Redpill me on the F80 M3, /o/.
Looking at picking one up. (manuel)
>>14768644
>looking for a new bmw in manual
you'll be looking for a while then....
>>14768644
difference between m3 and m4!?
Heavy, slower than a type r civic, the engines and turbos have reliability issues. Otherwise fast fun car if not a little toned down from older generations
Chevy SS does everything your M3 can do for 40k less. Youre paying 40 grand for the badge.
>>14768662
Except chevy has american made godawful quality of parts. Fisher Price interior anyone? Also nice meme post. +500 meme points!
>>14768656
>Otherwise fast fun car if not a little toned down from older generations
lol face it buddy your e39 is shit now
>>14768662
>Chebby
>>14768655
2 vs 4 doors
>>14768644
the m2 exists my friend
Boost kicks in 930 style.
>>14768693
bmw is the honda of yuroop you cuck
>>14768760
I need 4 doors. I have an e46 if i want to drive a coupe for whatever reason.
>>14768644
Double check to see if they make a manual. It might just be flappy paddles only
>manuel
>>14768644
Pigfat, sounds like absolute shit.
I'm not a fan and I have liked every M3 ever
>>14768769
but that's wrong, you fucking retard
>>14768693
>Except chevy has american made godawful quality of parts
Except the SS is built in Australia.
>baited
>>14768839
It's spiky as fuck, you turd burglar
>>14768693
lol wtf are you talking about the LS engine has been known to be one of the most reliable platforms out there.
>>14768644
Fantastic engine response, infotainment isn't complete shit, and it handles very well. The downsides are, the steering is terrible, the clutch is bad if you're short (height), engine noise is bad, it sounds really fake. Other than that it's a pretty great sports car, however that steering feel really got to me.
Why is the term Redpill me now acceptable on 4chan?
>manuel
Chingado!
>>14768647
It's called factory order. Not everyone on /o/ is a poorfag.
>>14768946
That's just the engine. It's one good part surrounded by a shit car.
>>14769666
It always has been. Moot was just a bluepilled cuck.
Don't get the ceramics, unless you feel like shelling out 5K per rotor on the off chance you fuck them.
its too expensive
Cant keep up with anything in its price range
>>14768775
>BMW is the honda of yuroop
This is mostly correct, but I doubt in the way you intended it.
Honda and BMW both make standard commuter cars for your average joe to buy. Honda and BMW also both make high performance vehicles that are practically indistinguishable from the standard commuters to the untrained eye.
The only real difference is that BMW has well designed interiors and rear wheel drive.
>>14768644
Buy an E46 M3 and invest in the real estate.
>>14771553
Alrready have an E46.
>>14771451
Average joe doesnt have 70k to drop on a family sedan.
>>14772154
Buy another.
>>14768644
Don't.
The F80 generation M3/M4 is a failure:
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D87tO7VUs2I
>>14773031
>faster
>a failure
kek
americuckos still on life support
>>14768644
Take the blue pill, anon. If you're after a modern BMW get an M2 instead and turn up the boost if you want more power.
>>14772713
The m versions are 70k+, normal commuters start around 34k
>>14769697
Youre simply a faggot. This car is fast enough to have an automatic do a 1000 times better job than the pleb that you are
>>14773031
>h2h
I can do without their shilling.
>>14768644
They're very underwhelming as a performance car. I worked for a track-focused BMW fab shop/parts manufacturer when the F80/82 came out, and we bought one of the first ones in the country to use as a dev mule.
It's crazy fast, both in a straight line and around the corners. It's an excellent daily driver, comfy, roomy, and with a great interior. However, on the track or in a canyon, it really lacks the driver involvement that you get from previous M3s, with weak steering and pedal feel and a really bland soundtrack. My general opinion of the F80 M3 is that it's a great M5, but not really an M3.
I'd look for a really clean E92 M3 sedan if you want a BMW in this vein.
>>14773208
Oh, also, there are plenty of manual F80/82s out there, but there's pretty much no reason to go with them. The DCT is faster and suits the car better, and the shift and clutch feel of the manual aren't anything to write home about.
>>14773211
Except paddles are gaaaaayyyy
Jeremy Clarkson said it's brilliant.
just get a Porsche rich boy
>>14773034
>he's trying to justify the extra .003% of speed is worth an extra 85% more money.
>>14773034
>posting the chart that shows that the M2 is faster than the M4.
Thanks for proving that the M4 is utter shit.
>>14773034
So you counterpoint to prove that the M4 is not a failure is to post a picture that shows that the cheaper, lower class M2 is faster?
Way to cuck your own argument.
>>14773218
I get where you're coming from, but if you're the kind of driver that insists on 3 pedals, you're probably the wrong kind of driver for an F80 M3. It's the perfect car if you have to creep through an hour or more of stop and go traffic every day and want something that you can throw in auto mode and relax on your commute, but still be able to turn off the freeway and on to your favorite back road and tear it up. As a focused performance car for enthusiasts, though, it's terrible.
I mentioned my shop's car and my personal experience with it, but if you want more evidence, pretty much all of my clients felt exactly the same way. We were also regulars at a trackday series that attracts a lot of rich enthusiasts, and within a month of the F80's release, there were over a dozen of them at those events. Not a single one of those guys still owns the car, and most of them sold theirs off within 6 months.
>>14773034
>even the M2 is faster than M4
Yeah, I'd still call it a failure.
>>14768789
Buy an E90 M3, OP. Then you get dat V8 and the only real problems to worry about are throttle actuators and *maybe* rod bearings. Even then the latter issue affects a very small number of S65s.
>>14768644
if you're picking it up from a guy named manuel it's probably gotten beat on to shit
>>14773525
Oh wow, somebody else on /o/ who actually knows their shit when it comes to newer M3s.
My experience with the rod bearing thing is that it's basically inevitable, but only if the car sees extensive track time. Normal street use, even canyons and hooning, don't really result in the sustained high RPMs and overheated oil that leads to trashed bearings, but pretty much every one of my E92 clients that went to the track regularly had us replace their bearings at some point. We had to replace the ones on our E92 race car pretty regularly, too, until we switched to a dry sump system, which seems to have cured the issue. (Likely due to cooler oil, more consistent flow, and the fact that the capacity is much larger, so you're not flowing the same oil through the engine as frequently.)
>>14773577
I'm not terribly worried about the bearings in my motor since my E92 is model year 2013 and they switched from the lead and brass shit to aluminum and tin, but I'm not sure if tolerances were changed. My assumption is that even if the bearings start getting worn, at least they won't score the crank.
>>14773605
Yeah, the '13s seem to be better, although part of that is that most of them are so low-mileage. I just don't know that I'll ever trust BMW when it comes to rod bearings, or engine wear items in general, the guys at the M division seem to think like aircraft engineers and trade longevity for performance and tight tolerances.
>>14773624
AMG does the same thing. Engine rebuilds are required every 60k miles. It's the price of extracting every ounce of performance from the engine.
>>14773627
>engine rebuilds are required every 60k
[citation needed]
>>14773154
Haha no.
http://www.bmwusa.com/bmw/5series
Starting prices are 50k, after taxes and tags, and a few ticks on the option box, look to spend 70k on a 535i
>>14773624
Not sure about that anon, aircraft have very long service lives typically. Granted they're meticulously maintained, which might be why they last so long too. I really think as long as an M car's service schedule is followed the car should last a long time. Though to be honest the oil change intervals on the S65 seems way too long, even though the motor carries 10 liters of oil. I've been going by the dealer schedule, but I think I'm gonna double the frequency of oil changes after my next dealer change in a thousand miles or so. I really don't want to be the sort of fag to start deciding I know better than the engineers and choose a different viscosity oil or some shit.
>false engine noise
>>14773905
If you're really concerned about it, pull a sample and send it to Blackstone.
As for oil, normal interval is fine unless you track a lot, in which case it's right to double it. If you want to think about brands and viscosities, our engine builder, who also did work for some pretty major ALMS teams and stuff like that, swore by Liqui Moly 10-60, and so we did too, and always had great luck with it. (Though our race car no longer runs it, because we got sponsored by Motul and use their product instead, which is also great.)
>>14773166
I would honestly get the auto, but OP wants manual. I was just saying there's nothing wrong with factory ordering it if you can afford it.
>>14768644
Saw one of those, exact same powder blue near OSU. Sadly, it was also "slammed" and I died a little inside
>>14773948
Need pics of your racecar senpai, curious if I've seen your car before
>>14774017
Ayyy you're an Oregonfag too?
>>14774049
Ohio State University, sorry
>>14774024
You probably have if you frequent the big BMW forums, since we had pretty popular build threads and stuff. It's a flat white E92 with a stroker motor, and it's now widebody, if that rings a bell.
I'd like to be less evasive about it, but posting pics or direct details would make it way too easy for people to find my personal info.
>>14774062
Gotcha, I'll look around on M3post
>>14773034
>>14773034
You just sank your own point by showing that the M2 is just as fast as the M4 and neither are a decent amount faster than the mulletmobile.
Protip: a 0.21s lap time difference vs an AMERICAN car that costs a little more than half as much is not anything to be proud of.
If you are a German car maker and you just BARELY beat an AMERICAN car that is over 30k cheaper, you have failed hard.
Looks shit, sounds shit, electric steering and 9:1 for autotragics to manuals sold. It's the blunder of the century.
>>14774443
>beat
>performance is the only thing that matters
Yet another fucktard comparing luxury cars to pony cars that blow their whole load on go-fast so penny-pinchers can benchrace them. You do know BMWs have things like build quality, materials, and aesthetics to consider, right? How about the quality of the driving experience?
>>14774765
>DCT
>autotragic
Confirmed never driven DCT car. It's not a slushbox. Automatic transmission? Sure, in function. But from an engineering perspective it's completely different from the typical torque-converter autobox. There is a distinction.
>>14774443
You realize the new Camaro has the outward visibility of a fucking Abrams tank, right Billybob?
It's a barebones track car with decent front seats however there's no real space in the back unless you are an amputated 5 year old, the trunk is small as shit, and luxury wise, the M3/4 shit all over it. That's why the M3/4 are more expensive.
You know that saying you get what you pay for?
>>14768647
There's lots of M cars that have it. I found one not to long ago.
>>14768644
It may just be that I'm retarded but I couldn't figure out how to get the reverse to work when I lookedat a manual M3. I've driven manuals for years but this was tough for some reason.
>>14774925
This. /o/tists always base their opinions of DCTs or fast-shifting autos on their experience driving their mom's auto Corolla. Essentially all higher end DCTs, and some torque converter autos (e.g. ZF, Lexus 8 speed) are really good.
>>14774956
I learned the other day that the 7 speed automatic in the Aston Martin Vanquish has the same shift time of the E9X M3's DCT: 130 milliseconds. And the M3's DCT box is considered top-notch, so it's really impressive how far conventional autos have come.
>>14775112
Redpill: Fastest cars in the world are auto
Veyron SS
One:1 (top speed of 280mph)
GTR
That doesn't make manual bad. I'd still have a 6 speed in my garage to dick around on the track. There's pros and cons to both.
>>14774929
>someone talks shit about american cars
>this fuckwit is so illiterate he spergs out and starts calling him stupid names that basically suggest fanboy
>>14774911
So what you're saying is that performance is not a primary focus of the M series? And you're also saying that the big german manufacturers should not aspire to make faster cars than american manufacturers, which they consider laughable?
haha, keep defending, fucking dumb fanboy.
At least some of us who own BMWs were able to admit bmw had lost its edge, not you though! Keep trudging on, bmw fankiddie. Brand loyalty is the sure mark of a duped consumer.
>>14768805
>>14775420
I'm just saying there's a reason why BMWs are more expensive. It's not just power but also luxury, styling, and R&D. It's a luxury performance car with style.
American muscle is just performance and when I say performance I mean linear acceleration. Lately however they've been getting better at turning.
>>14773166
There's no excuse for buying automatic
Shouldn't you be in the lifted truck containment thread?
>>14773678
Well my friend just bought a 2013 328i for 30k so that's too bad for ya huh?
>>14775430
Except price/performance never was the object of the BMW M cars. Throughout history there were always cheaper and faster alternatives.
E30 M3? - $30-35,000, slower than L98 C4 Corvettes that cost the same and $5000 cheaper RX7 Turbo IIs
E36 M3? - $35-40,000. Same price bought you a much faster LT1/LS1 Corvette and Mustang Cobra wasn't much slower for $5,000 less.
E46 M3? - $50-60,000. As quick as a LS1 C5 or C6 Corvette or a $27,000-33,000 Evo 8 GSR/WRX STI/Neon SRT4 ACR/350Z Track.
They never were meant to be bang for your buck cars. They're the overall package/sum of its parts/feels cars. They were meant to be cars you could do anything with. Perfectly comfortable daily drivers to take long highway drives with while able to look "good" at a high end steakhouse with your wife. They're "feels" cars that just like the Miata/BRZ make you feel 100% confident in your driving skills in the car and the car feels willing to do what you ask for it just from how communicative it is (not like other cars where you have to chuck them in and pray for the best). That makes them easy to drive fast.
If you've never driven a BMW you just won't get it. They're purely "feels" cars otherwise there wouldn't be such a rabid fanbase with them. They never were bang for your buck cars ever in history.
>>14768656
>slower than a type r civic
lol
>>14775690
>Except price/performance never was the object of the BMW M cars
I didn't say "price/performance" you fuckwit.
20 years ago BMW would NEVER have let their M3 be touched by the performance of an american muscle car.
>>14775699
20 years ago the Mustang Cobra existed and made 300hp in a 3400lbs against the 1996 M3's 240hp/3200lbs.
And it cost the same as the M3 while being much slower.
Let's go 25 years ago. The 1991 M3 (200hp/2900lbs) cost the same as the 1991 300ZX Twin Turbo (300hp/3400lbs) or L98 Corvette (250hp/3300lbs) while going way slower
Like I said, they're overall package type of cars. Luxury sports cars aimed at yuppies who can't afford a 911 (Another "sum of all parts" car that has had a horrible price/performance ratio throughout its life)
Price/performance and benchracing sells cars, feels and overall package make cars legendary.
>>14775759
Quit focusing on straight line and power to weight and READ WHAT I AM SAYING
>>14775886
What, that a cheaper car from a different country couldn't compete with the M3 until recently? That's bullshit. Read what I wrote first. Quit bench racing and actually drive. I don't even like the F80 M4 but you're paying a premium when you buy a M3/4 for the LUXURY part. It's again, why a E46 when it was new cost almost twice as much as a 2004 STI when they were both new.
>>14775913
>What, that a cheaper car from a different country couldn't compete with the M3 until recently?
Shut the fuck up and read my post again you dumb shit>>14775699
>>14775921
>E36 M3 vs 1996 Cobra/Camaro SS or any Corvette
Your argument is fucking stupid and holds no water.
>>14773678
The 320i is sufficient for family duties. It's grown enough to fit car seats in the back.
>>14775759
do you understand thats the bmw m is getting humiliated by a fucking camaro not a corvette a FUCKING CAMARO THE SYMBOL OF WHY AMERICAN CARS ARE DUMB THE REASONS BEHIND >LOL AMERICAN CARS
>>14773034
noice, ameribetics still can't deal
