Forums » Grassroots Motorsports » If you were in the market for an E36 M3, and no I don't need a poop shovel... 1 2

• 

  Dec. 8, 2010 11:19 a.m. LainfordExpress New Reader

  Would you guys rather find a lower mileage one, say under 60k, and pay a little more, maybe $10,000-$13,000, or get a high mileage one, say 120K to 180K and pay closer to $6,000-$8,000.

  I thinking of going to look at a 1995 with under 50k, ask of $13,000, but I just worry about used cars in general, used expensive cars in particular, and used expensive cars with oddly low mileage in detail.

  I guess I just wonder what the deal is with a car that has averaged under 4000 miles year for its life... what has it been doing this whole time?

  I suppose these are things to ask the seller, just trying to mine some knowledge from the herd here. I did search some, and read through those threads, but what the heck, have to drive up the post count somehow.

• 

  Dec. 8, 2010 11:34 a.m. hotchocolate New Reader

  I would get an E46 M3 for the kind of money on your high end since most of my driving is on the street and it is significantly quicker then the E36. But that was not your question. Unless you want it as a collector, i will skip the '95 and find one in the 80-110k range for 7-9k or so. they are out there you just have to be patient and have the money to "pounce" when one shows up. I bought a 97 last year for 5.6k with 146k and almost all service record since new. It needed a wheel bearing and other routine DIY maintenance all which totaled about $1k.

• 

  Dec. 8, 2010 11:35 a.m. mndsm Dork

  I'd probably prefer the higher mileage one. You'll save yourself some green, and figure if the car has been on the road that long and been properly maintained, all the high price failure items have likely been replaced...

  Go fast or go broke.

• 

  Dec. 8, 2010 11:36 a.m. Gimp Dork

  1995 has a slightly different front suspension, and was OBD-I, so parts aren't as common.

  All the rubber bits, and plastic cooling bits, should be replaced regardless of miles.

  If it were me, I'd go the cheaper route of the motor/trans/body were good. Use the money saved for repairs/upgrades.

  http://www.teamziptie.com

• 

  Dec. 8, 2010 11:56 a.m. nderwater HalfDork

  I picked up my '99 M3 two and a half years ago for $7,000. My car is a bit of a beater, so I've done only standard maintenance and only replaced parts when they broke - I've put less than $1,000 into it since I bought it. I don't regret the purchase at all, but my priorities have changed and I would trade it for a track-rat Miata in a heart beat.

  Auto photo blog: http://motomania.tumblr.com

• 

  Dec. 8, 2010 12:07 p.m. Tom_Spangler Reader

  I'd probably go with a cheaper, higher-mileage car, too, in fact that's what I did! I just picked up my 98 with 128k for $7500 a few weeks ago. Great shape, pile of service records. It needs a few things addressed over the winter.

  But in general, I'd go with higher mileage and cheaper, as long as you get service records. Either way you're going to need to address some stuff, and the drivetrains are pretty durable.

  As far as the E46 for similar money, eh, maybe. Yes, it's a lot more car than the E36, but my understanding is that the maintenance costs are quite a lot higher, as well.

  07 F-150 - 08 Taurus X

• 

  Dec. 8, 2010 12:08 p.m. Teh E36 M3 HalfDork

  I picked up my 95 with 65k miles for $8k last December (sold for $10.5k in August). In some ways I wish I hadn't sold it, but life was getting crowded and I needed to downsize. There was nothing wrong with it- just some peeling clear and a few scratches- really in terrific shape. Now I find myself looking for the same thing you are, and realistically lamenting that I sold it. I'd like a four-door, five speed, but those are difficult to find.

• 

  Dec. 8, 2010 12:39 p.m. bludroptop SuperDork

  I think that a lot depends upon your budget, your intended use for the car and how long you intend to keep it. I think these cars are at the bottom of their depreciation curve, and in 5 years a really clean, low mileage car will probably be gaining value. A (by then) 200k beater, not so much.

  My cars don't accumulate a lot of miles, but that doesn't mean that they aren't driven or maintained. Mrs. BDT's daily racks up less than 5K/year and I drive a lot less than she does split between two other cars. So low mileage is a potential red flag but not an automatic deal-killer.

  On the other hand, the e36 drivetrain seems to be very robust, so a high mileage car wouldn't scare me with proper records.

  So for a daily driver that I wouldn't worry about getting door dings, I'd buy the cheaper, higher mileage car. For a weekend toy and "hobby" car, I might just hold out for the nicest one I could find.

  Edit - for what it is worth, the '95 may not have the rear suspension reinforcement either. I can't recall exactly, but I think they started reinforcing the M-3s in '96. Conflicting info regarding the non-M cars - some say they were reinforced starting in '97, others say non-M cars never got the stronger parts.

• 

  Dec. 8, 2010 12:49 p.m. poopshovel SuperDork

  Well FINE!

  Build a man a fire, and he'll stay warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll stay warm for the rest of his life.

• 

  Dec. 8, 2010 12:58 p.m. miatame Reader

  My mouth still falls open when I see these threads talking about sub $10k BMW M3s! I paid about $21k for my '99 back in '05 or '06. It had 49k miles at the time and 62k now.

  From a lot I've read the '98-'99 cars got a few inhancements to the interior materials that help them last a little longer. '95 is certainly an interesting car with the OBDI 3.0L. I'd much rather have a maintained '95 vs. a beat 96-99 but that said a newer car stands a slightly better chance of being in better overall shape with equal miles. A '95 for $13k is probably the wrong price unless it is meticulously maintained and has aftermarket parts you actually want.

  Either way you're going to get a lot of enthusiast car for the money! I still smile every time I drive my M.

• 

  Dec. 8, 2010 1:15 p.m. Joe Gearin Associate Publisher

  My 97 has 140K or so and is going fine. It has had a few issues that I've had to deal with, but mostly just typical E36 BMW stuff. (look for an update soon on door panel repair and CEL diagnosing) Although mine has higher mileage than some, it's been pretty well taken care of, and still looks pretty darn nice.
  

  http://grassrootsmotorsports.com/project-cars/1997-bmw-m3/

  I wouldn't be afraid of a 100K-150K car as long as it has been well maintained, and has service records. There are plenty of these cars that were pampered since new. They are still out there, but it takes a bit of research to find them.

  I'd look for an adult owned, non-modified car that has been meticulously maintained. If I was shopping for one, I'd pay a bit more for one with a good interior and paint. Chances are if they took good care of the interior and paint, they took good care of the maintenance. If the paint has held up, chances are it has been garaged which is also a plus.

  Of course if you are looking for a track rat, just make sure the mechanicals are in good shape. The post 95 cars make a bit more torque (3.2 liter vs. 3.0) and a shorter rear gear so they are a bit quicker off the line. Of course these cars are OBDII making serious mods a bit more problematic. The later cars also had a staggered wheel set-up which adds low-speed understeer, but that is fixable with same size wheels if you prefer.

• 

  Dec. 8, 2010 1:46 p.m. BowtieBandit New Reader

  I can never take E36 M3 for real, since I never know anymore if its really about a car, or a hidden expletive. I'm gonna start using it in real life. Drop a hammer on your toe, HOLY EEE THIRTY SIX EMM THREE!!!!

  Sorry, you may now re-hijack your thread.

• 

  Dec. 8, 2010 1:55 p.m. kreb Dork

  I've been scanning for one. Good deals move fast, and most of the coupes that are for sale seem to be the rich kid's version of ricer cars and were treated acordingly. Thus I'm paying particular attention to 4-doors, as they seem to be owned by adults.

  Which brings up the question: what's the weight/rigidity penalty to the extra doors?

  It is better to wear out than to rust out.

• 

  Dec. 8, 2010 1:58 p.m. WilberM3 Reader

  i heard bmw campaigned the sedans in racing because they were actually more rigid. not sure about weight though.

