E90 330i vs. B7 A4

[Jason C]

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/Comparos/articleId=106052

I can see some clear advantages and disadvantages of each, but I'll hold my comments (and vote) for now. Which one would you park in your own garage, and why?

(Let's try to keep the "But I wouldn't get either one of these, I'd get car X" comments to a minimum)

[TD]

I haven't driven either one and I know to take magazine reviews with a large grain of salt. I think we can safely assume they will both have very similar feel - distinctly European but still rather numb.

For me, the biggest problem is that I'm just not feeling either one. No lust.

And if you don't feel any actual lust for a car, in the end, specific driving traits probably won't matter much.

[bren]

BMW, assuming all this is true: "...it's also faster, it handles better, has superior brakes, is roomier...."

I like the AWD of the A4 and that's about it.

[Jason C]

Plenty of votes, but not much in the way of commentary. What gives? ;)

I'd have to vote for the BMW, my misgivings about BMWs *cough* interesting engineering decisions notwithstanding. I'm not drawn to interstate cruisin', showing off on main street, stoplight wars, or drag racing. I think a car really should come into its element on a deserted stretch of canyon roads - and by that standard, the Audi would seem to fall short. The anti-snob in me really likes the A4, and my wallet likes the Audi more too. But it's not enough to sway me. Plus, in the area of esoteric emotional appeal, the NA straight-six just sounds much better than a muffled turbo 4-banger.

I think lemming summed up my sentiments a while back when he noted that despite all of our jabs at BMW numb fat-piggery, the competition for the most part is still noticeably behind in most areas of driving dynamics.

(Look at the polling, Hack! Maybe BMW isn't such an underdog around here as you thought?)

[Theo]

BMW, assuming all this is true: "...it's also faster, it handles better, has superior brakes, is roomier...."

I like the AWD of the A4 and that's about it.

Exactly.

Not that I like either, but the A4 wide mouth bass look is just ugly.

[JST]

Plenty of votes, but not much in the way of commentary. What gives? ;)

I'd have to vote for the BMW, my misgivings about BMWs *cough* interesting engineering decisions notwithstanding. I'm not drawn to interstate cruisin', showing off on main street, stoplight wars, or drag racing. I think a car really should come into its element on a deserted stretch of canyon roads - and by that standard, the Audi would seem to fall short. The anti-snob in me really likes the A4, and my wallet likes the Audi more too. But it's not enough to sway me. Plus, in the area of esoteric emotional appeal, the NA straight-six just sounds much better than a muffled turbo 4-banger.

I think lemming summed up my sentiments a while back when he noted that despite all of our jabs at BMW numb fat-piggery, the competition for the most part is still noticeably behind in most areas of driving dynamics.

(Look at the polling, Hack! Maybe BMW isn't such an underdog around here as you thought?)

IMHO, and having driven nearly everything available that's even close to being a competitor in my recent search, there are only two four door sedans that can give BMW a run for its money in terms of driving dynamics. One is the CTS-V. The other is the G35. Everything else is a pretender.

The Audi is nice enough, and I'd drive one as a second car, but if I could only have one car and I were asked to choose, there's no contest. It's front weight bias, lack of power, and poor suspension tuning doom it. Even the go-go S4, which has a really, really nice engine, can't compete even with a garden variety 330 SP in terms of being a rewarding drive.

[blee]

I would plunk down my money for the E90. My reasoning is similar to JST's.

What's more, I really do like the way it looks. I was pulling up to one this morning on the highway, and the rear 3/4 view was neat -- the sun was playing off of the body crease and the swoosh below it. It's really a handsome car, and it looks like it's a dynamic winner.

[Theo]

Plenty of votes, but not much in the way of commentary. What gives? ;)

I'd have to vote for the BMW, my misgivings about BMWs *cough* interesting engineering decisions notwithstanding. I'm not drawn to interstate cruisin', showing off on main street, stoplight wars, or drag racing. I think a car really should come into its element on a deserted stretch of canyon roads - and by that standard, the Audi would seem to fall short. The anti-snob in me really likes the A4, and my wallet likes the Audi more too. But it's not enough to sway me. Plus, in the area of esoteric emotional appeal, the NA straight-six just sounds much better than a muffled turbo 4-banger.

I think lemming summed up my sentiments a while back when he noted that despite all of our jabs at BMW numb fat-piggery, the competition for the most part is still noticeably behind in most areas of driving dynamics.

(Look at the polling, Hack! Maybe BMW isn't such an underdog around here as you thought?)

IMHO, and having driven nearly everything available that's even close to being a competitor in my recent search, there are only two four door sedans that can give BMW a run for its money in terms of driving dynamics. One is the CTS-V. The other is the G35. Everything else is a pretender.

The Audi is nice enough, and I'd drive one as a second car, but if I could only have one car and I were asked to choose, there's no contest. It's front weight bias, lack of power, and poor suspension tuning doom it. Even the go-go S4, which has a really, really nice engine, can't compete even with a garden variety 330 SP in terms of being a rewarding drive.

I hope the E90 M3 V8 has the punch and sounds of the current S4. JST is right, when I test drove the car it was the single best thing about it.

[lip277]

If you gave me either one - Fine.

If it's my money crossing the table - I'd get a used car (probably an E38 or E39) and pocket the difference. :flipoff:

[Optimus Prime]

I like audi's styling a little better, but I like BMW's "engineering" a little better (whatever the hell that means)

I'd plop down the money on a new 330 right now for the wife if it had a Heads-up-Display like the 5 series. Good thing it doesn't, she likes the Mazda 6 and it's been an insanely cheap car to own so far. That makes it easier for me to spend money on motorcycle stuff.

[lemming]

right now, i'd choose the e90 330i.

audi has not figured out how to do driving dynamics and because the 3.1L v6 comes auto only and the turbo four is kind of smallish (c'mon man, my minimum requirement is the 2.5litre turbo four from subie) --in this comparison, the bmw 330i wins without question.

looks wise, i love the new audi a4. not a fan of the e90. sorry. it's fine but i don't drool when i see one at all. the problem with the new bmw's to me is that they look so damn tacky and they're so busy, but they still don't look aggressive to me at all. the e60 needs the M5 package and i predict the e90m3 will look badass whereas the e90 330 just looks too much like a jaguar x-type.

[Jason C]

I was talking to a friend about this comparo and about the E90 in general. Something we both noted:

Active Steering: Optional
I-Drive: Optional
Me: :thumbup:

I have been going to the BMWNA website a lot more in the last 3 months than I have the last 3 years. Since I'm going to be working soon (yay, no more perpetual unemployment) I'm actually crunching the numbers for a stripper 330i. More waffling? Probably. :)

http://forums.carmudgeons.com/album_pic.php?pic_id=735
http://forums.carmudgeons.com/album_pic.php?pic_id=734


I have to say, it's the only *new* BMW in years that has any sort of appeal to me.

[lemming]

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/Comparos/articleId=106052/pageId=64262

why is the all new e90 with the lightweight magnesium cased engine 3415 pounds?

and why is the audi with the wee 4 banger engine 3517 pounds?

you're telling me that the e90 330i, which only has 255hp, weighs the same as the e46m3? i don't find the e90 330i to be all that much of a revelation, frankly, because the e46 should ahve had that power all along.

and it still kicks the audi a4's butt. they should have included the CTS 3.6litre 260hp with the new manual transmission, just for fun.

EDIT addition: the g35 sedan with the 298hp 6speed setup eats both of these cars alive and is still hungry for dessert. whoever wrote that edmunds.com article is another one of those people who has probably spent their life driving an underpowered FWDer lusting after BMWs and they're so blinded by their german wanderlust they forget how competitive this segment is becoming.

[Jason C]

EDIT addition: the g35 sedan with the 298hp 6speed setup eats both of these cars alive and is still hungry for dessert. whoever wrote that edmunds.com article is another one of those people who has probably spent their life driving an underpowered FWDer lusting after BMWs and they're so blinded by their german wanderlust they forget how competitive this segment is becoming.

Didn't you categorically eliminate the G35 because you thought that it was ugly, inside and out? :eeps:

FYI, a B7 quattro with the 3.2 would have been in the 3700lbs range. :thumbdow:

[lemming]

EDIT addition: the g35 sedan with the 298hp 6speed setup eats both of these cars alive and is still hungry for dessert. whoever wrote that edmunds.com article is another one of those people who has probably spent their life driving an underpowered FWDer lusting after BMWs and they're so blinded by their german wanderlust they forget how competitive this segment is becoming.

Didn't you categorically eliminate the G35 because you thought that it was ugly, inside and out? :eeps:

FYI, a B7 quattro with the 3.2 would have been in the 3700lbs range. :thumbdow:

are you nuts?

no. that wasn't the ultimate factor. its lack of pure speed meant it didn't make the cut. i can deal with ugly as long as it's fast (to a point). the V is no looker. to me, it's the 4 door version of the M coupe. funny looking and a bit crude but really, really fast.

if the g35 was faster, i would have gotten that because it's less expensive. the 330 is a competent car but it doesn't make me want to run to the dealership just yet. the new m3 might.

[FC]

the 330 is a competent car but it doesn't make me want to run to the dealership just yet. the new m3 might.

OK, this is something I don't get. How is the new M3 going to be "better" than the E46 besides speed/power? The suspension may be a bit better, but it is the weight that always got in the way of the E46 M3, I thought (never driven one).

Let's say it comes in at 3500lbs with a 50/50 weight distribution, a better suspension, and the much anticipated 400hp V8. Sounds like an awesome car, and it probably will be. But for what they'll ask ($55-60K?), will it be worth it? We can expect it to be even more isolated than the E46. It is not going to be very pretty (though hopefully not bad-looking). It will probably have crappy brakes (for whatever reason: calipers/venting).

It will be very fast, but so is a C6 'vette. So you may end up getting a more refined, classier, better-quality car, but heavier and MUCH more expensive than a C6.

For the same money, one could have a Cayman S. Assuming one doesn't need the back seats, the $60K question to me is: Cayman S or E90 M3?

[JST]

the 330 is a competent car but it doesn't make me want to run to the dealership just yet. the new m3 might.

OK, this is something I don't get. How is the new M3 going to be "better" than the E46 besides speed/power? The suspension may be a bit better, but it is the weight that always got in the way of the E46 M3, I thought (never driven one).

Let's say it comes in at 3500lbs with a 50/50 weight distribution, a better suspension, and the much anticipated 400hp V8. Sounds like an awesome car, and it probably will be. But for what they'll ask ($55-60K?), will it be worth it? We can expect it to be even more isolated than the E46. It is not going to be very pretty (though hopefully not bad-looking). It will probably have crappy brakes (for whatever reason: calipers/venting).

It will be very fast, but so is a C6 'vette. So you may end up getting a more refined, classier, better-quality car, but heavier and MUCH more expensive than a C6.

For the same money, one could have a Cayman S. Assuming one doesn't need the back seats, the $60K question to me is: Cayman S or E90 M3?

I do need the back seats.

At this point, my hopes for a new M3 are low; my hopes for a 335i are somewhat higher.

[Jason C]

For the same money, one could have a Cayman S. Assuming one doesn't need the back seats, the $60K question to me is: Cayman S or E90 M3?

<Stuka mode>

Or you could pony up a bit more (about $6k to be exact) for a car that actually has a race-bred engine with a dry sump, not these POS trackday *motorsport* poseur cars.

</Stuka mode>

[Rob]

OK, this is something I don't get. How is the new M3 going to be "better" than the E46 besides speed/power?

It will presumably have lots more torque. Torque is good. Yes, that's "more power," but it's not the same as more hp. Throttle steering is good stuff and makes any drive much more interesting.

It will probably be "better" than the e46 like the e46 was "better" than the e36. In other words, it will have better numbers in some areas, but lots of people will claim that it isn't really an improvement.

[FC]

For the same money, one could have a Cayman S. Assuming one doesn't need the back seats, the $60K question to me is: Cayman S or E90 M3?

<Stuka mode>

Or you could pony up a bit more (about $6k to be exact) for a car that actually has a race-bred engine with a dry sump, not these POS trackday *motorsport* poseur cars.

</Stuka mode>

Agreed. But for all the Z06's potential track glory, it remains to be seen if it will make a comfortable, refined daily driver. It may make for the most devastatingly fast, reliable, and well-handling piece of machinery south of (at least) a GT3, and those are all GOOD things. But if I cannot have comfortable fun driving it 60 miles a day through suburban twisty roads, it's no good for me.

Regardless, it would be WAY too much car for me. Hell, my 330i probably is too much performance for what I can handle, so I will likely go more for a "driver's nirvana" type of car than a race car. The Cayman/Boxster are the closest to an Elise without a strung out engine and with a decent dealer network/warranty and some semblance of practicality and comfort.

[lemming]

For the same money, one could have a Cayman S. Assuming one doesn't need the back seats, the $60K question to me is: Cayman S or E90 M3?

<Stuka mode>

Or you could pony up a bit more (about $6k to be exact) for a car that actually has a race-bred engine with a dry sump, not these POS trackday *motorsport* poseur cars.

</Stuka mode>

Agreed. But for all the Z06's potential track glory, it remains to be seen if it will make a comfortable, refined daily driver. It may make for the most devastatingly fast, reliable, and well-handling piece of machinery south of (at least) a GT3, and those are all GOOD things. But if I cannot have comfortable fun driving it 60 miles a day through suburban twisty roads, it's no good for me.

Regardless, it would be WAY too much car for me. Hell, my 330i probably is too much performance for what I can handle, so I will likely go more for a "driver's nirvana" type of car than a race car. The Cayman/Boxster are the closest to an Elise without a strung out engine and with a decent dealer network/warranty and some semblance of practicality and comfort.

you're right, of course. the zhp 330i is already overkill for the road and the e90 330i supposedly ups that driving experience.

[John V]

It will probably be "better" than the e46 like the e46 was "better" than the e36. In other words, it will have better numbers in some areas, but lots of people will claim that it isn't really an improvement.

I know this probably isn't what you intended, but every time I see your username I think "rectangular waveguide."

Moving on...

The E46 was "better" than the E36 in that it became more isolated in the steering and ride, offered more room, better interior materials, more technology and more features. It wasn't "better" if one's intentions were at all sporting.

[claresecl]

I'd get the A4... Because I did :p

[rumatt]

I'd get the A4... Because I did :p

If we followed that advice, we'd all have multiple wieners! :P


Still happy with the A4? I read your initial report, but haven't kept up after that.

[claresecl]

I'd get the A4... Because I did :p

If we followed that advice, we'd all have multiple wieners! :P


Still happy with the A4? I read your initial report, but haven't kept up after that.

Nothing wrong with having multiple wieners!

I am really loving the car. The more I drive it, the more I like it.

[rumatt]

'meicans

Is that short for Mexican American's or something? :scratch:

:twisted:

[FC]

You know, I really don't get this refined ride obsession that most 'meicans seem to have.

I used to think that maybe when I get older that I'll get it, but I still don't. The GT3 is plenty comfortable, and I doubt the Z06 will be THAT much harder.

And with regards to dealer network, I would think that domestics will blow away a small fern company like the P car.

What the hell is a 'meican? :?

Refined is a relative term. A "poseur" 997S has a refined ride comapred to a GT3, but it has a welded suspension compared to a Town Car.

You must have gotten used to SoCal roads. My 330i is plenty stiff for NE roads. I drove a Boxster and that is even stiffer. I don't know what a Z06 will sound like, but the base boxster I drove was much louder than Zach's E36M3 and I still consider it refined versus an insanely loud exhaust.

So stop acting like I yearn for a Cadillac Deville. Nobody gets on your case for being a sportscar reactionary. Let us poor bastards think one can still have fun in a cushy, POS Cayman or M3. At least I have an open mind. :rolleyes:

[Jason C]

About that 'merican, never in anywhere else in the world have I encountered this much emphasis on "smooth ride."

Have you ever travelled to the UK?

[John V]

All I'm saying is that Boxster is not harsh, and neither is any certified road car, including the GT3, and that not getting a "hardly sprung" car because your tushy might get a work out is silly. After all, we all like sports cars.

About that 'merican, never in anywhere else in the world have I encountered this much emphasis on "smooth ride." I actually had my friend's wife asking me why my 98 M3 was so rough compares to her Tercel. :lol:

You had a '98 M3? The ultimate POSEUR car! The motor in that car was derived from the US-spec 325 engine. Eeew! I can't believe you'd be seen in such a low-class car! I would only own one of those if it had the proper Euro spec S50 motor with individual throttle bodies, higher compression, better-flowing heads...

:)

[blee]

All I'm saying is that Boxster is not harsh, and neither is any certified road car, including the GT3, and that not getting a "hardly sprung" car because your tushy might get a work out is silly. After all, we all like sports cars.

About that 'merican, never in anywhere else in the world have I encountered this much emphasis on "smooth ride." I actually had my friend's wife asking me why my 98 M3 was so rough compares to her Tercel. :lol:

You had a '98 M3? The ultimate POSEUR car! The motor in that car was derived from the US-spec 325 engine. Eeew! I can't believe you'd be seen in such a low-class car! I would only own one of those if it had the proper Euro spec S50 motor with individual throttle bodies, higher compression, better-flowing heads...

:)

Yes. A poseur car, indeed.

:eeps:

[Jason C]

All I'm saying is that Boxster is not harsh, and neither is any certified road car, including the GT3, and that not getting a "hardly sprung" car because your tushy might get a work out is silly. After all, we all like sports cars.

About that 'merican, never in anywhere else in the world have I encountered this much emphasis on "smooth ride." I actually had my friend's wife asking me why my 98 M3 was so rough compares to her Tercel. :lol:

You had a '98 M3? The ultimate POSEUR car! The motor in that car was derived from the US-spec 325 engine. Eeew! I can't believe you'd be seen in such a low-class car! I would only own one of those if it had the proper Euro spec S50 motor with individual throttle bodies, higher compression, better-flowing heads...

:)

Yes. A poseur car, indeed.

:eeps:

Poseurevolution.com, anyone? :)

[FC]

Poseurevolution.com, anyone? :)

:lol:

[Jason C]

looks wise, i love the new audi a4. not a fan of the e90. sorry. it's fine but i don't drool when i see one at all. the problem with the new bmw's to me is that they look so damn tacky and they're so busy, but they still don't look aggressive to me at all. the e60 needs the M5 package and i predict the e90m3 will look badass whereas the e90 330 just looks too much like a jaguar x-type.

I actually got to see a 330i non-ZSP up close yesterday (and played around with the different key functions). It looked suble in silver, dare-I-say, a bit boring. All that creasework in the sheetmetal seem to blend in. But I'd take a bit boring over Z4-look styling anytime.

As with a lot of other cars, black once again will be the de facto safe choice.

[zach]

All I'm saying is that Boxster is not harsh, and neither is any certified road car, including the GT3, and that not getting a "hardly sprung" car because your tushy might get a work out is silly. After all, we all like sports cars.

About that 'merican, never in anywhere else in the world have I encountered this much emphasis on "smooth ride." I actually had my friend's wife asking me why my 98 M3 was so rough compares to her Tercel. :lol:

You had a '98 M3? The ultimate POSEUR car! The motor in that car was derived from the US-spec 325 engine. Eeew! I can't believe you'd be seen in such a low-class car! I would only own one of those if it had the proper Euro spec S50 motor with individual throttle bodies, higher compression, better-flowing heads...

:)

...not to mention the fact that his had a slushy.

[FC]

...not to mention the fact that his had a slushy.

You're kidding right? Please tell me you are. :shock:

[Jason C]

...not to mention the fact that his had a slushy.

You're kidding right? Please tell me you are. :shock:

http://scorpius.150m.com/master/smilie/ban.gif

[zach]

...not to mention the fact that his had a slushy.

You're kidding right? Please tell me you are. :shock:

It's true. And then, depending on one's perspective on such things, he moved on to an automatic e46 M3.

Preemptive :flipoff: to Nick et al.

Edit: In Stuka's defense, I think he had a 5spd e36 m3 as well.

[zach]

You had a '98 M3? The ultimate POSEUR car! The motor in that car was derived from the US-spec 325 engine. Eeew! I can't believe you'd be seen in such a low-class car! I would only own one of those if it had the proper Euro spec S50 motor with individual throttle bodies, higher compression, better-flowing heads...

:)

Yes, it was, and I seriously looked into getting a 150K mile E36 M3 and sticking a 321HP euro motor, Al doors, 6 speed tranny, and the DME. In the end, it was uninsurable, and I decided to get the E46 M3 instead.

On that same logic, what would 911's with bored out Boxster engines be called?

Right, that's what I thought.

Um, he was joking. The e36 M3 was and is a terrific performance sedan, despite the lack of engine pedigree.

[JST]

You had a '98 M3? The ultimate POSEUR car! The motor in that car was derived from the US-spec 325 engine. Eeew! I can't believe you'd be seen in such a low-class car! I would only own one of those if it had the proper Euro spec S50 motor with individual throttle bodies, higher compression, better-flowing heads...

:)

Yes, it was, and I seriously looked into getting a 150K mile E36 M3 and sticking a 321HP euro motor, Al doors, 6 speed tranny, and the DME. In the end, it was uninsurable, and I decided to get the E46 M3 instead.

On that same logic, what would 911's with bored out Boxster engines be called?

Right, that's what I thought.

Um, he was joking. The e36 M3 was and is a terrific performance sedan, despite the lack of engine pedigree.

Bah. I don't think John V. would be caught dead in something as prosaic as an E36 M3. Especially not one of those poseur yellow ones.

[lemming]

hey!

i owned a 99m3 coupe.

that wasn't a poseur car because that was our only choice. and it was fine keeping up with the euro e36m3 about until 100mph.

i did vote for the 330i, but if it were my money and i was tied to a sub 40k budget, there'd be no question i'm choose the g35 sedan.

[JST]

hey!

i owned a 99m3 coupe.

that wasn't a poseur car because that was our only choice. and it was fine keeping up with the euro e36m3 about until 100mph.

i did vote for the 330i, but if it were my money and i was tied to a sub 40k budget, there'd be no question i'm choose the g35 sedan.

psst...


lemming...


John V. drives a yellow E36 M3...

[lemming]

hey!

i owned a 99m3 coupe.

that wasn't a poseur car because that was our only choice. and it was fine keeping up with the euro e36m3 about until 100mph.

i did vote for the 330i, but if it were my money and i was tied to a sub 40k budget, there'd be no question i'm choose the g35 sedan.

psst...


lemming...


John V. drives a yellow E36 M3...

....which is why i would want to own a g35 with 298hp and a 6speed........it addresses two issues i had with the e36m3.

1. the lack of high end breathing.
2. the lack of a 6th gear.

plus the newer engines have much less peaky power delivery. it's just the way it is. as much as i hate to admit it, the 3.0 litre (ONLY in the e46) has a nice broad power curve that is missing in the e36m3. it's just the other stuff in the e46 that detracts from the driving experience. the e90 makes it worse.

[John V]

psst...


lemming...


John V. drives a yellow E36 M3...

:eeps: :eeps:



....which is why i would want to own a g35 with 298hp and a 6speed........it addresses two issues i had with the e36m3.

1. the lack of high end breathing.
2. the lack of a 6th gear.

plus the newer engines have much less peaky power delivery. it's just the way it is. as much as i hate to admit it, the 3.0 litre (ONLY in the e46) has a nice broad power curve that is missing in the e36m3. it's just the other stuff in the e46 that detracts from the driving experience. the e90 makes it worse.

The E36 M3 (3.0L) powerband can be fixed with one simple modification - the Euro HFM kit. If you want it to feel like the '96-99 3.2L cars, 3.23 gears in the diff help a lot.

And even lacking a 6th gear, my M3 trounces my buddy's G35 Coupe in fuel economy. Driven spiritedly, my M3 gets 21-22MPG city and 28-29MPG highway. His G struggles to get 25 on the freeway. :?

I like the G35, but there are a couple things I can't get past. First, the "sitting in a bathtub" feel to it. I guess high doorsills are the way cars are going, but it sucks. The second is the clutch / electronic throttle. That car is impossible to drive smoothly. Third is the weight. The car is heavy and you feel every pound.

But for a freeway cruiser it's better than the M3.

[clyde]

The E46 was "better" than the E36 in that it became more isolated in the steering and ride, offered more room, better interior materials, more technology and more features. It wasn't "better" if one's intentions were at all sporting.

Whoa, whoa, whoa...hold up there, cowpoke...

Substitute E36 for E46 and E30 for E36 and it wouldn't take but one letter to Roundel to have a thousand bench racers bowing to kiss your fungus infested footsies.

If you were looking for a competitive D Stock ride, what you would you choose? An E30? An E36? An E46? Yeah...I thought so.

According to those in the know around here, "sporting" is code for "sports car" which, as they have dug in their designer Piloti ensconed heels over, is code itself for "RACE car", hence "sporting" = "RACE car". Add to that, the requirement that has been repeated more often a three year old asking "Why?" that the only thing that matters in these RACE cars is leave-Evelyn-Wood-reading-in-the-dust like speed and the truth will out itself:

What is faster is what is better because it will win the most HPDE Championship events (remember, now, "HPDE" is also code for "RACING").

Therefore...the E46 p0wnz j00, even when it stops to hide three seconds under the Kenny cone.

EOD

[John V]

The E46 was "better" than the E36 in that it became more isolated in the steering and ride, offered more room, better interior materials, more technology and more features. It wasn't "better" if one's intentions were at all sporting.

Whoa, whoa, whoa...hold up there, cowpoke...

Substitute E36 for E46 and E30 for E36 and it wouldn't take but one letter to Roundel to have a thousand bench racers bowing to kiss your fungus infested footsies.

If you were looking for a competitive D Stock ride, what you would you choose? An E30? An E36? An E46? Yeah...I thought so.

According to those in the know around here, "sporting" is code for "sports car" which, as they have dug in their designer Piloti ensconed heels over, is code itself for "RACE car", hence "sporting" = "RACE car". Add to that, the requirement that has been repeated more often a three year old asking "Why?" that the only thing that matters in these RACE cars is leave-Evelyn-Wood-reading-in-the-dust like speed and the truth will out itself:

What is faster is what is better because it will win the most HPDE Championship events (remember, now, "HPDE" is also code for "RACING").

Therefore...the E46 p0wnz j00, even when it stops to hide three seconds under the Kenny cone.

EOD

I don't even know where to start, so I'm not gonna.

Except...

RACE

:yikes:

[Rob]

Clyde, you are on fire this week. :lol:

[Rob]

It will probably be "better" than the e46 like the e46 was "better" than the e36. In other words, it will have better numbers in some areas, but lots of people will claim that it isn't really an improvement.

I know this probably isn't what you intended, but every time I see your username I think "rectangular waveguide."

Moving on...

The E46 was "better" than the E36 in that it became more isolated in the steering and ride, offered more room, better interior materials, more technology and more features. It wasn't "better" if one's intentions were at all sporting.

I don't even know what a rectangular wave guide is. the call name is just my initials. :p

[Jason C]

Some nice comparison shots:

http://www.bimmerfest.com/forums/showthread.php?t=102277

The E90 does look quite good. But the E46 doesn't look very dated.

It's a far smoother transition than any other BMW recieved as of late.

Oh, and zeckhausen already has the CDV (http://www.zeckhausen.com/BMW/E90.htm) ready. Maybe if the ZHP had it removed, TD would buy one? :eeps:

[Jason C]

http://forums.carmudgeons.com/album_pic.php?pic_id=738
http://forums.carmudgeons.com/album_pic.php?pic_id=739
http://forums.carmudgeons.com/album_pic.php?pic_id=740
http://forums.carmudgeons.com/album_pic.php?pic_id=741
http://forums.carmudgeons.com/album_pic.php?pic_id=742

[blee]

Nice pics. I prefer the E90.

[lemming]

i don't mind the e90, but like the audi a4 design, it's kind of styled so as to not be hate-worthy.

both of the cars in those pictures are pretty.

one hopes both of them would be for high 40k to low 50k --poor s4. the e90 330i would still thrash it like a nun beating me in catholic school on any road course.

:lol:

[Jason C]

Nice pics. I prefer the E90.

Came across these excellent moving shots here:

http://e90post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1580

I think it's obvious that Bangle and Co. were told to *cough* restrain themselves for this model.

[lemming]

why are BMW wheels so damn ugly these days? was there something wrong with using classic BBS rims?

(they look heavy, too).

i'll bet those are heavy cast wheels.

blech.

[SARAFIL]

why are BMW wheels so damn ugly these days? was there something wrong with using classic BBS rims?

(they look heavy, too).

i'll bet those are heavy cast wheels.

blech.

Funny you should say that.

A few weeks ago I took a 330i SP home for the weekend. This weekend, I have a 325i SP. Surprisingly, I think the 325i feels nearly as quick as the 330i did. I think the difference in the wheel sizes and weights (18" vs 17") makes itself known when you drive these too cars. I've heard from many different people that the 325i might become the true "enthusiast" spec model in factory trim because it is lighter and feels a bit more tossable without those heavy 18" wheels. We'll see...

[JST]

why are BMW wheels so damn ugly these days? was there something wrong with using classic BBS rims?

(they look heavy, too).

i'll bet those are heavy cast wheels.

blech.

Funny you should say that.

A few weeks ago I took a 330i SP home for the weekend. This weekend, I have a 325i SP. Surprisingly, I think the 325i feels nearly as quick as the 330i did. I think the difference in the wheel sizes and weights (18" vs 17") makes itself known when you drive these too cars. I've heard from many different people that the 325i might become the true "enthusiast" spec model in factory trim because it is lighter and feels a bit more tossable without those heavy 18" wheels. We'll see...

My autox wheels are 17 (old, non-LTW 7.5" wheels from a 95 M3). Other than a more precise turn-in, which might have something to do with wheel weight but probably has a lot more to do with the tires, I don't notice any glaring difference between driving my car with 17s v. the 18 inch wheels it came with.

The 17s, BTW, are substantially ligther than then 18s. I haven't weighed either, but just from swapping them back and forth I can feel the difference.

[lemming]

the weight of almost any BMW 18" wheel is tremendous (non_M).

barring the dieter from sprockets wheel designs, they do tend to fill out the wheel wells better and look "cool". i'm just think that you only have 221ft#'s in your best case scenario to get those suckers moving from a standstill and then when you're stopping, you have little brake mechanisms trying to haul that rotational inertia plus the increased car weight down.

it's asking for a lot from the OEM componentry.

ah, who am i kidding. 99% of people will never test those limits. :lol:

[JST]

the weight of almost any BMW 18" wheel is tremendous (non_M).

barring the dieter from sprockets wheel designs, they do tend to fill out the wheel wells better and look "cool". i'm just think that you only have 221ft#'s in your best case scenario to get those suckers moving from a standstill and then when you're stopping, you have little brake mechanisms trying to haul that rotational inertia plus the increased car weight down.

it's asking for a lot from the OEM componentry.

ah, who am i kidding. 99% of people will never test those limits. :lol:

I think you're going a bit overboard in characterizing the E46 330s brakes as "little." The discs themselves are actually quite large (nearly 13" in diameter),* and the brakes perform admirably well. It strikes me as a valid criticism of the M cars that they don't have bigger/better brakes, since these cars are designed to take one step beyond what you'd realistically need for the street. But the 330, as one of BMW's mainstream cars, has brakes that are perfectly adequate. FWIW, if they were any bigger at all even 17 inch wheels wouldn't fit--mine clear with a credit card's thickness as it is.

I'm not going to lie to you and say that I think that the 330 has either a) enough torque or b) low enough gearing to comport with my everyday driving. However, I doubt that this will be a problem with the sequential FI setup that is being discussed for the 335--I suspect that car will have plenty of torque to deal with 18," 19" or even 20" wheels.






*As a point of comparison, the CTS-V has 14" rotors all the way around. The 330s are "only" 12.8/12.6, but then again, it weighs 4-500ish lbs less.

[lemming]

the weight of almost any BMW 18" wheel is tremendous (non_M).

barring the dieter from sprockets wheel designs, they do tend to fill out the wheel wells better and look "cool". i'm just think that you only have 221ft#'s in your best case scenario to get those suckers moving from a standstill and then when you're stopping, you have little brake mechanisms trying to haul that rotational inertia plus the increased car weight down.

it's asking for a lot from the OEM componentry.

ah, who am i kidding. 99% of people will never test those limits. :lol:

I think you're going a bit overboard in characterizing the E46 330s brakes as "little." The discs themselves are actually quite large (nearly 13" in diameter),* and the brakes perform admirably well. It strikes me as a valid criticism of the M cars that they don't have bigger/better brakes, since these cars are designed to take one step beyond what you'd realistically need for the street. But the 330, as one of BMW's mainstream cars, has brakes that are perfectly adequate. FWIW, if they were any bigger at all even 17 inch wheels wouldn't fit--mine clear with a credit card's thickness as it is.

I'm not going to lie to you and say that I think that the 330 has either a) enough torque or b) low enough gearing to comport with my everyday driving. However, I doubt that this will be a problem with the sequential FI setup that is being discussed for the 335--I suspect that car will have plenty of torque to deal with 18," 19" or even 20" wheels.






*As a point of comparison, the CTS-V has 14" rotors all the way around. The 330s are "only" 12.8/12.6, but then again, it weighs 4-500ish lbs less.

the V has better brakes than the z06 without a doubt and it's on par with the 993 and STi brakes --what do the three have in common? great ducting to the brakes, 4 piston calipers, vented discs all around and large discs at that.

no fade.

BMW brakes are what i call anecdotal brakes. they feel great --for the first 2-3 stops from high speed; that's enough to look good in magazine testing. in heavy duty usage, even with an experience trackster, they fade like mad mid-session (let's say the average session is 12-16 laps).

i've never felt the z06 brakes fade at the track, but this is a function of low weight and excellent ducting --i've felt E46 brakes fade like crazy even with stainless lines and superblue at a DE. did weight play a role? sure it did, but the OEM BMW brakes, M or non M, are crap. compared to the technological content in the engines and in the iDrive, active steering, active roll stabilization and "automatic safety wipers", the brakes are ridiculous.

[JST]

the weight of almost any BMW 18" wheel is tremendous (non_M).

barring the dieter from sprockets wheel designs, they do tend to fill out the wheel wells better and look "cool". i'm just think that you only have 221ft#'s in your best case scenario to get those suckers moving from a standstill and then when you're stopping, you have little brake mechanisms trying to haul that rotational inertia plus the increased car weight down.

it's asking for a lot from the OEM componentry.

ah, who am i kidding. 99% of people will never test those limits. :lol:

I think you're going a bit overboard in characterizing the E46 330s brakes as "little." The discs themselves are actually quite large (nearly 13" in diameter),* and the brakes perform admirably well. It strikes me as a valid criticism of the M cars that they don't have bigger/better brakes, since these cars are designed to take one step beyond what you'd realistically need for the street. But the 330, as one of BMW's mainstream cars, has brakes that are perfectly adequate. FWIW, if they were any bigger at all even 17 inch wheels wouldn't fit--mine clear with a credit card's thickness as it is.

I'm not going to lie to you and say that I think that the 330 has either a) enough torque or b) low enough gearing to comport with my everyday driving. However, I doubt that this will be a problem with the sequential FI setup that is being discussed for the 335--I suspect that car will have plenty of torque to deal with 18," 19" or even 20" wheels.






*As a point of comparison, the CTS-V has 14" rotors all the way around. The 330s are "only" 12.8/12.6, but then again, it weighs 4-500ish lbs less.

the V has better brakes than the z06 without a doubt and it's on par with the 993 and STi brakes --what do the three have in common? great ducting to the brakes, 4 piston calipers, vented discs all around and large discs at that.

no fade.

BMW brakes are what i call anecdotal brakes. they feel great --for the first 2-3 stops from high speed; that's enough to look good in magazine testing. in heavy duty usage, even with an experience trackster, they fade like mad mid-session (let's say the average session is 12-16 laps).

i've never felt the z06 brakes fade at the track, but this is a function of low weight and excellent ducting --i've felt E46 brakes fade like crazy even with stainless lines and superblue at a DE. did weight play a role? sure it did, but the OEM BMW brakes, M or non M, are crap. compared to the technological content in the engines and in the iDrive, active steering, active roll stabilization and "automatic safety wipers", the brakes are ridiculous.

I've never taken it to a trackday, so I can't comment on that, but I will say that if the biggest failing of the brakes on a non-M, mainstream BMW sedan is that they fade after 8 laps of a race course, that's not enough to dub them "ridiculous."

[lemming]

it's just my humble opinion, after all.

spending as much money as BMWs command and their corporate mantra being "ultimate driving machine", it's really disturbing how "competent" versus "super" the brakes are.

[FC]

it's just my humble opinion, after all.

spending as much money as BMWs command and their corporate mantra being "ultimate driving machine", it's really disturbing how "competent" versus "super" the brakes are.

They are not P-car brakes. I could tell immediately on base Boxster and I wasn't pushing it all that hard. But they are superb compared to my 92-X, and downright spectacular compared to other cars. And this applies not just to performance, but also feel, feedback, modulation, etc. I used to literally have recurring nightmares about my parents old Sable wagon's brakes giving up on me and crashing. Everyone in my family mocked me because I always rather drive the old POS 190D 2.2 rather than the newish Sable.

I'm sure at the track they may seem more flawed, but JST point is correct. These are primarily street cars. I drive my car hard and it performs brilliantly.

We're just spoiled.