Whether you consider this battle a pedigreed recasting of the Camaro-Mustang rivalry or a superficial spat to be had between handsomely paid professionals, one thing's certain: Neither coupe would have gotten this much engine if the other didn't exist.
Very likely, they wouldn't stop or handle as well, either. Nor would they each offer an active steering system as an option. At heart, the 2007 BMW 335i and 2008 Infiniti G37 are chasing the same driver.
And by most standards, the Infiniti G37 is an impressive car and a lot of fun. But it isn't as quick as the BMW 335i, nor does it engage its driver with equal commitment.
Due to its higher price and shorter features list, the 3 Series won this test by only 2.3 points. But contained within those points are all the details that make it a more intimate and involving driving partner.
"Nearly every aspect of our drive feels more natural in the 335i," one of our editors recorded in the notebook for this comparison. "I'm not sure what the price difference is, but the BMW feels $15,000 better."
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/Comparos/articleId=121462?tid=edmunds.il.home.photopanel..1.*
Still wouldn't pay 45 grand for one.
I, er, don't care for either of these cars.
Quote from: Raza ?link=topic=9943.msg494370#msg494370 date=1183476364
Still wouldn't pay 45 grand for one.?
I'm curious. I have driven a colleague's Carrera 4s (2003 model) and I did not find the experience overwhelming. I did not drive it very hard, because it was not my car. Do you feel all aspects of driving in your Boxster match or beat the experience in say, an E46?
Quote from: red_shift on July 03, 2007, 11:25:49 AM
I'm curious. I have driven a colleague's Carrera 4s (2003 model) and I did not find the experience overwhelming. I did not drive it very hard, because it was not my car. Do you feel all aspects of driving in your Boxster match or beat the experience in say, an E46?
Raza doesn't like BMWs. ;)
Quote from: red_shift on July 03, 2007, 11:25:49 AM
I'm curious. I have driven a colleague's Carrera 4s (2003 model) and I did not find the experience overwhelming. I did not drive it very hard, because it was not my car. Do you feel all aspects of driving in your Boxster match or beat the experience in say, an E46?
I've driven one E46, and that was about 5 years ago. It was an automatic 323i. I'd buy a stick one (really, even though it's a BMW, I'd buy one). But compared to about every other car I've driven (and it's a long list, about 75 cars, mostly performance models) it's better in just about every aspect (to drive; obviously it doesn't have the passenger space of an S55 AMG) than all of them, save for the Elise. I drove it to work today. I drove my mother's S500 to work yesterday. I enjoyed, even just mucking about on the highway at 70ish mph, I enjoyed it much more than the S500; even though the car is pegged more as a highway cruiser. And it is an accomplished highway cruiser, but just not as enjoyable.
So, yeah, I'd say "match or beat" would be pretty accurate.
And I've driven a 997 C4 (non S). It was not as fun as my Boxster. I think you really ought to go for a RWD 911.
Quote from: Raza ?link=topic=9943.msg494498#msg494498 date=1183484414
I've driven one E46, and that was about 5 years ago.? It was an automatic 323i.? I'd buy a stick one (really, even though it's a BMW, I'd buy one).? But compared to about every other car I've driven (and it's a long list, about 75 cars, mostly performance models) it's better in just about every aspect (to drive; obviously it doesn't have the passenger space of an S55 AMG) than all of them, save for the Elise.? I drove it to work today.? I drove my mother's S500 to work yesterday.? I enjoyed, even just mucking about on the highway at 70ish mph, I enjoyed it much more than the S500; even though the car is pegged more as a highway cruiser.? And it is an accomplished highway cruiser, but just not as enjoyable.?
So, yeah, I'd say "match or beat" would be pretty accurate.
And I've driven a 997 C4 (non S).? It was not as fun as my Boxster.? I think you really ought to go for a RWD 911.
Sure. I will check it out any chance I get. I would love a mid engined, rear drive sedan actually, but according to some (including Miro) it will be too noisy and the ride will not be perfect.
Quote from: red_shift on July 03, 2007, 12:01:50 PM
Sure. I will check it out any chance I get. I would love a mid engined, rear drive sedan actually, but according to some (including Miro) it will be too noisy and the ride will not be perfect.
Mid engined sedan would be tough. Look even at the Clio V6; down to two seats, it was still apparently very noisy. Rear engine could be done easily, though.
If you do a mid engine sedan, and you shove the seats way forward and put the engine between the trunk and the rear seats, it could work. But it would probably look even more cab forward than a 300M. Proportions would be off, to say the least.
Quote from: Raza ?link=topic=9943.msg494532#msg494532 date=1183486441
Mid engined sedan would be tough.? Look even at the Clio V6; down to two seats, it was still apparently very noisy.? Rear engine could be done easily, though.?
If you do a mid engine sedan, and you shove the seats way forward and put the engine between the trunk and the rear seats, it could work.? But it would probably look even more cab forward than a 300M.? Proportions would be off, to say the least.
I meant to say
rear engined sedan. That would be my dream car, seriously. Nevermind the oversteer characteristics. I can control the Go-Kart when driving like crazy, I should do OK with the sedan.
Quote from: red_shift on July 03, 2007, 12:20:59 PM
I meant to say rear engined sedan. That would be my dream car, seriously. Nevermind the oversteer characteristics. I can control the Go-Kart when driving like crazy, I should do OK with the sedan.
Rear engine sedan should work pretty easily. Just take a 911 and add two doors (after lengthening the chassis, of course). Why all the naysayers?
Quote from: Raza ?link=topic=9943.msg494532#msg494532 date=1183486441
Mid engined sedan would be tough.? Look even at the Clio V6; down to two seats, it was still apparently very noisy.? Rear engine could be done easily, though.?
If you do a mid engine sedan, and you shove the seats way forward and put the engine between the trunk and the rear seats, it could work.? But it would probably look even more cab forward than a 300M.? Proportions would be off, to say the least.
Just put the rear seats behind the engine. It will probably turn out to be a long one-box design...
(http://www.classiccarsofsc.com/images/85ToyotaVan.jpg)
Quote from: Raza ?link=topic=9943.msg494542#msg494542 date=1183487009
Rear engine sedan should work pretty easily.? Just take a 911 and add two doors (after lengthening the chassis, of course).? Why all the naysayers?
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/9c/T700_1.JPG/800px-T700_1.JPG)
Quote from: Raza ?link=topic=9943.msg494542#msg494542 date=1183487009
Rear engine sedan should work pretty easily.? Just take a 911 and add two doors (after lengthening the chassis, of course).? Why all the naysayers?
There was a big brouhaha of a discussion a few years back when I started a thread in C&D forums about this exact question. 'Why not rear engined rear drive sedans?'. ;)
Quote from: red_shift on July 03, 2007, 12:28:31 PM
There was a big brouhaha of a discussion a few years back when I started a thread in C&D forums about this exact question. 'Why not rear engined rear drive sedans?'.? ;)
I remember that, vaguely. Were you the one who started it?
I think this almost qualifies as an FMR layout:
(http://photo.netcarshow.com/Holden-VE_Commodore_SV6_2006_photo_17.jpg)
(http://photo.netcarshow.com/Holden-VE_Commodore_Calais_V_2006_photo_2d.jpg)
Front midship doesn't count.
Quote from: Raza on July 03, 2007, 12:36:43 PM
Mid engine.
Physically speaking, it would, but by traditional front/mid/rear engine definitions, it wouldn't.
Quote from: omicron on July 03, 2007, 12:46:10 PM
Physically speaking, it would, but by traditional front/mid/rear engine definitions, it wouldn't.
Agreed. That's why I said it doesn't count and not that it is not at all. I'd laugh if someone called the S2000 a mid engine sports car though.
Quote from: Raza on July 03, 2007, 12:48:06 PM
Agreed. That's why I said it doesn't count and not that it is not at all. I'd laugh if someone called the S2000 a mid engine sports car though.
I laughed when Wikipedia called a VE Commodore a front mid-engined RWD sedan.
Sounds like the new G37 may not be what I was expecting....too bad.
On another note, I test drove a TL-S today (along with a GT). For a FWD car, wow :rockon:. Definately a very competant ride with one of the best gearboxes in the market.
Quote from: LonghornTX on July 03, 2007, 01:02:30 PM
Sounds like the new G37 may not be what I was expecting....too bad.
On another note, I test drove a TL-S today (along with a GT).? For a FWD car, wow? :rockon:.? Definately a very competant ride with one of the best gearboxes in the market.
I drove the regular TL, and man, it was not very good to me. TSX is a better car, in my opinion.
Quote from: red_shift on July 03, 2007, 11:25:49 AM
I'm curious. I have driven a colleague's Carrera 4s (2003 model) and I did not find the experience overwhelming. I did not drive it very hard, because it was not my car. Do you feel all aspects of driving in your Boxster match or beat the experience in say, an E46?
Depends on the E46. I have driven a Boxster S in a slalom course for a bit. Unfortunately it was an automatic :huh:.
Power was sensibly less than in the M3. The chassis cornered much flatter but I had not enough time with the car to really push it to the limits. I felt I could go faster (also while cornering) in my M3 but likely that was simply due to familiarity.
I also drove a Carrera 4 a few years back (a 2000 model) and also found the experience underwhelming, and that was back when I had a 328Ci. A day after driving the Carrera 4 I rode in an F360 Modena that belonged to the same guy. Now, THAT was an experience. The Ferrari felt so much better than my BMW in every possible way. Not so the Carrera 4. I feel base Porsches are just slightly better than BMWs (in some model comparisons not even better). Ferrari is at a whole different level as an experience IMHO.
Quote from: Raza ?link=topic=9943.msg494556#msg494556 date=1183487418
I remember that, vaguely.? Were you the one who started it?
Yes. :lol: My reasoning was : If 50/50 SWD is so good, what will be 30:70 or 40:60 like?
Well, you could get to 40:60 even with a front layout, but for a family sedan, it would probably be very tough.
Quote from: NACar on July 03, 2007, 12:27:37 PM
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/9c/T700_1.JPG/800px-T700_1.JPG)
What's that? Are those Ferrari wheels I am seeing?
Quote from: red_shift on July 03, 2007, 01:34:28 PM
Yes.? :lol: My reasoning was : If 50/50 SWD is so good, what will be 30:70 or 40:60 like?
Well, you could get to 40:60 even with a front layout, but for a family sedan, it would probably be very tough.
Clearly, 50:50 is overrated. Do supercar manufacturers strive for 50:50 weight distribution? No. They stick the engine behind the driver, where it should be on a performance car. So many exotics are mid engined, you'd think people would realize that having about 60% or more over the rear makes for the best handling cars in the world. Sorry to champion my own cause here, but if you look at the time the Boxster S (and I'm talking 3.2, not 3.4 Variocam) put down in Evo's Knowledge section, you'll see that despite being way down on power, it's getting times reserved mostly for supercars. The Cayman's even faster (although I'd like to see how close a 3.4 v 3.4 comparison would be). The Toyota MR-2 was fantastic to drive, despite being ugly and pretty low on power (138), because the dynamics were sound. The NC MX-5 is still not as good to drive as the MkIII MR-2 was.
I say we do it. I don't have the tools. I don't have the know-how. But I do have the space...
Quote from: MexicoCityM3 on July 03, 2007, 01:29:34 PM
Depends on the E46. I have driven a Boxster S in a slalom course for a bit. Unfortunately it was an automatic :huh:.
Power was sensibly less than in the M3. The chassis cornered much flatter but I had not enough time with the car to really push it to the limits. I felt I could go faster (also while cornering) in my M3 but likely that was simply due to familiarity.
I also drove a Carrera 4 a few years back (a 2000 model) and also found the experience underwhelming, and that was back when I had a 328Ci. A day after driving the Carrera 4 I rode in an F360 Modena that belonged to the same guy. Now, THAT was an experience. The Ferrari felt so much better than my BMW in every possible way. Not so the Carrera 4. I feel base Porsches are just slightly better than BMWs (in some model comparisons not even better). Ferrari is at a whole different level as an experience IMHO.
So it does not come as a surprise to you that my colleague rates his
BMW 530i a slightly better feeling driver than his (gasp) Porsche!
(I am sure he is exaggerating though)
Quote from: red_shift on July 03, 2007, 02:26:04 PM
So it does not come as a surprise to you that my colleague rates his BMW 530i a slightly better feeling driver than his (gasp) Porsche!
(I am sure he is exaggerating though)
Seems like a stretch to me. Is it an E39 or an E60? The E39 was regarded as the best driving sedan in the world for many years, so maybe.
Quote from: red_shift on July 03, 2007, 01:44:46 PM
What's that? Are those Ferrari wheels I am seeing?
If I'm not mistaken, it's a Tatra sedan.
Quote from: TheIntrepid on July 03, 2007, 02:30:23 PM
If I'm not mistaken, it's a Tatra sedan.
IT'S A FUCKING REAL-LIFE REAR ENGINED SEDAN FOR ALL YOU NONBELIEVERS! :rockon:
Corvair?
Quote from: TheIntrepid on July 03, 2007, 02:30:23 PM
If I'm not mistaken, it's a Tatra sedan.
Right you are. What an innovative car. Probably scary as hell in the snow for housewives, but the perfect car for
me! (I think)? :lol:
Quote from: red_shift on July 03, 2007, 02:26:04 PM
So it does not come as a surprise to you that my colleague rates his BMW 530i a slightly better feeling driver than his (gasp) Porsche!
(I am sure he is exaggerating though)
I don't think he'd be surprised that anyone said a BMW is better at anything than anything else. He's a BMW troll!
(Just poking fun, Mex. You love your car. I'm guilty of that too.)
Quote from: MexicoCityM3 on July 03, 2007, 02:29:10 PM
Seems like a stretch to me. Is it an E39 or an E60? The E39 was regarded as the best driving sedan in the world for many years, so maybe.
E39. I have driven it. It's good, but come
on..
Quote from: red_shift on July 03, 2007, 03:06:37 PM
E39. I have driven it. It's good, but come on..
I haven't driven an E39 but I agree with you, better than a 911? Don't think so.
The 530i was the best E39 handling-wise b/c of the rack & pinion steering and lighter weight. The 540i and the M5 had recirculating ball steering.
