|
My takeaway from this thread, from the perspective of someone who's owned Ms and Porsches:
1// It's not a fair comparison if you just look at pure power and straight-line speed and output. In that case sure get an M, heck just get a Charger/Camaro/Mustang in the appropriate trim. However for many of us, it's not just about the straight-line power or pure output numbers. It's like the old adage that a Casio keeps time just as well (better?) than a Rolex...great but you're entirely missing the point.
2// Thinking about "value" is fair but not really the point... Yes, the M will always be the better value. I paid 2x for my GT3 what I paid for my M4. Is it "2x" the car...not really. If I wanted "value", I would have kept the M. But guess what, the people that drop money on these cars aren't really in it for "value". Do you think anyone pushing a Ferrari, Lambo, McLaren etc. made the choice because of "value"? Hells no. It comes down to wanting more edge, quality and a superior package (I'll add brand experience, while I'm at it) at diminishing value the higher up you go.
3// There is definitely some M fan-boy-ism here, as expected. Just as there's bias amongst the Porsche guys etc. But you're kidding yourself if you don't objectively realize the Porsche is the better car. The build quality, materials, etc. are all just a step above. The interior of my M4 was trash. I think most people objectively realize this, and you're kidding yourself if you don't. However, is the Porsche "2x" better? No... Once you get into cars above the M line (I'd throw in RS, AMG, etc.) the performance and quality you get for your money is not linear...you have to pay 2x for 1.5x the quality and performance, but that's the price you pay. Just like how a McLaren 720s isn't 2x the car of my GT3 but it's 2x the price...however anyone buying a 720s realizes that and it's not why they're buying that car.
|