BMW Value

[tdizzle]

Originally Posted by BMWinGE

Agreed.

I can see this same thread being created in a Mustang forum talking about how its a performance value compared to the M3/M4.

It's funny to talk about BMW and value in the same sentence. The OP lost me when he started there then proceeded to jump straight into pure numbers. If you want performance/$$ then grab a Mustang GT/Boss/GT500 and be done with it.

Comparing a 458 to a M3 or M3/GT3 is laughable. Sure the 'value' may be better if you're only talking hp. But then why not extend the argument to the 'value' and hp of M3/Mustang GT. About the same HP for half the price. At least the Mustang can keep up with the m3 on the track (currently available models). Put it in Boss form (which still saves you around $20k - or about half the cost of another Boss) and then it trumps the M3 in performance. Future iterations will probably have a similar result in both performance and power.

Not even sure how the M6 even fits. Great cruiser, but that's one car I wouldn't even own. It doesn't make sense to me. And yes, I've driven one, alot, hard on a track. Give me the M3 for sporty fun with enough room for my needs or the M5 if I really needed extra space.

But let's not get on the OP too much, he's just asking a question that got a few of us a bit too excited. Cross shopping is fun, just like talking about cars is.

If I could afford the GT3, I'd get that, if I could afford the 458 I'd have one of those before I'd have a M3 as many would, but since money is always a factor, the M3 is a better buy and probably an a better all around car than either if you're driving it to work every day and/or want to carry 2-3 pasengers.

But if you really want value, than truly the M3 beings to lose that battle when compared to other similarly performing cars (let's not get into lap comparisons of the Chevy ZL1 or Boss vs any of the cars mentioned in this thread other and debate the performance to $$$ value).

OK, rant over.

(PS I'd still take a M3 over an american car if I didn't have to rationalize its cost. But I'm keeping an eye on the C63 too)

[varsity]

Judging by the recent nonsense threads garnering lots of replies, these OPs are either clueless or successful trolls.

[Patronus86]

Originally Posted by ridin135

The 0-60 time is a pretty useless metric for a daily driver car or even a weekend cruiser unless all you want to do is drag race.

Actually the 0-60 time is a very important metric for many car enthusiasts. While it doesn't tell the whole story of how the car performs, it certainly tells you how fast it can accelerate. A lot of car enthusiasts, including myself, want to know what that time is, even if we never intend to drive the car in that capacity. That's why almost every major car magazine and website posts those times when reviewing cars.

Originally Posted by ridin135

Some cars you have listed have finesse some don't and we can go on and on but you will never understand it until you drive them. I don't mean drive them to the mall and back either actualy take them on a road and go through some nice tight switchbacks and long sweeping turns. You have to look at the whole package for a car comfort, suspension, brakes, amenities, hp, tq, weight, driving emotion, and cost.

Yep, I've agreed with this statement in numerous responses Ive posted. All cars are packaged together differently and have a unique feel. I don't know why you feel the need to say this again, other than you like "hearing" yourself "talk" on these forums.

Originally Posted by ridin135

With all that said yes BMW provides a decently priced performance vehicle but I wouldn't say they are bargain prices by any means. You get a fast car that is very practical but to me you get it at a high price, at least as of recently. If you want bang for buck I would suggest looking at the mustang, corvette, and gtr (for your 0-60) if want want the real bang for buck performance machines.

If you look at my initial post, I said that BMW M performance cars are bargains except when you compare them to American muscle cars. They are bargains when you compare them to other high-end euro performance cars.

Originally Posted by darkalley

The GT3 is absolutely twice the car of the M4. It's not just about 0-60 (which is is 3.0 seconds in the naturally aspirated 911). 4 wheel steering? Best sounding sport exhaust?

Everything you said there with the exception of the 0-60 time and the 4 wheel steering is subjective, based on your opinion. The GT3 certainly outperforms the M3 and even the upgraded M3 GTS, but to say that it is twice the car is purely a matter of opinion.

Originally Posted by darkalley

Yes. I am on the fence about getting one but at $140k it's the best deal out there and an alternative to a 458 not M4. Is the m4 better than the cayman? Not a better driving car but better presence. Going from an E46 to an E92 to a 911C4S I can tell you those cars are not in the same league in terms of steering or performance? The M3/M4 are great cars but if you want a "sports car" vs a GT car the 911 is hands down more engaging.

M4 hasn't come out yet, so we can probably hold off on declaring who is better than who, which again is a matter of opinion.

Originally Posted by darkalley

The M6? Have you driven it? Seriously least special car out there. The Ferrari 458????? Without question the single greatest car I have ever driven in-terms of everything.

Like I already said, I haven't driven either the M6 or the 458. I have read reviews and articles on both and watched track footage, and that's it. So I can't talk to how each car "feels" or even drives. I've learned that the 458 handles differently, and is reportedly much more capable on the track. I do know what is important to me when it comes to car buying and that I have no desire to spend $233k on a car when I can spend $113k on a car that still performs well, though maybe not as well as the 458.

Originally Posted by tdizzle

It's funny to talk about BMW and value in the same sentence. The OP lost me when he started there then proceeded to jump straight into pure numbers. If you want performance/$$ then grab a Mustang GT/Boss/GT500 and be done with it.

Yep, if you look at my original post I said American Muscle beats BMW in terms of bang-for-your-buck. I was comparing BMW M performance to the euro high performance cars (jags, aston, ferrari, porsche).

Originally Posted by tdizzle

Not even sure how the M6 even fits. Great cruiser, but that's one car I wouldn't even own. It doesn't make sense to me.

It does "fit" into this conversation, especially when we start talking about the high performance/luxury brands like jag and aston martin. The M6 comes at much lower price even though it provides similar if not outright better performance.

Originally Posted by tdizzle

But let's not get on the OP too much, he's just asking a question that got a few of us a bit too excited. Cross shopping is fun, just like talking about cars is.

Appreciate the concern, but the ferrari die-hards have already beat me up pretty good. I don't know if I'll ever recover from this verbal beat down...

Originally Posted by tdizzle

But if you really want value, than truly the M3 beings to lose that battle when compared to other similarly performing cars (let's not get into lap comparisons of the Chevy ZL1 or Boss vs any of the cars mentioned in this thread other and debate the performance to $$$ value).

Totally agree, BMW is starting to lose, in my opinion, to american muscle cars when it comes to the performance to $$$ ratio.

I realize I was a little vague in my initial post when I compared the hp and torque stats of BMW M performance cars to other high end cars. I probably should have explained myself a little better. I assumed everyone agreed with me that BMW M Performance cars are generally well-designed, well-packaged, good handling cars. I know that despite the closeness to certain cars in hp and torque, like ferrari and porsche, M Performance cars still get out-performed on the track by these guys. My only point was and still is that I don't think the better performance and "feel" of these cars, like the 911 gt3 and ferrari 458, justify the high prices. I think that the price you pay for M performance is much more reasonable in comparison (not in comparison to American Muscle).

[Patronus86]

Originally Posted by varsity

Judging by the recent nonsense threads garnering lots of replies, these OPs are either clueless or successful trolls.

Wasn't trying to troll, and though I still have a lot to learn about cars, I am by no means clueless. I put my opinion out and it turns out a lot of people disagree with it. Lesson learned...I'll keep my opinion to myself... until another person starts a thread, at which point I'll join the band wagon and let him/her know how foolish he/she is....

[VR1]

Originally Posted by Patronus86

If you look at my initial post, I said that BMW M performance cars are bargains except when you compare them to American muscle cars.

i agree with some of what you said, but IMO Camaro's and Mustang's aren't even in anywhere near the same league as ///M cars..

[Patronus86]

Originally Posted by VR1

i agree with some of what you said, but IMO Camaro's and Mustang's aren't even in anywhere near the same league as ///M cars..

As packaged luxury/performance vehicles, I agree BMW is in a different league from the Mustang and Camaro. But when it comes to outright performance, those American Muscle cars have started to gain on BMW or in some cases, have beaten BMW outright on the track (checkout the new Z/28 time on the Nurburgring and compare it to the M3's). And with the new Mustang and its transition to an IRS, who knows how it will compare to the new M3/M4. But that really wasn't the point of this thread so we should probably stop before....

[Boss330]

The moral of the story being:

Don't ask advice on which cars to buy on these forums as you will be flamed for considering, or mentioning, the following:

a) the wrong car
b) the wrong cars to compare
c) the wrong set of standards to compare cars with
d) mentioning a Ferrari and a BMW in the same sentence or post without a disclaimer that you respect the Ferrari much more than the BMW
e) that, even though it's mentioned in the OP, didn't just consider an american muscle car based on your preferences
f) considering a car that I personally don't care for
g) all of the above...

I could go on...

[///M5Bruno]

Agreed as well.

Originally Posted by Sapper_M3

Chill out, dude. I'm an obsessed car enthusiast myself, but there's no need for that reaction just because someone compared the M4 (which we're only beginning to see actual driven reviews for) to a 911 GT3.

The 911 GT3 is almost certainly a far better vehicle (and it should be for that price), but these are just cars we're talking about. The dude didn't insult your wife and kids.

[Boss330]

Originally Posted by mrkhanna16

Don't ever compare the M4 to the gt3....ever..... COMPLETELY DIFFERENT CARS!

Ooopppsss.... Someone didn't get that memo

First video from AMuS: BMW M3 wins the test, GT3 the hearts
Second, third and fourth video: In English so everyone get's how that turns out...

[darkalley]

Originally Posted by Boss330

The moral of the story being:

Don't ask advice on which cars to buy on these forums as you will be flamed for considering, or mentioning, the following:

a) the wrong car
b) the wrong cars to compare
c) the wrong set of standards to compare cars with
d) mentioning a Ferrari and a BMW in the same sentence or post without a disclaimer that you respect the Ferrari much more than the BMW
e) that, even though it's mentioned in the OP, didn't just consider an american muscle car based on your preferences
f) considering a car that I personally don't care for
g) all of the above...

I could go on...

Ha I agree most people do "pounce" maybe I did...I get people are passionate about M3/M4's but "my opinion" is there are very few cars that can honestly match a car on any level, that is twice the cost. In my business my customers are the corporate HQ's for Ferrari, Maserati, Aston, Bentley, MBUSA, BMW, etc and I can to see and touch EVERYTHING. I have test driven lots of cars (many pre-production M cars over the years) and I own a Mini Cooper (my fiances ride), F-150 (I have Raptor envy but couldn't justify the $15k difference), S2000 and a 911 C4S. Honestly, I have eagerly been waiting for the new M4 to come out. As the M4 has continued to go up in price so have my expectations. I view my E46 as a sports car, the E92 as "just about" to cross the line to GT car, and the new M4 unfortunately "appears" to have crossed into the "GT" car territory. I am getting old and that might be what I am ready for but I can't decide until I drive it which is 100% correct. I do actually think for this reason the M3 will actually be the better car over the M4 since, I for one, will find GT car handling great in a 4-door. Drive a 911S as your daily driver for a few months and then go into an E92 and you will realize the handling of the 911 is so much more agile in terms of feel. Then drive an S2000 for a week and get in the 911 and you will think "this feels like a school bus". Even with the crappy acceleration in the S2000, once you are moving on a back road you will forget everything. If 0-60 is the driving factor the Corvette is the best value for your money- maybe the Shelby Mustang. The new 991S in sport mode with the sport exhaust is as close to driving nirvana as I have found for $100k. Its the sum of all parts- fit, finish, performance, handling, etc. Let's be honest, if someone was looking for "value", we would all be driving the WRX STI because lets face it, out of the box it is great but with a little tune that is a monster. My view on "value" alternatives would be WRX STI vs M3, Corvette/Mustang/used 911S vs M4, and 911 GT3 vs a Ferrari458.

[darkalley]

Dude that's the M3GTS! He proves the point though on the M3/GTR/GT3 at 6:15...

Maybe its me but the GT-R is the one car that I want to love but I can;t get there...

[Boss330]

Originally Posted by darkalley

Ha I agree most people do "pounce" maybe I did...I get people are passionate about M3/M4's but "my opinion" is there are very few cars that can honestly match a car on any level, that is twice the cost. In my business my customers are the corporate HQ's for Ferrari, Maserati, Aston, Bentley, MBUSA, BMW, etc and I can to see and touch EVERYTHING. I have test driven lots of cars (many pre-production M cars over the years) and I own a Mini Cooper (my fiances ride), F-150 (I have Raptor envy but couldn't justify the $15k difference), S2000 and a 911 C4S. Honestly, I have eagerly been waiting for the new M4 to come out. As the M4 has continued to go up in price so have my expectations. I view my E46 as a sports car, the E92 as "just about" to cross the line to GT car, and the new M4 unfortunately "appears" to have crossed into the "GT" car territory. I am getting old and that might be what I am ready for but I can't decide until I drive it which is 100% correct. I do actually think for this reason the M3 will actually be the better car over the M4 since, I for one, will find GT car handling great in a 4-door. Drive a 911S as your daily driver for a few months and then go into an E92 and you will realize the handling of the 911 is so much more agile in terms of feel. Then drive an S2000 for a week and get in the 911 and you will think "this feels like a school bus". Even with the crappy acceleration in the S2000, once you are moving on a back road you will forget everything. If 0-60 is the driving factor the Corvette is the best value for your money- maybe the Shelby Mustang. The new 991S in sport mode with the sport exhaust is as close to driving nirvana as I have found for $100k. Its the sum of all parts- fit, finish, performance, handling, etc. Let's be honest, if someone was looking for "value", we would all be driving the WRX STI because lets face it, out of the box it is great but with a little tune that is a monster. My view on "value" alternatives would be WRX STI vs M3, Corvette/Mustang/used 911S vs M4, and 911 GT3 vs a Ferrari458.

