Do you need anything more than a 320d?
Discussion
Ares said:
ORD said:
The 3 series is fundamentally an excellent saloon car. Nobody should sensibly be disputing that, but the suggestion that an excellent saloon with a horrible engine is all anyone 'needs' is just nonsense.
To say the 320d engine is 'horrible' is even more nonsense. Like or loathe oil burning lumps, the 320d engine is one of the better diesel engines out there. 190bhp, hot hatch 0-60 & 40-70 times and real world 60+ mpg makes it quite an engineering feat if nothing else. Horrible engines are the asthmatic 2.0 and under lumps fitted to most saloon cars, and the even worse iron-age lumps fitted to the plethora of cheap-o cars on the roads.We can all cite the wonderful 6/8/10/12 cylinder engines in £50k+ cars, but in the sub-£30k bracket, with high levels of spec, there aren't many better lumps like-for-like (unless ANY petrol engine is deemed better than ANY diesel of course....
)It strikes me that those that currently have a 320d seem to be vehemently in favour whereas in the main those who have not but have driven one/owned one are not.
You could equally argue the same points for many other cars as you can a 320d with some being better in some area and some better in others.
If you have a 320d and like it then good for you.
I'll stick to something else as they don't float my boat at all.
lostkiwi said:
Ares said:
ORD said:
The 3 series is fundamentally an excellent saloon car. Nobody should sensibly be disputing that, but the suggestion that an excellent saloon with a horrible engine is all anyone 'needs' is just nonsense.
To say the 320d engine is 'horrible' is even more nonsense. Like or loathe oil burning lumps, the 320d engine is one of the better diesel engines out there. 190bhp, hot hatch 0-60 & 40-70 times and real world 60+ mpg makes it quite an engineering feat if nothing else. Horrible engines are the asthmatic 2.0 and under lumps fitted to most saloon cars, and the even worse iron-age lumps fitted to the plethora of cheap-o cars on the roads.We can all cite the wonderful 6/8/10/12 cylinder engines in £50k+ cars, but in the sub-£30k bracket, with high levels of spec, there aren't many better lumps like-for-like (unless ANY petrol engine is deemed better than ANY diesel of course....
)It strikes me that those that currently have a 320d seem to be vehemently in favour whereas in the main those who have not but have driven one/owned one are not.
You could equally argue the same points for many other cars as you can a 320d with some being better in some area and some better in others.
If you have a 320d and like it then good for you.
I'll stick to something else as they don't float my boat at all.
lostkiwi said:
Ares said:
ORD said:
The 3 series is fundamentally an excellent saloon car. Nobody should sensibly be disputing that, but the suggestion that an excellent saloon with a horrible engine is all anyone 'needs' is just nonsense.
To say the 320d engine is 'horrible' is even more nonsense. Like or loathe oil burning lumps, the 320d engine is one of the better diesel engines out there. 190bhp, hot hatch 0-60 & 40-70 times and real world 60+ mpg makes it quite an engineering feat if nothing else. Horrible engines are the asthmatic 2.0 and under lumps fitted to most saloon cars, and the even worse iron-age lumps fitted to the plethora of cheap-o cars on the roads.We can all cite the wonderful 6/8/10/12 cylinder engines in £50k+ cars, but in the sub-£30k bracket, with high levels of spec, there aren't many better lumps like-for-like (unless ANY petrol engine is deemed better than ANY diesel of course....
)It strikes me that those that currently have a 320d seem to be vehemently in favour whereas in the main those who have not but have driven one/owned one are not.
You could equally argue the same points for many other cars as you can a 320d with some being better in some area and some better in others.
If you have a 320d and like it then good for you.
I'll stick to something else as they don't float my boat at all.
I suspect it is far worse, Often those who decry have often no actual experience of the car they decry, or drove one 12 years ago.
I totally get why people don't see the 320d as being an aspirational car. I don't. But I likewise don't think it is dreadful, or indeed any part of it is dreadful. I've driven plenty, and for 90% of my driving would do me more than adequately.
A lot of diesel haters hate through ignorance. They just see diesels as clattery and slow. I've taken a few out in mine, and left a few others standing in their 911s and similar. Education is a wonderful and smile inducing thing
9mm said:
They are a junior and middle management car, just as an E30 320i was back in the day. They were probably all you needed on real world back in the day as well. I will concede that if you are limited by any of budget, company car choice and economy matters, they make a good buy. If you aren't, you won't be interested. As for 'racers drive them', just wow.
Not true. My father, my father in law and at least two friends I can cite own/drive them. None of them have any of the constraints you mention and to them, a 320d (all M-Sports) are a car they chose above all others that floated their boat. FWIW - One of the friends also races single seaters.Ares said:
It took me less than 10 secs to forget all about forced induction when driving them, road and track. They really have done a good job with the car. It feels like a big capacity V8 with so much low-down grunt but still plenty of top end power - makes the car the opposite of a old CSL which I found very peaky and a lot harder work to drive. On road the DSC kills drive pulling out of junctions, such is the amount of low down grunt,...on track its beautifully tail happy as you do the same thing with DSC turned off. The tighter corners of Hislops and Lodge were comfortable in 3rd (usually second) and didn't gain sufficient traction until Knickerbrook and Deer Leap until the power could be contained - granted, we were on road tyres so grip wasn't awesome, but still a demonstration of the lower down power.
The rest of the car is beautiful. Planted, balance, lithe and communicative in the way an almost 1500kg car shouldn't be. That said, the convertible was noticeably worse.
Given the choice of an E46, E91 or new M4 road or track, I wouldn't have the slightest hesitation in going for the new boy. Stunning.
Assuming the cars haven't been swapped out or rotated, the M4 Vert isn't as good dynamically but the carbon ceramic brakes held up notably better than the steels on the coupe.The rest of the car is beautiful. Planted, balance, lithe and communicative in the way an almost 1500kg car shouldn't be. That said, the convertible was noticeably worse.
Given the choice of an E46, E91 or new M4 road or track, I wouldn't have the slightest hesitation in going for the new boy. Stunning.
Take it this was the BMW & MSV full day collaboration you were on at Oulton? I was instructing at the Knockhill one and I'd echo your sentiments, the new M4 is a really rather stunning piece of kit.
A 320d...an essential mode of daily transport for weekend circuit racers! 
for me the engine is poor and I experienced it in a 520d and to me it just sucked, also have a diesel engine in a 640d and the engine still sucks in that.(noisy/vibrates on start up)
A diesel will always be a tool to cover a large mileage with good economy thrown in and a good range and there surely isn't anyone that actually thinks they are a great engine unless they haven't experienced anything else.
for me the engine is poor and I experienced it in a 520d and to me it just sucked, also have a diesel engine in a 640d and the engine still sucks in that.(noisy/vibrates on start up)A diesel will always be a tool to cover a large mileage with good economy thrown in and a good range and there surely isn't anyone that actually thinks they are a great engine unless they haven't experienced anything else.
emicen said:
Ares said:
It took me less than 10 secs to forget all about forced induction when driving them, road and track. They really have done a good job with the car. It feels like a big capacity V8 with so much low-down grunt but still plenty of top end power - makes the car the opposite of a old CSL which I found very peaky and a lot harder work to drive. On road the DSC kills drive pulling out of junctions, such is the amount of low down grunt,...on track its beautifully tail happy as you do the same thing with DSC turned off. The tighter corners of Hislops and Lodge were comfortable in 3rd (usually second) and didn't gain sufficient traction until Knickerbrook and Deer Leap until the power could be contained - granted, we were on road tyres so grip wasn't awesome, but still a demonstration of the lower down power.
The rest of the car is beautiful. Planted, balance, lithe and communicative in the way an almost 1500kg car shouldn't be. That said, the convertible was noticeably worse.
Given the choice of an E46, E91 or new M4 road or track, I wouldn't have the slightest hesitation in going for the new boy. Stunning.
Assuming the cars haven't been swapped out or rotated, the M4 Vert isn't as good dynamically but the carbon ceramic brakes held up notably better than the steels on the coupe.The rest of the car is beautiful. Planted, balance, lithe and communicative in the way an almost 1500kg car shouldn't be. That said, the convertible was noticeably worse.
