BMW 320 i coupe test drive.

Alfasudcrazy

Took one for a spin today. The coupe version all decked out with light tan leather sports seats and black (non metallic ) paint. While my drive was spoiled a bit by slow moving traffic I think I got enough road to get the feel of it.

I am not very impressed really. For a 170bph car it did not give you that kick in the back I used to get when I put my foot down in my 150bph Alfa GT diesel for instance. On the move the steering and car felt very twitchy on undulating roads. Perhaps I am too spoiled by the soft suspension of the landcruiser by now but I don't recall my old BMW coupe being that nervous on the road.

I constantly had to adjust the steering to compensate for the car being thrown off line over what were really only average Irish country bumpy roads. The steering wheel is smaller and chunkier than my old BMW's - a feature I dislike.
I know I put on weight a bit too but the bolsters on the backrest of these sports seats are clearly designed for fitter types than me and felt more like obstructions than bolsters.
Also the left foot rest is only about an inch away from the clutch pedal so you constantly find yourself trying to press both to the floor.
The six speed gearbox in typical BMW fashion is smooth and easy to change but even the gear lever has been given the sharp angle treatment and does not feel that pleasant to use.

While the coupe in line with the 3 series saloon is far less 'Bangled' it is still a big departure from what I was used to and liked. In my old coupe I used to like admiring the smooth curved flanks in the door mirrors but in this new one all you get is stealth fighter like sharp lines and flat surfaces. Not pleasing to the eye at all.

The dash while modern and efficient does not blend into the door cards as they used to in old BMW’s. Its as if the designers of the dash and doors worked in two separate buildings and never spoke to each other. The effect is to give the car a bit of a cheap feel. Even the landcruiser has brilliantly integrated dash and door cards – a feature I read once which it seems is quite difficult to engineer properly.

Have to go and look at the sports pack equipped coupe later in the week but when you are relieved to get back into a landcruiser you know the game is up.

http://carscoop.blogspot.com/2006/04/2007-bmw-3-series-coupe-official-press.html

unkel

Alfasudcrazy wrote:

Took one for a spin today. The coupe version all decked out with light tan leather sports seats and black (non metallic ) paint. While my drive was spoiled a bit by slow moving traffic I think I got enough road to get the feel of it.

I am not very impressed really. For a 170bph car it did not give you that kick in the back I used to get when I put my foot down in my 150bph Alfa GT diesel for instance. On the move the steering and car felt very twitchy on undulating roads. Perhaps I am too spoiled by the soft suspension of the landcruiser by now but I don't recall my old BMW coupe being that nervous on the road.

I constantly had to adjust the steering to compensate for the car being thrown off line over what were really only average Irish country bumpy roads. The steering wheel is smaller and chunkier than my old BMW's - a feature I dislike.
I know I put on weight a bit too but the bolsters on the backrest of these sports seats are clearly designed for fitter types than me and felt more like obstructions than bolsters.
Also the left foot rest is only about an inch away from the clutch pedal so you constantly find yourself trying to press both to the floor.
The six speed gearbox in typical BMW fashion is smooth and easy to change but even the gear lever has been given the sharp angle treatment and does not feel that pleasant to use.

While the coupe in line with the 3 series saloon is far less 'Bangled' it is still a big departure from what I was used to and liked. In my old coupe I used to like admiring the smooth curved flanks in the door mirrors but in this new one all you get is stealth fighter like sharp lines and flat surfaces. Not pleasing to the eye at all.

The dash while modern and efficient does not blend into the door cards as they used to in old BMW’s. Its as if the designers of the dash and doors worked in two separate buildings and never spoke to each other. The effect is to give the car a bit of a cheap feel. Even the landcruiser has brilliantly integrated dash and door cards – a feature I read once which it seems is quite difficult to engineer properly.

Have to go and look at the sports pack equipped coupe later in the week but when you are relieved to get back into a landcruiser you know the game is up.

You're not making much sense, Alfasudcrazy

You obviously liked your GT diesel and the superior flat torque that comes with it

So why test drive a petrol car and compare that to the diesel? Surely you did all that and came to the conclusion to go diesel when you bought the Alfa GT?

