[Uncle Erik]

Before buying either, take a long, hard and sober look at replacement parts and labor.

Do you want to pay upwards of $8,000 for a transmission?

A relative of mine bought a used German car. He also purchased a $4,000 extended warranty because a replacement transmission is $11,000.

Do you want to throw that kind of money around?

Next, take a long, hard and sober look at depreciation.

Do you want to go $20k-$30k into the purchase price, spend $5k-$7k on interest, perhaps another $10k on maintenance, then have an asset worth maybe $5k ten years on?

Is the styling and status really that important to you? Are you willing to flush $40k-$50k only to do the same a few years on?

I like both of those cars, too, and thought about buying something along those lines. But when I sat down and worked out the TCO and compared them to resale, I was shocked. If money matters, I'd look at something like a used Ferrari, NSX, Lotus, or 911. They tend to hold their value or appreciate. Further, even Lotus and Ferrari parts seem reasonable compared to BMW and Audi. You can even wrench on them yourself without needing some $50k proprietary diagnostic computer.

 

[chesebert]

I didn't think you can get any decent (less than 5 yr old) used Ferrari or 911 Turbo for less than $80k. I could be wrong.

A straight 6 BMW can consistently get around 28-30mpg mixed and Audi can go 30-35mpg mixed if you get the 4 cylinder turbo engine.

What's mpg for 911 and Ferrari? 15-20mpg?

 

[Happy Camper]

What are your priorities, sports car performance or everyday car? I enjoy taking the Bmer on the back roads but only do it a couple times a year. The rest of the time it's an everyday ride. I don't think it worth the investment from a purely investment purpose. But if you want to have fun get a two seater for that. Maybe a used SLK AMG.

 

[revolink24]

It would seem like the A5 Cabrio would be a better competitor to the 330i than the TT. The TT is more in the Z4 segment being a 2 seater roadster.

 

[Seamaster]

There are also 350Z/370Z, infinity G35, G37 in this price range. I had 350Z for shot time (crashed in the snow, the weatherman lied), and I loved it. Down side: my right feet were very happy at that time, got only 18 some mpg, and stiff suspension.

 

[skyline889]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Uncle Erik /img/forum/go_quote.gif Before buying either, take a long, hard and sober look at replacement parts and labor. Do you want to pay upwards of $8,000 for a transmission? A relative of mine bought a used German car. He also purchased a $4,000 extended warranty because a replacement transmission is $11,000. Do you want to throw that kind of money around? Next, take a long, hard and sober look at depreciation. Do you want to go $20k-$30k into the purchase price, spend $5k-$7k on interest, perhaps another $10k on maintenance, then have an asset worth maybe $5k ten years on? Is the styling and status really that important to you? Are you willing to flush $40k-$50k only to do the same a few years on? I like both of those cars, too, and thought about buying something along those lines. But when I sat down and worked out the TCO and compared them to resale, I was shocked. If money matters, I'd look at something like a used Ferrari, NSX, Lotus, or 911. They tend to hold their value or appreciate. Further, even Lotus and Ferrari parts seem reasonable compared to BMW and Audi. You can even wrench on them yourself without needing some $50k proprietary diagnostic computer.

Most BMW transmissions I've seen cost around $4-5k for replacement, which is in line with even a Honda or an Acura transmission. The cost to rebuild is usually less, around $2500-3000.

The NSX and Lotus are both relatively bulletproof and easy to maintain. However, if parts do go, they are just as expensive as that of a BMW or Audi, with the Lotus of course being a little cheaper to repair and maintain than the NSX.

Modern Ferrari's on the other hand are major $$ just to upkeep (Not to mention repair of course). Oil changes range from $1000-1500 a pop and major service is required at 30000 miles or every 5 years at the cost of $5-7k. What's more, with the new F1 gearboxes, the clutch will need to be replaced every 10-15k miles at the eye-watering price of $5-6k. They definitely are not cheaper to maintain and upkeep than a BMW or Audi. Edmund's did a long-term road test of a vintage Ferrari 308 a couple years back and their experiences give a vague idea about what it costs to own even a "cheap" Ferrari: 1984 Ferrari 308 GTSi Quattrovalvole Archives - Long-Term Road Tests

 

[Uncle Erik]

Quote:

Originally Posted by chesebert /img/forum/go_quote.gif I didn't think you can get any decent (less than 5 yr old) used Ferrari or 911 Turbo for less than $80k. I could be wrong. A straight 6 BMW can consistently get around 28-30mpg mixed and Audi can go 30-35mpg mixed if you get the 4 cylinder turbo engine. What's mpg for 911 and Ferrari? 15-20mpg?

You're probably right, but I was talking about a Ferrari 308 or a late 70s/early 80s 911. I've given some thought to both, and am not a huge fan of cars with computers. The older ones are fairly easy to wrench on and are fully depreciated. Some of them will even be insurable as antiques/classics, for even more savings.

Of the antique/vintage cars I've owned (I've had a few) they've all been worthwhile in terms of TCO and appreciation. I should have some workshop space in Arizona in the next few months, so I'm thinking about ordering a Pembleton kit and might unload a few things and grab a vintage Esprit.

 

[SP Wild]

The last E46 BMW were extremely reliable - watch out for the front control arm hydrobushes - dab the brakes when roadtesting if you feel a shudder on the steering then bargain lower. Power steering lines from the reservoir tends to leak - but this is a minor issue - M models are bullet proof if used on road only and no track work. The current 3 series generation have problematic electronics - run away - far away.

Uncle Erik suggested the Honda NSX - midmounted supercar and bulletproof. If the car never had track use - this would be the one for me - this car is for the smart superstar. Comparison of a front engined sedan based vehicle to a purpose built midmounted supercar chassis is not possible.

 

[XxATOLxX]

If it was the MKI TT vs the E46 330i, then I'd definitely go for the BMW.

If it was the MKII TT 2.0T vs the E90 330i, I'd go for the TT. The BMW is a really nice car, but driving it is kind of dull, the 2.0T is very fun.

 

[mrarroyo]

Owned a 2001 BMW 525 and a 2002 Audi TT Quatro. Both were a total disaster and spent a significant amount of time in the shop (under warranty). Even though I used to be given a loaner car it was so painfully that neither lasted 2 years and then were traded in for what were two much better vehicles.

If you want a performance car and do not need a rear seat a 370Z or a Vette are much better cars. My 2004 Vette was bullet proof until it got flooded!

 

[koven]

i have a e46 330ci and i've driven the older TT, the difference is night and day in terms of sheering driving pleasure

as far as maintenance, i've had to fix my car out of warranty a few times... but i still love it

 

[DeusEx]

The new Z4 looks impressive. It looks like a BMW now.

 

[revolink24]

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeusEx /img/forum/go_quote.gif The new Z4 looks impressive. It looks like a BMW now.

Thats a good thing?

 

[skyline889]

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeusEx /img/forum/go_quote.gif The new Z4 looks impressive. It looks like a BMW now.

By 2008, the Z4 had become a great looking car. The minor revisions made throughout the years slowly transformed the overall image of the Z4. I'd even venture to say that the rear on the old Z was much more distinctive than the shrunk down, nondescript, 6 Series tail it has now.

 

[subtle]

Neither. They're both money pits. I would never consider another BMW unless leasing it new.

What's your budget? I'd like to throw out some other suggestions.