BMW Value

[darkalley]

Originally Posted by Patronus86

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

Just curious the base for your comparison.

[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by darkalley

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

The Porsche boys are going to eat him alive now.

[varsity]

I'm not going to reply blow-by-blow to your post because I don't know how to do that.

You wrote, "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."

Great, that's your opinion. It's my opinion that the "high cost" of a Porsche is justified. We disagree. Big deal. This is a forum for conversation.

[paddy335]

The OP has a perfectly valid question, not sure it warrants the scathing reponses or the hysterical.pro-Ferrari ranting.

You guys should read some of the 'Bang for your buck' annual comparos that one of the Oz mags does, Wheels, or Motor. Invariably the winner, as decided by a panel of journalists and race drivers is actually one of the lower value cars (e.g. GT86) even though they have higher end and exotica in the test, because although the higher value cars are usually better, they are often only incrementally so, certainly not a factor of 2, 3 or 4.

[darkalley]

Like I said I love my Honda S2000! Plus in the 3 years I've owned it the car has gone up $5,000 in value!! Also if you bought a low mileage 2010 GT3 about 12 months ago for "market" you could have driven it and made $15,000 if you sold it today! How's that for value!

[swamp2]

Beating the dead horse or at least resurrecting a dead part of the thread but there is very little justification comparing an M4 to a GT3 when performance wise and cost wise (and many other "wises") it is basically saddles right between the base 911 and the 911S (991).

[Hoopumpers]

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.

Bingo. Well said

[BMWinGE]

Originally Posted by Patronus86

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. And I thought M Performance was historically focused more on performance than on luxury.

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?

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.

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).

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.

I get that your original post was genuine, however, after seeing the backlash you received, I don't understand why you continue to defend/rationalize your opinion so much. That was a very objective post explaining why there are differences between focused sports cars and BMWs, yet you appear to stubbornly have tried to dissect or question every point that was made to defend your opinion. You don't see why a Porsche or Ferrari costs more than a BMW M but you obviously think its acceptable for BMW Ms to cost more than corvettes, mustangs, camaros, WRX, 350Z, etc?

The majority of people that can easily afford an M3, will not buy a Mustang, WRX, etc instead. The same can be said for people who can afford Ferraris, they are not likely going to pick an M3 instead. So those cars may not be worth twice as much when it comes to performance alone, but when you also factor in the quality, exclusivity, status, the price is justified for those who can afford it.

[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by BMWinGE

I get that your original post was genuine, however, after seeing the backlash you received, I don't understand why you continue to defend/rationalize your opinion so much. That was a very objective post explaining why there are differences between focused sports cars and BMWs, yet you appear to stubbornly have tried to dissect or question every point that was made to defend your opinion. You don't see why a Porsche or Ferrari costs more than a BMW M but you obviously think its acceptable for BMW Ms to cost more than corvettes, mustangs, camaros, WRX, 350Z, etc?

The majority of people that can easily afford an M3, will not buy a Mustang, WRX, etc instead. The same can be said for people who can afford Ferraris, they are not likely going to pick an M3 instead. So those cars may not be worth twice as much when it comes to performance alone, but when you also factor in the quality, exclusivity, status, the price is justified for those who can afford it.

Very good point!

[swamp2]

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.

Let's not forget some additional fundamentals. Porsches cost more than BMWs (on any loosely competitive models) primarily because Porsche can and does charge more. It's really that simple.

I'm not saying that Porsche factory brakes aren't superior to BMWs. Nor am I saying that those brakes don't cost more. Porsche also enjoys THE highest margin in the industry. According to a German University study in 2013 in the first half of 2013, Porsche made an average profit of $22,405 USD per car or around 18.4% of the showroom price. One thing that helps keep the cost of a car like the 911 down compared to heavier cars is also simply that heavy cars are generally more expensive. There are obvious exceptions to this rule when very low production volumes and exotic materials come into play, however, the more raw materials in something the more it will cost. Lightweight Porsches save cost in this way and consequently enjoy more margin.

