Do you need anything more than a 320d?

[Welshbeef]

Ares said:

cerb4.5lee said:

I'm another weirdo that would rather drive my FWD manual petrol Cooper S over an auto 320d. I will enjoy driving the Mini...but I don't see much enjoyment to be had from an auto 320d though.

But you would take ANY manual FWD over ANY Auto RWD car?

Cerb4.5lee clearly had (or still has) one of the top Poster cars that was on my Uni bedroom in that purple colour 4.2 phase1 headlights. What a car a grisly epic epic car. I’ve been fortunate to have a rather spirited passenger ride (on the public highway ahem) the noise the fact you are so crazy low the interior the lol as the wiper blades appeared to not be touching the windscreen above a certain speed. What a car epic.

Given he had the daddy 4.5 possibly stroked and possibly red rose he knows all that there is to know about owning a drivers car.

For me auto in a do all car be it C63 or S Max (ours is stick shift annoyingly) makes those mundane drives seem less.

[cerb4.5lee]

RobM77 said:

Cooper S vs GT86 is a more realistic comparison,

That is a very interesting comparison. My favourite combination is a manual/RWD and a LSD, and I'm struggling to make my mind up if I'd ultimately prefer an auto GT86(over a manual Cooper S) even though I'd love the RWD/LSD bit.

I do get frustrated that the Cooper S doesn't have a LSD though, but an auto gearbox in a GT86 with it having such a small amount of torque sounds like a very frustrating recipe to me. So I reckon that I'd still give the nod to the Mini for its extra torque and put up with the lack of traction/torque steer.

[Fastdruid]

RobM77 said:

Ares said:

cerb4.5lee said:

I'm another weirdo that would rather drive my FWD manual petrol Cooper S over an auto 320d. I will enjoy driving the Mini...but I don't see much enjoyment to be had from an auto 320d though.

But you would take ANY manual FWD over ANY Auto RWD car?

Well, quite... Implicit in the statement that someone prefers manuals to autos is (or should be) that the rest of the car is comparable. The same goes for any preference. If someone prefers Indian food to English food, that doesn't usually mean they'd rather have a mouldy nan bread than a meal at the Fat Duck. I have a strong preference for rear drive and manual gearboxes, but I'd also rather drive a Cooper S than an auto 320d SE. Cooper S vs GT86 is a more realistic comparison, or auto 320d SE to a Mondeo or Mazda 6.

Having driven all three (albeit only an e90 318d) and a multitude of automatics I'd have the =<Mk4 Mondeo or Mazda 6 over an automatic 320d. Both Mazda and Ford are known for good handling cars.

Lets not forget that certainly up to the Mk3/E90 the Mondeo is an objectively better handling car than the 3-series anyway (arguably subjectively worse 'because RWD').

Admittedly neither Ford or Mazda now make any decent Mondeos/6's so it's a moot point. The Mk5 Mondeo is a wobbly bus and the only decent petrol is powerst auto only. The Mazda 6 is a better steer but slow. No decent engines outside the US (and those are auto-only).

Not to mention that also both the 6 and the Mondeo are huge and far bigger than the 3-series, both far closer in size to the 5-series. So in reality I'd personally probably go for something like a Focus ST Estate over an auto 320d.

[cerb4.5lee]

Welshbeef said:

Cerb4.5lee clearly had (or still has) one of the top Poster cars that was on my Uni bedroom in that purple colour 4.2 phase1 headlights. What a car a grisly epic epic car. I’ve been fortunate to have a rather spirited passenger ride (on the public highway ahem) the noise the fact you are so crazy low the interior the lol as the wiper blades appeared to not be touching the windscreen above a certain speed. What a car epic.

Given he had the daddy 4.5 possibly stroked and possibly red rose he knows all that there is to know about owning a drivers car.

For me auto in a do all car be it C63 or S Max (ours is stick shift annoyingly) makes those mundane drives seem less.

That's very nice of you to say Welshbeef!

I'd imagine your C63 to be awesome to drive as well.

[bodhi]

Fastdruid said:

RobM77 said:

Ares said:

cerb4.5lee said:

I'm another weirdo that would rather drive my FWD manual petrol Cooper S over an auto 320d. I will enjoy driving the Mini...but I don't see much enjoyment to be had from an auto 320d though.

But you would take ANY manual FWD over ANY Auto RWD car?

Well, quite... Implicit in the statement that someone prefers manuals to autos is (or should be) that the rest of the car is comparable. The same goes for any preference. If someone prefers Indian food to English food, that doesn't usually mean they'd rather have a mouldy nan bread than a meal at the Fat Duck. I have a strong preference for rear drive and manual gearboxes, but I'd also rather drive a Cooper S than an auto 320d SE. Cooper S vs GT86 is a more realistic comparison, or auto 320d SE to a Mondeo or Mazda 6.

Having driven all three (albeit only an e90 318d) and a multitude of automatics I'd have the =<Mk4 Mondeo or Mazda 6 over an automatic 320d. Both Mazda and Ford are known for good handling cars.

Lets not forget that certainly up to the Mk3/E90 the Mondeo is an objectively better handling car than the 3-series anyway (arguably subjectively worse 'because RWD').

Admittedly neither Ford or Mazda now make any decent Mondeos/6's so it's a moot point. The Mk5 Mondeo is a wobbly bus and the only decent petrol is powerst auto only. The Mazda 6 is a better steer but slow. No decent engines outside the US (and those are auto-only).

Not to mention that also both the 6 and the Mondeo are huge and far bigger than the 3-series, both far closer in size to the 5-series. So in reality I'd personally probably go for something like a Focus ST Estate over an auto 320d.

Is the 6 available with the Skyactiv-X engine yet? If so that brings yet another interesting variable into the mix - N/A 4 vs Diesel. OK you'll have to work the N/A harder, but I can confirm that even in a daily driver that is a lot of fun

[Fastdruid]

bodhi said:

Is the 6 available with the Skyactiv-X engine yet? If so that brings yet another interesting variable into the mix - N/A 4 vs Diesel. OK you'll have to work the N/A harder, but I can confirm that even in a daily driver that is a lot of fun

No. 3 or CX-30. I'm very much a fan of how the modern Mazda's look, however having owned one or two previously not a fan of their rust protection, parts prices or long term reliability for new technology!

The reviewers also seem a little disappointed with it https://www.carmagazine.co.uk/car-reviews/mazda/3-... but saying that I take most of what they say with a massive pinch of salt and would want to try it myself...well if it was quicker I would, as it stands. No. Too slow.

[ORD]

2.0 engine with 120bhp! Shambolic from Mazda.

[Kawasicki]

Fastdruid said:

Lets not forget that certainly up to the Mk3/E90 the Mondeo is an objectively better handling car than the 3-series anyway (arguably subjectively worse 'because RWD').

Admittedly neither Ford or Mazda now make any decent Mondeos/6's so it's a moot point. The Mk5 Mondeo is a wobbly bus

Objectively better handling? Handling is a subjective matter, in my opinion.

[ORD]

Kawasicki said:

Objectively better handling? Handling is a subjective matter, in my opinion.

Partly. Aren't there some things we all agree are objectively good or bad? Nobody likes steady state understeer (if that is the right terminology). Nobody likes instability under braking. Nobody dislikes at least some ability to steer on the throttle.

[RobM77]

ORD said:

Kawasicki said:

Objectively better handling? Handling is a subjective matter, in my opinion.

Partly. Aren't there some things we all agree are objectively good or bad? Nobody likes steady state understeer (if that is the right terminology). Nobody likes instability under braking. Nobody dislikes at least some ability to steer on the throttle.

All cars have steady state understeer don’t they?

ETA: I realise you’re not sure on terminology, but can you describe what you mean? Steady state means when a car in a corner is neither accelerating nor decelerating.

Edited by RobM77 on Thursday 18th June 17:54

[Welshbeef]

RobM77 said:

All cars have steady state understeer don’t they?

ETA: I realise you’re not sure on terminology, but can you describe what you mean? Steady state means when a car in a corner is neither accelerating nor decelerating.

Aggressive steering angle change whilst maintaining cornering speed (if high enough) will destabilise the dynamics of the car and lead to loss of traction of the rear

Edited by RobM77 on Thursday 18th June 17:54

[Fastdruid]

Kawasicki said:

Objectively better handling? Handling is a subjective matter, in my opinion.

Well...As an example a Mk3 Mondeo will go round a track quicker than a more powerful E46 318i...

https://www.facebook.com/CHandMTopGearVideos/video... about 45min in or 53min if you want to skip to the laps.

Objectively the Mondeo is quicker so _its_ handling is better.
Subjectively people prefer the way the RWD 3-series feels even if it doesn't go round corners as well so _its_ handling is better.

Of course equally valid is that people prefer the BMW badge so its handling must be better.

[thiscocks]

ORD said:

2.0 engine with 120bhp! Shambolic from Mazda.

Skyactive-X is 180hp. Very clever engine.

[Fastdruid]

thiscocks said:

ORD said:

2.0 engine with 120bhp! Shambolic from Mazda.

Skyactive-X is 180hp. Very clever engine.

The boggo 2.0i is only 120hp though. Which is less than you'd get out of a 2.0i 30 years ago.

[Kawasicki]

Fastdruid said:

Kawasicki said:

Objectively better handling? Handling is a subjective matter, in my opinion.

Well...As an example a Mk3 Mondeo will go round a track quicker than a more powerful E46 318i...

https://www.facebook.com/CHandMTopGearVideos/video... about 45min in or 53min if you want to skip to the laps.

Objectively the Mondeo is quicker so _its_ handling is better.
Subjectively people prefer the way the RWD 3-series feels even if it doesn't go round corners as well so _its_ handling is better.

Of course equally valid is that people prefer the BMW badge so its handling must be better.

Unless the Mondeo had more grip than the BMW, which isn’t the same as handling, is it?

[RobM77]

Welshbeef said:

RobM77 said:

All cars have steady state understeer don’t they?

ETA: I realise you’re not sure on terminology, but can you describe what you mean? Steady state means when a car in a corner is neither accelerating nor decelerating.

Aggressive steering angle change whilst maintaining cornering speed (if high enough) will destabilise the dynamics of the car and lead to loss of traction of the rear

Why would you do that? Suddenly wrenching the steering into the corner at high speed?!

[Welshbeef]

Fastdruid said:

thiscocks said:

ORD said:

2.0 engine with 120bhp! Shambolic from Mazda.

Skyactive-X is 180hp. Very clever engine.

The boggo 2.0i is only 120hp though. Which is less than you'd get out of a 2.0i 30 years ago.

Red Top Cavalier 2.0 Sri 16v was 150-155bhp.

Renault Clio Sport mk1 172bhp Mk2 182bhp
Civic type r 197bhp

[RobM77]

Fastdruid said:

Kawasicki said:

Objectively better handling? Handling is a subjective matter, in my opinion.

Well...As an example a Mk3 Mondeo will go round a track quicker than a more powerful E46 318i...

https://www.facebook.com/CHandMTopGearVideos/video... about 45min in or 53min if you want to skip to the laps.

Objectively the Mondeo is quicker so _its_ handling is better.
Subjectively people prefer the way the RWD 3-series feels even if it doesn't go round corners as well so _its_ handling is better.

Of course equally valid is that people prefer the BMW badge so its handling must be better.

If car A is faster than car B and car A has less power, it can be for any number of reasons:

• Higher cornering grip levels.
• Better traction out of low speed corners.
• Gearing better suited to the track.
• Less weight (a=F/m, so weight means as much as power).
• Better brakes.

It can be because it handles better, and allows the driver to optimise each corner better, but it's not as primary a reason as the above five things.

As an example: MX5s handle well but are slow. Plenty of hot hatches are faster, but don't handle anywhere near as well.

[cerb4.5lee]

Welshbeef said:

Fastdruid said:

thiscocks said:

ORD said:

2.0 engine with 120bhp! Shambolic from Mazda.

Skyactive-X is 180hp. Very clever engine.

The boggo 2.0i is only 120hp though. Which is less than you'd get out of a 2.0i 30 years ago.

Red Top Cavalier 2.0 Sri 16v was 150-155bhp.

Renault Clio Sport mk1 172bhp Mk2 182bhp
Civic type r 197bhp

I had a 1992 RS 2000 and that was also 150bhp. I remember loving the Recaro seats in that too.

[ORD]

RobM77 said:

All cars have steady state understeer don’t they?

ETA: I realise you’re not sure on terminology, but can you describe what you mean? Steady state means when a car in a corner is neither accelerating nor decelerating.

Edited by RobM77 on Thursday 18th June 17:54

I probably should have said dramatic steady state understeer. I am thinking of cars that push wide, as opposed to the ever-present “safety understeer”.