RE: BMW confirms new 374hp M240i flagship

[scoopdydoo]

So the Golf R will do 4.1s to 60mph in tests with '320hp' and BMW expect us to believe this will do it in 4.3s with '376hp'?

This will be properly rapid.

[Court_S]

scoopdydoo said:

So the Golf R will do 4.1s to 60mph in tests with '320hp' and BMW expect us to believe this will do it in 4.3s with '376hp'?

This will be properly rapid.

It does seem somewhat understated from a performance point of view. It’s not that much quicker (on paper at least) than the outgoing model which was RWD only.

[HM-2]

scoopdydoo said:

So the Golf R will do 4.1s to 60mph in tests with '320hp' and BMW expect us to believe this will do it in 4.3s with '376hp'?

This will be properly rapid.

VW quote 4.7 for the R, and several magazines have got it as low as 4.0.

The M340i was quoted as 4.2 despite being heavier than the 240i and having the same power. They've consistently tested around 3.8-3.9.

I suspect in reality the 240i will be in the 3.7-3.8 ballpark.

[cerb4.5lee]

HM-2 said:

scoopdydoo said:

So the Golf R will do 4.1s to 60mph in tests with '320hp' and BMW expect us to believe this will do it in 4.3s with '376hp'?

This will be properly rapid.

VW quote 4.7 for the R, and several magazines have got it as low as 4.0.

The M340i was quoted as 4.2 despite being heavier than the 240i and having the same power. They've consistently tested around 3.8-3.9.

I suspect in reality the 240i will be in the 3.7-3.8 ballpark.

It is mad at how quick cars have got over the years I reckon. When I was growing up anything under 4 seconds to 60 would've been dreamland performance. Now we have normal coupes/family cars doing it in that time!

[HM-2]

cerb4.5lee said:

HM-2 said:

scoopdydoo said:

So the Golf R will do 4.1s to 60mph in tests with '320hp' and BMW expect us to believe this will do it in 4.3s with '376hp'?

This will be properly rapid.

VW quote 4.7 for the R, and several magazines have got it as low as 4.0.

The M340i was quoted as 4.2 despite being heavier than the 240i and having the same power. They've consistently tested around 3.8-3.9.

I suspect in reality the 240i will be in the 3.7-3.8 ballpark.

It is mad at how quick cars have got over the years I reckon. When I was growing up anything under 4 seconds to 60 would've been dreamland performance. Now we have normal coupes/family cars doing it in that time!

The one that always ghasts my flabber is the outgoing E63 AMG in S guise. Two tonne executive saloon that does 0-60 in fractionally over 3 seconds (3.2 IIRC). And 0-100 in about 7. And with a good start, the right tyres and a smile from the gods, a quarter mile in the tens.

[Slowlygettingit]

Saw this car and a grey one with black trim instead of the chrome bits and they looked pretty good in the metal. I think it will be a grower.

It was interesting that 2 quite senior people (independently) agreed with me when I said the current styling was ugly and brash. They even said that senior people had complained to Munich but were told to suck it up as global sales figures are way ahead of forecasts.....

[arcticnick]

Can't believe no one has noticed the odd bit of plastic that connects the kidney grilles. Once you see it, you can't un-see it - it's like an odd moustache or unibrow.

Will probably disappear in Shadowline but I can't not notice it now.

[Clivey]

Beefmeister said:

So many people complaining that it's AWD and auto. Well maybe if people had actually bought the RWD cars in manual, they might have continued.

Instead it's just the internet car people wailing that they want a manual, but only in 3yrs when it's depreciated. It doesn't work that way, fools.

Every previous 6-cylinder 1 / 2 Series has been RWD only in the UK (as has every 1M, M2 & M3) so to say no-one bought them is just wrong.

Manuals, I’ll give you…but then, how many 3 or 5-Series GTs do you see? Yet they still carried on building them.

[Chapppers]

Did BMW bring Chris Bangle back and this is their way of announcing it?

[patrickkestrel]

Oh! My! God! This is utterly disgusting.
It evokes emotion of pure disgust, it is truly an art.....no doubt someone is sabotaging bmw designs recently.
I thought 4 series was from depths of design's hell but this car looks like a celebration of genetic defects.
X7 is pretty standing next to it.


There is not a single feature on this vehicle that is attractive. Of course everyone to their own taste but Jesus Christ!!!! if you looked liked this your own mother would obviously loved you but for sure she would have known you're ugly.

And as you can see I come in once a year to comment.
I DOUBT ANYTHING WILL BEAT THAT THIS YEAR....maybe another bimmer.

I drive e46 coupe btw......

Edited by patrickkestrel on Sunday 11th July 09:19

Edited by patrickkestrel on Sunday 11th July 09:19

[nickfrog]

patrickkestrel said:

Oh! My! God! This is utterly disgusting.
It evokes emotion of pure disgust, it is truly an art.....no doubt someone is sabotaging bmw designs recently.
I thought 4 series was from depths of design's hell but this car looks like a celebration of genetic defects.
X7 is pretty standing next to it.


There is not a single feature on this vehicle that is attractive. Of course everyone to their own taste but Jesus Christ!!!! if you looked liked this your own mother would obviously loved you but for sure she would have known you're ugly.

And as you can see I come in once a year to comment.
I DOUBT ANYTHING WILL BEAT THAT THIS YEAR....maybe another bimmer.

I drive e46 coupe btw......

Sounds like quite an extreme reaction. I think what you're saying is that you don't like how it looks, which is fair enough.

[IntriguedUser]

llcoolmac said:

That rear end is one of the worst looking things I've ever seen. If that design was in the back of an old Kia or Daewoo people would quite rightly say its a brutally ugly car.

BMW are horrific looking cars nowadays.

My exact argument with modern cars. Put a kia badge or hyundai badge on any Mercedes and they look the same

[nickfrog]

IntriguedUser said:

My exact argument with modern cars. Put a kia badge or hyundai badge on any Mercedes and they look the same

I agree. We have a Kia and it looks really good, probably as good as many modern Mercedes I like. Good news all round in my book.

[Court_S]

Chapppers said:

Did BMW bring Chris Bangle back and this is their way of announcing it?

At least his designs were cohesive. Apart from the 7 was was hideous then and remains so, I actually like his designs and think they’ve aged really well.

[J4CKO]

I dont mind this, its not as horrendous to be as to some but its some degrees away from being effortlessly good looking.

I did see this the other day on a Jayemm video, thought didn't have chance to watch it all, and it sort of made me think its more BMW looking at the front than BMW's are these days.

[Court_S]

J4CKO said:

I dont mind this, its not as horrendous to be as to some but its some degrees away from being effortlessly good looking.

I did see this the other day on a Jayemm video, thought didn't have chance to watch it all, and it sort of made me think its more BMW looking at the front than BMW's are these days.

The 240 is certainly one of their better recent efforts. My issue is the rear end and the silly exhaust trims.

That Hyundai you’ve posted is pretty BMW-esque

[K14A]

scoopdydoo said:

So the Golf R will do 4.1s to 60mph in tests with '320hp' and BMW expect us to believe this will do it in 4.3s with '376hp'?

This will be properly rapid.

Surely in modern times the 0-60 numbers are a tad archaic when most auto and DSG cars are geared with very agressive first, second and third gears just for that purpose. I feel a more realistic measure of performance to be something like 30 to 130.

[Clivey]

K14A said:

Surely in modern times the 0-60 numbers are a tad archaic when most auto and DSG cars are geared with very agressive first, second and third gears just for that purpose. I feel a more realistic measure of performance to be something like 30 to 130.

I miss when magazines would conduct comprehensive tests, rather than just regurgitating what's in the manufacturer's press release with a few cliches thrown in.

[J4CKO]

Clivey said:

K14A said:

Surely in modern times the 0-60 numbers are a tad archaic when most auto and DSG cars are geared with very agressive first, second and third gears just for that purpose. I feel a more realistic measure of performance to be something like 30 to 130.

I miss when magazines would conduct comprehensive tests, rather than just regurgitating what's in the manufacturer's press release with a few cliches thrown in.

Autocar still certainly do tests to that level, every week.

With Golf R's dipping into the threes and an M5 managing to nip under three, never mind the Tartan Tesla allegedly going under 2, already proven to be early twos without any messing it does make you wonder what the requirement is.

I cant say I actually ever do that kind of start, all about in gear times and anything remotely performance oriented is plenty quick enough in reality, if not our minds.

[The spinner of plates]

J4CKO said:

Autocar still certainly do tests to that level, every week.

With Golf R's dipping into the threes and an M5 managing to nip under three, never mind the Tartan Tesla allegedly going under 2, already proven to be early twos without any messing it does make you wonder what the requirement is.

I cant say I actually ever do that kind of start, all about in gear times and anything remotely performance oriented is plenty quick enough in reality, if not our minds.

My German pals tell me their mags used to measure 100-200kph.

Hold it at 100kph on the cruise control, floor it, stop the clock when it gets to 200.

It’s a really good measure for a powerful motorway car.