Volvo Seats

crinkleshoes · 16 Aug 2015 at 18:36

I said i/d.

I also have no idea what NXX number it may be, I couldn't care less... not everyone has a savant knowledge of car techical details/numberings/etc like you Fox

It doesn't really matter... all you have done is proven my point as to the silliness of nomencalture that doesn't actually have any relation to the real engine... which is only getting worse lately as power per litre increases.

I like the improvement in tech, but it's no reason to mislead buyers.

[TW]Fox · 16 Aug 2015 at 18:46

It's not really misleading or silly if you think about it.

It's the natural consequence of turbocharging and higher performance from smaller engines.

A 328i today offers more power and performance than a 328i from 15 years ago, should it really be badged as 320i because it has a 2 litre turbo?

What do you do with a 335i? Call it 335i because it's a 3 litre turbo? What about when it shared the range with a 330i? Two 330i's?

etc.

Engine size bears little resemblance to performance or position in a model range and hasn't done for some time, hence the increasing disconnect between badge and engine size.

Not that it's anything new - the 1982 BMW 316i had a 1.8 litre engine. But people seem forget that

crinkleshoes · 16 Aug 2015 at 18:55

330i + 330it or i turbo or whatever they like

Of course it's fair/necessary to differentiate, just misleading to those not in the know (arguably most car buyers).

Good example is one you mentioned... the 328.

There is a significant performance difference between a turbo 4 pot and an NA 6 pot... even if they both have the exact same bhp and torque figures.

You'd usually tell on a test drive, sure...

[TW]Fox · 16 Aug 2015 at 18:57

crinkleshoes said:
Good example is one you mentioned... the 328.

There is a significant performance difference between a turbo 4 pot and an NA 6 pot... even if they both have the exact same bhp and torque figures.

You'd usually tell on a test drive, sure...

No, there isn't. Infact actually there is - the other direction!

The 2011 528i with the 3 litre 258bhp Six Cylinder engine is half a second slower to 60 than the 2011 528i with the revised 2 litre 245bhp 4 cylinder turbo. It offers MORE performance than the 6 did. This is a particularly good example because it's one of the few cases where it's possible to directly compare the turbo 4 with the N/A 6 in an otherwise absolutely identical model with identical gearbox, weight, etc (330i v 328i isn't a fair comparison as all the 330i are E90 and all the F30's are 328i*). And it demonstrates that the turbo 4 loses none of the performance offered by it's 6 cylinder predecessor.

It lacks a lot of it's refinement, absolutely. And IMHO it's poorer as a result - but the performance is absolutely there and performance and economy is what people care about over refinement these days.

*Yes, I know, the 330i is back in the LCI F30 but you see my point and I don't think any are on the road yet.

crinkleshoes · 16 Aug 2015 at 19:16

I'm talking about usage / pleasantness of driving / etc.

6 pot = smoother than 4 pot... like for like (ie same bhp/torque figures as mentioned above)

Economy will be better on the 4 pot yes... but the 6 pot will be the nicer drive...

The difference you mentioned will be the torque, bhp is less relevant here...

[TW]Fox · 16 Aug 2015 at 19:18

I don't disagree that the smoothness and refinement isn't there - I say as much above - but the performance is there and sadly for those of us who like smoothness, performance is what matters to more people, therefore badging the 328i as '320i' when in reality it's as quick as the old 330i was seems counter productive.

The 4 cylinder turbo is a performance match or better over the 6 pots it has replaced.

Dis86 · 16 Aug 2015 at 19:18

crinkleshoes said:
I'm talking about usage / pleasantness of driving / etc.

6 pot = smoother than 4 pot... like for like (ie same bhp/torque figures as mentioned above)

Economy will be better on the 4 pot yes... but the 6 pot will be the nicer drive...

The difference you mentioned will be the torque, bhp is less relevant here...

Who says it'll be a nicer drive? Some people love the turbo kick. I know I do!

crinkleshoes · 16 Aug 2015 at 19:19

I'm a bit annoyed that they're releasing the 340 as a marginally improved 335... the 340 *should* be the same epic V8 as the E9X M3... even if it's a bit de-tuned.

But then I suppose that V8 only really comes to life when it tips over 7000rpm.

crinkleshoes · 16 Aug 2015 at 19:22

[TW]Fox;28447118 said:
I don't disagree that the smoothness and refinement isn't there - I say as much above - but the performance is there and sadly for those of us who like smoothness, performance is what matters to more people, therefore badging the 328i as '320i' when in reality it's as quick as the old 330i was seems counter productive.

The 4 cylinder turbo is a performance match or better over the 6 pots it has replaced.

That's just our definition of performance differing slightly... I use it to encompass all of how an engine performs (ie, inclusive of smoothness / refinement / driving pleasure / etc). I don't think we disagree here as much as the words might suggest.

Dyno figures are leading the way for most sure... but given the option to drive a 2l 4 pot turbo with 400bhp and a 4l v8 na with 400 bhp... i'd pick the v8 any day as it'll be nicer to drive all the time... even if the turboed 4 pot might be that little bit quicker on a track.

crinkleshoes · 16 Aug 2015 at 19:26

Dis86 said:
Who says it'll be a nicer drive? Some people love the turbo kick. I know I do!

I do too... but that doesn't really exist anymore unless it's a custom build.

Manufacturers have been working for years to hide the fact a car even has a turbo.

I'd say I'm quite sensitive to driving characteristics but I have to admit... I didn't realise the 420i I drove last year even had a turbo until I looked under the bonnet.

It missed the top-end peak of your average NA engine... but the torque curve feels a lot more like a supercharger than a turbo now and this is happening across many vehicles.

Great for minimising low-down lag, not so good for those of us who like that torque kick.

It's a great implementation in the new cars, I can't discredit the work they've done.

I just prefer the older style implementation for the fun aspect... or a bigger displacement engine.

I'll be driving an M4 on track in two weeks... I'll be interested to see how the new turbo-6 is performing.