RE: BMW 330i M Sport prototype: Driven
Discussion
janesmith1950 said:
havoc said:
Compared to what? The N52 (and later DI N53) was pretty much on the money for an n/a 3.0...and if you're going to start comparing to other types of engine then:-
- a turbo-4 of similar performance (bhp / mpg) doesn't have as much character, and isn't as smooth.
- a V8 of greater cc won't have as good mpg performance, so your argument falls down.
- a turbo'd 6 would be higher-performance without any real-world mpg gain, and would consequently cost more.
I think you like one specific type of engine (fat torque, sod the rpm, by the sounds of many posts), and decry anything different. I like the opposite type of engine, but at least acknowledge the benefits of torquier motors, even if I don't like the un-subtle all-in-a-rush delivery of (modern) powerful blown engines.
Not sure I agree. The F80 M3 has more power and better MPG as a turbocharged 6 compared to the high revving NA V8 in its predecessor.- a turbo-4 of similar performance (bhp / mpg) doesn't have as much character, and isn't as smooth.
- a V8 of greater cc won't have as good mpg performance, so your argument falls down.
- a turbo'd 6 would be higher-performance without any real-world mpg gain, and would consequently cost more.
I think you like one specific type of engine (fat torque, sod the rpm, by the sounds of many posts), and decry anything different. I like the opposite type of engine, but at least acknowledge the benefits of torquier motors, even if I don't like the un-subtle all-in-a-rush delivery of (modern) powerful blown engines.
Cerb was talking about the 3.0 n/a (non-M) 3-series motor, and saying that the n/a 6-pot (!) was pointless. That motor would deliver both 270bhp AND mid-30s mpg real-world. Which is ball-park the same as the modern crop of hot-hatch motors (who deliver 300bhp but real-world struggle to hit 30mpg.
it was NOT a comparison of n/a vs blown.
Your particular example, however, is very similar to my blown-4 vs n/a 6 example - character suffers massively* in the name of emissions.
* The 4.0 V8 was an absolute gem of a motor, with plenty of usable torque and two good gearboxes that allowed you to make best use of it. The F80's blown-6 is torquier, sure, but (a) it comes all in a rush, at the very-widely-commented expense of driveability; and (b) it sounds like a bag of feckin' spanners - the BMW engineers have tried to persuade buyers that volume and silly pops-and-bangs on the overrun replace the beautiful, cultured snarl / scream of the outgoing V8.
SidewaysSi said:
Mike335i said:
Mr Tidy said:
Well all of it FFS!
But I'll happily pay a bit more tax to have a bit more fun.
We all might, but BMW or any other manufacturer won't. They need to get average emissions down across the range. But I'll happily pay a bit more tax to have a bit more fun.
havoc said:
Ares said:
havoc said:
To pick one example, how many nat-asp manual sports saloons* still exist to buy?!?
(And please don't claim it's down to buyer demand, a lot is down to mfrs either forcing or at the very least nudging buyers towards more fleet-CO2 friendly options (so the mfrs comply with fleet-average emissions regs), both with engines and 'boxes)
Sorry buddy, but it is exactly down to buyer demand. What manufacturer would possibly remove a more popular option? They just wouldn't.(And please don't claim it's down to buyer demand, a lot is down to mfrs either forcing or at the very least nudging buyers towards more fleet-CO2 friendly options (so the mfrs comply with fleet-average emissions regs), both with engines and 'boxes)
You've also heard of Nudge Theory, I take it...and I'll wager a fair amount that most main dealer sales teams are well versed in it...at least in part as they may well be incentivised based on it, to ensure borderline buyers are persuaded into the right option: "Oh but sir, there's no market for manuals anymore...the residuals are significantly worse. And you HAVE to have the extended leather too.".
I do agree that only recently have auto-boxes been GENUINELY more economical (mainly due to them all having at least 25 gears ), but if you look back at 'official' CO2 stats, I'd imagine auto-boxes have been better on-paper for maybe 10 years (or at least equal), certainly better for over 5.
EDIT: Looks like approx equal for at least 10, better for the last +/-5, presumably with the advent of multi-multi-gear autoboxes. So on balance you've a point - 'German' car buyers (Porsche excepted) have been lazy f'ckers for years!
(But I still maintain the manual gearbox was removed from the F30 / G30 as much to improve CAFE etc. as because a minority of buyers chose it - I bet it's still available in the USA, for example)
Edited by havoc on Saturday 18th August 21:20
I was talking about manual boxes. It's demand waning, pure and simple.
Not he subject of modern manual boxes, and cross posted from another thread, but Mrs Ares had a 1-series manual for a weekend test-drive this weekend just gone.
The car was quite good, very solid and had a good chassis....but the thing that let it down was the manual gearbox - notchy, awkward to get from 1st to 2nd and 2nd to 1st and not enjoyable to use. Contrast that to her current MINI which has a far better manual box and is enjoyable to use.
Granted, the car had only done 800 miles, but the gearbox shouldn't need more to loosen up?
BMWs used to have the best manuals of mass-produced cars, but this surely can't be it any more. Little wonder manuals are being ditched by the general public in favour of Autos.
The car was quite good, very solid and had a good chassis....but the thing that let it down was the manual gearbox - notchy, awkward to get from 1st to 2nd and 2nd to 1st and not enjoyable to use. Contrast that to her current MINI which has a far better manual box and is enjoyable to use.
Granted, the car had only done 800 miles, but the gearbox shouldn't need more to loosen up?
BMWs used to have the best manuals of mass-produced cars, but this surely can't be it any more. Little wonder manuals are being ditched by the general public in favour of Autos.
nomis36 said:
Agreed, 330i with a 2.0i aint a 3.0 in my book. Half the appeal of powerful BMW's was the sound of the straight 6 motors. As good as 4 pots are these days the sound just isn't there. And don't get me started on the latest fad, farting gear changes ;-(
and I can't get my head around what engineer thought it was a good idea to introduce augmented engine sound through the speakers! is there anyone out there who actually likes this?Ares said:
Not he subject of modern manual boxes, and cross posted from another thread, but Mrs Ares had a 1-series manual for a weekend test-drive this weekend just gone.
The car was quite good, very solid and had a good chassis....but the thing that let it down was the manual gearbox - notchy, awkward to get from 1st to 2nd and 2nd to 1st and not enjoyable to use. Contrast that to her current MINI which has a far better manual box and is enjoyable to use.
Granted, the car had only done 800 miles, but the gearbox shouldn't need more to loosen up?
BMWs used to have the best manuals of mass-produced cars, but this surely can't be it any more. Little wonder manuals are being ditched by the general public in favour of Autos.
Maybe it does Mine is superb and continues to improve at 15,000 Miles. I Have found Mini boxes a bit meh!The car was quite good, very solid and had a good chassis....but the thing that let it down was the manual gearbox - notchy, awkward to get from 1st to 2nd and 2nd to 1st and not enjoyable to use. Contrast that to her current MINI which has a far better manual box and is enjoyable to use.
Granted, the car had only done 800 miles, but the gearbox shouldn't need more to loosen up?
BMWs used to have the best manuals of mass-produced cars, but this surely can't be it any more. Little wonder manuals are being ditched by the general public in favour of Autos.
telecat said:
Ares said:
Not he subject of modern manual boxes, and cross posted from another thread, but Mrs Ares had a 1-series manual for a weekend test-drive this weekend just gone.
The car was quite good, very solid and had a good chassis....but the thing that let it down was the manual gearbox - notchy, awkward to get from 1st to 2nd and 2nd to 1st and not enjoyable to use. Contrast that to her current MINI which has a far better manual box and is enjoyable to use.
Granted, the car had only done 800 miles, but the gearbox shouldn't need more to loosen up?
BMWs used to have the best manuals of mass-produced cars, but this surely can't be it any more. Little wonder manuals are being ditched by the general public in favour of Autos.
Maybe it does Mine is superb and continues to improve at 15,000 Miles. I Have found Mini boxes a bit meh!The car was quite good, very solid and had a good chassis....but the thing that let it down was the manual gearbox - notchy, awkward to get from 1st to 2nd and 2nd to 1st and not enjoyable to use. Contrast that to her current MINI which has a far better manual box and is enjoyable to use.
Granted, the car had only done 800 miles, but the gearbox shouldn't need more to loosen up?
BMWs used to have the best manuals of mass-produced cars, but this surely can't be it any more. Little wonder manuals are being ditched by the general public in favour of Autos.
GarageQueen said:
nomis36 said:
Agreed, 330i with a 2.0i aint a 3.0 in my book. Half the appeal of powerful BMW's was the sound of the straight 6 motors. As good as 4 pots are these days the sound just isn't there. And don't get me started on the latest fad, farting gear changes ;-(
and I can't get my head around what engineer thought it was a good idea to introduce augmented engine sound through the speakers! is there anyone out there who actually likes this?Ares said:
telecat said:
Ares said:
Not he subject of modern manual boxes, and cross posted from another thread, but Mrs Ares had a 1-series manual for a weekend test-drive this weekend just gone.
The car was quite good, very solid and had a good chassis....but the thing that let it down was the manual gearbox - notchy, awkward to get from 1st to 2nd and 2nd to 1st and not enjoyable to use. Contrast that to her current MINI which has a far better manual box and is enjoyable to use.
Granted, the car had only done 800 miles, but the gearbox shouldn't need more to loosen up?
BMWs used to have the best manuals of mass-produced cars, but this surely can't be it any more. Little wonder manuals are being ditched by the general public in favour of Autos.
Maybe it does Mine is superb and continues to improve at 15,000 Miles. I Have found Mini boxes a bit meh!The car was quite good, very solid and had a good chassis....but the thing that let it down was the manual gearbox - notchy, awkward to get from 1st to 2nd and 2nd to 1st and not enjoyable to use. Contrast that to her current MINI which has a far better manual box and is enjoyable to use.
Granted, the car had only done 800 miles, but the gearbox shouldn't need more to loosen up?
BMWs used to have the best manuals of mass-produced cars, but this surely can't be it any more. Little wonder manuals are being ditched by the general public in favour of Autos.
havoc said:
Oh FFS, read the post properly!
Cerb was talking about the 3.0 n/a (non-M) 3-series motor, and saying that the n/a 6-pot (!) was pointless. That motor would deliver both 270bhp AND mid-30s mpg real-world. Which is ball-park the same as the modern crop of hot-hatch motors (who deliver 300bhp but real-world struggle to hit 30mpg.
it was NOT a comparison of n/a vs blown.
Your particular example, however, is very similar to my blown-4 vs n/a 6 example - character suffers massively* in the name of emissions.
* The 4.0 V8 was an absolute gem of a motor, with plenty of usable torque and two good gearboxes that allowed you to make best use of it. The F80's blown-6 is torquier, sure, but (a) it comes all in a rush, at the very-widely-commented expense of driveability; and (b) it sounds like a bag of feckin' spanners - the BMW engineers have tried to persuade buyers that volume and silly pops-and-bangs on the overrun replace the beautiful, cultured snarl / scream of the outgoing V8.
I did read.your post properly. You invited comparison between the NA engine and a blown equivalent. I gave you one, using the M3 as an example. Cerb was talking about the 3.0 n/a (non-M) 3-series motor, and saying that the n/a 6-pot (!) was pointless. That motor would deliver both 270bhp AND mid-30s mpg real-world. Which is ball-park the same as the modern crop of hot-hatch motors (who deliver 300bhp but real-world struggle to hit 30mpg.
it was NOT a comparison of n/a vs blown.
Your particular example, however, is very similar to my blown-4 vs n/a 6 example - character suffers massively* in the name of emissions.
* The 4.0 V8 was an absolute gem of a motor, with plenty of usable torque and two good gearboxes that allowed you to make best use of it. The F80's blown-6 is torquier, sure, but (a) it comes all in a rush, at the very-widely-commented expense of driveability; and (b) it sounds like a bag of feckin' spanners - the BMW engineers have tried to persuade buyers that volume and silly pops-and-bangs on the overrun replace the beautiful, cultured snarl / scream of the outgoing V8.
You suggested the blown version wouldn't give a 'real world' mpg advantage. I gave you an example where it does.
We all know you like 'purity' etc. and that the modern trend of turbocharging and autos goes against your grain.
Also, FWIW, the motor in the F8x does sound st, but it also objectively a far more effective thing than the old V8. It's progress.
janesmith1950 said:
I did read.your post properly. You invited comparison between the NA engine and a blown equivalent. I gave you one, using the M3 as an example.
You suggested the blown version wouldn't give a 'real world' mpg advantage. I gave you an example where it does.
We all know you like 'purity' etc. and that the modern trend of turbocharging and autos goes against your grain.
Also, FWIW, the motor in the F8x does sound st, but it also objectively a far more effective thing than the old V8. It's progress.
I agree (although I like the engine note of the current M3/M4 - was always underwhelmed by the sound of the V8 of the E9x.You suggested the blown version wouldn't give a 'real world' mpg advantage. I gave you an example where it does.
We all know you like 'purity' etc. and that the modern trend of turbocharging and autos goes against your grain.
Also, FWIW, the motor in the F8x does sound st, but it also objectively a far more effective thing than the old V8. It's progress.
I can't think of an example, like-for-like, where blown doesn't give better mpg than N/A (unless you are constantly rodding the blown engine of course). To make good progress in the M3, you don't need to be revving the nuts of it.
I get the same average mpg in current car as I got in my E90 330i, despite the current car having more than twice the power and an engine 100cc smaller (but benefiting from 2 turbos). By current car also revs higher than the 330i
janesmith1950 said:
Also, FWIW, the motor in the F8x does sound st, but it also objectively a far more effective thing than the old V8. It's progress.
And who buys a high-end performance car based on objective information, unless they're just interested in top-trumps bragging down the pub?So if we ignore the HarryEnfield-esque "shut your mouth and look at my car keys!" brigade, you've got broadly two camps of buyers - those that want the performance, and those that want the 'experience' (OK, there's a clear spectrum in-between).
The second camp surely can't help but see the F80 motor as a clear step backwards in all regards except mpg:-
- sounds a lot worse;
- power delivery is less progressive, leading to real traction issues in anything other than ideal conditions;
- throttle-response isn't as good, nor as linear.
Point-to-point it's a bloody effective thing (traction aside), so the first camp will be happy. But unless you're a car journo on someone else's insurance, or a Troy Queef wannabe, very few buyers enjoy a car that wants to oversteer on a regular basis, certainly not when it's on the car's terms not the driver's.
I can't help but feel the F80 was a bad example for you to use, as to my mind Merc have done a much more effective job in going FI with the new 4.0 V8, which manages to retain much of the character and similar driveability to the outgoing 6.2.
Ares said:
Not he subject of modern manual boxes, and cross posted from another thread, but Mrs Ares had a 1-series manual for a weekend test-drive this weekend just gone.
The car was quite good, very solid and had a good chassis....but the thing that let it down was the manual gearbox - notchy, awkward to get from 1st to 2nd and 2nd to 1st and not enjoyable to use. Contrast that to her current MINI which has a far better manual box and is enjoyable to use.
Granted, the car had only done 800 miles, but the gearbox shouldn't need more to loosen up?
BMWs used to have the best manuals of mass-produced cars, but this surely can't be it any more. Little wonder manuals are being ditched by the general public in favour of Autos.
When did BMW have the best manuals of mass-produced cars? In my experience they have all been notchy and a general pain. The car was quite good, very solid and had a good chassis....but the thing that let it down was the manual gearbox - notchy, awkward to get from 1st to 2nd and 2nd to 1st and not enjoyable to use. Contrast that to her current MINI which has a far better manual box and is enjoyable to use.
Granted, the car had only done 800 miles, but the gearbox shouldn't need more to loosen up?
BMWs used to have the best manuals of mass-produced cars, but this surely can't be it any more. Little wonder manuals are being ditched by the general public in favour of Autos.
Need to do a CDV delete and get an upgraded shifter e.g. a UUC with DSSK to make them decent.
SidewaysSi said:
When did BMW have the best manuals of mass-produced cars? In my experience they have all been notchy and a general pain.
Need to do a CDV delete and get an upgraded shifter e.g. a UUC with DSSK to make them decent.
I think Honda generally led the way when it came to manual boxes. Even a lowly Civic had a great change. Need to do a CDV delete and get an upgraded shifter e.g. a UUC with DSSK to make them decent.
A 3 series which is bigger than a 5 of a few years back? Why? If you need the extra space, but a 5. The 3 started as a compact saloon and should stay that way.
I've also given up with BMW being a sports saloon maker. Auto only? Sad. A 4cyl in place of the 6? Sadder. It can't all be down to market demand, surely.
The pinnacle of the 3 was the e46. Right size for the road, sporty in the right way and good looking. I'm still looking for a a good 330i or 330d.
I've also given up with BMW being a sports saloon maker. Auto only? Sad. A 4cyl in place of the 6? Sadder. It can't all be down to market demand, surely.
The pinnacle of the 3 was the e46. Right size for the road, sporty in the right way and good looking. I'm still looking for a a good 330i or 330d.
drpep said:
While I admire their efforts here, I'm not at all excited about this. There are lots of companies still making exciting, 6-cylinder sport-sedan/saloon cars but this is no longer in that class. The F30 4 pot is pretty characterless and it's hard to imagine this being any different. Shame they can't play the downsize game and break norms doing a 5 cylinder block or something more spunky than the 4.
After a long time with 6-cylinder cars I'm starting to come to terms with having to get a 4-cyl sometime not too far away. The few which are 6-cylinder are getting way up there in price. You are right though, a 5-cylinder would be a lot more interesting. Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff