"BMW is not planning on bringing its 1-Series to the U.S. anytime soon" [Archive] - bimmerfest

PhilH

03-22-2004, 10:19 AM

Take it for what it's worth... :dunno:

http://www.thecarconnection.com/index.asp?n=173&sid=173&article=6967

DAILY EDITION: Mar. 22, 2004

BMW 1-Series Stuck?

One thing's for sure: BMW is not planning on bringing its 1-Series to the U.S. anytime soon. Reports published in recent days by Detroit trade papers say that the company will either kill the U.S. 1-Series project or delay it significantly based on comments made by Tom Purves, CEO of BMW North America. Purves reportedly says that the case for bringing the smallest of BMW-badged vehicles to America is still being made and the company is deciding currently which iteration(s) - coupe, hatch, or convertible - it would bring here. He also reportedly says that the company's in-line four engines would not gel with the widely-held BMW performance image in the United States, so a 1-Series powered by an in-line six is likely, if the vehicle ever shows up here. -Jack Gilbert

03-22-2004, 10:32 AM

PhilH

03-22-2004, 10:32 AM

Actually, if you read the article carefully, I'm not sure that anything has changed.

They say, "the company will either kill the U.S. 1-Series project or delay it significantly". Well, we know that we're not getting it right away, because the first model that was introduced was the 5-door, and we're not getting a hatch.

I don't think that this next part is news either, "the case for bringing the smallest of BMW-badged vehicles to America is still being made and the company is deciding currently which iteration(s) - coupe, hatch, or convertible - it would bring here". We've generally been unsure of which model they would bring, so the fact that they haven't made a decision about the bodystyle isn't really that surprising.

And the last point, "a 1-Series powered by an in-line six is likely, if the vehicle ever shows up here" was already pretty widely speculated.

I think the only news here may be that they still haven't committed themselves to definitely bringing the 1-series to the US.

03-22-2004, 11:20 AM

bringing it to the u.s.??? :confused: i thought that they were building the 1er at the spartenburg factory? :confused:

they sold the 318ti in NA, why all of a sudden the change in ideals. :dunno:

andy_thomas

03-22-2004, 12:30 PM

bringing it to the u.s.??? :confused: i thought that they were building the 1er at the spartenburg factory? :confused:

they sold the 318ti in NA, why all of a sudden the change in ideals. :dunno:

The 1er is built in Regensburg. There's be no point in building it in the US - there's no market for them there. Correction: there is a market for them, and very enthusiastic it is too, but it's about 20 people.

03-22-2004, 12:51 PM

The 1er is built in Regensburg. There's be no point in building it in the US - there's no market for them there. Correction: there is a market for them, and very enthusiastic it is too, but it's about 20 people.

oh, i guess i was wrong. maybe perhaps if bmw took an old german tank and covered the interior w/ leather, i-drive, big sound system and exterior w/ lots of chrome trim will interest lots of u.s. buyers.

Epi330

03-22-2004, 01:21 PM

maybe perhaps if bmw took an old german tank and covered the interior w/ leather, i-drive, big sound system and exterior w/ lots of chrome trim will interest lots of u.s. buyers.
What do you mean "perhaps"? AFAIK, Hummer is pretty popular here. Well, it is not exactly "german tank", but very close IMHO. :p

LmtdSlip

03-22-2004, 01:33 PM

oh, i guess i was wrong. maybe perhaps if bmw took an old german tank and covered the interior w/ leather, i-drive, big sound system and exterior w/ lots of chrome trim will interest lots of u.s. buyers.
Sad but true....

It seems BMW is trying very hard to be Lexus.

drmwvr

03-22-2004, 01:36 PM

Plaz

03-22-2004, 01:49 PM

they sold the 318ti in NA, why all of a sudden the change in ideals. :dunno:
IIRC, they lost their shirt on that decision, and damaged the brand image as well.

I'd love to see the 1er on these shores, but would venture to guess that in their internal discussions, the 318ti factor works against that outcome, not for it.

03-22-2004, 01:57 PM

BMW should bring back this (with chrome, etc.)...

i think it's a "been there, done that" by mb. it's called the g-class :eeps:

i think an german armoured tank from www2 w/ all the luxo-fixin's and chrome would sell in the u.s. and especially to the bling-bling gangster hip-hop crowds. it would compliment their bullet-proof vests and one-up the hummer owners. :thumbup: :angel:

Soupcan325i

03-22-2004, 02:06 PM

It seems BMW is trying very hard to be Lexus.

Yeah, a Lexus with more rattles...that's just what the market needs.

Chris90

03-22-2004, 02:21 PM

Chris90

03-22-2004, 02:23 PM

car_for_mom

03-22-2004, 10:02 PM

Er, isn't it more like BMW could be concerned about the 1-Series interfering with the Mini?

Of course, one could make the point (speaking of Lexus) that the Avalon and ES300 don't seem to significantly interfere with each other, even though they are fairly close?

Jon S.

03-22-2004, 10:43 PM

Well, it wouldn't surprise me. BMWNA is making one bone-headed move after another as they actively pursue the badge****er demographic and leave enthusiasts out in the cold.

My next car will not be a BMW.

Based on the sales successes (or lack therof) of the Ti, and now
that little Mercedes coupe, I am not at all surprised by this news...

As much as I personally loved the 318ti, they were a bit*ch to move;
the only way that we could retail them was to literally give them away.

Santa Barbara may be the exception, but we never retailed a ti to
an "enthusiast". They bought the older pre-owned E30's, and the M3's.

Kaz

03-22-2004, 10:46 PM

Based on the sales successes (or lack therof) of the Ti, and now
that little Mercedes coupe, I am not at all surprised by this news...

As much as I personally loved the 318ti, they were a bit*ch to move;
the only way that we could retail them was to literally give them away.

Santa Barbara may be the exception, but we never retailed a ti to
an "enthusiast". They bought the older pre-owned E30's, and the M3's.

There's been a lot said over the years of poor sales of the ti and the MB. I guess that's the case everywhere but where I live. There are TONS of E36 Compacts and C-class hatches around here.

03-22-2004, 10:51 PM

i see lot's of c-classes here too. it helps that the canadian $ is worth so little to move to the low end cars.

swchang

03-23-2004, 05:19 AM

Along the same lines: http://www.autoweek.com/cat_content.mv?port_code=autoweek&cat_code=carnews&content_code=07096554

BMW won't bring 1 Series hatch to U.S.; Audi hatches A3 plans

By AUTOWEEK

It’s no Mini
We’re not sure how they explain the Mini, but BMW blamed the alleged U.S. aversion to hatchbacks for the German automaker’s position that the entry-level 1 Series won’t come to the United States until a sedan or coupe body style is developed. A spokesman for BMW said the company hasn’t changed its mind that the 1 Series five-door hatch, which launches this fall in Europe, won’t come to the States as a hatch. We’ll see the 1 Series in late 2005 as an ’06 model, most likely as a sedan.

