[hmc]

If you drive the car by yourself, power seat is not that worth it.

[Kafkaesque328]

Originally Posted by bavarianride

Yes it is up to each to decide which options are worth the money. An apple to apple comparison is only doable for similarly configured 320i vs. 328i. A $10k difference between a 320i+ZSP and 328i+ZSL probably also means the 328i is configured with quite a few additional goodies, so it may not be a good reference to compare to base 320i with only ZSP.

There is no doubt it would be best if BMWNA configures 328i base without the extra stuff(e.g. many may be interested in an "extra-stripped" 328i base for $2.5k less), however such an alternative does not exist, so there is not much customers can do in that regard.

My recollection is that the 320i side bolster is part of ZSP and not on base 320i, or is it standard on 320i?

No the base 320 has the same standard flat seats that the no line 328 has I found those to be pretty terrible coming from the GTI. The sport seats were a must for me. Power seats are the least of my concerns as the manual ones have tons of adjustments. What drives me insane is lack of heated seats. That should be standard.

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by Kafkaesque320

Some of the most financially stable people I know drive old beater cars while many people you'll see around here driving new BMW's, it being L.A., are up to their eyeballs in debt and can't really afford the car they are driving, and vise versa. I also know wealthy business owners who lease R8's for $2500 a month or more and don't think twice about it. If you own a small business or are required to use your car for 1099 income, a % of that auto lease or loan is tax deductible.

I think financing a new car is generally a lot worse than leasing a new car, depending on your credit of course, because unless you are certain you are going to keep that new car for 7+ years, it will cost you more to own than to lease a comparable model since with leasing you are only financing and paying tax on the depreciation vs. with buying where you are paying interest on the entire purchase price as well as the massive chunk of sales tax. Others argue for paying cash for cars. Unless you have a lot of liquid, this is possibly the worst use of your money since that is the equivalent of dumping $40000 into a savings account that will lose 35% of it's value in 3 years. It would take you years of owning that car, trouble and maintenance free (esp if BMW) to make up for how much you truly paid to buy that car.

That said, many people in good financial situations w/top tier credit lease because it frees up cash flow and in comparison to buying, is a minimal financial commitment to a depreciating 'asset'. The 'smart money' is in buying an 8 year old 'reliable' Accord or something and driving it until the wheels come off, but we all know that none of of are going to do that.

But yes, for the money, say a Sport 320i vs. a Sportline 328i, I think the price disparity is silly, essentially being $10k more for a few more standard options and more HP which could be easily re-gained with a tune. That said again, money being no object, I would have just ordered a 328.

I think it is just ridiculous to compare a the value of money used for a car to the value of money used for investment portfolios. It's fun and sounds cool to say that a car is a "depreciating asset"; where the same money could be used for investments and that you loose money on the car, so it is a "bad investment" to buy a car. Rubbish. Transportation is transportation and investments are investments. It costs money one way or another to transport yourself. You either ride public transportation, walk, ride a bike, or drive a car. Any of those means is going to cost money to allow you to have the ability to move about the landscape. When you buy a car, yes the vehicle in most cases depreciates, but it provides value to you that allows virtually unlimited personal transport. Whether leasing or buying it all comes down to the cost per mile you pay to transport yourself. Done the correct way, the automobile offers an very inexpensive and efficient way to travel. A car is an investment in transportation; in most all cases you benefit from the use of the car.

So it is true, you could never spend any money on transportation and instead put it all towards investments, but then you'd not be able to go anywhere to earn a living to use the money earned for investments. Silly.

[Kafkaesque328]

You're silly.

[bavarianride]

Originally Posted by stevehecht

Also, to repeat myself, if the DHP is important to you, or Sport AT option, part of the $4550 delta is that you're paying for the ability to choose those things with the 328.

There are posts on F10 forum that people are able to special order 4 zone climate control for a few hundred bucks(dependent on how knowledgeable the CA is), so it may be possible to special order Sport AT on 8AT 320i.

[Ganxxta]

Originally Posted by bavarianride

There are posts on F10 forum that people are able to special order 4 zone climate control for a few hundred bucks(dependent on how knowledgeable the CA is), so it may be possible to special order Sport AT on 8AT 320i.

...or just import a "german" one, here you can order everything on the 20i/d.

MSport, active suspension, 8speed sport etc.

[Kafkaesque328]

^^ you guys always get better cars, options, etc. NTM the ability to actually drive these cars like they were built to be driven - at 140MPH

[Ganxxta]

Originally Posted by Kafkaesque320

^^ you guys always get better cars, options, etc. NTM the ability to actually drive these cars like they were built to be driven - at 140MPH

Thats why we also pay more...

[bavarianride]

Originally Posted by Ganxxta

Thats why we also pay more...

A post in the other enthusiast forum said a German spec 320i costs US$71k, which is 2x of US spec ones! That's close to US M3 price range.

[Kafkaesque328]

That is insane. Maybe the 16 year old on here with the new 335 auto tranny that shit the bed could get his dad to buy one for him.

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by Kafkaesque320

You're silly.

Dude, I was calling the idea of comparing using money to buy transportation vs. financial investments as a silly comparison. Both actions serve separate purposes...

[fecurtis]

Originally Posted by Kafkaesque320

You're silly.

Not really, he's right in the end. You're looking at simply how much something costs vs. the value (or in economics we call it "utility") someone gets out of something.

Sure you can look at the opportunity cost of it (instead of spending money on x you could invest money in y) but I can't drive my stock portfolio down a country back road with my windows down and music blaring on a nice spring day.

[Kafkaesque328]

No but there are ways that are more financially sound than others to get a car. For example, if you insist on having a new car but you aren't going to keep it longer than 5 years, unless you drive more than 12 or even 15k miles per year, leasing is often a better choice. Stating that it simply boils down to transportation costs is is pretty half-assed generalization because there are so many different factors but if you want to stay along the lines of 'transportation costs' then if you get a new car and keep it for five years, your transportation costs will be much higher over that 5 year time span vs. if you leased it. This is just basic math.

[fecurtis]

Originally Posted by Kafkaesque320

No but there are ways that are more financially sound than others to get a car. For example, if you insist on having a new car but you aren't going to keep it longer than 5 years, unless you drive more than 12 or even 15k miles per year, leasing is often a better choice.

Not always, depends on the residual. If you wanted to lease a 2014 Chevrolet Captiva Sport, you'd look at a residual value of 38% after 36 months (yes I've never heard of that car either but I found it here, http://blogs.cars.com/kickingtires/2...-for-2014.html).

Leasing luxury cars tends to make sense since they hold their value well. Other cars? Hit or miss.

Stating that it simply boils down to transportation costs is is pretty half-assed generalization because there are so many different factors but if you want to stay along the lines of 'transportation costs' then if you get a new car and keep it for five years, your transportation costs will be much higher over that 5 year time span vs. if you leased it. This is just basic math.

Who'd finance a car and only keep it 5 years unless they put about 25,000 miles or so per year on it? All in all what you said earlier is just common sense. If you want to keep a car for only a few years, leasing tends to be the best option. Figures people who only want to keep a car a few years go towards luxury cars. Others who get a Camry will just keep it til the wheels fall off and will finance it to amortize their payment over a longer period of time. You're typically foolish if you want to lease a car for 4-5 years.

Besides, you missed the point that Efthreeoh was getting at.