[bmwm3redblack]

I can't agree with op statement that 458 doesn't cost the money, but on the other hand I agree that m3-m4 is on of the best bang for the buck, In overall performance,especially with weight reduction and hp/tq numbers they offer.
But I have to say that gt3 and 458 is in another league,status, and etc. so we can't compare them with bmw.

But for example if to compare m3 with audi r8 I absolutely sure m3 is much better package!!!

[Boss330]

Originally Posted by swamp2

Let's not forget some additional fundamentals. Porsches cost more than BMWs (on any loosely competitive models) primarily because Porsche can and does charge more. It's really that simple.

I'm not saying that Porsche factory brakes aren't superior to BMWs. Nor am I saying that those brakes don't cost more. Porsche also enjoys THE highest margin in the industry. According to a German University study in 2013 in the first half of 2013, Porsche made an average profit of $22,405 USD per car or around 18.4% of the showroom price. One thing that helps keep the cost of a car like the 911 down compared to heavier cars is also simply that heavy cars are generally more expensive. There are obvious exceptions to this rule when very low production volumes and exotic materials come into play, however, the more raw materials in something the more it will cost. Lightweight Porsches save cost in this way and consequently enjoy more margin.

That's probably quite spot on.

Porsche CCB and BMW CCB are both made by Brembo. The 997.1 didn't have a great quality interior some previous owner said here recently.

More than the quality of each individual part, it's just as much that the 911 and a M3/M4 are two different car concepts from the ground. 911 don't have a 316d version that has to compete with other family cars. Which is why it's impressive what a M3 actually achieves compared with a 911!

[Patronus86]

Originally Posted by BMWinGE

I get that your original post was genuine, however, after seeing the backlash you received, I don't understand why you continue to defend/rationalize your opinion so much.

I defend my opinion for the same reason you felt like posting your own opinion/response. Why do you have an issue with that?

Originally Posted by BMWinGE

That was a very objective post explaining why there are differences between focused sports cars and BMWs, yet you appear to stubbornly have tried to dissect or question every point that was made to defend your opinion.

Some parts of that post were objective, but some were very much a matter of opinion, which is why I posted my responses. I never disagreed with the overall statement that porsche produces a more sports-focused car than BMW. And up to this point, no one has posted specific responses to my "stubborn" counterpoints or questions, which I would gladly welcome.

Originally Posted by BMWinGE

You don't see why a Porsche or Ferrari costs more than a BMW M but you obviously think its acceptable for BMW Ms to cost more than corvettes, mustangs, camaros, WRX, 350Z, etc?

I never said it was acceptable for BMW Ms to cost more than similarly performing American muscle cars, I simply acknowledged that was the case (in hopes that the thread would not change its subject). That being said, the price gaps between BMW and American muscle cars, though still very big, are not as big as what exists between BMW and the other high-end euro brands. $26k difference between a GT Mustang and a M3 is still not as bad as the $45k+ difference between the M3 and the 911 Carrera 4s and the even greater $$$ gap between the M3 and the gt3.

Originally Posted by BMWinGE

The majority of people that can easily afford an M3, will not buy a Mustang, WRX, etc instead. The same can be said for people who can afford Ferraris, they are not likely going to pick an M3 instead. So those cars may not be worth twice as much when it comes to performance alone, but when you also factor in the quality, exclusivity, status, the price is justified for those who can afford it.

Speak for yourself. There are plenty of people, including myself, who cross-shop the M3 and Mustang, as different of cars as they are. And with the new Mustang coming out, I guarantee there will be even more. I don't know how you can definitively say most people who shop for the M3 don't also consider American muscle cars (taking a poll on this forum wouldn't prove your point either). And I never compared the M3 to a ferrari 458 (I compared the M6). You think the ferrari's and porsche's are worth 2x, 3x as much, whatever their cost is relative to BMW Ms....Ok, I disagree....as I have with numerous other people who responded earlier. And I'm not basing that opinion on performance alone, but rather the whole package.

Originally Posted by swamp2

Let's not forget some additional fundamentals. Porsches cost more than BMWs (on any loosely competitive models) primarily because Porsche can and does charge more. It's really that simple.

