|
Rollcage
9,473 posts
62 months
|
flatline84 said: If I was on a budget Id honestly pick a straight 3.0 over a 3.2
The 5-speed is bulletproof and the engine more reliable. Its also plenty fast, 62 mph arriving in 6.0 seconds. Autocar tested it at 5.4 back in the day! http://www.bmw-driver.net/forum/showthread.php?t=8...
|
|
|
flatline84
1,060 posts
27 months
|
Also a saloon! A hellrot 3.0 saloon for me please, unmolested 
|
|
|
e21Mark
1,863 posts
43 months
|
flatline84 said: If I was on a budget Id honestly pick a straight 3.0 over a 3.2
The 5-speed is bulletproof and the engine more reliable. Its also plenty fast, 62 mph arriving in 6.0 seconds. My e21 is quicker than that. 
|
|
|
s m
8,282 posts
73 months
|
e21Mark said: flatline84 said: If I was on a budget Id honestly pick a straight 3.0 over a 3.2
The 5-speed is bulletproof and the engine more reliable. Its also plenty fast, 62 mph arriving in 6.0 seconds. My e21 is quicker than that. Link to test?
|
|
|
RemyMartin
Original Poster
1,081 posts
75 months
|
e21Mark said: My e21 is quicker than that. your e21 is one of my favourite cars on this website! love e21 3 series. 170k is big miles for 4k
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
chippy17
3,423 posts
113 months
|
Rollcage said: flatline84 said: If I was on a budget Id honestly pick a straight 3.0 over a 3.2
The 5-speed is bulletproof and the engine more reliable. Its also plenty fast, 62 mph arriving in 6.0 seconds. Autocar tested it at 5.4 back in the day! http://www.bmw-driver.net/forum/showthread.php?t=8... exactly what I did, picked one up about 4 years ago with 80K on the clock for £3k, two owners vgc, now on 120K + and going strong yes the Evo is better but does not make the 3.0 a bad car PC also clocked 5.4, and 100 in 13 dead, 120 in 19
|
|
|
flatline84
1,060 posts
27 months
|
What makes the 3.2 better? The gearbox in the 3.0 is better, and the 3.0 aint that much slower.
|
|
|
Output Flange
12,513 posts
81 months
|
flatline84 said: What makes the 3.2 better? The gearbox in the 3.0 is better, and the 3.0 aint that much slower. Better brakes, revised geometry, better engine, stronger diff, digi climate control all spring to mind. Gearbox is swings and roundabouts - the 5 speed has a slightly better shift action, but the Evo box has a 6th gear for economy.
|
|
|
flatline84
1,060 posts
27 months
|
Is the engine really better? It has 10-15 more horsepower but is more complicated and more expensive to run. Better Climate control... well I Guess 
|
|
|
Output Flange
12,513 posts
81 months
|
Twin oil pickups, better head design, variable timing on inlet and exhaust cams - yes, it's better. Not sure why it's more expensive to run, though? And if you say VANOS you can leave now...
|
|
|
Crook
3,552 posts
94 months
|
I bought a 3.0l over a 3.2 specifically because of the VANOS.
|
|
|
carreauchompeur
10,828 posts
74 months
|
VANOS fails... Worst case scenario £850. Not TOO scary.
|
|
|
flatline84
1,060 posts
27 months
|
Output Flange said: Twin oil pickups, better head design, variable timing on inlet and exhaust cams - yes, it's better. Not sure why it's more expensive to run, though? And if you say VANOS you can leave now... Is being vary of the vanos such a controversial issue? I Have two friends who chose the 3.0 for trackday duty specifically because of this
|
|
|
y2blade
46,914 posts
85 months
|
RemyMartin said: Still a quick car by 21st century standards?  Yes.
|
|
|
flatline84
1,060 posts
27 months
|
Output Flange said: Twin oil pickups, better head design, variable timing on inlet and exhaust cams - yes, it's better. Not sure why it's more expensive to run, though? And if you say VANOS you can leave now... All that and 200 ccm more and it still only on average produces 15-20 bhp more?
|
|
|
Crook
3,552 posts
94 months
|
Crook said: I bought a 3.0l over a 3.2 specifically because of the VANOS. I may not be being 100% serious...
|
|
|
Output Flange
12,513 posts
81 months
|
flatline84 said: Is being vary of the vanos such a controversial issue? I Have two friends who chose the 3.0 for trackday duty specifically because of this And did they fit the Evo twin pickup sump and the GrN restrictor valve needed on the 3.0 to avoid grenading the engine? Most Vanos issues can be either ignored completely or fixed relatively cheaply. Long gone are the days of £2000 replacements, when often £20 of soldering will fix it. Worst case is the timing sticks in one position and you get a lumpy idle and a 40bhp drop in power. I'd rather that than an oil starved engine, personally.
|
|
|
Fox-
10,038 posts
116 months
|
Output Flange said: Twin oil pickups, better head design, variable timing on inlet and exhaust cams - yes, it's better. Not sure why it's more expensive to run, though? And if you say VANOS you can leave now... The 3.0 doesn't require the valve clearance inspection that rockets the cost of an Inspection 1 or 2 on an E36 M3 Evo or an E46 M3 into the stratosphere, therefore making it cheaper to run.
|
|
|
Output Flange
12,513 posts
81 months
|
Fox- said: The 3.0 doesn't require the valve clearance inspection that rockets the cost of an Inspection 1 or 2 on an E36 M3 Evo or an E46 M3 into the stratosphere, therefore making it cheaper to run. Hmmm. I'd suggest that if you're worried about spending £200-300 on valve clearances at each inspection 2 then you're probably looking at the wrong car to start with.
|
|
|
Fox-
10,038 posts
116 months
|
Output Flange said: Hmmm. I'd suggest that if you're worried about spending £200-300 on valve clearances at each inspection 2 then you're probably looking at the wrong car to start with. Sadly 75% of used M3 buyers are looking at the wrong car to start with, which is why so many are fitted with 'Event' or 'Primewell' tyres.
|
|