Audi hatches plans
Meanwhile, a new version of the Audi A3 hatchback will definitely come to North America, Volkswagen has decided. After years of considering the old model for duty in the States and Canada, the company has decided the new five-door version of the upgraded VW Golf will work in North America. The three-door we are not expected to get is on the road in Europe already. The five-door we get isn’t due here until mid-2005. Look for the 1.8-liter turbo four and the 3.2-liter V6 to power U.S.-model A3s.

Some people on germancarfans.com think that BMW is doing a watch and wait sort of thing with the A3 before deciding definitively on the 1er.

racerdave

03-23-2004, 06:41 AM

Which seems kind of silly. Now, I have no numbers to back this up, but empirically I seem to be seeing a lot of Vibe/Matrix and even new Mazda 3 5-doors out on the streets these days. Maybe they just don't think "BMW" buyers will embrace 5-doors, but at least to my eye, people are making that move in other makes/models.

drmwvr

03-23-2004, 06:43 AM

racerdave

03-23-2004, 06:50 AM

Yeah, which could mean BMW will be behind the curve on this one if they wait too long...

LmtdSlip

03-23-2004, 07:05 AM

I think hatches are back in fasion again as people rediscover how effecient they are.

If you recall in the mid 90s manufacturers ran away from hatches in order give their cars a less econobox feel. Toyota was the biggest proponent of this as they killed or redesigned virtually every hatch in their lineup.

ObD

03-23-2004, 10:00 AM

He also reportedly says that the company's in-line four engines would not gel with the widely-held BMW performance image in the United States, so a 1-Series powered by an in-line six is likely, if the vehicle ever shows up here.

BMW knows who their market is. :thumbup:

Sean

03-23-2004, 10:07 AM

03-23-2004, 10:09 AM

With this engine news, it also looks like we can give up hope for a throwback to the E30 M3. I really was hoping for a lightweight, RWD, small sedan/coupe/hatch with a high HP, NA I-4 engine.

Alex Baumann

03-23-2004, 10:10 AM

I totally agree!

If I buy another BMW it will be a E30 M3 or 325is.
When I buy new again, it will likely be from Audi.

As long as the feel is gone, I might as well save some money and get a better looking car.

03-23-2004, 10:10 AM

Yup, you are right. It doesn't look like it is going to be anywhere near lightweight.
And the US isn't getting any 4-cyls.

nate

03-23-2004, 10:22 AM

Yup, you are right. It doesn't look like it is going to be anywhere near lightweight.
How do you know?

What is the weight?

Alex Baumann

03-23-2004, 10:29 AM

How do you know?

What is the weight?

Not official but 116i is expected to be not lighter than 2650 lb. (that without any options)

Kaz

03-23-2004, 10:35 AM

Not official but 116i is expected to be not lighter than 2650 lb. (that without any options)

I guess that's not bad, considering that's what a Cooper S (!!) weighs.

andy_thomas

03-23-2004, 02:06 PM

With this engine news, it also looks like we can give up hope for a throwback to the E30 M3. I really was hoping for a lightweight, RWD, small sedan/coupe/hatch with a high HP, NA I-4 engine.

The E30 appeared in 1982. The M3 version appeared in 1985/6. The lack of a high-performance engine derivative from the off isn't a death knell! As with every BMW high-performance derivative of modern times, it will most likely be launched within 2-3 years of the initial cars going on sale.

SARAFIL

03-23-2004, 02:45 PM

There's been a lot said over the years of poor sales of the ti and the MB. I guess that's the case everywhere but where I live. There are TONS of E36 Compacts and C-class hatches around here.

I've seen a handful of ti's. I've also seen only a small handful of the C-class hatches since it was released (excluding the ones sitting on our lot).

Mercedes is having trouble moving the C-class hatch, and they are forced to put on huge incentives to help move them. Want a great used Mercedes buy? Buy a one year old C230 hatch... you'd be surprised how much they depreciate.

BlackChrome

03-23-2004, 02:59 PM

...Mercedes is having trouble moving the C-class hatch, and they are forced to put on huge incentives to help move them...
Maybe they should have rebadged and sold them as Chryslers? :rofl:

SARAFIL

03-23-2004, 03:12 PM

Maybe they should have rebadged and sold them as Chryslers? :rofl:

The car isn't that bad (compared to some other cars to come out of DC), so that might actually help them sell it! I'm sure our Mercedes store wouldn't feel bad if they pulled that car out of the lineup.

03-23-2004, 03:16 PM

The E30 appeared in 1982. The M3 version appeared in 1985/6. The lack of a high-performance engine derivative from the off isn't a death knell! As with every BMW high-performance derivative of modern times, it will most likely be launched within 2-3 years of the initial cars going on sale.
I was more referring to the comment that the US wouldn't get a 4-cyl (and concurring with Alex's assessment that it would likely not be lightweight).

ed325i

03-23-2004, 03:20 PM

Chris90

03-23-2004, 04:30 PM

The 1 Series will have a hard time competing against the likes of the GTI VR6, RSX, and the WRX. I mean, geesh, 0-62mph in 7.9 seconds? A buyer will get a lot more bang for the same or less bucks from VW, Acura, Subaru, or even Mazda.

Ed

So that's like 0-60 in 7.5 seconds - kind of like a 325i? Did that have trouble competing against those cars?

Besides, a US 1 series would likely have at least 180 hp, and would be a lot quicker than that.

WILLIA///M

03-23-2004, 04:31 PM

He also reportedly says that the company's in-line four engines would not gel with the widely-held BMW performance image in the United States, .....

I think Tom Purves is right, I can't recall any successful sporty 4 cylinder BMW's being sold in the U.S.

http://www.tuningpt.com/carrosemana/2002/1973_bmw_2002_turbo-1.jpg

http://www.bmworg.ru/img/cars/e30_006.jpg

What an idiot.
:tsk:

swchang

03-23-2004, 04:37 PM

I think Tom Purves is right, I can't recall any successful sporty 4 cylinder BMW's being sold in the U.S.

http://www.tuningpt.com/carrosemana/2002/1973_bmw_2002_turbo-1.jpg

http://www.bmworg.ru/img/cars/e30_006.jpg

What an idiot.
:tsk:

Well, that was like 30+ years ago, wasn't it? In his defense, times have changed...

LmtdSlip

03-23-2004, 05:03 PM

The only thing that has changed is BMWs redefinition of the brand.

mwette

03-23-2004, 07:54 PM

Maybe BMW willl watch Audi sell hatchbacks and let them take the risk.

ed325i

03-23-2004, 07:54 PM

...Besides, a US 1 series would likely have at least 180 hp, and would be a lot quicker than that.

Huh? US versions of European cars typically have LESS power than Euro versions.

Ed

Sean

03-23-2004, 08:23 PM

When I buy new again, it will likely be from Audi.

As long as the feel is gone, I might as well save some money and get a better looking car.

