By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
(fun car to drive though!)
I just got back from driving that M3. It felt exactly like a well-done souped up version of the 323 I sold this past Monday. I guess I should have expected that. His ad actually stated "no apologies" but he made some apologies for the car when I got there (didn't have time to wash it or vacuum it, had a couple scuffs on the paint, leather was pretty worn, a very noticeable broken trim piece, his son's junk filling the entire trunk, power seat doesn't work). It was his son's college car and still had a "body piercing saved my life!" sticker on the window. It still was a pretty decent car. Mechanically I found nothing wrong. It helps that the price was reduced in the local paper today down to $8,900 and the wife approves of it, so it is still in the running as the new Lemmermobile.
I've driven the M3 before and it's just a blast to drive. It could be pricey fixing the power seat, but then again because of the worn leather, you have an excuse to maybe upgrade to newer M3 seats, or even Recaros? :shades:
2016 Audi A7 3.0T S Line, 2021 Subaru WRX
As for the M3, the kid was at Auburn only an hour and a half away and the car appears to have been maintained.
I'd like to offer a suggestion in case you don't get the M3: how about a Saab 9-3 Viggen? I hate to admit it but I'm biased toward Swedish cars because of my Vermont upbringing- I've driven a lot of Viggens and they are almost as fast as the M3, but due to the front-wheel-drive they have a lot of torque steer if you push them hard. Also, I don't know if you like high-powered turbocharged cars.
It won't be as quick as the M3 obviously, but it should still be fun to drive. Plus less electronics, less work to do, less mileage, nice wheels, nice interior, and yes it should be cheaper to maintain due to the fact that it's less complicated, and not an M3.
I always liked the looks of those older 3 series, I think more so than the generation after them.
With the money you save by buying that one, you can prolly find another car to toy aroud with (how about a 89 3 series convertible?)
2016 Audi A7 3.0T S Line, 2021 Subaru WRX
A 300Zx TT sounds nice of you can find an unmolested example out there.
2016 Audi A7 3.0T S Line, 2021 Subaru WRX
Saab's are cool, but if an M3 will nickel and dime you, a Saab will quarter you to death.
My two cents is that any car built for extra performance over the entry level production model requires having low mileage as a used car. These hi-po models are stressed, and so the miles mean a lot.
Even if it isn't about internal stress, it's about the owners driving them harder.
You can defend against future problems to some extent by really testing the engine thoroughly, with cylinder leakdown, compression, oil pressure testing and even removing valve covers and oil pan. But even that isn't an insurance policy, it just improves the odds.
But I tend to be cautious. If the price were a bargain, I might just go for it because I had a few thou in padding. But if he wants retail on a high miler, I'm not jumping in so fast.
I also might go look at this sludge-mobile. If I remember they are fun to drive, especially if you boost them a tiny bit with a conservative chip. Down side is that it needs a 90k service.
That car is also pretty cheap - something is probably wrong with it. The V8 cars of those years had the "lifetime" transmission fluid - but if you don't give it a flush like a normal car, there's a good chance you'll lose the tranny by 100K.
As far as the car being from a curbstoner, I feel that no private party would even be able to sell that car for that price-but your trade-off is that you're buying it from....a...curbstoner...
Second point, you are buying a vehicle to drive and enjoy. So I need to stop thinking like a car dealer and start thinking about "i'm going to drive this (almost) every day." That being the case, if you really want the M3 (as it is really more of a driver's car than the CLK, hands down), get a pre-purchase inspection and bargain hard to cushion yourself should the car need anything.
My problem with curbstoners is that they don't know the history of their cars, they often aren't licensed, bonded, or insured, they usually pretend to be private parties for as long as they can, they just flip cars without any kind of refurbishment, inspection, etc. By definition, they don't have a car lot. My experience is that they want to meet you in a parking lot somewhere. You typically end up with no contact info other than the guy's cell phone number. Curbstoning is illegal here, so the guy's ethics are questionable at best. To me, a curbstoner is a full notch below a small shady car dealer.
By the way, I have to think a little bit like a car dealer as I don't hold onto anything for long.
I wonder how people get 40 mpg on the highway out of their 944s when I can only get mid 20s. Other than that, how do you like the 540 idea? Cheaper to maintain than an M3 or an S4 of similar vintage?
That is easily grounds for an ugly breakup.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
The Saab is FWD, by the way, which goes against the rule you used to rule out my Volvo suggestion. ;P
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
A 307 Nova could be a 12 second car. If you're talking 0-50, perhaps.
I saw a road test somewhere of an Electra or Ninety-Eight of that vintage, and I want to say 0-60 was around 12.0-12.5 seconds? So I guess that would roughly correspond to a quarter mile of around 18 seconds, at best? By that time, I think those 455's were only putting out around 200 hp, and those cars probably weighed around 5,000 lb...not to mention most likely held back with 2.41:1 rear ends.
Nice, stately car to loaf around in, but definitely not a drag racer!
I wonder what simply changing the rear-end to something more in the 2.7X-ish range would do for one of those cars? My '76 LeMans has a 2.41:1 rear, and my '79 New Yorkers have the 2.45:1. Neither of those cars are powerhouses, but when you stomp on them, you can tell the engine is just begging to rev faster, but the tall axle just won't let it do it. Or, I wonder if the cars were just so choked down with the emissions, "economy" carbs and heads, etc, that they just wouldn't have been able to make any use out of a quicker axle?
Maybe if you put it in neutral and had a Prius tow it along. :shades:
I wonder what kind of fuel economy something like that could reasonably be expected to get? I always liked the '75-76 Electra hardtop sedans, as well as the '75 LeSabre convertible. My '76 LeMans, which just has a 350-4bbl, and is a lot lighter than one of those, only gets around 10 mpg around town, and the best I ever got out of it was 17.4 mpg on a gentle highway run. I think by the 70's though, Pontiac engines tended to be a bit thirstier than equivalent Buick/Olds or Chevy engines, because they didn't take as well to emissions controls.
So if you buy a high miler, you are on borrowed time with regards to major components, unless of course you have actual recent receipts for professional rebuilds to all major items on the car (basically a ground-up restoration).
If the M3 had 180K on it, I wouldn't even consider it $9K. I'd want it at $5K, but knowing full well that somebody would buy it off eBay for $7,500. Bottom feeder cars, whether they be Fords or Ferraris, always seem to sell for more a lot than they are intrinsically worth.
This M3 in particular, since it felt so well put together, seems to be stretching my comfort level.
This is all kind of pushing me back to the red '87 325is. Opinions on whether this can be a reliable daily driver? Better or worse than the aforementioned M3?
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
True, but I'd wonder which would be more fun to drive, day in, day out, if that's a big factor...we're talking old style IRS on the E30, right? And 10 more years on the clock...
Depreciation is a funny thing. It seems to make all year 2000 BMWs cost the same, whether it be a base 3 series or a fully loaded 7 series.
Well, there are 2 important parts to that statement.
1. Fun
2. Day in and day out
There is compromise involved. There must be. And I think an M3 with 150k on the clock may score big on the first factor, but falls flat on the 2nd factor.
If we put scores to it, let's call a 150k M3 an 9 on point 1 and a 2 on point 2, giving it an overall score of 10. Ah... but then there is price to consider, too. If we cap at $10k and give a $10k car a score of zero and add 1 point for every $1k less than that (making a free car a perfect 10), then the M3 gets a 1, bringing the grand total to 11.
Now, looking at the E30 with 140k on the clock, I think we're looking at a fun factor of 6 (not a fast car, but still handles very well), a reliability/livability factor of 6, and a cost factor of 6.5, for a grand total of 18.5 on the QB scale. Even if you adjust down the fun factor and reliability scores a couple of points, it would still win this comparison.
The 540? Hmmm... well, it scores a 0 on the cost scale. Reliability/livability is tough. I'm sure its comfy, but its a 540. I think maybe a 6. Fun factor is probably a 7 or 8. Either way, it scores low overall.
Even after saying that, though, I'd still give it a long look, too. Maybe we need a Desirability function in our equation.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
2016 Audi A7 3.0T S Line, 2021 Subaru WRX
Why do ad's always say "ran when parked" it dosen't matter if its been parked for 2 years or 60, they all say that. My dad has a 1933 Chevy coupe in his barn, unrestored. If he were to sell it, he could say "Ran when it came off the assembly line" same thing right? It either runs or it dosen't.