[fueledbymetal]

The latest Motor Trend has an article on the 320 past & present and they found their 2013 tester pulled more g's and was faster around the figure 8 than the current 328i - .91g, 26.2 @ .7g vs .89g, 26.3 @ .7g for the 328i. I found this surprising since they share the same engine so there shouldn't be any weight advantage there. So is there a legitimate dynamic advantage of the 320i or is it due to drivers, conditions, or the 320i being lighter due to being de-contented?

[Michael Schott]

No legit reason. Equal conditions, tires and drivers, the 328 should be faster.

[hmc]

320i is 100 lbs lighter. According to BMWUSA website, automatic 320i has 3295 lbs and automatic 328i has 3410 lbs.

[vitriol]

Worth noting that the 320 is barely faster around the track. It's hardly a runaway victory.

I bet, if the same cars were run around the same track 10 times, half of those times the 328 would be faster.

In other words, they're evenly matched on the track.

[Vervain]

What a pleasant surprise! Cool article.

[300hp]

Originally Posted by Anodite10

What a pleasant surprise! Cool article.

+1

[bavarianride]

Recent C&D article did say that 320i is 1 second slower 50 to 70 mph than 328i in highway passing. That helps a lot in daily driving situations.

[speedyvk]

Originally Posted by Anodite10

What a pleasant surprise! Cool article.

+1

[Cyberdemon]

G ratings are primarily a function of weight and grip. A slightly lighter weight plus tires that are either the same or possibly slightly better will give you a better cornering car.

With that said, upgrading to a set of sticky summer tires and you'll suddenly be ahead again in the 328i, so it's not worth confusing the issue. That extra power would be noticeable on the street and the track.

[300hp]

Originally Posted by Cyberdemon

G ratings are primarily a function of weight and grip. A slightly lighter weight plus tires that are either the same or possibly slightly better will give you a better cornering car.

With that said, upgrading to a set of sticky summer tires and you'll suddenly be ahead again in the 328i, so it's not worth confusing the issue. That extra power would be noticeable on the street and the track.

IS350 still gets beat by the 320i around the figure 8. The 320i is lighter and pulls the same amount of Gs on the figure 8 while wearing run flats

I think the 320 is just a great performer and the factors you set out do not impact this test as much as we would like to think.

[nicknaz]

Would be helpful if the magazine posted info on the tires and conditions when testing.

My understanding from the BMWUSA website is that the 320 sport package comes with 225 front 255 rear tires and the 328 sport line comes with 225 wide front and rear (M sport line needed for 225 front / 255 rear tires).

The extra width of the rear tires, plus a difference in the tire compound or test conditions could very well account for the difference.

Not really a surprise.. E90 328 had similar skid pad / figure results vs E90 335.

[Vervain]

Originally Posted by 300hp

IS350 still gets beat by the 320i around the figure 8. The 320i is lighter and pulls the same amount of Gs on the figure 8 while wearing run flats

I think the 320 is just a great performer and the factors you set out do not impact this test as much as we would like to think.

This just gets sweeter!

This reminds me of a really interesting article in a car magazine where they touted the 320i as the overall best of the 3 series range (not trying to sound like a douche!) in SA. I was pretty shocked as I thought the 328i deserved it due to great pricing and performance. But recently I've been realising how amazing this car really is. Quite affordable and decent performance too

[300hp]

Originally Posted by Anodite10

This just gets sweeter!

This reminds me of a really interesting article in a car magazine where they touted the 320i as the overall best of the 3 series range (not trying to sound like a douche!) in SA. I was pretty shocked as I thought the 328i deserved it due to great pricing and performance. But recently I've been realising how amazing this car really is. Quite affordable and decent performance too

You should post the article. Seems less is more these days.

Motortrend seems to be implying the 3 series recipe is most evident in the 320i.

Here is the online version
http://blogs.motortrend.com/more-tha...#axzz2f5enrOMZ

[Vervain]

Originally Posted by 300hp

You should post the article. Seems less is more these days.

Motortrend seems to be implying the 3 series recipe is most evident in the 320i.

Here is the online version
http://blogs.motortrend.com/more-tha...#axzz2f5enrOMZ

Here it is. It is short and succinct:

FIT for purpose: when a design is suitable for its intended use. It might sound like we’re damning the BMW 320i with faint praise when we apply this term to the entry-level 3 Series, but few cars can claim to be fit for purpose. A Mercedes-Benz S-Class definitely is. Toyota Hilux and Porsche 911? Yep. The 320i? Undoubtedly. And here’s why…
Where the bottom-rung petrol-powered 3 Series used to be the runt of the litter, the F30 320i surprised us with its performance during testing. The 180 kW/350 N.m 328i Sports Steptronic that we evaluated in May 2012 accelerated from 80 to 120 km/h in 4,72 seconds. This 320i, fitted with the same Sports Steptronic eight-speed automatic transmission, took only 5,58 seconds. It was never slower than 0,5 seconds in any of the 20 km/h in-gear acceleration increments than its pricier stablemate.
Furthermore, the 320i reached 100 km/h from a standstill in 8,11 seconds and felt even faster in the daily grind. BMW SA still offers model-designation deletion as a no-cost option. See where we’re going with this?
The 320i and 328i share the 2,0-litre turbopetrol four-cylinder engine. But without the weight of six-cylinder-equalling expectation that hindered the 328i in our test, the 320i’s use of this powerplant surprised all who experienced it.
The 2,0-litre retains the smoothness of the previous generation’s naturally aspirated version, but adds a wallop of low-down grunt and some welcome zing at the top end. Our sole criticism is that it still sounds like a diesel engine on start-up, but this soon disappears as the powerplant reaches operating temperature.
Our test vehicle was equipped with a number of dynamics-enhancing options, including Adaptive M running gear (which features adaptive damping and lowered suspension; R10 900), variable sport steering (R3 000) and 17-inch allow wheels (an inch larger than standard; part of the Sport Line package), which made objective evaluation difficult. However, judging by the favourable comments the 320i’s ride, steering and handling garnered from the test team, we’d advise potential buyers to consider these options.
In fact, the F30’s new-found rolling refinement remains the most significant improvement over the E90, a vehicle hampered by its stiff ride and relatively high levels of road noise. That BMW has managed to make these strides without negatively affecting its breadwinner’s poised, unflappable nature is deeply impressive.
Moving inside, we were relieved to find that this 3 Series, unlike the 328i Modern Line test unit with its bilious oyster-coloured trim, featured Sport Line specification.
Aside from a number of gloss-black trim items on the exterior, this package includes red trim strips (less garish than you’d think) and larger black surfaces, red accent stitching and sports seats complemented by a smaller steering wheel with a thicker rim. Despite the garnish and the glitzy infotainment screen that accompanies the best iteration yet of the iDrive system, it remains a classily conservative cabin that just misses a best-in-class gong because of some suspect material choices along the centre console and a slightly hollow sound when closing the doors.
We’ve yet to test a close-to-standard 3 Series, but the basic spec is sound (leather, auto lights and wipers, cruise and climate control are standard) and admittedly the numerous below-the-surface extras don’t add much to the occupants’ sense of well-being.
They will be grateful for the additional space compared with the E90, however. In all measurable planes, the F30 has improved, especially in rear-seat leg- and headroom. The boot is now larger and the shape more regular, but at 328 dm3 it is still bested by the Audi A4’s 376 dm3.
Test Summary
In the voting for our match-up section, every team member bar one picked the 320i over the equivalent Mercedes-Benz C-Class and Audi A4. Therefore, until we’ve tested a 320d (two CAR staffers have driven this model and commented unfavourably on its lack of mechanical refinement), there’s little doubt that the 320i is the best version of the new 3 Series and probably the best individual model in the premium D-segment.
This entry-level version provides strong performance, averaged just 6,9 litres/100 km on our fuel route, is refined, comfortable and sensibly priced in its segment. It does everything it needs to very, very well. Fit for purpose? We’d counter that the 320i is perfect for all its intended purposes.

Source: http://www.carmag.co.za/road-tests/b...ts-steptronic/

Bear in mind that this article is focused on the first-look of the 320i. It's from September 2012.

Also take note that the tested 0-100 times are not close to manufacturer's claims. This is largely due to the fact the Carmag SA tests all cars with two adults sitting in the car and a full tank of petrol.

Also know that I don't intend to belittle other F30 models nor do I have any insecurities about my entry-level car, by posting this article up.

[Vervain]

Here is the comparison data between the 320i and 328i that is referred to in the article I posted above. They are scans from the magazine itself. Sorry about the quality.

[300hp]

Originally Posted by Anodite10

Here it is. It is short and succinct:

Source: http://www.carmag.co.za/road-tests/b...ts-steptronic/

Bear in mind that this article is focused on the first-look of the 320i. It's from September 2012.

Also take note that the tested 0-100 times are not close to manufacturer's claims. This is largely due to the fact the Carmag SA tests all cars with two adults sitting in the car and a full tank of petrol.

Also know that I don't intend to belittle other F30 models nor do I have any insecurities about my entry-level car, by posting this article up.

Thanks. Good to see reviews from other countries. I often wonder why we don't see more of these given the international membership here

[Vervain]

Originally Posted by 300hp

Thanks. Good to see reviews from other countries. I often wonder why we don't see more of these given the international membership here

I've also not seen many reviews about the 320i on this forum from countries other than the US. Hopefully more will pop up soon.

Check out the performance comparison that I posted above between the 320i and 328i..

[tdizzle]

Cool, the car with the smaller/lighter engine handled better but was trounced in acceleration.

Should we be surprised?

[Vervain]

Originally Posted by tdizzle

Cool, the car with the smaller/lighter engine handled better but was trounced in acceleration.

Should we be surprised?

Lol, I honestly thought that the combination of handling and better performance would make the 328i faster. I didn't realise how significantly weight comes into play for this small test.

[300hp]

Originally Posted by Anodite10

I've also not seen many reviews about the 320i on this forum from countries other than the US. Hopefully more will pop up soon.

Check out the performance comparison that I posted above between the 320i and 328i..

I saw it, there is a lot of information there which I am still going through. It's refreshing to read reviews by a different set of people other than the American folks

[Vervain]

Originally Posted by 300hp

I saw it, there is a lot of information there which I am still going through. It's refreshing to read reviews by a different set of people other than the American folks

Couldn't agree more.

[Cyberdemon]

Originally Posted by 300hp

IS350 still gets beat by the 320i around the figure 8. The 320i is lighter and pulls the same amount of Gs on the figure 8 while wearing run flats

I think the 320 is just a great performer and the factors you set out do not impact this test as much as we would like to think.

What does the IS350 have to do with anything?

A figure 8 is nothing more than a glorified skid pad. It's great as a magazine metric, but it's a number that's easily modified.

1: Not all run-flats are created equal. It's well known BMW configures their cars with different tires even in the same class. I'm willing to bet one set of those tires provides marginally better grip. Even if it's the exact same tire, different tires will perform differently based on their wear, temperature, and PSI.

I could make the exact same car, on the exact same tires perform differently in the skidpad/figure 8 just by adjusting a few PSI in or out of the tires.

Also, the weight difference posted in the second set of posts shows a much narrower weight gap. The weight of the car has a lot more to do with how it is configured. You can bet that just adding a navigation system and some seat heaters and window washers will tweak the weight of the car.

This isn't rocket science, and skidpad scores that are .1 second different on different cars on different days, don't mean the car will lap a race track faster, out corner you in a turn, etc.

Skidpads are no different than dyno tests.

I can take my car to 5 different dynos, and do 5 runs on 5 different days, and every one will give me a different number - you have to take that information for what it is, and not for what it isn't.