2003 M3 - $23,000

[qube 3570]

the most reasonably priced E46 M3 ive seen in recent years, sure its SMG but so what. still awesome.

very tempting indeed

https://www.trademe.co.nz/2324747341

[leonf 162]

I agree. Very tempting. Perhaps not the right colour, but why would anybody buy a  near new Toyota/Hyundai/Kia/Mitsi/Holden etc when they could buy this???

[M3AN 4016]

2 minutes ago, leonf said:

I agree. Very tempting. Perhaps not the right colour, but why would anybody buy a  near new Toyota/Hyundai/Kia/Mitsi/Holden etc when they could buy this???

lol - because they don't want to have to spend $5000 on sh*t that goes wrong in the next 24 months.

I must say it's a sharp price, perhaps a little too sharp in today's market, I'd want to look at it very, very closely. On the other hand the seller may just need a quick cash sale and it all could be kosher. VANOS and subframe are obvious considerations.

It would make a better daily than my M3 that's for sure... and it would be more fun than an auto 130... hmm... (NO David, NO!).

[qube 3570]

the weird rear taillights kind of bug me and its a pity that its not the 2003.5 MY spec but still a great price with plenty of room for maintenance on top.

(NO Kyu, NO!)

[aja540i 1906]

It bugs me that it says its 4wd.....

[JohnM575 112]

13 hours ago, qube said:

the weird rear taillights kind of bug me and its a pity that its not the 2003.5 MY spec but still a great price with plenty of room for maintenance on top.

(NO Kyu, NO!)

The rear tail lights are an interesting modification, seems odd to 'downgrade' to an E46 M tail light set...

Otherwise at that mileage and price point (subject to service history, PPI etc...) it could be quite a good option for someone wanting an M3 as a daily or for regular use.

[bradgalbraith 218]

On 9/25/2019 at 9:10 AM, JohnM575 said:

The rear tail lights are an interesting modification, seems odd to 'downgrade' to an E46 M tail light set...

Otherwise at that mileage and price point (subject to service history, PPI etc...) it could be quite a good option for someone wanting an M3 as a daily or for regular use.

The owner has the original tail lights just FYI. 

[330itis 15]

People say sharp price, I say market value. So many trademe residents sitting there at 30k+ and never selling. Markets taken a dip even overseas.

[Blackie 510]

I agree with 330itis - some of the 30k ones have been on tardme for donkeys.

There's also an M6 recently listed at $20k.

Maybe it's the petrol prices....

[LemonHunter 583]

I'm bugged by non cert modifications that are 'easily changed for wof' 

I for one am super enthused by the idea of swapping suspension twice a year. 

[M3AN 4016]

It should be illegal to sell a registered car that needs a cert, without a cert. 

[JohnM575 112]

Didn't realise it didn't have a cert. Not so great buying at $23k then...

[Blackie 510]

A cert for the coilovers is a doddle.

[Blackie 510]

3 hours ago, M3AN said:

It should be illegal to sell a registered car that needs a cert, without a cert. 

We're already enough of a nanny state thanks 

[E30 325i Rag-Top 2956]

4 minutes ago, Blackie said:

A cert for the coilovers is a doddle.

So why not do it properly then and get one? Screams of bodge up to me.

 

4 minutes ago, Blackie said:

We're already enough of a nanny state thanks 

You should live outside NZ for a while if you think that’s the case.

[Blackie 510]

Don't buy then if you're that concerned.

I've lived in the UK 12 years where you pretty much have free reign with cars and mods. No certs there.

[B.M.W Ltd 950]

Until you get caught breaking the law and they impound and crush the car. Wish we had that law here ?

[Blackie 510]

Breaking which law?

[Bandit 194]

7 minutes ago, B.M.W Ltd said:

Until you get caught breaking the law and they impound and crush the car. Wish we had that law here ?

Was that not Crusher Collins' idea? Whatever happened after the first one was crushed?

 

[Olaf 3317]

5 hours ago, M3AN said:

It should be illegal to sell a registered car that needs a cert, without a cert. 

Interesting idea, Dave.  I’m split about that one.

On the one hand, my free market commercial freedoms stance that the buyer must be aware of what they’re buying, and they must understand the risks before using a modified un-certed vehicle.  I view additional government intervention as unnecessary, as the rules and law are well-established, and it’s simply a fail to drive the uncerted vehicle on public roads.

On the other hand, having a law that demands a modified car registered for use on public roads must be certed before sale would be a great thing, because SAFETY. And we don’t take chances with safety.  We want a safer vehicle fleet, increasing survival chances for road users by improving vehicle safety.

 Now, considering the above (having developed my thoughts as I wrote them), I need to go with the first option.  Not because “more nanny state=bad”, but because the second option is doomed to failure.  Here’s why:

it does not protect people from themselves, and there remains a high likelihood that people will choose to modify their cars, not certify them, and drive them on public roads.  The law proposed makes it more difficult to sell a modified vehicle, but does not increase safety. “Because Darwinism!”    The rules and laws governing modification exist and are working.

Accordingly, my answer is “higher standards of driver training, and a more rigorous licensing system including logbook and hours on country, urban, and highway road types”.  ?

 

[Gaz 1060]

If it was cheap chinese brand coils then I would be worried but they are not. They are high quality ones so its not a concern for me. I'm sure if you ask nicely, the seller would put the originals in for you and away you go, no worries

[M3AN 4016]

Most people wouldn't know that you can't get a warrant if you need a cert and to be honest I wouldn't expect them to even know if they needed a cert, it's a reasonably fringe activity.

If you sell a car that can't get a warrant then my view is it needs to be sold "as is, where is" with the registration on hold and the buyer informed why this is the case.

I reckon it would just be easier to pay the $500-$600 for the cert and if necessary bump up the price of the car. In my opinion to do anything less is a bit irresponsible. 

[E30 325i Rag-Top 2956]

2 hours ago, Blackie said:

Don't buy then if you're that concerned.

I've lived in the UK 12 years where you pretty much have free reign with cars and mods. No certs there.

Would never buy a modded car that’s not been done properly.

Not sure when or where you lived in U.K. but there certainly are rules and no free reign, not Certs as such but process for “Q” plate.

I don’t have a problem when idiot with cut springs and struts “welded by a mate” crashes when they collapse on a corner, it’s the poor buggers they take out I have thoughts of.

Seen so much dumb sh*t it my short time in NZ, some by “professional engineers” that ended up with some of those poor buggers not making it. 

Thats why you have to stop the idiots from themselves.

[bradgalbraith 218]

The sellers reason for not certifying the car is because it would 'devalue it'. Don't see the logic in that but anyways..

[Eagle 1662]

Reads to me like he spent a wad of cash on the upgrades, doesn't want to\cbf certing it or returning it to stock, so he's try to sell it before the WOF expires and its illegal. Can't see a cert it would devalue it either, you can revert it back to stock and get the plate removed when selling it. It devalued because it has none not one.

The original struts\dampeners are likely to be tired at 150,000km which is why he likely fitted the Bilsteins in the first place, so fitting them would of waste of time\money.