black fo sho :woowoo:



*edit* but the stereo's gotta go

 

wood grain - nice.

but those rims are tooo blingish.

 

wood trim = thumbdown

 

my thoughts exactly.......plus I like the rims on the 96 betterh:

 

The black one looks kinda ghetto with its chromed stock rims and chintzy lookin aftermarket headunit install.

The blue one looks a bit more promising but there is also less info in its ad, so there could still be ugly parts to it. Personally I don't think I could deal with a car that had a white interior like that.

And uh, don't you have some more choices? After clicking your link it cookied your zipcode, and I did a search for 1995-1999 M3s within 75 miles of you with asking prices of 20k or less and got 27 results.

A good majority of them have pretty high mileage but here's a few that seem worth checkin out:

http://www.autotrader.com/fyc/vdp.jsp?car_id=182086555
http://www.autotrader.com/fyc/vdp.jsp?car_id=160276650
http://www.autotrader.com/fyc/vdp.jsp?car_id=181334424

 

I kinda like it. h:

 

I like the rims on the second one, I don't like wood trim, and it's cheaper with less miles...but I'd get the first one. 3.2 > 3.0
Plus, I like black interiors.

 

personal preference thing. I change out wood trim in all my cars :chuckles:

 

aww mike :hugglez:

silver could work. i hate white cars, and the red looks like it has severe oxidation (or bad lighting)

 

stock 3.2L > 3.0
ease of modification wise 3.0>3.2L because the 3.0 is OBD1 while 3.2 is OBDII

also adding a turbo on the 3.0L is a looooooot simpler and cheaper because of the above. so it really depends.