Non stop cAr problems

skittles_m

Have you driven the BMW 325ci? If you have you'll find it drives similar to the 07 generation Astra both in power and driving pleasure. Only difference is that the BMW has a slightly higher quality interior.

AdrianC

Well, that and the fact that one is a RWD straight-six, and the other is a FWD transverse straight-four.

If you can't tell the difference between those from behind the wheel, the grannymatic Auris should be perfect for you, DM. Just make sure it has the optional extra rear brakes fitted.

skittles_m

The BMW 325ci maybe RWD and have a larger engine, but it still drives the same as the Astra. 99% of the time you wouldn't notice the difference between RWD and FWD except on track so having RWD in my opinion is pointless for public roads. Braking, steering and driving engagement is the same between the 325ci and astra even though one is RWD and other the FWD. Power also feels the same because power/weight ratio is the same.

skittles_m

For me personally, the Auris feels the best. Feels more reassuring and inspires more confident driving than both the BMW 325ci and the Astra. No surprise, it has the highest residual value of the 3.

arcon5

And of course we seem to be neglecting how prices compare when it comes to repairs and maintenance. You can be sure a straight-6 RWD BMW will cost much more than a FWD typical inline-4 engine.

jimjames

AdrianC wrote: »

I'm not the world's biggest BMW fan, but... "Same as Astra, worse than Auris"?

C'mon, DM, you're slipping.

Funny how a new poster hasn't even queried this. Confirmation if any was needed?

skittles_m wrote: »

The BMW 325ci maybe RWD and have a larger engine, but it still drives the same as the Astra. 99% of the time you wouldn't notice the difference between RWD and FWD except on track so having RWD in my opinion is pointless for public roads. Braking, steering and driving engagement is the same between the 325ci and astra even though one is RWD and other the FWD. Power also feels the same because power/weight ratio is the same.

Seriously? Did you get it out of first gear? I've driven various front and rear wheel drive cars and would't say you can't notice the difference.

Gavin78

I was under the impression that Automatics used a bit more fuel? I could be wrong.

In any event 25mpg-40-mpg city driving seems about normal to me for a 1.6 petrol engine depending on any fancy extras the company have added to the engine.

I have an xsara picasso and it usually says on a full tank 320-360 miles on that and this car is a 1.6 petrol of course city driving get a lot less anything from 25mpg-35mpg on average.

AdrianC

Gavin78 wrote: »

I was under the impression that Automatics used a bit more fuel?

Old-technology torque-converter autoboxes used to have fewer speeds than manual boxes. Add that to the TC wasting a lot of energy, and not locking up, and - yes - autos used to be a fair chunk slower and thirstier.

There's still boxes like that about, but they're all electronically controlled now. Many autoboxes have more speeds than manuals, and many aren't even really autoboxes any more, but automated manuals - so no torque converter, but an automatically operated clutch. Because the electronic controls make them better at selecting the right speed than the often-faulty human stirring cogs, they're often more economical (by book figures) than manuals.

almillar

biting....

2002 BMW 325ci manual

I had one with much lower mileage. If you think a 1.6 has a drink problem, what will you think of a 2.5 (?) litre 6 cylinder engine? Lovely car for sure, but it'll get 30MPG.

I test drove the BM2 325ci this morning and was severely disappointed. The interior felt nice but it drove and handled the same as my Astra and the power was about the same too.

Save money and stick to cheaper cars. That car is meant to have 170BHP (and decent torque) and if you didn't feel it either you don't need it or the car was faulty.
It's also slightly unfair to compare the Beemer against two cars that are 5 years younger.

99% of the time you wouldn't notice the difference between RWD and FWD except on track

YOU. Not ME. Try driving the RWD in the snow...

automated manuals

Semi-automatic. Real gears, but the car controls the clutch, not you.

skittles_m

almillar wrote: »

biting....


Save money and stick to cheaper cars. That car is meant to have 170BHP (and decent torque) and if you didn't feel it either you don't need it or the car was faulty.
It's also slightly unfair to compare the Beemer against two cars that are 5 years younger.


.

It has 192hp and apparently is meant to do 0-60 in 7.2 seconds but it didn't feel like it. I'm sure it was faulty.

Also, I don't think it matters to compare an older generation bmw to a much newer generation ecobox in terms of driving. the bmw SHOULD have better driving dynamics regardless of age, even the 90's bmw 3 series should drive better than todays toyota auris or vauxhall astra