E36 ///m3 - dissapointment to ///Ms

[Prev]

My 2c.
When I completed the BMW Advanced High Performance driver course in September this year, I asked the instructors which ///M car was their favourite. Out of 3 instructors, 1 for the e92 M3, 1 for the f10 M5, and one for the 1 Series M Coupe, they all said the e36 M3 and a close second the 1M. Why? Purely because of driver involvement. They quickly said the e36 M3 was definitely not the best M car, that goes to the e46 M3 CSL, but they prefer to drive the e36 M3 and the 1M more than the others, even though the other cars are better. Keep in mind that these instructors are ex racing drivers.
So it depends greatly on personal preference.

Also had the same discussion and reply from the instructors :thumbs:

 

[George Smooth]

In terms of market related performance the E36 M3 wins hands down. At the time 1994 for R189,000 you could buy a car that had the performance of a Porsche 911 and Ferrari 348 at a fraction of the cost. It was the biggest leap at one time that a manufacturer has ever taken.
When the marketing had started for the 3.0 ppl could not believe the performance figures and price hence it sold like hot cakes.
By the time the E46 M3 came out there where a few manufacturers offering cars that could challenge the big dogs.

I can't really thing of any real competitors to the E46 M3 at that time besides the S4 Audi and the Alfa 156 GTA. Which others were there? The RS4 came much later I know.

The europeans got the B5 S4 in 1997 which was a twin turbo V6 with a 0-100 of 5.6 seconds. There after they warmed it up and created the lethal RS4 twin turbo. Merc introduced the C32 and then the C55.
5 second cars became common place.
I guess in my books the gap of performance from the euro 3.2 6 speed E36 2 door was not big enough to the e46.

 

[moranor@axis]

all this over an Autocar writeup :roflol:

Autocar is the Heat magazine of the car world...

 

[wikk3d88]

In terms of market related performance the E36 M3 wins hands down. At the time 1994 for R189,000 you could buy a car that had the performance of a Porsche 911 and Ferrari 348 at a fraction of the cost. It was the biggest leap at one time that a manufacturer has ever taken.
When the marketing had started for the 3.0 ppl could not believe the performance figures and price hence it sold like hot cakes.
By the time the E46 M3 came out there where a few manufacturers offering cars that could challenge the big dogs.

I can't really thing of any real competitors to the E46 M3 at that time besides the S4 Audi and the Alfa 156 GTA. Which others were there? The RS4 came much later I know.

The europeans got the B5 S4 in 1997 which was a twin turbo V6 with a 0-100 of 5.6 seconds. There after they warmed it up and created the lethal RS4 twin turbo. Merc introduced the C32 and then the C55.
5 second cars became common place.
I guess in my books the gap of performance from the euro 3.2 6 speed E36 2 door was not big enough to the e46.

Ah yes, forgot about the mercs.

 

[Jerez]

all this over an Autocar writeup :roflol:

Autocar is the Heat magazine of the car world...

But Top Gear magazine had the similar write up ignoring the E36 as one of the best M3s of all time

---

In terms of market related performance the E36 M3 wins hands down. At the time 1994 for R189,000 you could buy a car that had the performance of a Porsche 911 and Ferrari 348 at a fraction of the cost. It was the biggest leap at one time that a manufacturer has ever taken.
When the marketing had started for the 3.0 ppl could not believe the performance figures and price hence it sold like hot cakes.
By the time the E46 M3 came out there where a few manufacturers offering cars that could challenge the big dogs.

I can't really thing of any real competitors to the E46 M3 at that time besides the S4 Audi and the Alfa 156 GTA. Which others were there? The RS4 came much later I know.

Dont forget,The e30 M3 was only developed in response to the introduction of the 190 2.3 16v

The europeans got the B5 S4 in 1997 which was a twin turbo V6 with a 0-100 of 5.6 seconds. There after they warmed it up and created the lethal RS4 twin turbo. Merc introduced the C32 and then the C55.
5 second cars became common place.
I guess in my books the gap of performance from the euro 3.2 6 speed E36 2 door was not big enough to the e46.

Ah yes, forgot about the mercs.

---

all this over an Autocar writeup :roflol:

Autocar is the Heat magazine of the car world...

But Top Gear magazine had the similar write up ignoring the E36 as one of the best M3s of all time

---

In terms of market related performance the E36 M3 wins hands down. At the time 1994 for R189,000 you could buy a car that had the performance of a Porsche 911 and Ferrari 348 at a fraction of the cost. It was the biggest leap at one time that a manufacturer has ever taken.
When the marketing had started for the 3.0 ppl could not believe the performance figures and price hence it sold like hot cakes.
By the time the E46 M3 came out there where a few manufacturers offering cars that could challenge the big dogs.

I can't really thing of any real competitors to the E46 M3 at that time besides the S4 Audi and the Alfa 156 GTA. Which others were there? The RS4 came much later I know.

Dont forget,The e30 M3 was only developed in response to the introduction of the 190 2.3 16v

The europeans got the B5 S4 in 1997 which was a twin turbo V6 with a 0-100 of 5.6 seconds. There after they warmed it up and created the lethal RS4 twin turbo. Merc introduced the C32 and then the C55.
5 second cars became common place.
I guess in my books the gap of performance from the euro 3.2 6 speed E36 2 door was not big enough to the e46.

Ah yes, forgot about the mercs.

---

Dont forget,but the e30 M3 was only developed in response to the Mercs 190 2.3 16v

 

[moranor@axis]

I remember reading another review where (dont remember by who):

e30 M3 = legend almost perfect drivers car
e36 M3 = more raw then the e46 but a bit to floppy in the chassis
e46 M3 = vast improvement in chassis over the e36 but a bit more disconnected... better car in just about every way just misses out the raw connected feeling of the earlier models...

 

[Fordkoppie]

in 2008, Evo magazine also rated the e30 M3 Sport EVO as the best M car ever and the CSL at a very close 2nd

---

Oh yes, and the e39 M5 was 3rd

 

[wikk3d88]

in 2008, Evo magazine also rated the e30 M3 Sport EVO as the best M car ever and the CSL at a very close 2nd

---

Oh yes, and the e39 M5 was 3rd

---

Doesn't make the E36 any less good

 

[Jerez]

guys here the full PDF article done by EVO magazine - The e36 M3 ha bad reviews

http://www.m3post.com/goodiesforyou/evo.pdf

 

[SP33DYV]

How many e30 M3's do we have locally? The motoring journalists did not even get the chance to test this car locally.:fencelook:

 

[Fordkoppie]

guys here the full PDF article done by EVO magazine - The e36 M3 had bad reviews

http://www.m3post.com/goodiesforyou/evo.pdf

Thanks.
This was the article I was referring to.
We obviously got the copy late as usual (in 2008)

---

Doesn't make the E36 any less good

Did you see who wrote the article? Could you see my name anywhere?? What the hell are you on about?:thumbdo:

 

[Jerez]

guys here the full PDF article done by EVO magazine - The e36 M3 had bad reviews

http://www.m3post.com/goodiesforyou/evo.pdf

Thanks.
This was the article I was referring to.
We obviously got the copy late as usual (in 2008)

---

Doesn't make the E36 any less good

Did you see who wrote the article? Could you see my name anywhere?? What the hell are you on about?:thumbdo:

---

were you in Majorca on this feature?

 

[hoosain]

All the facts, fiction, opinions and whatever else you want to throw in, it comes down to the individual...IMO the E36 M3 is a legend and will always be "THE M3" that was the benchmark for every boyracer and pretender to the crown...

well said
this article is rubbish E36 FTW

 

[wikk3d88]

guys here the full PDF article done by EVO magazine - The e36 M3 had bad reviews

http://www.m3post.com/goodiesforyou/evo.pdf

Thanks.
This was the article I was referring to.
We obviously got the copy late as usual (in 2008)

---

Doesn't make the E36 any less good

Did you see who wrote the article? Could you see my name anywhere?? What the hell are you on about?:thumbdo:

---

Why so defensive? Im simply stating that the E36 M3 was good. The implication that somehow its a bad M car is rubbish.

 

[WyKiD]

What is the actual point of this thread......M cars are supposed to be the pinnacle of BMW engineering....

Yes they are all different and some better than others, actually comes down to individual tastes and preferences. If everybody in the entire world shared the same tastes and had the same preferences, it would make for quite a dull place...

Everybody is of the assumption they know best and therefore make the best choices for themselves this includes petrol vs diesel, place you choose to stay, iphone vs blackberry...you get my point. We all know best and hence feel the need to share this with the world.....:blab:

 

[ClassicB]

I will try not to be too dissapointed when i fire mine up this weekend :rollsmile:

Like Hoosain said that article is rubbish, it is the writers opinion.

and i 2nd e36 FTW :thumbs:

 

[Jerez]

What is the actual point of this thread......M cars are supposed to be the pinnacle of BMW engineering....

Yes they are all different and some better than others, actually comes down to individual tastes and preferences. If everybody in the entire world shared the same tastes and had the same preferences, it would make for quite a dull place...

Everybody is of the assumption they know best and therefore make the best choices for themselves this includes petrol vs diesel, place you choose to stay, iphone vs blackberry...you get my point. We all know best and hence feel the need to share this with the world.....:blab:

The thread isn't about an individuals choice- its about motoring journalists views on the M family. The point of this thread is that perhaps with all the write ups and articles discounting the e36 M3, there may be some truth in it. If u have one then great.remember that this car and all other Ms are always compared to the model before .So yes, if you we're to put an e36 next to an e30- which would u choose or if you put an e36 next to an e46 which would u choose. Your choice will reinforce my point.its a coupe with a bigger engine and some " individual bumpers and side skirts" lets not start on the Vanos issues

 

[hoosain]

What is the actual point of this thread......M cars are supposed to be the pinnacle of BMW engineering....

Yes they are all different and some better than others, actually comes down to individual tastes and preferences. If everybody in the entire world shared the same tastes and had the same preferences, it would make for quite a dull place...

Everybody is of the assumption they know best and therefore make the best choices for themselves this includes petrol vs diesel, place you choose to stay, iphone vs blackberry...you get my point. We all know best and hence feel the need to share this with the world.....:blab:

The thread isn't about an individuals choice- its about motoring journalists views on the M family. The point of this thread is that perhaps with all the write ups and articles discounting the e36 M3, there may be some truth in it. If u have one then great.remember that this car and all other Ms are always compared to the model before .So yes, if you we're to put an e36 next to an e30- which would u choose or if you put an e36 next to an e46 which would u choose. Your choice will reinforce my point.its a coupe with a bigger engine and some " individual bumpers and side skirts" lets not start on the Vanos issues

all bmw have vanos issues eventually
i drove the e46M its a beautiful car to drive but it lacks driver feedback compared to the E36M
e36M is driver and car no fancy electronics that spoil the fun
i will choose E36M against the E46M if you put them next to each other

 

[WyKiD]

What is the actual point of this thread......M cars are supposed to be the pinnacle of BMW engineering....

Yes they are all different and some better than others, actually comes down to individual tastes and preferences. If everybody in the entire world shared the same tastes and had the same preferences, it would make for quite a dull place...

Everybody is of the assumption they know best and therefore make the best choices for themselves this includes petrol vs diesel, place you choose to stay, iphone vs blackberry...you get my point. We all know best and hence feel the need to share this with the world.....:blab:

The thread isn't about an individuals choice- its about motoring journalists views on the M family. The point of this thread is that perhaps with all the write ups and articles discounting the e36 M3, there may be some truth in it. If u have one then great.remember that this car and all other Ms are always compared to the model before .So yes, if you we're to put an e36 next to an e30- which would u choose or if you put an e36 next to an e46 which would u choose. Your choice will reinforce my point.its a coupe with a bigger engine and some " individual bumpers and side skirts" lets not start on the Vanos issues

Do you live your life guided by journalists and the opinions of others, I would assume not....there is a place and time for the ramblings of journo's but I do not take everything they write as gospel.

Personally I have not and living in SA probably would not have the opportunity to drive an E30 M3, so I would choose a car that I have experienced rather than one that is like the mythical unicorn...

As for the styling of the E36 M3 , does the iconic E34 M5 also get painted in the same brush due to the subtlety of its styling cues...The restraint shown with the styling of these models does endear them to many.

 

[wikk3d88]

If the E36 is as bad as journalists are now saying (we all know hindsight is 20-20), then why, at the time of its release, was it not judged as harshly?