If you're reconsidering going petrol this time, why going bottom of the range E92? Generally not a good idea to go small 4 pot petrol engined BMWs as you surely know? Try a 335i and report back here

And how the hell would you compare the driving characteristics of either the sporty Alfa or the BMW to a Toyota Landcruiser, of all things? :eek:

Elessar

Funny enough, I also went to see a 320Ci yesterday. It's an E46 model, 6 cylinder, full leather.

Everything about the car was mint. It was a pleasant, easy enough drive and the engine had plenty of power when it was needed. It didn't sound as meaty as the old M52TU engine that is in the older 2litre 6 cylinder though. Sounded rather tame in comparisson.

I'd advise you to go look at a 6 cylinder. They are nice. I'm getting a mechanic who is not a BMW fan at all to have a look at this one soon, and I'm afraid he will come up with all sorts to advise me against it :eek:

The gears were a bit heavier on the 320 than any other car I've driven. I've heard this is normal, anyone confirm/deny? There was also a feel of a slight clunk when changing. I know the mechanic will mention this to me. Hope it's not abnormal as otherwise it's a lovely car.

I'll probably buy it if it passes the inspection.

maidhc

unkel wrote:

So why test drive a petrol car and compare that to the diesel? Surely you did all that and came to the conclusion to go diesel when you bought the Alfa GT?

Seems to me he just tested the car and for want of a better word thought it was "crap". Certainly nothing wrong with reaching that decision. BMWs are a bit over rated and over priced anyhow.

spockety

"BMWs are a bit over rated and over priced anyhow."

Can you please qualify that and back it up?

Everyone on this board just loves saying it. Have you ever owned one?

MarkN

I thought it was a mostly fair review ! The guy doesn't like the car.. And ?!

We're never all going to agree and it's just one opinion.

I have to also back the lads up, buying a 170 bhp 4 pot BMW is not going to set the world alight, my boss picked up a 320 i sport coupe up a few months back and when he tells me how "it took off" in driving tales I just smile and nod.

For the price of a new 320 i sport you could probably have a 06 335 i.

All that said, a 150 bhp Alfa is by no means quick either Alfasud

maidhc

spockety wrote:

"BMWs are a bit over rated and over priced anyhow."

Can you please qualify that and back it up?

Everyone on this board just loves saying it. Have you ever owned one?

I thought Boards is a big BMW love in tbh!

I took a test drive in a BMW 318d recently with my parents. It is quite frankly a miserable car for the money. Sure you get lovely cars when you spend 70-80k, but they don't want to spend that.

Ford seem to be able to built a superior car than the 3 series for much smaller money. Hence my claim.

spockety

You claimed that BMW's are over rated and over priced, and what you're going on is a test drive in a 318d? Haha.. right.

Talk about 330's, M3's, M5's, M6's, 130's, etc., and how do you think they stacked up when you drove them and compared them to the competition?

Owen

Alfasudcrazy wrote:

and black (non metallic ) paint.

Who cares? One has shin bits of metal flake in the paint that you can't see if you're more than 2 feet away, and the other doesn't. They'll still age the same, and wear the same from washing. I never understand people who "must have metallic", it's always interesting to hold up a sample of Black Metallic, and Black Non-Metallic and ask them to do a pepsi challenge, which is which? 80% of the time they get it wrong.

Henry Ford III

Nice cars, at least the higher end models (6 cylinders +) are. Some very good diesel units too.

They are wickedly expensive however. Partly VRT and partly not.

maidhc

spockety wrote:

You claimed that BMW's are over rated and over priced, and what you're going on is a test drive in a 318d? Haha.. right.

Talk about 330's, M3's, M5's, M6's, 130's, etc., and how do you think they stacked up when you drove them and compared them to the competition?

Don't know and don't care. Are so far out of my price range that it isn't even worth my while finding out what the competitors are (i.e. it isn't a Toyota Avensis!!). I don't doubt they are great cars but so they should be when they cost half the price of a house!

Most mere mortals buy more basic models, and those my friend and overpriced and overrated compared to the offerings from "non prestige" marques.

prospect

I think the OP's review seems fair. He doesn't like the dynamics of the car. I don't think he made any unreasonable comments.

JoeA3

ned78 wrote:

Who cares? One has shin bits of metal flake in the paint that you can't see if you're more than 2 feet away, and the other doesn't. They'll still age the same, and wear the same from washing. I never understand people who "must have metallic", it's always interesting to hold up a sample of Black Metallic, and Black Non-Metallic and ask them to do a pepsi challenge, which is which? 80% of the time they get it wrong.

I'd have to disagree there. Non-metallic black tends to actually look better (deeper, wetter shine) when new, whereas metallic black often looks more charcoal-y.
But if people think metallic black is hard to keep, non-metallic is an absolute nightmare! The metallic tends to hide swirls, minor blemishes much better, every little mark on non-met sticks out like a beacon.

Owen

Alfasudcrazy wrote:

I am not very impressed really. For a 170bph car it did not give you that kick in the back I used to get when I put my foot down in my 150bph Alfa GT diesel for instance.

That's because you're comparing apples and oranges. The GT is a Diesel, which means more torque at lower revs. Of course it's going to have more of an immediate feel to the power delivery.

Alfasudcrazy wrote:

On the move the steering and car felt very twitchy on undulating roads. Perhaps I am too spoiled by the soft suspension of the landcruiser by now but I don't recall my old BMW coupe being that nervous on the road. I constantly had to adjust the steering to compensate for the car being thrown off line over what were really only average Irish country bumpy roads.

You don't mention the size of the wheels in your test drive car, or their profile. A 16" Wheel on a normal BMW with a 60 profile is quite comfortable indeed.

Alfasudcrazy wrote:

The steering wheel is smaller and chunkier than my old BMW's - a feature I dislike.

Can't please all of the people all of the time. BMW sat people into several cars with various steering wheels, and the concensus was that small, sporty, thick steering wheels were the preferred option. As you mention this steering wheel, you were probably in an M Sport model, which would have 17" wheels with low profile tyres, and sport suspension - which would explain the ride quality. It's a no compromise car, and you shouldn't be comparing it to the comfort of a Landcruiser. Drive the SE and then make a comparisson.

Alfasudcrazy wrote:

I know I put on weight a bit too but the bolsters on the backrest of these sports seats are clearly designed for fitter types than me and felt more like obstructions than bolsters. Also the left foot rest is only about an inch away from the clutch pedal so you constantly find yourself trying to press both to the floor.

Not to sound like an a**hole, but given you have both problems with the seats, and the pedals, is there a chance you're just too big for a 3 series?

Alfasudcrazy wrote:

The six speed gearbox in typical BMW fashion is smooth and easy to change but even the gear lever has been given the sharp angle treatment and does not feel that pleasant to use.

Agreed! It's the one thing I've always found too.

Owen

JoeA3 wrote:

But if people think metallic black is hard to keep, non-metallic is an absolute nightmare! The metallic tends to hide swirls, minor blemishes much better, every little mark on non-met sticks out like a beacon.

There is no difference whatsoever, and I'll gladly show you on a forecourt the non existent difference between a Metallic and Non Metallic Black car that's been brush washed. The paint has feck all to do with it, the swirls you see are on the lacquer, which is over the paint. Years ago, when paint tech was in it's infancy, a Metallic paint would have been more lusterous as the years went on, but I have a customer, in a 2001 MINI, non metallic red who knows how to properly care for his paintwork. His car is actually in better condition than the metallic reds, sold to people who just don't have that level of care, that were available at the time.

As I've already stated, when I hold a sample of each up and ask customers to identify which is which, they usually can't.

Henry Ford III

ned78 wrote:

That's because you're comparing apples and oranges. The GT is a Diesel, which means more torque at lower revs. Of course it's going to have more of an immediate feel to the power delivery. Not so sure about that. Throttle response should be almost immediate from any petrol engine. The pull of the diesel will be stronger in gear ok.



You don't mention the size of the wheels in your test drive car, or their profile. A 16" Wheel on a normal BMW with a 60 profile is quite comfortable indeed.

