nota_troll

Funny. I never watch this board. I sold a 993 for an M5. It's definitely not a sports car but does it pretend to be. I've owned an M3 too. If you want a sedan it's great. If you don't you will regret it.

If you want a sedan that can hustle at the track then get an Evo or an SRT4.

Alan Smithee

The 2001-2006 E46 M3 made 333hp from 3.2 liters. The 2001 996 made 300hp from 3.4 liters, and the 2002-2004 996 made 320hp from 3.6 liters.

Oracle

Still not apples to apples because the M3 is the "sport" version of a sedan. So you should compare it to a GT2 so both cars are supped up version.
Besides power is meaningles to some extent (think Corvette), time around a track is what matters in motorsports. Truthfully I don't have any data but would be interesting to find the times around the nurburgring for a stock M3 vs stock GT2.

Besides a bimmer is not a Porsche.

Remember "Porsche there is no substitute" (This means: girls dig Porsche more than a bimmer, that's a fact)

Sal 965

Some still say "BMW - The ultimate driving machine".....

I use both sayings just for the record....

Alan Smithee

Huh? A $50k, 333hp M3 should be compared to a $200k, 450+hp 996GT2?? The cars have nothing in common other than their country of manufacture.

And how is power meaningless with regards to the Corvette? Current base model Corvettes are as fast or faster than all current normally aspirated Porsches.

This started when somebody called the E46 M3 boring, soft, and bland, and I pointed out that it certainly is not when compared to the equivalent Porsche, the 996.

Yes, times around a track are what matter in motorsports. But that's not what's being discussed here...

Oracle

Since you confirmed the only thing they have in common is he country of manufacture so then there is no point in comparing a M3 vs 996, this is following your rationale.

Seriously what kind of answers did you expect from a Porsche forum?

There is no substitute.

Alan Smithee

Um, no, I said the M3 and 996GT2 have nothing in common other than country of manufacture. The M3 and standard 996, however, appealed to many of the same buyers when new, are priced similarly on the used market, and have very comparable performance on and off the track. Point being, the M3 is far from boring, soft, and bland.

What do I expect? A little objectivity. There are plenty of subsitutes, and that comes from a current Porsche 997 owner (and ex-E46 M3 owner).

Oracle

Are you serious?

last time I checked this is not a business meeting place but a leisure website for Porsche people... but what do I know?

Alan Smithee

That's where you're wrong. It's a leisure website about Porsche...for all people.

Oracle

Ok I'm wrong. Happy?

DHinkle

I was disappointed w/the E46 M3's. I thought they were to heavy and you had to be high in the rpm's to have a good time at which you were into triple digit speeds. Also, the M3 brakes cannot match Porsche 996 brakes on the track.

I've always preferred a regular 3.6 996 to an E46 M3 but I still love the original E30 M3's and older 911's....

kusee pee

This thread seems to have caused some fun! It's hard to compare an M5 with a 911 as they are very different beasts. The same with the M3 but to a lesser degree. I'm a big fan of both marques - IMO they're the best engine/chassis manufacturers in the world and both have great motor racing legacies too. Before my first 964 I had an E36 M3 which I loved but was blown away by the character of the 964. I agree with the comments about the M3 engines feeling a little breathless unless working at very high revs. If I was in the market for a sports saloon then an M5 would be at the top of the list, no doubt, but as a car to drive for fun the 964 takes it by a mile.

At the moment I've got an E36 325i as my track car alongside the 964T. Whilst they don't compare as sports cars I have nothing but admiration for the engine and chassis balance of the BMW.

So...in summary, keep the 964 if you're looking for what's the best fun drive. But feel confident that BMW produces some great cars too.