[Obioban]

Can we get a stock M3, or one without the ebay mods at least? That thing is.... not a good example of e46 styling :P

[termigni]

Originally Posted by Obioban

Can we get a stock M3, or one without the ebay mods at least? That thing is.... not a good example of e46 styling :P

what you just called 'ebay mods' on this car is full spec Dinan example. If you sum up the receipts on this car, it adds up to about $90k.

I thought you knew your stuff Obioban. I followed you all those years back in my E46m days. very disappointing..

[termigni]

Originally Posted by Obioban

Can we get a stock M3, or one without the ebay mods at least? That thing is.... not a good example of e46 styling :P

May these rims will give you a hint? Where do you get eBay parts in these pics? Hate is real huh?

[termigni]

Originally Posted by termigni

May these rims will give you a hint? Where do you get eBay parts in these pics? Hate is real huh?

Where do you see "eBay parts"??

[Obioban]

Originally Posted by termigni

Where do you see "eBay parts"??

yellow turn singles instead of the stock clears, yellow angel eyes instead of the stock none, something wrong with the fog lights that I can't make out from the photos (but very not stock), projectors have been made uglier somehow, and the either the color is way off on the camera or that is a vinyl wrap on the whole car.

It's just not a good looking example of what e46 M3 styling is

It may also have functional parts (though many of the Dinan parts for the e46 M3 are a downgrade vs stock)-- but the stylistic elements, which is what I commented on, are... not great (and separate/unrelated to the performance parts).

By ebay mods, I didn't really mean "purchased on ebay"-- I more meant the kind of mods that can be done for little to no money, that people do just to be "different"-- not because it actually makes the car better.

[termigni]

Originally Posted by Obioban

yellow turn singles instead of the stock clears, yellow angel eyes instead of the stock none, something wrong with the fog lights that I can't make out from the photos (but very not stock), projectors have been made uglier somehow, and the either the color is way off on the camera or that is a vinyl wrap on the whole car.

It's just not a good looking example of what e46 M3 styling is

It may also have functional parts (though many of the Dinan parts for the e46 M3 are a downgrade vs stock)-- but the stylistic elements, which is what I commented on, are... not great (and separate/unrelated to the performance parts).

By ebay mods, I didn't really mean "purchased on ebay"-- I more meant the kind of mods that can be done for little to no money, that people do just to be "different"-- not because it actually makes the car better.

I'm not trying to argue with you which one actually looks better as it is subjective but you did go ahead and write "M3(subjective, technically... but I don't think anyone's going to disagree" which is pretty arrogant way to say you are right and everyone is wrong.

for example, you are still doing that in your last post. amber corners are preferred by some E46M owners over the stock clear lights. it is a subjective thing but you are judging how "ebay" it looks.

as per the headlights, they were done by lightwerkz who is well known in E46M community. I think he actually started his company when his own M3 headlights became popular (as in some people like the styling). again, this is a subjective thing but you are still calling it "uglier" by your standards

[Obioban]

Originally Posted by termigni

I'm not trying to argue with you which one actually looks better as it is subjective but you did go ahead and write "M3(subjective, technically... but I don't think anyone's going to disagree" which is pretty arrogant way to say you are right and everyone is wrong.

for example, you are still doing that in your last post. amber corners are preferred by some E46M owners over the stock clear lights. it is a subjective thing but you are judging how "ebay" it looks.

as per the headlights, they were done by lightwerkz who is well known in E46M community. I think he actually started his company when his own M3 headlights became popular (as in some people like the styling). again, this is a subjective thing but you are still calling it "uglier" by your standards

Caesars (Lightwerkz) projector upgrades are awesome-- I have them on both of my M3s and my M5. The projector shroud, aftermarket angel eyes, and weird looking fog lights are all separate and unrelated to that-- it's entirely possible to have 100% of the functionality of the projector upgrade, giving you much better light output than any stock car sold in the USA, with a stock look.

How's this, as a statement we should both be able to agree with: If you want to compare cars, stock vs stock is the only fair way to do it.

