Talk:BMW 3 Series (F30)

engine comment

This next generation 3series BMW will feature 3cylinder engines, 4cylinder turbo engines and still some 6cylinder engines with 1 or 2 turbos. (The M3 will have 6cylinders) - —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.127.205.114 (talk)

Highly questionable claim

The claim that "Enthusiast magazine reviews were also less than stellar." is very weak with only C&D as the sole source. This statement cannot be supported as it does not show what other car enthusiast magazine reviews of the F30 are like. Furthermore, there is no source to show where the clam BMW has cancelled it's advertistment in the C&D came from. Unless more sources are added, that paragraph should be deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cfg123 (talk • contribs) 13:44, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Body styles

I deleted coupe and convertible body styles! As much as I know right now, 4 Series will be replacement for 3 Series coupe and convertible. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ZunaOFP (talk • contribs) 08:58, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

advertising should be removed

Details of the sport, modern, and luxury lines is pure advertising and not encyclopedic. If desired, a single sentence about various optional trim is ok. Let us do what is right. The consensus of the BMW advertising people is to have it. Might should not equal right. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bamler2 (talk • contribs) 20:06, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Done. Thomas.W (talk) 20:15, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Four-cylinder engines in North America

New for 2012 is the introduction of a four-cylinder engine for North America since the 318i of the late 1990s.

Huh? My sister in New York City owns a 2004 325ix (or is it a 325xi?) that has a four-cylinder engine. --anon 108.6.106.229 (talk) 12:51, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

The 325i has always been 6 cylinders. 87.114.142.1 (talk) 15:35, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

“[B]uilt in Germany and features better build quality”

In the Engines subsection, the following is currently found:

The 316i featuring the 1.6L TwinPower engine was launched in Q4 2012 and is only available in selected markets. Compared to the predecessor 316/318i, it is built in Germany and features better build quality.

The cited source says nothing regarding the claims in the latter sentence. --anon 108.6.106.229 (talk) 13:00, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

E90 comparison

This section is highly biased and there is a high degree of fanboyism showing through. It really should be rewritten. 87.114.142.1 (talk) 15:38, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on BMW 3 Series (F30). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140726123416/http://www.bmw.de/de/neufahrzeuge/3er/limousine/2011/technische-daten.html to http://www.bmw.de/de/neufahrzeuge/3er/limousine/2011/technische-daten.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:53, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

SOP

Why is November 2011 listed, when so many sources have the correct date of October 28, 2011? It is just absurd, considering how accessible that information is and misleading to put otherwise. Investing more time to get it right, with literal and reliable sources, avoids this issue in the first place. If I am able to do that research, anyone else can.--Carmaker1 (talk) 06:19, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for adding the referenced info. As per WP:FAITH, we should assume the previous date was just an innocent mistake. Cheers, 1292simon (talk) 07:46, 1 January 2018 (UTC)