Been offered M3 swop for my S2, any thoughts?

[phrudman]

Hi,

I've got my S2 up for sale at about 7 grand, and I got a message from a guy offering me a direct swop for his 1995 M3.

Now all things being equal, I'd appreciate some thoughts on whether this seems like a good deal.

Want to get rid of the S2 to reduce running costs, hence would I be in exactly the same boat with an M3?

Any thoughts of how you would rate the M3 compared to the S2 would be appreciated as I don't know a great deal about M3's and have never driven one.

Anyway I'll try and find an M3 forum as well to ask, but if anyone had any thoughts I'd appreciate it.

Thanks,

Paul

[Fat Audi 80]

FWIW I think if you are wishing to reduce running costs you are going to have to think a lot smaller than an M3. I would have thought you are looking at a 1.6 petrol or a diesel to reduce the fuel bill and then something old and reliable to keep your expenditure down.

For example, I run an 1993 Chavalier 1.6i that does 45mpg and cost £200 to insure with the MOT usually coming out at about £250. That's what I call cheap motoring. Have you any option to make the S2 your weekend car and then have a really cheap car for the daily commute?

HTH

Cheers,

Steve.

P.S. No one on here is going to advocate going from an S2 to an M3!!!

[s2avant95M]

i used to have an E30 M3, until some low life stole it. if that had'nt have happened i would probably still have it, that was 3 years ago. awesome car. back to the E36 M3, Steve is right, if you want to reduce your running costs then thats not how to do it.

[phrudman]

Thanks.. I guess I am not so keen to reduce the running costs, happy with petrol, insurance etc. more keen to know if its less car for the money. Selling S2 due to cost of new parts becoming prohibitive, and actually looking at some nasty looking old japanese pocket rocket thing at about 3k to free up some funds, so I'm only asking out of mild interest if anyone has said "the M3 is awesome, fabulous, etc etc." then I might have taken a closer look.

But yes I know no-one would advocate an M3 for an S2 lol, and if I went to an M3 forum I'd probably hear the reverse, so was just hoping to hear from some owners of both.

Thanks for the advice!

[ducattigezzer]

M3's are a fine drive as long as the road is dry
drive one it the wet then your'll know why you bought a S2
you get the best of both world's

the biggest thing i'll say on the part's side they are a little expensive

but if you bought something else your'll soon be going i wish i still had my S2

the jap pocket rockets are becoming more popular but how many S2's do you see

about

have fun deciding as it's going to hard

[audiman]

M3's use more fuel than an S2. They dont handle as well. Any thing with an M badge on means that parts are twice the cost.

S2 parts are not any dearer than M parts. Any special M bits can cost a fortune. BTDT.

[Sweeper]

M3 eats from 18 till 25L/100km depending on how you drive it.

Parts , hehe you don't want to know how much they cost and where to get them .

M3 is fun to drive on track, better than s2. More feel of control. But ....

I like the spool up of S2 turbine much more.

[The Spanish]

If you like the idea of an M3 get either and E30 or E46. E36 was never good IMHO, tha's why they had to build the EVO version and it still did not work.

M3 is fractionally slower than S2 and I would not now which is faster round the bends, my vote goes to the S2. M3 can be powerslide wich is nice but chasis is very understeery and soft. E30 M3 is a much better car to drive.

Hope it helps.

[Graham]

My Mate had a E30 2.5 and to get it over 200Hp would have cost him £2k which when considered how much increase £2K would get on an S2--BMW parts are really expensive.

[Dave cook]

i agree with fat audi, get a cheap run around and use the S2 on weekends
every time i see a S2 it brings a smile to my face.

[S2sedan]

Go for M3 much better car, almost bullet proof if well maintened, less parts to break, most time cheaper than S2.
you do not need any mod to smoke a RS2 at the track (both stock), much more fun to drive and a feel that can`t be compared to an S2. S2 seems like a truck near the M3. In wet S2 is much better but in dry is another story. My M3 Evo used to make 12 km/l travelling at about 200 km/h
A stock M3 has about 260rwhp with pulley kit, cold air intake, ex. and a good remap you can put easily more 20 rwhp spending US$ 500,00.

S2 are much easy and cheapper to tune than the M3.

In would not think go for M3.

I'm trying to buy another one as you can see.

[The Spanish]

M3 E36 wont see wich way an RS2 go in a track being both stock. Brakes much worse and has less traction out of cornes and it is way slower come on be serious.

Get Emule and download any Best Motoring video featuring the E36 M3 on track it was always last by far.

[S2sedan]

I used to have one, Evo the Evo is as fast as an M3 E46 if you want can check in the forums, Evo brakes are NOT worse than the RS as it is lighter and much more balanced car than B4 chassis. S2 are realy crap to drive if compared to an M3 no way. Check some websites, I found a test between the Evo, S4 (B5), 996, C43. Guess what ???
M3 is only slower than 996.
i'd like to see where the M3 is slower than the S2.

[nervas]

M3's use more fuel than an S2. They dont handle as well.

have you ever driven one? They handle much better than almost all 4wheel drive cars on track. S2 has massive understeer

[Sweeper]

Yeah forgot to mention. Standart M3 brakes are sh*it !!! Better than stock s2 of course , but still sh*i*t. Oh then there are brembo brakes for m3 , that's another story....