RE: BMW 330i M Sport prototype: Driven
Discussion
Ares said:
I'll bet a weeks' pension, there will be an ICE 3-series (equivalent) in 50 years.
Hmm, I'm reckoning on about 20-30 for the end of the ICE in this sector. I doubt we'll remember this conversation in 30 years time though so it's something of a moot point. I probably won't buy another car with an internal combustion engine anyway so it makes little difference to me whether they're available.
nunpuncher said:
I don't suppose it really matters anyway as they seem to know their audience
"3-Series customers tend to prefer passive suspension, often with an alloy wheel upgrade."
Fancy wheels and more M Sport/M performance badges for everyone.
Hmm, our most recent two 3-series have had the active suspension which is excellent even if you leave it in "comfort" all the time. "3-Series customers tend to prefer passive suspension, often with an alloy wheel upgrade."
Fancy wheels and more M Sport/M performance badges for everyone.
BaronVonVaderham said:
cerb4.5lee said:
I must be the only one who actually likes the switch from a 6 cyl NA to a 4 cyl Turbo. My old E90 330i felt as flat as a pancake unless you revved the backside off it. Plus this new 330i has the same amount of torque as my V8 M3 did...only it comes in even earlier.
I'm all for Turbos in the heavy 3 series for sure. Shame its gone Auto only though, but I do understand that the market wants that.
Sound and character is what is lost with the 2 less cylinders. I'm all for Turbos in the heavy 3 series for sure. Shame its gone Auto only though, but I do understand that the market wants that.
Not fussed about efficiency or the need to use the upper limits of the rev range, I want to smile when I drive my car.
Sound is a moot point with the N52 because its incredibly muted in the cabin, and its even more quiet from the exhaust because its built to be a refined cruising engine/car. I did appreciate its smoothness and it revved really well for sure, but I personally feel as an engine its a little overrated(much like the S65 in the M3, its a great engine but in the wrong car for me).
Low torque NA engines and heavy cars just don't go well together in my eyes sadly. Stick the N52/S65 in a much lighter car and you're on to an absolute winner!
Did someone mention Victor Meldrew?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vRc3CFT91ow
Why don’t we just buy nice old cars for very reasonable prices and keep a few quid in the biscuit tin to keep them running sweetly.
And in the olden days when it said 645 on the bootlid guess what was under the bonnet?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vRc3CFT91ow
Why don’t we just buy nice old cars for very reasonable prices and keep a few quid in the biscuit tin to keep them running sweetly.
And in the olden days when it said 645 on the bootlid guess what was under the bonnet?
Speedgirl said:
Did someone mention Victor Meldrew?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vRc3CFT91ow
Why don’t we just buy nice old cars for very reasonable prices and keep a few quid in the biscuit tin to keep them running sweetly.
And in the olden days when it said 645 on the bootlid guess what was under the bonnet?
A 4.4? Bad example but a good point! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vRc3CFT91ow
Why don’t we just buy nice old cars for very reasonable prices and keep a few quid in the biscuit tin to keep them running sweetly.
And in the olden days when it said 645 on the bootlid guess what was under the bonnet?
Gez79 said:
Speedgirl said:
Did someone mention Victor Meldrew?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vRc3CFT91ow
Why don’t we just buy nice old cars for very reasonable prices and keep a few quid in the biscuit tin to keep them running sweetly.
And in the olden days when it said 645 on the bootlid guess what was under the bonnet?
A 4.4? Bad example but a good point! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vRc3CFT91ow
Why don’t we just buy nice old cars for very reasonable prices and keep a few quid in the biscuit tin to keep them running sweetly.
And in the olden days when it said 645 on the bootlid guess what was under the bonnet?
E65Ross said:
Ares said:
alfabadass said:
Never thought i'd see the day where an Alfa is the car to beat for BMW!
Thats down to how good the Giulia is, rather than how bad the BMW is.Did you not read it? Or miss the context of the comment?
havoc said:
Ares said:
I don't think it is different. My current car revs higher than all but two of my history of cars (a 13,000rpm red-line race Caterham and a 8500rpm Exige), it just has a lot more flexibility so that its not hard work if you don't want it to be. It also provides as much gear changing input if I want, but doesn't if I don't want. It gives huge flexibility, and therein becomes the practical benefit.
Forgive me, but it doesn't provide as much gear changing input. You flick a switch (paddle), the electronics do everything else.Some of us enjoy the art of driving and the feeling of (mechanical) involvement with the car, and don't like the progress towards Playstation-like interfaces.
cerb4.5lee said:
BaronVonVaderham said:
cerb4.5lee said:
I must be the only one who actually likes the switch from a 6 cyl NA to a 4 cyl Turbo. My old E90 330i felt as flat as a pancake unless you revved the backside off it. Plus this new 330i has the same amount of torque as my V8 M3 did...only it comes in even earlier.
I'm all for Turbos in the heavy 3 series for sure. Shame its gone Auto only though, but I do understand that the market wants that.
Sound and character is what is lost with the 2 less cylinders. I'm all for Turbos in the heavy 3 series for sure. Shame its gone Auto only though, but I do understand that the market wants that.
Not fussed about efficiency or the need to use the upper limits of the rev range, I want to smile when I drive my car.
Sound is a moot point with the N52 because its incredibly muted in the cabin, and its even more quiet from the exhaust because its built to be a refined cruising engine/car. I did appreciate its smoothness and it revved really well for sure, but I personally feel as an engine its a little overrated(much like the S65 in the M3, its a great engine but in the wrong car for me).
Low torque NA engines and heavy cars just don't go well together in my eyes sadly. Stick the N52/S65 in a much lighter car and you're on to an absolute winner!
The only cars I've owned which can even attempt to hold a candle in fun and driver enjoyment to my current car were both sub-2 litre 4-pot engined cars. Cylinder count does not make driver enjoyment.
RemyMartin81D said:
why the camo? LOL
im sure in proper paint and revealed it will be ......a box on wheels just like the last two iterations of the 3 series
Have you actually driven an E90 or F30? Both are very accomplished saloons that are enjoyable to drive. E90 particularly is a good driver’s car. Why some people on here think the world ended at the discontinuation of the E46 I don’t know. im sure in proper paint and revealed it will be ......a box on wheels just like the last two iterations of the 3 series
As for the new one, good on BMW for focussing on driver involvement. I look forward to driving one. Haven’t driven an Alfa Giulia either, but would like to, as I’ve heard only good things.
Had a go in a Z4 with this engine a couple of days ago, boring as fook. Isn't even in the same division as the 6s for driver appeal. Can none of the manufacturers make a decent engine meet the current emissions now? All the good engines are being culled every time a new model comes out, Cayman Boxster, R Jags, V8 Bmw. If Ford can do it with the Mustang why can't the others?
havoc said:
Forgive me, but it doesn't provide as much gear changing input. You flick a switch (paddle), the electronics do everything else.
Some of us enjoy the art of driving and the feeling of (mechanical) involvement with the car, and don't like the progress towards Playstation-like interfaces.
I assume that your cars have a cable operated throttle, carburettors, no servo, no assisted steering etc etc so that you enjoy the art of driving and the feeling of (mechanical) involvement with the car, and that you don't like the progress towards Playstation-like interfaces. Some of us enjoy the art of driving and the feeling of (mechanical) involvement with the car, and don't like the progress towards Playstation-like interfaces.
Ares said:
The fact that a niche of car beards lament the demise of manual gearboxes meaning that the 5-8yr old car they buy for 50p and a cocker (in 5-8yrs time) will likely be an auto is of minimal concern to said manufacturers, who will assume the afore mentioned beards will find some other archaic technology to w
k over.
k over. 
You're actually very close to the mark. They are enthusiasts though...apparently.
caymanbill said:
The whole thing about rear wheel drive 3 series handling better yada yado is surely a mute point anyway, unless you're on a race track. The things that matter in the 3 is comfort and refinement which the current is a missing in comparison to my S3.
So you can’t tell the difference between a RWD and FWD/AWD car on the road, at sensible speeds? I certainly can, and can make the judgement that I prefer RWD in most situations, and I’d imagine most on here can, since we generally are a group of people who enjoy driving. Therefore I think it is important that the 3 series is primarily RWD. I can understand the use of M X-drive in the M5 and 760Li, due to the amounts of power being dealt with, but unless you live in a snowy place, 320d with RWD please.
Ares said:
It's not. Go and drive a modern car with a manual, then the same car with a good auto, the auto is just factually better. It might not stir the emotion or halcyon memories, but they are better.
The auto is ‘factually better’ at what exactly?Jeez, we get it, you like ‘em... but please accept that some people just don’t.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff