Discussion
I'm after a fun car for summer and have always had a soft spot for the S50 engine.
I'd prefer a 3 litre car to the later 3.2 but all the ones appearing for sale seem to have dubious history or a fair bit of rust appearing.
Anyone have any tips for finding a clean, tidy, not badly modified one? PH Classifieds the obvious choice but even that is pretty sparse of decent cars.
Budget upto £5K for a nice one or £3K for one I'd have to put a bit of work into - mechanical issues only idealy!
Any major pitfalls to be aware of?
All input appreciated! :-)
I'd prefer a 3 litre car to the later 3.2 but all the ones appearing for sale seem to have dubious history or a fair bit of rust appearing.
Anyone have any tips for finding a clean, tidy, not badly modified one? PH Classifieds the obvious choice but even that is pretty sparse of decent cars.
Budget upto £5K for a nice one or £3K for one I'd have to put a bit of work into - mechanical issues only idealy!
Any major pitfalls to be aware of?
All input appreciated! :-)
Edited by Icarus_ on Sunday 14th June 00:12
I think M3 prices have been through a bit of hell over the past year or so. Thankfully, a lot of pony cars have changed hands/died in this time and we're getting to a situation where there are proportionately more good cars left which are owned by people who take care of them properly and will not let them go for the silly prices the market has seen recently. For example, what car can you get of similar performance for a silly price of say £4,000? A similar age Impreza STi perhaps that could blow its engine at any moment?
M3 prices have strengthened and the best early ones, I see, are starting at over £5,500.
M3 prices have strengthened and the best early ones, I see, are starting at over £5,500.
swtmerce said:
what car can you get of similar performance for a silly price of say £4,000? A similar age Impreza STi perhaps that could blow its engine at any moment?
.
WTF???.
Subaru make good engines, they dont go bang at any moment.
A lot of the 280BHP+ jap stuff can be had for 4 grand, not just Imprezas.
Legacy GTB
GTO twin turbo
VR4
Skyline
To name but a few.
Any defining reason to? Power difference appears to be circa 30bhp so not a lot in it in that department. Do the later cars have different steering gear, suspension setup etc.?
To be honest I'm not after one as a massively fast car, at circa 200bhp/tonne they aren't much different in power to weight than a good hot hatch so performance at legal'ish speeds is never going to be earth moving. More a comfortable cruiser that isn't slow.
Very interested to hear the reasons to go 3.2 rather than 3.0.
To be honest I'm not after one as a massively fast car, at circa 200bhp/tonne they aren't much different in power to weight than a good hot hatch so performance at legal'ish speeds is never going to be earth moving. More a comfortable cruiser that isn't slow.
Very interested to hear the reasons to go 3.2 rather than 3.0.
Icarus_ said:
Any defining reason to? Power difference appears to be circa 30bhp so not a lot in it in that department. Do the later cars have different steering gear, suspension setup etc.?
To be honest I'm not after one as a massively fast car, at circa 200bhp/tonne they aren't much different in power to weight than a good hot hatch so performance at legal'ish speeds is never going to be earth moving. More a comfortable cruiser that isn't slow.
Very interested to hear the reasons to go 3.2 rather than 3.0.
Newer car (just), more torque so doesn't need the nuts revving off it, better steering - less lock-to-lock turns. Not hugely different in honesty but having had a 3.0 model 12 or so years ago and a 3.0GT more recently, I take the Evo over the 3.0. Forget the power part ... most 3.0 made around their quoted BHP where as the Evo's quoted 321BHP was optimistic to say the least ... if you have 300BHP then you're doing well. To be honest I'm not after one as a massively fast car, at circa 200bhp/tonne they aren't much different in power to weight than a good hot hatch so performance at legal'ish speeds is never going to be earth moving. More a comfortable cruiser that isn't slow.
Very interested to hear the reasons to go 3.2 rather than 3.0.
Saying all this, buy on condition, which ever model you go for.
nottyash said:
swtmerce said:
what car can you get of similar performance for a silly price of say £4,000? A similar age Impreza STi perhaps that could blow its engine at any moment?
.
WTF???.
Subaru make good engines, they dont go bang at any moment.
A lot of the 280BHP+ jap stuff can be had for 4 grand, not just Imprezas.
Legacy GTB
GTO twin turbo
VR4
Skyline
To name but a few.
I've owned 3 different Imprezas in the past. The two newer ones (2002 and 2003) were fine. The 1998 STi that I had for £5000 a couple of years ago blew its bottom end. Also, during the time I owned those 3 cars (about 2.5 years) I knew of six others from my own small club that had major engine issues. Most of them were older cars (the ones that slot into the £4000 bracket I'm referring to) but one of them was a 2004 WR1 so it's not an exclusive 'oldies' club.
Icarus_ said:
Any defining reason to? Power difference appears to be circa 30bhp so not a lot in it in that department. Do the later cars have different steering gear, suspension setup etc.?
To be honest I'm not after one as a massively fast car, at circa 200bhp/tonne they aren't much different in power to weight than a good hot hatch so performance at legal'ish speeds is never going to be earth moving. More a comfortable cruiser that isn't slow.
Very interested to hear the reasons to go 3.2 rather than 3.0.
As above.To be honest I'm not after one as a massively fast car, at circa 200bhp/tonne they aren't much different in power to weight than a good hot hatch so performance at legal'ish speeds is never going to be earth moving. More a comfortable cruiser that isn't slow.
Very interested to hear the reasons to go 3.2 rather than 3.0.
Plus, my Evo made over 170 mph on the Autobahn last year. Not sure I can think of
In standard form with fresh suspension, the Evo is the consumate alrounder. Moreover, despite the relatively small on paper power differences, the it is by far the quicker car on the road and indeed a very quick car period.
I bought a 3.0 as a track car project at the beginning of the year and quickly wished I'd bought an Evo instead.
paoloh said:
Almost certainly but a convertible definately isn't what I'm after. Asbo - hence why I said at legal'ish speeds. Similar power/weight ratios rarely mean similar top speeds but rates of acceleration at lower speeds can be very similar with a nigh on equal power/weight ratio. Somewhat of an over simplication but true none the less.
I'm certainly not ruling out a 3.2 but at the moment don't see why its worth passing up a good 3.0 in favour of a 3.2. As far as I can see they are a very similar cars but the concensous seems to be definately don't buy a 3.0? Is the steering comment purely based on rack ratio?
Edited by Icarus_ on Sunday 14th June 22:52
swtmerce said:
nottyash said:
swtmerce said:
what car can you get of similar performance for a silly price of say £4,000? A similar age Impreza STi perhaps that could blow its engine at any moment?
.
WTF???.
Subaru make good engines, they dont go bang at any moment.
A lot of the 280BHP+ jap stuff can be had for 4 grand, not just Imprezas.
Legacy GTB
GTO twin turbo
VR4
Skyline
To name but a few.
I've owned 3 different Imprezas in the past. The two newer ones (2002 and 2003) were fine. The 1998 STi that I had for £5000 a couple of years ago blew its bottom end. Also, during the time I owned those 3 cars (about 2.5 years) I knew of six others from my own small club that had major engine issues. Most of them were older cars (the ones that slot into the £4000 bracket I'm referring to) but one of them was a 2004 WR1 so it's not an exclusive 'oldies' club.
Regarding the above on the older cars no 3 big end bearing failure by any chance and on the newer car oil starvation during track time, possibly after a change to 'stickier' tyres?
I'm a big fan of relatively unstressed, well engineered, fairly high specific output naturaly aspirated engines.
Icarus_ said:
swtmerce said:
nottyash said:
swtmerce said:
what car can you get of similar performance for a silly price of say £4,000? A similar age Impreza STi perhaps that could blow its engine at any moment?
.
WTF???.
Subaru make good engines, they dont go bang at any moment.
A lot of the 280BHP+ jap stuff can be had for 4 grand, not just Imprezas.
Legacy GTB
GTO twin turbo
VR4
Skyline
To name but a few.
I've owned 3 different Imprezas in the past. The two newer ones (2002 and 2003) were fine. The 1998 STi that I had for £5000 a couple of years ago blew its bottom end. Also, during the time I owned those 3 cars (about 2.5 years) I knew of six others from my own small club that had major engine issues. Most of them were older cars (the ones that slot into the £4000 bracket I'm referring to) but one of them was a 2004 WR1 so it's not an exclusive 'oldies' club.
Regarding the above on the older cars no 3 big end bearing failure by any chance and on the newer car oil starvation during track time, possibly after a change to 'stickier' tyres?
