The BMW UUC Digest Volume 2 : Issue 489 : "text" Format Messages in this Issue: Re: WSJ article Re: WSJ article Re: <E30> Stock wheel tire choices Re: <E30> Stock wheel tire choices Re: <E30> Stock wheel tire choices Re: E46 Antenna Re: E46 Antenna Re: E46 Antenna Custom E21 at Barrett Jackson Re: Custom E21 at Barrett Jackson <E36> Speakers Re: WSJ Article/G35 Re: WSJ article
---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 12:45:14 -0800 (PST) From: P Kroon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [email protected] Subject: Re: WSJ article Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Raza, I agree that the comparison between a 9 year old car and a new car isn't totally legit. It is, however, the only direct comparison I can make since I don't own an e46. I thought I made that clear, but if I didn't, I appologize. Having said that, the one factor you failed to include is the all-mighty dollar. This is where the G35 shines, IMO. The base price of a 330i is $36k whereas the G35 is $31k according to KB base MSRP. Not to state the obvious, but the BMW is 16% more than the infiniti, and I'm not sure the BMW even comes standard with leather. Plus, the G35 has nearly 300 hp whereas the 330 has 220 hp. Regarding C&D failure to put the G35 on this years list, I don't honestly put that much stock in it. I think it is fair to say that most of the car mags have a "thing" for BMW. I agree that to a large extent it has been earned, but IMO it goes beyond that. It is NOT that I'm against BMW (heck, I wouldn't have bought mine if I was), it is just my observation. Also, BMW's quality is not the best. Again, I'm not bashing them, but take a look at Consumer Reports. -Paul 96 328i 03 G35 --- Raza Uddin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >And goes on to show that they stand behind making > the > > barf-mobiles that they are creating now, even with > slumping sales. It > > covers how BMW's competitors have closed the > performance gap & even > > surpassed what was once the industry benchmark, > with a quick blurb about a > > CCA instructor who was a devoted BMW buyer who > bought a new S4 instead & > > another who chose a G35 for it's better > performance. > Lee, > What is your source for BMWs slump in sales? From > what I can find, > BMW-Branded cars for the first time, topped 1 > million units rising > 10.3 percent from > 2003(http://www.dw-world.de/dw/briefs/0,1574,1455723,00.html). > > It seems to be cyclical that "purists" write-off > newer models as not > as great, I think, to save the face of their > vehicle. I have no shame > in admitting the E46 M3 is a superior car to my E36 > M3, my only > problem is finding the money to buy one! > > I like the new styling direction simply because BMW > is taking chances > and innovating, not like Audi and Merc who just > recycle and update > older designs. Yet if exterior styling is a prob > em, there should be > no problem about their technology: BMW power trains > are some of the > most innovative and sophisticated, build quality > seems to be as it > always has been if not much improved, and > convenience technology is, > in my opinion, the best of any car manufacturer. > > That said, it seems that you take a lot of stock in > your CCA friends > moving to the Audi S4. Two personal friends of > mine have bought S4s > after their M3/4s and their only reason for > switching was that there > is no M3 sedan, the 330i ZHP would be considered a > "downgrade" from an > M car, and the M5 was too expensive for their needs. > They still feel > that the E36 M3/4 is a much more agile, nimble car > and would be much > faster if it had the same power as the S4. And I > would argue that the > S4 doesn't offer any performance advantage over the > E46 M3 if pure > track impressions are concerned. I would have > settled with a ZHP, but > I am a BMW fanatic. > > > Paul, > As you did mention in your comparison, your 328i is > not new. That > said, your particular car is 9 years old but the E36 > chassis and its > technology is in many ways more than 13 years old > (1992 production). > The E36 also marks BMWs first foray in CAD and it > presents some > weaknesses/problem areas that need to be addressed > in most cars. Yet, > the chassis still seems to be the inspiration of all > companies trying > to get into BMWs pie (i.e. Fords new Mustang) > > But, I think your comparison is a little unfair. If > you are going to > compare vehicles, compare the G35 to at least the > E46, as they have > both benefited from advances in technology as > compared to the E36. > Even still though, E36s tend to still have an > advantage over newer > cars. Ask my 350z owner friends how they fare > against my stockish > (exhaust and software) M3/4 at the track. > > The base 330i and base G35 are very similar cars, > and on pure specs, > the G35 would win. But it isn't always about the > numbers, its about > the driving feel. Car and Driver, who had both the > G35 sedan and > coupe in last years 10 best, didn't think they were > good enough to > retain their titles. The BMW 3-series remains on > the list for 14 > consecutive years, a feat only bettered by Honda's > Accord. Being very > involved with the Nissan community (part of a Nissan > club) and having > wrenched, tracked, and lived with 4 Nissan 300zx > Twin Turbos I can say > the variants (350z and G35) are very capable cars, > but feel like > bloated, but very fast sedans (even the