E46 M3 and E46 M3 CSL was "purer" driver cars, then the E92 somehow did a mix of crazy engine but not up to speed brakes and a bit heavy perhaps (UK Magazines declared the E46 better when the E9x came).

To me, the F8x (both M3 and M4) seems to go back to the E46 roots with lower weight, upgraded brakes, better handling, better rear diff etc. Many parts of the evolution from E9x to F8x pointing more towards sports than GT, to me.

What happens with the M3 brakes after two laps here is worrying...

[Boss330]

Originally Posted by darkalley

Dude that's the M3GTS! He proves the point though on the M3/GTR/GT3 at 6:15...

Maybe its me but the GT-R is the one car that I want to love but I can;t get there...

There are 4 videos, two with the regular M3 vs GT3 and two with the M3 GTS vs GT3...

And really, it's more fair to compare the M3 GTS with the GT3 and the regular M3 with the Carrera S.

But the point really was that at least a few reputable Magazines thought it was fair to compare the M3 and GT3...

[darkalley]

Originally Posted by Boss330

E46 M3 and E46 M3 CSL was "purer" driver cars, then the E92 somehow did a mix of crazy engine but not up to speed brakes and a bit heavy perhaps (UK Magazines declared the E46 better when the E9x came).

To me, the F8x (both M3 and M4) seems to go back to the E46 roots with lower weight, upgraded brakes, better handling, better rear diff etc. Many parts of the evolution from E9x to F8x pointing more towards sports than GT, to me.

What happens with the M3 brakes after two laps here is worrying...

My hope was f8X would get back to the E46 feel. I might be going too hard on the car in that statement without driving it. For me at $75k if I can get a car with technology, premium feel on material, and handling close to my E46, that to me is a great car. If the MSRP starts with an "8" minus ceramic brakes they are starting to lose me... Oh and yes the GTS and GT3 I can see the comparison!

[Boss330]

Originally Posted by darkalley

He proves the point though on the M3/GTR/GT3 at 6:15...

At 21:46: "M3 GTS is a viable option to the GT3"

[varsity]

Originally Posted by Patronus86

Lesson learned...I'll keep my opinion to myself... until another person starts a thread, at which point I'll join the band wagon and let him/her know how foolish he/she is....

Pull yourself together, man.

Zoom out for a minute. M3 has always been based on a mass-market entry-level luxury vehicle. Many hard parts are shared. Significant differences are engine, suspension, and, more recently, exterior. M3 is a great car both on paper and on real-world streets. Everyone agrees to this. Every generation has been really good at what it's purported to do. I personally think E36 is the low point because of US v. ROW engine, but that's obviously an opinion rather than a fact.

But when you compare M3 to cars built on purpose-built sports chassis, like 911 or 458 or Elise, the M3 loses luster. Here's an example: on my first E46 M3, the front wheel bearings were shot after 20k miles, probably 7k of which were on the track. This wasn't a defect; it was just that the bearings were designed for more pedestrian use. Another: brakes are perennial weak point. Even after ducting, brass bushings, race pads, stainless lines, and SRF, my stock brakes significantly faded after 15 laps around Sebring in the summer. I thought all cars were like this until I started to look at 911s. All cars aren't like this. Porsches can actually handle this kind of usage without resorting to paragraph-long mod lists. So can modern Lotus as well as Ferrari. Candidly, I think that's the end of the list.

This is why Porsches cost more than BMWs. You're getting a car full of superior hard parts that the eyes don't see and drivers forget about because they're too busy driving rather than troubleshooting. Some guys love tinkering with their cars, and that's great for them.

I'm not at all knocking M3s. They're great - maybe the best - for what they portend to be: sporty street cars suitable for everyday use at a relatively reasonable price. But M3 is inherently a compromise car because it's built off passenger-car chassis rather than a sports car one. Add that to inferior hard parts, and you'll see why guys go nuts over Porsches and Ferraris over BMWs.

[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by varsity

Pull yourself together, man.

Zoom out for a minute. M3 has always been based on a mass-market entry-level luxury vehicle. Many hard parts are shared. Significant differences are engine, suspension, and, more recently, exterior. M3 is a great car both on paper and on real-world streets. Everyone agrees to this. Every generation has been really good at what it's purported to do. I personally think E36 is the low point because of US v. ROW engine, but that's obviously an opinion rather than a fact.

But when you compare M3 to cars built on purpose-built sports chassis, like 911 or 458 or Elise, the M3 loses luster. Here's an example: on my first E46 M3, the front wheel bearings were shot after 20k miles, probably 7k of which were on the track. This wasn't a defect; it was just that the bearings were designed for more pedestrian use. Another: brakes are perennial weak point. Even after ducting, brass bushings, race pads, stainless lines, and SRF, my stock brakes significantly faded after 15 laps around Sebring in the summer. I thought all cars were like this until I started to look at 911s. All cars aren't like this. Porsches can actually handle this kind of usage without resorting to paragraph-long mod lists. So can modern Lotus as well as Ferrari. Candidly, I think that's the end of the list.

This is why Porsches cost more than BMWs. You're getting a car full of superior hard parts that the eyes don't see and drivers forget about because they're too busy driving rather than troubleshooting. Some guys love tinkering with their cars, and that's great for them.

I'm not at all knocking M3s. They're great - maybe the best - for what they portend to be: sporty street cars suitable for everyday use at a relatively reasonable price. But M3 is inherently a compromise car because it's built off passenger-car chassis rather than a sports car one. Add that to inferior hard parts, and you'll see why guys go nuts over Porsches and Ferraris over BMWs.

Gotta hand it to you. That was an objective post.

[darkalley]

Originally Posted by varsity

Pull yourself together, man.

Zoom out for a minute. M3 has always been based on a mass-market entry-level luxury vehicle. Many hard parts are shared. Significant differences are engine, suspension, and, more recently, exterior. M3 is a great car both on paper and on real-world streets. Everyone agrees to this. Every generation has been really good at what it's purported to do. I personally think E36 is the low point because of US v. ROW engine, but that's obviously an opinion rather than a fact.

But when you compare M3 to cars built on purpose-built sports chassis, like 911 or 458 or Elise, the M3 loses luster. Here's an example: on my first E46 M3, the front wheel bearings were shot after 20k miles, probably 7k of which were on the track. This wasn't a defect; it was just that the bearings were designed for more pedestrian use. Another: brakes are perennial weak point. Even after ducting, brass bushings, race pads, stainless lines, and SRF, my stock brakes significantly faded after 15 laps around Sebring in the summer. I thought all cars were like this until I started to look at 911s. All cars aren't like this. Porsches can actually handle this kind of usage without resorting to paragraph-long mod lists. So can modern Lotus as well as Ferrari. Candidly, I think that's the end of the list.

This is why Porsches cost more than BMWs. You're getting a car full of superior hard parts that the eyes don't see and drivers forget about because they're too busy driving rather than troubleshooting. Some guys love tinkering with their cars, and that's great for them.

I'm not at all knocking M3s. They're great - maybe the best - for what they portend to be: sporty street cars suitable for everyday use at a relatively reasonable price. But M3 is inherently a compromise car because it's built off passenger-car chassis rather than a sports car one. Add that to inferior hard parts, and you'll see why guys go nuts over Porsches and Ferraris over BMWs.

Great post! Boss I agree the M3 GTS (I was talking about the base M3) is in 911 territory but for that money I'm getting a gt3 !

[Patronus86]

Originally Posted by varsity

Pull yourself together, man.

My comment was sarcastic...not meant to be taken seriously...

Originally Posted by varsity

Zoom out for a minute. M3 has always been based on a mass-market entry-level luxury vehicle. Many hard parts are shared. Significant differences are engine, suspension, and, more recently, exterior. M3 is a great car both on paper and on real-world streets. Everyone agrees to this.

I thought BMW M cars were historically made from unique parts that differed from the normal series cars. For example, the e92 m3 had different suspension, engine, body, exhaust from the regular 3 series. I'm no expert on BMW history, so someone please chime in if I'm wrong. And I thought M Performance was historically focused more on performance than on luxury.

Originally Posted by varsity

But when you compare M3 to cars built on purpose-built sports chassis, like 911 or 458 or Elise, the M3 loses luster. Here's an example: on my first E46 M3, the front wheel bearings were shot after 20k miles, probably 7k of which were on the track. This wasn't a defect; it was just that the bearings were designed for more pedestrian use.

7k of track use seems like a lot, for any car. I'd expect any car, regardless of the initial buy price to show some wear and tear after that kind of use. Are you saying a 911 doesn't have any kind of issues after 7k of track use? I don't know porsche's history that well, so someone well versed will have to chime in here...

Originally Posted by varsity

Another: brakes are perennial weak point. Even after ducting, brass bushings, race pads, stainless lines, and SRF, my stock brakes significantly faded after 15 laps around Sebring in the summer. I thought all cars were like this until I started to look at 911s. All cars aren't like this. Porsches can actually handle this kind of usage without resorting to paragraph-long mod lists. So can modern Lotus as well as Ferrari. Candidly, I think that's the end of the list.

Yeah, I've heard of the stock brakes on the M3 being an issue. Don't know if that was ever addressed in later years of the e92 m3. Though I do know plenty of people track their M3's without buying what you referred to as "paragraph long list of mods". The M3 was intended to be trackable out of the box, and with the exception of a few issues, everyone agrees that it pretty much is.

Originally Posted by varsity

This is why Porsches cost more than BMWs. You're getting a car full of superior hard parts that the eyes don't see and drivers forget about because they're too busy driving rather than troubleshooting.

Dude, I get it...the 911 is a much better car in stock form than the m3 and even than the m3 gts. I've got no arguments with that...My only point, which is really my opinion is that the increase in performance and driving experience you get with the 911 does not justify the high cost. I think BMW gives you good performance, not better than the 911, but still good for a much more fair price (not factoring in American muscle just in case someone decides to bring that up for the 100th time today).

Originally Posted by varsity

But M3 is inherently a compromise car because it's built off passenger-car chassis rather than a sports car one. Add that to inferior hard parts, and you'll see why guys go nuts over Porsches and Ferraris over BMWs.

It is a compromise car, but I would argue that chassis is still a sports car chassis, maybe not as sporty as the 911, but still sporty. The E92 M3 chassis, though it resembled the regular 3 series was still a different chassis...am I wrong on that? And though the m3's parts were inferior to those of the 911, they are still very good...for the price you pay...which is the point of my original post.

Porsche has the option of getting high-end carbon ceramic brakes...they cost around $8-9k. They look awesome, I've heard they perform really well and are durable, but like everything else in the world of cars they eventually break down and need to be fixed or totally replaced....$8-9k for brakes + labor fees just seems like a lot to me, regardless of how well they perform.

[darkalley]

Originally Posted by Patronus86;


Dude, I get it...the 911 is a much better car in stock form than the m3 and even than the m3 gts. I've got no arguments with that...My only point, which is really my [B

opinion[/B] is that the increase in performance and driving experience you get with the 911 does not justify the high cost. I think BMW gives you good performance, not better than the 911, but still good for a much more fair price (not factoring in American muscle just in case someone decides to bring that up for the 100th time today).

Patronus help me out here. What 911's have you driven for an extended period of time?

[Patronus86]

Originally Posted by darkalley

Patronus help me out here. What 911's have you driven for an extended period of time?

Bud, you and I don't see eye-to-eye on this...so why even bother?

[Suave]

Originally Posted by Boss330

The moral of the story being:

Don't ask advice on which cars to buy on these forums as you will be flamed for considering, or mentioning, the following:

a) the wrong car
b) the wrong cars to compare
c) the wrong set of standards to compare cars with
d) mentioning a Ferrari and a BMW in the same sentence or post without a disclaimer that you respect the Ferrari much more than the BMW
e) that, even though it's mentioned in the OP, didn't just consider an american muscle car based on your preferences
f) considering a car that I personally don't care for
g) all of the above...

I could go on...

Beat me to it! In my opinion and that of many journalists and automotive experts the M3 is an amazing well rounded do it all kind of car. When you think of every possible criteria that can be given to a car there is just very little that would clear the checklist. AND this is no point. There is no one thing this car does incredibly well above other brands but it sure is a complete package.