"WiscoProud" (wiscoproud)
10/10/2017 at 11:45 • Filed to: None
2
13|
"WiscoProud" (wiscoproud)
10/10/2017 at 11:45 • Filed to: None | 2
| 13 |
Since we have bank holidays off for some reason, I took the opportunity to partake in one of my favorite hobbies: test driving cars. I found a dealership about as hour away that had three cars I’ve been looking to drive for years: a 2003 BMW M5, a 2002 M3, and a 2006 CTS-V.
While the M3 was beat, the M5 and CTS-V were in good condition. All three were just stupid fast, and I was a grinning idiot the whole time.
E90M3
> WiscoProud
10/10/2017 at 11:50 |
|
The E46 have an SMG or 6MT?
WilliamsSW
> WiscoProud
10/10/2017 at 12:02 |
|
Where are they at/how much are they asking for the M5?
Which was your favorite?
|
WiscoProud
> E90M3
10/10/2017 at 12:11 |
|
All three were manual. Here are some more photos:
|
E90M3
> WiscoProud
10/10/2017 at 12:12 |
|
Blocked on my work computer, I’ll check them out when I get home.
|
WiscoProud
> WilliamsSW
10/10/2017 at 12:17 |
|
MSI Auto Sales in Middleton, WI. I’ve been told they have a shitty reputation, but they certainly had a nice fleet of fun cars, including a Supra Mk IV.
They wanted $16,900 for the M5, $14,900 for the M3, and $14,900 for the CTS-V. I think the M3 was overpriced, the M5 about right, and the CTS-V was cheap.
|
WilliamsSW
> WiscoProud
10/10/2017 at 12:27 |
|
Hmm, that doesn’t sound too bad for the M5. Agree on the M3, especially if it’s tired, and no clue on CTS-V values.
Is the M5 covered in scratches or is it terrible photos on the website? Seems like it’s terrible photos maybe.
They’re about 2.5 hours from me. Too far for just a test drive for me.
|
WiscoProud
> WilliamsSW
10/10/2017 at 12:31 |
|
The M3 was odd. The leather was in great shape, but every other surface other than that was insanely rough. The fabric was coming off of both a-pillars. I’d never seen that before. The “chrome” door pulls were bubbled, half the switches were illegible, there was a weird rattle from under the hood like a heat shield, etc. However, it ran well and fast. It also had snow tires on it, which being in Wisconsin, means the underside has been exposed to road salt.
The M5 was fine, my camera is just shitty. I broke the lens covering it, so its always got fingerprints and what not on the lens.
|
WilliamsSW
> WiscoProud
10/10/2017 at 12:35 |
|
I wasn’t calling out your photos - - I went to their website, the dealer’s photos are the ones that make it look covered in scratches, FYI.
The A-pillar thing is apparently common on E46's, though mine (‘00 323) hasn’t been an issue.
But yeah, what you’re describing there isn’t a $15k car.
|
WiscoProud
> WilliamsSW
10/10/2017 at 12:47 |
|
no worries.
I know E46 M3 prices are creeping up, and it was a very fun car, but I also think they were reaching. I enjoyed driving it very much, but I was so put off by the condition of what I could see, I would never take a chance on what I couldn’t.
TheJMan92
> WiscoProud
10/10/2017 at 16:33 |
|
Sounds like I know what I’m doing this weekend!
|
WiscoProud
> TheJMan92
10/10/2017 at 16:41 |
|
Enjoy! I was hoping to find a curvy road to test out the handling, but I don’t know that area very well. Instead I settled for high speed on-ramp mergers and rural 5-60 runs way out on Airport rd.
average user
> WiscoProud
10/10/2017 at 18:17 |
|
Oh for god’s sake give us a more in depth review of each please?
|
WiscoProud
> average user
10/11/2017 at 10:50 |
|
haha, sure.
I drove the M5 first (kinda wish I drove it again after I did the other two). First impression was that its not as big inside as it looks on the outside. I fit just fine (I’m 6'5" 250), but there wasn’t as much room behind me as I would have expected. My head was also pretty close to the ceiling. As for driving, even with 130k miles, everything was tight. The shifter was super accurate, the steering was great, it was quiet (too quiet). It just felt like a nice sedan. That is until I hit the “sport” button. Jesus Christ, does that make a difference. All of a sudden, the slightest push of the go pedal would launch the car forward. Insanely fun. I was still getting used to driving stick again (I haven’t owned a manual vehicle in almost 10 years), so I was a bit jerky, but the BMW was so smooth it didn’t matter. I did a 5-whatever run on a rural road and was shocked at how fast it was, although I realize there are a ton of modern cars that would eat it for lunch. In the end, I loved it. like many reviews have said, its too quiet and the shifts are a bit long, but that’s easily fixed.
I next drove the CTS-V. This was a 2006 with the 3rd version of the rear diff which supposedly fixed the wheel hop issues the early ones had. This car had an aftermarket exhaust and a nice “1320 Videos” sticker on the side window, so the odds are pretty great it was raced at some point. The interior was slightly roomier than the BMW, but my head was almost touching the ceiling again. The shifter was noticeably shorter, not sure if from a short-shift kit, or that’s just how they are. I think it was stock though. Interestingly, when I slammed into 3rd or 5th, my hand would actually make contact with the front console. Not a lot of room there. The shifter was nice, but not quite as “accurate” as the BMW. The big difference was the sound. God it sounded nice. It would roar when you floored it, and burble when you didn’t. It was intoxicating. There was also no “sport” button, you got hard acceleration all the time. Interestingly, the DSC button was on the steering wheel within reach of your thumb, they obviously (and correctly) believe that you will be constantly playing with it. Once again the acceleration was addicting. While the M5 chirped the tires going into second, the CTS-V full on squealed them. Although I was having trouble determining if I had DSC off in the M5.
Last I drove the M3. This particular M3 had led a rough life and had significant wear on near every surface aside from the leather, which was in great shape oddly enough (replaced?). There was also a weird rattle under the hood like a heat shield. However, it ran very well. While I won’t say that the M5 and CTS-V felt heavy to me, you could certainly tell you were in a lighter vehicle in the M3. During an on-ramp run, I floored it and was shortly cresting 80 mph. Even after driving the V8s, this felt “immediate”, although part of that might have been that I could carry more speed into the corner going to the on-ramp. I was certainly feeling more confident in my driving by that point. However, when I did the 5-whatever run, it didn’t feel as fast as the bigger cars, which I attribute to the torque curves of the engines. While each car was around 10lb/hp, the V8s certainly made a lot more torque. As for room space, despite being a coupe, it was surprisingly roomy on the inside, and I think I could have put my daughters car seat in the back even.
My goals for a fun car is something that can handle commuting duties in nice weather, as well as doing school runs for my 3yo. In this context, each of them would suffice. The M5 felt the most special, and had the best seats in my opinion, but maintenance issues with the SAI and VANOS make me question that decision. The CTS-V, while not as special, is just as fast, lower miles, and 3 years newer. Not to mention more reliable. The M3 was out, since I thought it was way overpriced for a project. Out of the three, I think I would still take my chances with the M5.