3 cylinder engines

3 cylinder engines

Author
Discussion

jimmybob

Original Poster:

6 posts

93 months

Tuesday 20th June 2017
quotequote all
Hi All,
Anyone out there with experience or comment on BMW 3 cylinder engines in the one series.
regards.
J

J1JPE

296 posts

225 months

Tuesday 20th June 2017
quotequote all
Yes

Earthdweller

13,432 posts

125 months

Tuesday 20th June 2017
quotequote all
I had a 2 series conv as a loan car a few months back whilst mine was being serviced

It was a perfectly good car .. be hard pressed to know what was under the bonnet as you drove it normally

Not exciting .. not quick but adequate

It was a petrol one .. recall being surprised how much fuel it had used though .. but couldn't recall now how much mpg it got however

As a service loan car it was meh .. adequate

Would I buy one ?

No .. but I can see why people do and maybe if my circs were different I might consider one

335d

758 posts

117 months

Tuesday 20th June 2017
quotequote all
We were looking for a new model 5 door Mini a few months ago and took extended test drives of the 3 cylinder diesel and petrol models which share their engines with the 116d and 116i, along with some other BMWs.

They were both surprisingly smooth engines. I had imagined that 3 cylinders would be lumpier than their 4 cylinder equivalents, but it seems not. The diesel does have an odd start up behaviour - for the first second or so of the engine turning over it does feel strangely out of balance, but once the engine fires up it settles immediately.

The advantage of 3 cylinders is the lack of weight, and in the Mini this leads to really precise steering. I think both the diesel and petrol 3 cylinders are surprisingly good engines. I have had loan 116i models on a couple of occasions, with the same 3 cylinder petrol, and I have always been impressed.

Having driven both, we went for the Diesel engine, but either would have been fine. Not tried the 116d, but I'm sure the engine would cope well. I understand that there is also a 116d ED model with very long gearing - that doesn't sound a great idea to me.

Edited by 335d on Wednesday 21st June 00:13

Reg Local

2,676 posts

207 months

Wednesday 21st June 2017
quotequote all
I ran a 218i for 18 months or so. It's a nice engine, free revving with quite a nice raspy tone at higher revs. It has the typical low-rev torque curve common to most modern turbocharged engines, and it returned an average of 42mpg during my ownership (I don't generally adopt an economical driving style - when I did, I managed, once, to get 62mpg, but low 50s are easily possible).

Another advantage of the engine is that, because it's quite short, it's installed right up against the front bulkhead, which keeps the weight towards the middle of the car and, combined with it's low weight, made for a very nicely balanced chassis.

It's no scorcher, but use the gears properly, keep the revs up, anticipate and maintan momentum & it moves along quite nicely.

I had one small issue during ownership - one morning, a warning message appeared & it went into limited performance mode. It went in for a software update and seemed to come back a little more spritely. It also started automatically rev-matching after the update.

Mrs Local has the same engine in her Mini Cooper. It's a better performer in a lighter car and mid-50s mpg is easily achievable.

Mr Tidy

22,065 posts

126 months

Friday 23rd June 2017
quotequote all
I had a 3-cylinder Mini Cooper as a courtesy car once (thankfully)!

Sounded like a tractor, lifeless performance unless you revved the nuts off it at which point it was hard to see what it offered that a decent N/A couldn't provide but without sounding like an agricultural implement - so not a fan! laugh

milburn7191

42 posts

88 months

Thursday 6th July 2017
quotequote all
This is nothing to do with the driving experience, but just a small insight into the modern world of automotive manufacturing and marketing.

It is a common misconception that manufacturers are building 1.0 and 1.5L 3 cylinder engines to meet emissions legislation...here is the real reason; money!

1. The largest new car market in the world is China; in 2015 Audi sold more cars in China than the rest of the world combined. In China the laws regarding taxation of cars is very different to here, and I wont bore you with the details, but it means that if your engine is below 1.5L the tax is normal and if it is above 1.5L then it is extortionate. I know guys that live in Shanghai that pay approx. £8000 in car tax for a 2.0L people carrier (again it is based on many things, not just the cars emissions stated by the manufacturer).

2. If manufacturers sell a car with a 1.5L for £25,000, this means that they can sell the 2.0L for £30,000. Previously the the 2.0L might have been the smallest engine so the car would have been £25,000 for a 2.0L but now they have the 1.5L they do not sell it for less, they just hike up the price of the bigger engines.

So what does all this mean: They sell a s**t load of cars globally because they are now affordable in China; and the cars that they sell with larger engines now command a larger pricetag

$$$$$$$


The BMW engine is the best 3 cylinder currently on the market; but this is an irrelevant statement because you are not going to buy a 1-series with a Ford or Renault engine, also because I have no experience comparing it to the 4-cylinders currently on offer.
Again I do not see the point in comparing the current 3-cylinder with an old NA 4-cylinder because you are not going to buy a brand new 1-series with a 10 year old engine design.

Rambling over; drive them both (3 and 4 pots) and them make up your own mind smile

Mr Tidy

22,065 posts

126 months

Friday 7th July 2017
quotequote all
[quote=milburn7191]This is nothing to do with the driving experience, but just a small insight into the modern world of automotive manufacturing and marketing.

It is a common misconception that manufacturers are building 1.0 and 1.5L 3 cylinder engines to meet emissions legislation...here is the real reason; money!

1. The largest new car market in the world is China; in 2015 Audi sold more cars in China than the rest of the world combined. In China the laws regarding taxation of cars is very different to here, and I wont bore you with the details, but it means that if your engine is below 1.5L the tax is normal and if it is above 1.5L then it is extortionate. I know guys that live in Shanghai that pay approx. £8000 in car tax for a 2.0L people carrier (again it is based on many things, not just the cars emissions stated by the manufacturer).

2. If manufacturers sell a car with a 1.5L for £25,000, this means that they can sell the 2.0L for £30,000. Previously the the 2.0L might have been the smallest engine so the car would have been £25,000 for a 2.0L but now they have the 1.5L they do not sell it for less, they just hike up the price of the bigger engines.

So what does all this mean: They sell a s**t load of cars globally because they are now affordable in China; and the cars that they sell with larger engines now command a larger pricetag

$$$$$$$ [quote]

Thanks for that. thumbup

Presumably that is why the MG3 has a 1.5 litre engine?!

But is a 3 cylinder 1.5 really that much cheaper to make than a 4 cylinder 1.5?

I know which I would prefer!

Ninja59

3,691 posts

111 months

Friday 7th July 2017
quotequote all
Drove a 218i with 1500 miles on the clock.It was okay up to say 40 mph and quite spritely, beyond that it did require a little more effort in my view.

The gearing I found a tad on the long side for my commute, and keeping it on the bubble was essential on some of the A roads I commute on.

MPG was "okay", but being only 1500 miles on the clock hard to judge, but it was around 35 MPG. That left me feeling a little "gutted" considering my 640 (yes diesel I know) does 34. I know which I would rather be in.

Handling wise it was good, could have done with an alignment I think to kill some of the slight understeer when pressing on, the only handling body roll trait I did not like was the slight "odd" wobble side to side on the M20 it had, which I simply could not understand.

Overall though I liked it, when the turbo was in action it was a little riot of a car. Ironically, the 116i or 118i is on the list of cars for my wife as her first car (she is in her 30's though so it is okay!)

creepy coupe

302 posts

132 months

Friday 7th July 2017
quotequote all
Mr Tidy]ilburn7191 said:
This is nothing to do with the driving experience, but just a small insight into the modern world of automotive manufacturing and marketing.

It is a common misconception that manufacturers are building 1.0 and 1.5L 3 cylinder engines to meet emissions legislation...here is the real reason; money!

1. The largest new car market in the world is China; in 2015 Audi sold more cars in China than the rest of the world combined. In China the laws regarding taxation of cars is very different to here, and I wont bore you with the details, but it means that if your engine is below 1.5L the tax is normal and if it is above 1.5L then it is extortionate. I know guys that live in Shanghai that pay approx. £8000 in car tax for a 2.0L people carrier (again it is based on many things, not just the cars emissions stated by the manufacturer).

2. If manufacturers sell a car with a 1.5L for £25,000, this means that they can sell the 2.0L for £30,000. Previously the the 2.0L might have been the smallest engine so the car would have been £25,000 for a 2.0L but now they have the 1.5L they do not sell it for less, they just hike up the price of the bigger engines.

So what does all this mean: They sell a s**t load of cars globally because they are now affordable in China; and the cars that they sell with larger engines now command a larger pricetag

$$$$$$$ [quote]

Thanks for that. thumbup

Presumably that is why the MG3 has a 1.5 litre engine?!

But is a 3 cylinder 1.5 really that much cheaper to make than a 4 cylinder 1.5?

