# BMW: What we still want - I6, V8, E38



## jamiehuntington (Feb 19, 2011)

NA inline-6 engines for the 3 and 5-series
NA V8 engine option for the 5 series
NA V8 engine for the next M3

5 and 7-series that looks like the E38 - more of sleek and square, less of curvy and rotund. Even if its less aerodynamic and means the engine needs to be smaller. 

Classic dynamics over complicated cutting-edge technology.
4-cyl, V6, turbo options for those who prefer fuel efficient performance.

Run-flats optional
Headliner color choice


----------



## hpowders (Jun 3, 2005)

What BMW is concentrating on: complicated cutting-edge technology over classic dynamics.

BMW has unfortunately lost its way: ditched the "Ultimate Driving Machine" motto since they weren't fooling anybody.

Looking at Porsche 911's. I've had enough.


----------



## CALWATERBOY (Aug 26, 2009)

hpowders said:


> What BMW is concentrating on: complicated cutting-edge technology over classic dynamics.
> 
> BMW has unfortunately lost its way: ditched the "Ultimate Driving Machine" motto since they weren't fooling anybody.
> 
> Looking at Porsche 911's. I've had enough.


Cayman, hp? Aftermarket turbo boost, <6 lb, makes that puppy stand up & BARK!

Faster than a GT - imagine....

Love a Porsche! Cayman, unfortunately for me, 2+" too short for my tall boy frame. 

Or, you could get FSD's for many less $. But heartily agree with you on 'Ultimate Driving Machine' - Porsche pretty good. Getting pretty complicated too.
.


----------



## thekurgan (Jul 22, 2007)

I'd like to see a revival of the E9, only slightly modernized, with a N/A I6, kept simple, no navi, no keyless entry, MT of course ....


----------



## hpowders (Jun 3, 2005)

CALWATERBOY said:


> Cayman, hp? Aftermarket turbo boost, <6 lb, makes that puppy stand up & BARK!
> 
> Faster than a GT - imagine....
> 
> ...


Not the early 997's. I drove a 2007 911 on Valentine's day. Has more legroom than the Cayman and the seatback can recline, since the engine is not directly behind the seatback. The suspension was no worse than my 328i's and that was with 19" Pirelli Zeros. The only things I didn't like-the rear window is a tiny slit; the passenger seatback must be vertical-otherwise your rear right side window is blocked and the damn right front wheel well is so big, it seriously intrudes on left leg room.


----------



## Oscar (Jan 9, 2002)

The wonderful, naturally aspirated I6 were key points in my choosing to own an E46 and E90.

However, BMW continues to migrate towards forced induction. BMW state that the turbo 4 that will be in the F30 (next gen 3-series) will have better the NA I6 with respect to: fuel consumption, hp, torque. BMW's turbo diesel 3-series is a great engine. Turbo diesels in general are great engines, long overdue for further acceptance in North America. Today's turbos and superchargers have large eliminated turbo lag and offer broad powerbands just off idle, which are a pleasure to drive.

Other manufacturers are also moving to forced induction. Again, improved torque, hp, fuel consumption are the reasons. Even Hyundai introduced a turbo 4 in their latest family vehicle and have no plans for a NA 6. Their turbo 4 bests the competition on all fronts.

My worries are NVH (noise, harshness, vibration). How will the turbo 4 compare to an NA I6?

Oscar


----------



## MrBonus (Jun 26, 2010)

hpowders said:


> Not the early 997's. I drove a 2007 911 on Valentine's day. Has more legroom than the Cayman and the seatback can recline, since the engine is not directly behind the seatback. The suspension was no worse than my 328i's and that was with 19" Pirelli Zeros. The only things I didn't like-the rear window is a tiny slit; the passenger seatback must be vertical-otherwise your rear right side window is blocked and the damn right front wheel well is so big, it seriously intrudes on left leg room.


The early 997s (I owned a 2005 997S) have PASM, PSM, dynamic braking control, cupholders, navigation, drive-by-wire throttle (complete with lag), etc. All of the same little techno-gadgets the new 3-series has.

Porsche is going the same way as BMW. Having gone to a 993, I refer to my old 997 as a warmed over 3-series because it has all of the creature comforts and technology, just with more speed and a bit less interior room.


