Do you need anything more than a 320d?

[RobM77]

greenarrow said:

Super_G said:

Due for a new company car. Thought this thread deserved a revival. Drove the 320d pre-lockdown. The acoustic glazing made a huge difference so inside the cabin the only things that tell you that you’re in a diesel is your butt dyno and the fuel gage/tacho. IMHO the G20 is everything the F30 should have been and it is closer to the drivers car feel of the E90.

Never driven either F30 or E90, but intruiged that many people on here say the E90 was the better driver's car.

I wouldn't mind an E90 myself, but I don't want another diesel. I personally think the post LCI E90 is a good looking car. Very understated. Not working from home now, I do very few miles so a diesel would be pointless. I like a car which is balanced and therefore wondered if a humble 4 cylinder might do the trick, but the internet is full of warnings about that era of 4 cylinder BMW car. So for now I stick to my ageing Mk1 Focus, a car which cost me just over £500 and ironically had me pondering after one early morning lockdown run recently, "Do you need any more than a Ford Focus".....

I've not tried the latest 3 series, but I did have a day in an F30 320d last year, to compare with the 100k miles I'd driven in my two E90 320ds. I wrote a review for Pistonheads, but it was so scathing that I never posted it, for fear of all the abuse I'd get. Essentially I felt that the F30 was slightly better than the E90 in most areas (ergonomics, driving position, tech, features, etc) other than ride and handling, for which is was absolutely bloody awful. The other negative was tyre noise at speed, which in the F30 on 17s was noticeably worse than my E90 on 16s, enough to put me off the F30 all together, and I never tried an M Sport, because obviously on 18s that would be even worse. Instead I bought an F10 530d M Sport, with the greater sound deadening as standard. For all BMWs I now see M Sport suspension as essential, not a nice to have option as it was in the past; both SE and M Sport appear to have softened markedly since the E90 LCI.

[anonymous-user]

RobM77 said:

I've not tried the latest 3 series, but I did have a day in an F30 320d last year, to compare with the 100k miles I'd driven in my two E90 320ds. I wrote a review for Pistonheads, but it was so scathing that I never posted it, for fear of all the abuse I'd get. Essentially I felt that the F30 was slightly better than the E90 in most areas (ergonomics, driving position, tech, features, etc) other than ride and handling, for which is was absolutely bloody awful. The other negative was tyre noise at speed, which in the F30 on 17s was noticeably worse than my E90 on 16s, enough to put me off the F30 all together, and I never tried an M Sport, because obviously on 18s that would be even worse. Instead I bought an F10 530d M Sport, with the greater sound deadening as standard. For all BMWs I now see M Sport suspension as essential, not a nice to have option as it was in the past; both SE and M Sport appear to have softened markedly since the E90 LCI.

I had an F30 M Sport rental once. Absolutely woeful ride, couldn’t wait to get back in my shed Volvo.

Handling wasn’t particularly special either.

[Welshbeef]

stickleback123 said:

Ares said:

Welshbeef said:

If you have a family of more than 4 yes as it’s not big enough - especially so if you want 3 child seats side by side.

Very few cars will allow 3 child seats across the back seats, especially seats rather than boosters

Correct, basically you're into big SUVs and MPVs. You can just about do it with a P2 Volvo V70 but it's far from ideal.

We have family car being S-Max but when you kid up with luggage it’s a real squeeze. As such we’re upgrading to a Galaxy (when the time is right covid)

[otolith]

I had an F30 - well, technically an F31 - 320d estate as a courtesy car a few years back. As I recall it was very refined, comfortable and utterly bland.

[Shiv_P]

greenarrow said:

Never driven either F30 or E90, but intruiged that many people on here say the E90 was the better driver's car.

I wouldn't mind an E90 myself, but I don't want another diesel. I personally think the post LCI E90 is a good looking car. Very understated. Not working from home now, I do very few miles so a diesel would be pointless. I like a car which is balanced and therefore wondered if a humble 4 cylinder might do the trick, but the internet is full of warnings about that era of 4 cylinder BMW car. So for now I stick to my ageing Mk1 Focus, a car which cost me just over £500 and ironically had me pondering after one early morning lockdown run recently, "Do you need any more than a Ford Focus".....

Focus probably handles as well as an F30, if not better.

[RobM77]

JDB96 said:

RobM77 said:

I've not tried the latest 3 series, but I did have a day in an F30 320d last year, to compare with the 100k miles I'd driven in my two E90 320ds. I wrote a review for Pistonheads, but it was so scathing that I never posted it, for fear of all the abuse I'd get. Essentially I felt that the F30 was slightly better than the E90 in most areas (ergonomics, driving position, tech, features, etc) other than ride and handling, for which is was absolutely bloody awful. The other negative was tyre noise at speed, which in the F30 on 17s was noticeably worse than my E90 on 16s, enough to put me off the F30 all together, and I never tried an M Sport, because obviously on 18s that would be even worse. Instead I bought an F10 530d M Sport, with the greater sound deadening as standard. For all BMWs I now see M Sport suspension as essential, not a nice to have option as it was in the past; both SE and M Sport appear to have softened markedly since the E90 LCI.

I had an F30 M Sport rental once. Absolutely woeful ride, couldn’t wait to get back in my shed Volvo.

Handling wasn’t particularly special either.

Interesting. I never tried the M Sport F30. With the other cars BMW make, I've found that since the E90 LCI era, SE has gone from great to far too bouncy, and M Sport has gone from focused to what I would call normal (i.e. the new 'SE' if you like). I guess the F30 is a generation to miss; which is how I felt about the E46 too.

[RobM77]

Shiv_P said:

greenarrow said:

Never driven either F30 or E90, but intruiged that many people on here say the E90 was the better driver's car.

I wouldn't mind an E90 myself, but I don't want another diesel. I personally think the post LCI E90 is a good looking car. Very understated. Not working from home now, I do very few miles so a diesel would be pointless. I like a car which is balanced and therefore wondered if a humble 4 cylinder might do the trick, but the internet is full of warnings about that era of 4 cylinder BMW car. So for now I stick to my ageing Mk1 Focus, a car which cost me just over £500 and ironically had me pondering after one early morning lockdown run recently, "Do you need any more than a Ford Focus".....

Focus probably handles as well as an F30, if not better.

It wouldn't surprise me. The standard F30 3 series is one of the worst riding and handling cars I've driven in recent years. A massive step backwards for BMW.

[Jamescrs]

nickfrog said:

Depends what you call tall obviously...

But if you talk about 6ft1 that is definitely not the case in either the current or previous generations. I have sat in front of my son a one, we are both 6ft1. Plenty of leg room, very comfy on a long journey.

I had an E91 320 and I'm 6ft4 and found the rear seats too tight for anyone but a child behind the drivers seat. I don't think it's BMW specific, I tried a Merc C63 sometime later and the rear seating would have been useless in that too behind drivers seat.

For me as a tall driver I find I need a 5 series/ E class size car to be reasonable as a family car now.

[P1H]

Jamescrs said:

nickfrog said:

Depends what you call tall obviously...

But if you talk about 6ft1 that is definitely not the case in either the current or previous generations. I have sat in front of my son a one, we are both 6ft1. Plenty of leg room, very comfy on a long journey.

I had an E91 320 and I'm 6ft4 and found the rear seats too tight for anyone but a child behind the drivers seat. I don't think it's BMW specific, I tried a Merc C63 sometime later and the rear seating would have been useless in that too behind drivers seat.

For me as a tall driver I find I need a 5 series/ E class size car to be reasonable as a family car now.

Surely not - I used to have a E92 330i, I'm 6ft 3.5, my friend sitting behind me at the time was also 6ft 3.5, we drove comfortably on a 12 hour drive to the Isle of Skye!

[Ares]

Jamescrs said:

I had an E91 320 and I'm 6ft4 and found the rear seats too tight for anyone but a child behind the drivers seat. I don't think it's BMW specific, I tried a Merc C63 sometime later and the rear seating would have been useless in that too behind drivers seat.

For me as a tall driver I find I need a 5 series/ E class size car to be reasonable as a family car now.

Oversized guy needs at least medium sized car, shock?

I can't think the lack of accommodation for the tallest 2% of the population is a weakness of 3-series?

[RobM77]

You're all correct... The problem is that you're using height as a definitive measure of leg length, which it isn't. Plenty of people of only 5'9" have longer legs than the average 6 footer. On average taller people have longer legs, but it's only an average and there is quite a variance.

For the record, I'm 5'10" (177cm) and when driving an E90 3 series, an adult can't fit behind me. The F30 added a couple of inches to help this problem, but yes, the 3 series is very much a compact family car and the 5 series a full sized family car.

[bluezedd]

I don't need anything better than a 320d and struggle to see how most people would realistically need anything more than that either (excluding other considerations like vans, or potential diesel issues, or perhaps if you're andre the giant). Most of the time whenever "need" is used it tends to mean "want".

There's nothing wrong with that though. I don't need 4 cars and a motorbike, or need many guitars, but I sure as hell want them and buy them.

[RobM77]

bluezedd said:

I don't need anything better than a 320d and struggle to see how most people would realistically need anything more than that either (excluding other considerations like vans, or potential diesel issues, or perhaps if you're andre the giant). Most of the time whenever "need" is used it tends to mean "want".

There's nothing wrong with that though. I don't need 4 cars and a motorbike, or need many guitars, but I sure as hell want them and buy them.

True. However, I'd contest that if that was what Chris Harris meant, I'm sure he'd have chosen a much cheaper car, like a Ford Focus, Honda Civic or Toyota Yaris. Or even a bus pass. They all provide reliable transport for a driver and family and tick that box.

There's surely a reason he said this about a £30k car instead, and that's surely because he was including typical driving enthusiast criteria such as a low CofG, a manual gearbox, rear wheel drive etc. The 320d has all those things already, without paying an extra £20k for 350bhp. With higher spec cars like the 340i, Alfa QF etc, you generally can't use the performance and they're heavier, so generally have worse handling. In that sense, you can't really get more than a 320d offers without compromising in other areas, thus his comment.

I've driven most of the BMW range from the last couple of decades and I think he's got a point. The only hole in his argument that I can see is the question of diesel vs petrol - many people despise diesels. Certainly in years past diesels were horrible and petrol engines much nicer, although nowadays with DBW throttles dullening engine responses, the ubiquitous use of turbos on everything, and huge amounts of sound deadening, that gap between the two has narrowed, to the point where yes, perhaps I do agree with him 100% on this one.

[Welshbeef]

RobM77 said:

True. However, I'd contest that if that was what Chris Harris meant, I'm sure he'd have chosen a much cheaper car, like a Ford Focus, Honda Civic or Toyota Yaris. Or even a bus pass. They all provide reliable transport for a driver and family and tick that box.

There's surely a reason he said this about a £30k car instead, and that's surely because he was including typical driving enthusiast criteria such as a low CofG, a manual gearbox, rear wheel drive etc. The 320d has all those things already, without paying an extra £20k for 350bhp. With higher spec cars like the 340i, Alfa QF etc, you generally can't use the performance and they're heavier, so generally have worse handling. In that sense, you can't really get more than a 320d offers without compromising in other areas, thus his comment.

I've driven most of the BMW range from the last couple of decades and I think he's got a point. The only hole in his argument that I can see is the question of diesel vs petrol - many people despise diesels. Certainly in years past diesels were horrible and petrol engines much nicer, although nowadays with DBW throttles dullening engine responses, the ubiquitous use of turbos on everything, and huge amounts of sound deadening, that gap between the two has narrowed, to the point where yes, perhaps I do agree with him 100% on this one.

I forget what 320ds are up to these days power wise but they are significantly lower power than I’ve had for well 20 years +.
I’ve driven a number of them and 420d whenever my previous BMWs we’re getting serviced.
What I found - noise of the engine is not nice what as an I6 diesel BMW does sound fairly good (for a diesel).
Economy didn’t impress either I was getting close to the 320mpg out of my 330d and then 535d so meh
Power is low sorry.

I’d have one and run one and wouldn’t complain as it’s a very good car it’s that I’d rather buy a year or two year older top of the range over a new 320d and the same applies if you say go older 320d go older much better car.

[South tdf]

bluezedd said:

I don't need anything better than a 320d and struggle to see how most people would realistically need anything more than that either (excluding other considerations like vans, or potential diesel issues, or perhaps if you're andre the giant). Most of the time whenever "need" is used it tends to mean "want".