Given the choice of an E46, E91 or new M4 road or track, I wouldn't have the slightest hesitation in going for the new boy. Stunning.
Take it this was the BMW & MSV full day collaboration you were on at Oulton? I was instructing at the Knockhill one and I'd echo your sentiments, the new M4 is a really rather stunning piece of kit.
The guys were saying the Knockhill one the week before was similarly good.
Ares said:
"It strikes me that those that currently have a 320d seem to be vehemently in favour whereas in the main those who have not but have driven one/owned one are not"
I suspect it is far worse, Often those who decry have often no actual experience of the car they decry, or drove one 12 years ago.
I totally get why people don't see the 320d as being an aspirational car. I don't. But I likewise don't think it is dreadful, or indeed any part of it is dreadful. I've driven plenty, and for 90% of my driving would do me more than adequately.
A lot of diesel haters hate through ignorance. They just see diesels as clattery and slow. I've taken a few out in mine, and left a few others standing in their 911s and similar. Education is a wonderful and smile inducing thing
There is no question the torque of a diesel is pretty impressive but then so is a good petrol turbo. Saab for example have always been very strong on overtaking due to the massive torque they generate in the mid range. I suspect it is far worse, Often those who decry have often no actual experience of the car they decry, or drove one 12 years ago.
I totally get why people don't see the 320d as being an aspirational car. I don't. But I likewise don't think it is dreadful, or indeed any part of it is dreadful. I've driven plenty, and for 90% of my driving would do me more than adequately.
A lot of diesel haters hate through ignorance. They just see diesels as clattery and slow. I've taken a few out in mine, and left a few others standing in their 911s and similar. Education is a wonderful and smile inducing thing
For 90% of my driving almost any car would be as much as I need. Lets face it for most people 90% of their driving is the daily commute stuck in traffic where even a Hyundai i30 (or a Ford Focus or a Kia Ceed - other similar cars are available) would suffice. It could equally be argued that with the improved versatility of a hatch over a sedan but without the bulk of an estate that you need nothing more than one of the aforementioned... (contentious but you get the idea). Do we even 'need' something 'aspirational' like a BMW (not forgetting that different folk aspire to different things and a 3 series doesn't feature on my aspirations list at all - not because its 'below' me but because they just do nothing for me).
To a certain extent a car that's aspirational isn't 'needed' at all as in order for it to be aspirational there is a certain excess about it in some way (image? price? perceived exclusivity? perceived quality?) that turns 'need ' to 'want'. To choose a car in a similar market segment , the Mondeo TDCi can do all the 320d does for less money but is not aspirational so could fit the 'need' better by being cheaper.
cerb4.5lee said:
A 320d...an essential mode of daily transport for weekend circuit racers! for me the engine is poor and I experienced it in a 520d and to me it just sucked, also have a diesel engine in a 640d and the engine still sucks in that.(noisy/vibrates on start up)
A diesel will always be a tool to cover a large mileage with good economy thrown in and a good range and there surely isn't anyone that actually thinks they are a great engine unless they haven't experienced anything else.
Can't help thinking you got a Friday afternoon 640. I'll grant you that for the first 4-5 seconds mine is a little noisy (although still quiter than Mrs Ares's MINI on start up), but once running it's no noisier that the 330i I ran 3 cars ago? And doesn't vibrate any more? I've still turned it off plenty of times not realising it was running. for me the engine is poor and I experienced it in a 520d and to me it just sucked, also have a diesel engine in a 640d and the engine still sucks in that.(noisy/vibrates on start up)A diesel will always be a tool to cover a large mileage with good economy thrown in and a good range and there surely isn't anyone that actually thinks they are a great engine unless they haven't experienced anything else.
The AC Schnitzer tweaks have helped the case with that further.... suggest you treat yourself,..purely in the name of noise abatement
cerb4.5lee said:
A 320d...an essential mode of daily transport for weekend circuit racers! for me the engine is poor and I experienced it in a 520d and to me it just sucked, also have a diesel engine in a 640d and the engine still sucks in that.(noisy/vibrates on start up)
A diesel will always be a tool to cover a large mileage with good economy thrown in and a good range and there surely isn't anyone that actually thinks they are a great engine unless they haven't experienced anything else.
