posted 06-25-2001 03:45 PM            

I just got my 95 M3 (first BMW ever). I have to say it is an excellent car. There's plenty of torque around town at low RPM's, and it's really respectable in the informal "I bet I can beat you to the next light" games. BUT, it is probably not the best choice if you are looking for a 1/4 mile car. Again, I love my car and came from a "muscle car" background... It's just a different type of power and perfomance.

If you want to do a lot of drag racing, you might reconsider, but if you are looking for an extremely elegant, powerfull and well balanced sports car that is still great to get to work in, then an M3 is probably a great choice for you.

The 0-60's tend to vary between 5.5 and 6.2 depending on the model and year of the car. The later cars were heavier. My 95 is 3175 lbs, but I think the 99's were around 3600. It's all a trade off, as the 96 and up models are available as 4 doors which is very convenient and still very sporty.

As for horsepower, the cheap things to do are to get the Conforti chip $250 www.turnermotorsports.com (19 HP) and the cold air intake (5 HP??). There are tons of mods available, but these are very common, easy on the vehicle, and yield decent returns for your $$$.

Hope this helps..
Derek

posted 06-27-2001 12:31 PM            

It's a 5 speed. I don't believe it's a "sport package". I think the only real option was for the luxury package (which I do not have), but you would probably not want a luxury package as it adds weight.

I don't know what my 0-60's and 1/4 mile times are as I've only had the car 9 glorious days so far.

It's a 2 door, the 95's are two door only, the later years give you choices as far as 2 or 4 door.

The 95 is the only year with the 3.0L engine. The 96-99 have a 3.2L that puts out the same amount of power.

The 95 has OBD-1 engine controls and is able to get 240HP from the 3L, the 96 to 99 have OBD-2 engine controls that do add some stuff, but make the same horsepower out of a slightly larger motor. HOWEVER, the 3.2L is supposed to have a bit more low end torque, which could help in drag racing type stuff.

The newer machines also offer some traction control and other goodies that are not available on the 95's. (but this increases the weight of the car, thereby hurting acceleration.)

I think the 95 is a good collector year because the style was only offered one year, they are affordable, and they are easier to wring more power out of. (I'm told.)

Good hunting!

posted 07-26-2001 04:17 PM            

I would really have to agree with Boskone, that the M3, while an amazing car, is not the greatest drag vehicle around. You could probably make it one, but it would set you back quite a few $$$$.

I have a '95 5-spd. I've never taken it to the drag strip or anything, but the car magazines (depending on which one you read) rate the 0-60 at 5.5 to low the 6's and the 1/4 mile at 14s. I traded in a '93 RX-7 (255hp twin turbo) for my M3. The RX-7 was supposed to hit 0-60 in the high 4's, and I believe it. Based on that, I would put my M3 in the low 6's.

My ex-RX-7 honestly beat my M3 in all performance catagories, but was overall an inferior car. The performance was amazing, but I'd take my M3 any day.

I have been pondering tuning the M3 a bit (I miss those sub 5s 0-60 times), but I've found it a rather expensive car to tune. I bought an air intake kit from BMPD, but haven't done much else. I'm thinking about a Dinan chip and a larger throttle body, but I still don't think I'll match my RX-7 without adding a supercharger or something. The cheapest one I've found is still around $4k!

If you are deadset on having a dragster, you may want to consider an RX-7, a Supra or a new Vette. These cars are hard to beat in terms of bang for the buck and it's tough to find too many things on the road today that can beat them at the stop light.

Good luck,

posted 08-09-2001 06:28 PM            

I've driven both cars and I do agree that the RX-7 is the faster of the two, besides what it says in the spec sheets. If I wanted a fast car, the RX-7 would by my pick. However, I would pick the M3 over the RX-7 for these reasons:
- Space/Comfort
- Overall handling
- Luxury options
- Practicality

If you have to decide between an M3 and any other car(s), remember that the M3 god is looking down on you. You better make the right decision or else... =)

I myself drive a 5-speed '97 Sedan. So far I've beaten my neighbor's boxster and my other neighbor's audi s4 (with stage II turbo) in the "red light to red light" race. I haven't made any modification to my car although I am saving up for a Dinan chip and air intake. So far the only reason I haven't upgraded is because I don't like the car being too loud. That's so... Honda. =)

posted 08-09-2001 06:46 PM            

actually RX-7's are pretty cool cars but if I were going that way, I would probably get a Twin turbo 300ZX or a Supra Twin Turbo.

All very fast cars and fairly reliable I think...for turbos.