll only lose a small amount compared to if he bought it new.

Anyway, back on topic, performance apart, I still think Audi's are very plain and boring to look at where's BMW's do have a more butch, agressive look.

Mike

larzyh wrote: Considering that the M3 is a relatively low volume production with very many parts not shared with the rest of the 3series I don't think it that outrageously priced.

The same could have been said of the E46 M3.  However, BMW have applied what is almost a 20% price rise.  Where does that come from?  You can cite SatNav and a few other bits as standard, but they don't get even a third of the way to making up the price increase.

My point is that they have done this across the models from mid to high-end.  Look at the Coupe Cabriolet and go from there.  The price increases are appalling and, in my opinion, nothing more than ample demonstration of BMW shoving it up the customers once more. 

larzyh wrote: In terms of outright performance it will rival the three exotics in Coasting's signature and from that perspective the M3 could be considered excellent value for money.

But it won't.  The 3 above would decimate it on performance. Bearing in mind a second is a very big visible difference - they'd be gone from view in no time. 

The F430, Zonda and Murcielago offer incomparable performance to the E92 M3.  The last two alone are 25-30% faster to 100 mph, and when you taking braking distances into account too - they are rightly called supercars.  Then of course, beyond 100mph, well it'd be very unfair on the M3 to even try to compete.

In respect of buying new, well whilst I'm unlikely to ever buy a new BMW again, I still see why a lot of people do, and I would under the right circumstances.

You have to remember that a lot of people buy cars on finance deals that are offered at much more attractive rates when new.  That can make a considerable difference to the overall purchase price and in many cases negate the impact of depreciation versus a nearly new car.

Furthermore, negotiation on new cars nearly always mean you'll never pay anything like the list price, and with dealer bonuses and quarterly targets you usually have a good deal more power in getting the price you want. 

My reluctance to buy new again would be based purely on what I see as ridiculous pricing from BMW (and Audi), but I can still see why someone would buy new over used.  If you look carefully at all the potential financial factors, they come much closer together than face value of list price might make it appear.

Well I wouldn't pay £50k for either of them. I'd buy a something like a second hand 911 of some description. The M3 and RS4 are undeniably very good cars but if I'm spending that kind of money on a car I want something that looks a bit more special. After all both cars are simply hotted up versions of much more average cars. For £50k I would want something that was designed from the outset as a sports car and whose wheels, bumpers and side skirts etc will not find their way onto lessers models. My opinion might change if I drove them, but as the asthetics of a car are very important to me I suspect not.

As a second hand buy for £20k-£30k they would start to appeal more.