2002 Bmw M3 0 60
Joined
·
799 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
I'm frankly baffled.
C&D tested the new RWD M340i and it hit 60 in 3.8 sec and covered the quarter in 12.3 at 114 mph.
The car has a curb weight of 3813 pounds
These are figures in 2016 M4 DCT Competition Package territory tested by C&D. 0-60 in 3.8, 1.4 mile in 12.1 at 119 mph..a car that weight 3645, rated at 445 HP and with wider and probably stickier tires.
We all know that the rated 382 HP figures is BS...but we are talking numbers close to a 450 CV car.
The poor Genesis G70 at 4.4 felt look like slow......it gets humiliated by the M340i by five seconds to 150!!!
In BMW tradition, xDrive models could even shave few tenths off that.
Do you think is a fluke?? Does BMW send to magazines overboosted cars when they are used for comparison tests??
Joined
·
3,528 Posts
We all know that the rated 382 HP figures is BS...but we are talking numbers close to a 450 CV car.
Yeap. Basically RS5 or F80 M3 level.
Joined
·
4,620 Posts
I'm frankly baffled.
C&D tested the new RWD M340i and it hit 60 in 3.8 sec and covered the quarter in 12.3 at 114 mph.
I does seem pretty quick, tough call without seeing an independent dyno or two.
Closest I can come to those numbers was my 335is 7DCT when it was at 370WHP on a DynoJet.
Don't know what my 0-60 time was but the 1/8 mile was 8.062 @ 90.430 & the 1/4 mile 12.583 @ 114.529.
My 440 8ZF RWD with 355BHP BMW advertised (never dynoed) has run 0-60 @ 4.2 on the BMW logging application. It would actually be quicker as a 4X4 since it loses traction off the start whether using my foot or launch control.
BMW specs the M340 4X4 version at 4.1 to 60. Just about anyone who tries can usually beat the factory published number 1 or 2 tenths
Joined
·
52 Posts
Seems almost unbelievable since the (much lighter) Z4 m40i got the same 0-60 in a C&D test about a month ago. I hope it's realistic, because it puts the M340i nearly as fast (or even faster) than the current M4, C43, RS5, etc. All cars those cars can cost about the same amount more than the Genesis costs less. So using C&D's logic, the M340i should beat the current M4, C43, RS5, etc. in a comparo? LOL.
I'm happy with C&D's test results on the M340i, but then also disappointed in seeing the 330i numbers from a few months ago. For a engine that got a significant HP and torque boost, the 0-60 times hardly (if at all) got better than the F30 330i
Joined
·
799 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 · (Edited)
I still suspect that BMW media cars may be significantly overboosted to make them faster when used in comparison tests.
My money is still on at least 430 HP at the crank for the M340i used on that test.
The reason for suspecting that media cars may receive a "special treatment" is that the F30 328i were clocked by C&D in the mid 5s or even low 5 in one particular test....this would have put them at the same level of the Infiniti G37.
Well, many years ago two friends of mine got a G37 coupe and a 428i, both automatic.....for fun we did race them....it was not even close, the G37 would constantly beat the 428i, once we even gave few lengths of advantage...the Infiniti was always eating the 428i alive.
Joined
·
8,098 Posts
Nope, not a fluke and not a special car for testing. I did 3.79 seconds to 60mph with the 1 foot roll out. 4.02 without roll out. I will get it into the 3s without the 1 foot roll out.
I am pretty sure Magazines test acceleration with the 1 foot roll out.
here is my proof. I have a RWD M340i and i am on Pirelli Run-Flats. If i had the Michelins, I would already be in the 3.70 with the 1 foot roll out and 3.9x without rollout.
Joined
·
4,620 Posts
Nope, not a fluke and not a special car for testing. I did 3.79 seconds to 60mph with the 1 foot roll out. 4.02 without roll out. I will get it into the 3s without the 1 foot roll out.
I am pretty sure Magazines test acceleration with the 1 foot roll out.
here is my proof. I have a RWD M340i and i am on Pirelli Run-Flats. If i had the Michelins, I would already be in the 3.70 with the 1 foot roll out and 3.9x without rollout.
This is correct & why its hard to beat a magazines 0-60 time. Also BMW lists 4.1 as it standard benchmark for the car. Ties into the 4.02 you listed.
Edit:
Just added this
C/D
TEST RESULTS
Zero to 60 mph: 3.8 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 9.4 sec
Zero to 130 mph: 16.5 sec
Zero to 150 mph: 24.6 sec
Rolling start, 5***8211;60 mph: 4.7 sec
Top gear, 30***8211;50 mph: 2.4 sec
Top gear, 50***8211;70 mph: 2.9 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 12.3 sec @ 114 mph
Top speed (governor limited): 156 mph
Braking, 70***8211;0 mph: 156 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.96 g
Joined
·
1,571 Posts
The new supra has been getting 0-60 under 4 seconds so I'm not surprised that a b58 equipped 3 series has getting high 3's.
The big difference between the b48 330i and the b58 m340 is the turbo lag. There is a lot more turbo lag in the 330 compared to the m340. I will post a 4 or 5 month on my 2019 330
Sent from my iPhone using Bimmerfest
Joined
·
52 Posts
I was considering the dual motor Model 3 after my current 440i lease is up, but after seeing these M340i numbers I'm really re-considering. Pretty awesome, and you can get a nicely optioned M340i for $57k-60k, which is what most of the dealers have in stock. That's a lot less than the usual C43, S5, etc. The $67k C&D example is with nearly every option selected, and I have yet to see one priced that high in any of the dealers around me (and I'm in the NorCal Silicon Valley area).
Can't wait to see the M440i Gran Coupe. Wishful thinking that maybe they'll provide a bit of a HP/torque boost just to differentiate it from the M340i??? 
More wishful thinking that they don't actually implement the concept version grill!
Joined
·
360 Posts
Joined
·
8,098 Posts
Sadly, that might indeed be wishful thinking at this point...
https://jalopnik.com/were-really-doing-this-huh-1839290802
:thumbdwn:
Am I the only one who thinks this is getting overblown?
The Bangle designs were "OMG SO TERRIBLE" when they came out. Now they are a "classic" BMW.
When the M3 comes out and it will have that grill, i wouldn't even give that a thought and just buy the car based on price and performance and features. Just like I bought the 2003 BMW 745i and instead of the grill, the "Bangle Butt" was the issue.
Joined
·
4,620 Posts
Grill on concept is a big issue for me. Will not buy a car I don't like the look of no matter how quick it is. Hope they tame it quite a bit.
Joined
·
360 Posts
Am I the only one who thinks this is getting overblown?
You might not be the only one, but I get the impression from reading numerous auto sites, blogs and forums that you're definitely in a minority.
Joined
·
19 Posts
TESLA Model 3 Performance is 3.2 sec (0-60) for $57k. Why even consider M340i?
I was considering the dual motor Model 3 after my current 440i lease is up, but after seeing these M340i numbers I'm really re-considering. Pretty awesome, and you can get a nicely optioned M340i for $57k-60k, which is what most of the dealers have in stock. That's a lot less than the usual C43, S5, etc. The $67k C&D example is with nearly every option selected, and I have yet to see one priced that high in any of the dealers around me (and I'm in the NorCal Silicon Valley area).
Can't wait to see the M440i Gran Coupe. Wishful thinking that maybe they'll provide a bit of a HP/torque boost just to differentiate it from the M340i???
Joined
·
1 Posts
TESLA Model 3 Performance is 3.2 sec (0-60) for $57k. Why even consider M340i?
I can think of several reasons.
1) You like the way the BMW drives.
2) You like the BMW interior.
3) You like the way the BMW looks.
4) You actually enjoy inline 6 noises.
5) You live in a rural area without ready access to charging (<--- this is definitely me).
Joined
·
700 Posts
I considered a Tesla, but the interior looks cheap and having nothing but the center screen is weird. A friend with a Model S says he is disappointed with the fit and finish. 0-60 isn't everything.
Joined
·
19 Posts
BMW ended for me when I took an F30 for a test drive when it just came out: If I wanted a Lexus I'd buy a Lexus I said to dealer that day. I owned an E90 335i at the time.
1) G20 still drives like Lexus
2) G20 interior is sub-par to the same class Audi and Mercedes. I hate G20 gauge cluster.
3) G20 looks OK. :thumbup:
4) I'm not sure about the the I6 sound since turbos muffle it a lot to the point that they have to pipe synthetic sound through speakers.
5) "Full tank" of electrons every morning if you charge at home.
For me, Tesla Model 3 Long Range RWD is the closest to E46 driving experience you can get in a modern vehicle. Too bad Tesla does not make them anymore.
Joined
·
360 Posts
TESLA Model 3 Performance is 3.2 sec (0-60) for $57k. Why even consider M340i?
Pretty simple, really...
Because some people buy a car for things other than 0-60 times.
Joined
·
4,620 Posts
TESLA Model 3 Performance is 3.2 sec (0-60) for $57k. Why even consider M340i?
1 Because I don't want to barf everytime I get in the car & am forced to look at the interior
2. Have a sub 3 second 0-60 car with a panel designed in the 1950's that is more interesting then a Model 3 Tesla.
Excuse the headings they were for something else on another Forum.
Joined
·
799 Posts
Discussion Starter · #20 ·
1 Because I don't want to barf everytime I get in the car & am forced to look at the interior
.....and because cars are not to be judged only in the 0-60 performance.....
Source: https://www.bimmerfest.com/threads/m340i-tested-by-c-d-0-60-3-8-realistic.1352031/
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar