Motor Trend 11/03: ZHP vs. 330i Sport

Motor Trend tested both an '03 330i with sport package, and a ZHP in this month's issue. Below are the (very interesting) results (330i's results are in parentheses).

ZHP (330i w/sport package)
0-60: 6.1 (5.8)
1/4 mile: 14.42@96.88 (14.30@96.51)
60-0: 109 (134)
Skidpad: .84 (.86)
Slalom: 67.5 (64.9)

This is the "slowest" I've seen for a ZHP so far, but the fastest I've seen for a 330i. Makes me wonder if they got the two mixed up. Hmmmmm.

definately mixed up

Were they tested at the same time and place and by the same driver? That makes a huge difference. So do options, since that contributes to weight. There are manufacturing tolerances as well, but these differences are a bit big for that.

There are so many variables that will help or hinder 0-60 times. 5.8 or 6.1 can be the difference between launching at 2,500 rpm or 3,000 rpm, how much fuel is in the car, weight of the driver, temp, tires, wheel spin, etc...etc....etc........



The # that throws me is the 60-0

ZHP- 109
330- 134

Explain that?

Originally Posted by Tanin

The # that throws me is the 60-0

ZHP- 109
330- 134

Explain that?

My guess would be tires.

--SONET

sounds like a case of different driving conditions, different drivers, or a mix up.

i think the feb 01? issue of r&t says 17" is the best.

My take is on tires too. I'm guessing Conti's on the 330 SP based on the poorer handling results.

As far as acceleration performance, the 10 extra HP of the ZHP is within the margin of error of a non-ZHP engine. Could be the case of a weak ZHP engine and a strong non-ZHP engine.

Looks like speculation that the ZHP is basically a cosmetic package hasn't been proven wrong yet.

Maybe the anthracite headliner is heavier.

Originally Posted by ObD

had to go there didn't you??

The really low testing and editorial standards at MT have been widely discussed here so I'm not surprised.

As far as I can remember, this is the first time a publication claims a 0-60 time SLOWER than BMW's number. BMW was claiming a 6.4 on the 330i and 5.9 on the ZHP. Normally, BMW's claim is very conservative and is pretty consistent with a 0.3-0.4 sec improvement on a real test, regardless of models. In fact, last month's C&D did a 5.6 on the ZHP. I hope they didn't put a 300 lbs driver in that test.

Originally Posted by TD

The really low testing and editorial standards at MT have been widely discussed here so I'm not surprised.

Yeah, they're published by Primedia, the (bottom-end) standard.

I've said this before, MT isn't worth the paper it's printed on.

Originally Posted by mkh

I hope they didn't put a 300 lbs driver in that test.

I know there is a, um, full-figured staffer. Has a beard. Can be seen on MT TV on Speedvision. Can't find him in the web site, and (like TD ) I don't read that automotive equivalent to "People" magazine.

Originally Posted by Tanin

had to go there didn't you??

Just a friendly

Originally Posted by Tanin

There are so many variables that will help or hinder 0-60 times. 5.8 or 6.1 can be the difference between launching at 2,500 rpm or 3,000 rpm, how much fuel is in the car, weight of the driver, temp, tires, wheel spin, etc...etc....etc........



The # that throws me is the 60-0

ZHP- 109
330- 134

Explain that?

It's tires. On Edmunds, the 330Ci and 328Ci on contisports stop in the same distance.

And the a 330Cic on 18" wheels with pilots or bridgestones blows them away.

Originally Posted by TD

I've said this before, MT isn't worth the paper it's printed on.

Exactly...they suck.

Were those cars tested side-by-side? Either the ZHP's engine was less broken in than the regular 330i's or they just happened to have gotten a strong 330i and a weak ZHP. The shorter differential alone should help the ZHP out accelerate the non-ZHP at lower speeds.

Originally Posted by ObD

Looks like speculation that the ZHP is basically a cosmetic package hasn't been proven wrong yet.

In any event, it shows a regular 330i is a match for a ZHP given the right circumstances. It "proves" the ZHP isn't going to blow the doors off of a 330i SP all the time, anyway.

edit-->thanks for the heads up, I'll have to go buy a copy of that issue...sounds like a rare MT keeper.

The way I read the article is the 0-60 time was from their best ever time on a 330i Sport Package, not a head to head comparison. They only tested the Performance Package in this article. MT wrote "What these numbers can't tell you is how cohesive and right the whole car feels" It goes on to say "make us especially yearn for a real M3 sedan"

Originally Posted by mtndog

The way I read the article is the 0-60 time was from their best ever time on a 330i Sport Package, not a head to head comparison. They only tested the Performance Package in this article.

Well, that's lame. Figures MT would find a way to screw up a good idea.

Look, I'm not saying that the ZHP is the fastest bimmer out there. I had a 97 M3 4 door prior to my ZHP and let me tell this car is almost as fast as that car. The ZHP my lack some of the low end grunt of the M, but in midrange area ZHP is extremely competive. I seriously doubt that BMW would make A claim that could not be backed up by track numbers. The backlash from its comsumers would be huge. BMW certainly does not want a Ford Mustang Cobra incident.

Originally Posted by tq2110

Look, I'm not saying that the ZHP is the fastest bimmer out there. I had a 97 M3 4 door prior to my ZHP and let me tell this car is almost as fast as that car. The ZHP my lack some of the low end grunt of the M, but in midrange area ZHP is extremely competive.

I don't think anyone is saying it's the fastest Bimmer out there.... because it isn't....

The comparision here is between a 330i with ZHP and a 330i with ZSP...
compare both with your old 97 M3 sedan and I think you'll find they both (the ZHP and ZSP) feel pretty much the same compared to the E36.

Having said that, the E36 M will probably still perform better then either of the E46s.... and for a good reason too... otherwise there would probably be alot of E36 ///M owners who would be rather upset...

As for the discrepancy in stopping distance.... I say tires as well....