Audi 4.2 TDI as found in the A8, now thats a good diesel motor for me the engine is poor and I experienced it in a 520d and to me it just sucked, also have a diesel engine in a 640d and the engine still sucks in that.(noisy/vibrates on start up)A diesel will always be a tool to cover a large mileage with good economy thrown in and a good range and there surely isn't anyone that actually thinks they are a great engine unless they haven't experienced anything else.
Ares said:
Can't help thinking you got a Friday afternoon 640. I'll grant you that for the first 4-5 seconds mine is a little noisy (although still quiter than Mrs Ares's MINI on start up), but once running it's no noisier that the 330i I ran 3 cars ago? And doesn't vibrate any more? I've still turned it off plenty of times not realising it was running.
The AC Schnitzer tweaks have helped the case with that further.... suggest you treat yourself,..purely in the name of noise abatement
I know you liked the 330i you had and I like mine too, I just don't like diesels and that wont change anytime soon but appreciate with the tweaks you have done will have made a nice difference to your 640, we have only ever gone diesel when covering high miles and for that job it is good. The AC Schnitzer tweaks have helped the case with that further.... suggest you treat yourself,..purely in the name of noise abatement
Ares said:
9mm said:
They are a junior and middle management car, just as an E30 320i was back in the day. They were probably all you needed on real world back in the day as well. I will concede that if you are limited by any of budget, company car choice and economy matters, they make a good buy. If you aren't, you won't be interested. As for 'racers drive them', just wow.
Not true. My father, my father in law and at least two friends I can cite own/drive them. None of them have any of the constraints you mention and to them, a 320d (all M-Sports) are a car they chose above all others that floated their boat. FWIW - One of the friends also races single seaters.
Same here. My Dad's on his third 320d and a number of my friends also own them, several of whom race single seaters (as do I). As I've said before, I/we like rear drive and a manual gearbox and I/we can't tolerate a latency between throttle input and output. That means we are effectively backed into a 320d shaped corner, because not many cars fit that criteria. Some others drive Mercs as obviously they offer a similar thing, and those with lower budgets or doing less miles tend to prefer the older cable throttled E36 BMWs (of which I've had two).With regard to the '20d rather than the '30d, I used to crave faster road cars, but that was back when I was racing cars that overlapped with road car performance; as soon as you start driving quicker racing cars like Radicals or other slicks and wings cars, most people either lose interest in road cars entirely or tend to forget about the engine power and cornering grip and just want something like the 320d that handles nicely. Yes, it's got a lighter engine than the 330d, but in the main I'm just not really bothered about having the extra performance because it doesn't make any difference on the sweeping roads and motorways I tend drive on. Given that I also have a road car with 370bhp/tonne, surely I'm in a good position to state that?!
Palmers said:
cerb4.5lee said:
A 320d...an essential mode of daily transport for weekend circuit racers! for me the engine is poor and I experienced it in a 520d and to me it just sucked, also have a diesel engine in a 640d and the engine still sucks in that.(noisy/vibrates on start up)
A diesel will always be a tool to cover a large mileage with good economy thrown in and a good range and there surely isn't anyone that actually thinks they are a great engine unless they haven't experienced anything else.
Audi 4.2 TDI as found in the A8, now thats a good diesel motor for me the engine is poor and I experienced it in a 520d and to me it just sucked, also have a diesel engine in a 640d and the engine still sucks in that.(noisy/vibrates on start up)A diesel will always be a tool to cover a large mileage with good economy thrown in and a good range and there surely isn't anyone that actually thinks they are a great engine unless they haven't experienced anything else.
cerb4.5lee said:
One or two people on here have said that the V8 diesels are good power plants, I haven't tried one so I presume its just noisy, unrefined and not much fun to sit behind like all diesels! hope I get to try one in the future as it could change my opinion of an oil burner.
I'm really confused by these constant criticisms of noise. At 60mph on an A or B road or 80mph on a motorway (abroad obviously ), you just can't hear it in the 3 series. All that I hear in mine is a rushing noise from the wind and the hum of the tyres on the tarmac. I've even compared with my friend's S Class (petrol V12) and the NVH is surprisingly similar. I've actually driven the entire E9x 3 series range and it's a very subtle audible difference between petrol and diesel at those speeds, unless you decide to floor it through the gears, but even then they're all so refined there's not really much difference to be honest. Do you crawl round a town centre with the windows open all the time or something?! 
cerb4.5lee said:
One or two people on here have said that the V8 diesels are good power plants, I haven't tried one so I presume its just noisy, unrefined and not much fun to sit behind like all diesels! hope I get to try one in the future as it could change my opinion of an oil burner.
I have only tried the earliest 4.2 tdi that came in the D3 A8. (326bhp + 480 ft/lb) There are more powerful available in the D4. (345bhp / 590 ft/lb + 380bhp / 630 ft/lb) The latter coming with an 8 speed box.I really need to try the later ones and also a mapped one as they are animals apparently.
I didnt find mine noisey, you could barely hear the engine running. I liked the low end grunt to be honest, could just hold it in 6th and pull from 30.
The problem with the quick diesels is that they weigh a huge amount and are only found in enormous floaty barges or SUVs that weigh over two tonnes; the V10 TDI for example weighed 200 kgs more than the petrol V8 in the Touraeg and Phaeton.
About the only interesting cars (to steer as well as just blast off) are the smallish saloons/estates with 6 pot diesels; the C350CDI, the A4 3.0TDI (not sure if they do thecBiTDI in the A4?) and the 335d which has now got too big and too comfy in F30 form.
So yes, the massive diesels will cause distortions of physics but show one an S bend and they'll weep.
My gripe isn't the way they drive (IMO the best are actually nice power units), the noise (they six pots all sound meaty as do the eights), it's the emissions crap they now all have that have utterly killed any "savings" in fuel with the reliability of a 70s Lancia. The diesel has had its day. It's petrols, petrol hybrids and full electric now.
About the only interesting cars (to steer as well as just blast off) are the smallish saloons/estates with 6 pot diesels; the C350CDI, the A4 3.0TDI (not sure if they do thecBiTDI in the A4?) and the 335d which has now got too big and too comfy in F30 form.
So yes, the massive diesels will cause distortions of physics but show one an S bend and they'll weep.
My gripe isn't the way they drive (IMO the best are actually nice power units), the noise (they six pots all sound meaty as do the eights), it's the emissions crap they now all have that have utterly killed any "savings" in fuel with the reliability of a 70s Lancia. The diesel has had its day. It's petrols, petrol hybrids and full electric now.
lostkiwi said:
To choose a car in a similar market segment , the Mondeo TDCi can do all the 320d does for less money but is not aspirational so could fit the 'need' better by being cheaper.
Come on, that's just silly.Firstly, neither car is aspirational in the developed world, they're four door saloons. Kids do not have posters of Audi A4s and BMW saloons on their bedroom wall.
Secondly, a Mondeo has a transverse engine mounted over the front wheels along with its gearbox and diff; whereas the 3 series has a longitudinal engine mounted further back, gearbox between the front occupants and the diff at the back. Obviously the BMW is also rear drive and the Mondeo is front drive. Lastly, the Mondeo is a classic narrow power band diesel, whereas the BMW is way more revvy - they delayed entering the diesel market for so long because they wanted sufficient flexibility to string corners together without constantly changing gear. They really are as different as two cars can be!
I could just about see what you mean if you're talking about what the average person wants in a car, but we're not, we're talking about what people who love driving like CH want. If I'm advising someone uninterested in driving I would never recommend a BMW; you can get much better value, more reliability and more interior space elsewhere (Honda, Toyota etc).
Regarding the price, there really isn't much difference in the list price. The last time I looked there was a couple of grand in it at most.
Let's put it to a side that a 320d is a complete pile of turd, I've always found that the type of people who say xxx is too much power for the road and I'd be happy with a 2.0D everyday are the type who've never owned a relatively fast car.
For some reason the people above think that you have to go flat out, pedal to the metal when you head out. Either that or they are poor.
For some reason the people above think that you have to go flat out, pedal to the metal when you head out. Either that or they are poor.
Edited by Sump on Thursday 2nd July 15:16
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff