Comments on: 2009 BMW M3 Review & Road Test

By: tom

tom — Sat, 22 Aug 2009 10:46:01 +0000

to u guys that has a c63…how much discount did u get?? thax in advance

By: Karl

Karl — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 11:29:13 +0000

I was typical person taking part in performance Holden Vs Ford discussions in the past, displaying the usual negative justification of owning the BMW/Merc performance vehicles. Having had opportunity to get frequent exposure to European vehicles through European contacts in Germany, namely BMW and Mercedes products, I have certainly changed my mind and consequently became an owner of a BMW performance vehicle. One has to appreciate vehicle technicalities and handling precision. I think the best demonstration of vehicle drive precision is to push a vehicle on an Australian road on a dark rainy night. The preciseness of the handling in the Euro vehicle will confidently allow a lot higher relaxed cruise speed. i.e. if the speedo was blanked off, a driver would be driving at consistently higher speeds due to the better feel of the vehicle. This same idea of a blanked off speedo does apply during day time also, where typical drivers will drive at higher speeds simply because the vehicle feels better. Of course the high price of the Euro vehicles cannot be justified by those who do not have the financial means, and most GM/Ford owners are not presented with the opportunity for a lengthy drive of a performance Euro vehicle. Also a recommendation for anyone who visits Germany to go to the BMW Nurburg Ring facility and go for a drive with a test driver in M3/M5, it will be an experience one will appreciate and remember for a long time.

By: Andrew

Andrew — Wed, 05 Aug 2009 02:40:25 +0000

One of the great things about this car is I bet that the manual gearbox would be mostly boring in big-engined low-revving cars as you could just use any gear and speed up. Reading a review of the Zonda they mentioned you could easily accelerate from 60 in 6th or you could downshift but deliberately mostly. This BMW small V8 is perfect for a manual gearbox whilst I am sure it still provides sufficent torque low down you would no doubt need to work the gearbox a little and according to the review that would be more enjoyable than anything else. If your going to have lots of torque across the rev band, may as well have a 4 speed auto, let it do the shifting and it wouldn’t need many gears anyways.

By: tony

tony — Fri, 08 May 2009 16:35:39 +0000

M3 is a nice car, but “everyday”, dunno bout that, everyday i reckon needs 4 doors, so it would have to be a 4 door M3 or a C63.

I hope my lotto ticket wins 2moro.

By: Devil's Advocate

Devil's Advocate — Sat, 25 Apr 2009 22:37:51 +0000

The GTR sure has the performance and road presence. If that is what you want, there is NOTHING better for the money. It is an awesome pice of kit. The M3 on the other hand, other than the 1st generation, has been more of a “Q” car. It’s looks don’t shout out performance other than a couple of subtle bulges and vents etc. Some people like that and don’t want to attract too much attention. BMW market the M3 as more of an “everyday”, practicle high performance car. With the M3 you only need the one car to take the family on holidays etc or go for a hard fang at your local track. If you have bucket loads of money for a “weekend” car, the GTR is the way to go as you would buy another car for everyday use. But if you could only have one car, for me it would be the M3. That is what the M3 has over the GTR.

By: Hayzel

Hayzel — Sat, 25 Apr 2009 18:22:30 +0000

With that much money I would no doubt will buy a nissan GTR instead. Not sure about the passenger but performance and looks wise GTR wil definitely take the cake. You get respects on the road too where the GTR will turn heads. M3 don’t have the same presence on the road. With 100k plus I definitely want presence on the road…

By: figjam

figjam — Wed, 22 Apr 2009 11:27:28 +0000

Have driven all 3 in this class the m3, lexus isf & the AMG c63 and from a drivers point of view the m3 by a whisker, for looks the isf hands down and for straight out power the isf & c63 both are awesome, so depending on what you are going to do with your ride all have great +’s and -’s in my eyes the bmw m3 just over the lexus isf & then the c63 but if its dollars and sheer bang for buck and value for money the lexus isf! but as “camski” said all are bloody great cars and would sit proud in anyone’s driveway

By: Devil's Advocate

Devil's Advocate — Sun, 19 Apr 2009 10:11:59 +0000

Devil666 Says:
April 17th, 2009 at 9:55 am
“The problem with a high revving engine is that all 309kw come at over 7000 rpm. Who wants to have to rev it that hard to get maximum power? Just how often are you driving a private track? Who is ever going to rev to 8300 to overtake someone?”

That may be true with Honda VTEC engines Devil666, however this is a BMW engine. BMW engines still have good low rev torque as well. This engine has so much technology and computing power it gives you the best of both worlds. You don’t need to rev the @$%@ out of it to overtake someone because you have a minimum of 340Nm of torque available from just 2000rpm up to well over 6500rpm. That is the same as the maximum torque of the “High Output” V6 in the Commodore. When in a smaller, lighter car with good gearing, it doesn’t take rocket science to work it out. Sure it is not “C63 style” lazy grunt, but you wouldn’t call it a slug either. It is more tractable than you think… :-)

By: Patrick

Patrick — Sat, 18 Apr 2009 20:47:46 +0000

When u owned a car in Australia, what sticker do u have to put on the front window?

By: AussieCars

AussieCars — Sat, 18 Apr 2009 15:37:24 +0000

Coupe looks a hell of alot better IMO. 4 door looks plain.

By: Bavarian Missile (.)(.)

Bavarian Missile (.)(.) — Sat, 18 Apr 2009 08:45:48 +0000

Mb quote
“Xr As much as I respect your comments and the F6, XR6 etc…at the end of the day the Falcon is still based on a $30K car and it shows.”

Agree there ,people have to understand its not about equaling power, the M3 is more than just speed .

FPV stuff is good bang for your buck yes but not in the class as the Euro stuff ,sorry! Ive owned and driven both and know others that also have stepped up from FPV to Euro Performance,they are amazed at the difference .

As much as you would like to compare the local performance stuff to this you cant !

Hardly compare the GT-R either,I mean maybe same price bracket but try bolting a baby seat in the back and doing the groceries in that !

By: Tim

Tim — Sat, 18 Apr 2009 08:11:33 +0000

70% Lindt dark chocolate is the best by far, 85% is too much IMO, but 70% is just right!

The BMW M3 is a great car, I also like the 4 door version more than the coupe. But then I like the RS4 much more than the M3. There is something about the Audi that the M3 lacks..I have a connection with the RS4, but not with this.

And then there is the GT-R for the same $$$…

By: IN FOCUS

IN FOCUS — Sat, 18 Apr 2009 07:37:29 +0000

Xr………..totally agree with you. The in gear acceleration of the F6 is phenomonal for a car of this price. Cant see past this fabulous car really for what you get compared to other overpriced and over hyped performance cars. Best car ever made in Australia and deserves to be compared to the great cars ever built……….well done Ford and FPV.

If i had the money I would buy one of these in a heartbeat and buy the F6 ute for work!!!!

By: Camski

Camski — Sat, 18 Apr 2009 00:35:11 +0000

MB – That’s a relieving thought. Likewise, I don’t think anyone would purchase a car in this league (M3 included) for it’s fuel economy, although it is a nice aspect to take into consideration, especially for those long trips that lead to some of the nicest roads – That is, without having to stop for fuel every hour.

One thing I do believe when it comes to the battle between the four, if any one of us were restricted to buying only one of these cars, an RS4, IS F, M3 or C63 – For whatever reason – You cannot tell me that you WOULDN’T be happy with any one of them. Take the F for example, the IS F which I gather most of you dislike, you’ve just saved yourself 15 grand and despite this saving, you’ve just gained yourself an excellent piece of engineering, it is NOT a bad car, it just isn’t quite as GOOD as the rest. But will it put a smile on your face? Damn right it will.

By: Simon

Simon — Fri, 17 Apr 2009 23:44:32 +0000

Now if they could only change those “dopey” looking headlights.

By: MB

MB — Fri, 17 Apr 2009 21:55:47 +0000

Camski

I Drove up to Winton recently via the Melba highway and stuck around the 100 – 105 km/h mark to test the fuel economy…..I was getting mid 9’s per 100 in 60 kmh zones and driving like Miss Daisy I have achieved lower…..it is only when you give it berries it churns the fuel like any car. Given the sound and power, power & accleration it is pretty addictive….but I did not purchase the car for economy runs I dont care with the fuel costs.

I have been getting between 10-12 per 100 in City driving depending on the traffic….trick is dont give it a boot if you are concerned with fuel ecomomy and leave it in Economy

As much as I respect your comments and the F6, XR6 etc…at the end of the day the Falcon is still based on a $30K car and it shows.

By: Camski

Camski — Fri, 17 Apr 2009 14:55:43 +0000

Jimmy – “Camski, but that’s the whole point isn’t it? If you’re going to find subtle differences between the two cars, the obvious one is that the C63 better in a straight line, and the M3 is better around corners. It’s as good as fact. The C63 has a much larger displacement, but the M3 is just about as good in a straight line despite the difference in capacity and annihilates it in the bends to boot.”

Right you are but that wasn’t what I was getting at. Without having to drop two gears everytime I wanna accelerate from 80-110 or 50-80, the C63’s larger displacement (as you said) really makes a difference when it comes to power delivery for everyday driving.

I’m in no position to debate the M3’s handling credential’s, just pointing out that the C63 does have a slight upper hand with regards to realistic everyday power delivery.

Mb – If you happen to read this, what sorta fuel figures are you getting? Expecting mine in 4 days and am shuddering at the prospect of 20L/100km round the city =(

By: Xr

Xr — Fri, 17 Apr 2009 14:18:21 +0000

Buy a F6 with the 6 speed auto for less than half the price of the M3, with the same amount of power and also experience far greater spread of usable torque for acceleration and far superior overtaking(80-120 2.64secs Autocar NZ oct issue 08). A M5 isnt even that quick!!! I personally cannot see the value in the M3 because of that fact alone, especially too, when you can easily tune a F6 to produce loads more power if needed….

By: John of Perth

John of Perth — Fri, 17 Apr 2009 13:28:39 +0000

I know it may seem silly – love the car – hate the dash with the centre iDrive screen – saw it first on a 330i a few years back and it does not do the vehicle justice.

I prefer the purity of the instrument binnacle only and would go without the sat nav etc for simple driving pleasure.

By: The Realist

The Realist — Fri, 17 Apr 2009 11:52:15 +0000

Hayzel Says:
April 17th, 2009 at 10:17 pm
“Seriously all these debates on which one is a better car between c63 vs m3 is jsut stupid. It’s not like any of you can afford one anyway…why bother?”

Hayzel, perhaps you could teach us about aspiration when you’re not working ten to two earning $13 an hour flipping burgers.

Well said BM.