See, if someone had just said that from the very beginning, instead of lecturing me on how I'll never understand the intrinsic value and feel of a ferrari or porsche, I would have accepted that and this thread would be dead by now. This statement right here proves my point. Porsche charges a #*$% ton for their cars because they can...BMW does it too in relation to American luxury, though I don't see as much of a price gap. I still think BMW's M cars are still well-priced packages for the performance and quality you get in comparison to other euro performance cars.

Originally Posted by bmwm3redblack

I can't agree with op statement that 458 doesn't cost the money, but on the other hand I agree that m3-m4 is on of the best bang for the buck, In overall performance,especially with weight reduction and hp/tq numbers they offer.
But I have to say that gt3 and 458 is in another league,status, and etc. so we can't compare them with bmw.

At least you understand what I was getting at in terms of BMW offering the best performance for the value/cost. If you believe the ferrari 458 and gt3 are worth their MSRP's and can't be compared with BMW M's, then we'll have to go our separate ways on that issue.

[gee-m-w]

The discounts get bigger on cars that expensive. When there is incentives you can get cars over $100k or $20k off MSRP. They might zero out the cost of a few options, and there's the $9k difference between invoice and MSRP.

[w3rkn]

Originally Posted by Patronus86

I used to think that BMW cars were overpriced. Compared to normal, everyday drivers and American muscle cars, that statement probably holds true. But when you start comparing BMW M performance cars to the other exotics and high priced/performance oriented cars, BMW prices really begin to look like a bargain.

Assuming that the new M4 coupe will be in the same ballpark as the previous M3, you'll pay nearly twice as much to get a similarly performing porsche (131k for a baseline 911 gt3 with 475hp and 325ft-lb). The GT3 will likely continue to outperform the m3/m4 in terms of handling, but hp/torque wise, the stats are close enough.

When you upgrade to the M6 coupe, the price difference increases dramatically. You pay 113k for a baseline M6 coupe with 560hp and 500ft-lb. You'll have to pay 27k more for a aston martin vantage which only has 430hp/360ft-lb (that's m4 territory in terms of performance)....57k more for jaguar xk with marginally lower hp and torque...and over 120k more for a ferrari 458 with much less torque.

Granted you need a lot of dough to play with the m6, but you compare it to the other top-of-the line v8's out there...you really get a lot more performance for your money. Really makes you appreciate the value and performance you get for the price you pay with BMW!

Now use that same analogy with M4 vs new Mustang.

Ask yourself, how much more will you actually get, for the extra premium BMW charges..? Also, if BMW offered individual options and/or AWD.. taking the premium route, might feel premium.



note:
W/stang, the saving is enough to buy 4 winter tires, & attached them to a whole new car..

[Chihuahua]

Originally Posted by Boss330

That has allways been what a M car is about. Supercar performance in a family car.

And don't let others dictate how you should write, mean or feel...

+1

That seems to be a hallmark of this forum, unfortunately.

[E90beemerfan]

Discussing which car is better is a very subjective measure. There are many factors coming into play when searching for the best car. It all depends on what you are going to use it for. I agree that comparing a Ferrari with a BMW does not make sense at all. Comparing a 5 series with a 3 series is of more interest because the cars can do more or less the same (just that the F10 has become a “comfortable pig” and the F30 is still a feather in comparison, I have owned both).

If money is of no issue, you will have several cars to cover different needs. In this case you take the car you feel for there and then. I would certainly place a Ferrari 458 or F430 in my garage if I could afford it… I have driven the F430 spider and know the difference compared with a M3 E92. The M3 is a great machine, but the feel of driving a Ferrari is in a different league.

I hope the new M3/M4 will be so much lighter than the outgoing model that the agility will be improved. In this case most of us, that cannot afford having a Ferrari or Porche 911 (991) in our garage, can enjoy a M3/M4 with great driving dynamics and still bring family/friends with luggage around when needed. This does not mean the M3/M4 will ever be better than a Ferrari 458 or any other Ferrari model, because a Ferrari does what it is built for so amazingly well. Price is no issue in this category mind you.

