Hoovey689

iTrader: (16)

2014 BMW 320i

Gallery:
http://www.autoblog.com/photos/2014-...photo-2121131/


When BMW switched its entry level 3 Series, the 328i, from a naturally aspirated, 3.0-liter six-cylinder to a turbocharged, 2.0-liter four-cylinder, we weren't entirely sure what to think. Sure, from a pure numbers perspective, the new 2.0-liter cooked the old 3.0's goose, delivering more torque at far more accessible engine speeds while boosting horsepower and fuel economy.

While we miss that revvy six-pot, the numbers for the 2.0 were just way too good to pass up. Then we received news of an even less-powerful 2.0-liter 3 Series – the 320i. This was interesting, as it saw BMW delving into a power level previously owned solely by the anemic Lexus IS 250 and its six-cylinder engine.

Could BMW make a sub-200-horsepower sedan that still drove the way we expected a 3 Series to drive? To find out, we borrowed the new 320i for a week of testing.

Driving Notes

• For the 320i, BMW has detuned its 2.0-liter, turbocharged four-cylinder from 240 hp to 180 hp, all of which is available from 5,000 to 6,250 rpm. Torque is similarly taken down, from 255 pound-feet to 184 lb-ft, spread from 1,250 to 4,500 rpm. A six-speed manual is available as standard, although our tester was fitted with the more frugal eight-speed automatic. Rear-wheel drive is standard and what we found ourselves with, while BMW's xDrive system offers some all-weather ability for the low-powered sedan.
• Regardless of which transmission is chosen, the 320i can hit 60 in 7.1 seconds. Hardly brisk, we'll agree, as the average hot hatch can out-sprint this BMW. But in practice, the readily available torque and excellent transmission result in a car that feels quicker than its numbers indicate. We were rarely wanting for power while testing the 320i, as a bootload of torque was seemingly always ready to be called up. Having the smaller engine doesn't feel like a handicap, like it does in the Lexus IS 250. We can thank the broad spread of torque for this.
• This is a responsive engine, too, without much in the way of turbo lag. In fact, this author prefers its smoother dynamics to that of the more powerful 2.0-liter in the 328i. It doesn't sound half bad either, with the single-pipe exhaust delivering a smooth, refined note that isn't intrusive or noisy.
• The eight-speed automatic is the excellent 8HP unit from ZF, which, if we're honest, is one of the best traditional, torque-converter-equipped automatic on sale today. It is quick on upshifts and downshifts, and will happily drop multiple gears in a single go. It doesn't need to be thought about - it just delivers whatever the driver needs, seemingly before the driver knows it. In practice, the transmission responded well in manual mode. It still doesn't beat a dual-clutch system for involvement (or for that matter, a proper manual trans), but it can provide some entertainment in the right circumstances.
• The ride provided by the sporty suspension certainly adds a degree of entertainment to the 320i. It feels poised and balanced, with progressive body roll that comes on through a turn. Despite the sportier ride, though, the 320i is still very much a comfortable car. BMW's decision to fit 18-inch wheels as the largest option on this model makes for a ride that isn't compromised by the firmer suspension.
• Opting for the least-powerful 3 Series is also a boon to fuel economy, with BMW claiming our auto-trans car will net 24 miles per gallon in the city and 36 mpg on the highway. We certainly had no issues hitting right in the middle of those two, recording numbers in the high 20s.
• Aiding the fight for fuel economy is BMW's Driving Dynamics Control, which features an excellent Eco Pro setting. Paired with a smooth stop-start system, we imagine netting over 30 mpg would be a fairly easy task for a conscientious driver.
• Not surprisingly, the 320i is the cheapest member of the 3 Series family. Prices start at $32,750 for our rear-drive model, while opting for xDrive adds $2,000. Our tester's sole option was the $1,300 Sport Package, so while we had a very reasonable as-tested price of $34,975 (including a $925 destination charge), that number only tells part of the story.
• Our tester was stingy on the standard equipment. The sport seats were unheated and featured manual controls, while a dumbed-down version of the brand's iDrive control handled the radio and Bluetooth functions. Moreover, those infotainment options lacked things like streaming Bluetooth audio and satellite radio. And for some reason, the USB input wouldn't recognize the iPhone 5 we attempted to use for some extra tunes. The lack of rear park sensors added insult to injury.
• It's not that the 3 Series is a bad car for lacking these features, but it's simply something prospective customers should keep in mind before making a purchase - a well-equipped 320i isn't going to be anywhere near that $32,750 starting price. Fitted with the missing features we listed above, the price pushes $41,000.
• The 320i puts BMW into difficult territory. Between the base price and a well-equipped price, there are no shortage of upstart competitors, from a Ford Fusion Titanium to more traditionally luxurious brands, like the new Mercedes-Benz CLA-Class. If you really want a BMW, the 320i retains the brand's pedigree well – it's just going to cost you.

http://www.autoblog.com/2013/12/24/2...ew-quick-spin/

yowps3

One thing I don't understand is why people label the IS250 as anemic, it has become cliche.

