Entry Level Luxury Performance Sedans

gpwatfrd

I quoted the 330i,G35coupe with my Insurance AAA NJ. The 330i was about 40% higher than the G35coupe. If you want to factor in gas mileage than you should add Insurance cost into the picture.

shipo

When I was shopping for my 530i a couple of years ago, I cross shopped the G35 and my insurance company (Liberty Mutual in NJ) told me that the 530i was something like $150 cheaper than a G35, and only $60 more per year than my (then current) 328i. That said, the G35 was just new on the market at the time, maybe things have changed.

I will say that I have always been surprised at how cheap my two BMWs have been to insure. My 1999 328i was about $110 less than my previous 1995 Passat GLX, and my 530i is $32 cheaper than our family hauler, a 2003 Dodge Grand Caravan ES. Go figure. ;-)

Best Regards,
Shipo

kyfdx

Yeah.. that seems strange.. My '03 325i is only $75 more per year than the '01 4-cylinder Accord it replaced.. About 10% more. I almost said something about insurance rates, but I was going to guess the Infiniti would be higher.

regards.
kyfdx

kdshapiro

I second shipo, I got a dirt cheap quote for a BMW in NJ as well.

cheerioboy26

IIRC, my 00 Maxima SE costs slightly more than my 03 G35sedan to insure. They are about the same, $600 each per year (Northern Va).

kennyg5

$600 a year? That is not even enough to pay for liability coverage alone, and I have been driving 25 years with a perfect record. LOL. It shows you what New Yorkers have to pay. I pay a lot more for my 03 Max than my 97 Max. Probably due to higher HP and HID theft concerns.

I believe one can get a decent price (ie not MSRP) on a G35 these days. Has anyone compared a similarly equipped G35 against the TL? Which is better priced (not from dealer's perspective)?

gpwatfrd

I can only speak to personal experience. The G35coupe was even cheaper to insure than the 02 ES330 which happens to be with AAA NJ. I would have never thought that. This was an 03 330i which I had a deposit on at the time. I thought the BMW quote was high but now outrageous. The real surprise was how cheap the G35coupe was to insure.

drmp

The C class deserves consideration especially with the interior and mechanical redesign. I am more interested with the c230 sport sedan with very good fuel economy and a BMW-like performance, excellent oversized 4-piston brembo brakes, staggered 17" wheels, without sacrificing luxury ride, and excellent noise control.

The C320 has a much smoother & heavier engine but it takes away the fun factor and the tossability of the car. Hey, you only live once, you might as well enjoy it.

blueguydotcom

Yeah, MB reliability...as if BMW's weren't bad enough.

pmb

I traded in my 2001 330ci for a 2004 g35 cpe about 4 months ago. I will admit that the g35 exhaust sounds powerful and it is probably quicker off the line than the 330, but the 330 is actually quicker 0-60. Also the 330 is a quieter car on the road...I tend to hear more road noise in the g35. As far as gas mileage i now get about 20% worse mileage than my bmw. I do have to admit though that the g35 seats are very comfortable. Bottom line is that there is a difference, but the g35 is also 10 less than a similar 330ci.

chrisboth

I can personally attest and sill readily assure you that the BMW is not faster 0-60 unless in Perf Package. If you buy an auto the difference between the two auto's is about .8 or so difference. All 3 series fall short or barely match (perf only) the G 1/4 mile time. The G is more visceral and with more engine noise the ride is louder - but with 220 watts of bose you wont care unless you are like me and you like th noise. I haven't put in a CD in 3 months and barely turn it on. With 277 or whatever HP the G will run about 14.1 in the quarter my guess. That's unreacheable buy any bimmer without spending 75k on 545 or 65 on a M3.

blueguydotcom

can personally attest and sill readily assure you that the BMW is not faster 0-60 unless in Perf Package. If you buy an auto the difference between the two auto's is about .8 or so difference.

Buying an automatic in a sports sedan - it's like forcing Jessica Alba to wear a sackcloth all the time. Is your car an auto?

