316 V 318

The 318 is slightly more powerful and as a result slightly quicker. I think it gets to 60mph about 1 second quicker and will do an extra 5mph. Your best bet is to take it for a test drive to see what you think. To be honest if you're after extra grunt you really need to be looking at a 318is or a 6 cylinder 320/325.

Cheers for the replies lads.  I think i'll pass on the 318 m40 so and keep my eye out for a decent 320i i can afford.

The m40's run great if looked arfter but now there geting old thay tend to suffer. my touring did a cambel be4 I had it and ended up with new top end. But me Dad's runing a 316 e30, now on 175k and it's all down to servicing but all the work it has is on the moterway 25k this year. People are just to tight to have the oil changed every 6 k on these older engines. Moterway work can save old engins.

I have a m30 525 did'nt know when I bought it but it had'nt seen a oil chang for six years I have NEVER seen anthing like it you could not get any more crud in it 3 inc of muck at the bottom on the filter housing and the filter had near colapsed but it ran soo sweet I changed oil and ran it for 4 k up n down the m25 and a12 changed it this week and replaced the rocker cover for a nice painted one and was amased to see that the top end was in mint condishion not a shighn of crud? valve clearence were way out but other than that

My two pennorth.

I had an M40 316i bought at about 100k. It rattled and clattered all the time except for when I did a 1500 mile trip to France at very high speed. Ran sweet as a nut for about 6 weeks after that. I wouldn't buy another one, unless I knew it had had the top end work done and it was for peanuts.

I now have a 318is E36. Apart from a general sound of chains and cogs, it runs very nicely at 125k. Chain tensioner was changed at 90k. I find the engine much more responsive than the 320i 2 litre and its pretty economical even at high speeds.

So I'd buy a 318is, or a 323 upwards. If I found a nice M43 engined car I might consider it, but it would have to be a peach and cheap.

AndyS wrote: You'll never convince me Vauxhall's were good for anything except landfill. Tacky designs, crummy interiors, rubbish gearboxes & a complete absence of class.

None of which means the engines weren't any good

No they are not classy but then the people that buy them aren't after classy. They are good for doing what they are supposed to. Affordable transport for people who just want to get from A to B. Why do you think there are so many cavaliers still on the road? Because they are reliable, cheap to maintain and reasonably well put together.

I bet all my dad's Vauxhalls have been a damn site more reliable than your 635!

His Mk2 cavalier 1.6L went from 40k to 140k in his ownership over about 6 years. It was comfortable, never broke down, had a hard wearing interior and for a large car with only a 1.6 had a reasonable ammount of poke. In short it did what it was supposed to. Even after he traded it in it was still driving around for at least another 3 years.

AndyS wrote: If they're so good why are you driving around in a 5-series?

Because I want more from my motoring than a Vauxhall can offer.

Don't get me wrong, they are not great cars, but they do the job they were intended to do. Affordable motoring for those who aren't bothered about image etc.

I would however have a Vauxhall Monaro if funds would permit.

Oh and there are loads of Mk3 Cavaliers still on the road. You even still see the occasional MK2.