Page 1 of 2

3.0i versus 3.0si

Posted: Thu Sep 15, 2011 12:36 pm
by bmwangler
No doubt this has been discussed before, so apologies if I'm dragging up an old topic.

Many members will have owned/driven both the 3.0i and 3.0 si cars. just how much difference in perfomance is there?

Is the 3.0 Si much quicker? On paper there's not much in it, bur 30 odd BHP must count for something.

I'd be interested in opinions on this :wink:

Re: 3.0i versus 3.0si

Posted: Thu Sep 15, 2011 12:51 pm
by jamie_z4
Yes i've owned both.

there is a big difference, mainly putting your foot down in 6th the N52 seems a lot faster

I had a SI coupe and a 3.0SE roadster.

don't get me wrong the roadster sure felt quick too but the n52 is a lot more refined.

Re: 3.0i versus 3.0si

Posted: Thu Sep 15, 2011 1:23 pm
by JDM
+1 on the above, although mt 3.0se roadster was an auto.

Better MPG with the si aswell :D

Re: 3.0i versus 3.0si

Posted: Thu Sep 15, 2011 1:33 pm
by peddy
I've had a mini drag up to 2nd with th30d0r3 in his Coupe and he was about 1/2 a cars length ahead.

Re: 3.0i versus 3.0si

Posted: Thu Sep 15, 2011 1:40 pm
by Zed Five
I've owned both.

3.0si is a much better car than 3.0. Anyone who tells you otherwise has not owned a 3.0si. :wink: Better / faster/ more powerful / better interior etc etc :lol:

Re: 3.0i versus 3.0si

Posted: Thu Sep 15, 2011 1:58 pm
by srhutch
peddy wrote:I've had a mini drag up to 2nd with th30d0r3 in his Coupe and he was about 1/2 a cars length ahead.
He is just a better driver :poke:

Re: 3.0i versus 3.0si

Posted: Fri Sep 16, 2011 1:56 pm
by peddy
srhutch, Funny you should say that because I totaly screwed up my 1st to 2nd change. LOL :oops:

The only plus I could give the non-Si is that you can SC it, but you can't with the Si (well I wouldn't recommend it).
Not sure, but am I right in saying the N52 has more common issues than the M54? :?

Re: 3.0i versus 3.0si

Posted: Fri Sep 16, 2011 4:45 pm
by Jembo
Zed Five wrote:I've owned both.

3.0si is a much better car than 3.0. Anyone who tells you otherwise has not owned a 3.0si. :wink: Better / faster/ more powerful / better interior etc etc :lol:
Can only comment on my lowly 3.0SE after a day ragging mine through the gears in Kent a couple of weeks back following PVR's //M which is even more of a car. He was definitely vaporising huge amounts of money into the government's coffers when we got enthusiastic on a few dual carriageways, but was amazingly surprised there really wasn't much in it at all...

so a 3.0 230bhp vs a 3.0si 260bhp, yep likely to be a bit faster but not by much, so suggest you find someone that will let u rag them both & make yr own mind up

Re: 3.0i versus 3.0si

Posted: Sat Sep 17, 2011 11:45 am
by Blue
I'd love a go in an Si to see what the fuss is about, but my big concern over the Si is that it does seem to be an engine with more inherent problems than the M54 from reading the forums.

Re: 3.0i versus 3.0si

Posted: Sat Sep 17, 2011 11:06 pm
by bmwangler
Jembo wrote:..........Can only comment on my lowly 3.0SE after a day ragging mine through the gears in Kent a couple of weeks back following PVR's //M which is even more of a car. He was definitely vaporising huge amounts of money into the government's coffers when we got enthusiastic on a few dual carriageways, but was amazingly surprised there really wasn't much in it at all......
Really :o

I suppose fast is fast, but I'd expect an extra 100bhp to make a huge difference?????

Re: 3.0i versus 3.0si

Posted: Sat Sep 17, 2011 11:23 pm
by Jembo
bmwangler wrote:
Jembo wrote:..........Can only comment on my lowly 3.0SE after a day ragging mine through the gears in Kent a couple of weeks back following PVR's //M which is even more of a car. He was definitely vaporising huge amounts of money into the government's coffers when we got enthusiastic on a few dual carriageways, but was amazingly surprised there really wasn't much in it at all......
Really :o

I suppose fast is fast, but I'd expect an extra 100bhp to make a huge difference?????
I"m in total agreement with u... expected exactly the same... can't quite say what speeds we got up to but we found a few clear dual carriageways to ... make a little progress ... & was the subjeect of discussion at our pit stop... conclusion being the 3.0 in any guise is a capable motor, not quite as quick but still in there.

Re: 3.0i versus 3.0si

Posted: Sun Sep 18, 2011 2:33 pm
by Zed_Steve
Jembo wrote:
bmwangler wrote:
Jembo wrote:..........Can only comment on my lowly 3.0SE after a day ragging mine through the gears in Kent a couple of weeks back following PVR's //M which is even more of a car. He was definitely vaporising huge amounts of money into the government's coffers when we got enthusiastic on a few dual carriageways, but was amazingly surprised there really wasn't much in it at all......
Really :o

I suppose fast is fast, but I'd expect an extra 100bhp to make a huge difference?????
I"m in total agreement with u... expected exactly the same... can't quite say what speeds we got up to but we found a few clear dual carriageways to ... make a little progress ... & was the subjeect of discussion at our pit stop... conclusion being the 3.0 in any guise is a capable motor, not quite as quick but still in there.
Breaker will like this. Cue the 'real world' debate' :fuelfire: :P

Re: 3.0i versus 3.0si

Posted: Tue Sep 20, 2011 8:36 am
by bcworkz
Whilst shopping for my Zed, I test drove both back to back. At least in 2nd gear (freakin' speed limits :x ), there was an easily noticeable difference in acceleration, albeit not a huge difference. The si also has several options as standard, which may be either appealing or unappealing to the buyer. There's many reasons I bought the si, but the lower power would not have been a deal breaker on the i if other things were equal, as it's still quite adequate, On paper, the 0.6 sec longer 0-100km time is actually not insignificant. In the real world, it probably doesn't matter much.

Re: 3.0i versus 3.0si

Posted: Tue Sep 20, 2011 6:38 pm
by mason storm
Like others for me the runing costs vs additional speed are not attractive enough. If I thought the runing costs were about 15% more I would have jumped at getting an M. Also if I was someone looking for a car to take on track I may have a different opinion as I bet on track the M's difference in performance is alot bigger than it is on the road as you can use those revs easier and the brakes/suspension/dif will make a bigger difference.

3.0i versus 3.0si

Posted: Wed Sep 21, 2011 8:26 pm
by easty027
I had a 3.0i for 3.5 years and once had a 3.0si for a week. the car did feel faster for sure. you could definitely tell the difference. especially when I then got back in my 3.0i after a weeks motoring.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk