E46 M3 and E46 330ci-not that different at all really
Discussion
I have owned a couple of 330ci's and now own an e46 M3.
The 330's were ok, one was an SE (manual) and the other was a sport auto. The SE was the nicest to drive. The sport was a confusing car as said above. The suspension didn't make much sense.
Although they are relatively cheap to run, I really do think the M3 is worth the extra cost. I agree, it can feel very 330ish around town, but when you do get to gun it properly, it's well worth it imo. It feels much more special in those circumstances.
The 330 revs so smoothly, it's almost boring (although I appreciate the engineering that makes it behave that way), whereas the snarl of the S54 is intoxicating, especially on overrun.
Mine has done 128000 miles and where conditions allow, I do drive it pretty hard. It's never given me any reason to doubt it's durability in the (admittedly) short time I've owned it (6 months). Ok, That may not be a sufficient amount of time to gauge over-all running costs, but it is booked in for either an oil service or an inspection 1 on Monday (not quite sure what it needs yet).
But anyway, I'm waffling. It takes time to get to know them, and how to get the best out of them. I definitely still learning and enjoying it!
Oh, and I agree about the manual gearbox being a little uncooperative around town, but it seems to become much more tactile at higher speeds
The 330's were ok, one was an SE (manual) and the other was a sport auto. The SE was the nicest to drive. The sport was a confusing car as said above. The suspension didn't make much sense.
Although they are relatively cheap to run, I really do think the M3 is worth the extra cost. I agree, it can feel very 330ish around town, but when you do get to gun it properly, it's well worth it imo. It feels much more special in those circumstances.
The 330 revs so smoothly, it's almost boring (although I appreciate the engineering that makes it behave that way), whereas the snarl of the S54 is intoxicating, especially on overrun.
Mine has done 128000 miles and where conditions allow, I do drive it pretty hard. It's never given me any reason to doubt it's durability in the (admittedly) short time I've owned it (6 months). Ok, That may not be a sufficient amount of time to gauge over-all running costs, but it is booked in for either an oil service or an inspection 1 on Monday (not quite sure what it needs yet).
But anyway, I'm waffling. It takes time to get to know them, and how to get the best out of them. I definitely still learning and enjoying it!
Oh, and I agree about the manual gearbox being a little uncooperative around town, but it seems to become much more tactile at higher speeds
Froomee said:
daveco said:
AC43 said:
daveco said:
LJK Setright hit the nail on the head when he said the best engines are the ones where torque and power outputs are about the same; the linear surge of the 330 is barely any different to the fizz-pop of the M3 in the out right "feel" of speed. Unless you're in a constant state of hoonage, the 330 gives you 9.5/10ths of the performance.
I still that holds today.Another of Setright's maxims was that the peach of any model range was often the one just below the halo model. Best compromise of torque and (accessible) power, slightly more compliant suspension and bushing, sightly narrower and more compliant tyres, etc all of which can create a sweeter-handling car than the one where the engineers have sacrificed some of the above in the pursuit of the ultimate lap time.
I'm not sure how people can say the M3 is 'miles' ahead of the 330, even from a driver's perspective, when the 330 offers more reliable and usable performance, better overall reliability, better fuel economy, and cheaper servicing (with a better gearbox). It is the more complete car.
The M3 wins hands down on noise but my only concern is it would not take the abuse the 330 has taken. I'd like to hear if anyone has driven the M3 as a daily car. I'm lucky in the sense my drive to and from work takes in a lot of near-empty roads where I can use a good bit of the performance of these cars.
Driven in a similar manner i assume fuel economy will be similar and i wouldn't imagine a person purchasing an M3 will worry to much about the extra servicing costs.
I am going to take delivery of a Z4M Roadster shortly and for me a car is not about reliability (warranty to cover this if anything happens, although they seem fairly reliable), fuel economy (i don't need my car for work)and cheaper servicing (I want circa 340bhp, better looks, noise, etc) so for me a 3.0 Z4 (equivalent to the 330ci) would be something i wouldn't even consider and wouldn't be a more complete car for my intended purpose.
Trying to justify any performance version of a car or even any performance car by practicality and cost is never going to end well and is missing the point of these cars altogether.
daveco said:
What year was your car? Manual or SMG? The noise was fantastic in the M, sounded just as good with the windows up.
Manual 2003 pre led lights upgrade but with the strut brace and steering rack changes.It is only when you switch the traction control off and really drive it do you feel the huge gulf over the 330.
Crusoe said:
daveco said:
What year was your car? Manual or SMG? The noise was fantastic in the M, sounded just as good with the windows up.
Manual 2003 pre led lights upgrade but with the strut brace and steering rack changes.It is only when you switch the traction control off and really drive it do you feel the huge gulf over the 330.
I think I might have another test drive. As I said my biggest worry was reliability on these cars if they are driven hard. Geez, you put forward an opinion and all hell breaks loose...
I run an M3 on a daily basis, I get an average of 27 mpg, higher if all motorway work, 1500 miles covered in the last 5 days with an average of 30.5 mpg. Worth buying for the noise alone. It is the best all round car I have owned...just wish it didn't eat rear tyres. If you buy a 330 you will always wish you bought the M3 and that is not taking away how from good the 330 is.
The 330 and the M3 should not be even in the same sentence. The M3 is so much better in every respect, I don't even know where to start. Food for thought - everything on the M3 is beafier - suspension, gearbox, clutch, diff etc - in order to cope with the expected higher stress. My old E46 M3 is still in the family. Still on the original clutch after 95,000 miles, lots of trackdays, Ring trips, mad dashes to Bordeaux, Central London traffic and two Alp trips.
Seriously, read what you just wrote and think again about the absurdity of the 330 being better than the M3...
Seriously, read what you just wrote and think again about the absurdity of the 330 being better than the M3...
daveco said:
I test drove an '06 M3 last week and I have to say I was left somewhat disappointed by the experience. I expected it to be drastically different in character to the E46 330
Why would they be drastically different? 
Pretty much the same car in many regards tbh, the M3 is just more focused with a lot more power if you keep your foot in it.A 320 or even a 318 is fundamentally very similar to a 330 unless you are driving flat out all the time.
I've owned a 330i and thought it was a great car.
The OPs post reminded me of something my uncle said a few years ago. He's a petrol head through and through. He described the M3 as a disappointment and whan I asked him, why he said it just wasn't anywhere near as fast as he was expecting. He thought his old E36 328 sport was a great car, but then he bought that with much lower expectations.
Maybe it's a bit like the latest Hollywood blockbuster, it doesn't matter how good it is, it can never live up to the hype. Just a though.
The OPs post reminded me of something my uncle said a few years ago. He's a petrol head through and through. He described the M3 as a disappointment and whan I asked him, why he said it just wasn't anywhere near as fast as he was expecting. He thought his old E36 328 sport was a great car, but then he bought that with much lower expectations.
Maybe it's a bit like the latest Hollywood blockbuster, it doesn't matter how good it is, it can never live up to the hype. Just a though.
Had a similar debate with myself 5 years ago and have never ever regretted opting for the E46 M3. You can use at as a daily and its ok on fuel, wear & tear etc (no major failures for me) if you drive 'normall'y. Having a quick blast now and then or a decent run out over a weekend wont kill it. Its a high performance car that comes alive when you need it to. A mate's stage II mapped 330 has the same torque and BHP but just doesn't feel or sound the same - its good but not great.
Just do your research before and buy a good one!
Just do your research before and buy a good one!
doogz said:
crispyshark said:
330 in my mirror and i'm not worried....M3 in my mirror different matter...i drive a Boxster S. Even on twisty A + B roads for car of it's size the M3 is epic, truely. 330 is a gnat's fart in comparison.
Seeing an M3 in your mirror worries you?Strange...
Generally i don't worry about any car in my mirror unless they are driving like a complete knobber.
Why does the M3 cost more to service ?
I am thinking if I got one and serviced it at home it would cost the same or very little more, same shell, same drive layout, both need a cambelt, both need oil and air filters, both need fuel filters, cabin filters etc, both will need coolant and brake fluid changes, really cant see the extra expense, is it down to intervals ?
I am thinking if I got one and serviced it at home it would cost the same or very little more, same shell, same drive layout, both need a cambelt, both need oil and air filters, both need fuel filters, cabin filters etc, both will need coolant and brake fluid changes, really cant see the extra expense, is it down to intervals ?
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff