BMW 3 series - Petrol needed ?? which one??

[cerb4.5lee]

bodhi said:

cerb4.5lee said:

It's a lovely engine for sure, but it doesn't really deliver the numbers for me when compared to the newer blown power plants.

I used to be a N/A fan through and through, but I seem to be going with the times now rightly or wrongly.

Can't say I agree with that at all - I've currently got the previous shape 125i with the detuned 3 litre N52, and the numbers I'm seeing are remarkably similar to what Merv has quoted on the current model. Sit at 70 I can easily see 40 mpg, at 80 that probably drops to around 37 - only on roads like the Toll Road and the M40 does that drop down towards 30.

Now I haven't driven the equivalent 2 litre turbo, but I have spent some time driving my mother's 220i. For instance 1 weekend I went up to Cheshire Oaks and Carden Park in the 125i, and averaged about 36 for the journey - did a similar trip to Liverpool airport the next weekend in the 220i, and ended up doing 34. So similar MPG, less power, less flexibility, nowhere near as smooth or nice to drive. Don't get me wrong it was still a nice powerplant, just didn't really compare to what went before.

I was looking at a 328i next, but the 220i experience has convinced me to wait until I can stretch to a 335i.

Don't get me wrong the 6 pot will feel nicer to use and it's lovely and free revving too, and I am a fan of the engine.

When I compare my N52 330i to the current 4 pot turbo 330i though, the newer model is faster to 60 and has more torque than the 3 litre and offers around 10 mpg more too.

So to me it just makes the old N52 seem a little light on torque and thirsty for the performance it offers, a little outdated if you like.

[bodhi]

cerb4.5lee said:

Don't get me wrong the 6 pot will feel nicer to use and it's lovely and free revving too, and I am a fan of the engine.

When I compare my N52 330i to the current 4 pot turbo 330i though, the newer model is faster to 60 and has more torque than the 3 litre and offers around 10 mpg more too.

So to me it just makes the old N52 seem a little light on torque and thirsty for the performance it offers, a little outdated if you like.

I would suggest that the bulk of that 10mpg is taken up by the old fashioned autobox in the E90 - my manual 125i gets very similar figure in the real world to the current model, as discussed.

[cerb4.5lee]

bodhi said:

I would suggest that the bulk of that 10mpg is taken up by the old fashioned autobox in the E90 - my manual 125i gets very similar figure in the real world to the current model, as discussed.

Yes and that's a fair point, I would expect a 125i to be much better on fuel the the 330i though with it being a lighter/smaller car and running a little less bhp.

I just think the N52 is an old fashioned engine, and when a 2 litre 4 pot shows it up for performance/torque that only underlines it for me.

I've not tried the new engine though and I could drive it and think it's pants in all fairness.

[Swervin_Mervin]

Numbers aren't everything, thankfully. Well, they will be to some people of course. Our 125i with the ZF8 Sport Auto is as quick as our 330i with its sloppy ZF6, and will return marginally better economy - I consider it a close comparison given it's a lighter car but with less power. the 3 will return 34-35mpg at a steady 80 whereas the 1 will return 38-40 at those speeds, if not a little more.

But, whilst it's impressive what these modern 4pot turbos can achieve, they are simply not as nice an engine as some of those they replaced, once you take into account all those difficult to define aspects (noise, power delivery etc.). Someone could do a much better job than I of putting it all into words to be fair! That and the N52 is the last great N/A 6 that BM have produced.

[cerb4.5lee]

Swervin_Mervin said:

Numbers aren't everything, thankfully. Well, they will be to some people of course. Our 125i with the ZF8 Sport Auto is as quick as our 330i with its sloppy ZF6, and will return marginally better economy - I consider it a close comparison given it's a lighter car but with less power. the 3 will return 34-35mpg at a steady 80 whereas the 1 will return 38-40 at those speeds, if not a little more.

But, whilst it's impressive what these modern 4pot turbos can achieve, they are simply not as nice an engine as some of those they replaced, once you take into account all those difficult to define aspects (noise, power delivery etc.). Someone could do a much better job than I of putting it all into words to be fair! That and the N52 is the last great N/A 6 that BM have produced.

I think that's a really good sum up to be fair

My fear as well is that when I've had cars with a 4 pot turbo engine before they can be massively thirsty, my old S14a 200sx used to drink like a fish, and the Audi TTS got nowhere near its quoted mpg figure either.

Used to get 27mpg out of the TTS and that was on long runs, I get around 27mpg out of the 330i(shorter runs)although the TTS did 0 to 60 in 5.2 secs whereas the 330i is a bit of a slow coach at 6.6 secs!

So performance per mpg was much better in the TTS and I wonder if the new 330i delivers in that regard too.

Maybe I'm just too obsessed with figures lol.

[Maracus]

IceBoy said:

Hi All,

OP here, so what about the 320i ? Is this also a 2.0T......any view on this model, 184 hp I believe?

IceBoy

Also a 2.0T, but noticeably slower than than 328i. The MPG figures are pretty similar.

Similar scenario to the E46 6ers, the 320i, 325i and 330i all cost about the same to run, so the 330i would be the obvious choice - bar insurance costs.

[gizlaroc]

I have the 3.0 NA in the 130i, it's a manual, as good as the 328i 8 speed auto was, the 130i manual still feels better imho, the instant response from the NA six is hard to beat.

I also have the 3.0 NA in the X3 with the 6 speed auto, now that feels positively archaic compared to the 328i.

So I guess it really does depend what you are coming from?

[Mr Tidy]

cerb4.5lee said:

Don't get me wrong the 6 pot will feel nicer to use and it's lovely and free revving too, and I am a fan of the engine.

When I compare my N52 330i to the current 4 pot turbo 330i though, the newer model is faster to 60 and has more torque than the 3 litre and offers around 10 mpg more too.

So to me it just makes the old N52 seem a little light on torque and thirsty for the performance it offers, a little outdated if you like.

Maybe, but it's still got 2 cylinders missing! And does it really give another 10 mpg when driven with a bit of gusto?

Pootling maybe, but going for it probably not!

Torque is for tractors (having had a 123d before a Z4Coupe I must say torque is effective, but so boring)!