BMW M3 v M5

Idbatterim

Hi, can someone please tell me how the e46 m3 v the e60m5 is only .2 seconds slower to the 100 kmph mark? the m3 has 338bhp and m5 500bhp!

copacetic

the M5 is heavier

Idbatterim

none of the e46 m3's have launch control do they?

Biro

It's to do with the fact that a 0-100km/h test is like judging a woman by looking at a picture of her neck. It only tells some of the story.
Put an M3 and M5 travelling at 90mph and shoe them both and you'll see the difference.

Anan1

Biro wrote: »

It's to do with the fact that a 0-100km/h test is like judging a woman by looking at a picture of her neck.

I like that analogy.

Gumbo

Idbatterim wrote: »

none of the e46 m3's have launch control do they?

yes the SMG models have launch control.

Idbatterim

when the m5 launches in 2011 as expected how much value could I expect the current m5's to lose?

Tropheus

Idbatterim wrote: »

when the m5 launches in 2011 as expected how much value could I expect the current m5's to lose?

I would say a lot, especially if you shop in the UK. They are already pretty reasonable in the UK at the moment. Don't forget insurance and running costs. They can't be a cheap car to run.

Idbatterim

i am considering getting an m3, and was deciding whether to wait for the current m5 to come down in price,. Believe it or not the only extra Id be paying is fuel! road tax and insurance would be the same, I just checked!

Idbatterim

I thought the insurance would have been more for the bigger engine! then again the m3 is so powerful, it probably doesnt even make much of a difference to them!

unkel

Idbatterim wrote: »

I thought the insurance would have been more for the bigger engine!

More powerful doesn't always mean more insurance.

Gumbo

Idbatterim wrote: »

i am considering getting an m3, and was deciding whether to wait for the current m5 to come down in price,. Believe it or not the only extra Id be paying is fuel! road tax and insurance would be the same, I just checked!

indeed, the E60 M5 is supposed to be monsterous on petrol. service and parts may be a little more expensive too, imo well worth it, what a car!

unkel wrote: »

More powerful doesn't always mean more insurance.

i agree, my insurance is 200e cheaper on a 2.0 twin turbo 280bhp legacy B4 than it is on a 200bhp Mk 5 GTi.

cabla

Biro wrote: »

It's to do with the fact that a 0-100km/h test is like judging a woman by looking at a picture of her neck. It only tells some of the story.
Put an M3 and M5 travelling at 90mph and shoe them both and you'll see the difference.

You can tell a lot about a woman from her neck...

Beta Ray Bill

kceire wrote: »

i agree, my insurance is 200e cheaper on a 2.0 twin turbo 280bhp legacy B4 than it is on a 200bhp Mk 5 GTi.

you're not driving a B4 now Kieth are ya? (sorry for going Off topic)

Gumbo

grahambo wrote: »

you're not driving a B4 now Kieth are ya? (sorry for going Off topic)

no, was thinking of one, even test drove one but just didnt warm to me......it wasnt an evo

im picking up an 2005 E90 BMW 320d tomorrow, so im going down the sensible route for 2 years or so

Seth Brundle

Idbatterim wrote: »

when the m5 launches in 2011 as expected how much value could I expect the current m5's to lose?

The current ones have lost so much value already that I'd say that it would be negligible.

qz

Seeing as you can clear an E39 for, as near as makes no difference, €15k, it's sunshine and lollipops when the F10 comes rolling along in terms of the viability of owning an E60.

Graham_B18C

Absolutely love the M5, I'd say it enjoys a sip of petrol though!

Just curious but in this ad it says the M5 is the fastest 4 door saloon in the world, is the Flying Spur not?

http://www.driving.ie/usedcars/index.cfm?fuseaction=car&carID=1377663

leeroybrown

I wouldn't put much faith on most of the 'facts' on Carzone. Also, that's appears to be a Hartge tuned M5 which has ~50BHP more power and should be able to hit 200MPH.

I had a serious think about an M3 earlier in the year. The insurance wouldn't have been much extra (compared to a Mk5 GTi) but the extra tax and servicing costs were just too much.

qz

leeroybrown wrote: »

I wouldn't put much faith on most of the 'facts' on Carzone. Also, that's appears to be a Hartge tuned M5 which has ~50BHP more power and should be able to hit 200MPH.

Even a standard M5, when de-limited, should be able to hit 204MPH.

leeroybrown wrote: »

I had a serious think about an M3 earlier in the year. The insurance wouldn't have been much extra (compared to a Mk5 GTi) but the extra tax and servicing costs were just too much.

Think with the heart not with the head!

Graham_B18C

qz wrote: »

Even a standard M5, when de-limited, should be able to hit 204MPH.

Ah ha, had a Google theree and the Bentely's top speed is 195-200. Thought it was the fastest!

unkel

leeroybrown wrote: »

I had a serious think about an M3 earlier in the year. The insurance wouldn't have been much extra (compared to a Mk5 GTi) but the extra tax and servicing costs were just too much.

What kinda M3? Unless it was very old / cheap, your depreciation on it alone will make the extra tax and servicing costs (compared to the Golf) immaterial in comparsion tbh.

leeroybrown

unkel wrote: »

What kinda M3? Unless it was very old / cheap, your depreciation on it alone will make the extra tax and servicing costs (compared to the Golf) immaterial in comparsion tbh.

An mid-cycle E46. It was one of those 'cars I want own' options. You've got a point about depreciation all right but throwing a very large chunk in extra tax, service and tyres on top of that was a bit much. In the end the current economic nosedive pushed me towards buying a newer GTi for less cash. Illogical as it sounds asset depreciation is a bit easier to put up with than high recurrent costs.