BMW's nothing but problems??? Really???

In article >,
GLitwinski > wrote:
> Ace, you have it exactly wrong. Some BMW automatics are GM sourced, no
> manuals are. Now, that is not a bad thing as GM makes excellent
> automatics and have a much longer history doing it than anybody else.

They did - but are they at the forefront now? The first ZF 5 speeder was
fitted to the E34 in '91 - it was 10 years or so till the GM in the US E39
became 5 speed. Now 6, 7 and 8 speed boxes are fitted to M-B and BMW.

--
*Change is inevitable ... except from vending machines *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

8 speed? I thought only the 2006 or is it 2007 Lexus LS 460 has an 8
speed auto box?

"GLitwinski" > wrote in message
...
> Ace, you have it exactly wrong. Some BMW automatics are GM sourced, no
> manuals are. Now, that is not a bad thing as GM makes excellent automatics
> and have a much longer history doing it than anybody else.
>
>
Actually, I could care less. I just threw it out there for all the chest
pounding, real men only drive manuals, crowd.

On Sat, 04 Feb 2006 22:38:27 GMT, "Jack Dotson" >
wrote:

>
>"GLitwinski" > wrote in message
...
>> Ace, you have it exactly wrong. Some BMW automatics are GM sourced, no
>> manuals are. Now, that is not a bad thing as GM makes excellent automatics
>> and have a much longer history doing it than anybody else.
>>
>>
>Actually, I could care less. I just threw it out there for all the chest
>pounding, real men only drive manuals, crowd.
>

Deja moo: the feeling that I've heard this bull**** before.
--
Dan.

Thanks for all the great feedback. After reviewing the messages here
and research on the web, it appears that if I want to buy a the best
(performance / comfort)used convertable the model to go with is the
330ci with sport package & SMG? Comments? Any thoughts on difference
between buying 2001-2005. Are there years significantly better then
others?

szguitar wrote:
> Thanks for all the great feedback. After reviewing the messages here
> and research on the web, it appears that if I want to buy a the best
> (performance / comfort)used convertable the model to go with is the
> 330ci with sport package & SMG? Comments? Any thoughts on difference
> between buying 2001-2005. Are there years significantly better then
> others?

Just as long as (yet once again) you realise that you won't be getting
the full M-model SMG, but a cut-down 'economy' version. You'd probably
be better off with the Steptronic.

szguitar wrote:
> Thanks for all the great feedback. After reviewing the messages here
> and research on the web, it appears that if I want to buy a the best
> (performance / comfort)used convertable the model to go with is the
> 330ci with sport package & SMG? Comments? Any thoughts on difference
> between buying 2001-2005. Are there years significantly better then
> others?

That's exactly the car I want (330 sport w/ hardtop and SMG).

SMGs *do* exist on 330's, but they're rare. I suspect I'll have to
settle for a manual tranny, which is hard enough to find on a 330. I
think over 90% of 330's have autos, while maybe 2% have SMGs.

I've looked *very* closely at M3s, but the reasons I prefer a 330 a

1) I own an e36 M3 now, and the suspension is just too damned stiff for
urban driving. If I lived out in the burbs where pavement is smoother,
maybe. But in the busted asphalt of the city, a softer suspension is
unquestionably easier to live with.

2) Mileage will be better on the 330.

3) Insurance will cost less on the 330.

4) The 0-60 times for the 330 are only 1 second slower than the M3 (6.2
vs 5.2, respectively).

5) A used e46 M3 costs about $15 thousand MORE than a used 330.

IMHO, the only attraction of the M3 is the greater likelihood of finding
an SMG. But paying $15k more just for a SMG is nuts.

Randy

In article >,
Randy > wrote:
> SMGs *do* exist on 330's, but they're rare. I suspect I'll have to
> settle for a manual tranny, which is hard enough to find on a 330. I
> think over 90% of 330's have autos, while maybe 2% have SMGs.

Then the market is sensible. Why do you want an auto that doesn't work
well? The proper auto is fine for those that want such things, and those
who want a manual buy just this. The SMG transmission does neither well.

--
*Why do overlook and oversee mean opposite things? *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Randy wrote:

>
> 4) The 0-60 times for the 330 are only 1 second slower than the M3 (6.2
> vs 5.2, respectively).
>

Yes, only one second longer, but that represents a 20% slower
acceleration. That is something one can definitely feel in your
"seat-of-the-pants" accelerometer.


--
-Fred W

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
> In article >,
> Randy > wrote:
>
>>SMGs *do* exist on 330's, but they're rare. I suspect I'll have to
>>settle for a manual tranny, which is hard enough to find on a 330. I
>>think over 90% of 330's have autos, while maybe 2% have SMGs.
>
>
> Then the market is sensible. Why do you want an auto that doesn't work
> well? The proper auto is fine for those that want such things, and those
> who want a manual buy just this. The SMG transmission does neither well.

I want an auto that shifts when I want it to, does not shift down when I
don't want it to, and that does not slow down my car. SMGs do this.
Automatics do not. The most advanced race cars use SMGs to get maximum
performance: Formula, dragsters. etc. The SMG M3 is faster than the
manual M3; probably this is true of the 330 too. Finally, for personal
reasons, I probably should avoid using a clutch.

You argue that, if the masses like something, it must be good. If so,
you should be driving a Toyota Camry.

Randy