That is most likely what I will buy if I ever buy new again, but I am really sick of dumping a ton of cash into a new automobile just to end up losing half of it or more. :thumbdwn:

swchang

03-23-2004, 08:36 PM

That is most likely what I will buy if I ever buy new again, but I am really sick of dumping a ton of cash into a new automobile just to end up losing half of it or more. :thumbdwn:

Yeah, I've heard the best strategy to maximize bang for buck is buying 2-3 year used and driving it into the ground. YMMV, of course.

blueguydotcom

03-23-2004, 09:37 PM

There's been a lot said over the years of poor sales of the ti and the MB. I guess that's the case everywhere but where I live. There are TONS of E36 Compacts and C-class hatches around here.

I never see Tis or MB's lousy little hatchback.

I'm not shocked BMW is holding off on the one. Unless they can offer a car that can outgun a Jetta GLI for about the same coin it'd be pointless. And a 4 cylinder 2.2 just isn't gonna cut it.

blueguydotcom

03-23-2004, 09:40 PM

I think Tom Purves is right, I can't recall any successful sporty 4 cylinder BMW's being sold in the U.S.

What an idiot.
:tsk:

Please the market isn't the same. Why blow 25k on a 1 series when someone can snatch up a Golf with a V6R for 2-3k less? Yeah RWD is great but when you're dealing with 22 v. 25k the many people will opt for the cheaper, more powerful car. Why do you think Acura's moving 6k TLs a month?

Motown328

03-23-2004, 09:41 PM

Well, that was like 30+ years ago, wasn't it? In his defense, times have changed...

That red e30 is quite possibly the sexiest BMW ever made.....absolutely brilliant!

I still would like my idea to go into production: The BMW R-Series. R for Retro. Bring back the e30 and 2002 body styles but fitted with all modern equipment. Man, that would rock!!!!!!

Motown328

03-23-2004, 09:44 PM

Motown328

03-23-2004, 09:47 PM

Maybe BMW willl watch Audi sell hatchbacks and let them take the risk.

Yeah, you got it. Here's what is going to happen.

BMW will wait, Audi will come out with the A3, sell a ton, BMW will intro the 1er, it won't sell and then BMW-AG will get the "I told you so" disease.

Of course the reason why they didn't sell was everyone who wanted a 1er IN THE FIRST PLACE jumped on the A3 or WRX.........duh!!!!!!!!

andy_thomas

03-24-2004, 12:56 AM

The 1 Series will have a hard time competing against the likes of the GTI VR6, RSX, and the WRX. I mean, geesh, 0-62mph in 7.9 seconds? A buyer will get a lot more bang for the same or less bucks from VW, Acura, Subaru, or even Mazda.

Ed

???

You have quoted the 0-60 mph time for the diesel version - a version even less likely to come to the US. Moreover the direct rivals for this car are the diesel versions of the Audi A3 (slower), Alfa 147 (slower still), VW Golf (slower) and Mazda 3 (if it can accelerate at all). The 120d has a top speed of 141 mph so it's also quicker outright (assuming it lives up to those figures).

This car has so little to do with the "GTI VR6", RSX, or WRX that comparison is not only worthless, but misleading. Not until BMW puts a bigger engine in it at least :).

andy_thomas

03-24-2004, 01:03 AM

I never see Tis or MB's lousy little hatchback.

I'm not shocked BMW is holding off on the one. Unless they can offer a car that can outgun a Jetta GLI for about the same coin it'd be pointless. And a 4 cylinder 2.2 just isn't gonna cut it.

If that 4-cylinder 2.2 is turbocharged, as one rumour implies, then I think the Jetta/Bora - surely one of the most stolid, unenthusiastc cars available to the keen motorist today - will not see which way it went.

On a serious note, the turbocharging rumour is more likely to come true because with Valvetronic, BMW has run out of high revs. The Valvetronic ceiling is currently around 6,500 rpm; configure the valvetrain to run higher than that and all the benefits of Valvetronic are lost lower down (taking more power to drive the stiffer valvetrain). Turbocharging - assuming it can be integrated with the Valvetronic system - might be the only answer, whether we like it or not.

A turbocharged 2.2 with the same specific capacity as Audi's hottest four would produce around 275 bhp. Now if only they can get the turbocharging right...

EDIT: apparently neither new petrol motor uses the Valvetronic head. Wonder if that technology is dying a death...?

blueguydotcom

03-24-2004, 08:08 AM

It wouldn't be pointless. Most people don't buy BMWs to "outgun" anyone...

Why buy one if you can't outhandle, outrun and outfun them while sitting in some measure of luxury? I didn't buy a 325i expressly because the engine is so anemic. If the 1 or 2 comes in under 3000 lbs and offers and engine with over 200 HP I'll buy it. Even at over 30k.

from the looks and upsizing of the new 3, my ZHP will be my last 3 until the next redo. I already think my ZHP is fat and sorta sloppy, so need to go even bigger.

blueguydotcom

03-24-2004, 08:10 AM

If that 4-cylinder 2.2 is turbocharged, as one rumour implies, then I think the Jetta/Bora - surely one of the most stolid, unenthusiastc cars available to the keen motorist today - will not see which way it went.

On a serious note, the turbocharging rumour is more likely to come true because with Valvetronic, BMW has run out of high revs. The Valvetronic ceiling is currently around 6,500 rpm; configure the valvetrain to run higher than that and all the benefits of Valvetronic are lost lower down (taking more power to drive the stiffer valvetrain). Turbocharging - assuming it can be integrated with the Valvetronic system - might be the only answer, whether we like it or not.

A turbocharged 2.2 with the same specific capacity as Audi's hottest four would produce around 275 bhp. Now if only they can get the turbocharging right...

EDIT: apparently neither new petrol motor uses the Valvetronic head. Wonder if that technology is dying a death...?

That sounds promising. A 2 series convertible with 250+ HP would be nigh perfect. Small package, RWD, great power. I'd buy it.

andy_thomas

03-24-2004, 08:19 AM

I didn't buy a 325i expressly because the engine is so anemic.

Ha ha ha :)

Josh (PA)

03-24-2004, 10:36 AM

The 1 Series will have a hard time competing against the likes of the GTI VR6, RSX, and the WRX. I mean, geesh, 0-62mph in 7.9 seconds? A buyer will get a lot more bang for the same or less bucks from VW, Acura, Subaru, or even Mazda.

EdThe 7.9 sec spec was for one of the diesel engines. I expect the gasoline ones to be a little quicker.

I'm still holding out hope for the 5 door to make it over here once the e90 is released and there is more room in the model lineup for a smaller car.

OBS3SSION

03-24-2004, 10:56 AM

Why buy one if you can't outhandle, outrun and outfun them while sitting in some measure of luxury? I didn't buy a 325i expressly because the engine is so anemic. If the 1 or 2 comes in under 3000 lbs and offers and engine with over 200 HP I'll buy it. Even at over 30k.

from the looks and upsizing of the new 3, my ZHP will be my last 3 until the next redo. I already think my ZHP is fat and sorta sloppy, so need to go even bigger.
Because HP is not the measurment for "outhandle", "outrun" or "outfun". A car with less HP can do all of that than a competitor with more HP. Then again, it might not. It all depends on the car and how it was built, the power to weight ratio and a bunch of other variables.

The US market is so obsessed with HP that they fail to realize that HP is only one very small factor in the complete package of a car. And in actuallity, tourque numbers are usually more important than HP anyway, especially when it comes to a drag race.

As for your amemic 325... it was Bill Auberlen driving a 325 last year that won him the Touring Car championship, and has him on his way to a second championship this year.

Chris90

03-24-2004, 11:23 AM

Huh? US versions of European cars typically have LESS power than Euro versions.

Ed

Only if you don't convert to SAE horsepower.

US models will not be 2.0L diesels, but inline sixes, that's why it'll have more horsepower, I thought that was obvious to everyone. One of the articles said the US would get a 2.2L inline six with 180 hp. I assume that's the lower end of the two engines we'll likely get.

Chris90

03-24-2004, 11:28 AM

Motown328

03-24-2004, 11:28 AM

Motown328

03-24-2004, 11:31 AM

The US market is so obsessed with HP that they fail to realize that HP is only one very small factor in the complete package of a car. And in actuallity, tourque numbers are usually more important than HP anyway, especially when it comes to a drag race.

There it is. Perhaps I am not crazy in saying that I actually look at the Torque # before glancing at the HP?!!!!! I started that years ago after drooling over Japanese cars with seemingly awesome numbers then getting the wind knocked out of me when I saw the torque was about half of the HP......yeesh......

Kaz

03-24-2004, 11:42 AM

There it is. Perhaps I am not crazy in saying that I actually look at the Torque # before glancing at the HP?!!!!! I started that years ago after drooling over Japanese cars with seemingly awesome numbers then getting the wind knocked out of me when I saw the torque was about half of the HP......yeesh......

Peak numbers don't mean much, either. M54 engines have lower peak torque (in lb/ft) than bhp (SAE) but it sure doesn't feel like it, because it's spread better. And industry marketing is starting to tout the benefits of fat torque curves over peak HP.

Still, numbers don't explain everything, like why 0-60 for a IS300 is much closer to a 325 than a 330.

Motown328

03-24-2004, 11:45 AM

Peak numbers don't mean much, either. M54 engines have lower peak torque (in lb/ft) than bhp (SAE) but it sure doesn't feel like it, because it's spread better. And industry marketing is starting to tout the benefits of fat torque curves over peak HP.

Still, numbers don't explain everything, like why 0-60 for a IS300 is much closer to a 325 than a 330.

Yep. That's why nothing beats a test drive...hahaha...

blueguydotcom

03-24-2004, 01:41 PM

Outhandling and "outfunning"? them is a whole other story than outgunning them. I don't care if Joe Schmoe beats me at the light......I know the 3er will take them at the corners and in comfort....it's that combination that makes me buy. Otherwise, might as well get a Mustang Cobra or some other engine wrapped in sheet-metal.

Some of us want it all - handling, speed, luxury. The Mustang Cobra is saddled with bad interior/exterior/build quality. Ditto the WRX. And any other cheap fast car you can name.

And the outfun was a little literary license. I had a motiff going.

blueguydotcom

03-24-2004, 01:44 PM

If the 120i is 2770 lbs, a US 225i with the 180 hp 2.2L inline six would be around 3000 lbs, hopefully less. This would be equivalent to a 200 hp 325i in power/weight. Put a 250 hp 3.0L inline six in the car, and it would be a beast. 230ci zhp for $30k anyone?

I'd be on it like white on rice. Right now I'm looking at getting stuck with the TL in 06 because the upcoming 3 and the current G just aren't ringing my bell. I sincerely hope BMW finds a way to deliver a high performance 2 or 1 series. We need more small, rwd fun cars.

johnf

03-24-2004, 01:45 PM

Huh? US versions of European cars typically have LESS power than Euro versions.

Only if you don't convert to SAE horsepower.

Sssshhh. You are going to ruin a perfectly fine conspiracy and undo the tireless work of several writers for the Roundel. ;)

I will now return to contemplating how to best use my car's 103 kilowatts.

blueguydotcom

03-24-2004, 01:49 PM

The US market is so obsessed with HP that they fail to realize that HP is only one very small factor in the complete package of a car. And in actuallity, tourque numbers are usually more important than HP anyway, especially when it comes to a drag race.

Torque is very important and it's something BMWs have lost. I dig my ZHP but the engine's got a very peaky torque curve - much like Honda. The 325i's I drove were even worse. There wasn't any thrust or spike in the power at any point. Not my kind of car.

As for your amemic 325... it was Bill Auberlen driving a 325 last year that won him the Touring Car championship, and has him on his way to a second championship this year.

Great and some twit on Edmunds is posting about FWD cars besting the 325i in a series of races. I don't much care who wins which race. I don't buy my cars based on race results. This isn't the 1950s when the manus believed a first place in racing would translate to sales.

Kaz

03-24-2004, 01:52 PM

Torque is very important and it's something BMWs have lost. I dig my ZHP but the engine's got a very peaky torque curve - much like Honda. The 325i's I drove were even worse. There wasn't any thrust or spike in the power at any point. Not my kind of car.

:confused:

Peaky?

http://www.bimmerfest.com/forums/showthread.php?t=54518

blueguydotcom

03-24-2004, 03:04 PM

:confused:

Peaky?

http://www.bimmerfest.com/forums/showthread.php?t=54518

Did I stutter? The torque curve on BMW's vaunted 2.5 and 3.0 engines is peaky. My ZHP is fun but it's pretty much gutless below 4k rpm.

philippek

03-24-2004, 03:19 PM

Did I stutter? The torque curve on BMW's vaunted 2.5 and 3.0 engines is peaky. My ZHP is fun but it's pretty much gutless below 4k rpm.

I disagree.

A lot.

Chris90

03-24-2004, 06:35 PM

Did I stutter? The torque curve on BMW's vaunted 2.5 and 3.0 engines is peaky. My ZHP is fun but it's pretty much gutless below 4k rpm.

Compared to what, a V12?

anon

03-24-2004, 07:41 PM

I sincerely hope BMW finds a way to deliver a high performance 2 or 1 series. We need more small, rwd fun cars.
i absolutely agree with this, the 1 series would be the absolute king of small, fun rwd cars... the miata is pretty good but they all suffer from lack of practicality, i can't relate measurements on paper to actual physical space for the life of me, so from what's been printed about the space, how does it compare to a 3 series coupe?

ed325i

03-24-2004, 07:43 PM

... I thought that was obvious to everyone. One of the articles said the US would get a 2.2L inline six with 180 hp. I assume that's the lower end of the two engines we'll likely get.

I hope that you are right! :thumbup:

Ed

blueguydotcom

03-24-2004, 08:46 PM

Compared to what, a V12?

Compared to the 45i for instance which doesn't seem to be gasping for air 85% of the time. My ZHP is entertaining for about 10 minutes but it gets old fast that you've got to wind it way up to motivate the car. From 5000-6700 rpm it's a really fun engine. The rest of the time...

swchang

03-24-2004, 09:31 PM

No. You just didn't support your claim, which many folks seem to disagree with. Did you look at the torque curves in Kaz's post? I don't see how you can describe them as peaky.

Kaz's post seems to indicate that torque for the ZHP was >= 175 from 2500-6000 rpm before dropping off. Is that what's referred to as the powerband?

It also seems in direct opposition to what blueguydotcom is saying...

andy_thomas

03-24-2004, 11:31 PM

i absolutely agree with this, the 1 series would be the absolute king of small, fun rwd cars... the miata is pretty good but they all suffer from lack of practicality, i can't relate measurements on paper to actual physical space for the life of me, so from what's been printed about the space, how does it compare to a 3 series coupe?

It's a bit cramped. The wheelbase is 70 mm less than a 3er.

blueguydotcom

03-24-2004, 11:34 PM

No. You just didn't support your claim, which many folks seem to disagree with. Did you look at the torque curves in Kaz's post? I don't see how you can describe them as peaky.

Support the claim? i've driven the car. Heck, I own the car. The engine's just not as torquey as I think it should be given all the raves it receives and the way people wax poetically about it.

Drive a ZHP and then tell me you don't find the power peaky. The car couldn't get out of its own way anywhere under 4k rpms.

Ask yourself this, why would I lie about a car I own? I enjoy many aspects of my bimmer - the handling, the power in the upper revs, the sound of the exhaust - but I'm not gonna tell anyone I think the engine's as flat and powerful torque wise as other cars out there. It feels very honda to me. I know what I want out of a car and though my ZHP is fun it's just not ringing my bell any longer.

philippek

03-24-2004, 11:59 PM

Support the claim? i've driven the car. Heck, I own the car. The engine's just not as torquey as I think it should be given all the raves it receives and the way people wax poetically about it.

Drive a ZHP and then tell me you don't find the power peaky. The car couldn't get out of its own way anywhere under 4k rpms.

Ask yourself this, why would I lie about a car I own? I enjoy many aspects of my bimmer - the handling, the power in the upper revs, the sound of the exhaust - but I'm not gonna tell anyone I think the engine's as flat and powerful torque wise as other cars out there. It feels very honda to me. I know what I want out of a car and though my ZHP is fun it's just not ringing my bell any longer.

I own a ZHP. For 9 months and 11,896 miles.

And I've owned Hondas. B16s and B18s. Have you?

This car might not be ringing your bell any longer, but is that the car's fault, or yours?

Have you entertained the possiblity (for even a minute) that maybe you don't know how to drive it?

Show me an engine that's torquier than the M54 and I'll show you one of two things: 1) A Mustang/Camaro/Corvette that needs more chassis welds or 2) A Ferrari/Maserati/Lamborghini that consumes that blossoming flower that used to be a retirement fund.

Support your claim.

andy_thomas

03-25-2004, 01:26 AM

I own a ZHP. For 9 months and 11,896 miles.

Show me an engine that's torquier than the M54

320d :).

The great temptation with engines sporting flat torque characteristics is to underestimate the performance. People like the rush of power - it's primordial. ("And then the VTEC kicked in.") A smooth progression of power, with no obvious peak, simply doesn't set the senses alight. The actual power delivered becomes a secondary consideration.

andy_thomas

03-25-2004, 01:30 AM

Did I stutter? The torque curve on BMW's vaunted 2.5 and 3.0 engines is peaky. My ZHP is fun but it's pretty much gutless below 4k rpm.

Then I have to say there's probably something wrong with it. Unless, of course, you're still getting used to a BMW design. Since their dawn, BMW's engines have been higher-revving designs that require revs to make power - and revving is something that many drivers simply don't like doing.

OBS3SSION

03-25-2004, 04:49 AM

Support the claim? i've driven the car. Heck, I own the car. The engine's just not as torquey as I think it should be given all the raves it receives and the way people wax poetically about it.

Drive a ZHP and then tell me you don't find the power peaky. The car couldn't get out of its own way anywhere under 4k rpms.

Ask yourself this, why would I lie about a car I own? I enjoy many aspects of my bimmer - the handling, the power in the upper revs, the sound of the exhaust - but I'm not gonna tell anyone I think the engine's as flat and powerful torque wise as other cars out there. It feels very honda to me. I know what I want out of a car and though my ZHP is fun it's just not ringing my bell any longer.
The way you talk (post), I honestly think that you've set your standards of a car so high that there is no car in production that would make you happy, or keep you happy past a few weeks. If you want to call your ZHP peaky, then by all means that's the way you feel. However, that claim is based on your assessment of your standards.

I haven't driven a ZHP, but I drive a 330 every day. I'm amazed at how much oomph this car has at nearly any RPM. Only on rare occasions (driving uphill with very low RPMs) do I find the car lacking. But that is my assessment... which seems to coincide much more with everyone else's.

I doubt you're lying about your own car. I just think that you have such a narrow focus on life that you can't see anything around you. I read this in all your posts. It seems to be your way or no way. And not only that, but your way to extremes.

blueguydotcom

03-25-2004, 08:04 AM

I own a ZHP. For 9 months and 11,896 miles.

And I've owned Hondas. B16s and B18s. Have you?

This car might not be ringing your bell any longer, but is that the car's fault, or yours?

Have you entertained the possiblity (for even a minute) that maybe you don't know how to drive it?

Show me an engine that's torquier than the M54 and I'll show you one of two things: 1) A Mustang/Camaro/Corvette that needs more chassis welds or 2) A Ferrari/Maserati/Lamborghini that consumes that blossoming flower that used to be a retirement fund.

Support your claim.

Yes, now we resort to personal insults. I must not know how to drive the car if I say it lacks torque. Keep the revs over 4k and the car moves fine. Anything less and it's anemic. Do you deny this?

What am I comparing it to? What I personally want from a car. Does it have more than 80-85-maybe 90% of the cars available? Yep. Doesn't mean I have any respect for those cars either.

That the car doesn't entertain me is the car's fault. It doesn't have the juice I want. I'll replace it in two years. No big deal.

My ZHP is about a 7 on the scale of what the ultimate car would offer. The handling's still not crisp enough, the engine could use another 300 lb-ft of torque (ideally with a turbo that spools from 2k on) and I could write a book about the sundry other things I'd want from my car.

An M5 might be fun next time...

blueguydotcom

03-25-2004, 09:12 AM

The way you talk (post), I honestly think that you've set your standards of a car so high that there is no car in production that would make you happy, or keep you happy past a few weeks. If you want to call your ZHP peaky, then by all means that's the way you feel. However, that claim is based on your assessment of your standards.

Shouldn't you rate EVERYTHING by your personal standards? In the end, isn't this the only metric that matters when you make a purchase. 9 out of 10 dentists prefer Crest, great, what if you like Colgate? Well the others say Crest, so therefore, personal preferences aside, go for what the majority says is good.