Can't please all of the people all of the time. BMW sat people into several cars with various steering wheels, and the concensus was that small, sporty, thick steering wheels were the preferred option. As you mention this steering wheel, you were probably in an M Sport model, which would have 17" wheels with low profile tyres, and sport suspension - which would explain the ride quality. It's a no compromise car, and you shouldn't be comparing it to the comfort of a Landcruiser. Drive the SE and then make a comparisson.

Big wheels and sports suspension shouldn't mean a terrible ride quality. It seems to in this and the MINI too. I don't accept a 320i (however specced) is a "no compromise" car either. An M3 is.

2 thoughts.

Owen

Henry Ford III wrote:

Not so sure about that. Throttle response should be almost immediate from any petrol engine. The pull of the diesel will be stronger in gear ok.

Look at the torque curve for a Petrol, and Diesel engine. A 320i has a peak torque of 200nm @3600rpm. The 320d has a peak torque of 340nm @ 2000rpm. So not only is there significantly more torque, it comes in much lower in the rev range.

Henry Ford III wrote:

Big wheels and sports suspension shouldn't mean a terrible ride quality. It seems to in this and the MINI too. I don't accept a 320i (however specced) is a "no compromise" car either. An M3 is.

Of course they should. Nearly every single car I've driven with large wheels, sports suspension, and low profile tyres = uncomfortable ride. And that includes everything from a 1995 'Glanza' I recently had the misfortune in driving, right up to a Range Rover with 22 inch wheels.

When I said no compromise, it was obviously in terms of handling. The M3 is a no compromise car in terms of the engine, and funnily enough, the suspension setup in the M3 isn't a million miles away from an Msport 320i either.

Henry Ford III

ned78 wrote:

Look at the torque curve for a Petrol, and Diesel engine. A 320i has a peak torque of 200nm @3600rpm. The 320d has a peak torque of 340nm @ 2000rpm. So not only is there significantly more torque, it comes in much lower in the rev range.

You are missing the point. I know about deisels stronger and lower revband torque. Throttle respsonse is what I was on about.



Of course they should. Nearly every single car I've driven with large wheels, sports suspension, and low profile tyres = uncomfortable ride. And that includes everything from a 1995 'Glanza' I recently had the misfortune in driving, right up to a Range Rover with 22 inch wheels.

Golf GTI & Focus ST for example have big wheels (18") and sports suspension and have a quite comfortable ride. They also have more power than the 320i

Retort....

Owen

Henry Ford III wrote:

You are missing the point. I know about deisels stronger and lower revband torque. Throttle respsonse is what I was on about.

The OP thought "For a 170bph car it did not give you that kick in the back I used to get when I put my foot down in my 150bph Alfa GT diesel for instance". He mentions nothing about throttle response. I was making an observation that naturally, the Diesel would feel more urgent under acceleration.

Henry Ford III wrote:

Golf GTI & Focus ST have big wheels (18") and sports suspension and have a quite comfortable ride.

Actually, in the compound where we keep our cars, Ford also keep their cars. The ST is not that comfortable at all. And in keeping with the OP's post, he was comparing what is obviously an M Sport model, with something as roly poly as a Landcruiser, of course there will be differences. I have little experience with the Golf GTi in it's current guise.

It's also exceptionally difficult to quote your posts when you build your responses into my quote. I have to manually copy and paste them into a reply.

rebel.ranter

An Octavia TDi is they way to go then eh HenryF!

Thought I'd get in before the rest of ye!


BTW I have a Land Cruiser & a BMW (or two) at present & the only thing I really cannot understand about the original OPs post is how the comparison has been drawn between the Land Cruiser & BMW, with the Land Cruiser coming out on top! I hate the damn thing, it's too plasticy!!!

Also there should not really be any substantial difference in perfromane between a 150BHP diesel & a 170BHP petrol. You would really want a stop watch out, make sure it's one with split second timing.

JoeA3

ned78 wrote:

There is no difference whatsoever, and I'll gladly show you on a forecourt the non existent difference between a Metallic and Non Metallic Black car that's been brush washed. The paint has feck all to do with it, the swirls you see are on the lacquer, which is over the paint. Years ago, when paint tech was in it's infancy, a Metallic paint would have been more lusterous as the years went on, but I have a customer, in a 2001 MINI, non metallic red who knows how to properly care for his paintwork. His car is actually in better condition than the metallic reds, sold to people who just don't have that level of care, that were available at the time.

As I've already stated, when I hold a sample of each up and ask customers to identify which is which, they usually can't.

Maybe the average Joe Bloggs can't tell the difference between the two, but I certainly can I know the scratches are in the lacquer, but I'd still argue that they are easier to camouflage on a metallic than a flat paint. I guess the metallic flakes make scratches less apparent. I've seen brand new flat-black Audi's off the transporter and you'd only need to put your hand on it to leave a visible scratch! Metallics at least appear more robust.

That said, the prices some manufacturer's charge for metallic is unreal, e.g. its nearly a grand(!!) on an Audi A3, and less than half that on a VW Golf!

Owen

JoeA3 wrote:

Maybe the average Joe Bloggs can't tell the difference between the two, but I certainly can

Up close I'd guarantee you can too! But not at distance, and at anything over 1 metre, it becomes quite difficult indeed.

TomMc

ned78 wrote:

As I've already stated, when I hold a sample of each up and ask customers to identify which is which, they usually can't.

You really need strong sunlight or bright lighting to shine down on same to notice the flakes properly. Carbon black been the perfect example. The blue hue only really comes out then, with the Sunshine !

Anyway, most BMW owners probably wouldn't know a 4 cyl from a 6 cyl either.

_______

I think what JoeA3 may be referring to is certain non-metallic matt (or low gloss) blacks which are a bitch to keep in good shape.

_______

It's all well and good using a manufacturers flagship performance cars as a showcase for their abilities, but the bottom line is that most sales are of the entry and mid range models in the range. This reflects the true picture and the fact is many of the 1/3/5 series models are overpriced and overated.

prospect

Ned78,

Maybe BMW's Black and Metallic Black are close, but my 147 was metallic black, and the difference between it and a Black was massive.

I prefer Black as a non-metallic colour.

Cyrus

maidhc wrote:

I thought Boards is a big BMW love in tbh!

I took a test drive in a BMW 318d recently with my parents. It is quite frankly a miserable car for the money. Sure you get lovely cars when you spend 70-80k, but they don't want to spend that.

Ford seem to be able to built a superior car than the 3 series for much smaller money. Hence my claim.

not everyone who has a bmw on boards bought a new one :rolleyes:

they make wonderful second hand buys, i have a 01 530i with 50,000 miles and every extra you can get for less than the price of a new 1.4 litre base golf.

Owen

prospect wrote:

Maybe BMW's Black and Metallic Black are close, but my 147 was metallic black, and the difference between it and a Black was massive.

Good point!

prospect wrote:

I prefer Black as a non-metallic colour.

Ditto, it looks fantastic as a non-met colour!

unkel

maidhc wrote:

Don't know and don't care

With respect, you have 3.5k posts on boards, mainly in the motoring section and you don't care about great cars, any great car? Just because you'll never be able to afford a new one of them? The mind boggles...

Curran

Cyrus wrote:

not everyone who has a bmw on boards bought a new one :rolleyes:

they make wonderful second hand buys, i have a 01 530i with 50,000 miles and every extra you can get for less than the price of a new 1.4 litre base golf.

Agreed - i bought a 96 523i with 90k, high spec (with all the luxury ya need ) and for 1/3 the price of a new Golf

Here she is.....

spockety

Curran wrote:

Agreed - i bought a 96 523i with 90k, high spec (with all the luxury ya need ) and for 1/3 the price of a new Golf

Here she is.....

Yeah but you could have had a '02 Toyota Avensis for that money you flaming idiot!!!! :rolleyes:

Owen

Cyrus wrote:

not everyone who has a bmw on boards bought a new one
they make wonderful second hand buys

Yes they do! One of my Colleagues recently bought a 1997 840ci. What a car! We're both in love with it, I wish they still made the 8 Series.

Cyrus

ned78 wrote:

Yes they do! One of my Colleagues recently bought a 1997 840ci. What a car! We're both in love with it, I wish they still made the 8 Series.

lovely car, would love to have one as a second car when im a bit older