[DanG]

F0r people holding out for the M240i, Motor Trend found that the 340i was actually slower than a 335i.

http://www.motortrend.com/news/bmw-3...ear-contender/

[midwest 340xi 6sp]

"Unfortunately, the 340i is no faster than the old 335i. In fact, our 340i was slower to 60 mph than F30-chassis 335i sedans and coupes we’ve tested, and it tied the 435i convertible to 60 mph. At 5.1 seconds to 60, it’s no slouch, but the 340i trails the original 2012 335i’s 4.9-second run.

It finally catches up at the quarter-mile mark, though, with a run of 13.6 seconds at 105.3 mph."

[Cyberdemon]

I find that generally odd, especially since the B58 Dynos have shown it to be a very strong engine.

Keep in mind that acceleration runs are subject to lots of variables including:

-Driver
-Particular Car (Press car that has been beat on?)
-Tire & tire pressure
-Altitude & ambient temperature
-Transmission (they are using a manual which we know is slower than the AT car)

There are lots of reasons why the acceleration run could have been worse by a few 10ths.
So reading into it as "The new car will be worse based on this single data point" is bad logic. From what we've seen from the initial tuning done by Burger - the B58 looks like it could be a very awesome platform.

[nike001]

Originally Posted by Cyberdemon

I find that generally odd, especially since the B58 Dynos have shown it to be a very strong engine.

This.

I've driven the new 340i and it's lightyears better than the old 335. Now, not everyone may notice a difference but to me the suspension is better, steering is more communicative & the engine pulls so much better. Not to mention it sounds a lot better too!

[dan99]

Interesting article but like stated earlier dep on conditions