2011 Mustang GT vs. 2010 BMW M3

Discussion in 'Car Comparisons' started by GT40 2, Apr 16, 2010.

  1. Guibo is pretty good at judging interior comfort and fit and finish through magazine pictures apparently. If peoples only argument between the Ford and BMW is how well the interior is, I would say Ford has done a good job with the Mustang.

    Also, I've only heard compliments about the new interior from the few owners I know. Maybe the snobbish BMW driver wouldn't like it because there isn't a blue and white wheel on the steering wheel, but I would assume most people would be fine with the materials in the cabin.
     
  2. i like both cars but in the interior design, the mustang is definately better imo. the m3's interior may be high quality but its plain dashboard ruin it.
     
  3. What part of "get in and feel it" do you not understand? Interior is not the only argument in favor of the BMW. It's only the one we are discussing now because nobody wants to talk about the cost of a properly sorted independent rear suspension, a handling/ride combination that has seen the M3 beat the newer CTS-V coupe and RS5 in recent head to head comparos, the cost to develop RHD versions for all markets, interior and safety features that are lacking in the Mustang, etc.
    I don't think anyone here is saying Ford *hasn't* done a good job with the Mustang.

    Being a snob about interiors is no worse than being a snob about performance/$. So you've only heard compliments about the new interior from the few Mustang owners you know...how many of the M3 owners do you know wish the car were faster or really complain about the price premium over a Mustang?
     
  4. I don't know anybody who owns the new BMW's. All I'm saying is that most people who buy Mustang's are surprised about how much has changed since the previous generation, and even since the launch of the 05' Mustang.

    The only thing the Mustang and M3 should be compared is the performance. Everything else, the M3 obviously is better at. A 60,000 (base) dollar car should be, and it is.

    Anybody who says the Mustang looks cheap here and there needs to get their mind set for what price range the Mustang falls into. The GT is just the performance version of the Base Mustang which is a little over $20,000. There are a few things that separate the base Mustang and the GT in terms of luxury, but not by much.

    And I don't see how the Mustang GT is a bad choice for performance/$ like you said.
     
  5. When you pull out the performance versus dollar arguement, a very popular come back youll see from many who are squarely in American performance denial is "you can buy a used XXXXX and mod it to be WAY faster." Of course that is a useless arguement.


    How else could anyone think a new Mustang GT is a bad performance / $$$ choice?


    I don't care how much finesse and class an M3 has. When he finally gets matched by a Mustang GT performance wise, in the real world, I would pay to see the look on his face.

    Trust me, a lot of M3 owners have had this Mustang in their heads lately because they know they are going to pull up beside one very soon and it just might not go their way like it has before.





     
  6. There's nothing surprising about how far the '05 Mustang has changed. It's pretty easy to realize performance and refinement gains when the bar wasn't all that high to begin with.

    So what you're saying is that the $39k optioned-up Mustangs that have been road tested have little interior differentiation from a $20k car. Gotcha. Fine, go ahead and compare the performance. But assessing the relative value of both cars based purely on performance/$ is pretty shortsighted.

    Buying almost *any* new car is pretty dumb decision if all you're after is performance/$. When you have to throw in qualifiers like "it must be a new car with 4 seats with a factory warranty", then you've just admitted your arbitrarily chosen 2-parameter litmus test fails miserably.
     
  7. Performance/$ issue addressed above. It's not a useless argument when you can in fact have a modded Evo or C5 Z06 that will beat a new Mustang GT silly.

    A lot of M3 owners? Haha. That just may go to show how stupid some M3 owners are (yes, some of them are idiots as they are with any model). If most M3 owners were really worried, they would have bought something faster for cheaper. Yet they didn't. Do you think it's because they lacked the financial means?

    Do you really think the E30 M3 was faster in a "pull up beside one" scenario than the 5.0 of the day? How many M3 owners jumped ship to go buy the SVT Cobra, which pretty much shat on any BMW performance-wise of the time?

    So instead of acknowledging the merits that the M3 has over the Mustang, your argument boils down to you not caring about how much finesse and class an M3 has. Well, some people (many who are buying with their money) do care. The fact that they could have bought 2 Mustangs for the price of one M3 is pretty much irrelevant to those with the means to buy an M3.
     
  8. Okay yeah you can get leather and the Ford Sync system. Nothing too earth shattering. The reason it's 39K is because you get the 5.0 engine, upgraded suspension, tires, wheels, apperance package so forth. Not cheap.

    And *any* new car comes with a warranty so I thought that would be a given "parameter".

    So what you're implying is that no body buys a new car nowadays because it's realitively inexpensive, but also has great performance? Right.

    Edit: I think we are just different when it comes to what we want in a new car. You're more into refinement, where the M3 excells, where I'm more "go fast for cheap".

    Edit 2: And I still don't think the two should be compared regardless unless it's track time numbers.And even then...
     
  9. It's not a given parameter when you list only 2 parameters as priorities. One of which is not a new car with a warranty.

    "So what you're implying..."

    I don't even know what that sentence means.
     
  10. Okay well I figured we were talking about new cars to begin with, all of which come with warranties.

    "Buying almost *any* new car is pretty dumb decision if all you're after is performance/$"

    That is what you said. Well there must be alot of "dumb" people out there then.
     
  11. first was guibo vs mafalda.
    now: guibo vs domestic89
     
  12. first was guibo vs mafalda.
    now: guibo vs domestic89
     
  13. ...OR maybe it means most people don't buy just for performance/$ only, which has been my position to begin with. Think about this for a second: of the cars in the $30k price range, muscle/pony cars like the Mustang make up only a small fraction of the total.
     
  14. Okay well I'm just talking about the Mustang, since this is a topic about the Mustang and M3. I already said people who are into overall refinement should get the M3 (directly or indirectly, I'm not gonna reread what I said). Then I said that people who are looking for performance/$ should get the MUSTANG, not the Accord, not some base BMW or Audi, the MUSTANG.

     
  15. Yeah, you'd have to talk only about the Mustang because the 2-parameter litmus test fails. And if you want to focus only on the Mustang, then ask yourself how many potential buyers would buy a new Mustang if it came with no warranty. And if it came with only 2 seats. So your comment about there being a lot of dumb customers doesn't even make any sense. Even Mustang-type buyers know there are other factors to consider.
    And you didn't merely say those looking for refinement should get the M3. You had to put in your little snob dig as if there isn't a tangible difference between the two interiors. This whole argument came about because some people took exception to my claim that the BMW is the more rounded, complete car. If you don't have a problem with that claim, then there's really not much more you can say.
     
  16. Well I think we can both agree that these two cars shouldn't really even be compared. And yeah I did the little snob dig against the M3. I wouldn't say that your "2 incomplete Mustangs won't even equal the M3" is very classy either. Your dislike towards the Mustang is very apparent throughout this thread and maybe you get all knit picky when someone calls you out on it. Pretty much you're whole argument is based on personal opinion, and still, I agree with some of the arguments you are bringing up:

    "The only thing the Mustang and M3 should be compared is the performance. Everything else, the M3 obviously is better at. A 60,000 (base) dollar car should be, and it is."- me

    The BMW is a more rounded car is a Personal opinion (which I agree). The Mustang being "incomplete" (Incomplete? Is it missing an engine? Wheels? I know what you're saying, but it's an awful argument. Moving on) is also a personal opinion which I disagree.

    The warranty argument has been taken way too far. Obviously every car comes with a warranty. The Mustang and M3 both have warranties! shocker! What would happen if neither did? I don't know, why would they do that?

    Also, your "2 parameters" of the performance/$ value is pretty much the only thing the Mustang has...OVER THE M3. So yeah I guess that is the only, legitimate, way the Mustang is more appealing than the M3. Which I have been saying the whole time...

    "But assessing the relative value of both cars based purely on performance/$ is pretty shortsighted." -You. Both cars have many qualities that make them appealing. For THIS COMPARISION though, it might be just my opinion, but performance is the ONLY thing they should be compared at.

    Obviously people buy the Mustang for other reasons, so let's not play dumb.
     
  17. First of all, if you think I dislike the Mustang, you're a raging idiot.

    Secondly, regarding "I wouldn't say that your '2 incomplete Mustangs won't even equal the M3' is very classy either", is that not a fact? I didn't say "even." That is a word you interjected based on an unfounded, poorly conceived bias that I somehow dislike the Mustang.
     
  18. First of all. I don't give a shit.

    "But you'd still have 2 incomplete cars, compared to the M3."

    I'm not gonna get into another page argument over the word "even". You're digging too deep now.

    Edit: And I know, incomplete as in they lack refinement and the feel yadda yadda yadda im done.
     
  19. The new Boss 302 like whoa!!!


    but maybe if you can find me a used GT-R for similar money...
     
  20. You obviously give a shit since you have no problem going with me post for post.

    Thank you for quoting what I really said. Didn't take so much effort did it? There's no dig at the Mustang there. It's factually correct: buying 2 Mustangs doesn't mean you suddenly get the refinement, handling finesse, quality materials, convenience & safety features, not to mention the considerably greater individuality on offer (should you want it) that the M3 has. This is no less of a "dig" than saying the M3 offers less visceral driving excitement than a Ferrari. If you agree that that is not arguable, then you've basically wasted your time with a useless rant.
     
  21. tough choice but ive seen a few GT-R's selling for mid 50k. I might try getting one 5-8 years from now.
     
  22. #72 thebarron1989, Aug 23, 2010
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016
  23. Doesn't the warranty state you must get repair work done at a BMW authorized shop?
     
  24. #74 Guibo, Aug 24, 2010
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016
  25. Edit: Nevermind Guibo stated it.
     

Share This Page