Comparing modified cars doesn't really accomplish anything. If my argument was... my e46 M3 has 60 hp more than a stock M2, weights 450 lbs less than a stock M2, has better suspension and brakes than a stock M2, has better light output, seats, and more useful on board electronics than a stock M2 (all of which are true), and therefore all e46 M3s are faster, better braking, better turning, better tech cars than the M2s... would that be a fair comparison?

IMHO, no. Stock vs stock is the only fair way to compare-- which is why my list of attributes was comparing a stock e46m to a stock M2. But, similarly.. when comparing styling, stock vs stock is the only sensible way to do it-- and the car you posted very much was not.

But, I do agree that styling is subjective. Nothing I write can convince anyone of something looking better or worse. Perhaps I should not have worded my statement that way-- previously I had never heard of anyone who thought the M2 was a better looking car. The e46 M3 is routinely featured on lists of BMW best looking cars of all time, along side the 3.0 CSL and 507.

Out of curiosity: is that e46 vinyl wrapped?

[termigni]

Originally Posted by Obioban

Caesars (Lightwerkz) projector upgrades are awesome-- I have them on both of my M3s and my M5. The projector shroud, aftermarket angel eyes, and weird looking fog lights are all separate and unrelated to that-- it's entirely possible to have 100% of the functionality of the projector upgrade, giving you much better light output than any stock car sold in the USA, with a stock look.

How's this, as a statement we should both be able to agree with: If you want to compare cars, stock vs stock is the only fair way to do it.

Comparing modified cars doesn't really accomplish anything. If my argument was... my e46 M3 has 60 hp more than a stock M2, weights 450 lbs less than a stock M2, has better suspension and brakes than a stock M2, has better light output, seats, and more useful on board electronics than a stock M2 (all of which are true), and therefore all e46 M3s are faster, better braking, better turning, better tech cars than the M2s... would that be a fair comparison?

IMHO, no. Stock vs stock is the only fair way to compare-- which is why my list of attributes was comparing a stock e46m to a stock M2. But, similarly.. when comparing styling, stock vs stock is the only sensible way to do it-- and the car you posted very much was not.

But, I do agree that styling is subjective. Nothing I write can convince anyone of something looking better or worse. Perhaps I should not have worded my statement that way-- previously I had never heard of anyone who thought the M2 was a better looking car. The e46 M3 is routinely featured on lists of BMW best looking cars of all time, along side the 3.0 CSL and 507.

Out of curiosity: is that e46 vinyl wrapped?

Both are vinyl wrapped by me. The e46 is silvergray underneath which I'd much prefer but the owner wanted a Porsche blue so he went with this color. It looks really good in person. This car gets a lot of attention whenever we hit up cars and caffee. My M2 is LBB, wrapped in Atlantis blue.

I agreed with most of your comparison except your statement of saying something like most will agree that the e46m looks better. Like i mentioned, I'm a big fan of e46m, it has been my dream car which I was able to own in silvergray over red in the past. However when I actually put the cars next to each other, i prefer the m2 styling much more. Just look at the last picture I posted. M2 looks much more exotic than the e46.

[stefan]

I'm sorry but the only thing the M2 has on the E46 M3 is warranty. Ok and maybe some streetability. I even think the E46 interior wins out with its dense soft plastics, very little creaks/squeaks on well kept cars, dull orange hue to the lights focusing the driver on driving. Great pedals. My only gripe is the slow steering ratio, fixed in the ZCP.

Looks? Not even subjective.






I miss my E46 M3 dearly.

[termigni]

Originally Posted by stefan

I'm sorry but the only thing the M2 has on the E46 M3 is warranty. Ok and maybe some streetability. I even think the E46 interior wins out with its dense soft plastics, very little creaks/squeaks on well kept cars, dull orange hue to the lights focusing the driver on driving. Great pedals. My only gripe is the slow steering ratio, fixed in the ZCP.

Looks? Not even subjective.

I miss my E46 M3 dearly.

sorry I disagree. I used to hate how slow it was to get it going. No TQ just like my S2000 but with 4 seats instead of 2. I DD'd it for 3 years 12,000 miles per year and I had to get on it to keep up with Honda Accord V6s. of course, at high RPM is another story but if the car is mainly for DD, it's pretty much useless. And there is that constant worrying about VANOS, rod bearing, subframe crack, never ending interior rattles, and horrible MPG.

even though E46M was my dream car and I regret the day when I sold it, M2 is just a better car. Only things that E46M has is high RPM(no low end torque just kills this car), better interior(only the design, thx to technology M2 interior is more useful) and steering feel(welcome to the future).

I used to miss my E46M dearly until I drove my friend's E46m with full 100% dinan upgrades. His car is definitely much faster than my stock M2, his aftermarket shifter feel is close to the S2000, upgraded suspension and BBK are great upgrades to the stock E46M. but after a couple of drives, it reminded me of the things I used to not like about the car and it actually got rid of my thoughts of may be picking up a used E46m in the near future.

[Obioban]

Originally Posted by termigni

sorry I disagree. I used to hate how slow it was to get it going. No TQ just like my S2000 but with 4 seats instead of 2. I DD'd it for 3 years 12,000 miles per year and I had to get on it to keep up with Honda Accord V6s. of course, at high RPM is another story but if the car is mainly for DD, it's pretty much useless. And there is that constant worrying about VANOS, rod bearing, subframe crack, never ending interior rattles, and horrible MPG.

even though E46M was my dream car and I regret the day when I sold it, M2 is just a better car. Only things that E46M has is high RPM(no low end torque just kills this car), better interior(only the design, thx to technology M2 interior is more useful) and steering feel(welcome to the future).

I used to miss my E46M dearly until I drove my friend's E46m with full 100% dinan upgrades. His car is definitely much faster than my stock M2, his aftermarket shifter feel is close to the S2000, upgraded suspension and BBK are great upgrades to the stock E46M. but after a couple of drives, it reminded me of the things I used to not like about the car and it actually got rid of my thoughts of may be picking up a used E46m in the near future.

Funny-- I find my M5 boring primarily because of the low end torque. I've been thinking about building myself an s54 powered e39 just to have an e39 that I enjoy driving (and, in fact, recently bought a 530i for that purpose). I find torque to make the car far less involving-- when the car is fast without effort, going fast in it is a much less rewarding experience. I far prefer having to work the car over to get the most out of it.

I like torque in cars that I don't intend to drive in an involving manner-- e.g. I find it useful in my suburban, especially when towing the race car. But for a drivers car? High revving, high RPM horsepower every time for me. I don't feel like I'm alone in that, either-- if you think about all of history's best drivers cars, they're all of that philosophy-- S2000, GT3, McLaren F1, Ferraris, Lambos, lotuses, NSX, e30 M3s, small british sports cars-- pretty much every driver focused car until government mandated MPG and emissions standards forced the manufacturers off NA and onto turbos (and even then Porsche is holding out with their GT line). If it's an iconic "best drivers car" from any era until now (when they were forced off it), it was very likely a low torque, high revving, high specific output, NA engine.

VANOS and subframe are only a constant worry if you're lazy or uninformed. So long as you don't wait for failure, you can lock down both in a day with <$500 parts and never have to worry about them again (Beisan vanos pump disk, loctite on the cam bolts, BMW structural foam injected in the subframe mount points).

... there's much better parts out there than Dinan for the car. As I said before, several of the Dinan parts for the e46 are actually downgrades, and several are just a wash. Even the good ones (e.g. Brakes) are just a Dinan badged and price jacked version of the same thing (e.g. the Dinan brakes are just the Brembo GT kit for the e46 with a $2000 price jack and a Dinan sticker on the caliper... and in the worse rotor size of the two that Brembo offers for the car). The Dinan suspension you drove on is unmodified Koni yellow (with the price jacked) and lowering springs, possibly with sways if he optioned them-- FAR better options exist for the money, or you can get the same parts for less money. Unless he has the Dinan supercharger (which comes poorly tuned and without an intercooler, for a higher price than competing kits that are properly tuned, more power, and have an intercooler), his car makes less power than a stock e46 M3-- their engine tune loses power, the throttle bodies are useless on an other wise stock car, and the intake and muffler (of which only the right pipes work-- the left pipes are literally just blanks) has never been shown to do anything power wise.

[stefan]

Originally Posted by Obioban

Funny-- I find my M5 boring primarily because of the low end torque. I've been thinking about building myself an s54 powered e39 just to have an e39 that I enjoy driving (and, in fact, recently bought a 530i for that purpose). I find torque to make the car far less involving-- when the car is fast without effort, going fast in it is a much less rewarding experience. I far prefer having to work the car over to get the most out of it.

I like torque in cars that I don't intend to drive in an involving manner-- e.g. I find it useful in my suburban, especially when towing the race car. But for a drivers car? High revving, high RPM horsepower every time for me. I don't feel like I'm alone in that, either-- if you think about all of history's best drivers cars, they're all of that philosophy-- S2000, GT3, McLaren F1, Ferraris, Lambos, lotuses, NSX, e30 M3s, small british sports cars-- pretty much everything until government mandated MPG and emissions standards forced the manufacturers off NA and onto turbos (and even then Porsche is holding out with their GT line). If it's an iconic "best drivers car" from any era until now (when they were forced off it), it was very likely a low torque, high revving, high specific output, NA engine.

VANOS and subframe are only a constant worry if you're lazy or uninformed. So long as you don't wait for failure, you can lock down both in a day with <$500 parts and never have to worry about them again (Beisan vanos pump disk, loctite on the cam bolts, BMW structural foam injected in the subframe mount points).

... there's much better parts out there than Dinan for the car. As I said before, several of the Dinan parts for the e46 are actually downgrades, and several are just a wash. Even the good ones (e.g. Brakes) are just a Dinan badged and price jacked version of the same thing (e.g. the Dinan brakes are just the Brembo GT kit for the e46 with a $2000 price jack and a Dinan sticker on the caliper... and in the worse rotor size of the two that Brembo offers for the car). The Dinan suspension you drove on is unmodified Koni yellow (with the price jacked) and lowering springs, possibly with sways if he optioned them-- FAR better options exist for the money, or you can get the same parts for less money. Unless he has the Dinan supercharger (which comes poorly tuned and without an intercooler, for a higher price than competing kits that are properly tuned, more power, and have an intercooler), his car makes less power than a stock e46 M3-- their engine tune loses power, the throttle bodies are useless on an other wise stock car, and the intake and muffler (of which only the right pipes work-- the left pipes are literally just blanks) has never been shown to do anything power wise.

Removing the S62 is a sacrilege. By the way both the S54 and S62 need..absolutely need headers and high flow cats. These motors need to breathe. When people say the Dinan versions seem to haul ass, I think they are feeling the effect of quality headers. I am fairly certain an FBO E46 M3 zcp will be quicker around most low elevation tracks than an M2.

For sure the Dinan stuff isn't worth it. For suspension the clear choice is Ground Control on the e46. I would also avoid intakes and any kind of TB upgrades. Snake oil for the most part.

[Obioban]

Originally Posted by stefan

Removing the S62 is a sacrilege. By the way both the S54 and S62 need..absolutely need headers and high flow cats. These motors need to breathe. When people say the Dinan versions seem to haul ass, I think they are feeling the effect of quality headers. I am fairly certain an FBO E46 M3 zcp will be quicker around most low elevation tracks than an M2.

For sure the Dinan stuff isn't worth it. For suspension the clear choice is Ground Control on the e46. I would also avoid intakes and any kind of TB upgrades. Snake oil for the most part.

Dinan never offered headers or a header tune for the e46 M3

CSL intake with CSL engine management and a tune actually makes some power-- particularly on an s54 with cams/headers already. MSS5X tuning has come a LONG way in the last couple years-- my car is up 70 SAE RWHP over stock, NA. At this point, the TBs would actually probably be good for another 5-10 hp (though that's a pretty expensive 5-10hp).

Suspension... there's actually a ton of good (and bad) options out there. Dinan's is just unexceptional and overpriced.

My wife likes the torque of the M5, so it's staying in that car. My original plan was to swap the M5, but she was against it... so I got the 530i to use as the starting point. The 530i is probably a better starting point anyway, since the I6 cars got R&P steering (whereas the V8 cars got reticulating ball-- much worse feel). I'm pretty excited for an s54 e39-- the curb weight on the manual trans e39 530i was only 3472 lbs stock, so an s54 version should be ~3500 lbs... in a very stiff chassis, with space for 4 people sit in comfort, and a full size spare tire. With some light weight but comfortable reclining aftermarket seats and some other tweaks, the passenger space is further increased (thinner seats, more ******* and I suspect I should be able to get it down to ~3400 lbs without compromising any comfort/quiet... with the kind of powerband I like (high revving, low torque) and R&P levels of steering feel.

[stefan]

Originally Posted by Obioban

Dinan never offered headers or a header tune for the e46 M3

CSL intake with CSL engine management and a tune actually makes some power-- particularly on an s54 with cams/headers already. MSS5X tuning has come a LONG way in the last couple years-- my car is up 70 SAE RWHP over stock, NA. At this point, the TBs would actually probably be good for another 5-10 hp (though that's a pretty expensive 5-10hp).

Suspension... there's actually a ton of good (and bad) options out there. Dinan's is just unexceptional and overpriced.

My wife likes the torque of the M5, so it's staying in that car. My original plan was to swap the M5, but she was against it... so I got the 530i to use as the starting point. The 530i is probably a better starting point anyway, since the I6 cars got R&P steering (whereas the V8 cars got reticulating ball-- much worse feel). I'm pretty excited for an s54 e39-- the curb weight on the manual trans e39 530i was only 3472 lbs stock, so an s54 version should be ~3500 lbs... in a very stiff chassis, with space for 4 people sit in comfort, and a full size spare tire. With some light weight but comfortable reclining aftermarket seats and some other tweaks, the passenger space is further increased (thinner seats, more ******* and I suspect I should be able to get it down to ~3400 lbs without compromising any comfort/quiet... with the kind of powerband I like (high revving, low torque) and R&P levels of steering feel.

I am not familiar with Dinan's historic product line. Having owned an M3, being around many and working on them, and owning an M5, all I can tell you is that the S54 and S62 benefit *greatly* from full exhaust systems and high flow headers.

To be clear a stock M3 with a tune makes a trivial amount to no additional power. A FBO will respond better immediately and maybe put a bit of power back on the table. Obviously if you do cams and such, which almost nobody does, then that changes.

Either way, being that the topic is m2 vs e46 m3, I have to think people haven't driven an e46 m3 or at least a properly maintained one. To your point about torque laziness, that is one of the reasons I picked up the M2. I don't want to wring this car out on daily driving and use it to pick up my kid etc, need the warranty because I don't have time to be under my car anymore. Otherwise it would be an E46 in the garage no question.

[Obioban]

Originally Posted by stefan

I am not familiar with Dinan's historic product line. Having owned an M3, being around many and working on them, and owning an M5, all I can tell you is that the S54 and S62 benefit *greatly* from full exhaust systems and high flow headers.

To be clear a stock M3 with a tune makes a trivial amount to no additional power. A FBO will respond better immediately and maybe put a bit of power back on the table. Obviously if you do cams and such, which almost nobody does, then that changes.

Either way, being that the topic is m2 vs e46 m3, I have to think people haven't driven an e46 m3 or at least a properly maintained one. To your point about torque laziness, that is one of the reasons I picked up the M2. I don't want to wring this car out on daily driving and use it to pick up my kid etc, need the warranty because I don't have time to be under my car anymore. Otherwise it would be an E46 in the garage no question.

I completely agree on the s54/s62 header front! It is undoubtedly THE power mod, to do before any others, on both cars. I just mentioned Dinan because I thought that was the topic at hand.

Cams... more common than you might expect these days (since MSS5X tuning has come of age)-- e.g. there is currently a cam group buy going on with 17 participants. That's just this time period, with just people on M3forum, with just people that want that brand of cam.

[termigni]

Originally Posted by Obioban

Funny-- I find my M5 boring primarily because of the low end torque. I've been thinking about building myself an s54 powered e39 just to have an e39 that I enjoy driving (and, in fact, recently bought a 530i for that purpose). I find torque to make the car far less involving-- when the car is fast without effort, going fast in it is a much less rewarding experience. I far prefer having to work the car over to get the most out of it.

I like torque in cars that I don't intend to drive in an involving manner-- e.g. I find it useful in my suburban, especially when towing the race car. But for a drivers car? High revving, high RPM horsepower every time for me. I don't feel like I'm alone in that, either-- if you think about all of history's best drivers cars, they're all of that philosophy-- S2000, GT3, McLaren F1, Ferraris, Lambos, lotuses, NSX, e30 M3s, small british sports cars-- pretty much every driver focused car until government mandated MPG and emissions standards forced the manufacturers off NA and onto turbos (and even then Porsche is holding out with their GT line). If it's an iconic "best drivers car" from any era until now (when they were forced off it), it was very likely a low torque, high revving, high specific output, NA engine.

VANOS and subframe are only a constant worry if you're lazy or uninformed. So long as you don't wait for failure, you can lock down both in a day with <$500 parts and never have to worry about them again (Beisan vanos pump disk, loctite on the cam bolts, BMW structural foam injected in the subframe mount points).

... there's much better parts out there than Dinan for the car. As I said before, several of the Dinan parts for the e46 are actually downgrades, and several are just a wash. Even the good ones (e.g. Brakes) are just a Dinan badged and price jacked version of the same thing (e.g. the Dinan brakes are just the Brembo GT kit for the e46 with a $2000 price jack and a Dinan sticker on the caliper... and in the worse rotor size of the two that Brembo offers for the car). The Dinan suspension you drove on is unmodified Koni yellow (with the price jacked) and lowering springs, possibly with sways if he optioned them-- FAR better options exist for the money, or you can get the same parts for less money. Unless he has the Dinan supercharger (which comes poorly tuned and without an intercooler, for a higher price than competing kits that are properly tuned, more power, and have an intercooler), his car makes less power than a stock e46 M3-- their engine tune loses power, the throttle bodies are useless on an other wise stock car, and the intake and muffler (of which only the right pipes work-- the left pipes are literally just blanks) has never been shown to do anything power wise.

*my friend's car has Dinan supercharger stage 2 I believe..(hence why I stated his car is faster than my stock M2). it is tuned (properly or poorly) and has an intercooler.
This E46M is a monster and it is very well put together. it was so fast that it scared the crap out of me when I was merging onto the highway.


what you just wrote is why I used to read up on your journeys on M3forum.net. You know your stuff about cars, you are very handy, very good at up keeping your cars. I even remember reading what you wrote on how to get best MPG on an e46M.

everyone has different preferences, different skill sets and different lives. our reasoning of buying cars are different. some prefer to drive their cars modded, some don't. I keep my cars stock. My e46M was never touched and even my S2000 is bone stock except the wheels and convertible cover. Stock to stock, M2 wins hands down, road & track.

some prefer low end tq, some prefer high end hp. I used ride Ducati super bikes because they have great low end tq instead of high end hp of the Japanese sportbikes. it's just different preferences. over the past 15 years, I've seen winning motoGP bikes evolving into more low end torque bikes over the high end hp. Yamaha for example went to cross-plane crank on the i4 to match the ducati's low end tq and started winning races.

you are right, historically high end hp cars are the cars to have. yes the experienced racers and journalists prefer n/a high reving cars because they are great fun to drive on track and sounds great. But did we see that many applications of turbos in past sports cars? I don't think so. Ferrari did it once on F40 and didn't turn to turbo until the 488. Turbos in the past are under developed. isn't the F40 a great classic? isn't the 488 a great driver's car that turns in some fast track times? (except the sound) We've started to see the changes and advancement of turbos in the past 10 years. they are efficient, easily accessible power, minimal lag, and they are very fun to drive on and off the track.

screaming engine isn't much appreciated to people like me who will be lucky to see one track day in a year. so when we are talking about supercars, yes I'd agree with you more favoring the high end hp n/a engine. but we are talking about M cars that will see a lot more street time than track time in general.


to add.. your M5 may be boring not because of low end torque but probably the boring family sedan chassis, especially for someone like you who has some great knowledge and experience with your E46 coupe. one thing I noticed about the M2 is its nimble chassis. It handles like a mini cooper but it's much more fun because of the power it has.

[seetohey]

Originally Posted by termigni

I disagree 100%.

M2 has E46M beat by miles on the exterior styling. I owned E46m and now own an M2. I love the E46M, a big fan of the car but M2 looks better IMO.

I have some pictures of my M2 and my friend's E46M parked side by side and my friend also agrees that the M2 looks better. Hopefully I can find the pictures and post them up here for a comparison soon.

Overall, after owning both cars, my choice is the M2 over the E46M by a big margin.

I feel the opposite after also owning both cars. Reluctantly gave up the E46 M3 only because of random electrical gremlins and didn't want to deal with subframe.

[termigni]

Originally Posted by seetohey

I feel the opposite after also owning both cars. Reluctantly gave up the E46 M3 only because of random electrical gremlins and didn't want to deal with subframe.

oh I had random electrical gremlins too on the E46m that annoyed the crap out of me.

[qnet]

I think the E46 M3 looked great for it's time, and I still like the look. Having said that, I like the look of the M2 better. I shopped E46 M3's and one thing I do agree with Obioban about is, changing the look from stock. It's really hard to find a E46 M3 that someone hasn't done something to the exterior, and I can't stand most of them.

[M3 Adjuster]

Originally Posted by termigni

sorry I disagree. I used to hate how slow it was to get it going. No TQ just like my S2000 but with 4 seats instead of 2. I DD'd it for 3 years 12,000 miles per year and I had to get on it to keep up with Honda Accord V6s. of course, at high RPM is another story but if the car is mainly for DD, it's pretty much useless. And there is that constant worrying about VANOS, rod bearing, subframe crack, never ending interior rattles, and horrible MPG.

even though E46M was my dream car and I regret the day when I sold it, M2 is just a better car. Only things that E46M has is high RPM(no low end torque just kills this car), better interior(only the design, thx to technology M2 interior is more useful) and steering feel(welcome to the future).

I used to miss my E46M dearly until I drove my friend's E46m with full 100% dinan upgrades. His car is definitely much faster than my stock M2, his aftermarket shifter feel is close to the S2000, upgraded suspension and BBK are great upgrades to the stock E46M. but after a couple of drives, it reminded me of the things I used to not like about the car and it actually got rid of my thoughts of may be picking up a used E46m in the near future.

The M2 is a better daily driver. The E46 M3 has a better motor for track duty probably.

Unlike many , I never liked the rasp of the S54 ( I started off with 17 years of S14) so for me the N55 is far better. The N54 in the 1M is too quiet but does sound wonderful as well.


I had an E46 M3 Vert and my 1M at the same time at one point. Absolutely no way I would pick the S54 for daily driving over the torquey N54.

The stock shifter had a super long throw also and as you mention it was very slow off the line in comparison. Finally , the steering wheel was absolutely like driving a bus. Soft and floaty unless you are at serious speed. The steering rack in the E82 just slays it.

Between the E46 rack and the M2 EPS.. I don't know which I would consider worse. Probably the EPS.

[Levente_CSL]

the m2 looks like an exotic car next to the e46. look at that front, its like its gonna eat that e46 anytime. much more dynamic body design, on the front side, back. theres just isnt comparison. e46 looks simply boring compared to the m2 design. Having said that, i still think a silver metallic M3 CSL is the best looking bmw yet, then comes the m2. *grabs popcorn*

[No Boost]

Many say that the E46 M is a timeless design, never looking outdated. I think this is because it's not polarizing, rather it's a safe and clean design with few bulges and/or flares. It does look good from all angles but not great. The M2 looks great from most angles, the weak point being the rear. But that angle is saved by the flared hips, something the 235/240 doesn't have. Who knows, in 20 years the M2 may end up looking ridiculous depending on current trends.