Do you need anything more than a 320d?

[ORD]

Not fair to Rob in the slightest. He is a long way from being a fanboy, and he always articulates his thinking very clearly. I think he's slightly mad, but that's a different matter - his views on cars are genuine, considered and worthy of a listen.

Anyway, more importantly, the 320d engine is truly awful (because it's a 4 cylinder diesel, albeit an excellent one), but it can still be fairly good fun to drive a 320d. Less than a 320i or a 330i etc etc, but still (to me) a long way ahead of a FWD saloon. The 3 series is still very noticeably neutral compared to most decent cars, and it is quite a lot of fun to drive in that FE/RWD way that you either love or don't.

[whoami]

ORD said:

Not fair to Rob in the slightest. He is a long way from being a fanboy,

[Tractor lad]

Four cylinder diesels are all horrific; I've had three, all were rubbish but in fairly "decent" vehicles.
Never again.

[T0MMY]

I haven't read all 14 pages so maybe this has been said already but to 90% of modern car buyers that just want something that looks expensive, is comfortable on the motorway and feels fast compared to the 10 year old Tdi they had before they started leasing then I'd agree, a 320d does it all and I'd happily have one as a company car.

If your requirements extend to driving enjoyment then clearly you do need something more. Was it being suggested they could tick that box too!?

[anonymous-user]

Tractor lad said:

St John Smythe said:

Reminds me a bit of that dxb335 chap few years back

Who now has a 997 GT3...

Nice, but zero relevance to this thread.

[whoami]

Tractor lad said:

St John Smythe said:

Reminds me a bit of that dxb335 chap few years back

Who now has a 997 GT3...

Do you like it?

[anonymous-user]

whoami said:

Tractor lad said:

St John Smythe said:

Reminds me a bit of that dxb335 chap few years back

Who now has a 997 GT3...

Do you like it?

[Patrick Bateman]

I've always meant to ask Rob, if throttle delay is such an issue, why have I never heard it mentioned in any car review I've ever read?

[anonymous-user]

Patrick Bateman said:

I've always meant to ask Rob, if throttle delay is such an issue, why have I never heard it mentioned in any car review I've ever read?

I had a 330ci few years back and there is a slight throttle delay. However you get used to it pretty quickly. Total non issue IMO.

[Tractor lad]

whoami said:

Do you like it?

I only have an M135i and a Subaru Outback.
I did have a 335d Touring.

[Mr2Mike]

Patrick Bateman said:

I've always meant to ask Rob, if throttle delay is such an issue, why have I never heard it mentioned in any car review I've ever read?

It's a conspiracy between car manufacturers and reviewers, obviously.

[Mr2Mike]

ORD said:

I'm with Rob on this.

I can't really imagine a circumstance in which I would prefer a Mondeo. If I literally had to have either a 316i or top-spec Mondeo with a decent engine, that might be a hard choice; but I cannot see how that situation would arise.

To anyone who can't see why a 3er is better to drive than a Mondeo, just go and drive each down a country road. If you can't tell which is better, fill your boots and enjoy the Ford, but you're wrong

Once again, why would anyone obsessed with the potential handling advantages RWD go for a dull as ditch-water 320d? Surely you'd have to be something of a driving enthusiast, in which case why on earth settle for a boring four pot diesel?

[Barchettaman]

My daily is an 07 320d. It has the slightly older-tech 163 diesel engine which apparently is less troublesome than later variants.

It's not bad. Good points:

-engine is much more willing to rev round than other 4-pot diesels I have owned/driven
-diesel is much much cheaper than petrol here in Germany so the price differential is in its favour
-quiet on the Autobahn with a high 'natural cruising speed'
-engine performance is radically improved by a €35 second-hand tuning box from eBay
-feels tight as a drum at 164,000 km
-looks pretty good after a polish
-it was bloody cheap (RHD, registered here by its previous owner)
-my wife loves it

Bad points:

-impractical: no SFRS on my saloon and the estate is small (even a Fabia estate is bigger apparently)
-I find the brakes and steering underservoed, but that's personal I guess
-The seat height adjustment lever was designed by Karl Pilkington, utter rubbish
-the climate control is weird, but I prefer a standard simple aircon anyway
-gearbox is a bit notchy, maybe a transmission oil change would help

I wouldn't agree that it's all the car anyone would ever need. That accolade would go to the Merc R63.

[RobM77]

Mr2Mike said:

ORD said:

I'm with Rob on this.

I can't really imagine a circumstance in which I would prefer a Mondeo. If I literally had to have either a 316i or top-spec Mondeo with a decent engine, that might be a hard choice; but I cannot see how that situation would arise.

To anyone who can't see why a 3er is better to drive than a Mondeo, just go and drive each down a country road. If you can't tell which is better, fill your boots and enjoy the Ford, but you're wrong

Once again, why would anyone obsessed with the potential handling advantages RWD go for a dull as ditch-water 320d? Surely you'd have to be something of a driving enthusiast, in which case why on earth settle for a boring four pot diesel?

You have to try and see things from someone else's point of view. What for you makes the 320d dull?

[RobM77]

whoami said:

ORD said:

Not fair to Rob in the slightest. He is a long way from being a fanboy,

Thanks ORD I don't think I'm a fanboy, no, because if a better FE/RWD saloon turned up then I wouldn't think twice about switching. I'm also happy to admit my car's faults, of which it has plenty.

[heebeegeetee]

Mr2Mike said:

Once again, why would anyone obsessed with the potential handling advantages RWD go for a dull as ditch-water 320d? Surely you'd have to be something of a driving enthusiast, in which case why on earth settle for a boring four pot diesel?

I'm going to suggest: As a very keen enthusiast he's able to appreciate the advantages on offer as opposed to those who feel the need to flaunt the Because Petrolhead badge?

[anonymous-user]

Mr2Mike said:

Once again, why would anyone obsessed with the potential handling advantages RWD go for a dull as ditch-water 320d? Surely you'd have to be something of a driving enthusiast, in which case why on earth settle for a boring four pot diesel?

What other diesel estate would you recommend?

[RobM77]

St John Smythe said:

Patrick Bateman said:

I've always meant to ask Rob, if throttle delay is such an issue, why have I never heard it mentioned in any car review I've ever read?

I had a 330ci few years back and there is a slight throttle delay. However you get used to it pretty quickly. Total non issue IMO.

It is mentioned sometimes, but not nearly as much as one would expect. When bikes went DBW I remember Bike magazine did a review of the Yamaha R1 with a leading BSB/WSB rider (I can't remember who); apparently he turned up in the morning, they chatted bikes for a bit, looked at the new bike and then started the riding, but he came back to the layby they set up in after a short while saying he couldn't ride it due to the throttle delay. No doubt his race bike ran a bespoke ECU that removed it (The Wookie on here reported that his Carrera Cup car actually had a bodged throttle cable running through the inside of the car to make it raceable. Almost all race cars with a road standard engine either completely re-programme the ECU or swap it for a dedicated racing one). I also read an American magazine once that actually did some graphs showing the time difference between input and output. At the end of the day though, almost all cars built post 2000 do it, so what are they supposed to say? Car reviews frequently skim over fairly major criticisms with cars, and interestingly only mention them when a new version of the car comes out with them fixed. The 330ci is again a good example - the early models like mine had the electric seats set so high they were undriveable for anyone over about 1.8m. I chatted to a dealership about it and it was a mini catastrophe at the time - never mentioned by reviews though. Also bear in mind that not many car reviewers are actually true car people, many are just journalists who've worked their way up through newspapers and magazines. I've tried to get into car journalism on a number of occasions and have been told that every single time. Obviously there are exceptions, but that's generally the rule.

With regard to your 330ci, I think what you meant to say was that it wasn't an issue for you. Mine was the worst car I've ever owned and I sold it because of it. There was a recent thread on here called "worst car you've ever owned" and several people heavily criticised the 330ci for this very issue.

If you time the average delay on something like the 330ci, at 40mph it equates to about two thirds the length of a corner. That means that you're effectively coasting from turn in to exit. Many people do this anyway (it's one of the top two problems to iron out in drivers when I've done track day instruction), so it won't matter to them. If you try to drive a car through a corner properly on a balanced throttle, then it'll be a major issue for you.

[RobM77]

Barchettaman said:

Bad points:

-impractical: no SFRS on my saloon and the estate is small (even a Fabia estate is bigger apparently)
-I find the brakes and steering underservoed, but that's personal I guess
-The seat height adjustment lever was designed by Karl Pilkington, utter rubbish
-the climate control is weird, but I prefer a standard simple aircon anyway
-gearbox is a bit notchy, maybe a transmission oil change would help

I agree on all points (other than the climate control - it's fairly normal isn't it?), especially the underassisted steering - it's a bit too heavy for my liking, but it was fixed for later models. Mine has split fold rear seats and electric seats. Incidentally, the gearbox loosens up with age. My Dad actually got BMW to change his at 10k miles on the warranty, but the new one was just the same; with age though, they slacken up - mine's a peach now at 123k miles.

I'd also add:

- driver's seat could go a bit lower
- steering wheel needs another 2-3cm of reach adjustment towards the driver
- the clutch delay valve is infuriating

Perhaps that excuses me from being a fanboy?

I should add that my car criteria were widely met in years past - both E36s I owned ticked every box for example (a 325i 4 door and a 328i SC).

[Tractor lad]

RobM77 said:

I agree on all points (other than the climate control - it's fairly normal isn't it?), especially the underassisted steering - it's a bit too heavy for my liking, but it was fixed for later models. Mine has split fold rear seats and electric seats. Incidentally, the gearbox loosens up with age. My Dad actually got BMW to change his at 10k miles on the warranty, but the new one was just the same; with age though, they slacken up - mine's a peach now at 123k miles.

I'd also add:

- driver's seat could go a bit lower
- steering wheel needs another 2-3cm of reach adjustment towards the driver
- the clutch delay valve is infuriating

Perhaps that excuses me from being a fanboy?

I should add that my car criteria were widely met in years past - both E36s I owned ticked every box for example (a 325i 4 door and a 328i SC).

Try a 335d if you can; only that and the 335i had non electric steering; it's really quite meaty. In fact a chap I know with a knackered arm is thinking of getting an aftermarket electric system fitted to his E92 335d. Might be partly because it has 19s though; mine was on 17s. I really rated the steering on it; tonnes more feedback than my M135i which has almost none.