S2000 would be a much better choice gas wise but, I would prefer the power of a Camaro or T/A personally. I don't think the SS would be .6 slower than the Ws6 thow.

it's pointless, the f bodies theoretically get way better gas mileage than all the cars listed if you hypermile it in it's ridiculous 6th gear. most of these numbers wont apply in real life just because there are just way to many variables.

**** it, just do what makes you happy. you wont find out if it was the stupid thing to do until it's already been done, the bank has you locked up in payments for the next 4-5 years and you've just realized that you should have just stuck with what you had and just sucked it up, realizing that ultimately, you'll just be paying more in the long run.

if you really want to save money, go out less. make ur own lunch. replace meals with a protein shake. get wasted off of moonshine. find a cool gf that isn't a gold digging whore etc. Gas is a hard thing to save on... u have to go where your going... can't really avoid that. but correcting a previous mistake(initially getting a car that sucks on gas) and trying to replace it with a MORE expensive car that gets SLIGHTLY better mpg is kinda stupid.

WS6

i need to make my post long enough

I had a 350Z, sold it for an E46 M3, was severely disappointed, and then went back to one.

Stock for stock, the Z is a tiny bit slower, handles a tiny bit worse, and brakes a tiny bit weaker than the E46 M. Add just a plenum spacer to the Z and they are head to head, switch out the sway bars with Hotchkis ones and get better tires than the OEM all-season Potenzas and it handles noticeably better (My M3 also had H&R springs/Koni struts and Hankook V12 Evos on 19" CSL wheels), and change out the stock brake pads with something a little more aggressive (I chose the Nismo ones) and the braking is equal. Do more than that and it blows by the M3 in everything.

In my opinion, the Z is a better car. The throttle response is better, its stiffer, and has much better seats than the M. People will give the argument that the M3 has more luxury, is a nicer daily driver, has more comfort, etc; but I didn't see that as the case. The M3 rides rough, gas mileage was a joke, and the interior wasn't fantastic. I also found that the "upgraded" Harman Kardon sound in the M wasn't even as good as the "base" non-Bose stereo in the Z. I won't even get into the maintenance and repair costs, but let's just say NOT WORTH IT compared to the virtually maintenance-free Z.

Well I'm biased but I think that the 98-02 WS6 is one of the nicest looking cars ever built. Reliable motor too and if you drive it right can get incredible gas mileage.

what do you have done to your m3? how many miles? have you have any issues with the car?

curious, how much are they willing to give for your trade?

I agree with the SS not being .6 difference last I checked they were the same of not the SS being slightly faster. 6th gear is win though I was at 32mpg heading to the shore though town cruising is more like 14-16.

Just say your sick of your car and want a new one. Getting a different car isn't really going to save you any money.

^ agreed. & whatever happened to going out and driving the cars? typically whenever i feel the need to look ill go test drive cars for the hell of it and give them a false phone number & email. ive even had a few used car dealers throw me the keys and let me drive it alone. In the end the car is going to be yours asking people for their opinions will give you severe bias. go out and drive a ton of different cars. if one feels right go after that type of car and find people knowledgable in x car to give you an idea of problem areas to scan over. (every car has factory problems)

If two cars are only 2-3 MPG off its probably a ~100 dollar difference a year in price that you could probably make up for by changing driving habbits.

What abotu a C5/C6 'vette? In highway driving many owners of the C5 Z06 get above the 26 MPG they are rated at and get closer to 29-30 MPG.

Haha.. The numbers for 1/4 mile times I just copied/pasted. I figured things looked off with the SS/WS6 being basically the same damn car.

FINE. I will admit it. I am "bored" of my car, though I still love it. I test drove a Z and liked it, but it felt slower than my M3. I really love the WS6 (my ex g/f and a bunch of my friends had 'em). One of the most fun cars to drive and take to car shows, Wildwood, cruise nights, etc. Per my ex, whom I just texted, she said she got 19 city but 25-30 highway and averaged around 22 overall. I confirmed this with 2 other buddies as well.

I am set at this point on the WS6, though the Z is close behind.

Test drive a GTO since you like the WS6. The GTO has functional back seats and feels more refined then the WS6. Honestly one of the easiest cars I've ever driven at its limits. I never had any issues recovering.

I was working for Pontiac when they were first reintroduced. I drove the first new gen (non-ram air, single exhaust) - I think they were LS1's versus the second new gen ones with the ram air, dual exhaust and LS2 (IIRC)? I drove probably 20 different GTO's over the couple years I was there. I loved how they drove, how the interior looked/felt, but hated/hate the exterior looks of the car.

I too worked at Pontiac and had my T/A when the GTO came out. T/As are sexy and Goats are not. GTO is going to be more balanced, controled, and refined, but who needs that in a muscle car. C5 is a good idea but they cost a lot more than f-bodys obviously.

You didn't happen to work over at Fred Beans in Limerick at the time, did ya? I'd take a WS6 over a C5 'vette personally. 2 rear seats (I've sat in 'em and I am 6'4") were not horrible, just bad :) Plus the large trunk, t-tops, etc., just appeal to me more than a 'vette.

Nah, Loughed Pontiac GMC in Springfield which is now closed unfortunately. I traded my T/A for a Vette when I worked at Thomas Chevy, it wasn't a mistake, but I have missed the T/A ever since. My g/f and friends all missed it too. The C5 seats are wayyyy more comfortable, except yea no back seats. Handling is 100x better in a C5. Everything else is about the same haha.

Anyone who complains sitting in the back of a T/A is whiney. They are so not bad at all for a sports car. Headroom galore, u just cant see out which makes it scary as hell haha.

Either way it's better than the rear seats were in my old 97 3000GT VR-4 lol. Those were not seats, they were purely shelves.

If that's the case, then something must have been wrong with it. It might be a drivers race up to about 40-50, but after that its not even close. Its been done :wink: A closer comparison is the E46 like I said above.