E90 loaner... I really miss my F30

Originally Posted by bayoucity

The real question shall be " How are BMW & Audi 4 banger better than Hyundai's ?"

Genesis' 2.0 T is rated @ 274 hp. Pretty surreal & humbling huh?

Originally Posted by Jamesonsviggen

No, I was going by this dyno of the 2.0T...

When you humble me I will let you know.

James, I simply am responding to those who doubted Genesis' 2.0T & claimed N20 is underrated. I'm actually humble to know 2011 Sonata 2.0T is only trailing N20 by 18 lb-ft & 6 hp. Surreal !

Originally Posted by bayoucity

James, I simply am responding to those who doubted Genesis' 2.0T & claimed N20 is underrated. I'm actually humble to know 2011 Sonata 2.0T is only trailing N20 by 18 lb-ft & 6 hp. Surreal !

Hyundai sure has come a long way

Well, since there's a lot of posturing going on here (nice to know this corner of the Internet is exactly like every other corner of the Internet... ) I'll summarize some of the controversial numbers:

Peak dyno hp:
BMW F30 - 240 hp (Inside Line)
Cadillac ATS - 239 hp (Inside Line)
Hyundai Sonata 2.0 T - 234 hp (Inside Line)
Audi A4 - hard to find a dyno of a stock car on comparable equipment. My general impression is 200 to 210 hp or so?

Recent performance data from C&D:
0-60:
A4 - 5.6 sec
F30 - 5.6 sec

1/4:
A4 - 14.4 @ 95
F30 - 14.2 @ 98

Rolling start:
A4 - 7.2 sec
F30 - 6.5 sec

My thoughts on contributing factors to the A4's acceleration: AWD and 245 width summer tires. Such extra traction helps a lot when launching from a standstil, but as evidenced by the rolling start times doesn't help with outright acceleration once moving. Since that's what I notice most, not having ever launched an A4 or F30 for an acceleration test, the F30 certainly felt much quicker than the A4.

610ft slalom:
A4 - 44.3 mph
F30 - 42.7 mph

Certainly a win for the Audi. But it's a head-scratcher for me, since the A4 didn't feel an more sporty - but I haven't autocrossed either car. I again suspect the tires were the main factor, though - the BMW had 225 width all-season M+S. The other two cars with M+S tires had similar slalom numbers (42.8 and 42.9) and the one other summer tire car had a similar speed to the A4 (44.2.)

IIRC, the F30 I test-drove had summer tires. The one I ordered certainly does.

So in terms of feel and driving excitement - yeah, in my book the F30, with it's N20, is superior.

Originally Posted by bayoucity

James, I simply am responding to those who doubted Genesis' 2.0T & claimed N20 is underrated. I'm actually humble to know 2011 Sonata 2.0T is only trailing N20 by 18 lb-ft & 6 hp. Surreal !

I thought people would have moved on from Hyundai being some kind of 3rd world car manufacturer at this point.

The Gene sedan now has a 333hp DI V-6 which nets about 30mph highway.

The V-8 makes 429hp.

They have direct injected 4's making 201hp from 1.6L and as shown, the RWD Gene has a 274hp 2.0 and the v-6 now makes close to 350hp.

Hyundai should be most threatening due to their inside culture which allows them to move very fast.

I was approached in '05 to come in as designer for the newly opening design center in Ann Arbor. The guy at the time said Hyundai was planning from within to be the #1 car company inside of a decade. At the time it was comedic. Now, 7 years later, it's not so outlandish.

Originally Posted by The X Men

The performance numbers are close, but it should have never been that close to begin with considering that we are comparing a 6 year old design with a brand new one.

I feel you have a tendency to pick and choose your facts. Yes the A4 is a 6 year old design but the AT is brand new and transforms the performance of the car. I believe the 0-60 went from 6.2 to 5.6 seconds with the same engine. That's a major upgrade. The again the BMW was faster in the 1/4 mile at a higher trap speed and faster by 1.3 seconds to 100 mph. This shows how well the A4 hooks up due to the Quattro system.

Originally Posted by Jamesonsviggen

I thought people would have moved on from Hyundai being some kind of 3rd world car manufacturer at this point.

The Gene sedan now has a 333hp DI V-6 which nets about 30mph highway.

The V-8 makes 429hp.

