Talk me down: E30

I agree with you gearhead.. if Rust had not claimed my old 318ti, it would be a car I would happily own for a long time.

I bring up that particular model of E36 as it has the most in common with the E30 due to it's light weight and rear suspension. Do not let that trailing arm rear put you off.. you have to be doing something really stupid to get it to bite.. remember, it worked well on the original M3 and it took something like the Z3M to really show the limitations of that suspension set up

Just sold mine last night. Yes, it's a great platform, and the Eta's not the end of the world. There's plenty you can do with it, from chips to exhaust to the "i" head swap. Or, do what thousands of other people have done and do an engine swap. If it's a good, rust-free shell, I say go for it.

jere wrote: There was a video of this from some mainstream show, but instead of putting sticky tires on it and adding power, put it on donuts all around It will be tons of fun just driving to the grocery store. You can slide around corners like a fool, roast the tires with ease, and you can start the next trend for the stance crowd.

Stance kids won't do this because they would have to properly tuck their wheels instead of poke them to the point where they mangle their fenders. I could see them using tires from a spare to stretch onto a 6" wheel though. LOL

I'll try to talk you down. (I'm sure a few of you knew this was coming... )

My general hatred of the E30 is fairly well documented on these forums (I bought an '88 325is off this forum back in 2010). Most unreliable, uninspiring and "un-fun" POS car I've ever owned. I eventually feared driving it since it seemed like every time I drove it, something broke. It's a shame because I love how they look compared to other BMW's, but I really didn't like driving the car at all. Maybe it's because I had too much experience with an E36 M3 and many R53 MINI's before I bought it, but the E30 just wasn't fun to drive.

Never before or since have I wanted so much to burn a car to the ground or watch it roll off a cliff rather than sell it. For better or worse, I did sell it on this forum; for a huge $$ loss.

Working on it was best described as having all of the complexities of a modern car but with the build ergonomics of a classic car, leading to many "WTF were they thinking when they designed this thing?" situations. Of course, if you strip it down to a race car as many of the E30-lovers on this forum have, then working on it will be easier, but if you want things like power steering, cruise control and working A/C, the engine bay gets tight.

Yes, there are many "fixes" you can do to an E30 to make it better. Or you can just buy a better car in the first place, like an E36 or E46... After the latest GRM article, I lean heavily towards a E46.

Ian F wrote: Working on it was best described as having all of the complexities of a modern car but with the build ergonomics of a classic car, leading to many "WTF were they thinking when they designed this thing?" situations. Of course, if you strip it down to a race car as many of the E30-lovers on this forum have, then working on it will be easier, but if you want things like power steering, cruise control and working A/C, the engine bay gets tight.

This. I went in thinking that the E30 would be an easy car to work on because it's old and "simple". Well, it's still German. And it's full of half-assed 80s electronics that are fragile, failure-prone, and more complicated than they should be. Some jobs are easy, the suspension stuff is cake, but anything under the hood was a pretty major PIA, and the interior wiring is an unholy nightmare.

The M42 is definitely easier to work on underhood than the 6 cylinder cars, but it puts you even further down the power scale than the eta.

Not sure what electronics are failure prone or complicated? My experience over the 10 years I've owned mine, and working on countless as a mechanic, is that there are a few things (Service Indicator board batteries, blower motor resistors) that will fail, but for the most part, they have enough luxury to be good dailies without so much electronic stuff as to make them unreliable. Granted, that's just my experience. Compared to the various other cars I've owned, little things like good quality fasteners and plastics means that you don't break something every time you work on it, which is nice.

It's always amazing how different experiences can be. Maybe I've just owned a lot of PITA-to-work-on cars so it just makes the E30 seem like cake to work on?

gearheadE30 wrote: The M42 is definitely easier to work on underhood than the 6 cylinder cars, but it puts you even further down the power scale than the eta.

According to Wiki.. the Eta engine only produced 120hp.. the 318is with the M42 made 130. Not sure where you put the 4 cylinder down below the E..

mad_machine wrote:

gearheadE30 wrote: The M42 is definitely easier to work on underhood than the 6 cylinder cars, but it puts you even further down the power scale than the eta.

According to Wiki.. the Eta engine only produced 120hp.. the 318is with the M42 made 130. Not sure where you put the 4 cylinder down below the E..

Torque.

gearheadE30 wrote: It's always amazing how different experiences can be. Maybe I've just owned a lot of PITA-to-work-on cars so it just makes the E30 seem like cake to work on?

Maybe. All I can say is if you gave me the choice of working in the engine bay of a R53 MINI or an E30, I'll take the MINI every time.

Let me describe our eta experience, going in 1k rpm increments, starting at 1,000 rpm: nothing, nothing, nothing, here comes something, rev limiter. Shift and repeat.

Tom_Spangler wrote:

mad_machine wrote:

gearheadE30 wrote: The M42 is definitely easier to work on underhood than the 6 cylinder cars, but it puts you even further down the power scale than the eta.

According to Wiki.. the Eta engine only produced 120hp.. the 318is with the M42 made 130. Not sure where you put the 4 cylinder down below the E..

Torque.

I actually looked it up.. 1987, which is the last year for the es.. zero to 60 comes up in 8.9 Seconds.. slow by todays standards, but not too shabby. The 1990 318is can do it in 8.7.

I don't think the torque makes up for that much of the engines inability to rev

Yeah, I was putting more stock in torque. For daily driving, the eta feels somewhat quicker and you don't have to shift as much. On the track, yeah, I'll take the M42 any day of the week. That's why I have one, after all.

I have not worked on an R53 before....but I do like them. Fun cars, but I struggle (for very few logical reasons, really) with actually buying a front drive car as a 'fun car'.

this is true.. my old 318ti, you had to shift to third at 50.. and that is if you hit the revlimiter.. so yes, the M42 and M44 require a lot more shifting to get their just slightly quicker.. but I have also wondered what slightly changing the gearing to put that upshift at 60mph would have done to the zero to sixty times..

I've had half a dozen e30's, including one that I autocrossed in SM.

In my opinion the market has reached a point where the only thing that makes sense is buying an E36.

You can get one already done with the right motor in it for not too much more:

http://austin.craigslist.org/cto/5529609942.html

I'll be honest though, I've never seen the love for the E30's. I always thought they were ok but nothing super special. I liked my DA9 Integra GSR better.

Tom_Spangler wrote:

mad_machine wrote:

gearheadE30 wrote: The M42 is definitely easier to work on underhood than the 6 cylinder cars, but it puts you even further down the power scale than the eta.

According to Wiki.. the Eta engine only produced 120hp.. the 318is with the M42 made 130. Not sure where you put the 4 cylinder down below the E..

Torque.

Drive in the correct gear?

I love E30s...because I love old BMWs and E30s. Unless you like the classic car aspect (yes, they are a classic) then get an E46. Many people regard them as the 'last good BMW,' and they're fully depreciated. Everything is still DIY-able.

E30s are going the way of the 2002 in a big hurry. If you want an E30, get one now. If you just want a nice BMW, look at the E46 or E36M3. Unlike the E30, they're still so thick on the ground that you can be very choosy.

most of the e30s I still see around have been "destroyed" with some pretty questionable modifications. Even the 4 door at work is getting pretty worn out. The past few weeks the hood has been popped because the latch broke.. I guess the guy who owns it can't afford to fix it

Tom_Spangler wrote:

Ian F wrote: Working on it was best described as having all of the complexities of a modern car but with the build ergonomics of a classic car, leading to many "WTF were they thinking when they designed this thing?" situations. Of course, if you strip it down to a race car as many of the E30-lovers on this forum have, then working on it will be easier, but if you want things like power steering, cruise control and working A/C, the engine bay gets tight.

This. I went in thinking that the E30 would be an easy car to work on because it's old and "simple". Well, it's still German. And it's full of half-assed 80s electronics that are fragile, failure-prone, and more complicated than they should be. Some jobs are easy, the suspension stuff is cake, but anything under the hood was a pretty major PIA, and the interior wiring is an unholy nightmare.

Interesting. I don't share this opinion for any of the 3 E30s I had.

An 88 325is, that became a 332is. A 318is. And a 325ic.

In reply to z31maniac:

I seem to live an "inverse world" where cars that are solid for most folks - E30 & Cummins - are unreliable turds for me and cars that most folks run away from (my '03 VW; MINI) have been as reliable as a rock.