coupes). > They've lost the > immediacy and willingness of the older Z32 models > and, while good > cars, they are not great in my eyes. > > Drive Safely, > Raza > Search the > ARCHIVES:http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected] > > > __________________________________________________________________________ > In memory of Michel Potheau - friend, enthusiast, > founder of the BMW CCA. > > UUC Motorwerks - BMW Performance Fine-tuning and > home of the Ultimate > Short Shifter - accept no substitutes! > 908-874-9092 . http://www.uucmotorwerks.com > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 13:23:12 -0800 From: Eric Valentine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [email protected] Subject: Re: WSJ article Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I'm a proud G35 Coupe 6MT owner for this exact reason; more car for the $$$. I was ready to pull the trigger on a 330i ZHP, then I drove the G35. The Infiniti doesn't have the BMW "feel" to it, but the G35 is still fun to drive. (and it looks and sounds great as well) I just couldn't justify the extra $5K for a comparably equipped 330i. Eric Valentine 04 G35 91 318is On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 12:45:14 -0800 (PST), P Kroon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > ...Having said that, the one factor you failed to include > is the all-mighty dollar. This is where the G35 > shines, IMO. The base price of a 330i is $36k whereas > the G35 is $31k according to KB base MSRP. Not to > state the obvious, but the BMW is 16% more than the > infiniti, and I'm not sure the BMW even comes standard > with leather. Plus, the G35 has nearly 300 hp whereas > the 330 has 220 hp. ... ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 13:24:21 -0800 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [email protected] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: <E30> Stock wheel tire choices Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 205/60-14 on stock wheels is not Plus 1, since the wheels are the factory 14 inch diameter. The tires are just wider. I also once had a set of Firestone SH-30s and would buy them again. But the last time I checked the Tire Rack's web site, they were not listed. I don't know if they are available from other sources or not. The Eagers on our family '91 325iA don't appear to be at risk of wearing out any time soon, so my need for 14 inch tires is not great at the moment. Scott Miller GGC BMW CCA >Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 12:51:27 -0600 >From: "Paul Craven" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: <[email protected]> >Subject: <E30> Stock wheel tire choices >Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Hi all, >I know this has been covered in depth before, but since there are fewer >and fewer tires out there for 14" wheels, I wanted to see if anyone had >found anything special in the 205/60/14 "plus one" size.� I have found >(in order of cost) Dunlop A2 Sports, BFG TA's, Yoko ES 100s and Michelin >XGTH4's.� On a previous E30 I put on a set of the Firestone SH30's and >liked them a lot as a decent all-season general use tire.� The ES100's >were erecently discussed as being noisy and they are not an all season, >so they are not high on my list (I have a truck for full on snow use, >but I drive the E30 otherwise). Anyone have any recent experience good >or bad with the above? Maybe some other tire?� Of course any of them >would be an upgrade from the Road Hugger Radials I now have (really, >that's what they say on them). > >Regards, >Paul Craven >93-325ic - now with a hardtop! ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 13:30:09 -0800 (PST) From: Brian Daley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [email protected] Subject: Re: <E30> Stock wheel tire choices Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Paul in addition to the Yoko ES100, Michelin XGTH4, the BFG Traction T/A, and the Dunlop A2's you mentioned Tire Rack also shows the Kumho Touring Plus 732 (Touring All Season) $40, Sumitomo Srixon4 (High Performance All Season) $46, and the Sumitomo HTR200 (High Performance Summer) $45, as available in 205/60-14. They all have the added bonus of being cheaper than the others. It sounds like your criteria are something like "An all season tire that's an improvement over the Road Hugger Radials" so either the 732 or the Srixon4 probably meet that standard. Brian '94 325ic -----Original Message----- On 1/11/05 10:51 AM, "Paul Craven" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi all, > I know this has been covered in depth before, but since there are fewer > and fewer tires out there for 14" wheels, I wanted to see if anyone had > found anything special in the 205/60/14 "plus one" size. I have found > (in order of cost) Dunlop A2 Sports, BFG TA's, Yoko ES 100s and Michelin > XGTH4's. On a previous E30 I put on a set of the Firestone SH30's and > liked them a lot as a decent all-season general use tire. The ES100's > were erecently discussed as being noisy and they are not an all season, > so they are not high on my list (I have a truck for full on snow use, > but I drive the E30 otherwise). Anyone have any recent experience good > or bad with the above? Maybe some other tire? Of course any of them > would be an upgrade from the Road Hugger Radials I now have (really, > that's what they say on them). > > Regards, > Paul Craven > 93-325ic - now with a hardtop! ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 13:31:56 -0800 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [email protected] Subject: Re: <E30> Stock wheel tire choices Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Paul, For my son's E30 we put on a set of Falken ZE-512's. He immediately noticed an improvment. I can't recall however if his wheels are 14 or 15". For my daughter's Honda I put on BF Goodrich Traction T/A's. If you scope out the Tirerack web site you'll see that these tires are very good head to head with others in the category. These same tires were on the Neon's at the Barber school my son attended. They seemed pretty impressive as an outside observer and in talking to the instructors. -Kevin ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 13:25:33 -0800 (PST) From: Andre Yew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [email protected] Subject: Re: E46 Antenna Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > A cow-orker just bought a 323Ci which has a stick antenna. He has seen > some E46s with the fin antenna, and being somewhat anal about appearances, > he wants to change to the fin-type. Questions: > > Is this technically feasible? In other words, are the two antenna types > equivalent and compatible? Yes, I believe it is. The stick antenna is there for an in-car cell phone. The fin is there for BMW Assist (an OnStar-like system which isn't available for E46 323Ci) and Bluetooth integration (and neither is this), as well as the cell phone. If he doesn't have the official BMW in-car cell phone, then neither antenna are actually electrically functional. Also, I believe the stubby antenna has a hole drilled through the roof, whereas the shark fin wiring goes through the weather stripping in the window, so he'd have to seal up the hole, or route the wires differently. I like the stubby antenna. It even comes with a big key to tighten it down occasionally, and if you leave the key on your antenna, it looks like a big wind-up car. :-) > I seem to recall that these cars use a diversity antenna system? So in > other words, does the diversity electronics care what is attached to the > external antenna wire? The radio antennae (there are two oriented differently and the radio picks the one with the stronger signal) are built into the rear window of the coupe. I think various tuner catalogs and Ebay sell sticky-tape shark fins for people like your friend. --Andre ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 21:28:14 +0000 From: "Gilbert Hoffman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [email protected] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: E46 Antenna Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Scott asked: >If the two antennas are not interchangeable, could he swap out the whole >stereo system to make it work? Any options here? Is this making any >sense? IIRC the dealership told me that the antenna was only there for cell phone and has no bearing on the radio. Of course, dealerships have been known to be wrong. Gilbert ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 13:45:47 -0800 (PST) From: Brian Daley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [email protected] Subject: Re: E46 Antenna Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <snipped>A cow-orker just bought a 323Ci which has a stick antenna. He has seen >some E46s with the fin antenna, and being somewhat anal about appearances, >he wants to change to the fin-type. </snipped> <snipped>If the two antennas are not interchangeable, could he swap out the whole >stereo system to make it work? </snipped> Are you serious? This guy would actually consider swapping out his entire stereo system because he doesn't like how the antenna looks? I'm not sure the description "somewhat anal" quite does that justice... Brian '94 325ic (thinking about a new stereo, nothing to do with how the antenna looks) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 17:08:59 -0500 From: "Alex Cagann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "BMW List" <[email protected]> Subject: Custom E21 at Barrett Jackson Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Hello guys. I am going to Barrett Jackson later this month and saw one particular interesting car there...and wondered if anyone knew anything about it. I'd also like opinions on what you guys think this sucker is worth. It is a one-off 320 with over $75,000 in custom crap. Here is a link. If the link doesn't work, make sure and cut and paste the second line. http://www.barrett-jackson.com/events/scottsdale/vehicles/cardetail_list.asp ?id=179750 Alex Cagann ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 17:12:43 -0500 From: "Eric Nghiem" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Alex Cagann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "BMW List" <[email protected]> Subject: Re: Custom E21 at Barrett Jackson Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Wow...what a monster! Betcha the auction ends around 10-20K, if they are lucky. If it ends for anything more then that, I better go and dust off the 320 in my garage! ----- Original Message ----- From: "Alex Cagann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "BMW List" <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, January 11, 2005 5:08 PM Subject: [UUC] Custom E21 at Barrett Jackson > Hello guys. I am going to Barrett Jackson later this month