They have direct injected 4's making 201hp from 1.6L and as shown, the RWD Gene has a 274hp 2.0 and the v-6 now makes close to 350hp.

Hyundai should be most threatening due to their inside culture which allows them to move very fast.

I was approached in '05 to come in as designer for the newly opening design center in Ann Arbor. The guy at the time said Hyundai was planning from within to be the #1 car company inside of a decade. At the time it was comedic. Now, 7 years later, it's not so outlandish.

There's a tendency in this thread to use HP alone when comparing engines. The Hyundai 2.0T engine is nicely powerful but as Car and Driver says, has the aural pleasure of a hair dryer. While the N20 has issues at idle, reviews say it sounds great revving to the redline and pulls strongly all the way. It's a more refined engine than all the competitors at this point in time.

Lots of kudo's to Hyundai who has come a long way. They are doing well competing in teh Accord, Camry class of cars but are not yet building a car for enthusiasts except possibly the Genesis Coupe.

Originally Posted by Michael Schott

I feel you have a tendency to pick and choose your facts. Yes the A4 is a 6 year old design but the AT is brand new and transforms the performance of the car. I believe the 0-60 went from 6.2 to 5.6 seconds with the same engine. That's a major upgrade. The again the BMW was faster in the 1/4 mile at a higher trap speed and faster by 1.3 seconds to 100 mph. This shows how well the A4 hooks up due to the Quattro system.

Audi is around 200 lbs heavier.

Originally Posted by LegendsNeverDie

Audi is around 200 lbs heavier.

I'm sure he understands that. The point is that, at least in 0-60 times, the AWD would typically overcome that small of a weight difference and would provide better launch traction than a RWD car.

The Audi is a great car... I'm not sure why you are trying to convince everyone it's better than the F30.

Clearly you are upset that BMW is not doing "better"... but the 3-series is still winning comparos... and the reason is that comparos aren't won or lost by 0-60 or slalom times but by over-all performance and driving pleasure.

Originally Posted by LegendsNeverDie

Audi is around 200 lbs heavier.

So? That means the Audi needs more HP. It's apples to apples in this test as each car is the sportiest version available. Audi of course doesn't offer the option of a RWD version and FWD version has a CVT and is not in the same class as a RWD 328i.

Originally Posted by Michael Schott

So? That means the Audi needs more HP. It's apples to apples in this test as each car is the sportiest version available. Audi of course doesn't offer the option of a RWD version and FWD version has a CVT and is not in the same class as a RWD 328i.

I understand. I was just trying to point out that the weight will also affect performance just like awd.

Originally Posted by LegendsNeverDie

Audi is around 200 lbs heavier.

And you can feel it when driving, not in a good way. Front weight bias and doesn't feel as nimble as the BMW when driving.

Originally Posted by voip-ninja

I'm sure he understands that. The point is that, at least in 0-60 times, the AWD would typically overcome that small of a weight difference and would provide better launch traction than a RWD car.

The Audi is a great car... I'm not sure why you are trying to convince everyone it's better than the F30.

Clearly you are upset that BMW is not doing "better"... but the 3-series is still winning comparos... and the reason is that comparos aren't won or lost by 0-60 or slalom times but by over-all performance and driving pleasure.

And hence is why C/D stated the E90 would likely have won a comparison against the F30.

Originally Posted by justinnum1

And you can feel it when driving, not in a good way. Front weight bias and doesn't feel as nimble as the BMW when driving.

Yes you do.

Originally Posted by Michael Schott

There's a tendency in this thread to use HP alone when comparing engines. The Hyundai 2.0T engine is nicely powerful but as Car and Driver says, has the aural pleasure of a hair dryer. While the N20 has issues at idle, reviews say it sounds great revving to the redline and pulls strongly all the way. It's a more refined engine than all the competitors at this point in time.

Lots of kudo's to Hyundai who has come a long way. They are doing well competing in teh Accord, Camry class of cars but are not yet building a car for enthusiasts except possibly the Genesis Coupe.

I drove a '11 Genesis 4.6L and liked it a lot 2 years ago. Engine sounded very nice. Car had a $44k sticker and was nabbed by me as a company car(instead of a Town Car) for $38k.

If the R-Spec was a proper tuned car in the way or AMG or M and under $50k, I would be all for it.

Originally Posted by LegendsNeverDie

And hence is why C/D stated the E90 would likely have won a comparison against the F30.

Maybe it would and maybe it wouldn't. I would LOVE it if C&D put their money where their mouth is and did exactly that. I have a feeling that the outcome would not be as you think.

Trash talking is good for selling magazines.

As some noted in this tread the major weakness for both the 328i and the 335i IMO are the tires. BMW choose to go with the smaller width for fuel efficiency. I love for one of these car magazines to do a comparison between the S4, 335i and ATS V6 but the 335i having 235s in the front and 245s in the rear summer tires.

Originally Posted by windsor027

As some noted in this tread the major weakness for both the 328i and the 335i IMO are the tires. BMW choose to go with the smaller width for fuel efficiency. I love for one of these car magazines to do a comparison between the S4, 335i and ATS V6 but the 335i having 235s in the front and 245s in the rear summer tires.

Or just use an Msport F30

Originally Posted by windsor027

As some noted in this tread the major weakness for both the 328i and the 335i IMO are the tires. BMW choose to go with the smaller width for fuel efficiency. I love for one of these car magazines to do a comparison between the S4, 335i and ATS V6 but the 335i having 235s in the front and 245s in the rear summer tires.

All the mag tests so far are'12 and usually Sports.

I am anxious to see an MSport which hàs 255 summer tires out back and the better brake pads. It should give better numbers and present itself better to the more sporting ATS.

Originally Posted by Jamesonsviggen

All the mag tests so far are'12 and usually Sports.

I am anxious to see an MSport which hàs 255 summer tires out back and the better brake pads. It should give better numbers and present itself better to the more sporting ATS.

Yep. I wonder how the mag tests work. Does the car mag tell BMW what cars it plans on comparing?

IMO it was stupid by BMW, since it decided to go with 3 different packages not to have the sport package with the highest performance tire/wheel combo possible. For the luxury I would go with the quietest and most forgiving RTF available, for the modern I would have gone for the most fuel efficient tire. Its like you are a world class runner and you are running against other world class runners who have spikes running shoes and you have plain old snickers.

Originally Posted by windsor027

As some noted in this tread the major weakness for both the 328i and the 335i IMO are the tires. BMW choose to go with the smaller width for fuel efficiency. I love for one of these car magazines to do a comparison between the S4, 335i and ATS V6 but the 335i having 235s in the front and 245s in the rear summer tires.

It's not the width they object to, it's the hard compound low rolling resistance tires BMW now uses.

Originally Posted by justinnum1

Yep. I wonder how the mag tests work. Does the car mag tell BMW what cars it plans on comparing?

They try to get cars that are as sporty as possible and in a comparison test as similar in base price and features as possible. For example they would never compare a base A4 to a 335.

Originally Posted by justinnum1

A4 owners aren't saying **** because they lost lol. And they probably have better things to do then spend time in a different cars forum. F30>B8 or 8.5. It's e90 owners like yourself that need to do whatever they can to try and make the F30 look bad(and yourselves feel better about your aging automobiles).

Anyways, a win is a win, and the F30 has quite a few of them

A very fitting response from someone with limited knowledge of any car brand beside BMW

FYI, I do not own a E90, my wife does, I actually tried to talk her into buying the F30, but she like the way the E90 drove better. All I am trying to tell you is that the A4 is a much better car than you think. Stick your head into the rabbit hole and you will see the light.

Originally Posted by Michael Schott

I feel you have a tendency to pick and choose your facts. Yes the A4 is a 6 year old design but the AT is brand new and transforms the performance of the car. I believe the 0-60 went from 6.2 to 5.6 seconds with the same engine. That's a major upgrade. The again the BMW was faster in the 1/4 mile at a higher trap speed and faster by 1.3 seconds to 100 mph. This shows how well the A4 hooks up due to the Quattro system.

Every model going thru refresh or LCI. the A4 is no exception, a new transmission or a new engine doesnt make it a new design.

Originally Posted by The X Men

A very fitting response from someone with limited knowledge of any car brand beside BMW

FYI, I do not own a E90, my wife does, I actually tried to talk her into buying the F30, but she like the way the E90 drove better.

Then why do you waste so much time in this forum always talking about why you dislike the new 3 series? Is the F10 forum not active enough for you?