# BMW 118D M Sport



## Pricy147 (Oct 15, 2009)

I know, I know - this is a TT forum! :roll:

But have seen many of you have previously owned BMs.

Never been a particularly big fan of them in the past - think the interiors are relatively basic, and not been overly fussed on the exterior design. BUT...I do like the BMW 1 series hatchback - especially the M Sport model.

I am looking for a second car to tow my jet ski, and as a work horse / motorway car, so want something that fits the following criteria;

- Reasonably sporty looking, with a bit of poke
- Very good MPG
- Reasonable residuals
- Can fit a tow bar!

I have been looking at a few different options;

*Volkswagen Scirrocco:* Cannot fit a tow bar - so no go. do like it though!
*Audi A1:* Details still fairly sketchy - and cannot see it in the flesh (or metal) as yet. Again - like the look of it.
*Volvo C30: *Surprised how nice this looked. Nicing looking seats I have ever seen on the R Design model. Small boot, and MPG / performance not as good as BMW. Nice looking car though. Not sure on residuals.

The there is the BMW 118D M Sport. The hatchback version. Does @ 64 or so to the gallon, 0-60 @ 9 secs or so, reasonable top end, and look v nice. Residuals seem reasonable too.

My questions are;

- Any cars I am obviously overlooking? Not so keen on the Audi A3 or VW Golf. Also not keen on 4x4s, although do like the Q5/Q7 - but bit pricey.
- Any experiences / opinions of the BMW 118?


----------



## graTT58 (Jan 28, 2009)

Can this be posted in the other marques section please.


----------



## Pricy147 (Oct 15, 2009)

does any1 read that board :?


----------



## graTT58 (Jan 28, 2009)

Look at the activity on the board - the answer is yes.


----------



## senwar (Apr 21, 2003)

I've got a 120d M sport and love it. The performance is excellent.

My mate has just got a 1.8d X1 (so same engine as the one you talk of) and the performance is surprisingly good for a heavier motor.


----------



## jammyd (Oct 11, 2008)

Only thing I would say is the ride is stiff... I am not a fan of the run flats...

you could consider an A3 instead of an A1 as the A3 is more the size of the 1Series


----------



## GlasgowEd (Feb 11, 2010)

jammyd said:


> Only thing I would say is the ride is stiff... I am not a fan of the run flats...
> 
> you could consider an A3 instead of an A1 as the A3 is more the size of the 1Series


BMW makes FANTASTIC cars, having just sold my 320d after owning it for 5 years I can honestly say I have NEVER felt that the ride to be overly firm. Would definitely recommend one instead of the 1 series. IMO the 1 series feels cheap and nasty, the 3 series feels much more better quality for not much more money. You should give it a test drive at the very least, bet you will buy one.


----------



## graTT58 (Jan 28, 2009)

GlasgowEd said:


> jammyd said:
> 
> 
> > Only thing I would say is the ride is stiff... I am not a fan of the run flats...
> ...


+1. I could not agree more.


----------



## senwar (Apr 21, 2003)

GlasgowEd said:


> jammyd said:
> 
> 
> > Only thing I would say is the ride is stiff... I am not a fan of the run flats...
> ...


My 1 series feels far superior build quality to the Z4M coupe I had. Whilst I truly adored that car, the build quality was shocking. The 1er I've got doesn't feel cheap/nasty at all.


----------



## jammyd (Oct 11, 2008)

GlasgowEd said:


> jammyd said:
> 
> 
> > Only thing I would say is the ride is stiff... I am not a fan of the run flats...
> ...


I am only going on limited experience, I had one for 2 weeks ( did a swap @ work with someone who wanted to try the Golf I had) and I was not overly impressed... maybe it was the softness of the golf. I would consider the 123d as an option


----------



## Kell (May 28, 2002)

I'm pretty sure I've read that the 2.0d engine is more economical than the 1.8d.

Depends on purchase price though.

For that size of car, I'd say you've overlooked sporty diesel versions of the Golf and Leon.


----------



## graTT58 (Jan 28, 2009)

If you appreciate fabulous handling, go for the BMW, preferably a 120d with 177bhp.


----------



## fut1a (Dec 28, 2006)

Kell said:


> I'm pretty sure I've read that the 2.0d engine is more economical than the 1.8d.
> 
> Depends on purchase price though.
> 
> For that size of car, I'd say you've overlooked sporty diesel versions of the Golf and Leon.


I would be surprised it that is right because i think the 118d has the same engine as the 120d but less bhp


----------



## graTT58 (Jan 28, 2009)

fut1a said:


> Kell said:
> 
> 
> > I'm pretty sure I've read that the 2.0d engine is more economical than the 1.8d.
> ...


The power to weight is better and that produces better mpg. You dont have to work the engine as hard in the 120d.


----------



## Kell (May 28, 2002)

fut1a said:


> Kell said:
> 
> 
> > I'm pretty sure I've read that the 2.0d engine is more economical than the 1.8d.
> ...


I think it's the way the engine management has been set up as well as lower rolling resistance tyres etc.

This article metions the engine in the 320d, not sure if it applies to the 120d too.

http://www.carmagazine.co.uk/Green-Cars ... AR-review/


----------



## tdk (Jul 22, 2003)

[quote="Pricy147"The there is the BMW 118D M Sport. The hatchback version. Does @ 64 or so to the gallon, 0-60 @ 9 secs or so, reasonable top end, and look v nice. Residuals seem reasonable too.[/quote]
I have a 118d auto 3 door as a second car and it's very nice - quiet, comfortable and economical. However, there is no way you're going to get 64mpg - over the 12,000 miles and 10 months that I've had the car since new I've averaged 46mpg with a combination of town and motorway driving. If you're going to use it for towing then I'd imagine you'll get even less mpg!

Interestingly, on the odd occasion when I've had a 120d for a few days I averaged 42mpg for long motorway journeys as you're tempted to use the extra power. I found that if you go over 80mph on the motorway it really hits the fuel economy. Stick below 60mph and it's not difficult to get over 50mpg, but that's way too slow! :lol:

Simon.


----------



## senwar (Apr 21, 2003)

tdk said:


> I have a 118d auto 3 door as a second car and it's very nice - quiet, comfortable and economical. However, there is no way you're going to get 64mpg - over the 12,000 miles and 10 months that I've had the car since new I've averaged 46mpg with a combination of town and motorway driving. If you're going to use it for towing then I'd imagine you'll get even less mpg!
> 
> Interestingly, on the odd occasion when I've had a 120d for a few days I averaged 42mpg for long motorway journeys as you're tempted to use the extra power. I found that if you go over 80mph on the motorway it really hits the fuel economy. Stick below 60mph and it's not difficult to get over 50mpg, but that's way too slow! :lol:
> 
> Simon.


I do two lengthy motorway journeys a week and average about 52-52mpg in my 120d.

Use the power pretty much as well - just coming up to 13,000 miles.

Agree re: the quoted figure though, no chance.


----------



## coupe-sport (May 7, 2002)

Good car - i'd go for the 120d if you can. My other half had a 118d (original) and that never seemed to do more than 40mpg. My 123d seems to do a consistent 43-44mpg on my normal commute.

James


----------