I'm a big fan of relatively unstressed, well engineered, fairly high specific output naturaly aspirated engines.
Icarus_ said:
I'm certainly not ruling out a 3.2 but at the moment don't see why its worth passing up a good 3.0 in favour of a 3.2. As far as I can see they are a very similar cars but the concensous seems to be definately don't buy a 3.0? Is the steering comment purely based on rack ratio?
I would not say definitely don't buy a 3.0ltr, it is just that should you get the opportunity to buy an Evo for a similar price then you would be wise to go for the more developed of the two. I use a 3.0ltr as a track car and although I have just purchased a Z3 steering rack to install as this is a bolt on modification that addresses the supposed slow original rack fitted as standard, I have never had a problem with the standard rack and am only fitting said upgrade because I happened across one just last week. I wouldn't necessarily pass up a mint 3.0, but the Evolution is the one to go for if you have the choice between two nice cars. The clue is in the name - evolved handling, power, drivetrain, fuel economy and levels of equipment. They are a good bit faster around a track than the 3.0 and close to the E46 M3 in terms of performance.
In favour of the 3.0, I'd say they sound marginally better and I personally prefer the flat dish sunflower alloys on the older cars.
In favour of the 3.0, I'd say they sound marginally better and I personally prefer the flat dish sunflower alloys on the older cars.
I never found that much difference between the two having tracked both. The 3.2 does have slightly more torque in the mid range which means that you can spin up the rears more easily coming out of a tight turn. The 3.0 will do this almost as easily though.
The steering of the 3.2 does feel sharper due to the slightly quicker rack, but again it's not like the 3.0 is undriveable.
As for outright pace, a friend of mine used to have a Clio Trophy and he used to keep up, up to about 75-80ish at which point the 3.0 M3 would steadily walk away. You can't do power oversteer in a Trophy though.
I would say go for the one in the best condition you can find, which isn't as easy as it sounds.
The steering of the 3.2 does feel sharper due to the slightly quicker rack, but again it's not like the 3.0 is undriveable.
As for outright pace, a friend of mine used to have a Clio Trophy and he used to keep up, up to about 75-80ish at which point the 3.0 M3 would steadily walk away. You can't do power oversteer in a Trophy though.
I would say go for the one in the best condition you can find, which isn't as easy as it sounds.
bennyboysvuk said:
I never found that much difference between the two having tracked both. The 3.2 does have slightly more torque in the mid range which means that you can spin up the rears more easily coming out of a tight turn. The 3.0 will do this almost as easily though.
The steering of the 3.2 does feel sharper due to the slightly quicker rack, but again it's not like the 3.0 is undriveable.
As for outright pace, a friend of mine used to have a Clio Trophy and he used to keep up, up to about 75-80ish at which point the 3.0 M3 would steadily walk away. You can't do power oversteer in a Trophy though.
I would say go for the one in the best condition you can find, which isn't as easy as it sounds.
But yet the performance stats for even the 3.0 are quicker than that for the Clio. Afterall, let us not forget that even the first E36 M3 was/is as quick as the Nissan 350Z is today.The steering of the 3.2 does feel sharper due to the slightly quicker rack, but again it's not like the 3.0 is undriveable.
As for outright pace, a friend of mine used to have a Clio Trophy and he used to keep up, up to about 75-80ish at which point the 3.0 M3 would steadily walk away. You can't do power oversteer in a Trophy though.
I would say go for the one in the best condition you can find, which isn't as easy as it sounds.
This:
http://www.pistonheads.co.uk/sales/1089446.htm
Looks fairly good to me! Pretty base spec but low mileage and appears very tidy. I don't mind trading some extras for a good condition car - afterall dual climate wasn't even an option on either of my TVR's ;-)
As for Clio's I've built a couple that consistantly beat M cars in 24hr endurance races, but they most definately don't go sideways under power LOL
http://www.pistonheads.co.uk/sales/1089446.htm
Looks fairly good to me! Pretty base spec but low mileage and appears very tidy. I don't mind trading some extras for a good condition car - afterall dual climate wasn't even an option on either of my TVR's ;-)
As for Clio's I've built a couple that consistantly beat M cars in 24hr endurance races, but they most definately don't go sideways under power LOL
Edited by Icarus_ on Monday 15th June 23:19
Gassing Station | M Power | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff