m3 or s2000

1999 m3 with 72k miles (silver)

2000 s2000 with 69k miles (red)

same price. Pick one and why!!

(I need help)

M3 because its the E36 M3

and more reliable

And I don't buy red cars.

M3

for one reason:

Torque

s2000 because I've always wanted one and I'm guessing they are more fun. Also they are not E36 M3

Ummm.................................Yes?

Drove an S2000. It felt like a dental drill. Torque was no there.

I haven't driven an M3 so I'm leaning towards that because it has to better.

Repair costs may be higher for one than the other.

1967cutlass wrote: 1999 m3 with 72k miles (silver) 2000 s2000 with 69k miles (red) same price. Pick one and why!! (I need help)

I've owned two e36 M3's and both were fantastic cars. Part of your decision though rests on your needs. If you think you'll ever want to haul more than 1 passenger around or luggage for a weekend (golf clubs, etc), it's a no brainer.

I moved from an e36 M3 to a e46 325 and miss the M3 dearly.

honestly... they are two different approaches to high performance driving. You will need to try both, perferably for a weekend.

Could always through a Z3M on that list too.. best of both worlds

I'm going to look at the m3 on Thursday if it hasn't been sold. Wish me luck!!

I wish you luck.

I would rather have the M3 myself.

I would take 1 of each.. thank you.

Miata?

swift gti

mtn wrote: Miata?

Have one, too slow :)

Can't really make a mistake here... so the bottom line is really "Do you need a back seat?"

M3 because my shins are to long to fit in an S2000 (I tried to buy one...)

The S2000 if all you ever want to do is auto-x. Otherwise the M3 will be a better car every day and it ain't too shabby at the track neither.

mad_machine wrote: Could always through a Z3M on that list too.. best of both worlds

Umm... not quite. M3 engine, e30 chasis, ugly body (IMO), and no back seat.

Besides, they make M3 verts... I would rather have one of those over the Z.

Z3 is an E36 Chassis which happens to have E30 rear suspension

1967cutlass wrote: 1999 m3 with 72k miles (silver) 2000 s2000 with 69k miles (red) same price. Pick one and why!! (I need help)

That is a seriously tough call.

I have a '98 M3 with 111k on the ticker and it is a fantastic car on all counts. It gobbles up highway miles as well as it gobbles up autocross runs and hot laps around road courses. It has also been the most reliable and affordable performance car I have ever owned, but maybe I got "a good one", I dunno.

Having said that - S2000's are awesome cars that I have been drooling on - and driving every chance I get - ever since they started to get cheap. The handling is pretty much unmatched, and the power is great at high revs. I did a check ride in a lightly modified but very well driven one at Summit Point a few months ago and left the car saying "if I tried T3 in my E36 as fast as this S2K does T3, I would be upside down in the trees behind the tirewall past the gravel trap." But you give up a few things to get those great qualities. Namely - torque and interior space.

So I guess it comes down to your needs. Second car / go-fast toy? S2000 all the way. Daily driven weekend warrior? E36 M3 won't do you wrong if the one you have found is in good shape.

Keep in mind, on both counts you are talking about used cars that could break at any moment. At that age/mileage I'm gonna say neither one is particularly unreliable or expensive compared to the other. That is, it all depends upon prior care and condition.

Note: at 72k miles that M3 should've already had a full cooling system replacement, and probably shocks/struts, likely mounts and some bushings too, as well as several major services (fluids, plugs, maybe belts, etc.) If it's on original everything, run far far away...

IMHO, YMMV, etc,

Jon

The m3's carfax shows that it's been serviced at a BMW dealership at regular intevals from new until now. Doesn't say what's been done exactly but hopefully it's all good. I thought the coolant systems on the 99's were fixed?

getfast wrote: At that age/mileage I'm gonna say neither one is particularly unreliable or expensive compared to the other. That is, it all depends upon prior care and condition.

Having had a similar M3, I'd put my money on the S2k, assuming comparable levels of maintenance/care. E36 BMWs all seem to have electrical gremlins, but the basics (engine, transmission, etc.) are bulletproof.

getfast wrote: Note: at 72k miles that M3 should've already had a full cooling system replacement, and probably shocks/struts, likely mounts and some bushings too, as well as several major services (fluids, plugs, maybe belts, etc.) If it's on original everything, run far far away...

Yeah, that's exactly how I reached my conclusion about the S2k being more reliable assuming a reasonable level of care. I picked up what I thought was a creampuff '99 with a little over 50k, only to discover it needed all sorts of doo-dads like control arms, bushings, etc. within my first year of ownership.

If I can't get it checked out by a shop how should I check the bushings?

billy3esq wrote: Yeah, that's exactly how I reached my conclusion about the S2k being more reliable assuming a reasonable level of care. I picked up what I thought was a creampuff '99 with a little over 50k, only to discover it needed all sorts of doo-dads like control arms, bushings, etc. within my first year of ownership.

Stuff rots from the car sitting as much as it gets worn from the car being driven. I know of several E36 M3's with half the miles mine has... that I would consider less reliable. Then again I have always been very proactive/preventative with mine, covering all the regular stuff before it was needed. To me this is just part of ownership. And considering how hard I drive the car on a regular basis, I'm fine with it personally...

Does nothing ever break or wear out on an S2000? Miles are miles... and they've got a whoooooole lot more aluminium chassis parts under 'em than the equivalent E36 M3, for starters...

1967cutlass wrote: The m3's carfax shows that it's been serviced at a BMW dealership at regular intevals from new until now. Doesn't say what's been done exactly but hopefully it's all good. I thought the coolant systems on the 99's were fixed?

That could be a very good thing if the owner is on the realistic preventative maintenance program not the "don't fixit until it breaks" program. For instance dealers may say you never need to change the fluid in the trans, it's lifetime fluid according to BMW. Riiiiiight... which is cheaper, 3 quarts of synthetic and half an hour of labor every 60k miles or a new gearbox?

Same with the cooling system refresh. All E36 cars need it every 60 months or 60k miles AFAIK. Plastic water pump impellers, plastic t'stat housings, plastic expansion tanks, and plastic radiator necks are junk after that many heat cycles... on all of 'em. $400 worth of parts and 2 hours of labor every 5 years is a lot cheaper than a blown headgasket/warped head due to overheating...

As for the bushings - front lower control arm bushings you can see, rear trailing arm bushings you can feel when driving (twitchy rear end like the toe is way off), front strut mounts & rear shock mounts you can hear (clunking) if they're gone. Also check engine & trans mounts with a flashlight. And the guibo (big rubber flex disc on the transmission side of the driveshaft.)

Jon