I have driven a 530i E60 and its
very far from being a 911.
Quote from: Raza ?link=topic=9943.msg494705#msg494705 date=1183495312
I don't think he'd be surprised that anyone said a BMW is better at anything than anything else.? He's a BMW troll!
I do look at life through "///M Colored Glasses". :praise:
Quote from: MexicoCityM3 on July 03, 2007, 03:34:56 PM
I do look at life through "///M Colored Glasses". :praise:
Don't feel bad.
A coworker has a black M3. E46, I don't know the year or the mileage, but his daily commute is about half mine (so, 50 miles a day for him). He wants to buy a 135i. Around the time of the introduction of the 135i, I will be losing my Passat since the lease will be up. So, there's a possibility that we'll be doing our transactions at the same time. So, there will be a black, 6 speed M3 up for sale around me that will be high mileage and relatively cheap with a credible history around the same time that I will be looking for a new car.
Kismet? It's no Laguna Seca Blue, but black's nice. 2/3 of the cars I've owned have been black.
I ran an example car through KBB; a 2002 with 80K miles and CD and leather in "Good" condition. Trade in value was $19,700. Which means, if I offer $21K, he might go for it...
It would be a damn shame for me to buy a BMW. :lol:
Quote from: Raza on July 03, 2007, 01:19:54 PM
I drove the regular TL, and man, it was not very good to me. TSX is a better car, in my opinion.
TSX was painfully slow IMO, though it did have a good tranny. The handling was also pretty wallowy IMO. The Type-S was significantly more appealing to me than either the regular TL or TSX.
I dont know because I have never drove my E39 back to back with a Porsche 911.
But if I had to guess I would say it is a stretch to say that E39 sedan would drive better then a sports car like Porsche 911. Maybe you should ask him in what sense is he speaking :huh:
On the other hand I do remember clearly that my friend when he was looking to buy a new car went on a test drive to see if he would like a Porsche 911. He was planing on trading his E46 BMW M3 at that time. But he came back and told me that he didnot like Porsche 911 it didnot feel much faster or even more involving then his M3. He also hated the interior layout and felt it looked real dated and boring. Anyways he settled for a BMW 645ci at the end as he thought it was more to his taste.
I guess everything comes down to individual taste some people swear by Porsche while others dont find them all that and a bag of chips.
Quote from: red_shift on July 03, 2007, 03:06:37 PM
E39. I have driven it. It's good, but come on..
I have driven my coworkers 335i and it truly is amazing. It's by far the best all around performance car I've ever driven. Having said that I would rather buy a Mustang.
:lol:
Quote from: LonghornTX on July 03, 2007, 10:56:57 PM
TSX was painfully slow IMO, though it did have a good tranny. The handling was also pretty wallowy IMO. The Type-S was significantly more appealing to me than either the regular TL or TSX.
The TSX does have mushy stock tires.
But I found it quick enough. Some people do care more for forward thrust than I do, though.
Quote from: Raza on July 04, 2007, 08:14:16 AM
The TSX does have mushy stock tires.
But I found it quick enough. Some people do care more for forward thrust than I do, though.
I find that opinion interesting considering you bought the more powerful S model of the Boxster lineup. It would seem that choice is rather incongruent with some of your opinions described here and elsewhere.
But, please do not think I am insulting you, I am not. I am only trying to understand you better :ohyeah:.
Quote from: LonghornTX on July 04, 2007, 12:18:11 PM
I find that opinion interesting considering you bought the more powerful S model of the Boxster lineup.? It would seem that choice is rather incongruent with some of your opinions described here and elsewhere.
But, please do not think I am insulting you, I am not.? I am only trying to understand you better? :ohyeah:.
He got the S because he's a badge whore.
Quote from: 1 BAD 7 on July 04, 2007, 12:16:25 AM
On the other hand I do remember clearly that my friend when he was looking to buy a new car went on a test drive to see if he would like a Porsche 911. He was planing on trading his E46 BMW M3 at that time. But he came back and told me that he didnot like Porsche 911 it didnot feel much faster or even more involving then his M3. He also hated the interior layout and felt it looked real dated and boring. Anyways he settled for a BMW 645ci at the end as he thought it was more to his taste.
645 over a 911? Your friend has interesting taste. And by interesting, I mean really, really bad.
Quote from: Lebowski on July 04, 2007, 12:26:22 PM
645 over a 911? Your friend has interesting taste. And by interesting, I mean really, really bad.
You're wrong. Kayani said it, and therefore it must be, across all the lands. A 645ci >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> any 911, in any regard
Quote from: sportyaccordy on July 04, 2007, 03:57:48 PM
You're wrong. Kayani said it, and therefore it must be, across all the lands. A 645ci >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> any 911, in any regard
:lol: :lol: :lol:
Dude shutup with your non-sense and grow up loser :evildude:
Quote from: sportyaccordy on July 04, 2007, 03:57:48 PM
You're wrong. Kayani said it, and therefore it must be, across all the lands. A 645ci >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> any 911, in any regard
Like I said it is just a matter of taste he didnot care for Porsche 911 and instead it finaly came down between BMW 645ci or CLS 500. Like they say different strokes for different folks.
Quote from: Lebowski on July 04, 2007, 12:26:22 PM
645 over a 911?? Your friend has interesting taste.? And by interesting, I mean really, really bad.
So basically, for your friend, style meant more than performance. I am not sure why else a person would cross shop those three cars seeing as how they are very different in nature. The 645ci is a big luxury gt and therefore makes almost no sense whatsoever. The CLS500 is a sports sedan and there is really no reason to get one over a cheaper E500. The 911, on the otherhand, is a legend for a reason.
Quote from: TBR on July 04, 2007, 09:16:41 PM
So basically, for your friend, style meant more than performance. I am not sure why else a person would cross shop those three cars seeing as how they are very different in nature. The 645ci is a big luxury gt and therefore makes almost no sense whatsoever. The CLS500 is a sports sedan and there is really no reason to get one over a cheaper E500. The 911, on the otherhand, is a legend for a reason.
It looks better, handles better, is more exclusive?
I am not sure how it would handle better when they have the same suspension, though I guess the wider track might help. As far as looking better and being more exclusive, that is precisely my point (though, I find the car to be overdone while the E is just perfect).
Quote from: 1 BAD 7 on July 04, 2007, 07:35:00 PM
Dude shutup with your non-sense and grow up loser :evildude:
Anyone remember my list of Kayanisms?
Quote from: ro51092 on July 04, 2007, 10:10:34 PM
Anyone remember my list of Kayanisms?
Whip it out!
Quote from: ro51092 on July 04, 2007, 10:10:34 PM
Anyone remember my list of Kayanisms?
go take a chill pill
Quote from: LonghornTX on July 04, 2007, 12:18:11 PM
I find that opinion interesting considering you bought the more powerful S model of the Boxster lineup.? It would seem that choice is rather incongruent with some of your opinions described here and elsewhere.
But, please do not think I am insulting you, I am not.? I am only trying to understand you better? :ohyeah:.
True, and I often think "maybe I should have gotten the standard model", but it's not that I dislike fast. I just don't need it. Also, it's a very involving car, despite being modern, and slightly heavy (it's light for its class, but its whole class is overweight), so I don't mind the extra speed. Of course, a car like the Box S is very dangerous....for your license.
As a sports car, though, many of the criteria are different. It's not a commuter car. I've driven it to work twice, and I couldn't imagine doing it everyday. It's not harsh or tough in jams or anything like that, I feel bad about just driving on the highway with cruise control on instead of tearing up backroads. As enthusiasts, we tend to ask more out of the cars that we have to use everyday.
If they sold the Fiat Panda 100HP (I think they're making an Abarth version!) or a Lupo GTI, I'd absolutely buy one to replace my Passat.
Quote from: TBR on July 04, 2007, 09:33:19 PM
I am not sure how it would handle better when they have the same suspension, though I guess the wider track might help. As far as looking better and being more exclusive, that is precisely my point (though, I find the car to be overdone while the E is just perfect).
The CLS is tuned slightly differently.? And it's prettier and has a better interior. If I were buying in that class, I'd save up for a CLS.
Man, I really like the E92. But now, I'll take an E87 coupe over it.
Quote from: ro51092 on July 05, 2007, 06:55:51 AM
Man, I really like the E92. But now, I'll take an E87 coupe over it.
E87?
Oh. I would too. But I hate the E92. So, take what you wins you can get.
I'd still rather have a 3 door 1 series.
Quote from: Raza on July 05, 2007, 06:58:47 AM
Oh. I would too. But I hate the E92. So, take what you wins you can get.
I'd still rather have a 3 door 1 series.
I wouldn't mind a hatch either. But the coupe looks so damn good.
(http://img.netcarshow.com/BMW-1-Series_Coupe_2008_800x600_wallpaper_05.jpg)
VS.
(http://img.netcarshow.com/BMW-130i_M-Package_2005_800x600_wallpaper_01.jpg)
They both look pretty good.
Quote from: 1 BAD 7 on July 04, 2007, 07:42:13 PM
Like I said it is just a matter of taste he didnot care for Porsche 911 and instead it finaly came down between BMW 645ci or CLS 500. Like they say different strokes for different folks.
Right... so basically, what was the point of your post? Your friend prefers the 6 to a 911. I prefer the 911 to a 645. I can find someone else who agrees with me. Does that make either car absolutely better than the other?
And more importantly, what do either car have to do with the G37 or 335i?
Quote from: 1 BAD 7 on July 04, 2007, 07:42:13 PM
Like I said it is just a matter of taste he didnot care for Porsche 911 and instead it finaly came down between BMW 645ci or CLS 500. Like they say different strokes for different folks.
Oh, I agree 100%, it is a matter of taste. Your friend has bad taste. He probably prefers Moe's over Chipotle and he probably drinks Bud Light. But to each his own.
Quote from: ro51092 on July 05, 2007, 06:57:15 AM
1er coupe.
FYI, the coupes designation is E82 :ohyeah:.
Quote from: LonghornTX on July 05, 2007, 08:36:36 AM
FYI, the coupes designation is E82 :ohyeah:.
E81. My bad, that's what I meant.
Quote from: ro51092 on July 05, 2007, 08:54:36 AM
E81. My bad, that's what I meant.
The 3-door hatch? If so, that is indeed the E81, but the recently released coupe is the e82.
Quote from: TBR on July 04, 2007, 09:16:41 PM
So basically, for your friend, style meant more than performance. I am not sure why else a person would cross shop those three cars seeing as how they are very different in nature. The 645ci is a big luxury gt and therefore makes almost no sense whatsoever. The CLS500 is a sports sedan and there is really no reason to get one over a cheaper E500. The 911, on the otherhand, is a legend for a reason.
I'd certainly consider a 911, a 650Ci and a CLS500 if making a purchase with my own $180-200k.
Quote from: Raza ?link=topic=9943.msg494921#msg494921 date=1183513718
It would be a damn shame for me to buy a BMW.? ?:lol:
not as much of a shame as it would be if I bought a VW :mask:
Quote from: Vinsanity on July 05, 2007, 11:40:11 AM
not as much of a shame as it would be if I bought a VW :mask:
Badge whore.
Quote from: Raza ?link=topic=9943.msg496770#msg496770 date=1183658866
Badge whore.
says the Porsche owner to the Honda owner :rolleyes: :evildude:
;)
Well to be honest I was the one pushing him towards Porsche 911 because I thought he might like it as he really like his E46 M3. But the overall lack of stylish looks, more upscale interior and the lack of useable seats turned him off.
He was drawn to the CLS because it looks like a sporty and stylish coupe but is actually a sedan and has useable back seats. He settled on the BMW 645ci because it was stylish, luxury sport GT with very decent performance and refinement. Also it helped the fact that BMW 6er drove like a typical BMW and at that time BMW 6 series were quiet new and unique and not many people had them.
I was equaly shocked to see that he didnot care for Porsche 911 :huh:.
Quote from: TBR on July 04, 2007, 09:16:41 PM
So basically, for your friend, style meant more than performance. I am not sure why else a person would cross shop those three cars seeing as how they are very different in nature. The 645ci is a big luxury gt and therefore makes almost no sense whatsoever. The CLS500 is a sports sedan and there is really no reason to get one over a cheaper E500. The 911, on the otherhand, is a legend for a reason.
Once again go re read the post I never said Porsche 911 < BMW 645ci : :rolleyes:
Are you insane or just prentending to be one :huh:.........on the other hand I think you are just super confused as you have no idea what the conversation was about.
Go re-read the posts and maybe things will make sense to you. ;)
Quote from: sportyaccordy on July 05, 2007, 07:10:35 AM
Right... so basically, what was the point of your post? Your friend prefers the 6 to a 911. I prefer the 911 to a 645. I can find someone else who agrees with me. Does that make either car absolutely better than the other?
And more importantly, what do either car have to do with the G37 or 335i?
You are entitled to your opinion. :ohyeah:
But I dont think picking a 2004 BMW 645ci over a 2003 Porsche 911 has anything to do with bad taste. I believe he perfered the overall refinement, better interior and stylish looks of 645ci over the performance advantage of Porsche 911. I think what he was looking for was much different then what Porsche was offering at the time. It is much like how all of us that can afford a Lotus Elise are not driving one even though it is a super fun vehicle. Some times people rather drive a Corvette then Elise. No choice is bad as long as the owner is happy with his choice.
On the other hand if you really like Porsche 911 then you will be truly disappointed in someone elses choice.
On a side note I know I would love to own a Porsche 911 turbo one day. :partyon:?
Quote from: Lebowski on July 05, 2007, 08:02:57 AM
Oh, I agree 100%, it is a matter of taste.? Your friend has bad taste.? He probably prefers Moe's over Chipotle and he probably drinks Bud Light.? But to each his own.
Quote from: 1 BAD 7 on July 05, 2007, 08:42:01 PM
You are entitled to your opinion. :ohyeah:
But I dont think picking a 2004 BMW 645ci over a 2003 Porsche 911 has anything to do with bad taste. I believe he perfered the overall refinement, better interior and stylish looks of 645ci over the performance advantage of Porsche 911. I think what he was looking for was much different then what Porsche was offering at the time. It is much like how all of us that can afford a Lotus Elise are not driving one even though it is a super fun vehicle. Some times people rather drive a Corvette then Elise. No choice is bad as long as the owner is happy with his choice.
On the other hand if you really like Porsche 911 then you will be truly disappointed in someone elses choice.
On a side note I know I would love to own a Porsche 911 turbo one day. :partyon:?
That makes more sense, I didn't realize we were talking about an '03 - I've never been a huge fan of the 996. I was wondering why you were criticizing the interior - IMO the 997 has a great interior (but you're right, the 996 interior leaves something to be desired).
I still wouldn't have gone for a 645 tho, then again I have an almost rabid hatred of the 6-series.
I don't really care that much about interiors, personally, unless it's so bad or so good that it really stands out.
And I'd have taken the CLS over the 6 series.
Quote from: Raza on July 05, 2007, 06:52:36 AM
If they sold the Fiat Panda 100HP (I think they're making an Abarth version!) or a Lupo GTI, I'd absolutely buy one to replace my Passat.
Weren't you talking earlier in this thread about replacing your Passat with an E46 M3? Why not a Fit or a Mini or even a Rabbit, if you are looking for a smaller, simpler car?
Quote from: Raza on July 06, 2007, 07:05:34 AM
And I'd have taken the CLS over the 6 series.
Me too. :rockon:
Quote from: afty on July 06, 2007, 08:50:39 AM
Weren't you talking earlier in this thread about replacing your Passat with an E46 M3?? Why not a Fit or a Mini or even a Rabbit, if you are looking for a smaller, simpler car?
I would take a rabbit in a second.....
Quote from: afty on July 06, 2007, 08:50:39 AM
Weren't you talking earlier in this thread about replacing your Passat with an E46 M3?? Why not a Fit or a Mini or even a Rabbit, if you are looking for a smaller, simpler car?
Raza has no idea what he wants, but in his desire to have some teenage angst he often longs for things he knows he can never have (ie: European micro cars). :devil:
I truly like the improvements 997 has made over 996 with regards to the interior and overall refinement. It is almost day and night difference. But I think the interior still lags behind those out of Audi, MB, BMW, Jag or Aston. I think the Aston and specialy the Audi R8 interior is awesome. :rockon:
I think stylish interior is where Porsche lags behind others. On the other hand it makes up for that weakness with great dynamics and performance.
As for 6 series lots of people have either a love or hate relationship. When it first came out I thought it was just a stylish looking GT coupe. But after driving it real hard on few occassions I started to like the combo of power, performance, style and nice interior with useable back seats. Now dont get me wrong it is no E46 M3 or 911 but it is a nice luxury sport GT coupe.
Quote from: Lebowski on July 06, 2007, 06:55:40 AM
That makes more sense, I didn't realize we were talking about an '03 - I've never been a huge fan of the 996.? I was wondering why you were criticizing the interior - IMO the 997 has a great interior (but you're right, the 996 interior leaves something to be desired).
I still wouldn't have gone for a 645 tho, then again I have an almost rabid hatred of the 6-series.
Quote from: afty on July 06, 2007, 08:50:39 AM
Weren't you talking earlier in this thread about replacing your Passat with an E46 M3?? Why not a Fit or a Mini or even a Rabbit, if you are looking for a smaller, simpler car?
Definitely thinking about it, though the Fit doesn't have enough power, the Rabbit doesn't get good enough gas mileage (the GTI gets better mileage), and I don't like the R56, and R50s cost too much on the used market.
The M3 thing is just because I know the guy who will be selling the car. I wouldn't buy one otherwise.
Quote from: omicron on July 03, 2007, 09:26:58 AM
I, er, don't care for either of these cars.
Is it the near criminal absence of a crushed medici velour interior option?
Quote from: Raza ?link=topic=9943.msg497477#msg497477 date=1183727134
I don't really care that much about interiors, personally, unless it's so bad or so good that it really stands out.?
Interiors aren't all that important to me, either. But, when it's your own money, and not your dads, a $90k car should have a nice interior.
I don't care much about interiors either. There's not a car on sale right now that has an interior bad enough that it would be the reason why I wouldn't buy the car.
Quote from: Raza on July 06, 2007, 04:29:34 PM
Definitely thinking about it, though the Fit doesn't have enough power, the Rabbit doesn't get good enough gas mileage (the GTI gets better mileage), and I don't like the R56, and R50s cost too much on the used market.
The M3 thing is just because I know the guy who will be selling the car. I wouldn't buy one otherwise.
I've ridden in the Fit... I can't imagine it being much slower than a Rabbit :shrug:
Quote from: Soup DeVille on July 06, 2007, 04:57:28 PM
Is it the near criminal absence of a crushed medici velour interior option?
Oh, what heavenly thoughts. A luxury car is not a luxury car until you can lose your hand in the seat fabric.
Quote from: sportyaccordy on July 07, 2007, 01:03:09 AM
I've ridden in the Fit... I can't imagine it being much slower than a Rabbit :shrug:
I think the Rabbit is a full second faster to 60, and it has a lot more torque. Besides, I was just calling out one point each that's pushing me away.
Quote from: Raza ?link=topic=9943.msg496559#msg496559 date=1183639956
True, and I often think "maybe I should have gotten the standard model", but it's not that I dislike fast.? I just don't need it.?
Nobody NEEDS fast, we just really badly WANT it.
Fun is more important than fast, and fast isn't always fun. I've driven 500bhp cars that are very, very fast, and really not as much fun as, say, an MR-2.
I want the newest MR-2. I don't care if it's gutless.
Quote from: Tave on July 09, 2007, 10:29:06 AM
I want the newest MR-2. I don't care if it's gutless.
It's really not that slow (low 7s to 60), and it handles very well. And it's quite fun.
I mean, the NB MX-5, its contemporary, was hopeless against it on a track and in a drag. For a straight drag race, the NC is just now able to catch it. And I'd bet on the MR-2 against the NC as well.
The thing was the lightest car on the market until the Elise showed up. 2100.
Quote from: Raza ?link=topic=9943.msg500852#msg500852 date=1184001673
It's really not that slow (low 7s to 60), and it handles very well.? And it's quite fun.?
I mean, the NB MX-5, its contemporary, was hopeless against it on a track and in a drag.? For a straight drag race, the NC is just now able to catch it.? And I'd bet on the MR-2 against the NC as well.?
The thing was the lightest car on the market until the Elise showed up.? 2100.
And it was also horribly ugly IMO.
I wouldn't call it pretty, but I think the design worked and it was certainly unique.
Quote from: LonghornTX on July 09, 2007, 11:44:58 AM
And it was also horribly ugly IMO.
Yeah, but you can get over that when you're inside driving.
Quote from: Raza on July 06, 2007, 07:05:34 AM
I don't really care that much about interiors, personally, unless it's so bad or so good that it really stands out.
And I'd have taken the CLS over the 6 series.
The CLS looks like shit. The "coupe" profile comes of poorly, and the car looks like a Boat about to defecate. Terrible.
Quote from: JYODER240 on July 06, 2007, 09:46:06 PM
I don't care much about interiors either. There's not a car on sale right now that has an interior bad enough that it would be the reason why I wouldn't buy the car.
It would stop me. CR had a picture of the poorly finished G6 trunk, and the Aura Poor fit and finish, exposed jaged plastic peices. That is a complete turnoff..
Quote from: ArchBishop on July 13, 2007, 01:01:23 AM
The CLS looks like shit. The "coupe" profile comes of poorly, and the car looks like a Boat about to defecate. Terrible.
I'll give it to you that the windows are too small, but that's all I'll give you. I think it's fairly attractive, at least with larger rims. It looks disproportionate otherwise.
Quote from: the Teuton on July 13, 2007, 01:08:38 AM
I'll give it to you that the windows are too small, but that's all I'll give you. I think it's fairly attractive, at least with larger rims. It looks disproportionate otherwise.
Looks like crap all around to me. Not one angle on that car I like. The 6 series is just as bad.
Quote from: ArchBishop on July 13, 2007, 01:01:23 AM
The CLS looks like shit. The "coupe" profile comes of poorly, and the car looks like a Boat about to defecate. Terrible.
Obviously I disagree.
Quote from: ArchBishop on July 13, 2007, 01:01:23 AM
The CLS looks like shit. The "coupe" profile comes of poorly, and the car looks like a Boat about to defecate. Terrible.
take it back, you horrible horrible monster :frown:
I don't think many will look back on the CLS in 20years and still think it's a beautiful design.
I concur with Yoder, it looks alright but it isn't going to age well. The E-class on the otherhand, is a classic and always has been.
Quote from: Vinsanity on July 13, 2007, 11:35:46 AM
take it back, you horrible horrible monster :frown:
Never.
Quote from: Raza on July 13, 2007, 04:23:48 AM
Obviously I disagree.
Obviously, I don't care.
Quote from: JYODER240 on July 13, 2007, 05:03:39 PM
I don't think many will look back on the CLS in 20years and still think it's a beautiful design.
Time will not allow that terrible car to look any better.
I have a strange attachment to the last MR-2. Oddly enough, I want one in black, with a tan interior, which is entirely random for me.
Quote from: omicron on July 15, 2007, 10:14:14 AM
I have a strange attachment to the last MR-2. Oddly enough, I want one in black, with a tan interior, which is entirely random for me.
Fantastic car. If I didn't already have a mid engined sports car, I would buy one as soon as possible.