[ndog14]

Originally Posted by derrick603

From a business standpoint, BMW did the right thing. The N20 is much more in line with what customers want than the N52. That may even be true for many, perhaps even most, enthusiasts.

A 4-banger? You think that is what people want for a car that starts for nearly $40k? Lol. Puhlease. To the average person that drives their car in D and smashes the gas on the highway they end up at a relative fast speed quickly. To an enthusiast or racer, the actual numbers matter. The normal consumer only cares about the end result, reaching highway speed.

[derrick603]

Originally Posted by ndog14

A 4-banger? You think that is what people want for a car that starts for nearly $40k? Lol. Puhlease.

Apparently, your market research is superior to the marketing departments of BMW, Audi, Cadillac, and Mercedes, all of whom sell $35k cars with turbo 4-cylinders.

Originally Posted by ndog14

To the average person that drives their car in D and smashes the gas on the highway they end up at a relative fast speed quickly. To an enthusiast or racer, the actual numbers matter. The normal consumer only cares about the end result, reaching highway speed.

You're contradicting yourself here. You say people don't want a turbo 4, then you say that average people, enthusiasts, and racers all value the aspects in which the N20 is superior to the N52. Which is it?

It's pretty simple to me. Most customers want two main things from an engine, assuming it has no other glaring flaws, output and fuel economy. The N20 seems to be pretty good on both counts.

[Dozhdbog]

Mitsubishi Evos, Wrx Stis, and Golf R's are all 4 banger engines that can go very fast in a straight line and around corners.


I think many longtime enthusiasts are lamenting the loss of the bigger type engines with their smooth power delivery and sonorous sounds, and, in their sadness, confuse that nostalgia with actual performance numbers.

Some people want a 6 -8 -12 cylinder engine because that, in and of itself, denotes luxury/sportiness/etc. It's all in the branding and how such engines have been traditionally used, and many people buy into it and can't change with the times.

[ndog14]

Originally Posted by derrick603

Apparently, your market research is superior to the marketing departments of BMW, Audi, Cadillac, and Mercedes, all of whom sell $35k cars with turbo 4-cylinders.



You're contradicting yourself here. You say people don't want a turbo 4, then you say that average people, enthusiasts, and racers all value the aspects in which the N20 is superior to the N52. Which is it?

It's pretty simple to me. Most customers want two main things from an engine, assuming it has no other glaring flaws, output and fuel economy. The N20 seems to be pretty good on both counts.

Gas mileage, oh great one.

Average person, they don't care what the hell the type of engine it is as long as it gets them to highway speed effectively.

Enthusiasts and racers, want a good engine. NA I6s are great performance motors before the age of turbos. BMWs dominated motorsports with the NA I6, they don't produce a lot of negative torque at high revs so it is great for racing. That said, adding a turbo to an engine opens a whole new world of power. Turbo 4s are popular because they are cheap to manufacture, but there is a point where an I4 can only produce so much power per limits of the engine displacement where I6, V6, V8, etc come into play.


All the major car companies are going to turbo 4s because of fuel, emissions, and production costs. When the N55, a much less expensive engine than the N54, came out BMW did not decrease the price of a 335i or any other vehicle powered by it. Gross profit stayed the same, for the analogy it did, but cost of goods sold went down.

[Dozhdbog]

How is it a much less expensive engine?

[derrick603]

Originally Posted by ndog14

Gas mileage, oh great one.

I don't understand. When it comes to what most people look for in an engine, gas mileage is a great one.

Originally Posted by ndog14

Average person, they don't care what the hell the type of engine it is as long as it gets them to highway speed effectively.

Sure, and frankly, why should they care?

Originally Posted by ndog14

Enthusiasts and racers, want a good engine. NA I6s are great performance motors before the age of turbos. BMWs dominated motorsports with the NA I6, they don't produce a lot of negative torque at high revs so it is great for racing.

E30 M3's used I4's. Nothing wrong with a good 4-cylinder.

Originally Posted by ndog14

That said, adding a turbo to an engine opens a whole new world of power. Turbo 4s are popular because they are cheap to manufacture, but there is a point where an I4 can only produce so much power per limits of the engine displacement where I6, V6, V8, etc come into play.

You can replace I4 with any configuration of engine and I6 with the next size up and say the same thing, i.e. an I6 can only produce so much power per limits of the engine displacement where V8s come into play. So why use an I6?

The motor in an Evo can make a ton more power than any NA I6 in a street car, so no need to worry about limits yet. And there are other reasons to go with a turbo 4 over an I6 other than costs. An I4 can be packaged more efficiently, has a more useful torque curve for everyday driving, can get better gas mileage, etc.

[Saintor]

Those 2.0 are a joke. I got my C&D... here are interesting figures;

2013 ATS L4 2.0T 272HP / 2013 328i L4 2.0T 240HP / 2006 330i I6 3.0 255HP All manual.

Weight 3477lbs / 3390lbs / 3458lbs
On 1200miles+ 19mpg / 23mpg / 25mpg
0-60mph 6.3s / 5.6s / 5.9s
5-60mph 7.4s / 6.6s / 6.5s

Those 2.0T don't perform any better the larger NA engines of yore not even direct injected, neither are they significantly lighter.

[Sered]

Originally Posted by Bimmerlover76

2. Hydralic or electric-assisted steering? You decide. But, I believe the jury has already ruled that hydraulic-assisted steering as the way to go.

I'm pretty certain the F30 has hydraulic-assisted steering too. It's definitely not full electric steering as you're alluding; I'm pretty sure it still has a steering shaft. It may be an electric power steering pump, but it is still hydraulic regardless of the power souce (mechanical vs electrical). As for mechanical vs electrical in 'feel'; that's just BS because there's still a steering shaft, it just comes down how the assist is programmed. My S2000 had an electric powersteering pump as well (less drag on the engine), I don't see any BMWs touching it in regards to handling and steering feel and that car came out in 1999/2000

[Sered]

Originally Posted by ndog14

A 4-banger? You think that is what people want for a car that starts for nearly $40k? Lol. Puhlease. To the average person that drives their car in D and smashes the gas on the highway they end up at a relative fast speed quickly. To an enthusiast or racer, the actual numbers matter. The normal consumer only cares about the end result, reaching highway speed.

I'd take a turbo 4 over a N/A 6 any day of the week. Wider powerband, same power, more efficiency, nuff said.

[JustinGTP]

Originally Posted by Laguna Seca Blue

Drove an E90 323i and a F30 328i Sport back to back the other day.

In my eyes, you can't compare the two cars. World's apart.

You can't compare a base model E90 to a sport F30.

Try a 335i E90 with Active Steering and then tell me it's a better car.

[MattMD]

Originally Posted by Sered

I'd take a turbo 4 over a N/A 6 any day of the week. Wider powerband, same power, more efficiency, nuff said.

*revokes your BMW card*

[Bimmerlover76]

Originally Posted by Sered

I'm pretty certain the F30 has hydraulic-assisted steering too. It's definitely not full electric steering as you're alluding; I'm pretty sure it still has a steering shaft. It may be an electric power steering pump, but it is still hydraulic regardless of the power souce (mechanical vs electrical). As for mechanical vs electrical in 'feel'; that's just BS because there's still a steering shaft, it just comes down how the assist is programmed. My S2000 had an electric powersteering pump as well (less drag on the engine), I don't see any BMWs touching it in regards to handling and steering feel and that car came out in 1999/2000

Good clarification. It's appreciated.

Still going to get a LS3 C6?

[atl530i]

I test drove an F30 328i a few months back and was pretty amazed with it. The best part of the entire car was how BMW integrated the cup holders into the center console like a normal car. For me, this means more coin storage. The only thing I did not like about it was the fact that I am now forced to get iDrive (which I could deal with). I say this because it's not even touch screen which is worthless to me. The interior felt brighter than my E90 which I think is because my car has tinted windows so that's probably an unfair assessment.

The N20 is an amazing engine. The only way I would get an F30 328i is new or CPO. I like to work on my cars (my E90 has a thick folder of records from just me now) but it seems that BMW just made the entry level 3 Series that much more expensive to maintain if there is no warranty. My only gripe with the N20 is the fact that it sounds like a diesel when it first starts up (reminds me of valve tick I had in an E28 535i).

I like the exterior but it looks kind of weird with the way the headlights and grill are on the front.

[BMWs4ever]

Originally Posted by The Low Key OG

I was reading my issue of C&D about the F30 vs ATS. I noticed at the end that they said "We're convinced that the E90 would handily win a comparison test against the F30."

I won't spoil the winner for anyone, but what do E90 owners think about this statement? I think I would rather have an E90 than an F30...

I know it's been said already but I like my smooth 6 cylinder and non electric steering and it's those two reasons I'd take my car any day over a 4 cylinder and electric steering BMW. C/D is right

Oh I don't give a crap about better gas mileage. If I did I would have bought a Smart car.

[Meeni]

Originally Posted by atl530i

The best part of the entire car was how BMW integrated the cup holders into the center console like a normal car. For me, this means more coin storage.

Don't know if serious

For one, I really like the new front end of the F30, agreed, I never liked so much the e90 look anyway, so for me the F30 is a good bowl of fresh air.

But I am less than convinced by the plastic center console, it looks cheap compared to the e90. The rest of the interior is great, but really that's a disgrace.

On the engine side, I'd like to see a NA I6 again, but that's not gonna happen with fuel prices now. Sad but true.

For electric steering, the vague feel is not here to stay. Porsche sorted out the matter last year. While the 911 electric steering introduced 2 years ago received bad mouthing, the refresh on the Boxter received good reception, and everybody agrees that the electric steering feels just right. Seems to be a matter of adjustement, just like SMG used to be crappy and is now tuned properly.

[John 070]

Originally Posted by derrick603

Apparently, your market research is superior to the marketing departments of BMW, Audi, Cadillac, and Mercedes, all of whom sell $35k cars with turbo 4-cylinders.

Faulty premise here--does marketing research have the consumer's best interest in mind, or profit?

That's like your HR telling you that they're going to increase health care premiums, but also figuring out how to communicate with you in order to keep you healthier, in your interest, not theirs.

Think, people. If you don't base the E9x > Fxx on simply driving the two cars, just how in the world do you say that the steel subframe of the Fxx is better than the aluminum subframe of the E9x? No marketing research can draw that conclusion. Steel = cost savings.

[avocet]

Bimmer 4 bangers did ok in racing...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BMW_M12

[BMWs4ever]

Originally Posted by calicolorado

My only objection to the F30 is that one is now compelled to buy a turbo engine to drive one. Turbo power is absolutely great, and I have extensive experience with the care and feeding of a turbo Audi, but part of the 3 series appeal until now has been a wonderful NA 4 or 6 cylinder engine. BMW must think they cannot achieve competitive power outputs using direct injection and smaller displacement because they have embraced turbo completely. It's sad, because the euro 330i with direct injection made awesome power without turbos.

Adding a turbo makes the 3 (or any other regular turbo BMW) much more complicated and expensive to repair. This is unfortunate for people who don't treat cars as throwaway Kleenex. I'm young, but I have an old-school view toward cars and ownership. My 328i was bought because it had the perfect combination of normal aspiration, manual transmission and a comfortable, long lived leather interior and I hope to drive it through 300K miles.

The F30 has all of the electronic subsystems and computers an E90 has, only more AND it has turbocharging. How hard will it be to keep and love this car long term???

Your absolutely correct and was one of the reasons I bought a 328i vs the 335i

[derrick603]

Originally Posted by John 070

Faulty premise here--does marketing research have the consumer's best interest in mind, or profit?

The premise is not faulty at all. Of course maximizing profit is the ultimate goal, but even the highest margin product makes you no profit if no one wants to buy it.

[Michael Schott]

Originally Posted by Saintor

Those 2.0 are a joke. I got my C&D... here are interesting figures;

2013 ATS L4 2.0T 272HP / 2013 328i L4 2.0T 240HP / 2006 330i I6 3.0 255HP All manual.

Weight 3477lbs / 3390lbs / 3458lbs
On 1200miles+ 19mpg / 23mpg / 25mpg
0-60mph 6.3s / 5.6s / 5.9s
5-60mph 7.4s / 6.6s / 6.5s

Those 2.0T don't perform any better the larger NA engines of yore not even direct injected, neither are they significantly lighter.

We all know you hate the move to the N20 engine. You just can't let it go. However when you cite enthusiast car reviews in terms of fuel economy you are making a spurious comparison. These guys drive cars far harder in these tests than even the most hard core enthusiast does in daily driving. I drive my E90 328i MT pretty hard and get 21 MPG in the city but on the highway at 80 mph I get 31 mpg. The numbers for the N20 are much better than this based on evidence in fuel economy threads on this and other sites. Many average 24+ in the city and 36+ on the highway. It is abundantly clear that the N20 is faster than the N52 and it gets better fuel economy by at least 10%. Also, if you read the latest CD test, they love the engine except at idle.

[Bmoney2K4]

I read that article too. I think they were saying the E90's handling is far superior than the F 30s.

[ndog14]

Originally Posted by Michael Schott

We all know you hate the move to the N20 engine. You just can't let it go. However when you cite enthusiast car reviews in terms of fuel economy you are making a spurious comparison. These guys drive cars far harder in these tests than even the most hard core enthusiast does in daily driving. I drive my E90 328i MT pretty hard and get 21 MPG in the city but on the highway at 80 mph I get 31 mpg. The numbers for the N20 are much better than this based on evidence in fuel economy threads on this and other sites. Many average 24+ in the city and 36+ on the highway. It is abundantly clear that the N20 is faster than the N52 and it gets better fuel economy by at least 10%. Also, if you read the latest CD test, they love the engine except at idle.

The N20 is faster than which N52? What about the 270hp N52?