saw a gto

Discussion in '2005 - 2009 Specific Tech' started by audioslave, Feb 6, 2004.

  1. :bang:
    my point is that the M3 cant even be compared to a Mustang... Different price range, different audience, different class altogether.
     
  2. The front end on a Mustang isn't rounded looking like the BMW. It's got more of a linear shape to it. The BMW has more of a rounded shape to its front end.
     
  3. your point?... :shrug:
     
  4. I think he M3 is a beautiful car. Maybe a little too rounded, but still pretty muscular looking. Clean? Yes. Boring? No. Just because it doesn't have louvers and fake scoops plastered all over it, does not mean it's bland.
     
  5. are looks everything to you?
     
  6. I totally agree... The front air dam alone makes it plenty aggressive, while still refined enough for the class of driver its aimed at.
     
  7. sub┬Ějec┬Ětive ( P ) Pronunciation Key (sb-jktv)
    adj.

    Proceeding from or taking place in a person's mind rather than the external world: a subjective decision.
    Particular to a given person; personal: subjective experience.
     
  8. We are talking styling here. Last I checked, styling is not proportional to cost.

    Even with the cost differences, comparisons between the M3 and 05 mustang are inevitable. Both look like a million bucks, have 2 doors, seat 4, front engine, rear drive, comparable power outputs (peak power and rev's going to the M3, low and midrange torque going to the mustang). They even have similar wheel base, weight, length, etc.
     
  9. thanks B, but i think we were all aware of that
     
  10. YES. Looks is a BIG factor to me when choosing a vehicle. I also look at quality, performance, horsepower and torque. That's what I look for when I choose a vehicle. The BMW has excellent performance and quality, but it's ugly. And it's waaaaay too overpriced. The Mustang GT isn't. And it has a decent amount of performance, HP and torque for the money.
     
  11. we are talkin about the 05 then?
     
  12. The styling on an M3 is not there specifically for looks... The engineers at BMW get paid to spend hours making things like air dams just to see which design makes the air flow over/under/around the car with the least coefficient of drag. Everything on an M3 is there for a reason. Think of the 2002 GT mustang... Fake hood scoop... fake side scoops... a largely flat front end... fake rear diffuser... Ford didnt spend the time to look at the aerodynamics of the car... This is the reason that neither the styling, the price, nor the performance can be compared between these two machines no matter what drivetrain setup they have. :owned:
     
  13. And BMW didn't spend the time to look at the exterior styling of the car. They just concentrated on performance which is not enough for me. For a $50,000 price tag, BMW should of also considered the exterior styling and looks. I would never spend $50,000 on a BMW that looks like a beefed up Camry because that's what it really is. :owned:
     
  14. Im done argueing, Its just another to each there own. I think Ron just might be a little farther out there in the twilight zone.
     
  15. Read my last post again.

    I'm not comparing the M3 to the 2002. I am not even comparing the 2005 to the M3. Since a production version of the '05 hasn't even hit the street yet, subjective comparisons, good or bad, are speculative at best. I... am... saying... that... comparisons... will... be... made.

    BMW is also not the only auto company in the world that operates a wind tunnel. You can be sure that they make concessions to styling just like everyone else. Maybe not to the same extent, but they do it just the same. I assure you, the M3 body is not the definition of the pure automotive form. Nor are the funky creases in the Z4's body, or the trunk on the last 7 series. I'm sure the chrome gills on the M3's front fenders *really* do a lot. And of course the shape of the twin kidney grill is is the absolute best thing out there for sucking air.

    Peace out, Senior :owned:
     
  16. That's what BMW does best. They suck air and build ugly cars. :owned:
     
  17. suck air? what does that mean.. explain

    EDIT: OH i think i get what your saying, as a joke maybe?
     
  18. It may sound like a joke, but I really beleive that BMW has airbrains designing their cars. Back in the mid 80's up until the early 90's BMW built some really nice looking vehicles. After 1994 they converted into building ugly vehicles. They haven't built a nice looking car since then. The only BMW which I thought that was nice looking was the 7 Series BMW. But they ruined it in 2002 when they redesigned it. These are the main reasons why I don't like any current BMW models. Their looks don't appeal to me like some of their older models did.
     
  19. Were you really being serious when you said that?
     
  20. Does that mean the Current Mustang is ugly because it looks so much like a Grand Am Coupe from the profile?

    I've driven an M3 on an 18hr. trip it is a great car and blows the mustang away in every way other than Price and Torque. It is a great looking car but in a different way than the Mustang, it has a cleaner classier look.

    Not all Mustangs look good. The '05 Mustang GT with 18" rims looks gorgeous, but the V6 with those dumb 16" rims, and no spoiler or fog lights looks like crap.

    Everyone has their own tastes but when someone says every car but the one they own is ugly it makes them sound ignorant.