£5-8k. E46 330Ci vs E46 M3?

[Patrick Bateman]

'As far as 3 litre straight-sixes go, the only thing it's got going for it is that it can achieve 40mpg. Other than that it's a bit of a fail IMO.'

So much wrong all in one sentence. Unbelievable.

And if front bushes last a year then you must drive on the worst roads in the world or do a ridiculous mileage.

Edited by Patrick Bateman on Sunday 25th March 20:45

[gaz1234]

The highest I ever got out of my oil drinking 330 was 34mpg which was on a sensible run. For the power they are not great. The 110bhp more m3 doesn't use a drop of oil and can do 31 on a run with its 6 gears. Fact

[Fox-]

You really don't seem a fan of that engine. Which is odd because in your profile it says 'probably the best 3.0 litre petrol engine you can get'

34mpg as a best doesn't sound great - was it an auto? My manual E39 manages more than that and its heavier, and I get even more out of a 3 litre Z4 (Though that does have a 6 speed box).

Unless you like to cruise at 90ish on the Motorway I'd be expecting to get 35-40 out of a 330 on long Motorway trips. Which, if you get 31 out of the M3, would tally with the difference in fuel consumption BMW state.

I can't argue with the oil consumption thing though! That really is the M54's annoying point.

[gaz1234]

Fox- said:

You really don't seem a fan of that engine. Which is odd because in your profile it says 'probably the best 3.0 litre petrol engine you can get'

34mpg as a best doesn't sound great - was it an auto? My manual E39 manages more than that and its heavier, and I get even more out of a 3 litre Z4 (Though that does have a 6 speed box).

Unless you like to cruise at 90ish on the Motorway I'd be expecting to get 35-40 out of a 330 on long Motorway trips. Which, if you get 31 out of the M3, would tally with the difference in fuel consumption BMW state.

I can't argue with the oil consumption thing though! That really is the M54's annoying point.

I am, only thing was the oil problem and not so great mpg considering not much power. It was a manual 5spd. apart from that I know they are pretty bullet proof which is why they will probably out do these newer e90 engines....

[carl0s]

I had a couple of mk4 Supras. Twin turbo straight-sixes. Ticked over like a sewing machine. Amazing smooth power delivery. No leaks - vacuum or oil.
Only problem: 23mpg.

The BMW M54 does not tick over like a sewing machine. If you're saying it's quiet, then I want to see a Youtube video to prove it, from the engine bay. There is a lot of noise.

[carl0s]

Patrick Bateman said:

'As far as 3 litre straight-sixes go, the only thing it's got going for it is that it can achieve 40mpg. Other than that it's a bit of a fail IMO.'

So much wrong all in one sentence. Unbelievable.

How? The 2jz gives the same bhp/l, is quieter and smoother, and doesn't leak oil or air so predictably. Only downside is fuel economy. Oh, maybe there's a difference in CO2 output too, but that's not something I consider.

Patrick Bateman said:

And if front bushes last a year then you must drive on the worst roads in the world or do a ridiculous mileage.

No I think it's the expected lifetime. At least they are easy to replace though.

[carl0s]

and to add: it feels coarse at around 6krpm. Almost feels like it's not a straight-six anymore - more like an I5.

[carl0s]

My mate's 2.8 v6 (vr6 layout) golf feels straight-six smooth, just like the 2jz. Compare either of those engines to the M54 and you'll see what I mean.

[Fox-]

carl0s said:

How? The 2jz gives the same bhp/l, is quieter and smoother, and doesn't leak oil or air so predictably. Only downside is fuel economy. Oh, maybe there's a difference in CO2 output too, but that's not something I consider.

The fuel economy thing is a pretty big 'difference' though isn't it? The M54 is usefully economical - its economical enough to give a pretty excellent touring range which the 2JZ isn't.

[quote=carl0s
No I think it's the expected lifetime. At least they are easy to replace though.

The expected lifetime of a suspension bush is rather more than just 1 year!