[basscadet]

The M3 is a great compromise for the enthusiast who needs day-to-day utility. This is the "BMW value" that the OP speaks of. From the late 1980s until very recently if you needed to haul children, groceries, or put people in a back seat the M3 was the go-to car.

Infiniti made a run at BMW in the mid 2000s but seems to have given up the chase.

Now Cadillac, Ford, and Mercedes are in the chase. Are their offerings exactly the same as BMW's? No. But each of those 3 have cars that scratch an itch that only the M3 had been able to reach.

I just bought a CTS-V. Never in a thousand years did I think I would own a goddamned Cadillac. But it's an incredible car, there is little hope that a F8X M3/M4 can keep up with me either on a race track or at the dragstrip, especially if mods are on the table. And most importantly, it's fun to drive and has torque all over the place. Yes, it's ugly. Yes, it's American and doesn't have prestige. But I paid nearly half what a F80 will cost me for a car that is less than a year old with 10k miles.

I do think comparing a M3 to a GT3 is a little ridiculous as the GT3 gives up a ton of utility for driving pleasure and speed.

[Patronus86]

Originally Posted by E90beemerfan

Discussing which car is better is a very subjective measure.

The point of this thread wasn't to claim that one car is better than another...I simply said that BMW M cars offer better packages (performance, interior, quality, feel, ect.) for their sell price, better than what ferrari and porsche offer for their sell prices. In other words, as good as the ferrari 458 and porsche 911 gt3 are, and even though they outperform BMW M Cars, I think they are way overpriced.

Originally Posted by E90beemerfan

If money is of no issue, you will have several cars to cover different needs. In this case you take the car you feel for there and then. I would certainly place a Ferrari 458 or F430 in my garage if I could afford it… I have driven the F430 spider and know the difference compared with a M3 E92. The M3 is a great machine, but the feel of driving a Ferrari is in a different league.

Originally Posted by E90beemerfan

Price is no issue in this category mind you.

Just because money may not be an issue for some people and they are able to buy a ferrari 458 doesn't mean that said car is not overpriced. There are a lot of factors that go into determining what a product will sell for on the market, and profit margins are amongst the more influential of those factors.

A ferrari 458 does not cost $233k to manufacture, prep and transport to the customer. A large portion of that MSRP is based on the company's desire to net a profit. Everyone, including BMW and Ford and even Kia, does this when figuring MSRP's for their cars...it's how capitalism works. I'll contend, however, that certain companies, like Ferrari and Porshe, do this to a greater extent than the others because they cater to a specific consumer group (the wealthy) and they know they can get away with it.

[solstice]

I buy the best car for my needs and preferences that is within my car budget. I couldn't care less what the profit margin is on the car. If it's the best car for me for the price it's fairly valued as far as I'm concerned.

[catpat8000]

Originally Posted by ridin135

I would never base a vehicle purchase on its 0-60 time but that is me I guess. You are entitled to your opinions but it's pretty clear you haven't driven these different types of vehicles before. 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. The feel of a car to me is way more important then how fast I can get to 60. I would much rather own a 325hp cayman than an M6 as it is way more fun to drive and is a much better sports car.

Today's cars are governed by traction on there 0-60 times, so more HP is not always a good thing. I have driven many different vehicles including the M6 and personally I would never buy an M6. The M6 is really only good for a highway cruiser in my mind. It feels way too big and floaty to take it on the track and I wouldn't feel all that comfortable taking it on a mountain run.

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.

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. Off topic but hopefully ford nails down that new irs suspension as that was the only thing holding back the last mustang from being amazing.

+1
Especially to the M5/6 being a highway cruiser and bang for the buck being the 2014 Corvette!

[khanyam4]

Originally Posted by BMWinGE

The majority of people that can easily afford an M3, will not buy a Mustang, WRX, etc instead. The same can be said for people who can afford Ferraris, they are not likely going to pick an M3 instead. So those cars may not be worth twice as much when it comes to performance alone, but when you also factor in the quality, exclusivity, status, the price is justified for those who can afford it.

This right hea