The '06 BMW 330i
#32
Originally Posted by dcak,Mar 9 2005, 02:09 PM
This part of the auto industry confuses me a bit. I agree that the electronics/controls/instrumentation has gotten very complex, but solid state electronics, lacking moving parts, should be inherently less prone to failure. I don't know what exactly is the cause of automotive electronics failures, but they just seem like they shouldn't be as prevalant. An engine can spin millions of cycles before breakage, yet the electronics are the first thing to go?? With as much modeling and exhaustive testing that you can do with electronics.
#33
I've thought I would shy away from a Bimmer that was nearly out of warranty. Do you really have as much confidence in the build quality of a Bimmer, as compared to say, a Lexus, Acura, etc? Listening to these boards tells me to stay away from 3 year old German cars.
#34
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 5,094
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Coming from a Jag S Type, you would love the '06 BMW 330i. The new styling of the 330i looks worse than the old model (IMO), but still looks a lot nicer than the Jag. When you are driving it, you would think you are driving a sports car comparing to the Jag. I would say that a good choice!
#35
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Milwaukee, USA
Posts: 542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The new 330i (coupe of course) parked next to the S is my ideal garage.
There are very few cars that I consider thoroughbreds....meaning that they don't steal from the corporate parts bin.
3series and the S2000 are true thoroughbreds....IS300,G35c,TL, many new Jags are filled w/parts from the vanilla people movers or even worse: modded up people movers.
There are very few cars that I consider thoroughbreds....meaning that they don't steal from the corporate parts bin.
3series and the S2000 are true thoroughbreds....IS300,G35c,TL, many new Jags are filled w/parts from the vanilla people movers or even worse: modded up people movers.
#36
Registered User
Originally Posted by dcak,Mar 9 2005, 11:09 AM
This part of the auto industry confuses me a bit. I agree that the electronics/controls/instrumentation has gotten very complex, but solid state electronics, lacking moving parts, should be inherently less prone to failure.
#37
Registered User
Originally Posted by dcak,Mar 9 2005, 11:09 AM
This part of the auto industry confuses me a bit. I agree that the electronics/controls/instrumentation has gotten very complex, but solid state electronics, lacking moving parts, should be inherently less prone to failure. I don't know what exactly is the cause of automotive electronics failures, but they just seem like they shouldn't be as prevalant. An engine can spin millions of cycles before breakage, yet the electronics are the first thing to go?? With as much modeling and exhaustive testing that you can do with electronics.
#40
Registered User
Originally Posted by BPUKiller,Mar 9 2005, 05:11 PM
Nope, thems the times of the e36 M3. Back then those times were fairly quick, but todays standards they are almost entry level sports car times.
Sam
Sam
The only manual M3 that showed a 0-60 of 6.0 consistently was the '99. All of the tested numbers tended to be poorer on the '99 car; some attribute that to the downgrade in tires from the original MMX3 on the '95 - 98.
1/4 mile (magazine) was generally between 14.2 and 14.4 with an almost consistent trap of 99 mph. The automatic E36 M3 usually tested at 6.0 - 6.6 seconds - but that car and the wet fish vert were really sad examples of the E36M3. I have just about every Magazine article - both major and minor mags, England and US, from '95 to 00 with E36 M3's . I do the same for the S2000 and 997 S. You