I know which I would prefer!
Why not just sleave a 4 pot down to 1.0ltr? It would be cheaper than redesigning a new engine. The reason is weight. If your're going to fit a small engine in a small car, it helps fuel consumption, because it's lighter.

Mike335i

4,985 posts

101 months

Saturday 8th July 2017
quotequote all
creepy coupe said:
Why not just sleave a 4 pot down to 1.0ltr? It would be cheaper than redesigning a new engine. The reason is weight. If your're going to fit a small engine in a small car, it helps fuel consumption, because it's lighter.
I think it's also that these BMW engines are modular from 3 to 6 cylinder, so one adaptable engine design rather than the many previous designs.

I had a 3cyl mini Cooper the other day whilst mine was in for a service. The car was quite nice to drive I suppose, but it seemed completely unremarkable. It gripped well and the steering was quick, but a Polo or a Fiesta would probably be broadly similar. The engine was smooth, punchy with lots of torque that seemed to have an entirely flat torque curve up until about 5k rpm ish, when it began to tail off. The sound was different so a novelty at first, but not spine tingling or even that nice.

What really hampered it though was the gearing, as it was just too long to be fun. Second gear goes all the way up to 70mph which is just to high in a car like that, although it does help economy. It felt slower than it actually was.

Objectively its a good engine that fits its design brief well, but it didnt really do anything for me.

sjj84

2,390 posts

218 months

Sunday 9th July 2017
quotequote all
I had a 116d as a loan car a few months back, hateful thing. I drove it home and left it on the drive whilst using one of my other cars, a ford fiesta of all things to commute to work. There's a short hill on my route home from work, every car I've ever driven along that road can manage to stay in top gear without problem, the 116d had to drop a gear. It was a truely disappointing car in every aspect.

Mr Tidy

22,065 posts

126 months

Monday 10th July 2017
quotequote all
Mike335i said:
What really hampered it though was the gearing, as it was just too long to be fun. Second gear goes all the way up to 70mph which is just to high in a car like that, although it does help economy. It felt slower than it actually was.

Objectively its a good engine that fits its design brief well, but it didnt really do anything for me.
Yes, I forgot about the gearing being too high.

But I can't see how high gearing helps economy unless you drive like a granny - you have to rev the nuts off them to get any performance. laugh

RBH58

969 posts

134 months

Monday 10th July 2017
quotequote all
Triples sound better than 4 cylinders smile

335d

758 posts

117 months

Monday 10th July 2017
quotequote all
sjj84 said:
I had a 116d as a loan car a few months back, hateful thing. I drove it home and left it on the drive whilst using one of my other cars, a ford fiesta of all things to commute to work. There's a short hill on my route home from work, every car I've ever driven along that road can manage to stay in top gear without problem, the 116d had to drop a gear. It was a truely disappointing car in every aspect.
I wonder if this was actually a 116d ED (Efficient Dynamics model), which is a version of the 116d with unusually high gearing. It would still be badged as a 116d, so you would need to enter the reg number into a vehicle check website / app to tell. The ED version does seem to attract a lot of criticism for its high gearing which may well be justified.

Our experience of the 116d engine, albeit in the lighter body of a Mini, is that it allows decent progress.

Mr Tidy

22,065 posts

126 months

Wednesday 12th July 2017
quotequote all
RBH58 said:
Triples sound better than 4 cylinders smile
Do they?

Petrol sixes sound better than either though! laugh

creepy coupe

302 posts

132 months

Wednesday 12th July 2017
quotequote all
Mike335i said:
I think it's also that these BMW engines are modular from 3 to 6 cylinder, so one adaptable engine design rather than the many previous designs.

.
Have to agree. To fit multi platforms.

iSore

4,011 posts

143 months

Wednesday 12th July 2017
quotequote all
Nothing new though - the 1968 M30 straight six used many parts (pistons, rods, rockers, valves etc) from the M10 'four' and so on.

RBH58

969 posts

134 months

Wednesday 12th July 2017
quotequote all
Mr Tidy said:
Do they?

Petrol sixes sound better than either though! laugh
Listen to a BMW 1.5 and it does sound surprisingly like an inline-6. Not kidding.

creepy coupe

302 posts

132 months

Wednesday 12th July 2017
quotequote all
RBH58 said:
Listen to a BMW 1.5 and it does sound surprisingly like an inline-6. Not kidding.
It will do. It uses the same phase angle of 120° It's not as naturally well balanced because no two pistons are at the top or bottom of the bores at any one time like a six pot.