How bad are E36 BMWs really?

AutoXR wrote:

njansenv wrote:

AutoXR wrote: As far as price/ performance and practicality, a Stock WRX wagon beats it in every category...

How do you figure? A really nice E36 M3 these days is a 10-15K car. They will do 0-60 in 5.7 or so 1/4 mile in 14.00 at about 100 mph They also get 25 mpg or so in mixed driving The E36 has a big trunk, and decent back seats that fold down. The E36 is also a much better handler right out of the box than a WRX wagon. OK, I'll give you the practicality.....maybe as the Subi is a wagon Otherwise a stock E36 M3 is a better performing car than a stock 10-15K WRX wagon. (unless there is snow on the ground)

Chris_V wrote: But the main point is here, no one here bought their BMWs for the badge. All of them like them for tangible reasons. But the people hating on them are doing so PRIMARILY due to the badge, and ascribing motives to those that did buy them, then insulting them for those made up motives. That's not merely "having an opinion" and you don't get to get off without comment in response for making those sorts of statements.

Chris you hit the nail on the head.

When I bought my ti (one of the most hated BMWs ever built.. at least by the badge whores.. as it "cheapens" the "image") I got her because I always liked the looks of the little bobtailed 3er. It's perceived combination of performance and practicality was perfect in my mind.

When I drove her home from western Mass to southern NJ.. a 6 hour drive in a car I had never SEEN let along test driven, it had 4 blown shocks, bad bushings, and a broken driver's side window and a radio without a code.. but even on that nailbiting trip home, even in the shame the car was, I understood why BMWs are revered. It quite honestly held the road like nothing I had owned since my old 914 (that car is still the best) or my X 1/9s.. but unlike those, I could carry 3 extra people AND all their stuff.

I have been hooked on E36s since.

The whole argument is pretty silly. Drive what you like to drive after all you are the one paying for it. After all it is not like people are slapping M3 badges on 318i four doors and saying it is the ultimate driving machine.

Beating more expensive machinery relates a great deal as to who is driving said machinery and on what course. At an Auto-X I have beaten a Lotus Elise with my modified RX-7 only to have had my clocked cleaned by relatively stock Miata on R-Comps. Go figure... I would rather have the Elise.

I would agree that the WRX is a more practical car over all than an M3.

From the stats that I have seen both run the quarter in about 14.5, both get about 20 mixed according to fuel economy.gov and both handle pretty well out of the box.

Handling is pretty subjective and I doubt you can find a back to back comparison. You can probably find a WRX cheaper but it will continue to depreciate faster whereas the M3 is holding its own. The WRX is only a few modifications away from roasting all but forced induction M3s in the 1/4.

Pick your poison.

Bobzilla wrote: I've been nice. But the generalities are hilarious. "Most of the car is ready for teh scrap yard before the bushings need replaced".. C'mon. pull your head from that dark smelly hole you call your anus and welcome to reality. Come talk to me when you buy your BMW new, auto-x it for 2 seasons, DD and get 35mpg and have a total expense of $15k wrapped up in it. Wanna talk about driver enjoyment? My first auto-x on my new suspension I smoked a 325i. That's enjoyment. BMW's are more expensive to maintain PERIOD. That's expected. The question then becomes is it worth the extra cost in driving satisfaction/ownership. For me it's laughable when I cna build a better car for less. It just doesn't have "the name". I personally consider Grassroots to be a non-name brand shopper's category. I guess I was wrong. The BMW leg-humping is thick in here. Am I at Car & Driver?

I've got a 91 525, that sees regular autocross duty, and has also done some fairly hardcore winter rally time. I've got 6k into it over 2 years. Oh, and it has 400,000 km's - that's 250 000 of your American miles - and no rust after having been in Canada it's entire life. It's rattle free, runs like a top and I drove it from Montreal to Vancouver to Seattle and back 2 years ago BEFORE I put any money into it.

The car is ridden hard and put away wet, it's a daily driver to boot and it loves it. Gets 28 mpg on the highway, 19 in town. I paid $2,500 CAD for it.

That's not a generality, that's a fact.

Oh, my sister has a Sonata, she seems to like it.

Greg Voth wrote: Handling is pretty subjective and I doubt you can find a back to back comparison.

Actually, you CAN find a back-to-back comparison, in the November 2002 issue, where we compared a BMW, Subaru and Acura for our RWD/AWD/FWD showdown.

http://grassrootsmotorsports.com/issues/details/91/

I've got small cars: Tall cars: But I like this one like no other:

Tim Baxter wrote:

Greg Voth wrote: Handling is pretty subjective and I doubt you can find a back to back comparison.

