under-rated

[QUOTE]Originally posted by ttb

ttb

riceburner gets my point...the m3s are what, like 60k brand new? if bmw offer the m3 at say 75k but there was no 325, 330s, 328s, woul dyou pay the extra 15k?

under-rated

15k is no sweat off my nutts, why not!

Slamnasty

I'm surprised that there's a question of automotive "elitism" among cars on the same platform. The

M3 doesn't have feelings. And if the existence of the "lesser" 3-Series tarnished the M3's names, how come I see 5 M3s a day?

People buy great cars, it's that simple. Should Saab poll its customers if they know that the new 9-3 is built on roughly the same platform as the upcoming Chevy Cobalt? Should VW Taoureg customers be upset their $50,000 SUV rides on a ruggedized Golf A4 chassis?

This is a simple fact of life in manufacturing. VW runs on essentially 1 platform, Honda on 2 or 3, Nissan is quickly moving to a single platform setup, and GM and Ford are thinking 3 major platforms for any and all cars domestic and global. It's simply smart business to operate this way.

wantone

[QUOTE]Originally posted by QUIKAG
Doesn't make sense...

wantone

[QUOTE]Originally posted by ttb
Saw this top gear clip about the NSX-R. They didn't like it because it was basically fiddling around with an existing car. They said Honda needs to dump the NSX and build a new car. Anyways, that got me thinking...as much as I like the M3 and M5 and some of the AMG models, I'd wished it didn't have the corresponding non M, non AMG models.

Fanman

If the M3 were an exclusive car, it would cost a lot more than $75K. The "regular" 3 series models all together probably outsell the M3 about 20 to 1. Most of the research costs for a new chassis would come from the "regular" models. I bet if the M3 didn't have it's siblings the cost would be far more than $60K-$75K. A big part of R&D costs is the frame, and frame dynamics, not to mention that the M3 while different from many of the M3's still uses many of the components of the regular 3-series, or just extentions of the regular 3 series body panels. aerodynamics, handling, etc. have already been done on 3 series cars, the M3 just takes that a bit further. The question isn't whether the M3 by itself would be better without the 3 series, but would the 3 series ever get rid of the M3. At some point many car companies sell way more base models than specialty cars. In BMW's case the M division has been pretty successful. But there have been cases where hi-po versions of the regular cars failed like the ZR-1, or the Ford Taurus SHO, etc, and were subsequently killed.

under-rated

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Fanman

ttb

yea, i remember the e36, so many people slap on the m3 badge. much harder to do with the current m3

ninethreeeleven

From my understanding this is an argument towards "if your going to spend the extra 15-20k for the M3, shouldn't it look different than the regular 3XX." I guess that would then be more about showing your car and wealth than enjoying your car and wealth. Change the look totally so everyone knows you have the more powerful version? I dont see BMW doing that.
Does it make the M3 less appealing, NO, it makes the regular 3 series less appealing knowing there is a "better version." Thats jsut my opinion though.

I think platform sharing only hurts cars that are trying to be something better than they are i.e the H2 on the Tahoe platform, and not some "balls-to-the-wall" platform like its "big brother" the Humvee.