and saw one > particular interesting car there...and wondered if anyone knew anything > about it. I'd also like opinions on what you guys think this sucker is > worth. It is a one-off 320 with over $75,000 in custom crap. Here is a > link. > If the link doesn't work, make sure and cut and paste the second line. > > http://www.barrett-jackson.com/events/scottsdale/vehicles/cardetail_list.asp > ?id=179750 > > Alex Cagann > > > Search the ARCHIVES:http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected] > > > __________________________________________________________________________ > In memory of Michel Potheau - friend, enthusiast, founder of the BMW CCA. > > UUC Motorwerks - BMW Performance Fine-tuning and home of the Ultimate > Short Shifter - accept no substitutes! > 908-874-9092 . http://www.uucmotorwerks.com > > > ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 14:07:52 -0800 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [email protected] Subject: <E36> Speakers Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Anyone know a speaker (mid to high end) that will fit in the E36 M3 kick panel? One is starting to go south. -Kevin ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 17:09:08 -0500 From: Neil Maller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Subject: Re: WSJ Article/G35 Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 1/11/05 3:36 PM, Tom Kosmalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > For a variety of reasons (deleted to relieve reader boredom), I need a > wagon, even if it's a small one. > > If the G35 were available in that configuration, I would have chosen it > hands down over the 325iT, for all the reasons others have already > mentioned. BMW continues to have its head up its arse as far as product offerings go. Why do people buy wagons? Why for hauling stuff and people. So naturally you can only get an E46 wagon with the smallest (2.5) engine when the 3.0 costs the same to manufacture and would make much better sense. Similarly, while our E39 525iT drives quite nicely, this relatively heavy car could really use the extra torque of the 3.0. on 1/11/05 3:36 PM, "Rex Tener" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > There are no new BMW's I want and I doubt I will buy a new one in the > next five to ten years. Even though our household is a prime BMW > demographic and we have/had three new M Cars over the last ten years. I > like the E46 M3, but not enough to get rid of our E36 M3 and S54 M Coupe > to get one. The forthcoming new 3 series does seem potentially quite attractive, perhaps because the styling isn't very Banglified compared to the current 5 and 7. Neil 96 M3 - Bastard child 88 MB 300E - Gone after 240K+ miles 03 525iT - New arrival, Sterling Grey Metallic 77 MGB - Original owner, need to sell 05 Mini - Cooper S on order ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 14:18:36 -0800 From: Raza Uddin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [email protected] Subject: Re: WSJ article Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 15:36:38 -0500, Robinson, Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Have you driven one? I was always kinda disappointed in the E36 M3, despite > it being a really great car. I was really excited about the E46 when I > first saw it, because it again looked like an M3 should....at the expense of > 3500lbs though. The driving experience left a lot to be desired, especially > compared to the far better cars you could buy new. The E36 is the best bang > for the buck, but I would want an S54 Mcoupe. The previous 2 generations of > M3 were very competitive in their price class, the E46 is just 'vette & Jap > import fodder. For the Europeans, it must be even more disappointing, as > they only gained 12hp from the E36...... I have driven both a an SMG and a plain-jane manual. The only thing that I was somewhat let down by was the SMG. It wasn't as quick as I figured and also wasn't as smooth as I hoped. Apparently, much has been improved with the new version available in the M5. Although I have no track impressions of the E46 (except from the passenger seat), from what other owners have told me, it is a vast improvement and from my drives on the street, I believe them. It seems less twitchy and a bit more composed than my E36 (which is very neutral). Plus, the power is the biggest plus. It finally goes like an M3 should. Fully loaded, the E46 M3 is a bit of a porker. However, a base model with no sunroof and all interior intact and some aftermarket seats was able to get down to ~3200 lbs. (http://forums.corner-carvers.com/showthread.php?t=8594&highlight=ybgsm) > Have you seen the new Benz's. Sorry, but the SL & new SLK are far better > looking than just about anything on the road--especially the Z4. They are > very updated from previous designs. Even the C class is a good looking car > now. Audi's just look like someone pumped a little too much air in them. I personally don't like the new Benzes. The SL is a very good looking car, but the SLK looks very dowdy with it faux-F1 style nose. I would much rather a Z4. I guess this is a classic case of beauty is in the eye of the beholder. > BMW's on the other hand, seem very incongruous from almost any angle. The > Z4 has strange un-matching lines that don't seem to make a point other than > (we spent more on metalforming). The other cars are no picnic either. What > they really look like is a product that was designed by a bunch of people > who never talked to each other until the project was done. They said, I > have this & I have this....they stuck those together, & we ended up with > what you see on the roads. I think the only reason they seem incongruous is that they don't suffer from the "bloating" rotundness and insanely high belt lines that are all the rage today. Round is good, but only to a point. I think Audi has taken it way too far. I would have preferred a more subtler trunk treatment than the 7 and the 5, but they have both grown on me. In pictures, I thought both cars were butt ugly, but actually seeing their proportions en vivo really changed my mind. I especially think the 5 is very good looking. > I'm not really aware of any staggering engine/suspension changes between > models, & have only heard complaints about the electronics & their > reliability. The $45k 330i makes less power than a Nissan Altima or Honda > Accord V6!!!!!! Both are available with 6-speeds too, I believe. The CL & > TL make almost 50 more HP. The CL, IS300 & G35 are all available with > really trick LSDs, & you can get Brembo brakes from the factory on the G35. > The C230 sport has a trick diff & 4-piston front brakes. The CTS-V has a > 400 'vette V8 in it & Brembo brakes. I'd say all of these companies right > now are working their way ahead of BMW when it comes to performance cars. I guess I was referring to many of the new power plants like the 4.5l in the 7 and 5 and the new 5.0 V10 in the M5 as being truly staggering in technology. However, the only way that they have been working their way above BMW is simply because they have been the benchmark to meet. And I'm sure you are aware that horsepower isn't everything in a car. The Accord and Altima would have a very hard time keeping up with a 330i at the track, but might be closer in straight lines. Mainly the Japanese companies are making competitors, but they are still being beaten by the BMW stalwart. The CL is a pumped up front -wheel drive Accord, the IS300 was dismissed as a serious threat once it debuted a few years ago, the C230 is anemic and has a very uninspiring engine (not to mention you have to get an auto for any real engine offered by Merc), and the G35 sedan is a worthy competitor but still seems to be outdone by the less powerful BMW. I'm probably preaching to the choir, but there are a lot of intangibles with BMWs that are taken for granted. The main reason I bought a BMW is that is the only sedan that makes the least compromises when compared to a purpose built sports car. > I would expect a lot to be more agile than a 4000lb Audi S4!!!! :) That > came out of the WSJ, btw. I was a BMW fanatic, but BMW just seems more > interested in turning out luxury cars than the driver's cars they built > their reputation on......looks more & more like a Subie may be in my future, > although I do like the Mcoupe, but suspect the STi may be better. You are arguing that BMW has gone "too luxury" yet it is okay with Audi and other makers to build heavy (in most cases heavier) cars? I don't follow. I like the EVO and the STi but their styling is very "ricey" and have some of the worst interiors I have ever seen. Also, the STi especially is very heavy. I did enjoy the car when I drove it during a monsoon track session at Thunderhill. > I believe most of this was carried over to the E46...... It is mostly a carry over from the E36, but I believe there are many major changes in suspension geometry/pick-up points (I'm trying to find proof, but I'm going on what I've been told). > Yes, you should give the BMW a few hundred extra pounds to work with. ;) Why? So that we can handicap BMWs to make the G35 look better. Nissan wasn't forced to make their car so heavy... ;) > 350Z? Yaaawn. I've eaten those on the track with my positively archaic E30 > M3.....of course, it's also handed a smackdown to all the E36 & E46 cars > it's shared the track with......If it were just more cost-effective. I > drove the track-package 350Z, & would put an E36M3 against it any day! The > G35 feels a lot more confident & refined somehow--a lot more BMW. If the > RX-8 had some power, it might be the benchmark for sports sedans (excepting > the STi which is kinda special). If we are comparing strictly on-track performance, then BMWs have them beat, correct? On the street, the topic becomes much more subjective (i.e. styling, ride, etc.) > Exactly like the BMWs you are comparing them too....... If you do think that BMWs are bloated and feel "sedan-ish" it is because they are sedans. G35s and 350s parade a sports cars, but feel like sedans. In short, BMW is the best at what they do: building sport sedans. They are adding luxury to their vehicles, but they must to keep up with the mainly luxury oriented brands. BMW has alway prided itself for making the least compromises in trading luxury for sport, and I think they are still true to it. For the people that still value style, convenience, handling, and power, I think BMW is still the best. Drive Safely, Raza __________________________________________________________________________ > In memory of Michel Potheau - friend, enthusiast, founder of the BMW CCA. > > UUC Motorwerks - BMW Performance Fine-tuning and home of the Ultimate > Short Shifter - accept no substitutes! > 908-874-9092 . http://www.uucmotorwerks.com > ------------------------------ End of [bmwuucdigest] digest(13 messages) **********