  Dave

• 

  Dec. 8, 2010 2:13 p.m. miatame Reader

  WilberM3 wrote: i heard bmw campaigned the sedans in racing because they were actually more rigid. not sure about weight though.

  I think they are a few pounds LIGHTER too. Never been able to understand that.

• 

  Dec. 8, 2010 3:24 p.m. pinchvalve SuperDork

  In reply to miatame:

  I remember the early 2.5 RS Subaru was like 3 pounds different between the 2 and 4 door. Never understood that either.

  "Don't Sweat the Petty Things." Yes, and Don't Pet the Sweaty Things.

• 

  Dec. 8, 2010 3:33 p.m. bludroptop SuperDork

  According to BMW's published specs, 4 door cars are incrementally lighter - but only by about 25 pounds or so. As far as them being stiffer, that seems to be mostly internet babble. I remember seeing some torsional rigidity numbers once that put them pretty much even. I can't find that data at the moment, but it is out there somewhere. This applies to the e36 cars - there seems to be more conclusive evidence in favor of the 4 door e46.

  Back to the e36 - I've had both 2 and 4 door models. I prefer the 4 door, but as others have said, the 4 door cars are much more likely to be automatic.

• 

  Dec. 8, 2010 3:45 p.m. Ian F Dork

  The additional structure of the B pillar on a 4-door might make it more dureable - flex-wise - over the long term life of the car.

  Occasionally I miss the '97 M3 (sold in '04)... then the memories start to come back... and I don't.
  

  No matter how cheap E36 M3's get, there are still similar priced cars I'd rather have.

• 

  Dec. 8, 2010 4:05 p.m. z31maniac SuperDork

  Joe Gearin wrote: Of course these cars are OBDII making serious mods a bit more problematic.

  Converting to OBD-I is an easy proposition, but in reality, the OBD-II tuning stuff has been handled well enough now that you can just swap on the OBD-I intake manifold and get a tune from TRM, Conforti, etc.

• 

  Dec. 8, 2010 4:08 p.m. dj New Reader

  Ian F wrote: No matter how cheap E36 M3's get, there are still similar priced cars I'd rather have.

  If you're going to E36 M3 on a E36 M3 then at least actually recommend some better E36 M3.

• 

  Dec. 8, 2010 4:35 p.m. kreb Dork

  dj wrote: If you're going to E36 M3 on a E36 M3 then at least actually recommend some better E36 M3.

  Now let's not act like your E36 M3 don't stink.

  It is better to wear out than to rust out.

• 

  Dec. 8, 2010 4:45 p.m. SupraWes Dork

  4 door FTW! I don't understand peoples obsession with 2D E36's, the car is not pretty, whats the point of having a coupe?

  Because Toyota hasn't made anything interesting since 1989

• 

  Dec. 8, 2010 4:50 p.m. Otto_Maddox HalfDork

  In reply to SupraWes:

  Agreed. It really is just a two door sedan. I see no reason to pick it over the four door.

• 

  Dec. 8, 2010 4:52 p.m. BoxheadTim Dork

  SupraWes wrote: 4 door FTW! I don't understand peoples obsession with 2D E36's, the car is not pretty, whats the point of having a coupe?

  The weight distribution is slightly better on the coupe (true 50/50 IIRC), plus I don't think you could get the fold-down rear seat on the sedan so you can actually get bigger items into the coupe's trunk compared to the sedan.

  That said, I believe the sedan is rarer and depending on your requirements, slightly more practical.

  Sanity is vastly overrated.

• 

  Dec. 8, 2010 6:24 p.m. LainfordExpress New Reader

  poopshovel wrote: Well FINE!

  No offense meant! I am a much longer lurker than my posts might suggest (this is like my third or fourth user name since about 2002, since I lurk so much and forget my passwords and user names).

  I was just making a play on the E36 M3 word replacement thing, I'd welcome your opinion.

1 2  

You'll need to log in to post.