Most people find 200-250 lb-ft of torque in a car to be more than adequate. That's great. I don't buy so that I'm in line with most people. I buy and judge based on what I prefer. I couldn't conceive of living any other way.

I doubt you're lying about your own car. I just think that you have such a narrow focus on life that you can't see anything around you. I read this in all your posts. It seems to be your way or no way. And not only that, but your way to extremes.

My way or no way? If it's my money purchasing a toy for myself, then it is my way or no way. I don't see anything extreme in doing things your own way when you're the only party impacted by it.

It seems many people here are fiercely loyal to a manufacturer. I encountered this with VW too. To each his own. BMW is just another brand to me and brand that to me has some faults that are hard to overlook - namely their bad trannies, less-than-stellar torque and horrible brand association.

I dig my car but there's not a moment I'm in it that I don't wish it had 300-400-500 lbs-ft of torque. And you're right, probably within a month I'd be wondering if I could get 700 lb-ft of torque out of it.

Chris90

03-25-2004, 09:52 AM

What's the point arguing about this? Everyone has a different idea of what torquey is. My '97 GSR was a lot torquier than my '93 Civic EX.

I personally love peaky motors, which is why I like the sweet 2.5L in my E36. I hate diesels cause they have monster torque and nothing up top.

Plaz

03-25-2004, 09:59 AM

Actually, I think the relative flatness of the M54 powerband is exactly what makes it less exciting. It delivers its power very linearly, so it's deceiving to the butt dyno.

blueguydotcom

03-25-2004, 12:37 PM

Actually, I think the relative flatness of the M54 powerband is exactly what makes it less exciting. It delivers its power very linearly, so it's deceiving to the butt dyno.

But that's not true in my experience. There's nothing linear about it. At over 4k the engine seems to kick in and take off like a bat out of hell. Over 5k and the engine's pulling like a freight train.

Insider

03-26-2004, 06:03 PM

I posted something similar in another thread but BMW is most likely waiting to bring the 1 to the States because of the poor dollar/euro exchange rate. The expense of getting a new model certifed for sale in the states isn't cheap and they may be waiting for that exchange rate to even back out a bit. Under the current exchange rates, every sale would be a loser based on proposed profit margins so it wouldn't make good business sense to spend all the money needed to get a car here just to lose money. :(

Optimus Prime

03-30-2004, 12:47 PM

Optimus Prime

03-30-2004, 12:50 PM

Yes, now we resort to personal insults. I must not know how to drive the car if I say it lacks torque. Keep the revs over 4k and the car moves fine. Anything less and it's anemic. Do you deny this?

What am I comparing it to? What I personally want from a car. Does it have more than 80-85-maybe 90% of the cars available? Yep. Doesn't mean I have any respect for those cars either.

That the car doesn't entertain me is the car's fault. It doesn't have the juice I want. I'll replace it in two years. No big deal.

My ZHP is about a 7 on the scale of what the ultimate car would offer. The handling's still not crisp enough, the engine could use another 300 lb-ft of torque (ideally with a turbo that spools from 2k on) and I could write a book about the sundry other things I'd want from my car.

An M5 might be fun next time...

Sounds like you have high standards. It also, then, seems like it is your fault for buying the car. You want a supercar but didn't pony up the $$$ for it. If what I really wanted was a 330i, but I bought a VW golf, would I really have the right to complain that the Golf wasn't good enough by my standards? Prolly not.

If you wanted a Supercar, you should have bought a supercar.

blueguydotcom

03-30-2004, 01:42 PM

Sounds like you have high standards. It also, then, seems like it is your fault for buying the car. You want a supercar but didn't pony up the $$$ for it. If what I really wanted was a 330i, but I bought a VW golf, would I really have the right to complain that the Golf wasn't good enough by my standards? Prolly not.

If you wanted a Supercar, you should have bought a supercar.

I'm not complaining - though I'd be willing to drop some complaints on the bmw tranny - about the power. It's a good 7-8/10ths car. I have fun with it. I simply believe the engine lacks torque and needs more power across the rev-range.

As someone who owned a VW, god I wouldn't wish that pain on another soul. :)

Optimus Prime

03-30-2004, 01:50 PM

I'm not complaining - though I'd be willing to drop some complaints on the bmw tranny - about the power. It's a good 7-8/10ths car. I have fun with it. I simply believe the engine lacks torque and needs more power across the rev-range.

As someone who owned a VW, god I wouldn't wish that pain on another soul. :)

But you are complaining.

Torque is very important and it's something BMWs have lost. I dig my ZHP but the engine's got a very peaky torque curve - much like Honda. The 325i's I drove were even worse. Not my kind of car.

Did I stutter? The torque curve on BMW's vaunted 2.5 and 3.0 engines is peaky. My ZHP is fun but it's pretty much gutless below 4k rpm.

Compared to the 45i for instance which doesn't seem to be gasping for air 85% of the time. My ZHP is entertaining for about 10 minutes but it gets old fast that you've got to wind it way up to motivate the car. From 5000-6700 rpm it's a really fun engine. The rest of the time...

Support the claim? i've driven the car. Heck, I own the car. The engine's just not as torquey as I think it should be given all the raves it receives and the way people wax poetically about it.

Drive a ZHP and then tell me you don't find the power peaky. The car couldn't get out of its own way anywhere under 4k rpms.

All sound like complaints to me. Plus, when somebody shows you the dyno results and the torque curves are flat from 2500 and up, I don't see how that's peaky. Drive an s2000, that's peaky. Maybe what you really want is a powerstroke diesel, that might have enough torque for you.

blueguydotcom

03-30-2004, 11:49 PM

I don't think of those as complaints. They're comments from experience with the car over a year. You want complaints, I can give you posts from Vortex where I bash my Jetta and all VW products as worthless, unreliable hunks of junk. My BMW is fun, it just has a lousy tranny (like most BMWs) and no power below 4k

All sound like complaints to me. Plus, when somebody shows you the dyno results and the torque curves are flat from 2500 and up, I don't see how that's peaky. Drive an s2000, that's peaky. Maybe what you really want is a powerstroke diesel, that might have enough torque

You can post 1000 dynos but if they fly in the face of my experience with every BMW 3 series, what good are they? I drive the car, where do you get off arguing that my car doesn't drag its butt until 4k rpm? My friends and family think the car has plenty of thrust. I don't. You can physically feel the 3.0 push you back in the seat over 4k rpm. That's not an illusion, the engine pulls quite suddenly. If I accelerate with the pedal depressed 50% everybody and their mother will pass my ZHP off the line. Once I hit 4k the car leaps to life and explodes up to redline in a rush. It's like having a badly tuned turbo.

Why does this bother you so much? Eek, a BMW owner says BMW's inline 6s are peaky and not much fun.

andy_thomas

03-31-2004, 01:10 AM

Eek, a BMW owner says BMW's inline 6s are peaky and not much fun.

Yes, I went onto a Porsche group, and complained that their ass-engined nazi slot cars had anodyne engines, and why hadn't anyone sued Porsche yet for producing such dangerous handling cars. I got my butt flamed off - what's up with that? :).

racerdave

03-31-2004, 05:05 AM

Seems to me that the bottom line is this... many E46 owners are happy with their torque curves. Bluedotcom guy is not.

Why don't we all just help him find a way to fit a supercharged Viper motor into his E46, then he will be happy and so will everyone else. :p

Optimus Prime

03-31-2004, 06:49 AM

blueguydotcom

03-31-2004, 09:06 AM

Then the weight split will be forward bias and he'll complain about that :bigpimp:

Don't get me started on how fat my ZHP already feels. :D

2 more years...and the goal for 2006 will be smaller, lighter, faster. Hopefully the M2 will be out and fit that bill.

Chris90

03-31-2004, 10:22 AM

Don't get me started on how fat my ZHP already feels. :D

2 more years...and the goal for 2006 will be smaller, lighter, faster. Hopefully the M2 will be out and fit that bill.

I'll agree with you on that point - I hear so much about how BMW thinks sporty cars should be lighter - and then they give us a two ton 6 series. The 3 series should not be 3400 lbs, I'm sorry.

andy_thomas

03-31-2004, 03:54 PM

I'll agree with you on that point - I hear so much about how BMW thinks sporty cars should be lighter - and then they give us a two ton 6 series. The 3 series should not be 3400 lbs, I'm sorry.

?

The 645Ci is quoted at 1,690 kg - not bad, considering this will be the heaviest of the entire line-up (M6 excluded, perhaps). BMW's 5er is lighter than the outgoing car. M-B bangs on about how much aluminium it uses then releases another 2,xxx pg monster. Personally I prefer cold, hard facts.

The 3er starts at 3,025lb, including 200lb of driver, luggage and fuel. (So 2,825lb in "impossible" driver- and fuel-less trim.) Blame the automatic/electric everything and heavy engine for your entry-level car weighing more :).

Chris90

03-31-2004, 04:11 PM

?

The 645Ci is quoted at 1,690 kg - not bad, considering this will be the heaviest of the entire line-up (M6 excluded, perhaps). BMW's 5er is lighter than the outgoing car. M-B bangs on about how much aluminium it uses then releases another 2,xxx pg monster. Personally I prefer cold, hard facts.

The 3er starts at 3,025lb, including 200lb of driver, luggage and fuel. (So 2,825lb in "impossible" driver- and fuel-less trim.) Blame the automatic/electric everything and heavy engine for your entry-level car weighing more :).

Sorry, noticed you are in the UK - I was really talking about US models, which start out at 3300 lbs (3 series). BMWs may be lighter than the competition, but that's not saying much. Look at the IS300 - it's tiny but weighs 3400 lbs - what a pig!

whitewagon

04-05-2004, 01:54 PM

Support the claim? i've driven the car. Heck, I own the car. The engine's just not as torquey as I think it should be given all the raves it receives and the way people wax poetically about it.

Drive a ZHP and then tell me you don't find the power peaky. The car couldn't get out of its own way anywhere under 4k rpms.

Ask yourself this, why would I lie about a car I own? I enjoy many aspects of my bimmer - the handling, the power in the upper revs, the sound of the exhaust - but I'm not gonna tell anyone I think the engine's as flat and powerful torque wise as other cars out there. It feels very honda to me. I know what I want out of a car and though my ZHP is fun it's just not ringing my bell any longer.

Hi, long time lurker. I have to agree with blueguydotcom. These bimmers are pretty peaky. When I test drove the 6 speed 330ci I was expecting a night and day diff with my 325it. It was more like a dusk and day difference. A 3.54 differential is definately needed I think.

Not that I hate peaky motors, my other car is an S2000. But driving the 330 made me feel that the 325 is a better bang for the buck. I always felt that if the 325 had 1000 more RPM on top it would be perfect.

You should really go test drive the new S4, that has the off the line, snap the passenger neck torque that you are looking for. I test drove one that same day. Highly recommend a drive with a salesman who lets you actually really DRIVE the thing, lucky for me I did. The best thing was the sound of the motor, just like Ronin. :thumbup:

Motown328

04-05-2004, 06:44 PM

?

The 645Ci is quoted at 1,690 kg - not bad, considering this will be the heaviest of the entire line-up (M6 excluded, perhaps). BMW's 5er is lighter than the outgoing car. M-B bangs on about how much aluminium it uses then releases another 2,xxx pg monster. Personally I prefer cold, hard facts.

The 3er starts at 3,025lb, including 200lb of driver, luggage and fuel. (So 2,825lb in "impossible" driver- and fuel-less trim.) Blame the automatic/electric everything and heavy engine for your entry-level car weighing more :).

Hahaha....my '98 328 with options is listed at over 4,200 lbs. Hahaha... It feels like a bank vault on wheels. :rofl: But it handles as you'd expect and the heaviness grows on you, endears a sense of safety and old-fashioned craftmanship. Doors sound like a gunshot when they close, not a coffee can dropping. Of course, that could all be B.S. Hahaha... :p

Chris90

04-05-2004, 06:56 PM

Hahaha....my '98 328 with options is listed at over 4,200 lbs. Hahaha... It feels like a bank vault on wheels. :rofl: But it handles as you'd expect and the heaviness grows on you, endears a sense of safety and old-fashioned craftmanship. Doors sound like a gunshot when they close, not a coffee can dropping. Of course, that could all be B.S. Hahaha... :p

What options do you have, reactive armor and a 120 mm howitzer?

Motown328

04-05-2004, 07:09 PM

What options do you have, reactive armor and a 120 mm howitzer?

Damn dude! You're good! You know all about those "Secret options" for U.S. buyers that have been leaking out recently. Mine was called the "Detroit Package." Armor-plating, 60cal., reinflating tires, and a frig in the trunk that can carry up to eight 40's of Colt 45. Was a very popular package around here.

And to think....all the suckers that took the premium package over this one......hahahahaha....

andy_thomas

04-06-2004, 01:41 AM

I don't think anyone thinks you are lying. It's a matter of whether you are making the right confcusions from your perceptions.

Either there is something wrong with your car, or your butt dyno is severely broken.

The 330i's peak torque is at 3500 RPMs. There is LESS torque available at 5000 RPM than at 3500, thus LESS instaneous acceleration. Don't tell me you are disputing this.

This is obviously way OT (the engines under discussion will never find their way into the 1er just released) but this last comment made me think. If torque is what accelerates cars, why bother quoting a power figure? If the car makes less torque at 5,000 rpm than it does at 3,000 rpm, it must be a real slug at 6,000 rpm, at which point it makes even less torque. Then why bother with quoting a 6,000 rpm power peak, if it has nothing to do with the engine's accelerative capabilities? And, indeed, why does a Honda S2000 with 240 bhp and 153 lbft massively out-accelerate a 320td with similar kerb weight, 153 bhp and 240 lbft?