----------



## bmw325 (Dec 19, 2001)

hpowders said:


> Not the early 997's. I drove a 2007 911 on Valentine's day. Has more legroom than the Cayman and the seatback can recline, since the engine is not directly behind the seatback. The suspension was no worse than my 328i's and that was with 19" Pirelli Zeros. The only things I didn't like-the rear window is a tiny slit; the passenger seatback must be vertical-otherwise your rear right side window is blocked and the damn right front wheel well is so big, it seriously intrudes on left leg room.


love porsches too, and think they're much higher quality than BMWs, but they're not really an alternative for a 3 series. Most people would have to have a 911 + a more practical car...which means more $$$ even if you're talking a used 997. once you start comparing practical, decent looking and sporty cars, you're down to the GTI, S4 and a few 3 series models unfortunately


----------



## Nimyue (Feb 1, 2011)

I purposely bought a 2011 with a NA i6 since it sounds like its last year in production. Turbo engines are getting better, but they're not at the same reliability as their NA counterparts. Of course that only works in favor for BMW; ppl buy more cars. I'm thinking since almost every carmaker is moving to turbos that in about ten years (when I'll be buying again) those engines will hopefully have reached enough technological advancement that they'll be just as or incredibly close to the reliability of the NA i6. Even as it stands turbos aren't bad. The problem I think comes with BMWs idea of a maintenance schedule. Every engine needs regular maintenance, but turbos are more picky about it. I imagine that if you bought a turbo engine, threw out BMWs maintenance schedule, went back to more frequent service intervals, the turbo would last just as long as a NA... Really 18,000 mile oil changes in a turbo... you're just asking for trouble.


----------



## Nimyue (Feb 1, 2011)

Fortunately, the 4-cyl turbos they're sticking the in the next gen 3 series are not brand new. They've been using them in Europe for years. So it's not _quite_ as bad as it sounds... as far as reliability goes anyway.

But honestly 4-cyl turbo vs NA i6.... the i6 is just so much more sexy.


----------



## darbyogill (Jan 16, 2011)

jamiehuntington said:


> 5 and 7-series that looks like the E38


You're joking, right? The F10 is the reincarnation of the E38 (specs are for Sport models):

2001 740i

Curb Weight 4255
Weight Distrib. 50.8/49.2
Horsepower 290
Torque 324
0-60 6.8
HP to weight ratio 14.67
HP/Liter 72.5
Fuel Capacity 22.5 US gal
Length 196.2 in
Width 73.3 in
Height 56.5 in
Wheelbase 115.4 in
Head Room, F/R 37.4/37.9 
Leg Room, F/R 41.9/36.7
Shoulder Room, F/R 58.4/58.4
Trunk Capacity 13.0 cu. ft.
Wheels 18x8, 18x9.5
Tires 235 50/18, 255 45/18

2011 535i

Curb Weight 4090
Weight Distrib. 50.9/49.1
Horsepower 300
Torque 300
0-60 5.7
HP to weight ratio 13.63
HP/Liter 100
Fuel Capacity 18.5 US gal
Length 193.1 in
Width 73.2 in
Height 57.6 in
Wheelbase 116.9 in
Head Room, F/R 40.5/38.3 
Leg Room, F/R 41.4/36.1
Shoulder Room, F/R 58.3/56.2
Trunk Capacity 18.4 cu. ft.
Wheels 19x8.5, 19x9.0
Tires 245 40/19, 275 35/19


----------



## hpowders (Jun 3, 2005)

MrBonus said:


> The early 997s (I owned a 2005 997S) have PASM, PSM, dynamic braking control, cupholders, navigation, drive-by-wire throttle (complete with lag), etc. All of the same little techno-gadgets the new 3-series has.
> 
> Porsche is going the same way as BMW. Having gone to a 993, I refer to my old 997 as a warmed over 3-series because it has all of the creature comforts and technology, just with more speed and a bit less interior room.


Only the 997 S and 4S come with PASM as standard. The base 911 and 911 4 do not have PASM as standard.


----------



## hpowders (Jun 3, 2005)

bmw325 said:


> love porsches too, and think they're much higher quality than BMWs, but they're not really an alternative for a 3 series. Most people would have to have a 911 + a more practical car...which means more $$$ even if you're talking a used 997. once you start comparing practical, decent looking and sporty cars, you're down to the GTI, S4 and a few 3 series models unfortunately


Yes. Nothing beats the practicality of a 3 Series sedan. If I get a 911, the wife gets my 328i.
So, she will take over posting here as my substitute. She will be posting in Tagalog.

NOT!!!!!!!!:tsk:


----------



## beden1 (Dec 22, 2007)

That's why I just ordered a MT M3 sedan. I think it will be much more reliable in the end over the turbo engines, but time will tell.


----------



## AzNMpower32 (Oct 23, 2005)

I've mentioned this on many occasions, but there are more and more gov't regulations that need to be met, regulations that affect the design and drivetrains.

Europe and the US continually mandate stricter emissions and fuel consumption standards, step by step. For example, the EURO 5 emissions tier kicked in last fall; the N54 along with the M57 diesel only met the EURO 4 standards, whereas the N55 and N57 meet the newer 5 standard. This is why the 335i and 335d (*except* North America) got new engines. In a few years, automakers will have to meet the EURO 6 standard, so expect more revisions.

A non-BMW example rests with Mazda: The RX-8 can longer be sold in the EU because the rotary engine does not meet the EURO 5 emissions standards.

The US has its CAFE standards. A smaller displacement turbo engine can produce fewer CO² and lower fuel consumption figures in the laboratory for certification purposes, where it matters most.

There are also regulations on pedestrian safety and how the bonnet/front of the vehicle is designed. The idea is that when a person is struck, there is sufficient space between the hood and any hard structures underneath (engine), and also so that injury to the person is minimised. There are also minimum bumper heights in the US as well.


----------



## hpowders (Jun 3, 2005)

bmw325 said:


> love porsches too, and think they're much higher quality than BMWs, but they're not really an alternative for a 3 series. Most people would have to have a 911 + a more practical car...which means more $$$ even if you're talking a used 997. once you start comparing practical, decent looking and sporty cars, you're down to the GTI, S4 and a few 3 series models unfortunately


The only Porsche that is an adequate daily driver is the Cayenne, which is the one Porsche that does nothing for me.


----------



## bmw325 (Dec 19, 2001)

hpowders said:


> The only Porsche that is an adequate daily driver is the Cayenne, which is the one Porsche that does nothing for me.


Agree. I guess the Panamera is practical too, but its way too much money and way too ugly.


----------



## hpowders (Jun 3, 2005)

bmw325 said:


> Agree. I guess the Panamera is practical too, but its way too much money and way too ugly.


I agree. The Panamera looks like a distorted stretched-out 911. Ugly it is. Of course if someone dumped one on my doorstep, I may decide not to return it.


----------



## hpowders (Jun 3, 2005)

bmw325 said:


> Agree. I guess the Panamera is practical too, but its way too much money and way too ugly.


Can you imagine if Porsche got really aggressive and decided to build hot hatches and sport sedans?


----------



## vexed (Dec 22, 2001)

hpowders said:


> The only Porsche that is an adequate daily driver is the Cayenne, which is the one Porsche that does nothing for me.


Not true. Do you go to Home Depot and buy a bunch of lumber every day? Probably not. If you asked on rennlist you would see many use their cars as DDs. I do and carry 2 kids and their stuff to school on a regular basis, one summer it was 3. Yes I have a CR-V to use for stuff but I bet for most of your driving and running errands the 997 will be fine. You do know the frunk is smaller in the C4 and C4S if you are worried about that.

And I find the visibility to be excellent, better than the E60 I had.



bmw325 said:


> Agree. I guess the Panamera is practical too, but its way too much money and way too ugly.


Can't argue with the looks, but the V-6 model is not insanely priced.

Wait a year or two and buy someone else's.


----------



## hpowders (Jun 3, 2005)

vexed said:


> Not true. Do you go to Home Depot and buy a bunch of lumber every day? Probably not. If you asked on rennlist you would see many use their cars as DDs. I do and carry 2 kids and their stuff to school on a regular basis, one summer it was 3. Yes I have a CR-V to use for stuff but I bet for most of your driving and running errands the 997 will be fine. You do know the frunk is smaller in the C4 and C4S if you are worried about that.
> 
> And *I find the visibility to be excellent*, better than the E60 I had.
> 
> ...


Not out of the rear window of the 997-it's a narrow slit.

If I was a single guy with no friends-the 997 could be my DD. The Cayman is actually a bit more practical, but I don't fit well in the Cayman.


----------



## vexed (Dec 22, 2001)

hpowders said:


> Not out of the rear window of the 997-it's a narrow slit.
> 
> *If I was a single guy with no friends-*the 997 could be my DD. The Cayman is actually a bit more practical, but I don't fit well in the Cayman.


One out of two is not bad.

Sorry it was an easy shot. I can see fine in the 997, the only time it is a challenge is backing down my driveway which I have to do anyway at night in heavy rain.

If I did not use the rear seat I would have looked hard at a Cayman S.

Were you just tire kicking when you flew to NO?


----------



## hpowders (Jun 3, 2005)

vexed said:


> One out of two is not bad.
> 
> Sorry it was an easy shot. I can see fine in the 997, the only time it is a challenge is backing down my driveway which I have to do anyway at night in heavy rain.
> 
> ...


No. I was prepared to buy. The car and the price were wonderful, but the car was just out of warranty with no CPO backup. I was afraid to go forward.

I have two more 997's to look at-both out of state.

It's okay. I don't take that stuff personally.


----------



## westwest888 (Jun 12, 2005)

hpowders said:


> What BMW is concentrating on: complicated cutting-edge technology over classic dynamics.
> 
> BMW has unfortunately lost its way: ditched the "Ultimate Driving Machine" motto since they weren't fooling anybody.
> 
> Looking at Porsche 911's. I've had enough.


Jeez I'm tired of hearing this talk. If you get that car don't go posting about it here. You know a 911 is just a rebadged Beetle. Porsche and VW are like the same company. I heard they have the same window switches. Also, the C4S uses the same AWD system as a VW Routan minivan. Big thumbdown.


----------



## hpowders (Jun 3, 2005)

westwest888 said:


> Jeez I'm tired of hearing this talk. If you get that car don't go posting about it here. You know a 911 is just a rebadged Beetle. Porsche and VW are like the same company. I heard they have the same window switches. Also, the C4S uses the same AWD system as a VW Routan minivan. Big thumbdown.


You are confusing hearing with reading, the first of several rather embarrassing inaccuracies.:angel:


----------



## vexed (Dec 22, 2001)

hpowders said:


> No. I was prepared to buy. The car and the price were wonderful, but the car was just out of warranty with no CPO backup. I was afraid to go forward.
> 
> I have two more 997's to look at-both out of state.
> 
> It's okay. I don't take that stuff personally.


Good luck with your search. The posters on RL are very helpful and if you need one of them to look at a car for you they will. You should be able to find lots of cars where you are and Dallas is another prime area to look.


----------



## hpowders (Jun 3, 2005)

vexed said:


> Good luck with your search. The posters on RL are very helpful and if you need one of them to look at a car for you they will. You should be able to find lots of cars where you are and Dallas is another prime area to look.


Thanks. You say the frunk on the 911 4 is smaller than the base 911? I didn't know that.


----------



## vexed (Dec 22, 2001)

hpowders said:


> Thanks. You say the frunk on the 911 4 is smaller than the base 911? I didn't know that.


Due to the front diff on the 4's. I don't know the exact difference, but the front compartment of the 4's do have a slightly different layout.


----------



## jamiehuntington (Feb 19, 2011)

The F10 535i and E38 740i have similar size and power numbers but the E38 has a lower sleeker less curved hood and a longer, more angular trunk. 
And the E38 740i is powered by a NA V8 rather than a turbo 6. 

______________________________

darbyogill wrote:

"You're joking, right? The F10 is the reincarnation of the E38 (specs are for Sport models)"

2001 740i 
Trunk Capacity 13.0 cu. ft.


2011 535i
Trunk Capacity 18.4 cu. ft.


----------



## jamiehuntington (Feb 19, 2011)

AzNMpower32 said:


> I've mentioned this on many occasions, but there are more and more gov't regulations that need to be met, regulations that affect the design and drivetrains.
> 
> Europe and the US continually mandate stricter emissions and fuel consumption standards, step by step. For example, the EURO 5 emissions tier kicked in last fall; the N54 along with the M57 diesel only met the EURO 4 standards, whereas the N55 and N57 meet the newer 5 standard. This is why the 335i and 335d (*except* North America) got new engines. In a few years, automakers will have to meet the EURO 6 standard, so expect more revisions.
> 
> There are also minimum bumper heights in the US as well.


____________________

I believe BMW can still make whatever engines they like, the bigger ones will just start to incur the gas guzzler tax, like the current M3. If they can afford the production and R & D cost, the consumer ideal would be to have a wide variety of engine options.
Like:
1-series: 4-cyl turbo, NA I6, and a hybrid
3-series: 4-cyl turbo, NA I6, a diesel, and a hybrid
5-series: NA I6, turbo I6, NA V8, and a hybrid 
7-series: NA V8, turbo V8, NA V12, and a hybrid 
M-series: M1-turbo I6, M3-NA V8, M5-turbo V8

If they can afford even more variety, include again a turbo I6 in the 3-series, add a turbo V8 to the 5-series, and perhaps a slightly longer NA V12 M5


----------



## MrBonus (Jun 26, 2010)

hpowders said:


> Only the 997 S and 4S come with PASM as standard. The base 911 and 911 4 do not have PASM as standard.


Correct, but I think you understand my point.


----------



## FCBayernFTW (Oct 10, 2005)

OP, who gives a crap..as long as the car pushes you back into your seat when you mash the gas, does it really matter what's under the hood? Do you really think that BMW will put out an inferior product???:eeps:

You 'enthusiasts' are their bread and butter.....


----------



## CALWATERBOY (Aug 26, 2009)

hpowders said:


> Not the early 997's. I drove a 2007 911 on Valentine's day. Has more legroom than the Cayman and the seatback can recline, since the engine is not directly behind the seatback. The suspension was no worse than my 328i's and that was with 19" Pirelli Zeros. The only things I didn't like-the rear window is a tiny slit; the passenger seatback must be vertical-otherwise your rear right side window is blocked and the damn right front wheel well is so big, it seriously intrudes on left leg room.


Water cooled Porsche prior to 2009 a bit fragile.

_But for you_, hp, a 1986 911 is the way of the warrior.

Fairly bullet proof and lacking the complication of modern rides, the 911 of that day was and is, in a word, exquisite.

Bit bouncy at low speed, yet supremely comfortable even over bumpy roads at speed, this is engineering even a Luddite can love. 100+ mph no problem at all with utterly linear power.

Plus, the cachet of a true classic. _Can you stand it?!_ :thumbup::thumbup::thumbup::thumbup::thumbup:
__________________________________________________
PS - PM Emission for an opinion re: air cooled turbo Porsche
.


----------



## CALWATERBOY (Aug 26, 2009)

jocamryn said:


> OP, who gives a crap..as long as the car pushes you back into your seat when you mash the gas, does it really matter what's under the hood?


It does.

We strive for linear cream over bell curve buzziness.

It is there that turbos have work to do, but I gotta admit, the N54 was a giant step in the right direction.

Step falls a bit short. Have been remiss in not driving a DCT! You dual clutch owners - can you say you've achieved cream?

Let's not take that the wrong way....
.


----------



## hpowders (Jun 3, 2005)

vexed said:


> Due to the front diff on the 4's. I don't know the exact difference, but the front compartment of the 4's do have a slightly different layout.


Thanks. One of the vehicles I will be looking at is a 911 4. Hope I can fit a sandwich in there!


----------



## hpowders (Jun 3, 2005)

MrBonus said:


> Correct, but I think you understand my point.


I'm looking at low optioned vehicles-all I need are Xenons and 19" wheels. Fruck the expensive stereo, Bluetooth, dimming mirrors and ridiculous Porsche NAV.


----------



## hpowders (Jun 3, 2005)

CALWATERBOY said:


> Water cooled Porsche prior to 2009 a bit fragile.
> 
> _But for you_, hp, a 1986 911 is the way of the warrior.
> 
> ...


What I wouldn't be able to stand is the expensive repair bill for a blown engine-notorious in those early 911's. Just write 'em a $20,000 check, eh?


----------



## MrBonus (Jun 26, 2010)

hpowders said:


> I'm looking at low optioned vehicles-all I need are Xenons and 19" wheels. Fruck the expensive stereo, Bluetooth, dimming mirrors and ridiculous Porsche NAV.


Fruck indeed. Good luck with your purchase. It will be a fine, fine vehicle.


----------



## MrBonus (Jun 26, 2010)

hpowders said:


> What I wouldn't be able to stand is the expensive repair bill for a blown engine-notorious in those early 911's. Just write 'em a $20,000 check, eh?


The chain tensioner issues were resolved in the final iteration of the 911. The large cost generally associated with the engines in the post-SC air-cooled motor is valve guide wear, generally blamed on loose factory tolerances and the issue of gravity with the flat motor, which can be resolved with a costly top end rebuild. Fortunately, a pre-964 car will not run afoul with emissions issues, only slightly reduced power and excessive oil consumption so it's a repair that can be deferred. On a 964 or 993, not so much.


----------



## CALWATERBOY (Aug 26, 2009)

hpowders said:


> What I wouldn't be able to stand is the expensive repair bill for a blown engine-notorious in those early 911's. Just write 'em a $20,000 check, eh?


Early?

Dude!

I said 1986....the 911 [Neunelfer] debuted in '63, and vis-a-vis air cooling, 1986 isn't early, though available through '97.

You prefer an analog cockpit, yes? :str8pimpi
.


----------



## swajames (Jan 16, 2005)

westwest888 said:


> Jeez I'm tired of hearing this talk. If you get that car don't go posting about it here. You know a 911 is just a rebadged Beetle. Porsche and VW are like the same company. I heard they have the same window switches. Also, the C4S uses the same AWD system as a VW Routan minivan. Big thumbdown.


Every single "fact" you've posted here is wrong...

No 911 has any connection to the VW Beetle. The 356, a car which let us not forget debuted in 1948, shared some mechanicals with the Beetle - hardly unsurprising given that one was designed by the Porsche founder and one was designed by his son. The other limited collaboration was on the 914 which, of course, has nothing to do with the 911.

No current Porsche on the road today was designed under VW ownership or with any VW influence. Porsche isn't yet wholly owned by VW, which still owns only half the company. The merger will take place this year or next. Either way, being part of the VW group is going to be good for Porsche and good for VW. Interestingly, it is the Porsche division and not the Lamborghini division which will own the roadmap for the group's sports car direction. Frankly, the prospect of Porsche engineers and Lamborghini engineers working together and with access to the unbelievable engineering talent that saw the creation of the Veyron excites the hell out of me. VW, quite simply, now has access to the best engineering talent in the business. From an engineering perspective, no other company really comes even close to the caliber of talent now available in the VW family. Piech has finally got what he wanted, and in doing so he has built the most capable dynasty in the business.

The window switches in a 911 aren't featured in any current VW.

The AWD system in a C4S isn't used in the Routan. The Routan is, of course, essentially a badge-engineered Chrysler Town and Country.


----------



## mujjuman (Feb 2, 2009)

Agree with the above


----------



## CALWATERBOY (Aug 26, 2009)

westwest888 said:


> Jeez I'm tired of hearing this talk. If you get that car don't go posting about it here. You know a 911 is just a rebadged Beetle. Porsche and VW are like the same company. I heard they have the same window switches. Also, the C4S uses the same AWD system as a VW Routan minivan. Big thumbdown.





swajames said:


> Every single "fact" you've posted here is wrong...


See a neurologist....you can't feel your leg when pulled!
.


----------



## swajames (Jan 16, 2005)

CALWATERBOY said:


> See a neurologist....you can't feel your leg when pulled....


 uch:


----------



## bmw325 (Dec 19, 2001)

CALWATERBOY said:


> Water cooled Porsche prior to 2009 a bit fragile.
> 
> _But for you_, hp, a 1986 911 is the way of the warrior.
> 
> ...


My father in law has an 86 930. Fun to drive occasionally and surprisingly comfortable seats, but even he admits it's not an everyday car or a car to take on long trips.. You have to really drive it 100% of the time. He mostly drives his jeep wrangler. Amazing that its still fast by 2011 standards, and the build quality is really nice. Looks perfect too. His kids don't appreciate it so I told him that I would gladly inherit it.


----------



## CALWATERBOY (Aug 26, 2009)

bmw325 said:


> My father in law has an 86 930. Fun to drive occasionally and surprisingly comfortable seats, but even he admits it's not an everyday car or a car to take on long trips.. You have to really drive it 100% of the time. He mostly drives his jeep wrangler. Amazing that its still fast by 2011 standards, and the build quality is really nice. Looks perfect too. His kids don't appreciate it so I told him that I would gladly inherit it.


Definitely not a DD as a 3 can be.

But whatta car....weekend Heaven....


----------



## TerraPhantm (Nov 22, 2004)

I am definitely going to miss the N/A BMWs... at least I managed to get myself a car with an S54 while I had the chance. I'm hoping to add an E39 M5 to the stable at some point in the future if I can find one in decent shape


----------



## darbyogill (Jan 16, 2011)

So, to recap--you take issue with the styling, you'd prefer the F10 had less trunk room and you're not happy that BMW replaced the engine with one that is lighter, has a more horsepower, a flatter torque curve and gets better fuel economy? Is that about right?



jamiehuntington said:


> The F10 535i and E38 740i have similar size and power numbers but the E38 has a lower sleeker less curved hood and a longer, more angular trunk.
> And the E38 740i is powered by a NA V8 rather than a turbo 6.
> 
> ______________________________
> ...


----------