That's unreacheable buy any bimmer without spending 75k on 545 or 65 on a M3.

Your prices are interesting. Wrong but interesting. 58 msrp on the 545i and 47k on the M3.

kdshapiro

"That's unreacheable buy any bimmer without spending 75k on 545 or 65 on a M3."

For having 50+ hp on the 3 series the G35 coupe is probably only *marginally* faster in the 1/4 mile.

chrisboth

"Buying an automatic in a sports sedan - it's like forcing Jessica Alba to wear a sackcloth all the time. Is your car an auto? "

Yes it is I dont want to hear it. There are few autos that are this fast when compared to 6sp counterparts. I drive it everyday and dont want fat left leg sydnrome from driving in philly traffic. If i wanted a true sports car with tru sports tranny for tru sports driving (on the weekend) I would look into the miata or the 2 series coming soon. A 5 series size family cruiser with 4 doors is not lacking in 5at form especially at the track where I have done quite well. I owned a 5 speed for 12 years or so - I know all about feeling connected....I dont miss it one bit and since it doesn't slow the car down too much it's prob best left to the new buyer to decide.

In 6MT form the G 1/4 miles are sub 14. Show me a quarter less than 14.5 for any 3 series and I'll make more sense of the comment "For having 50+ hp on the 3 series the G35 coupe is probably only *marginally* faster in the 1/4 mile. "

Marginally faster is still faster. 14.6 or 14.5 vs 13.9 or 14 is a major difference and worth the savings no less that a G is over a 3. Lets see marginally (+) faster and cheaper in any tranny...And don't forget if there are doubters these numbers I qoute are with 260hp. with 270 or more those margins will not get anything but bigger.

.4 seconds is a whooping at the track as the coupes i run can attest.

AS for 545 being sub 60 HA are you kidding. A loaded new 530 is 54-56k as I've shopped them and there are no discounts for a 545. The old 540 loaded was near 68 or so.

M3 for 47K - Stripped maybe and with a discount I can't get !! The 330 loaded is 44 man for 3 more K we'd all be in M3 me included. If you can get these prices please email me as I am the family car shopper and there is a demand at these numbers.

kdshapiro

"Marginally faster is still faster. 14.6 or 14.5 vs 13.9 or 14 is a major difference and worth the savings no less that a G is over a 3."

Yes, I agree if you want a G. But if you want a BMW you'll be getting substantially better gas mileage, more refined ride, better precision machine, and a nice looking ride to boot! Your ride, you decide.

If you're really talking about racing then you can supercharge your M3 and do 0-100 in 5 seconds.

If you want a stripper M3, just order it, you'll wait a few months, but you'll get the car you want. You can order a stripper M3 for $47,895 here

riez

For manual transmission cars, driver skill and familiarity with the clutch & shifter will make a huge difference. The car mag guys are paid to do this and use aggressive means. Are you willing to turn your TC system off and drop your clutch at 3-5,000 RPMs and smoke your tires? Few real world drivers even come close on the street. And if they do it, they don't do it many times.

Even BMW's SMG launch control will only allow so many of the most brutal launches. Forget if the number is 5-6-7.

An automatic transmission takes most of the driver skill out of it. It is easier for the average person to get close to theoretical maximum performance since there are fewer variables and less driving skill is needed.

Don't forget that gearing and final drive ratios are critical. A huge key to best 0-60 mph time is to do it needing only 2 gears (1st and 2nd). Time between shifts is wasted. Too many cars require a shift to 3rd to hit 60 mph. They'll hit the rev limiter before reaching 60 mph and you have to upshift.

C&D's 5-60 mph "street start" time is probably the best single acceleration number for the average street driver!

chrisboth

It's been too long so here goes...

"Yes, I agree if you want a G. But if you want a BMW you'll be getting substantially better gas mileage, more refined ride, better precision machine, and a nice looking ride to boot! Your ride, you decide."

1) Substantially better Gas mileage:

OK you win. Folks do report 3-6 better in a 3 over G. Got to have fuel to beat the class to tears.

2) More refined ride:

NO Is this more interior stuff because in stock 27k form the G handles better is faster than and out tractions (new term) the 330 and matches the 330 zhp. The latest test has the G sedan with 215s at .9 skidpad and most slaloms stats have the G at >66 or so and never once second to a 330 in direct comparison. There is nothing the 3 does better except maybe in ride quality? Where o where is the refinement in a vehicle that is second to the leader in all performance categories. I must have missed that when I bolted for the infiniti dealer after my 330 was 44k; and get this -no more refined than the 28K G I test drove. In fact all the extra wheel base is more 5 series like than 3 according to the bimmer loving soon to be in laws who claw at my G all weekend. The 3 is refined and it has the interior of a german car sure - but it can't run the road any better than a G beyond the intricacies of personal preference. ALWAYS subjectiveness here but lets take a look at what the media has to say once in a while when they consistently dub the G the class leader. I'm sure the new 3 will address this in spades.

3) Better precision machine:

 Um NO. What does this mean since the car is slower and handles almost as well as a G. Does the 3 have some inbred feeling of precision that makes it feel like it can handle or acccelerate like a G when it can't...whatever it is it costs too much - WAY too much.

4) Nice looking ride: YES you are correct. The 3 is great looking and will prob be the best looking of the 1-7 series once refined to Bangles desires. At least he got 1.5 of 3 right - the 5 is growing on me again! The old 3 is a classic desing for sure - i wonder if they thought they would sell that many here - ubiquity is a sign of success. The G is like the Cowboys - OK Blueguy - The G is like J LO - either people love her or hate her.

Supercharge an M3 - Power is not lacking in an M3 but that would keep me from going far from home. With all the problems a over stroked engine already has at 9k rpm - another 140 ft/# would be a detenation waiting to happen. I'm a NA guy. PS the VQ handles about 400-500 hp FI without reinforced internals. If one had to build a car from scratch and get the most HP I know pleny of FI G's that would cause one to scratch thier head when considering a M3. Guys with 6 pounds of boost are getting 12.5's with street tires. Really does anyone FI an m3? they must really turn down the boost.

chrisboth

PS I'm building my m3 now and It's 1500 just to have the paint I want.

OK 55K without too much extra is more like it. less than I thought - o wait no cd changer - jeez.

speedracer3

I'd give the "prescision machine" tittle to Infiniti, since they are more reliable than BMWs. I think the correct word is probably "teutonic".

designman

Teutonic? With Bangle as design director? Nah, those days are over.

speedracer3

Designman,

Be nice, the 3 series is not Bangled yet. That's next year.

designman

Ah-h the E46. We're at the Last Chance Saloon here. Get 'em while you can!

blueguydotcom

C&D's 5-60 mph "street start" time is probably the best single acceleration number for the average street driver!

I've never understood that one - drop the car into first and take off like a bat out of hades.

 The sillier one involves top gear from like 30 or 50. Uh, what sort of a tool with a 6 speed tries to speed up in 6th from 50? That's a cruising gear - use it over 80 mph.

MSRP on a 545i is 58k. If I wanted that car stripped like that, I'm sure I could get a deal for it at least a grand below that price. Probably more off than that.

As for FI G35...no way. talk about nuking a warranty. A nicely packaged G35 is like 34k msrp, 30k before TTL. nice deal. If you like the car. A guy in an STI can obliterate all the cars mentioned. but just like the G35, the car didn't appeal to me. I can't change the fact I just didn't love the G35. I wanted too. i'm sure my accountant wishes I'd gone that route too. If outright performance were my only goal either of the WRX models would be in my garage. I expected more from my sports sedan and only one company offered a product I could put up with day in and day out. It wasn't acura or infiniti. I wish it had been...

riez

blueguydotcom... What happens when you "drop the car into first and take off like a bat out of hades?" Smoking/shredding rubber! Premature clutch wear? Possible drivetrain trauma?

The 5-60mph street start is how most driver's do their "testing". Can't say I have any desire to do smoking burnouts. Tires are expensive and I need them for handling not to create smoke!!!

The top gear testing data indicates engine torque and relative gearing. Just check out the difference between say a 6-speed manual TSX, a 6-speed manual G35 coupe, and a 6-speed manual GTO.

blueguydotcom

blueguydotcom... What happens when you "drop the car into first and take off like a bat out of hades?" Smoking/shredding rubber! Premature clutch wear? Possible drivetrain trauma?

None of the above. I can slip into first in my bimmer and simply launch. No fuss, no TCS, nothing but zipping away. I do it quite often if I'm creeping a light I know that will change soon. Roll up, slide into first and when the light changes, slam it home.

The 5-60mph street start is how most driver's do their "testing". Can't say I have any desire to do smoking burnouts. Tires are expensive and I need them for handling not to create smoke!!!

Never had smoke coming from my tires - even with traction control off and the car going sideways.

The top gear testing data indicates engine torque and relative gearing. Just check out the difference between say a 6-speed manual TSX, a 6-speed manual G35 coupe, and a 6-speed manual GTO.


And on any of those cars, if they're geared correctly, the car should be turning almost no RPMs at 60 or 30 in 6th gear. Only an tool would attempt to punch it at 60 mph in 6th gear. You don't buy a manual to totally be out of control of the car. 3rd gear works fine at those low speeds. 6th is for over 80. Ideally around 100. top gear is supposed to be a cruising gear, not a passing gear. Sounds like the sort of test a magazine would do to compliment the lazy american style of driving.

riez

blueguydotcom... Remember, I'm talking about the average driver. And most drivers in USA are driving automatics. Keep in mind that many cars don't allow you to disable or fully disable their traction control system. In these cars, you can't achieve maximum acceleration launches. And other cars lack the engine output to really smoke their tires no matter how high the RPMs before you drop the clutch.

Unlike the aggressive-launch 0-60 mph test, the 5-60 mph test is a very good indicator of the average person's ability to reliably duplicate the test result, esp. in an automatic.

kyfdx

The 5-60 is a good test, mainly because it involves no revving up and clutch drop. It takes the spinning tire and driver ability equation out of the acceleration numbers.. It can give you a good handle on torque and turbo lag, etc... The top gear thing is just silly.. If the car is automatic, they obviously can't keep it in top gear, so the test is useless.. but, they still do it.

regards,
kyfdx

kdshapiro

We must be reading different magazines.

rckyvntr

I apologize in advance if the topic has come up before, and sorry to divert from the current train of thought, but …

Has anyone else struggled with the transition to a car for the middle-aged, mid-career, upper-mid income person with spouse & kids?

I am having difficulty making the leap to what I consider “boring” cars. Don’t get me wrong, I appreciate the fact that a good 6-speed sport coupe/sedan, with 2+2 seating, on average, will go from 0-60 in less than 6 seconds, and run the skid pad at over .88g. What I am referring to are the bland body styles & interior that tell you that the car’s driver runs a mile in more than 8 minutes, sees a therapist, has a non-aggressive investment portfolio, listens to 70s rock and has a short-term memory problem.

The TL 6MT, G35 6MT Coupe, 330ci have bland, common body styles and interiors. They are not head-turners.

Four seat head-turners exist in other classes: Mazda RX8, Volkswagen bug convertible, BMW Mini Cooper, Dodge Magnum.

It seems there is a need for a class of automobile in the $35K range that fulfils all of the needs of the near-luxury buyer with kids -- plus has head-turning appeal.

cdnpinhead

the people with the means to acquire a vehicle in this price range, plus the need for a sedan (as opposed to a Boxster or S2000 or something), are generally conservative, otherwise known as bland.

I have one of these blandmobiles, and couldn't even get it in a decent color. Back in 2000, only BMW offered a true red. Everyone else offered two or three shades of gold, the obligatory silver, black & white & precious little else. Everything's metallic (the better to hide defects), rather than good ol-fashioned solid colors like red, orange & BRG, among others.

Even if all you want is a head-turning color, this is not the segment for you.

Never mind a head-turning vehicle.

Good luck in your quest. I feel your pain.

wco81

http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/business/columnists/bu- siness_update/8948216.htm

(registration required)

As someone speculated about the new 3 series having some kind of iPod integration, looks like BMW is heading that way. However, the BMW official didn't say this would be specifically for the new 3-series model, just that it would be for all BMWs and Minis (Cooper that is, not iPod).

kdshapiro

Head turning automobiles don't exist under $120K. Even the Porsche in my area is so common it's not a head turner. This is not to say they (Porsche) doesn't make nice looking vehicles.

However, BMW in it's price range IMO, makes the best looking/driving/entry level luxo automobile.

jazevedo

Yeah, in the SF Bay Area, the flashy cars are everywhere. I get excited when i see a Lamborghini but not much else! As for sedans, I guess it really has to do with preference. I personally think the head turners that you mention such as the rx8 and bug, look pretty dumb and I'd rather have a more normal looking car. Not bland though, like a passat or accord, but a bit more sporty like the G35 or bmw. BMW's are everywhere, but I feel the 330 with zhp makes it look a bit different with a different front bumper and wheels that make the car look better. Maybe people don't even notice those subtle differences though. Unfortunately I don't like the looks of the G35, so I'm stuck lusting after the BMW, which you see everywhere.

I guess I'm just saying that I don't think the bmw looks so boring...except that many people have them. It certainly won't make you look old. Just my opinion....

It's probably hard to make flashy on a budget and still appeal to a high % of people..without looking ghetto or tacky. Bland sells!

blueguydotcom

Four seat head-turners exist in other classes: Mazda RX8, Volkswagen bug convertible, BMW Mini Cooper, Dodge Magnum.

To each his own. Only the RX-8 to me is a head turner and it has FAR less usable space than the "bland" TL, G35 and 3 series. Guess I'm weird as I think the TL, G and 3 are sexy and classy while the other cars mentioned are showy do-nothings.

It seems there is a need for a class of automobile in the $35K range that fulfils all of the needs of the near-luxury buyer with kids -- plus has head-turning appeal.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Unless you're looking to buy a car that other people approve of...which is ultra-weird.

scott1

"The TL 6MT, G35 6MT Coupe, 330ci have bland, common body styles and interiors. They are not head-turners. "

I had those same thoughts. I traded in a 99 Navy Blue Corvette for my 04 Cadillac CTS, because I needed something a bit more practical. The CTS is more of a head turner then most of the others I was considering, the styling certainly isn't bland anyway. It's a great handling car as well...it gives me some of the same driving enjoyment I had with the Corvette.

kdshapiro

"The CTS is more of a head turner then most of the others I was considering,"

Unfortunately it's a head turner in the negative sense of the word. I think it's still plain ugly.

To be a head turner it still has to be an exotic. Otherwise the car is stuck in a morass of cars all trying to be head turners, where no one car really stands out.

jjm

"Unfortunately it's a head turner in the negative sense of the word."

Speak for yourself. Sold 50K units last year, 25K thru May this year.

Of course the styling of the CTS is love it or hate it. More people love it right now than hate it.

I think Cadillac did what they had to do with the bold style of the CTS. They knew they couldn't make it look like a 3 series wannabe, so they went with a completely different look. The sales figures prove there was a market outside of the classic look of the 3.

chrisboth

While the caddy may not turn heads for the same reasons IT IS turing heads. The CTS-V is phat and I applaud caddy for going against the grain with the CTS sytle theme. The angular design is bold and not hard to like IMO. That style is selling in many iterations and will be with us for a while.

kdshapiro

"The CTS-V is phat and I applaud caddy for going against the grain with the CTS sytle theme"

It's still ugly, and that has nothing to do with sales. Look at Hyundai to prove that point. I would rather have a new 3 series with the 333hp turbo than a CTS-V any day. I can just imagine my car with 333hp. Yummy! Maybe BMW will even offer up an LSD.

kyfdx

in arguing about looks.. Everyone has their own opinion.. Easiest way for this discussion to devolve into name calling. Lets find something else to discuss.. PLEASE.

regards,
kyfdx

rckyvntr

The cover photo of C&Ds March 2004 comparison says it all ...

They all look like Japanese economy cars, cut from the same basic, bland mold. Nothing special -- you see them everywhere, and everyone is driving one. Anyone of them could be a Korean auto, a decked-out Accord or Camry, or ... "is Yugo back with a new sedan?"

The desert backdrop is appropriate.

http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp?section_id=15&article- _id=7785&page_number=1

rckyvntr

http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp?section_id=15&article- _id=7785&page_number=1

jmess

Spend sometime in Europe and amerasian sports sedans stand out from the typical European styling.

At least folks there take badges off cars because they don't want to draw attention.

designman

I like the CTS approach, the stealth fighter inspired look. I think it's too tall though... disproportionate. Don't you think they would have nailed it with a little less height? The tail is chunky and the tail lights overpowering.

The stealth look personified is the Cadillac Cien. It's awesome. They get an A with this baby. Auto designers take note, this one shows real talent. No Lamborghini or Ferrari has anything on this masterpiece. Of course, I'm talking only about exterior styling. Too bad we'll probably never see it released. BTW, would have given it an A+ if not for, once again, the stark, blocky rear which seems to afflict most cars today:

http://www.edmunds.com/news/conceptcarspotlight/articles/51600/ar- - - - - ticle.html

kdshapiro

It gets a kinda okay. If you take the concept of styling and moving forward, BMW did a better job in their 5/7 series than Caddy did with this. Of course, it's a prototype, but I'm not a fan of bold angular styling. That's why I like the new 5/7 series.

designman

I think Caddy is going in the right direction. Seems they are well on their way to proving they can morph into something that was unexpected from them. They are pulling off change. If they refine and develop some stamina in this direction they should do fine. On the other hand, the BMW story is developing into one of recovery.

chrisboth

"Look at Hyundai to prove that point. I would rather have a new 3 series with the 333hp turbo than a CTS-V any day. I can just imagine my car with 333hp. Yummy! Maybe BMW will even offer up an LSD. "

I think you prove my point. Once hyundia got some itilian designers the cars looked better (not G level but thats tuff to beat) and sales are better than ever.

Less subjectively: 333 hp is heavy duty but a turbo is just against my grain. 400 hp in the caddy for 45 or so is tuff to beat especially as NA format. When will this hit the shelves KD i hear the older 3.0 is going to be the only option for a couple years. By then they'll all have 350 hp options. Hell the G is only 35-40 hp away from that in 05 anyway....with more NA refinements to come I'm sure.

chrisboth

WOW

"Of course, it's a prototype, but I'm not a fan of bold angular styling. That's why I like the new 5/7 series. "

What do you call those bangle lines that aren't really doing anything but creating angles and seeming so bold?

rckyvntr

"The stealth look personified is the Cadillac Cien. It's awesome."

http://www.edmunds.com/news/conceptcarspotlight/articles/51600/ar- - - - - ticle.html

Wow. A quintessential head turner. Do they make a $35K, 2+2 seater, stripped version?

PS - the CTS does stand out in terms of body style.

kdshapiro

"I think you prove my point. Once hyundia got some itilian designers the cars looked better (not G level but thats tuff to beat) and sales are better than ever."

Their cars are still ugly.

Re the CTS-V: different strokes for different folks. Yes they win bragging rights as eclipsing the Japanese in hp per dollar, but we'll have to see how they are in the real world won't we?

BMWs do not have sharp angular styling.