Chris90

04-06-2004, 05:44 AM

This is obviously way OT (the engines under discussion will never find their way into the 1er just released) but this last comment made me think. If torque is what accelerates cars, why bother quoting a power figure? If the car makes less torque at 5,000 rpm than it does at 3,000 rpm, it must be a real slug at 6,000 rpm, at which point it makes even less torque. Then why bother with quoting a 6,000 rpm power peak, if it has nothing to do with the engine's accelerative capabilities? And, indeed, why does a Honda S2000 with 240 bhp and 153 lbft massively out-accelerate a 320td with similar kerb weight, 153 bhp and 240 lbft?

Good luck getting a good answer to this age-old question!
A good way to think about it is if you've driven a diesel car like a 320d, or an Audi A4 1.8T is a good example - when you step on the gas, you get a big jolt in the back initially, but keep the pedal down and not a whole lot happens. That's cause your torque drops off so quickly as the engine revs. If you keep shifting every second or two, you'd get more torque, but all that shifting slows you down too.

johnf

04-06-2004, 06:19 AM

Not one, but two replies have appeared as I composed this. I shall
offer it anyway in the hope that someone will correct any
misconceptions I might hold. Being formally trained as a glaciologist,
my idea of a huge acceleration is having an ice stream sprint from moving
10 meters a year to a blistering 10 meters a day over a couple decades. ;)

If torque is what accelerates cars,
why bother quoting a power figure? If the car makes less torque at
5,000 rpm than it does at 3,000 rpm, it must be a real slug at 6,000
rpm, at which point it makes even less torque. Then why bother with
quoting a 6,000 rpm power peak, if it has nothing to do with the
engine's accelerative capabilities? And, indeed, why does a Honda
S2000 with 240 bhp and 153 lbft massively out-accelerate a 320td with
similar kerb weight, 153 bhp and 240 lbft?

The one word answer is: gears.

What wins races is not the torque produced by the engine but the
torque delivered at the drive wheels. The Honda may produce much less
engine torque but it can delivery it to a much higher engine
speed. Consequently, the Honda driver can remain in a lower gear and
apply a greater torque at the drive wheels for longer.

I expect if you pit the S2000 against the 320d, the 320d will
initially pull away from the S2000. Because of his car's much lower
redline, however, the 320d driver will have to shift to higher gears
sooner and more often than the S2000 driver - higher gears that produce
increasingly less torque at the drive wheels, and less acceleration.
Eventually the S2000 will win.

The 320d's low rpm limit becomes an ever increasing disadvantage as
the road speed increases. This is not because the 320d engine produces
less torque - it produces considerably more - but because it can only
delivery that torque at a lower engine speed, meaning, it can only
delivery it with the car in a higher gear producing less wheel
torque.

Another way to look at it is that power is just the amount of torque
that can be delivered at a given speed. The S2000 has much more power
and, therefore, can deliver more torque to its drive wheels at a given
road speed (once that speed becomes great enough and the 320d has to
shift).

blueguydotcom

04-06-2004, 08:27 AM

Hi, long time lurker. I have to agree with blueguydotcom. These bimmers are pretty peaky. When I test drove the 6 speed 330ci I was expecting a night and day diff with my 325it. It was more like a dusk and day difference. A 3.54 differential is definately needed I think.

Not that I hate peaky motors, my other car is an S2000. But driving the 330 made me feel that the 325 is a better bang for the buck. I always felt that if the 325 had 1000 more RPM on top it would be perfect.

You should really go test drive the new S4, that has the off the line, snap the passenger neck torque that you are looking for. I test drove one that same day. Highly recommend a drive with a salesman who lets you actually really DRIVE the thing, lucky for me I did. The best thing was the sound of the motor, just like Ronin. :thumbup:

Thanks for the suggestion. Unfortunately, after my experience with VW, I'll never own one of their products again. Also, unfortunately, even though the A4 is sexy as hell, it's not very comfortable for me. Sigh...

blueguydotcom

04-06-2004, 08:33 AM

I don't think anyone thinks you are lying. It's a matter of whether you are making the right confcusions from your perceptions.

Either there is something wrong with your car, or your butt dyno is severely broken.

The 330i's peak torque is at 3500 RPMs. There is LESS torque available at 5000 RPM than at 3500, thus LESS instaneous acceleration. Don't tell me you are disputing this.

It could very well be there's something wrong with the car then because it's very much like I have a turbo - over 5k that car moves like lightning and this burst of power comes on suddenly. Up to 3k if I'm moderate with the gas I'm getting passed by people left and right...

I tend to hold most gears up to at least 5500 lately as I only drive it on the weekends - thus I'm looking to extract all the fun out of it I can before the inevitable end of the weekend. :(

whitewagon

04-06-2004, 09:52 AM

Thanks for the suggestion. Unfortunately, after my experience with VW, I'll never own one of their products again. Also, unfortunately, even though the A4 is sexy as hell, it's not very comfortable for me. Sigh...

I understand that. The S4 has recaros all around (even the rears) so it may be more or less comfortable for you than the normal A4.

A good friend of mine just bought a MY04 1.8 A4, and a week later one of the speakers stopped working. But I suppose these kind of issues can pop up on any european car. On the other hand my wifes TT never had any problems. It liked to use oil though, which I understand all the 1.8's like to do.

I think you should try slapping a new differential in there. From what I have read, a used pumpkin from a automatic 325 is pretty cheap, 300 bucks or so. I think the change is from approx 3.0 to approx 3.5? But I also understand that some people don't like to modify their cars. Good luck.

blueguydotcom

04-06-2004, 02:00 PM

I understand that. The S4 has recaros all around (even the rears) so it may be more or less comfortable for you than the normal A4.

A good friend of mine just bought a MY04 1.8 A4, and a week later one of the speakers stopped working. But I suppose these kind of issues can pop up on any european car. On the other hand my wifes TT never had any problems. It liked to use oil though, which I understand all the 1.8's like to do.

I think you should try slapping a new differential in there. From what I have read, a used pumpkin from a automatic 325 is pretty cheap, 300 bucks or so. I think the change is from approx 3.0 to approx 3.5? But I also understand that some people don't like to modify their cars. Good luck.

It's a lease going back to BMW in 2 years, so yeah it'll stay stock.

Sad that I'm already looking for the next thing...1/2 series convertible M sounds nice. Even if I must wait until 2007 I can always drive my Protege for a year straight.

Maybe the mini convertible will have an engine with 200+ by then too.

The next 3 seems like it'll be bigger, so no thanks.

andy_thomas

04-07-2004, 01:19 AM

It's a lease going back to BMW in 2 years, so yeah it'll stay stock.

Sad that I'm already looking for the next thing...1/2 series convertible M sounds nice. Even if I must wait until 2007 I can always drive my Protege for a year straight.

Maybe the mini convertible will have an engine with 200+ by then too.

I don't see any reason why the Mini covertible won't have the JCW package available (and of course Hartge and ACS will make engine packages available). If the drop-top Mini has only half the torsional stiffness of the tin-top, that still makes it as stiff as an E46 coupe...