Do you need anything more than a 320d?

[Ares]

Patrick Bateman said:

Wills2 said:

Are you sure? My F31 335d xdrive was around 1745kg (EU) IIRC I can't see the saloon being 245kg lighter even by the kerb weight standard -75kg .

Lowest I've seen for any variant is 1630kg.

Try google.
Or the BMW website
Or any review.

FWIW a 335d X-Drive will weigh a lot more than a 320d RWD (which is quoted at 1495 (with 75kg 'occupant' apparently)

[Ares]

TurboHatchback said:

Fastdruid said:

The only reason for a diesel is because you do lots of miles[1] in which case having it a better drive (or what end it's driven) is pointless, it's all about where you're sat and for the same money I would be rather sat in a top end Mondeo with a nice engine than a base 3-series with the bottom of the range engine.

If on the other you're comparing spec with spec or actually had an interesting drive and ignoring price then I'd take the 3-series (in petrol form).

[1] Or are RobM77 and have a very exacting set of requirements that are only met by a 320d.

Edited by Fastdruid on Thursday 2nd July 19:46

This pretty much covers it.

Only reason for buying a diesel = Massive mileage and limited funds



<.....waffle...... Yawn.....>

Wrong. HTH.

[cerb4.5lee]

Fastdruid said:

it's all about where you're sat and for the same money I would be rather sat in a top end Mondeo with a nice engine than a base 3-series with the bottom of the range engine.

You are the same as me and I have had three Mondeo`s and three 3 series and I would much sooner have a top end mondeo than a bottom end 3 series, I know I always get laughed at for saying it but for me the mondeo does exactly the same job as a 3 series anyway.

[Ares]

Fastdruid said:

Ares said:

Fastdruid said:

Ares said:

Fastdruid said:

The only reason for a diesel is because you do lots of miles[1]......

No it's not. Try again without blinkers on

Nope. Apart from RobM77 throttle requirements I can only think of a single reason why you'd get a diesel over a petrol that isn't related to doing lots of miles and that's tax related (and even then personally I'd take the tax hit to not drive a diesel).

If you 'like' diesels because of the torque you're really saying you like turbocharged engines. In which case turbocharged petrols are nicer (but of course worse on fuel which doesn't matter unless you're doing enough miles to make it worth it).
If you 'like' diesels because of the range it's because you're doing enough miles in one hit to make it worth it.
If you 'like' diesels because of the cost it's because you're doing enough miles to make it worth it (for low mileages the equivalent petrol will almost always be cheaper, of course there are exceptions).

There are no good reasons to own a diesel (apart from throttle lag for RobM77 and even then that's only a specific to the engines in BMW's he's interested in) over a petrol apart from because you're doing enough miles to make it worth it putting up with them.

The only exception is the person who gets a company car as a perk rather than a need and for who the badge is more important than how it drives and wants to limit the BIK costs.

Wrong again. Just because YOU can only think of a single reason doesn't mean it's right. It's called an Opinion.

Go on then. Enlighten me rather than just spout "You're wrong".

I chose a 640d over a 640i. Drove both. Preferred the diesel. It drives better, goes better, is smoother, quicker, suits the gearbox better...etc etc.

I do 8-10k per year. 16 months on, I still can't see a car that can do what it does, as well as it does let alone does it all whilst looking as good. The fact that Schnitzer have now made it even better just extends it's lead.

[Wills2]

Ares said:

Patrick Bateman said:

Wills2 said:

Are you sure? My F31 335d xdrive was around 1745kg (EU) IIRC I can't see the saloon being 245kg lighter even by the kerb weight standard -75kg .

Lowest I've seen for any variant is 1630kg.

Try google.
Or the BMW website
Or any review.

FWIW a 335d X-Drive will weigh a lot more than a 320d RWD (which is quoted at 1495 (with 75kg 'occupant' apparently)

So why did you state the 335d weighs 1500kg, as it doesn't (or anywhere near that for that matter)

[Wills2]

Ah! I think we have a fanboy on the thread....

[Tractor lad]

Ares said:

Bullst. In every regard. HTH.

Still makes your initial point utter nonsense.

The M division could release a three tonne diesel barge and you'd still rave about it. Blinkered.
But if that's your best response, ta daa. No interest in offensive goons like you.

[Patrick Bateman]

Wills2 said:

Ares said:

Patrick Bateman said:

Wills2 said:

Are you sure? My F31 335d xdrive was around 1745kg (EU) IIRC I can't see the saloon being 245kg lighter even by the kerb weight standard -75kg .

Lowest I've seen for any variant is 1630kg.

Try google.
Or the BMW website
Or any review.

FWIW a 335d X-Drive will weigh a lot more than a 320d RWD (which is quoted at 1495 (with 75kg 'occupant' apparently)

So why did you state the 335d weighs 1500kg, as it doesn't (or anywhere near that for that matter)

Indeed.

And I meant any variant of 335d.

[SidewaysSi]

Ares said:

Tractor lad said:

Ares said:

You need to try a new M3 or M4. I did alongside both M135 and M235, on track and road. Different league.

So it should be for double the price. More or less the same engine, terrible traction issues and saloon/faux coupe shape rules it out. I'd get a 911 if I raided the bank funds in a rather reckless way.

Bullst. In every regard. HTH.

Still makes your initial point utter nonsense.

I think the M3/M4 traction issues have been well documented so hardly bullst. The current car is not as good as what has gone before - I am not sure many people will argue against that.

And for £50k ish I would be looking at a 911 too.

[cerb4.5lee]

Ares said:

I do 8-10k per year.

and you still went diesel! we are doing around 40k a year and I still find myself wondering why we put up with a diesel engine, at 8-10k a year I wouldn't be going anywhere near a diesel engine but appreciate its each to their own.

Any day of the week I would personally prefer a 640i/650i over a 640d for sure.

[IAJO]

Recently sold an is220d. Lovely mint condition car, amazingly comfortable, fast enough for the commute and 38mpg tank average. I owned it 10 months before deciding life was too short, just never loved it.

I think many people seem to miss the fact that a majority of your driving is done in your daily driver, might as well try to enjoy it. Maybe its easier for me having a nice mountain A road commute as opposed to a motorway traffic jam grind.

If i went for a 3 series i'd think why not go for the petrol six? Surely only fuel costs?

[TurboHatchback]

I'm sure the 640d is a very good car but I can't see any reason other than cost for picking it over the 650i or M6 (maybe range but they're both perfectly good in that respect). Cost is a very valid reason for sure, the advantages are not worth the premium for most people but they are advantages nonetheless.

[Fastdruid]

Ares said:

I chose a 640d over a 640i. Drove both. Preferred the diesel. It drives better, goes better, is smoother, quicker, suits the gearbox better...etc etc.

Except it's not quicker. It *feels* quicker. Same 0-60 times (actually the 640i is on some sites claimed tiny touch quicker at 5.4s against 5.5s). Same top speed. Won't handle as well as the petrol (although the difference would be small it's still carrying a 55kg weight penalty round everywhere). No comment on smoother as I've not driven either.

To be honest though this is more about how BMW have matched their engines in the top end of their range. They have grouped them by power so the 640i has only a tiny touch more power than the 640d but the d has a massive amount more torque.

Down the bottom end and the i is quicker up to the x30i/d and has a massively wider spread of torque.

It always seems to come down to this though. I compare 2l petrols with 2l diesels and then someone comes along with "but diesel is better because my 60 grand remapped 3l twin turbo diesel is epic and much faster than a 2.0 NA petrol".

[Ares]

Wills2 said:

Ares said:

Patrick Bateman said:

Wills2 said:

Are you sure? My F31 335d xdrive was around 1745kg (EU) IIRC I can't see the saloon being 245kg lighter even by the kerb weight standard -75kg .

Lowest I've seen for any variant is 1630kg.

Try google.
Or the BMW website
Or any review.

FWIW a 335d X-Drive will weigh a lot more than a 320d RWD (which is quoted at 1495 (with 75kg 'occupant' apparently)

So why did you state the 335d weighs 1500kg, as it doesn't (or anywhere near that for that matter)

I didn't. I said the 320d did.

[Ares]

Tractor lad said:

Ares said:

Bullst. In every regard. HTH.

Still makes your initial point utter nonsense.

The M division could release a three tonne diesel barge and you'd still rave about it. Blinkered.
But if that's your best response, ta daa. No interest in offensive goons like you.

Intelligent response when found wanting. Well done.

Try again when you can read. TAGL.




edited to add.... This was your original comment.

Ares said:

Tractor lad said:

I think the M1/235i are the only really fun road cars BMW currently makes. The M3/4 are superb on track and ballistic but seem to struggle on real roads. The M5 is lovely but weighty as is the M6. The X M cars are just silly. The M2 could be a corker.

You need to try a new M3 or M4. I did alongside both M135 and M235, on track and road. Different league.

Tractor lad said:

Ares said:

You need to try a new M3 or M4. I did alongside both M135 and M235, on track and road. Different league.

So it should be for double the price. More or less the same engine, terrible traction issues and saloon/faux coupe shape rules it out. I'd get a 911 if I raided the bank funds in a rather reckless way.

Edited by Ares on Friday 3rd July 14:19

[Ares]

Fastdruid said:

Ares said:

I chose a 640d over a 640i. Drove both. Preferred the diesel. It drives better, goes better, is smoother, quicker, suits the gearbox better...etc etc.

Except it's not quicker. It *feels* quicker. Same 0-60 times (actually the 640i is on some sites claimed tiny touch quicker at 5.4s against 5.5s). Same top speed. Won't handle as well as the petrol (although the difference would be small it's still carrying a 55kg weight penalty round everywhere). No comment on smoother as I've not driven either.

To be honest though this is more about how BMW have matched their engines in the top end of their range. They have grouped them by power so the 640i has only a tiny touch more power than the 640d but the d has a massive amount more torque.

Down the bottom end and the i is quicker up to the x30i/d and has a massively wider spread of torque.

It always seems to come down to this though. I compare 2l petrols with 2l diesels and then someone comes along with "but diesel is better because my 60 grand remapped 3l twin turbo diesel is epic and much faster than a 2.0 NA petrol".

Yes, but I actually drove them rather than just looked at 0-60 times (which are a) irrelevant, and b) never going to favour a diesel)

The 640d is noticeably quicker than a 640i when you actually drive it.

[Ares]

SidewaysSi said:

Ares said:

Tractor lad said:

Ares said:

You need to try a new M3 or M4. I did alongside both M135 and M235, on track and road. Different league.

So it should be for double the price. More or less the same engine, terrible traction issues and saloon/faux coupe shape rules it out. I'd get a 911 if I raided the bank funds in a rather reckless way.

Bullst. In every regard. HTH.

Still makes your initial point utter nonsense.

I think the M3/M4 traction issues have been well documented so hardly bullst. The current car is not as good as what has gone before - I am not sure many people will argue against that.

And for £50k ish I would be looking at a 911 too.

Documented by who? I've driven both, on road and track, and made my own mind up. What did you think when you drove them?

I've yet to find someone who HAS driven them, that doesn't think the M4 is better than the I6 & V8 M3s, perhaps CSL excluded.


....and a 911 starts about £25k north of £50k. Unless you are being silly and comparing 3yr old cars with new???

[Patrick Bateman]

Ares said:

I didn't. I said the 320d did.

Ares said:

What car is more powerful than a 335d that is noticeably sportier/better to drive than the 1500kg 313bhp 335d?

.....and what car would you like to see a 313bhp oil burner in that would make a demonstrable difference?

[iSore]

Ares said:

You need to try a new M3 or M4. I did alongside both M135 and M235, on track and road. Different league.

Me too, whilst eating a Bic Mac (with fries) and sending a text. Honest.

[Tractor lad]

Ares; You've done a BMW experience day and that's it.

You drive a two tonne diesel barge.

You are hardly justifying your self titled "Lord of car knowledge" status. Why not cut down on patronising everyone else and go and polish your USS Nimitz?

Good spot Patrick!!

Edited by Tractor lad on Friday 3rd July 14:26