[mookie45]

I'm definitely going to wait for the upgraded/tweaked n55 motor.

[volsfan0911]

That 0-60 estimate on the N55 motor is (as typical with the Germans) - "conservative". You can find real world examples of sub 5 second runs easily right now with the current E90/E91 335i and given excellent track conditions, I wouldn't call breaking into the 12's ridiculous either on a stock setup. So throw the 5.4 0-100 kph stuff out the window and say that we'll get 0-60 mph of 5.0 seconds or less here in the US market easily. 13.2 quarter mile and pushing 110 on the trap speed? Sounds reasonable to me.

[MonsterM]

The N54/N55 are both "beasts". The numbers don't do it justice. In real life scenario they blow the doors off the N20.

Here are numbers for the N52 328i Manual VS the N20 Z4 for comparisons sake:

http://www.caranddriver.com/var/ezfl...fdee60f558.pdf

n52 328i
0-60 5.9 secs
1/4 mile 14.6 @ 96 mph
0-100 mph 16.1
0-120 24.8 secs
5mph - 60mph 6.3 seconds

n20 Z4 (estimated)

PERFORMANCE (C/D EST):
Zero to 60 mph: 5.7–5.8 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 14.5–14.6 sec
Top speed: 155 mph
"BMW claims the new engine brings 0-to-60 acceleration with the manual down by 0.1 second to 5.5 and the optional eight-speed automatic will better the time of the old six-speed auto by 0.4 second, dropping it to 5.6. We figure both guesses might be a bit optimistic. Expect the sprint to take a couple more 10ths with either transmission."

IMO I don't see what the big deal is about the N20. On paper so far it seems its barely, if at all faster than the N52. No way will it be any close to N55. Only advantage I see is a easy tune (chip) and slightly better MPG. I guess I will have to wait and drive one for myself. I already own a vehicle equipped with VAG 2.0 TSI and I would take the N52 over it anytime, maybe besides uphill runs lol.

[MonsterM]

Originally Posted by volsfan0911

That 0-60 estimate on the N55 motor is (as typical with the Germans) - "conservative". You can find real world examples of sub 5 second runs easily right now with the current E90/E91 335i and given excellent track conditions, I wouldn't call breaking into the 12's ridiculous either on a stock setup. So throw the 5.4 0-100 kph stuff out the window and say that we'll get 0-60 mph of 5.0 seconds or less here in the US market easily. 13.2 quarter mile and pushing 110 on the trap speed? Sounds reasonable to me.

This.

[RPM90]

Originally Posted by MonsterM

The N54/N55 are both "beasts". The numbers don't do it justice. In real life scenario they blow the doors off the N20.

Here are numbers for the N52 328i Manual VS the N20 Z4 for comparisons sake:

http://www.caranddriver.com/var/ezfl...fdee60f558.pdf

n52 328i
0-60 5.9 secs
1/4 mile 14.6 @ 96 mph
0-100 mph 16.1
0-120 24.8 secs
5mph - 60mph 6.3 seconds

n20 Z4 (estimated)

PERFORMANCE (C/D EST):
Zero to 60 mph: 5.7–5.8 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 14.5–14.6 sec
Top speed: 155 mph
"BMW claims the new engine brings 0-to-60 acceleration with the manual down by 0.1 second to 5.5 and the optional eight-speed automatic will better the time of the old six-speed auto by 0.4 second, dropping it to 5.6. We figure both guesses might be a bit optimistic. Expect the sprint to take a couple more 10ths with either transmission."

IMO I don't see what the big deal is about the N20. On paper so far it seems its barely, if at all faster than the N52. No way will it be any close to N55. Only advantage I see is a easy tune (chip) and slightly better MPG. I guess I will have to wait and drive one for myself. I already own a vehicle equipped with VAG 2.0 TSI and I would take the N52 over it anytime, maybe besides uphill runs lol.

The big deal is that the new 2.0 turbo gives at least the same power, actually a bit more, AND it gives much better MPG.
That's a winning big deal, imo.

When we see real tested numbers for the N20 Z4, then we'll be able to compare it to the NA 3.0.

The 2.0T should improve the numbers for the 328i, if the weight of the new 328i is the same. If it's lower in weight, then acceleration performance will be even better.
Plus, you can't do much to tune the NA 3.0 whereas there will be software tunes for the 2.0T once it's released to the public.
Still, I do LOVE the NA 3.0 at high rpm wail. Turbo's tend to muffle the brilliant mechanical cacophony of a NA BMW engine.

Given that the front end weight should be lighter on a 2.0T 328i compared to the 3.0 twin scroll N55, with sport pkg the 328i may actually be the better handler, even though it will be slower straight line than the 335i.

I have a 135i MT now and it has power. But, I rarely get a chance to use all of it, and given it's low rpm torque tuning I can't get better MPG even if I am driving conservatively. Plus, it does't handle as well as the current 3 series with sport suspension. That is a let down.
I may try a bit less power with potentially better handling next time around.
Make mine an imola red with back interior, M sport, MT, 328i with potential for software power upgrades and better MPG, sounds like I may give this one a try.

Check this out:
http://www.bmwblog.com/2011/10/05/vi...28i-dyno-test/

[Ti335]

Originally Posted by Saintor

BTW, C&D clocked the 5-60mph in a Z4 N20 in 7.1s... not very good compared to the 0-60mph they got (in 5.6s).

Of course 5-60 is slower than 0-60...you are starting in 2nd gear. But why would you want to do that??

[dday]

Originally Posted by Ti335

Of course 5-60 is slower than 0-60...you are starting in 2nd gear. But why would you want to do that??

Why would you be in 2nd?

[Ti335]

Originally Posted by dday

Why would you be in 2nd?

With a modern auto gearbox, if you gently roll off the line to hit 5 mph, it would shift into 2nd right away.

[ATX78703]

The issue here isn't how 328i compares to 335i...

it's that 328i f30 is a huge upgrade over the e90, while the 335i didn't really get jack sht with the redesign

[SavvyByNature]

Originally Posted by ATX78703

The issue here isn't how 328i compares to 335i...

it's that 328i f30 is a huge upgrade over the e90, while the 335i didn't really get jack sht with the redesign

I don't know if I would say the new N20 engine is a huge upgrade over a N52.

The engine has more torque and slightly more horsepower but I highly doubt it will have the reliability of the N52 due to the HPFP. Also, i4's are inherently unbalanced, so now you add mounts and other gizmo's to muffle the vibrations.

The N20 looks to be a good engine, however I would've stuck to the I6 or detuned-TTI6 (smaller 6-cyl) due to constraints/extras needed to make a i4 work at the same level.

[justinnum1]

Yea, im excited about the N20, the 6cyl is nice, but a joke at low rpms. The F30 328 is a nice upgrade over the E90

[hector]

[QUOTE=RPM90;10663550]...

Given that the front end weight should be lighter on a 2.0T 328i compared to the 3.0 twin scroll N55, with sport pkg the 328i may actually be the better handler, even though it will be slower straight line than the 335i.

I have a 135i MT now and it has power. But, I rarely get a chance to use all of it,... Plus, it does't handle as well as the current 3 series with sport suspension...
I may try a bit less power with potentially better handling next time around.
Make mine an imola red with back interior, M sport, MT, 328i...
QUOTE]

i like your points re power vs. handling; a mt, sp 328 sounds like a good way to go. on a somewhat related point; how do you feel about the mt and steptronic costing the same i.e. you have to pay for the auto even though you're not getting it?

[justinnum1]

[QUOTE=hector;10850144]

Originally Posted by RPM90

...

Given that the front end weight should be lighter on a 2.0T 328i compared to the 3.0 twin scroll N55, with sport pkg the 328i may actually be the better handler, even though it will be slower straight line than the 335i.

I have a 135i MT now and it has power. But, I rarely get a chance to use all of it,... Plus, it does't handle as well as the current 3 series with sport suspension...
I may try a bit less power with potentially better handling next time around.
Make mine an imola red with back interior, M sport, MT, 328i...
QUOTE]

i like your points re power vs. handling; a mt, sp 328 sounds like a good way to go. on a somewhat related point; how do you feel about the mt and steptronic costing the same i.e. you have to pay for the auto even though you're not getting it?

Yea, 328i sportline, manual, and maybe the msport suspension option seem like its going to be a hell of a car.

[Nero7]

Will the performance (F30 328i, 0-60) be worse or better with 8-speed automatic sport and x-drive? I know that the car will be heavier, but will it have much better grip with xdrive and faster shifting with sport automatic? I hope the new N20 engine will be easy to tune .

[Ti335]

Originally Posted by Nero7

Will the performance (F30 328i, 0-60) be worse or better with 8-speed automatic sport and x-drive? I know that the car will be heavier, but will it have much better grip with xdrive and faster shifting with sport automatic? I hope the new N20 engine will be easy to tune .

It's it's anything like Audi (which has the same 8-speed gearbox), the automatic should be slightly faster.

[Saintor]

Originally Posted by Ti335

Of course 5-60 is slower than 0-60...you are starting in 2nd gear. But why would you want to do that??

No, they floor it and it starts in 1st. Don't try to invent excuses that don't exist.

[335fourdoor]

i bet terry burger will get n20 in 300hp club very quickly. with that i can see it run
13.0/107 quarter mile with 8 speed auto

[RPM90]

[QUOTE=hector;10850144]

Originally Posted by RPM90

...

Given that the front end weight should be lighter on a 2.0T 328i compared to the 3.0 twin scroll N55, with sport pkg the 328i may actually be the better handler, even though it will be slower straight line than the 335i.

I have a 135i MT now and it has power. But, I rarely get a chance to use all of it,... Plus, it does't handle as well as the current 3 series with sport suspension...
I may try a bit less power with potentially better handling next time around.
Make mine an imola red with back interior, M sport, MT, 328i...
QUOTE]

i like your points re power vs. handling; a mt, sp 328 sounds like a good way to go. on a somewhat related point; how do you feel about the mt and steptronic costing the same i.e. you have to pay for the auto even though you're not getting it?

I'm not happy about that.
It's clear that giving a brand new high tech 8spd auto as standard, means that that cost was absorbed into the overall price of the car.
So, MT buyers don't get a break at all, even though we are getting a lower cost trans.

I would be happy if MT 3's actually came equipped with extra no cost options. I think if someone buys a 3 with MT, then they should get the optional M sport suspension included in the cost.
Or, MT buyers get a lower cost sport or M sport package.

These modern automatics cost between $1200-$1600 extra on top of the base MT price. MT buyers get nothing other than to subsidize the cost of the automatic.

Perhaps BMW is trying to push MT's away because modern automatics actually get better MPG.

I'd like a no cost DCT option along with the 8spd automatic.
The DCT is a sportier automatic, and the slush box 8spd automatic is the smoother cruising and traffic transmission.
Why not offer that to us?
I'd gladly take a DCT over the slushbox if an MT weren't offered.
BMW just needs to change the gear ratios of the current 7spd DCT so that it has a proper over drive gear, or maybe even 2 over drive gears for better MPG and lower rpm cruising.

[justinnum1]

[QUOTE=RPM90;10898876]

Originally Posted by hector

I'm not happy about that.
It's clear that giving a brand new high tech 8spd auto as standard, means that that cost was absorbed into the overall price of the car.
So, MT buyers don't get a break at all, even though we are getting a lower cost trans.

I would be happy if MT 3's actually came equipped with extra no cost options. I think if someone buys a 3 with MT, then they should get the optional M sport suspension included in the cost.
Or, MT buyers get a lower cost sport or M sport package.

These modern automatics cost between $1200-$1600 extra on top of the base MT price. MT buyers get nothing other than to subsidize the cost of the automatic.

Perhaps BMW is trying to push MT's away because modern automatics actually get better MPG.

I'd like a no cost DCT option along with the 8spd automatic.
The DCT is a sportier automatic, and the slush box 8spd automatic is the smoother cruising and traffic transmission.
Why not offer that to us?
I'd gladly take a DCT over the slushbox if an MT weren't offered.
BMW just needs to change the gear ratios of the current 7spd DCT so that it has a proper over drive gear, or maybe even 2 over drive gears for better MPG and lower rpm cruising.

+1

[rocco]

N20 might be faster under ideal conditions ... but heat soak? humidity? AC on with a car full of passengers? There's not an underlying 3-liter 6 to keep it moving. I6 with fewer horses and lb-ft for me, thank you.

[PostModernHero]

Originally Posted by RPM90

The big deal is that the new 2.0 turbo gives at least the same power, actually a bit more, AND it gives much better MPG.
That's a winning big deal, imo.

Um, no. You are comparing the N52 in purposely neutered form. Compared to the N52 in full 255 reliable HP the N20 is FAIL...

[Bimmerlover76]

One thing I haven't noticed are comments that add to the typical N52 owner's comments about how the I-6 is "enough power for me" etc. Etc. etc.

This said, I agree with their opinions about the N52. It is plenty and now that it's getting a large boost in torque and modest bump in HP?! Wow! Can't wait!