[carl0s]

Fox- said:

The expected lifetime of a suspension bush is rather more than just 1 year!

These 'compliance bushes' are a different thing. We're not talking about pressing bushes in and out of wishbones, or replacing wishbones. They can be changed in 5 minutes with a bit of red rubber grease and a 2 jaw puller.

[anonymous-user]

carl0s said:

My mate's 2.8 v6 (vr6 layout) golf feels straight-six smooth, just like the 2jz. Compare either of those engines to the M54 and you'll see what I mean.

I've owned a lot of cars over the years and I can tell you that the 3.0i straight six in both the 330ci and Z4 I owned is a very smooth and quiet engine. If you had a noisy one then it must of been knackered

[carl0s]

St John Smythe said:

I've owned a lot of cars over the years and I can tell you that the 3.0i straight six in both the 330ci and Z4 I owned is a very smooth and quiet engine. If you had a noisy one then it must of been knackered

Maybe I have a lemon

[Onedesi]

If your driving is mainly around town I would recommend the autobox. I was reluctant at first but after 6 months of ownership think it was the best decision i made although fuel economy does suffer.

[Clivey]

Saddling a 330i with an auto 'box is a waste of a good car IMHO. At the moment, I drive my manual 320i mostly in town during the week (unfortunately) and have never wished it was an auto (unlike the derv shopping car, but that's another story). Come the weekend (playtime) and the manual really comes into it's own. - With a petrol straight six, it'd be rude not to.

[carlingofblack]

The 5 speed steptronic auto is good although yes, first hand experience tells me that the auto likes a drink. It's not dull though, and the manual override or sports mode selection makes it feel nicely perky.

[david_h]

Agreed, the auto 330i robs the car of it's driving ability. I had one and the box, just as in my 530i, is too slow to react when kicking down and fails to give you the instant hit of the M3 SMG box.

Manual 330i is much more preferable.

[Fox-]

Pr1964 said:

Yes I'm thinking manual is worth the extra.

If you want to waft about then the autobox is fantastic at doing just this. Nice and smooth and wonderfully refined. But if you want to get a move on then even the Steptronic mode cannot make up for a manual box, therefore on something like a 3 Series manual is probably best.


[quote]
Maybe that's because the M3 didn't get the facelift......

It did - it just didn't get the front end facelift.

[StottyZr]

730d does 37mpg on the motorway? I take it, your talking about a very old 730d? The newer ones will get closer to 60.

Also, have you only calculated the fuel costs at 10,000 miles per year as you are refunded 45p/mile for the other mileage. If so, your delving into the realms of man maths. A cheaper car would be you'd make profit from the 45p/mile so this needs to be included

Edit: Holy hell I think I missed the boat a bit. I read the first 2 pages thinking thats all there was...

[Clivey]

Pr1964 said:

Just out on a twisty lane auto would be dull.

Precisely.

In town, usually an auto is preferable (but my experience with my car is that the manual 'box is a very good one and makes things much more pleasant).

Out of town on A & B roads, the manual is much better.

On the Motorway it doesn't matter as you don't change gear too often.

Pr1964 said:

It's a pity the SSG in the 330i isn't as solid and reliable as the SMG in the M3, otherwise that would be the one.

The manual cars are definitely more expensive plenty of autos around for less relatively ... Mind you the autos should be better for the traffic light getaway.. At least up to the next set of lights ...

Not sure I understand that one. Usually, torque converter autos are slower off the line than a manual because you can't launch the car.

[Fox-]

StottyZr said:

730d does 37mpg on the motorway? I take it, your talking about a very old 730d? The newer ones will get closer to 60.

Also, have you only calculated the fuel costs at 10,000 miles per year as you are refunded 45p/mile for the other mileage. If so, your delving into the realms of man maths. A cheaper car would be you'd make profit from the 45p/mile so this needs to be included

Edit: Holy hell I think I missed the boat a bit. I read the first 2 pages thinking thats all there was...

Lol. 60mpg from a 7 series?