View Full Version : Slap me again... This time re: the car to replace my E90.
I have been struck by how good the new Audi TT looks in person. In pictures it looks funky (and not a good funky). But in person, IMO, it's striking.
And the coupe version has a back seat. And it can be had with a manual trans. And it's not silly expensive. And I'm guessing it again shares a platform with the A3 and VW Golf/GTI/R32, so it's driving dynamics should be similar but slightly better due to a lower center of gravity.
And the interior is gorgeous too.
So... What am I missing?
http://www.fashionfunky.com/2007/05/11/2007-audi-tt-1.jpg
Drive it first, before you get to hyped over it.
Drive it first, before you get to hyped over it.
On the agenda. No time this weekend. Maybe next.
dredmo
10-19-2007, 10:38 AM
It is nice, why do you need slapped over this? I know you're an elitist, but this isn't a Hyundai, it's an Audi.
P.S. I'm a huge Audi fan, always have been.
They're nice. They've shed the squashed-Beetle look, pretty much.
But no RWD, right? Either FWD or (front-biased?) Quattro?
Here's a vid of gf & equ driving it.
http://forums.carmudgeons.com/showthread.php?t=11770
It's quite good for an audi. It didn't really feel like a test drive as I was busy following instructor, focusing on track but it didn't really annoy me in any way as audis tend to. Not crazy front heavy, smooth shifting, good clutch, ok feel, quite comfy...
I'm not sure it's that much better than an e90 330 sport that has ditched its RFTs though - it's just smaller. However, it is far less capable/thrilling than the cayman.
John V
10-19-2007, 10:51 AM
It's FWD. Even in AWD form, it's still a FWD car.
It is pretty, though. Way better than the previous Beetle-esque car.
It's FWD. Even in AWD form, it's still a FWD car.
It is pretty, though. Way better than the previous Beetle-esque car.
It looks a lot less "girlie", IMO.
But I'm fine with the Audi AWD feel. I had a '97 A4 and drove the piss out of it.
I had been thinking 135i. But that's similar enough to my E90 (in good ways and bad) that it feels like I'm not taking advantage of the opportunity to mix things up. It's too similar. And the Audi is quite different.
I need to drive one. And I need to get a sense of how well they lease as, unfortunately, few cars seem to lease as well as BMWs.
The 135i remains a solid fall back position.
They're nice. They've shed the squashed-Beetle look, pretty much.
But no RWD, right? Either FWD or (front-biased?) Quattro?
The older Quattro Audis were 50/50. The Haldex Audi/VWs were something like 70/30 f/r default. I believe the newer Audis are 40/60 f/r.
So you have to go with the 3.2 to get AWD or stick, otherwise it's front drive and auto. But isn't the 2.0T considered the better engine?
While it's good to give the competition a whirl, I can't possibly see how a tt can beat a 135i in terms of dynamics & practicality. I expect the 1er has a small but real back seat. In fact, I'm having thoughts of getting a 128i instead of the 325xi that's my likely daily - though having two small cars is a bit strange.
The tt does not have a real back seat. Looks, well perhaps...
It looks a lot less "girlie", IMO.
But I'm fine with the Audi AWD feel. I had a '97 A4 and drove the piss out of it.
I had been thinking 135i. But that's similar enough to my E90 (in good ways and bad) that it feels like I'm not taking advantage of the opportunity to mix things up. It's too similar. And the Audi is quite different.
I need to drive one. And I need to get a sense of how well they lease as, unfortunately, few cars seem to lease as well as BMWs.
The 135i remains a solid fall back position.
We should get together so you can drive the 335 before I put snow tires on it (which would be the wknd before Thanksgiving, I think).
I had the TT on my list early on to replace the 530...
Then I priced one out... It gets pricey quick.
Additionally, the back seat is very small -- so I don't think I could get the car seat in it.
I haven't driven it, but did sit in one over a year ago (just after it was announced -- Audi had one at the Goodwood Festival of Speed)
Have not driven the new one, butr the old one drove like shite.
Yea, my brother has an '05 TT 1.8T Quattro w/ 225hp 6MT and that thing is not fun to drive. fast as hell off the line with a crazy turbo feeling but not a lot of grip through moderate to fast turns. compared to my '05 330 it feels very loose and very front end heavy/twitchy.
Every Audi I have ever driven has been a fwd car, even when it was quatro and even when it was supposed to be biased to the rear. Even the rear biased cars seem to think they need to shift power to the front at the earliest opportunity.
That doesn't mean you won't like it. Deciding you want a fwd car is no different then considering suvs - sometimes you change your mind about what you want.
Every Audi I have ever driven has been a fwd car, even when it was quatro and even when it was supposed to be biased to the rear. Even the rear biased cars seem to think they need to shift power to the front at the earliest opportunity.
That doesn't mean you won't like it. Deciding you want a fwd car is no different then considering suvs - sometimes you change your mind about what you want.
Umm, while I agree in general terms, you have to drive a fwd and an audi (non-haldex) back to back. On a wet day, my gf pulled out hard from a parking spot and the fwd civic lost it for a bit. That would never happen in an audi. Even a decent fwd like the civic si, has steering that hunts on the hwy. Once again, would not happen on an audi.
It won't happen with RWD either. :)
They are fine cars if you like them. I am just not a fan.
3LOU5
10-19-2007, 08:40 PM
Man, it only seemed like yesterday you got that E90.
I must be the only "foolish" one here who drives their car into the ground before replacing them. :confused:
operknockity
10-19-2007, 08:46 PM
I must be the only "foolish" one here who drives their car into the ground before replacing them. :confused:
Not the only one.... I had my previous car for 16 years before I got rid of it.
wdc330i
10-20-2007, 09:17 AM
Man, it only seemed like yesterday you got that E90.
I must be the only "foolish" one here who drives their car into the ground before replacing them. :confused:
I'm trying to do that, but it's a daily battle against temptation. I'm given strength by the fact that we have a car payment on the wagon--and we don't want two car payments. When that's paid off in two years, I may be more vulnerable to switching out the 330i. Plus, it'll be 8-9 years old by then.
3LOU5
10-20-2007, 01:36 PM
I would love to switch out cars every few years, if possible. (I suppose that is why I researched the crap out of my vehicles before buying them, knowing that I will be stuck with them for a while).
My problem is, my interests lie in other things. In the next few years, my garage will be home to a motorcycle (Harley dreams with a Honda budget), and if possible, a boat. (One of my neighbors here can fit TWO ski boats in his garage ! He took the towers down and angled them in in order to make them fit). Of course, the boat can stay outside if it doesn't fit in my garage.
Saving up for other toys has its price, I suppose....
lemming
10-22-2007, 08:10 PM
TD: the new TT is actually 'lighter' than the others on the platform because it uses a lot more aluminum in the substructure.
i like the way the new one looks, too.
i think the only non-compelling thing about the car is that it's not a family man's car.
TD: the new TT is actually 'lighter' than the others on the platform because it uses a lot more aluminum in the substructure.
i like the way the new one looks, too.
i think the only non-compelling thing about the car is that it's not a family man's car.
How is that last item a bad thing?
As long as the kids can fit...
Remember, I've been pondering a 911.
lupinsea
10-23-2007, 01:45 AM
Yeah, unless you "need" a family car I'd say leave 'em. I'd rather have something fun a sporty, preferably two seats.
Besides, if you REALLY need to carry extra passengers there is alway trunk space.
It looks good and it's somewhat fun for a VAG product - but your 330i is the better performer (in numbers & feel) - it just happens to be practical as well. It may be a performance downgrade. Are you ready for that?
Man, you bring out the slapper in all of us. What's going on? First the R, then this.
lemming
10-24-2007, 11:51 PM
http://www.leftlanenews.com/audi-tt-rs-future.html
this sort of news tells me that Audi actually takes the new TT chassis seriously. they weren't so willing to put forth an S or RS package in the past for obvious reasons.
that they are now speaks to the potential of the car. sort of validates it as more than a bauhaus styling gig.
http://www.leftlanenews.com/audi-tt-rs-future.html
this sort of news tells me that Audi actually takes the new TT chassis seriously. they weren't so willing to put forth an S or RS package in the past for obvious reasons.
that they are now speaks to the potential of the car. sort of validates it as more than a bauhaus styling gig.
Yes, but...
At the end of the day, it's still a FWD-derived chassis. That's fine, but given the choice between a Cayman S and a TTRS (which presumably will cost about the same), I'll go with the Porsche, even if it means giving up 50 hp and AWD.
TD have you considered the new A5/S5? IMO this is the better way to go if one is not completely into the dynamics of the old/current TT. Longer wheelbase, same engine options and an engine that sits farther back.
TD have you considered the new A5/S5? IMO this is the better way to go if one is not completely into the dynamics of the old/current TT. Longer wheelbase, same engine options and an engine that sits farther back.
$$$$
$$$$
agree that it's expensive. but it might be worth the jump.
$$$$
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ (for what it is)
agree that it's expensive. but it might be worth the jump.
When the reviews specifically say the E92 is much better dynamically, I don't think so.
When the reviews specifically say the E92 is much better dynamically, I don't think so.
agreed. just coming from the point of view that you were considering the TT and it's quattro system. the A5/S5 comes into the picture.
why are we even talking about Audi?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LDhF__PI2vA
why are we even talking about Audi?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LDhF__PI2vA
That is so over the top its silly. Is that Ian McKellen doing the voice over?
That is so over the top its silly. Is that Ian McKellen doing the voice over?
sounds like patrick stewart.
sounds like patrick stewart.
Ah yes.
Jeff_DML
11-02-2007, 03:28 PM
finally saw a new black TT last night on my bikeride home. Looks a lot better then previous gen, lower and wider which gives it a lot more aggression instead of the prev gen squashed beetle look
lemming
11-04-2007, 08:12 AM
finally saw a new black TT last night on my bikeride home. Looks a lot better then previous gen, lower and wider which gives it a lot more aggression instead of the prev gen squashed beetle look
i like it, too.
it's always been a cool car. now it has some underpinnings to back up the coolness.
Jeff_DML
11-07-2007, 12:18 PM
but hey beat out the 135:)
http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/carreviews/grouptests/212097/audi_tt_32.html
Looking at pics like that make me wonder why they bother putting in a back seat at all. Why not just forgo it, and reduce the cost, weight, complexity of the car?
Jeff_DML
11-07-2007, 12:53 PM
Looking at pics like that make me wonder why they bother putting in a back seat at all. Why not just forgo it, and reduce the cost, weight, complexity of the car?
cheaper insurance?
i prefer a semi useless seat then no seat, still works in a crunch.
cheaper insurance?
i prefer a semi useless seat then no seat, still works in a crunch.
And you can always put kids back there.
Jeff_DML
11-07-2007, 01:21 PM
And you can always put kids back there.
yep but looks pretty tough to fit a child seat(s) in those rear seats in the TT:eeps:
And you can always put kids back there.
If they need zero legroom (kids are all double-amputees?). And there are no more than 2 kids. And they aren't in child seats. Then it might work.
yep but looks pretty tough to fit a child seat(s) in those rear seats in the TT:eeps:
My daughter is out of a seat altogether but still relatively short and my son only needs a booster (or will by the time I'm out of my E90). So childseats are not an issue.
They really don't need to be double-amputees.
They really don't need to be double-amputees.
... but why take chances? :dunno:
http://www.acohardware.com/uploaded/images/ACOsite/Brands/Tools/Milwaukee/sawinsides.jpg
... but why take chances? :dunno:
http://www.acohardware.com/uploaded/images/ACOsite/Brands/Tools/Milwaukee/sawinsides.jpg
This is the worst post ever.
This is the worst post ever.
WooHoo!
:music: :drink2: :groupjump
:kekeke:
This is the worst post ever.
(but still funny)
My daughter is out of a seat altogether
I'm still scratching my head on that one. I tried putting my daughter (who is relatively tall, and is the same age as yours) in the back seat of the Honda and the Lexus without a booster, and the belt comes across her chest/neck too high. She still very much needs a booster.
So, what's replacing the E90?
When will it go off lease?
Less than 5 months from now, right?
For giggles, I was able to put the Maxi Cosi Mico in the GT2 back area, so at least the 996 body is big enough. No more difficult to take in and out than the E30. Pain in the ass yes, but totally doable. Even rear facing.
Too bad the car is rated as a 2 seater by the govt and the insurance companies.
So are you getting Big Bird V2.0?
lemming
10-29-2008, 09:22 PM
i think the quattro is 40/60 with an RWD bias, no?
lemming
10-29-2008, 10:14 PM
Yes, so was the 996 Turbo. The 996 Turbo will go all the way down to 5% front.
But it just aint the same as the GT2, not by a long shot.
the things is, if the TT has a RWD bias and a short enough wheelbase, it could really be fun to drive --not as facile as any mid-engined car (true, Equ!), but....
....i just took a wickedly tight u-turn in the MINI and the rear end snapped around just like a RWD car. the weight distribution is AFU in the MINI, so it's got a lot going against it --but the combination of a short wheelbase and power plus power-off snapped the rear around JUST LIKE the CTS-V took this incredibly tight u-turn.
I drove the 08 (new?) TT on pocono racetrack at an Audi event. Pretty good, smooth clutch/manual, ok steering etc. etc. It does NOT feel rear biased, it doesn't feel terrible either, it just feels ok.
It is not really any better than a e90 330i, perhaps better in foul weather (it would probably lose to it on a track). It's no porsche, that's for sure. But it is a comfy, nice sports car.
lemming
10-29-2008, 10:22 PM
I drove the 08 (new?) TT on pocono racetrack at an Audi event. Pretty good, smooth clutch/manual, ok steering etc. etc. It does NOT feel rear biased, it doesn't feel terrible either, it just feels ok.
It is not really any better than a e90 330i, perhaps better in foul weather (it would probably lose to it on a track). It's no porsche, that's for sure. But it is a comfy, nice sports car.
i don't see TD in a TT, either.
:D
probably a 1er.
heck, if they offered an LSD on the 1er, i'd get one. honest.
but, as it is, i'm gonna spend less money, get a RWD v8 with an LSD.......:eeps:
Sharp11
10-29-2008, 10:44 PM
the things is, if the TT has a RWD bias and a short enough wheelbase, it could really be fun to drive --not as facile as any mid-engined car (true, Equ!), but....
....i just took a wickedly tight u-turn in the MINI and the rear end snapped around just like a RWD car. the weight distribution is AFU in the MINI, so it's got a lot going against it --but the combination of a short wheelbase and power plus power-off snapped the rear around JUST LIKE the CTS-V took this incredibly tight u-turn.
You can easily get the rear out in many FWD cars, it's not the short wheelbase, it's the lightening of the rear during throttle lift off.
Ed
lemming
10-29-2008, 10:55 PM
You can easily get the rear out in many FWD cars, it's not the short wheelbase, it's the lightening of the rear during throttle lift off.
Ed
i have always agreed with you on this point --but in short wheelbase FWDers, they 'can' spin like little tops.
:dunno:
85% of the fun of a decent RWDer, driven correctly.
A 1er is way more attractive to me than a TT.
wdc330i
10-30-2008, 10:11 AM
A 1er is way more attractive to me than a TT.
Plus, it has a back seat.
John V
10-30-2008, 01:32 PM
A 1er is way more attractive to me than a TT.
I can attest to the fact that the TT's rear seat is useless unless you're under five feet tall. It's also hard to get into.
But the TT is infinitely better-looking than the 135. For pseudo-performance cars like this, that might very well sway me.
Sharp11
10-30-2008, 05:26 PM
A 1er is way more attractive to me than a TT.
I really like the looks of the new generation TT vert.
Much more so than the 1 series.
Some of the trim options are quite nice, too.
For the way I drive a car - it's got plenty of performance.
I may have to go drive one..... :)
Ed
Speaking of 1-ers...
I saw a few around over the summer, but hadn't seen one for about a month (and when I did it was usually a cab).
I've seen two today though... 128 and 135 coupes...
lemming
10-31-2008, 10:16 AM
Speaking of 1-ers...
I saw a few around over the summer, but hadn't seen one for about a month (and when I did it was usually a cab).
I've seen two today though... 128 and 135 coupes...
how is that CTS doing for you, btw?
how is that CTS doing for you, btw?
So far its great. I've put about 2500 miles on it in about 2.5 months.
Here's a few quibbles:
I'm still having a hard time getting the driver's seat into a perfect position. It seems like I have to tweek the settings every few days. There's really 3 issues with it:
1) the dead pedal is not in the same plane as the gas and brake -- its further back, so to get proper dead pedal support, I have to move the seat closer, which cramps my right leg a bit. GM apparently changed the dead pedal on '09s to address this issue -- so I may see about retrofitting the newer part.
2) the seat cushion feels about 1/4 to 1/2 inch shorter than it should be -- It doesn't really support my thighs very well (in all fairness -- I did come from BMW sport seats, and I kept the extension about half extended.)
3) For some reason, GM built a spring into the seat base -- so it gives an odd bouncing feeling when you hit certain bumps in the road. Really unsettling and it took quite a while to get used to. I'm still trying to figure out how I can restrict that motion (ie I need to figure out where I can jam something).
Because of 2 and 3, I may consider seeing if I could retrofit the Recarro seats from the '09 CTS V. Will need to keep on the lookout for a crashed V...
Other thoughts:
- I'm OK with the slushie in it. Sport mode is programmed nicely -- and it'll hold a shorter gear on aggressive acceleration, and keeps holding it when you let off the throttle. On "regular" acceleration, sport will upshift earlier too, although just a bit later than non-sport mode.
- It has a bit more body roll than I'd like, but otherwise handles great. When the tires need to be replaced, I may put summer tires on instead of all-seasons -- that might add just enough extra stiffness...
- Overall build quality is very good, but it still doesn't feel as solid as the E39. Most of the interior pieces are very well designed, but odd pieces here and there are the "old GM" -- the interior door handles for example remind me of rental car stock from a decade ago.
- I'm glad it has Bluetooth -- but you can tell this is GM's first gen design. It works very well, but its missing features that you'd think would be very easy to implement -- for example the Nav screen Phone display has only a single button for "end call". It doesn't have a number pad to dial out (or to enter a conference call ID) -- so you still have to hold the phone for that. It also doesn't download the phone's address book. Voice activation is also limited -- and its annoying that you have to first go into the OnStar menu, then say "Bluetooth" -- but then you have to go into the Phone's voice dial menu as opposed to the BT module having its own (which is a problem now that I have an iPhone without built-in voice dial).
- The Nav system is overall pretty good, and having XM Traffic support is very cool. It has a couple of interface quirks (keyboard is NOT QWERTY, the temp is displayed as a tab, but tapping on it doesn't bring up the weather info -- instead you have to hit the info physical button), but its a touch-screen so you can forgive most of them...
- Cooled seats are wonderful.
Sharp11
10-31-2008, 11:10 AM
So far its great. I've put about 2500 miles on it in about 2.5 months.
Here's a few quibbles:
Z,
I wrote almost exactly the same thing about the seats in this car last April.
It was my only main complaint, but it was enough of one to keep it off the list of contenders.
Too-short cushions and a cramped footwell made it uncomfortable for the long trip I was on.
I echo the cooled seats comment, though - we've got them on out Infiniti - they're great.
Ed
Z,
I wrote almost exactly the same thing about the seats in this car last April.
It was my only main complaint, but it was enough of one to keep it off the list of contenders.
Too-short cushions and a cramped footwell made it uncomfortable for the long trip I was on.
Ed
Its something I didn't notice on test drives. I'm usually fine for 15-20 minutes. But after that is when I start to get a bit uncomfortable and start playing with the seat.
I really think a dead pedal repositioning will help most of the feeling... I've googled trying to see if someone like UCC makes one for a CTS, but the best I can come up with is a hack job someone did on a first gen CTS where he glued a piece of 2x4 wrapped in some scrap carpet to the existing dead pedal. I may have to resort to that...
So, what's replacing the E90?
When will it go off lease?
Less than 5 months from now, right?
:dunno:
:dunno:
Unknown at this time.
Yes, ~ 5 months to go.
IndyMike
02-16-2009, 10:20 AM
tick....tick.....tick.....tick......tick........
Surely the 'wheels' must be turning in your head.
Narrowed it down to any specifics yet?
Wow, yeah, only a few weeks left. What's it gonna be, TD?
LOL
I quit posting my perseverations back before I got the E90.
My plan is set. But it's boring and practical.
My father is older and his vision has gotten a lot worse int he last year and should no longer really be driving.
So I'm going to "borrow" his E39 indefinitely - probably for a year or so - until the overall sense of economic dread passes. Then I'll probably pick up a nice used Boxster S.
For the record, I have not been personally impacted by the recession/depression and at my employer we just finished a year of record growth and strong profits. But it just feels prudent to lay low for a little while in terms of major outlays. Call me part of the problem wrt to economy. But I'm just not comfortable buying a new car right now.
The E39 is a 2000 528iA SP/PP, anthracite/black. It's a sharp looking car. The only downsides are relative lack of power and the damn slushie. I'll put in OE Bluetooth and swap out the tape deck unit for an in-dash CD with an aux in. And I'll get it detailed.
So... :yawn:
I don't blame you. For all my waffling, I'll effectively be swapping the ZHP for a jeep and nothing else for probably a year. While the Jeep is 10K+ more expensive, I own the ZHP outright and the jeep will be financed at 0%, so I'm actually getting a lot of cash in the process.
Boring. I like equ's threads better.
Boring. I like equ's threads better.
Isn't it, though? :yawn:
Why is the fiscally prudent choice always so friggen boring?
The good news is that I've pre-sold the Boxster S idea with the wife. So once we feel like we aren't being irresponsible buying something, I'll start the search process.
lemming
02-16-2009, 11:42 AM
Isn't it, though? :yawn:
Why is the fiscally prudent choice always so friggen boring?
The good news is that I've pre-sold the Boxster S idea with the wife. So once we feel like we aren't being irresponsible buying something, I'll start the search process.
fiscally prudent is so boring. :D
i admire it whenever i see it here, though.
IndyMike
02-16-2009, 01:43 PM
It is a good conservative plan.
Fortunate that it is the classic, good looking E39 bodystyle (although I would have given near anything to see you in a slushie E60 instead :D ).
And I think you'll find the slushie tolerable for most driving occasions. On vacation road trips with the Touring I actually find it relaxing when I go into full-on slacker mode. Heck, I even keep it in 'D' the whole time, not even messing with the 'M/+S' mode (obvious signs that I am slipping into a bonafide old goat).
But I imagine you will use it only for commuter purposes, and take the Avant for vacation and other work-horse duties.
Anyway, make sure you post pics after you get it detailed.
Mr. The Edge
02-16-2009, 01:50 PM
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/BMW-M6-Convertible-2007-BMW-M6-CONVERTIBLE-GRAY-RED-7SPD-SMG-WARRANTY-WOW_W0QQcmdZViewItemQQ_trkparmsZ72Q3a727Q7c66Q3a2Q 7c65Q3a12Q7c39Q3a1Q7c240Q3a1308Q7c301Q3a1Q7c293Q3a 1Q7c294Q3a50QQ_trksidZp3286Q2ec0Q2em14QQhashZitem3 60129954061QQitemZ360129954061QQptZUSQ5fCarsQ5fTru cks
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/BMW-M6-Convertible-2007-BMW-M6-CONVERTIBLE-GRAY-RED-7SPD-SMG-WARRANTY-WOW_W0QQcmdZViewItemQQ_trkparmsZ72Q3a727Q7c66Q3a2Q 7c65Q3a12Q7c39Q3a1Q7c240Q3a1308Q7c301Q3a1Q7c293Q3a 1Q7c294Q3a50QQ_trksidZp3286Q2ec0Q2em14QQhashZitem3 60129954061QQitemZ360129954061QQptZUSQ5fCarsQ5fTru cks
Have they honestly tanked THAT much? :lol:
Have they honestly tanked THAT much? :lol:
there is a luxury pre-owned dealer here in chicago that has a 2006 M5 w/ 26,000 miles on it for $44k
that is a $50k drop in value over 26,000 miles and around 3 years. unreal.
Mr. The Edge
02-16-2009, 02:26 PM
Have they honestly tanked THAT much? :lol:
I should have leased mine and it's not an M. :(
wdc330i
02-16-2009, 02:32 PM
I should have leased mine and it's not an M. :(
Nah. Just make sure you hold onto it forever. ForEVER.
lupinsea
02-16-2009, 02:34 PM
fiscally prudent is so boring. :D
You need to put more expclamation points and oneses on the end, then it gets real exciting.!!11one!11!!!
Mr. The Edge
02-16-2009, 03:00 PM
Nah. Just make sure you hold onto it forever. ForEVER.
Yep.
To be honest, I really love this car. While the 2009's have some differences, they are very small. Most people wouldn't / can't tell the difference between mine and a new one, especially with my M wheels. I saw an 09 the dealership just like mine (Alpine White / Tan leather) that stickers for $96K. :eek:
My wife and I drove up to wine country this weekend and the car drives/handles so nicely. I am keeping this car for the long term.
killerdeck
02-16-2009, 04:44 PM
The local BMW dealership here in Austin tried for months to sell a 2008 M6 vert with every option. Final price: $71,500!!!
clyde
02-16-2009, 05:41 PM
there is a luxury pre-owned dealer here in chicago that has a 2006 M5 w/ 26,000 miles on it for $44k
that is a $50k drop in value over 26,000 miles and around 3 years. unreal.
What's so hard to believe about a 50% (yes, percent) drop in value over 3 years? Yes, the car has relatively low miles for 3 years (under 10k/yr), and the residual value isn't where BMWFS inflated most BMWs future values a few years ago, but a 50% drop in value for a new car over three years is pretty "gasp" normal, ///Magical ///Marketing ///Mcrack-pipes not withstanding. When you start with ridiculous numbers like $100k, you get ridiculous losses in terms of dollars.
I don't see anything "unreal" here.
Boring. I like equ's threads better.
:lol:
But most of you are not as silly as me.
Actually, it's a great time to be "short" cars, i.e. coming to an end of a lease. Many decent deals on a wide variety of nice/fun cars, and likely to stay that way for the rest of the year. As long as you're not trading in, you "own" the dealer. If you are trading in, it is worthless.
I've been having lots of silly thoughts this weekend, but in the end few make sense. It is very hard to incorporate the m3 into the garage strategy.. If I sell the cayman, that would be too sad. If I upgrade from the 330i to it, that would be a lot of dough for a car that's worse on long trips (mileage/range) and that I would have to be worried sick about if I park it here or there.
Perhaps the only thing I'll do, purely to do a transaction, is to sell the 330i this or next spring/summer. It is warrantied until 2012, I'll have white hairs by then, there is no way I'm keeping it that long.
Yep.
To be honest, I really love this car. While the 2009's have some differences, they are very small. Most people wouldn't / can't tell the difference between mine and a new one, especially with my M wheels. I saw an 09 the dealership just like mine (Alpine White / Tan leather) that stickers for $96K. :eek:
My wife and I drove up to wine country this weekend and the car drives/handles so nicely. I am keeping this car for the long term.
It took me a while (and several friends wanting to buy one) to get around to the 6er but I do see its point. It is comfortable and smooth, a great GT car. To top it off, it has a great front interior, spacious and uncluttered.
lemming
02-16-2009, 07:32 PM
It took me a while (and several friends wanting to buy one) to get around to the 6er but I do see its point. It is comfortable and smooth, a great GT car. To top it off, it has a great front interior, spacious and uncluttered.
the 6er is a highly subjective "lifestyle" car.
if i wanted something with 2 doors and that weighs 4000lbs, personally, i'd get the CTS-V coupe.
half the money at MSRP.
:dunno:
nah. not really. i couldn't get past the practical aspect of 4 doors. CTS-V sedan.
forget it.
What's so hard to believe about a 50% (yes, percent) drop in value over 3 years? Yes, the car has relatively low miles for 3 years (under 10k/yr), and the residual value isn't where BMWFS inflated most BMWs future values a few years ago, but a 50% drop in value for a new car over three years is pretty "gasp" normal, ///Magical ///Marketing ///Mcrack-pipes not withstanding. When you start with ridiculous numbers like $100k, you get ridiculous losses in terms of dollars.
I don't see anything "unreal" here.
50% drop on an M5 in what could in all reality be less than 3 years (possibly) Maybe unreal was a bad word to use. who knows.
It's just odd to see a 2 to 3 year old M5 dropping this quick. obviously a sign of the times and a sign of BMW's M Division. There are 2002 M5s out there on the market in the mid 30s to low 30s.
IndyMike
02-16-2009, 08:12 PM
There are 2002 M5s out there on the market in the mid 30s to low 30s.
Cue the :stukabot:
SARAFIL
02-16-2009, 08:23 PM
50% drop on an M5 in what could in all reality be less than 3 years (possibly) Maybe unreal was a bad word to use. who knows.
It's just odd to see a 2 to 3 year old M5 dropping this quick. obviously a sign of the times and a sign of BMW's M Division. There are 2002 M5s out there on the market in the mid 30s to low 30s.
E60 M5's are cheap, but so are E39's right now. The whole used car market has taken a massive adjustment in the past 6 months due to more difficult financing and the overall economic downturn. Here are some average MMR values:
2002 M5: $19,267 with 64436 miles
2003 M5: $28,075 with 33160 miles (initially surprised the average mileage is this low, but it is thrown off by one that BMWNA sold a few weeks ago with 1,075 miles)... take that car out and the average appears to be closer to $24,000 with 50000 miles
2006 M5: $40,040 with 32970 miles
2007 M5: $42,710 with 21360 miles
2008 M5: $55,525 with 13620 miles
I think you can see that these cars take a massive depreciation hit in year 1, a somewhat large but not as bad hit in year 2, and start to level off in year 3. The data here is thrown off because there is no 2004 or 2005 model, but I think that if we had data from these years you would see that the drop after 3 years is significantly less per year.
lemming
02-16-2009, 08:32 PM
E60 M5's are cheap, but so are E39's right now. The whole used car market has taken a massive adjustment in the past 6 months due to more difficult financing and the overall economic downturn. Here are some average MMR values:
2002 M5: $19,267 with 64436 miles
2003 M5: $28,075 with 33160 miles (initially surprised the average mileage is this low, but it is thrown off by one that BMWNA sold a few weeks ago with 1,075 miles)... take that car out and the average appears to be closer to $24,000 with 50000 miles
2006 M5: $40,040 with 32970 miles
2007 M5: $42,710 with 21360 miles
2008 M5: $55,525 with 13620 miles
I think you can see that these cars take a massive depreciation hit in year 1, a somewhat large but not as bad hit in year 2, and start to level off in year 3. The data here is thrown off because there is no 2004 or 2005 model, but I think that if we had data from these years you would see that the drop after 3 years is significantly less per year.
:D
the thing is, in person, you're not this big of a nerd.
:lol:
SARAFIL
02-16-2009, 08:44 PM
:D
the thing is, in person, you're not this big of a nerd.
:lol:
haha
I'm a former mathlete, I like working with numbers. :eek: :eeps:
2003 M5: $28,075 with 33160 miles (initially surprised the average mileage is this low, but it is thrown off by one that BMWNA sold a few weeks ago with 1,075 miles)... take that car out and the average appears to be closer to $24,000 with 50000 miles
Cough Cough I hope not. UGH! Looks like I am keeping a certain car for a LONG time.
SARAFIL
02-16-2009, 09:16 PM
Cough Cough I hope not. UGH! Looks like I am keeping a certain car for a LONG time.
haha
remember that these are auction prices, not retail prices.
also remember that these are transactions from december-january, two of the worst months of the year for the wholesale market.
Well you definetly had me checking cars.com and autotrader. =)
TD, you could pick up an e46m3 on the cheap... Or a fun, used boxster, as long as you have the e39 to get you around.
TD, you could pick up an e46m3 on the cheap... Or a fun, used boxster, as long as you have the e39 to get you around.
I thought I already mentioned that that was the eventual plan.
Just not now.
And it'll be a Boxster. If I'm going to have a separate fun car, it's not going to be a BMW.
lemming
02-17-2009, 10:59 AM
I thought I already mentioned that that was the eventual plan.
Just not now.
And it'll be a Boxster. If I'm going to have a separate fun car, it's not going to be a BMW.
until they shed a lot of weight, i don't think BMW and fun will be in the same sentence often in the future.
few examples:
i love the idea of the 135 because it's the most pure little thing going --but remember that a WRX with awd mechanicals weighs less, has more space and is as fast.
i love the M3 with the v8, but with 300ft-lbs, no matter the gearing, that's still 3600 or so pounds of curb weight. it's fun what you're at WOT all of the time. in traffic, that's not exactly fun. even at the track, that curb weight is really a disadvantage and everyone can intuitively sense this.
how Porsche has managed to keep the cayman and the 911 within 3000lbs is amazing to me. cobalts, GTIs, and mazdaspeed 3 weigh more than those two cars.
:dunno:
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.