[kaishang]

Originally Posted by FieldingMellish

Yes but they look a bit 'wrong', the 17 inches, don't they. The E90 needs reasonably big wheels to look good. Plus the vast majority of 330i coupes and saloons I've seen have 18 inch wheels.

I have the M Sport 18 inch wheels on my 320d M Sport saloon, and the ride is a bit hard of course, with the runflats, but it doesn't bother me much and the handling is fantastic.

Personally I'm neutral about the appearances of M Sport vs SE and big wheels vs standard wheels. However I spend a lot more time driving the car than looking at it from the outside, so I picked the option which gives better comfort and drivability on typical roads: 17"

Pics of my car are on this thread, it looks ok on 17" imho.
http://www.e90post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=462018

[creepy coupe]

Originally Posted by FieldingMellish

Without a doubt, yeah. I just wonder if it's worth the extra. I'm looking to trade up to a 330i auto, from a manual 320d M Sport saloon, so I must pay some extra for each of: auto, 330i, coupe. I know I would miss the M Sport if I bought an SE coupe, and I don't want to spend a massive amount and get a post-LCI saloon, which would be the other option.

I need to test drive a saloon and a coupe back to back, I guess.

Always a good idea, everyone of us will have an opinion, but you have to live with it.

[FieldingMellish]

Originally Posted by xenon

Interesting. Perhaps it did have 19" or worse tyres or M-Sport (and the other wasn't)

What I can tell you unequivocally is that the ride on my M-Sport coupe with 19" wheels and Bridgestone RFTs is dreadful. Really dreadful.

Hmmm. I wonder if you'd find the ride on mine as dreadful?

All the models I test-drove were M Sports. I came away suspecting that the coupe felt more 'crashy' to drive. But I'm not sure. Need to compare them.

[xenon]

I drove a 320d M-Sport Saloon when mine was in for service once, with standard 18" M-Sport wheels and it was much better than mine but that's not really the comparison you're looking for.

[dxb335d]

Originally Posted by xenon

Still not according to BMW.

335d saloon = 1655Kg, 335d coupe = 1645Kg. Whether the saloon shell is stiffer I don't know but one could see how it probably would be.

Must have changed then mate, wasn't that way 4 years ago!

[FieldingMellish]

Originally Posted by kaishang

Personally I'm neutral about the appearances of M Sport vs SE and big wheels vs standard wheels. However I spend a lot more time driving the car than looking at it from the outside, so I picked the option which gives better comfort and drivability on typical roads: 17"

Pics of my car are on this thread, it looks ok on 17" imho.
http://www.e90post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=462018

Oh yeah, that's right, we mostly don't see our cars because we're inside, driving. And it is tempting to go for comfort, certainly. When I drive my daughter's recently acquired 116i SE I love the way it coasts over those awful speed bumps etc.


And yes, your car does look fantastic in those excellent photos.

[Em135eye]

How about the Touring on 17s then?

I'll get my coat...

[creepy coupe]

Originally Posted by 335diesel

How about the Touring on 17s then?

I'll get my coat...

Fcuk off

[FieldingMellish]

Originally Posted by 335diesel

How about the Touring on 17s then?

I'll get my coat...

Ha ha! You've got to be joking. I'd rather switch to Audi than get a touring!

[Em135eye]

Originally Posted by FieldingMellish

Ha ha! You've got to be joking. I'd rather switch to Audi than get a touring!

Ouch

[FieldingMellish]

Originally Posted by 335diesel

Ouch

Sorry. Perhaps I exaggerated. Slightly.

[toxicnerve]

I dont think in day to day driving you would be able to tell the difference in terms of handling. Sure the saloon may be stiffer but would you really be able to tell the differece on the road?

Agree with Creepy on this, the coupe (IMO) feels much more special and is a more elegant car all round.

[acerboo]

bmw car mag put a 335d saloon against a 335i coupe round a track and the d was 1 tenth second faster they put it down to the extra torque but could be the saloon handled better

[Burton]

I have not driven the saloon but as I posted recently in a discussion about variation in handling and RFTs, I beleive I experienced a significant difference between two demo coupes that should have been the same spec and also the 2010 coupe I have now. Here is a cut and past of my comment from the other post (not sure how to embed a link yet!)

"Reading some of the above and the various posts on here about RFT and general ride quality I wonder how much these cars vary in ride quality from car to car or batch to batch.

Also did they also change something with the last facelift 2010 model?

I have a new 2010 e92 Msport (bridgestone RFTs) and am pleasantly surprised at the compliance of the ride compared to two Msport demo cars tested prior to ordering. Yes the ride is still very firm but the car does not tram line and the bumps have a subdued hard rubber feel rather than the harsh crashy nature of the demo cars. The demo cars both tramlined and I always felt one was worse than the other.

I almost ordered a non Msport model just because of the ride quality on the demos, but unless it gets worse with age my car is completely different and works very well for me."

[toxicnerve]

I think cars that at the dealers as demo models are generally quite new and stiff. As a car ages (specifically, as it racks up some mileage) they tend to loosen a bit and get softer as various components wear (bushes etc) and even the metal components "settle" and flex.

I have an E92 on 19" 225 style wheels and the ride is firm for sure, I don't really know what "crashy" means but I do grit my teeth as I drive over a pothole I've not managed to avoid!

With regards to handling, I can't really complain...I think the car handles just fine, the turn in is precise, the steering wheel loads up nicely and the feedback is good too. Now, I've never pushed the boundaries so I don't know where the limits are but in the kind of driving I do I even find the grip level offered by the OE Bridgestone RFTs is also fine, even on damp roads when giving it some stick.

[FieldingMellish]

Originally Posted by toxicnerve

I have an E92 on 19" 225 style wheels and the ride is firm for sure, I don't really know what "crashy" means but I do grit my teeth as I drive over a pothole I've not managed to avoid!

I'm not sure what 'crashy' means myself! That's why I put it in inverted commas. It's an imperfect and imprecise word I used to describe a general feeling I got from driving a coupe for half an hour, four years ago. FWIW, my Dad happened to be visiting at the time and came on that test drive with me, and he felt the same about the ride in the coupe, compared with the saloon. BUt maybe teh coupe had 19 inch wheels.

[ALF_E90]

Originally Posted by kaishang

Personally I'm neutral about the appearances of M Sport vs SE and big wheels vs standard wheels. However I spend a lot more time driving the car than looking at it from the outside, so I picked the option which gives better comfort and drivability on typical roads: 17"

That's my view on it. Do you buy a car because of the way it drives, or because of the way you think other people look at it? The fact is 99.9% of people don't give a toss about the sort of stuff we "car people" fret about.

I do care about how cars look in general - i.e. I'd rather buy a car where the whole range looks great - but I've made a pact with myself not to compromise the drive with silly options and not to pay over the odds for extras I don't want just because some "expert" tells me I need them for resale. And also to buy a car that suits my current driving needs, not the car I've always wanted even if it is badly suited to my current needs. There are no good or bad cars, just ones that are or are not suited to how you use a car.

If I was doing fewer miles and was not so keen on mountain biking I'd have bought a 330 manual coupe. But actually I do shed loads of miles and rarely ever look at my car except from the inside! The 330i engine I'll pay extra for because that's a real benefit to me the whole time I'm driving, fancy wheels.... no.

Back on topic I don't think with many modern car ranges you can tell much difference in the drive between the saloon, coupe, and estate - the wheelbases, tracks, stiffnesses and weights tend to be very similar.

[FieldingMellish]

Originally Posted by toxicnerve

I think cars that at the dealers as demo models are generally quite new and stiff. As a car ages (specifically, as it racks up some mileage) they tend to loosen a bit and get softer as various components wear (bushes etc) and even the metal components "settle" and flex.

That's definitely true - demo models are usually very new, and a lot stiffer .

[Em135eye]

Originally Posted by ALF_E90

That's my view on it. Do you buy a car because of the way it drives, or because of the way you think other people look at it? The fact is 99.9% of people don't give a toss about the sort of stuff we "car people" fret about.

I do care about how cars look in general - i.e. I'd rather buy a car where the whole range looks great - but I've made a pact with myself not to compromise the drive with silly options and not to pay over the odds for extras I don't want just because some "expert" tells me I need them for resale. And also to buy a car that suits my current driving needs, not the car I've always wanted even if it is badly suited to my current needs. There are no good or bad cars, just ones that are or are not suited to how you use a car.

If I was doing fewer miles and was not so keen on mountain biking I'd have bought a 330 manual coupe. But actually I do shed loads of miles and rarely ever look at my car except from the inside! The 330i engine I'll pay extra for because that's a real benefit to me the whole time I'm driving, fancy wheels.... no.

Back on topic I don't think with many modern car ranges you can tell much difference in the drive between the saloon, coupe, and estate - the wheelbases, tracks, stiffnesses and weights tend to be very similar.

Couldn't agree more.

[FieldingMellish]

Originally Posted by 335diesel

Couldn't agree more.

Sure, but then if looks aren't important, why not buy a Mondeo?

Great cars though they are, a 3 Series BMW is an indulgence and a luxury. Sadly, even though they are very expensive in their most 'basic' forms, BMW make us pay even more money to get a decent 'spec', and the best 'spec' of all is M Sport, which also enhances (or, depending on taste, ruins) the look. In a sense, form and function go together.

Sure, I don't want to put big wheels on my car just to look good, and then get a terrible ride. But if the wheels are too small, they look silly. Even seen an E90 with 16 inch wheels?

We're all (or mostly) strangers on forums etc. but if you knew me in real life you'd know I am the last person who wants to show off and attract attention. But there's no doubt that a coupe looks a good bit better than a saloon, and it must, at some level, give me/us satisfaction to drive a nice-looking car, whether we care what other people think or not.

I'm pretty much welded to the idea that, budget allowing, I have to have the M Sport. Small wheels would look even more out of place with the M Sport look, I reckon.

[RockIt]

I do believe that coupes are as much about the "look" as they are about the drive. I ran a 330i SE but added 18" wheels and sports seats and suspension because the M Sport wasn't available when I bought new. If it had it would have been a no brainer

I also went for manual as the engine really suits a manual 'box and thrives on high revs. My personal opinion is that an auto diluted the driving experience for this particular engine in a way that it doesn't with the turbo charged variants. Just a consideration Fielding M.

[chrisbin]

Coupe definitely feels more "special" both inside and outside ime