Avert your eyes, Michael...

Stereo Mic said:
If you look carefully, can't you read the word "Wanker" inscribed down the side panels?

Is that on the options list?

I though that was standard fit? :cool:

Tazz
 
julian2002 said:
i've even figgured out how to use the indicators!
In white van man tradition dont spoil things by actually using them though. Follow steps:
1. look in mirror and wait till car in fast lane is within 4 ft
2. make your manouver
3. hear the screech behind you
4. take piss with a flash of each indicator
 
M3 is a great car! And was on my shortlist, I wouldn't touch the audi, 4WD/quattro IME robs some of the fun of this type of car, Drive a slower car or be a passenger in a bullet? although I'm sure its a different story in the 911 turbo (think thats an 80R/20F split to retain the RWD feel).

The thing that put me off the bm were size and the fact it had 4 seats - but that engines power and sound are both awsome!

The sort of roads I like to play on I just wanted something smaller and more nimble, I made the right chice 4 me, a m8 has an m3 and when we go out I lose him in the bends he catches me on the streights so not much in it.

No on should do that to anyones property! unders ANY circumstance even if it wasn't an x, I have never undersood why guys take it out a guy who doesn't know them when the person who actually wronged the was the partner!?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I would have thought that the only thing to separate the BMW & Audi in "real-world" driving on public roads would be the skill/bravery/foolhardiness of the driver.

Of the two, I would prefer the BMW because it's RWD.
 
Of the two I think I'd prefer the Audi because less of them are driven by wankers.

Seriously, I am amazed at how slowly most people drive M3's on twisty country lanes. It suggests to me they don't feel as secure as Audi's or 4WD cars in general. I laughed as I overtook three Beemers in a row last winter on snow and ice!!
 
The S4 is appreciably slower than an m3 in a straight line i will post a video later (and also considering the raw figures); THe s4 does get a better start though. I am sure that on a dry track, the m3 would be quicker.

The RS audi's are another matter. Having ridden in both the M3 and an RS6 many times, I would say that both are fantastic cars, but for everyday use ability, the RS6 is something rather special. The thing that annoys me about the RS6 is that the torque has been artificially limited in some areas/flattened,(the gearbox is near its limit) so coupled with 4wd it is very quick to begin with, but acceleration does not really punch you forward at higher revs, as seems to be the case with most other turbo cars. Stage one Chipping an RS6 gives an easy 50bhp increase, and masses more torque. Trying to get the old man to do it, but warranty issues are abound. Abt do one that supposedly doesnt invalidate the warranty, but it costs abot 4 times as much as any other.

On a dry road, using all the rev's the M3 is a devastingly fast car too. Great fun.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
michaelab said:
See above.

Do you think comparing a high-powered RWD car with a 4WD car on snow and ice is remotely relevant?
:D

I've never understood why people (tossers?) have a thing for BMWs. The car (especially M3) is great. If the driver is a wanker, then it is because he/she is a wanker who happens to be driving a BMW, he/she would be an equally big wanker if he/she was in any other car. There are some perfectly logical reasons why BMWs attract more than their fair share of wankers but that does not mean the car is bad.
 
I have overtaken quicker cars than mine on country roads (maybe they just dont want to play, or*)and been overtaken by slower cars than mine in 30's and 40's means nothing!

You don't have anything to prove in an m3 and thats why I'm happy for the MG Rover et al to fly past in 30's and 40's.

*It is also true just that because someone owns a fast car doesn't mean they can drive it! The thing about the Audi's is that ANYONE can drive them fast because they require no skill with such a heavy handed traction control system, the m3 on the other hand requires skill to drive quick but is more rewarding of the effort!

I didn't find Quatro an asset on ice with such wide tyres, couldn't get off the drive even!
 
Stereo Mic said:
Of the two I think I'd prefer the Audi because less of them are driven by wankers.
Stereotypical view - how small minded :o

I really don't give sh1t what people think of me or my car and wouldn't let it dictate how to spend in excess of 40k :eek: if I wanted the m3 i would have bought it regardless!
 
The "wanker/tosser" comments are just a symptom of envy. A peculiarly British inverse snobbery is apparant whenever a desirable car appears.

Overtaken by a Porsche? Wanker!!!!

Ferrari? Tosser!!!!

Etc.
 
Dev said:
If the driver is a wanker, then it is because he/she is a wanker who happens to be driving a BMW, he/she would be an equally big wanker if he/she was in any other car.
What! Do you mean that Volvos are sometimes driven by people who are not senile???


Only jesting, I agree, of course tossers drive all sorts of cars, and white vans, and... ad nauseam.
 
Dev said:
:D

I've never understood why people (tossers?) have a thing for BMWs. The car (especially M3) is great. If the driver is a wanker, then it is because he/she is a wanker who happens to be driving a BMW, he/she would be an equally big wanker if he/she was in any other car. There are some perfectly logical reasons why BMWs attract more than their fair share of wankers but that does not mean the car is bad.


Exactly, but there is a large amount of BMW pilots who are complete masturbaters, ney, masterbaters of the highest order.
But as you all know, i dont drive but ride a mans form of transport, so anyone in a 4 wheel slow mobile is obviously masterbating at the wheel.
 
I think what you are trying to say in a roundabout(:)) way is that since you only have half the number of wheels, you are only half a masterbater. Right? :D
 
Back
Top