Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
First off, the OP is asking about older cars, not current generation.
Secondly, the M5 and CTS-V run basically the same, performance-wise (even though the CTS carries an additional 56 HP and another 168 ft. pounds of torque, so it's a little embarrassing that it doesn't soundly beat the M5), with every review of them dogging the CTS for its sub-par interior and fit and finish.
Also, the M5 is a 3-year-old car, the CTS-V is brand-new. Given that, the CTS should be spanking the M5, not scratching by.
I knew that would get your panties in a bunch. CTS is also 200 lbs. heavier.
Last edited by Lux Hauler; 03-04-2010 at 04:50 PM..
First off, the OP is asking about older cars, not current generation.
Secondly, the M5 and CTS-V run basically the same, performance-wise (even though the CTS carries an additional 56 HP and another 168 ft. pounds of torque, so it's a little embarrassing that it doesn't soundly beat the M5), with every review of them dogging the CTS for its sub-par interior and fit and finish.
Also, the M5 is a 3-year-old car, the CTS-V is brand-new. Given that, the CTS should be spanking the M5, not scratching by.
Dig up some '05 CTS-V - M3 comparisons. Be careful, don't embarrass yourself.
It would help to say where you are, if this would be a "weekend" fun car or a daily, how much of a motoring enthusiast you are, your ability to DIY or tolerate paying for the more extensive maintenance of the BMW, how long you plan to own the car, etc.
The BMW is, as noted already, the more refined car, but it's running costs will be more. It will cost you money, time, or both.
The Acura would be less trouble, and with FWD it's easier for most "non-car-people" to drive in snow, but it's not as rewarding to the real enthusiast.
It really depends upon what you need the car to do. The 3-series is a tad smaller in terms of a back seat, than a TL. You can also shop around for a TL-S if you want a more sporting feel. The TL is a completely different experience than an Accord, and I have driven both many times. Road noise seems to be a Honda issue, since I have noticed it in a TSX, Accord, and TL, but it's nothing so obtrusive where I'd not buy the car because of it.
Both are very good cars, and it really depends upon the car's use. If it's largely a single-occupant vehicle, where the back seats are used as a parcel shelf, then the BMW is fine. If, however, the vehicle must do duty as a family sedan, transporting more than people the size of small children, then the Acura will offer more room.
__________________
All the world's a stage, and all the men and women merely players: they have their exits and their entrances; and one man in his time plays many parts, his acts being seven ages.
~William Shakespeare (As You Like It Act II, Scene VII)
It would help to say where you are, if this would be a "weekend" fun car or a daily, how much of a motoring enthusiast you are, your ability to DIY or tolerate paying for the more extensive maintenance of the BMW, how long you plan to own the car, etc.
The BMW is, as noted already, the more refined car, but it's running costs will be more. It will cost you money, time, or both.
The Acura would be less trouble, and with FWD it's easier for most "non-car-people" to drive in snow, but it's not as rewarding to the real enthusiast.
I mostly agree with you, except the caveat that certain Honda/Acura models (CL, TL, Accord, etc.) around that time had problems with their auto trannies in the V6 models. Hence the general stereotype of Acura>BMW reliability may not hold up when comparing certain models.
If it were up to me, I'd prioritize fun-to-drive and style, and preferably RWD or AWD over FWD:
and there is the quandry! aren't beemers notoriously unreliable and expensive to fix?
thanks so far everyone!
I've been wondering why it is that BMW have this rep in the States, in Europe it's widely recognized (both by stats, owners recommendation etc etc) that as of 2002-2003 the BMW's are very sound and solid vehicles, ESPECIALLY the 3-series, and maybe most notably the 2004-2005 E46 and the new E92.
I wonder if the different wiring can have anything to say for the reliability over there, or if it's simply the bigger engines that aren't as well constructed as the smaller ones, you'll generally buy over here.
As of today, they're some of the most reliable cars you can buy, and as much as the dealers charge an arm and a leg for a service, they require them fairly rarely.
As for the OP's question, I'd buy a nice as late as possible MY E46, with low mileage, manual transmission and M-sport package (another thing I've noticed, hardly anyone seems to have bought that over in the States). Engine is irrelevant, anything from a 320iM and up would be sufficient for me.
As for the OP's question, I'd buy a nice as late as possible MY E46, with low mileage, manual transmission and M-sport package (another thing I've noticed, hardly anyone seems to have bought that over in the States). Engine is irrelevant, anything from a 320iM and up would be sufficient for me.
M-sport packages were introduced in 2009 and 2010 on certain models in the US after a long hiatus. The US-spec E46 was never offered with that option.
I'd also speculate that power might be a bit more important in the states, considering places are further spread out and there's lots of freeway travel. NTM so few seem to abide by "keep right except to pass" that you've really got to jump on it when the opportunity does arise to get past slow-moving traffic.
M-sport packages were introduced in 2009 and 2010 on certain models in the US after a long hiatus. The US-spec E46 was never offered with that option.
I'd also speculate that power might be a bit more important in the states, considering places are further spread out and there's lots of freeway travel. NTM so few seem to abide by "keep right except to pass" that you've really got to jump on it when the opportunity does arise to get past slow-moving traffic.
I've driven quite a bit in Dallas and Houston (god that city was awful to drive in!) for a 4 month period, so I'm somewhat familiar with it. That said, I personally never experienced any traffic situation where I'd feel like 170hp (BMW E46 320i) wouldn't handle.
I was driving a 2.0L Ford Escort (don't know the hp, but doubt it's over 120hp) with some... mood problems , and I was by no means the slowest thing on the road.
Personally I think it's more of a case of the bigger engines being cheaper, so the price difference might not be big enough to warrant going for the smaller one, from what I saw, few people who had high power cars really used the power available.
I've driven the latest model TL and the latest 3 series.
The 3 series car I think will cause problems for those who are obese (so, roughly 1/2 of Americans). The seats hug you and give you a composed feel, something akin to being "connected" to the road. Thus, for 1/2 of Americans, I would suggest the TL because its seats are more made for them.
For the normal people though, I would highly recommend the 3 series. Despite the fact that they have run-flat tires, the suspension is so well done that I could hardly feel the bumps in the road (and I live in Seattle, home to some raelly crappy roads with ruts in them and some nasty potholes). The sport automatic and steptronic system also give the person who likes control (myself) some joy and will still shift at the appropriate times if you dwell too long at the higher revs, then the other who doesn't drive manual (my wife, not saying all women only drive autos, just giving an example) a chance to drive it too.
The TL felt like a car that is confused. It's trying to be a lazy cruiser whilst giving the glitz (poorly, I might add) and attempting to have the horsepower of a sports sedan, and ends up in the middle. And that's what all Honda owners are, really, "middle of the road", "settle for watered down" type of people if it will save them some money.
Dig up some '05 CTS-V - M3 comparisons. Be careful, don't embarrass yourself.
CTS-V doesn't compete with the M3. That's like saying "let's compare my GT-R to your Civic Si."
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