There's nothing wrong with that though. I don't need 4 cars and a motorbike, or need many guitars, but I sure as hell want them and buy them.

I took a car allowance a year back and ended up buying a 2017 118d M-Sport as a stop gap but it’s really grown on me and I can’t see any point changing it.

Having done a couple thousand miles in the latest 320d it is a very good car and in my opinion best in class however for my usage a 330e would be preferable.

[Mr Tidy]

My 1st BMW back in 2005 was a 2004 E46 320td, followed by a 57 plate 123d in 2008 bought with business mileage use in mind.

Then in 2014 when business use was no longer a factor I bought an E46 325ti, and realised how much more fun it was than my 320td and that my 123d should have been a 130i!

Is a 320d all you need? Probably.

But if you think about what you want then a 320d may not be the answer!

[B'stard Child]

Mr Tidy said:

Is a 320d all you need? Probably.

I would rather be dead.................

Life is just too short to drive a 320d

[Mr Tidy]

B'stard Child said:

I would rather be dead.................

Life is just too short to drive a 320d

That may be why I sold mine in 2008.

[RobM77]

Welshbeef said:

RobM77 said:

True. However, I'd contest that if that was what Chris Harris meant, I'm sure he'd have chosen a much cheaper car, like a Ford Focus, Honda Civic or Toyota Yaris. Or even a bus pass. They all provide reliable transport for a driver and family and tick that box.

There's surely a reason he said this about a £30k car instead, and that's surely because he was including typical driving enthusiast criteria such as a low CofG, a manual gearbox, rear wheel drive etc. The 320d has all those things already, without paying an extra £20k for 350bhp. With higher spec cars like the 340i, Alfa QF etc, you generally can't use the performance and they're heavier, so generally have worse handling. In that sense, you can't really get more than a 320d offers without compromising in other areas, thus his comment.

I've driven most of the BMW range from the last couple of decades and I think he's got a point. The only hole in his argument that I can see is the question of diesel vs petrol - many people despise diesels. Certainly in years past diesels were horrible and petrol engines much nicer, although nowadays with DBW throttles dullening engine responses, the ubiquitous use of turbos on everything, and huge amounts of sound deadening, that gap between the two has narrowed, to the point where yes, perhaps I do agree with him 100% on this one.

I forget what 320ds are up to these days power wise but they are significantly lower power than I’ve had for well 20 years +.
I’ve driven a number of them and 420d whenever my previous BMWs we’re getting serviced.
What I found - noise of the engine is not nice what as an I6 diesel BMW does sound fairly good (for a diesel).
Economy didn’t impress either I was getting close to the 320mpg out of my 330d and then 535d so meh
Power is low sorry.

I’d have one and run one and wouldn’t complain as it’s a very good car it’s that I’d rather buy a year or two year older top of the range over a new 320d and the same applies if you say go older 320d go older much better car.

All fair points, and I guess this comes down to what you value in a car. The 320d certainly has a lot of the qualities that many car/driving enthusiasts value in a car: linear controls, manual gearbox, rear drive, balance, not too heavy, not too much grip. Then again it completely lacks other things that people look for: sound, looks, rarity etc. Bizarrely I actually went from a Z4 Coupé to my first 320d - of course I missed the sound, but found the handling actually better (far less understeer than the Z4C), there was less grip, giving a more natural feel, and the ride was more composed.

As a side point, I'm surprised the economy didn't impress. On a long trip not going over 70mph my 320d ED was comfortably above 70mpg. I'm struggling to think of a car that's better for economy. To combine that with 0-60 in around 8 seconds is freakishly good.

[TurboHatchback]

I have an early E90 (330i manual) and in many ways it is perfection, the handling is delightful, it offers enough refinement and space for four people to undertake most European trips whilst being quite compact by modern standards. The steering is lovely, the suspension (SE) is great and overall it's just a really nice car to drive.

I couldn't live with the nasty 20d engine though, IMO the place for rattly 4-cylinder diesels is in vans and pickups and that's it. I'm sure it's the rational choice but a BMW isn't a rational purchase, you have to want it and for me it's a straight 6 petrol or nothing. It's a huge part of why I enjoy the car so much.