Actually, you CAN find a back-to-back comparison, in the November 2002 issue, where we compared a BMW, Subaru and Acura for our RWD/AWD/FWD showdown. http://grassrootsmotorsports.com/issues/details/91/

Ah but that was a 330i which I believe is a little softer and down on power.

Results of the test.

RSX-S - 42.284

WRX - 41.982

330i (DSC off) - 42.44

330i (DSC on) - 43.982

Yeah, but you think I'm going to miss a chance like that to mention a back issue?

^The ABCs of selling

Always Be Closing

:)

Well played Tim!

Blake: You got leads. Mitch & Murray paid good money. Get their names to sell them. You can't close the leads you're given, you can't close E36 M3, you are E36 M3, hit the bricks pal, and beat it, 'cause you are going out.

Shelley Levene: The leads are weak.

Blake: "The leads are weak." The berkeleying leads are weak? You're weak. I've been in this business fifteen years...

Dave Moss: What's your name?

Blake: berkeley you! That's my name!

[Moss laughs.]

Blake: You know why, mister? 'Cause you drove a Hyundai to get here tonight, I drove an eighty thousand dollar BMW. That's my name.

Greg Voth wrote: The whole argument is pretty silly. Drive what you like to drive after all you are the one paying for it. After all it is not like people are slapping M3 badges on 318i four doors and saying it is the ultimate driving machine. Beating more expensive machinery relates a great deal as to who is driving said machinery and on what course. At an Auto-X I have beaten a Lotus Elise with my modified RX-7 only to have had my clocked cleaned by relatively stock Miata on R-Comps. Go figure... I would rather have the Elise. I would agree that the WRX is a more practical car over all than an M3. From the stats that I have seen both run the quarter in about 14.5, both get about 20 mixed according to fuel economy.gov and both handle pretty well out of the box. Handling is pretty subjective and I doubt you can find a back to back comparison. You can probably find a WRX cheaper but it will continue to depreciate faster whereas the M3 is holding its own. The WRX is only a few modifications away from roasting all but forced induction M3s in the 1/4. Pick your poison.

Assuming we're talking about Bugeye WRXs... i personally found them to handle like complete piles of berkeley, stock.

I had zero problems running them down in an early 90s celica with eibach sportlines as my only upgrade, running All Season tires.

But that's just my opinion. Maybe i don't know how to drive AWD cars, i won't rule out that possibility.

You can tell who is defending their car to the death!!!

funny if the E36 is so much better box stock why did a superior E46 330 get beat by a WRX ?

Anyone who has driven on the stock Re92's knows that a WX has a lot of performance hiding in it with just a tire change.

What do I know thou... I owned an E36 M3 (not read about it) and have had 30+ WRX's as company cars...

You get a WRX as a company car? That is sweet, indeed.

E46's are softer and heaver than E36's and lack a LSD. The (stock) WRX's I've driven felt soft and heavy too, but had much better bite coming off of corners.

While in college a decade ago I worked as a valet and drove examples pretty much every single non-exotic car sold in that time. It quickly became obvious that the vast majority of cars were rolling appliances - very few cars stood as having any real personality, even fewer felt like magic from behind the wheel. I'd thought Miatas were chick cars before I drove one, and then I was sold. Porsches, Small BMW's, and certain Audi's were special too. 30 seconds behind the wheel - it's all it takes to know you've found a car designed by enthusiasts. Since then, other car's I've driven have really stood out - S2000's for instance are amazing when driven hard. I didn't feel the Solstice GXP until I really started to push it, and it suddenly came alive.

AutoXR wrote: You can tell who is defending their car to the death!!!

That's 'cause no one is silly enough to call a WRX owner a badge whore who only bought the car as a status symbol. It's not as much defending the cars, but defending ourselves against what is basically a personal attack. One using spurious claims and misinformation, to boot.

funny if the E36 is so much better box stock why did a superior E46 330 get beat by a WRX ?

Because no one pitted an E36 M3 against a WRX. They pitted the much less focused and heavier E46 non M against it. The E46 was much less a track ready, balanced car than the E36, especially comparing a non M versus an M. And, even at that, close the doors on the WRX and close them on the BMW. The WRX was a tinny factory modded econobox with bad ergonomics, cheap interior bits, and much less rigid structure, with a good engine and AWD. The non-M 3 series was essentially an entry level luxury sport sedan. that's what you paid extra for. Performance AND refinement. Yeah, we don't all need that (as is evidenced by the types of cars we all tend to have fun with over the years). But don't discount the engineering that goes into designing a car that way from the start, rather than upgrading a lesser structure to try to compete with it.

Anyone who has driven on the stock Re92's knows that a WRX has a lot of performance hiding in it with just a tire change.

To be fair, you can say that about pretty much any stock vehicle. The difference in my 7 sereis between the 16" all seasons it would have had stock (much like the stock replacement ones I had on it for the first year and a half I had it), and the 19" P zero Rossos it has on it now is impressive.

unfortunately it does seem that way about the 3 series.. the e30 was one of the most focused driver's cars.. but hampered by lower powered engines.. the e36 had better engines, but was not as focused.. the e46 even more of the same.. I have not driven the e9x so I cannot give an opinion.

Chris_V wrote: The WRX was a tinny factory modded econobox with bad ergonomics, cheap interior bits, and much less rigid structure, with a good engine and AWD.

You shut your whore mouth!

Actually, having driven both E36/E46, and my WRX, I've got to say, the E46 is a MUCH better car.. till I hit the go-pedal.

Ok, ok, till boost kicks in...

Chris: If I was going to attack you, it wouldn't be veiled under assumptions and hidden in a bunch of crap. I'll just call you what I would call you. I don't mince words.

Now.... with that said, you really expect me to believe that the majority of 3-series owners bought them because of the track abilities? Honestly? There's a reason for all the jokes about porcupines, bmw's and their drivers.

Ok, you guys were doing fine without me. Continue.....

Bobzilla wrote: Now.... with that said, you really expect me to believe that the majority of 3-series owners bought them because of the track abilities? Honestly? There's a reason for all the jokes about porcupines, bmw's and their drivers.

Well yeah, that's true about just about any roadgoing vehicle aside outside of a Caterham or an Exige.

BTW, those kind of jokes are generally more reflective of the person telling them.

I don't think anyone who has driven a stock bugeye is going to say it was the bees knees out of the box but you ad a rear bar and that piggy plowing car becomes a whole lot more fun.

I doubt that anyone who disagree that stock for stock a E36 M3 would outperform a stock bugeye WRX. Now who here would buy a showroom stock example of either of these cars then leave them completely stock down to the tires?

Interior quality is better on a BMW when it is new however I have never been impressed with how they hold up. Almost every E36 and E46 I have been in have had their own problems. Door panels pulling, window switches and regulators or motors going, headliners falling down. I just don't regularly see the same problems on many Japanese and American cars I have come across. I would trade longevity for initial quality. I would also contend that 02-03 WRX seats are some of the most comfortable and supportive I have been in.

That said I really like e36 M3s. I have been recommending one to my little brother after he graduates college. If I were to buy a WRX or an M3 today you can bet it would be the M3. It will not depreciate heavily and you can find nice non beat up examples. Plus the fiance already has a 2000 Impreza L Wagon. Thats practical and fun just without the turbo. A whiteline rear bar is on the way from Turn in Concepts.

Osterkraut wrote:

Chris_V wrote: The WRX was a tinny factory modded econobox with bad ergonomics, cheap interior bits, and much less rigid structure, with a good engine and AWD.

You shut your whore mouth! Actually, having driven both E36/E46, and my WRX, I've got to say, the E46 is a MUCH better car.. till I hit the go-pedal. Ok, ok, till boost kicks in...

Lol! yeah, I should have said "with an outstanding engine and AWD." I love the sound of a good Boxer Subie. Not as smooth as an inline 6, but man, addictive boostlies!

Maybe I'll just put Subaru emblems on my BMW......problem solved!

Now if I could only find some Porsche emblems for my Eagle...

"Someone stole the H off of my Honda! How will anyone know that I'm driving a Honda without the H!" ----Principal Skinner

Maybe Jimbo...I mean Bobzilla...took the H for his Hyundai?

somebody brought up the headliner issue. I think in the 90s only the asians got that one down (or up) correctly.

out of the 90s cars I once had here.. a 96 BMW 318ti, 94 Saab 900 SE Turbo, and my moms 95 Sunbird SE.. all of them had the headliner falling down.

I also had a 99 Hyundai tiburon, that had an almost structural steel headliner, it was that stiff and heavy (not to mention almost as well padded) and never even attempted to fall down.

I have to wonder though if some of the "problems" the european cars have is not due to how we treat cars here in the states. I know the UK have they have the MOT tests where they go over the car from top to bottom and if they do not fail you for bad stuff, you get a notice that it is going. No doubt this keeps a lot of bad bushings from staying on cars for 100,000+ miles.

Here in the states, cars are lucky to have their oil changed 10 times in that same amount of time.