Can you guys post a link to that article, I'd like to look at it.
gotta love the mags... Mustang wins in almost every category, AND costs 25k less, yet, the M3 is the better car.
Since our Stang is a DD, I look at the bottom of the specs. M3 14/20mpg GT 17/26... TWENTY SIX mpg on the hiway.
Yeah, you can keep your M3.... (and I was seriously considering one)
I can put my quick .02 in, don't have a lot of time right now but quickly; my last car before my 2010 GT was a 2008 M3, manual...
I know the 11 is a new animal but I don't think my 2010 would come close to the performance of the M.... that being said, don't misunderstand, the m3 was a rip off in my opinion. I paid 67k for mine and a year and a half later I got in the 37k range... ouch. the stang is just as much fun in reality as 99% of most peoples driving time is on the streets, not the track anyways and I didn't get to visit the track once in 35,000 miles of M driving.
Can you guys post a link to that article, I'd like to look at it.
the M was ridiculous in areas like handling, chasis/feel, brakes and 414 hp at 8400 RPM's was quite fun.
the price difference is insane, you could almost have 2 5.0's for the price of a new M
Luxury is all about perception.
For the price difference, there's no way the M3 is a better car.
I've gotta disagree with you on this one. I sold my 2008 GT for a 2008 M3. Btw - you got ripped off if you got that little on your trade. Dealers are still asking over $50k for most 2008s. I almost just traded the M3 in for a new C63 AMG last month and they offered me $44k for my M3 sedan that's nearly 3 years old. It stickered at $66k. The Mustang on the other hand lost nearly 50% of it's value in one year.
There is just no comparison between the two cars. Performance-wise, there will be little difference between the two cars for nearly any driver. From a performance per dollar standpoint, the Mustang is clearly the better choice. When you factor in features, amenities, luxury, and comfort, though, there is absolutely no comparison. The M3 instantly transforms from a luxury car to an absolute beast, while the 5.0 is more in absolute beast mode all the time. There's no calm and comfortable cruising "mode" in the Mustang - and that's exactly what some people want. Most people here will likely disagree with me, and that's fine. But most also haven't had a chance to spend any significant time (if any at all) behind the wheel of an M3 to really appreciate just how amazing of a machine it is. I always thought the magazines were BS and obsessed with BMW's for some strange reason. But after comparing the M3 to the C63 and IS-F, it becomes clear why the mags always choose BMW as the winner.
I'm not trying to take anything away from the 5.0 - it's an awesome machine, but it's just different. I mean who would really be cross-shopping those two cars anyway? No one - it's like the comparison test between Ferraris and Z06/ZR1 Corvettes. It is just apples to oranges.
Do keep in mind, however, that the DCT M3 is a bit faster than the manual. Same magazine tested the DCT 0-60 as 4.1 seconds and the quarter mile (if my memory serves me correct) in 12.5 at 113 mph...
I 100% agree. The M3 is marginally better in terms of qualiity materials used and perhaps fit and finish, however for the price difference you can pull out all the seats, get leather trim placed around all the panels and get an interior with softer more plush seats and an all around more luxurious feel than that of the M3. However why would anybody do that? People buy the Mustang since it is the best bang for the buck in the $30,000 price bracket. People who buy the M3 have the brand perception that it is worth all that much money more when in reality it isn't. However as long as you think it is, that is all that matters.
I actually agree with everything you've said. I absolutely love the new mustang and plan on getting one when the demand for them dies down a bit but the AMG's and M series cars are on a totally different eschelon of existence. Anyone who's seen the car show Top Gear knows that straight line acceleration, track times, etc isn't everything. Also, how many electronic gizmos they can cram in or luxurious items can be found also isn't the benchmark.
It's the total package and how the manufacturer has managed to engineer everything about the car to work in harmony with the driver.
I've driven a new M3 and ridden in a new M5 as well as a few of the recent AMG's, ridden in the twin turbo bently continental GT and Maserati Gran Tourismo and these cars have a high price tag for a very good reason. They manage to combine world class performance with the luxury, comfort and gizmos that the more discerning car owner demands.
It's more of a sum of all parts equaling the whole. Where most of us would like to judge them solely on numbers or specs on paper, to actually get behind the wheel of one and drive them on and off the track, you begin to understand what these luxury super cars are all about and it's really something hard to put into words or into specs on a magazine article.
If I could afford one, I'd probably take a used M3 over the mustang. As noted in a previous post, the depreciation is pretty hefty on these cars so buying certified pre owned really isn't that crazy if you can afford it. $45k for an M3 vs $38K for a well equipped 5.0L is NOT that much of a difference.
In terms of real world "practical" buying though, if they wanted to test a german coupe vs the GT, I'd like to see the 335i vs the 5.0.
What's funny is a standard Mustang GT with the Brembo package did that. The BOSS 302, BOSS 302 Laguna Seca and GT 500 all being even quicker that would be interesting.
If I could afford one, I'd probably take a used M3 over the mustang. As noted in a previous post, the depreciation is pretty hefty on these cars so buying certified pre owned really isn't that crazy if you can afford it. $45k for an M3 vs $38K for a well equipped 5.0L is NOT that much of a difference.
Having owned both, I can say "marginally better" isn't understating the difference quite a bit from my perspective. As was mentioned though, luxury is all about perception. While fit and finish and quality materials are objective features, the extent to which one is better than another is very subjective.
This simple fact will cause this discussion to never actually cease, as there is no objective measure. Quality/fit and finish isn't like comparing 0-60 times where one is better than the other and you can tell exactly by how much.
Anyone who simply says "there's no way" one car is better than another or "People who buy the M3 have the brand perception that it is worth all that much money more when in reality it isn't" are just being extremely close-minded. You just can't make that statement as a fact. Everyone is entitled to his own opinion. Some will think one car is better, another with think the other is better, and that is fine. No one is wrong. If someone was wrong and we operated by the logic stated by a couple people, the M3 wouldn't be in existence because no one would buy it since it "isn't" the better value.
Supermans' last sentence basically sums it up great - as long as the person who's buying the car sees the value in the extra cost, then that's great. That is why our economy works (well, sort of works right now...) and how free markets work.
Bang for the buck? Yeah, I think the 5.0 is way better than the M3. Again, it is still just an opinion, but I think you'd have a hard time to find anyone to argue against that.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?