The IS250 punches well above its weight considering how it's quite heavy and only has a small 2.5L V6.
It owns the N/A base 3 series of the same year.

The BMW 320i is nothing special considering it has a turbo and the IS250 only has 0.5L of extra displacement.

SteVTEC

If I bought another 3-series, besides an M, this is the one I'd get. Seriously. Just can't justify spending $45-50k for a 4-cylinder 328i. Can't do it. And $50k+ for a 335i sedan with the proper Inline-6 is too much, considering this F30 generation has gone backwards in a number of areas. $40k or so for a reasonably equipped 320i that still has more than enough power, gets great gas mileage, and drives and handles like a BMW but without much of the price premium is appealing. 0-60 in 7.1s is plenty.

SteVTEC

Even Consumer Reports says the IS250's engine is anemic and that you have to wind the crap out of it to get anywhere, all while it drinks fuel. Punches well above its weight?? The 2.0L turbos have lots of torque so no need to wind them out, and because of that can run extra tall gearing and are extremely efficient. Lower friction also. Not sure which base N/A 3-series you're referring to, because there isn't one anymore, but even the E90 325/328i still smoked the IS250, because they weren't actually 2.5 or 2.8L but all 3.0L engines. The original E90 325i was very under-rated at 215hp/185tq.

Joeb427

iTrader: (1)

7.7 to 0-60 in a $40K IS F-Sport is anemic.I know it's anemic.I owned a '06 IS250.
A 4 cyl '13 Accord 0-60 is 7.8.


The 320 is an oddball BMW model to me.

LexBob2

I agree. The performance of the IS250 is adequate at best.

lamar411

IS250 is perfectly fine for the non enthusiast or someone who doesn't need a ton of power. But the 320i is what I would get. Price is low enough that it is not completely rediculous once you add the options.

RXSF

kudos to BMW for putting in an 8 speed on the cheapest model. 7.1 seconds to 60 sounds a bit optimistic.

Hoovey689

iTrader: (16)

Well in regards to the IS250 it shouldn't be viewed as a V6. It's more a large four cylinder with 204hp and 185lbft, the two extra cylinders give this engine smoothness that 4 bangers struggle to do. Refinement is a Lexus quality.

The 320i is a good choice for people that want a BMW badge and it does get great mileage. For those looking for more power without stepping up to a 328i, I'm sure it can be tuned or chipped by Vishnu, Dinan or JB3

stlgrym3

iTrader: (4)

BMW should combine the 320 and 328 into a 325 with a turbo 2.0 pumping out 200hp and 220ft-lb with base price of $33000 topping out at $40k. now the 3 series is just too diluted.

stlgrym3

iTrader: (4)

just priced one out on carsdirect.com. it was a '13 model with ton of discounts, total comes out to $35500 down from msrp of $41000 with sport, premium pkgs and navigation. not a bad deal at all

Och

iTrader: (3)

I wonder why there is a $5,000 price disparity between the 328 and 320? Is it just the engine alone, or the 328 has more options by default? Because I just don't see how the engine can justify this difference, it's essentially the same setup - probably just the matter of software tuning makes up for 90% of the difference in power output.

stlgrym3

iTrader: (4)

328 has more standard options than 320, but the main reason for the price gap is the motor. i wonder if there's an aftermarket chip that would make 320 performs just as well as 328

SteVTEC

Yeah the 328i has a lot more standard equipment. The engine is pretty much all the same. I think just the pistons are higher compression (11.0:1 vs 10), and other than that it's just a different software de-tune I think.

yowps3

Well I forgot to indicate that I was referring to the 2IS. Before I got my IS350 I was set on getting an IS250. When I took the IS250 for a drive I never had any complaints regarding power, but landed a very good deal on a used IS350 that I couldn't let pass by. I'm not sure if the new IS250 is slower or quicker than the previous IS250.

But regarding power and torque you absolutely do not have to wind anything up as these motors have a extremly flat torque spread



--Now if we're talking about a Honda S2000 yeah you defiantly need to wind it up if you want to go anywhere..