Another Euro vs Jap thread...

**edrik** · March 14th, 2007 05:34 PM

10 year old 320i or 3-5 year old Jap sedan? ...or 6-8 year old Jap CUV?

My budget is around 450-500k. I only drive around 3-4k kms a year. I plan to keep it for 3-5 years. I want the usual comfort, safety, economical, and practical features as well as relatively affordable cost of ownership and decent resale value. Of course, I also want to feel good about what I drive.

Most would tell me to stick to the Japs but given the kilometers I put on a car, wouldn't my cost of ownership on a 320i be comparable to that of a Jap sedan that puts on 10-15k kms per year? And wouldn't the resale value of a 320i hold better in 3-5 years? Obviously, I'm a bit biased here but life is too short right? Hehe...

But seriously, I want too keep it real. Help me out here. What am I missing?

**niky** · March 14th, 2007 05:53 PM

Realistic resale value, I guess. When a car is fifteen years old, it's just plain old. But BMWs have a certain mystique that keep residuals high.

At 3-4k kms a year, your expenses shouldn't be so bad, and a 90's 3-series doesn't have as much in terms of electronics as new ones, so there's not really much to watch out for, there, except you should expect your fuel consumption to be lower than Japanese cars of similar size and displacement. (The 320 is heavier, and the RWD drivetrain causes more drag-induced fuel consumption).

If you can find a 320 in great condition, why not? Most Japanese cars of 6-8 years ago didn't feel as special or as solid as BMWs of the time, and the interior trim on Japanese cars doesn't wear particularly well... expect rattles and loose trim in Japanese cars, unless the car is very low mileage... especially not if you're going to keep the car another five years after purchase.

Just make sure you're prepared for the ownership expense... but this is true of any secondhand buy.

**squala** · March 14th, 2007 07:35 PM

Niky, are you sure RWD cars have more drag? I believe it's only the driveshaft that makes them heavier, but otherwise they're better balanced than FWD cars. Aerodynamic drag, from what I know, is based on the body shape and dimensions and not from the drivetrain. Besides, the fastest cars in the world aren't FWD.

Now to answer the poster's question, an E36 320i shouldn't be a bad buy. I've tried the manual 316i and it's great fun despite the significant lack of power. The straight-six 320i should noticeably be quicker, but it's only available in automatic. The one we have here is 5-speed anyway, and with the engine's good balance of performance and economy, your fuel numbers shouldn't be so bad, maybe slightly worse than a 1.6 Jap but not a 2.0. Try out the car and feel its solidity. Then evaluate whether or not it's great fun for you. And oh, another issue of this particular BMW is the fact that the underchassis hits big humps, largely because of its long wheelbase and low ride height. Maybe you can raise it a bit with rubber lifters (to be placed under the springs) or if you're after its handling, get used to doing the '7' in the humps (as in going over them sideways).

**Alpha_One** · March 14th, 2007 08:04 PM

Originally Posted by squala

Niky, are you sure RWD cars have more drag? I believe it's only the driveshaft that makes them heavier, but otherwise they're better balanced than FWD cars. Aerodynamic drag, from what I know, is based on the body shape and dimensions and not from the drivetrain. Besides, the fastest cars in the world aren't FWD.

Niky must be referring to "drivetrain drag" (frictional+additional mass losses). RWD (actually, FR*) layouts are slightly less efficient because the drivetrain's heavier and causes more friction. They're a lot more robust however, and as you say, much better balanced. The "less efficient" disadvantage may be outweighed by the durability and/or balance advantages in heavy duty or high performance applications, respectively.

*MR and RR layouts don't have the problem of having to send power from one side of the car to the other. They share their mechanical efficiency advantage with the FF cars, at the cost of a LOT of space of course (unless we're talking about a bus, in which the RR layout saves space over the FR/MR layouts), and other concerns (cooling, etc.)!

**boyscout** · March 14th, 2007 08:43 PM

If you haven't driven a RWD and a BMW for that matter. Get the bimmer. At least for once in your life experience the thrills and experience this car. A bimmer is still a bimmer and always will be a bimmer. Other cars can come close but the BMW is still the benchmark of sport executive sedan. SHEER DRIVING PLEASURE!!!

**niky** · March 15th, 2007 12:31 PM

*squala: Alpha One is spot on... it's driveline drag I was talking about.

I've talked with one or two BMW 3-series owners, and this was their primary complaint... the fuel consumption compared to japanese compacts... but then again, it might be due more to the heavy body and the 18 - 19" rims they're always putting on them...

**BlueBimmer** · March 15th, 2007 12:54 PM

the E36 chassis is HEAVY * 1,495kg as written in the manual. the I6 2.0 engine is somewhat negligible (from standstill acceleration) if compared to a 316i because of the a/t transmission. but once you've cleared 2nd gear, thats where you'll really notice the difference. of course there's the better sounding straight6 engine too.