Thoughts on 330ci vs M3

Thoughts on 330ci vs M3

Author
Discussion

boxster9

Original Poster:

466 posts

201 months

Sunday 22nd June 2008
quotequote all
New to this forum. Was thinking of trading my Volvo S70R for either a 330ci or M3. The volvo has fairly good mid-range torque, 250bhp with 0-60 of 6.5s. I was initially considering a 330ci, But was not sure whether I would notice a performance difference compared to the Volvo.

Looking at the classifieds, a 3- 5 year old M3 can be found between 11-16k. I am interested to know what ownership is like, cost, performance. I have not tested one yet..what is the ride like? and is it comfortable for long motorway journeys. What are the main pitfalls? Would I be better off going for the 330ci

Thanks for any advice


waremark

3,242 posts

214 months

Sunday 22nd June 2008
quotequote all
This is so subjective. The 330 is quieter and better riding, and very competent, but in my opinion it completely loses the snap and precision which make the M3 satisfying - and the M3 is still sufficiently refined to be a pleasant long journey car. The 330 will be more similar to the Volvo. There is no substitute for trying one of each.

On costs, I am sure M3 maintenance costs will be considerably higher. On consumption, I got between 22 and 28 mpg from my M3 depending on usage (top of that range for long motorway journeys at 80) - I used super unleaded, but did not notice any worse consumption when I used regular.

dgm

97 posts

209 months

Sunday 22nd June 2008
quotequote all
I ran both cars for a couple of years each and I found the ride and damping on the M3 to be far superior to the 330C sport. On a drive to the south of France and back the M3 was a very comfortable, accomplished cruiser. My mpg on the 330 was about 18 whilst on the M3 it dropped to 15/16. You can easily get both cars into the mid 20mpg mark on motorways.

Servicing costs are substantially more on the M3, not the oil services but Inspection I and II are several hundred more. If you run 19's on the M3 expect the tyres to cost a good bit more as well.

The 330 is a good car but if you can stomach the extra costs then the M3 is in a different league in performance and handling terms.

Edited by dgm on Sunday 22 June 11:11

San Diego GTR

469 posts

208 months

Sunday 22nd June 2008
quotequote all
I've owned both. I upgraded a 2003 330Ci to a 2006 M3. Both of the above comments are right on and I agree with them on all points. The M3 has a much more aggressive suspension with 50% more horsepower. I have the ZCP which has 19's and tires were $1700 recently. Overall mileage is 20.8.

Huliganov

319 posts

196 months

Sunday 22nd June 2008
quotequote all
M3 can get 30mpg + on a long motorway journey. I've heard of people getting close to 35mpg albeit at a steady 70mph on motorways. SMG is slightly thirstier but so so so much fun though, it can totally transform the character of the M3, whereas the manual M3 doesn't give you that luxury/option.


m12_nathan

5,138 posts

260 months

Sunday 22nd June 2008
quotequote all
Why would SMG use more fuel other than the small weight increase? Like saying the cars with sat nav and hk stereo are worse on fuel, negligable.

m3sye

26,231 posts

202 months

Sunday 22nd June 2008
quotequote all
I dont think your going to get to good a M3 for 11-13k either....
Unless 80k+ miles dont bother you..

I would pay a little more a get yourself a decent 53 One with 30-40k on it...

fridgemiester

82 posts

191 months

Sunday 22nd June 2008
quotequote all
Hi having owned both the 330sport and the E46 M3 in my opinion they are both very different cars, if its cost of ownership your concerned about opt for the 330 however if its out and out fun you want the M3 WINS EVERYTIME!!

Huliganov

319 posts

196 months

Sunday 22nd June 2008
quotequote all
m12_nathan said:
Why would SMG use more fuel other than the small weight increase? Like saying the cars with sat nav and hk stereo are worse on fuel, negligable.
From what I've heard. I'm in no position to judge though unfortunately so only going by others opinions.

M3 looks like a riot though, amazing overtaking ability.

waremark

3,242 posts

214 months

Sunday 22nd June 2008
quotequote all
SMG is polarising - people either love it or hate it. I hate it - I obsess about smoothness, and it is more difficult than a manual to make upchanges very smooth even in manual mode. In automatic mode it is worse. I would only buy the M3 if I wanted to enjoy using a clutch pedal.

M DCT on the new M3 is quite different of course - fast smooth changes, whether in automatic or manual mode. The downside here is that since you can drive it like a good automatic it reduces the involvement and satisfaction.

boxster9

Original Poster:

466 posts

201 months

Monday 23rd June 2008
quotequote all
thanks for all the usefull info. I am more inclined towards the M3, which i feel would give me a significant performance improvement on my current volvo.

What are the annual running costs like.

Secondly ...I have seen a few that have done over 70k in the classifieds...are these a money pit or a bargain. I bought my volvo at 70k miles and have so far doubled that...and it still runs like the day I bought it...no issues whatsoever. Are the M3's as reliable over 100K miles?

M5 Russ

2,243 posts

193 months

Monday 23rd June 2008
quotequote all
If you are into performance cars then you should not even be thinking about a 330.
I would avoid the SMG and stick with a manual but get a test drive and the you will wonder why you did not get a M3 earlier.

Mileage is not as important as condition and service history. If the car is out of warrentee then use a good indi garage to keep servicing costs down.

Good luck.

dan101smith

16,802 posts

212 months

Monday 23rd June 2008
quotequote all
On the earlier cars that you'll be looking at, I think there was a recall (shells?). Worth checking with BMW customer services that it has been done.

I changed from a 328i to M3 in E36 guise, and they are very different cars. The M3 is firmer and more focussed, the 328i was more comfortable around town. There is always a trade-off when you go to a performance model, but to me it's well worth it. If you can afford to maintain it.

NST

1,523 posts

244 months

Monday 23rd June 2008
quotequote all
I've not driven a Manual M3 but i have driven a SMG version (friends car). it is a love or hate thing, but i actually like the SMG! i drove it around for for the first day hating it, but after learning how to drive it properly i thought the SMG was actually very smooth in town. when having alittle fun it was excellent.

m12_nathan

5,138 posts

260 months

Monday 23rd June 2008
quotequote all
Huliganov said:
m12_nathan said:
Why would SMG use more fuel other than the small weight increase? Like saying the cars with sat nav and hk stereo are worse on fuel, negligable.
From what I've heard. I'm in no position to judge though unfortunately so only going by others opinions.

M3 looks like a riot though, amazing overtaking ability.
The actual gearbox is the same, and it has a proper clutch so no extra drive losses there to increase consumption.

dadofbud

589 posts

210 months

Monday 23rd June 2008
quotequote all
The M3 all the way, this is a night and day difference between these two cars, had both, 330ci sport is never going to get close to M3 performance wise.

Prices are falling for the M3, and it can still give you great fun.

If you buy a 330ci sport you will have it for a month and want the M3, Buy it, drive it, put lots of petrol in it, buy lots of rear tyres, but you will have fun, get a PY,IR or LSB and be different.

Condition, 1200 mile service, history , history & history and your certain to have the best performance per pound car available.

Just do it.

Huliganov

319 posts

196 months

Tuesday 24th June 2008
quotequote all
m12_nathan said:
Huliganov said:
m12_nathan said:
Why would SMG use more fuel other than the small weight increase? Like saying the cars with sat nav and hk stereo are worse on fuel, negligable.
From what I've heard. I'm in no position to judge though unfortunately so only going by others opinions.

M3 looks like a riot though, amazing overtaking ability.
The actual gearbox is the same, and it has a proper clutch so no extra drive losses there to increase consumption.
Freewheelig in a manual M3 (whacking it into neutral and letting it 'roll' down a long hill) helps fuel consumption I'm sure biggrin

kusee pee

1,021 posts

204 months

Tuesday 24th June 2008
quotequote all
Agree that the 330 will not come close to the M3. The engine alone is worth the extra price and it will blow the volvo into the weeds. Go for it, you won't regret it!

Jake.

1,195 posts

236 months

Wednesday 25th June 2008
quotequote all
Huliganov said:
SMG is slightly thirstier but so so so much fun though, it can totally transform the character of the M3, whereas the manual M3 doesn't give you that luxury/option.
Sorry mate but I totally disagree with you there. I test drove both before going for a manual (e46) M3. The SMG was quite unpleasant to drive IMO. I hated the slowness of the change in the softer setting and the harshness of the shifts in the sportier settings. I was quite disappointed actually 'cos I really thought I was going to like the SMG, and I'm not prejudiced against autos like a lot of folks, but I just didn't. You know where you are with a manual.

boxster9 said:
thanks for all the usefull info. I am more inclined towards the M3, which i feel would give me a significant performance improvement on my current volvo.
You definitely need to test drive a few. They are quite quick but nothing amazing. If you're expecting breathtaking acceleration you may be disappointed. Compared to a decent sized turbo engine you really have to work at it to keep the m3 going, you need to be pretty much thrashing it to produce decent acceleration.
Nice cars though. I like mine a lot ('53 plate, e46 M3, <40k miles, 18k about 3 months back)
Actually mine is in the bodyshop having a new rear bumper at the moment, thanks to a myopic white van man, so I'm driving an 07 plate 325i coupe (which is the newer shape of course) hire car. This is also a good car but surprisingly the fuel consumption is no better than the m3. I've never driven a 330ci so can't comment.

Good luck.

CarbonM5

927 posts

192 months

Wednesday 25th June 2008
quotequote all
Consider an 8k 330ci then supercharge it.

You will have a more understated beast with a nicer drive to boot.