RE: BMW 340i manual (F30) | Spotted
Discussion
big_rob_sydney said:
tenmantaylor said:
Good example.
It's not about performance or speed. It's about connection and control. One tiny (I'm talking fraction of a second) where the engine does something the gearbox told it to, not me, I get seriously pissed off. That's what I mean by control of the engine. Only the throttle, controlled by me, should control revs, and it should be immediate, not processed and delayed by an algorithm or CANBUS system from the 90s. Don't believe the BS you've been fed by the car industry about how fast the shifts are, the processing power. Its all killed by lag before the amazing gearbox recieves the signal. Anything more than 1ms is unacceptable to me. Most have lag of 100s of ms from input to response. Most might not feel that but I do. Amd don't get me started on throttle lag on top of the gearbox lag.
I enjoy driving manuals even at normal speeds, matching shifts and blips coasting to roundabouts at 30mph. It's a skill to be refined and enjoyed, not ignored and bypassed for the sake of convenience.
There's no excuse for loving auto apart from laziness/ignorance or in the case of sequential/motorsport environments, outright speed.
Do you consider yourself to be a driving god? It's not about performance or speed. It's about connection and control. One tiny (I'm talking fraction of a second) where the engine does something the gearbox told it to, not me, I get seriously pissed off. That's what I mean by control of the engine. Only the throttle, controlled by me, should control revs, and it should be immediate, not processed and delayed by an algorithm or CANBUS system from the 90s. Don't believe the BS you've been fed by the car industry about how fast the shifts are, the processing power. Its all killed by lag before the amazing gearbox recieves the signal. Anything more than 1ms is unacceptable to me. Most have lag of 100s of ms from input to response. Most might not feel that but I do. Amd don't get me started on throttle lag on top of the gearbox lag.
I enjoy driving manuals even at normal speeds, matching shifts and blips coasting to roundabouts at 30mph. It's a skill to be refined and enjoyed, not ignored and bypassed for the sake of convenience.
There's no excuse for loving auto apart from laziness/ignorance or in the case of sequential/motorsport environments, outright speed.
Clivey said:
big_rob_sydney said:
tenmantaylor said:
Good example.
It's not about performance or speed. It's about connection and control. One tiny (I'm talking fraction of a second) where the engine does something the gearbox told it to, not me, I get seriously pissed off. That's what I mean by control of the engine. Only the throttle, controlled by me, should control revs, and it should be immediate, not processed and delayed by an algorithm or CANBUS system from the 90s. Don't believe the BS you've been fed by the car industry about how fast the shifts are, the processing power. Its all killed by lag before the amazing gearbox recieves the signal. Anything more than 1ms is unacceptable to me. Most have lag of 100s of ms from input to response. Most might not feel that but I do. Amd don't get me started on throttle lag on top of the gearbox lag.
I enjoy driving manuals even at normal speeds, matching shifts and blips coasting to roundabouts at 30mph. It's a skill to be refined and enjoyed, not ignored and bypassed for the sake of convenience.
There's no excuse for loving auto apart from laziness/ignorance or in the case of sequential/motorsport environments, outright speed.
Do you consider yourself to be a driving god? It's not about performance or speed. It's about connection and control. One tiny (I'm talking fraction of a second) where the engine does something the gearbox told it to, not me, I get seriously pissed off. That's what I mean by control of the engine. Only the throttle, controlled by me, should control revs, and it should be immediate, not processed and delayed by an algorithm or CANBUS system from the 90s. Don't believe the BS you've been fed by the car industry about how fast the shifts are, the processing power. Its all killed by lag before the amazing gearbox recieves the signal. Anything more than 1ms is unacceptable to me. Most have lag of 100s of ms from input to response. Most might not feel that but I do. Amd don't get me started on throttle lag on top of the gearbox lag.
I enjoy driving manuals even at normal speeds, matching shifts and blips coasting to roundabouts at 30mph. It's a skill to be refined and enjoyed, not ignored and bypassed for the sake of convenience.
There's no excuse for loving auto apart from laziness/ignorance or in the case of sequential/motorsport environments, outright speed.
tenmantaylor said:
.......There's no excuse for loving auto apart from laziness/ignorance,,,,,
So there you have it folks. If you happen to love your automatic you are either lazy or ignorant. It's a shame that you would have to lie to yourself, and more importantly insult driving gods, to assume anything else. Don't let us hear any other excuses now!
Will the technology/lack of debate be largely dependent on what the owner has previously been used too? I've personally never used the heated seats in any of the cars I have owned so would never think to pay extra to option them. My attitude to having the best possible stereo available has slightly mellowed too now that I don't spend nearly as much time on the road as I used to. So long as it makes a noise, and isn't truly horrendous, I'm sure the basic set up would probably be enough for me these days - do any but the very cheapest and basic cars come with truley horrible set ups these days? I think a lot of technologies are a case of you'd never miss them if you never had them so I can see there being cases where cars are specced by folks who have never had, and therefore appreciated, what is on offer so just don't see the point of paying for it.
I can certainly see the appeal of prioritising the engine/mechanicals over optional extras if the budget should dictate that both aren't achievable together.
I can certainly see the appeal of prioritising the engine/mechanicals over optional extras if the budget should dictate that both aren't achievable together.
Edited by Harrypop on Wednesday 10th August 09:22
tenmantaylor said:
There's no excuse for loving auto apart from laziness/ignorance or in the case of sequential/motorsport environments, outright speed.
That's some absolute Grade A bulls
t right there. If you can't see why some drivers would prefer an auto, or scenarios where it might be a better option, then I don't know what to tell you.
Harrypop said:
tenmantaylor said:
.......There's no excuse for loving auto apart from laziness/ignorance,,,,,
So there you have it folks. If you happen to love your automatic you are either lazy or ignorant. It's a shame that you would have to lie to yourself, and more importantly insult driving gods, to assume anything else. Don't let us hear any other excuses now!
What a ridiculous comment. Frankly, I'm surprised his car has a key and not a manual starter.... I mean, how lazy and ignorant! Does it have electronic fuel injection, or does he still have a carburettor so he can manually adjust the choke on-the-fly? If not, he's lazy and ignorant!
I'm poor and this car is way out of my league but my only connection to a 3 series is the 2002 320i (2.2) i once owned.
It was a lovely car. It looked great (it had the big optional M sport multispoke things which looked lovely on the car), was great quality and was a nice place to be.
However.
It just wasn't nice to drive. The clutch/manual combo was mediocre at best and bordering on unpleasant/difficult at worst. The steering tramlined horribly due to the big wheels. The ride suffered a bit due to the low profile tyres.
The engine just felt weak. It was smooth...but it just didn't feel like it had 170bhp.
We had an Alfa 156 Sportwagon 1.8 at around the same time....and although that car felt a lot cheaper, it was much the nicer car to drive (and still felt special) - and the engine was a peach.
Anyway.
Not sure what this has to do with the thread.
Sorry. (oh, it was to do with the discussions about BMW manuals - yes. In my case, mine wasn't good. Oh and smaller wheels = a better drive (often, IMO)
However, i have driven a number of Z4 and found their manuals more pleasing.
It was a lovely car. It looked great (it had the big optional M sport multispoke things which looked lovely on the car), was great quality and was a nice place to be.
However.
It just wasn't nice to drive. The clutch/manual combo was mediocre at best and bordering on unpleasant/difficult at worst. The steering tramlined horribly due to the big wheels. The ride suffered a bit due to the low profile tyres.
The engine just felt weak. It was smooth...but it just didn't feel like it had 170bhp.
We had an Alfa 156 Sportwagon 1.8 at around the same time....and although that car felt a lot cheaper, it was much the nicer car to drive (and still felt special) - and the engine was a peach.
Anyway.
Not sure what this has to do with the thread.
Sorry. (oh, it was to do with the discussions about BMW manuals - yes. In my case, mine wasn't good. Oh and smaller wheels = a better drive (often, IMO)
However, i have driven a number of Z4 and found their manuals more pleasing.
I have a 340 touring in blue with red interior in a similar poverty spec. As suggested earlier it was about 30pc off list when new, built to order.
The basic audio system is far worse than you can imagine and I had it upgraded. They had other cars in having the HK system upgraded as well.
Prof nav etc are all a bit useless, just use apple car play, Google maps etc.
I did get the BMW performance and sound retro upgrade, which is rumoured to push the power up to 380hp. In sport mode it sounds it is a bit of a hooligan with pops and bangs, I switch it off but my 21 year old…
I would have preferred a manual box just for the involvement and I like to heal and toe, but it’s auto. Once moving it’s great but it is very sluggish at low speeds.
Best investment from new is not heated seats or tinted glass, I got the suspension professionally aligned, it was miles out and transformed the car.
The basic audio system is far worse than you can imagine and I had it upgraded. They had other cars in having the HK system upgraded as well.
Prof nav etc are all a bit useless, just use apple car play, Google maps etc.
I did get the BMW performance and sound retro upgrade, which is rumoured to push the power up to 380hp. In sport mode it sounds it is a bit of a hooligan with pops and bangs, I switch it off but my 21 year old…
I would have preferred a manual box just for the involvement and I like to heal and toe, but it’s auto. Once moving it’s great but it is very sluggish at low speeds.
Best investment from new is not heated seats or tinted glass, I got the suspension professionally aligned, it was miles out and transformed the car.
TyrannosauRoss Lex said:
Harrypop said:
tenmantaylor said:
.......There's no excuse for loving auto apart from laziness/ignorance,,,,,
So there you have it folks. If you happen to love your automatic you are either lazy or ignorant. It's a shame that you would have to lie to yourself, and more importantly insult driving gods, to assume anything else. Don't let us hear any other excuses now!What a ridiculous comment. Frankly, I'm surprised his car has a key and not a manual starter.... I mean, how lazy and ignorant! Does it have electronic fuel injection, or does he still have a carburettor so he can manually adjust the choke on-the-fly? If not, he's lazy and ignorant!
In a modern BMW, I'd take auto every time. The reason is partly because the ZF8 auto is a masterpiece (and it's particularly brilliant with the B58 engine), and partly that modern BMW manuals are just awful things. The change quality is notchy, baulky and heavy, and the clutch delay valve robs the clutch of all feel, and makes smooth gearchanges (particularly 1st to 2nd) a bit of a lottery even with familiarity. Their clutches and dual mass flywheels are also made of chocolate. I love a good manual gearbox as much as anyone, but a manual F30 BMW doesn't have one.
TyrannosauRoss Lex said:
What a ridiculous comment. Frankly, I'm surprised his car has a key and not a manual starter.... I mean, how lazy and ignorant! Does it have electronic fuel injection, or does he still have a carburettor so he can manually adjust the choke on-the-fly? If not, he's lazy and ignorant!
Anything else would be pretty lazy to be honest.
Harrypop said:
TyrannosauRoss Lex said:
What a ridiculous comment. Frankly, I'm surprised his car has a key and not a manual starter.... I mean, how lazy and ignorant! Does it have electronic fuel injection, or does he still have a carburettor so he can manually adjust the choke on-the-fly? If not, he's lazy and ignorant!
Anything else would be pretty lazy to be honest.
cerb4.5lee said:
They definitely vary I agree. The manual gearbox in my Z4M was absolutely garbage for me, whereas the manual gearbox in my E92 M3 was slightly less garbage. However I really liked the manual gearbox in my E61 520d though(apart from a manual gearbox being a poor match to a diesel engine for me). It was a smooth and lovely gearchange I thought.
I found it almost impossible to do a smooth gear change in my old Z4M Coupe from 1st to 2nd if driving in a relaxed manner, and sometimes I just wanted a relaxed drive (no CDV-delete). I hear of this issue a lot with BMW manuals. I ran a pretty tired 8v mk4 Golf GTi alongside the Z4M and for relaxed driving I think that car had the best manual gearbox I've ever had, was weighted just right, smooth, wasn't a particularly long throw... only realised that after I got rid of it. I also ran a manual V8 R8 with the open gate gearbox for 2 years, and whilst it looked stunning it wasn't any better to use than any other other gearbox IMO (throw in the knurled texture of the knob and temperature of it on sub-zero cold days and it's not a gearbox that I particularly miss!) Back to this low spec 340i, I'd rather spend less and get a 335i with some kit with similar miles. I like a sunroof, folding mirrors, the extended dials display, and to my ears the HK set up is decent, so I'd forego the extra 16bhp of the B58. Also, doesn't £20k sound a bit strong for the most basic 340i you could ever buy? Time will tell I guess...
big_rob_sydney said:
Do you consider yourself to be a driving god?
Just a wild fantasist. The need to do any of that stuff in most cars built in the last 30 years just doesnt exist.He'll be telling us he loves to double clutch and left foot brake next too.
With the advent of DMF's, clutch release valves, fly by wire throttles and the mapping that goes with them, all of the above is redundant and has zero effect on performance, in fact trying to do them for the sake of it makes it harder to drive and slower. Still, whatever makes them happy
Even with the best manuals there is a break in power delivery, a delay if you will, when you depress the clutch and change gear. That can feel a bit laggy, even if you are brutal with the stick.
After you’ve driven a good auto, especially if your driving concerns traffic, a manual does seem harder to love.
After you’ve driven a good auto, especially if your driving concerns traffic, a manual does seem harder to love.
highway said:
Even with the best manuals there is a break in power delivery, a delay if you will, when you depress the clutch and change gear. That can feel a bit laggy, even if you are brutal with the stick.
After you’ve driven a good auto, especially if your driving concerns traffic, a manual does seem harder to love.
TC auto has a very similar torque dip. After you’ve driven a good auto, especially if your driving concerns traffic, a manual does seem harder to love.
The only way to avoid it is CVT in a road car.
Gweeds said:
tenmantaylor said:
There's no excuse for loving auto apart from laziness/ignorance or in the case of sequential/motorsport environments, outright speed.
That's some absolute Grade A bullst right there. If you can't see why some drivers would prefer an auto, or scenarios where it might be a better option, then I don't know what to tell you.
If you use Auto on Forza, you are lazy and ignorant, what's the point!
In the real world though, they make a lot of sense. He'll understand in 5 years when he's old enough to take his driving test.
Wills2 said:
BMW manual gearboxes are very disappointing rubbery, notchy and long throw (don't let that stubby lever fool you) that coupled with a poverty spec gives this car zero appeal to me.
My manual 325 coupe had a fabulous stick shift... perhaps I just got lucky? In a new manual vRS now and enjoying motoring again after numerous automatic Germans! Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff