Re: M5 or M3?
You are accessing this site in a read-only mode. For full access to all member benefits, including message posting, please login or register. Registration is completely free, simple, and takes only a few seconds.
Login |
Free CarKB.com registration |
Whole discussion thread
The message you are replying to and its parents are listed in the reverse order with the most recent posts first. This might not be the whole discussion thread. To read all the messages in this thread please click here.
Re: M5 or M3?
| dizzy | 27 Aug 2008 22:18 |
>> So saying, 25k is not a bad life for tyres on a very high performance >> car. Especially if all that performance is used frequently. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >which has the same engine as the E39 M5, needing to replace tires at >under 20K miles too. The rears on my Supra TT have lasted about 15k, on average.
|
| bfd | 27 Aug 2008 16:23 |
On Aug 27, 1:19 am, "Dave Plowman (News)" <d...@davenoise.co.uk> wrote:
> In article > <f863f9b1-20a5-40fa-88d6-2a0041a1d...@b30g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > So saying, 25k is not a bad life for tyres on a very high performance > car. Especially if all that performance is used frequently. That's true. Tire life is really dependent on the driver and driving condition. Yesterday night, I looked at the most recent Roundel mag, and in the tech talk section, Mike Miller stated that some E39 M5 drivers were getting as little as 8K (EIGHT THOUSAND) MILES on a set of tires!!!!
Similarly, I've read in the past about complaints about E52 Z8 owners, which has the same engine as the E39 M5, needing to replace tires at under 20K miles too.
Of course, the same complaints about the clutch, which is dependent on driving habit. If you *ride the clutch* on one of these V8s, expect to replace sooner than later....
|
| Dave Plowman (News) | 27 Aug 2008 08:19 |
In article <f863f9b1-20a5-40fa-88d6-2a0041a1da67@b30g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
> Agree, BMW V8s can be pretty pricey to maintain. For example, the last > generation M5, E39 model, eats tires for breakfast, (expect to replace > every 20-25K!), E39s aren't particularly hard on tyres and their life will depend on how it's driven. It also depends on the type of tyre - the most grippy ones are likely to have the shortest life. So saying, 25k is not a bad life for tyres on a very high performance car. Especially if all that performance is used frequently.
 Signature *Dance like nobody's watching.
Dave Plowman dave@davenoise.co.uk London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound.
|
| bfd | 26 Aug 2008 22:22 |
> Horses for courses. Performance wise there isn't THAT much of a difference > between the two, but the M3 will be a lot more nimble, more a sports car, [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > has dropped a lot for a few year old car they're around £35k, so on > that front the M5 probably won't lose much more and the M3 might do. Agree, BMW V8s can be pretty pricey to maintain. For example, the last generation M5, E39 model, eats tires for breakfast, (expect to replace every 20-25K!), clutches for lunch, (some people have had to replaced the clutch at 25K! Ouch!!!), and expect to replace small things like the vanos. Also, don't forget to use the BMW-specific 10-60 grade oil which sells at BMW dealers for like $14/qt. After all, a replacement engine is only around $21K.
Of course, you know that the BMW V10 found in the E60 M5 is even more expensive....
> The M3 would be slightly cheaper to insure and probably better on > fuel, so is it a good option over the M5? I like the E90 M3. Probably the question is do you need the extra room of the M5? Good Luck!
|
| John Carrier | 26 Aug 2008 22:05 |
Horses for courses. Performance wise there isn't THAT much of a difference between the two, but the M3 will be a lot more nimble, more a sports car, than the M5. Both will require significantly more maintenance than their more mundane siblings. Everything from oil to tires will be changed more often and at greater expense.
The 335Ci is a pretty nice compromise and offers enough thrust for 99% of real world driving situations. Crank up the boost (enlarge the oil cooler when you do) and it can be quite a beast.
R / John
Hi,
I recently posted asking if the M5 was worth the extra over other higher end 5 series and I know that I won't be happy with my next BMW unless it has the M badge on it. However now I'm not so sure about the pros and cons of M5 v M3.
Of course the M3 is still holding it's value at around £42k and the M5 has dropped a lot for a few year old car they're around £35k, so on that front the M5 probably won't lose much more and the M3 might do.
The M3 would be slightly cheaper to insure and probably better on fuel, so is it a good option over the M5?
Thanks
Daz
|
| daz | 26 Aug 2008 14:48 |
Hi,
I recently posted asking if the M5 was worth the extra over other higher end 5 series and I know that I won't be happy with my next BMW unless it has the M badge on it. However now I'm not so sure about the pros and cons of M5 v M3.
Of course the M3 is still holding it's value at around £42k and the M5 has dropped a lot for a few year old car they're around £35k, so on that front the M5 probably won't lose much more and the M3 might do.
The M3 would be slightly cheaper to insure and probably better on fuel, so is it a good option over the M5?
Thanks
Daz
|
Quick links:
|
|
|