BMW 328i Rocks ATS, A4, C250, TL, S60 in $46,000 Sport Sedan Challenge

Wait this is a $46k shootout and cars are putting out 0-60 numbers of 8 seconds? Geez my truck costs like half that and is sub-7 second come on that's pathetic for luxury sport sedans. It does seem like they went with the cheap base model for cars then added in random options, and ok fair enough the base C class has an inexplicable 201 hp. But why not just go with a $42k C class that has 300 hp, you're still in the ballpark you just can't get any fancy options, but if you weigh performance that heavily you need to prioritize what you shop for accordingly.

except for the BMW 328i which not only was 6.62 seconds 0 to 60, best braking, best handling and almost 3 mpg over the next closest competitor at 28.1 mpg .... Great job BMW

And in Grand Am Ferraris and 911s race against Camaros and Mazda 6s, what gives? Are you trying to say they are comparable? What a moronic assumption.

And in Grand Am Ferraris and 911s race against Camaros and Mazda 6s, what gives? Are you trying to say they are comparable? What a moronic assumption.

Is that english? LoL! By the way in F1 Ferraris and Mercedes race against Renault. Do you know anything about racing? Why are you calling me Lexsucks? Nothing to do with him, I am in Jacksonville, FL.

And yes, Mazda had two diesel 6s at the Rolex 24 hrs.

I am not exactly sure which class they were in but I was at the track on Saturday of the Rolex 24 hrs and Mazda had two diesel 6s racing. I don't think they finished the race but I am pretty sure they were competing in the same class as the 911s and the Viper. Just Google it.

John Doonan is relaxing for a minute in a motor coach in the Daytona International Speedway infield. It is probably one of the last times he'll be able to rest in the next 24 hours. An hour into Grand-Am's season-opening Rolex 24 at Daytona today, Doonan -- Mazda North America racing boss -- is monitoring the progress of his three newest offspring, or Mazda 6 sedans using Skyactiv diesel four cylinder engines.


While a diesel has never run the Rolex, Mazda is certainly no stranger to the Daytona 24 hours: It has won its class here 23 times. With the Skyactiv program though, as with many new projects, there have been teething problems.


"It's actually a miracle we are even here with the three cars," says Doonan. "Of the three, one didn't even exist a week ago. We've had about five test days. Double that would've been nice."


Worse perhaps than teething issues, word in the pre-race Daytona paddock was, the cars were slow.


"We've had vibration problems, and so the engines are running at about 80-85 percent. Besides, how do you define slow?"


Doonan has a point about that: since the cars run in Grand Am's all-new GX class, there's no real performance baseline. The Skyactiv diesels are 2.2-liter four cylinders using 60 percent production parts and developing 400 hp and 450-lb.-ft. of torque, housed in full-on tube frame race cars with Mazda 6 bodies on them. In reality, these are lengthened versions of Mazda's RX-8 GT cars of the past several Grand-Am seasons; the manufacturer pulled the plug on that program prior to this season because it no longer makes the RX-8.


Of course, this is the last year for Grand-Am before merging with the American Le Mans series. So rules for whatever the GX class becomes next year -- and thus the future of the Skyactiv program -- are still being formed.


Doonan told Autoweek the new, combined sanctioning body has assured Mazda there will be a place for the 6 and the diesel.


"The GX class will stay we are told, and we are counting on it."


Three and a half hours into the Rolex on Saturday evening, all three 6s were in the garage. A $0.25 nut (isn't that always the way?) failed on each cars' fuel line. Doonan was able to get one back out and he hopes it will finish the race tomorrow.


All three 6s, however, were out of the race less than six hours into the race.


"Racers want to get in the car and go straight to the front,” he said. We get it. But this is a long-term deal and our drivers have bought-in to that. We are committed -- we are here to stay."

Read more: http://www.autoweek.com/article/20130126/grand_am/130129841/0/autoweek.com#ixzz2Q0bESFvC
Follow us: @AutoweekUSA on Twitter | AutoweekUSA on Facebook

Stype I think the article stated GX class? maybe?

Stype you are correct, the GRAND-AM expanded that list to 13 models from 12 different manufacturers, adding the Audi TT, BMW 1 Series, Chevrolet Cruze, Ford Focus (four door), Hyundai Genesis, Subaru BRZ, Scion FR-S, Nissan 370Z or Altima, and Volkswagen EOS.

The Volvo s60 did very well, its a shame Volvo doesn't get the credit they deserve ! A few other publications have also placed the Volvo over similar cars. Mercedes and Audi desperately need to update their cars, they are falling behind.

OK so I decided to actually look at WTF is up with this comparison because honestly if you give me a 272hp Caddy ATS and say it'll take me 7.9 seconds to get it to 60 I will laugh in your face. So I looked up some other comparos to gauge the, you know, ACTUAL 0-60 times for the cars and concluded that the cars.com comparison is basically worthless. For example, the ATS 2.0T, motortrend got to 60 in 6.0 seconds. The BMW 328i they compared it to got there in 5.5 seconds. That's more like what I'd expect to see from these cars. So the whole "best handling", "best acceleration" etc. in this article is NULL AND VOID because I don't trust the driving skills of anyone involved in putting that kind of embarrassing stat sheet together.

The acceleration tests could have been done at altitude or they did not use power braking or a 1 foot roll out like other mags, but where the cars placed in acceleration is fairly consistent with other reviews even if they are a little slower. Anyway I don't think it discredits anything, for example MT & C&D both placed the Volvo highly among these cars.

Everything else in the comparison has been consistent in the comparison tests in the sport sedan market.

No. If you are going to do a car test and put weight on performance, then actually do your due diligence and test the cars for their actual performance. Half-assing it on some of the cars is not my idea of journalistic integrity. I don't give a shit which car ends up on top, but when I see figures nowhere near what they're supposed to be I can't take the results seriously. And if you're gonna tell me that it's "consistent" with other comparos and bring up MT, then how is it that in MT's test the 328i didn't take top honors in braking, for example? I enjoy a good head-to-head as much as the next guy, and the one in question simply wasn't a good one, your confirmation bias notwithstanding.

As long as the comparison test source is actually testing all the vehicles themselves at the same time and location and not compiling the data from somewhere else then there's really nothing to gripe about. Maybe it was a hot day, maybe it was at altitude, maybe they're not using 1ft of rollout, maybe they're not brake torquing the engines, whatever. The braking distance on the 3-Series did strike me though, those crap low rolling resistance "sport" tires have hampered them in other tests recently. I hate those low rolling resistance "sport" tires, it's a total oxymoron. Maybe BMW wised up and the M Sport (tested here) doesn't use them? Does it say anywhere what tires were on the cars?

Hmm. If the BMW was recorded as having a 0-60 time of 8 seconds you can imagine there'd be people saying "what the heck" because it's demonstrably nonsense. "1 foot of rollout" me arse, be serious my friend. Consider this... if we had a Porsche vs Vette vs GTR shootout and the GTR lost points because it went to 60 in 5.9 seconds and had a stopping distance 20 ft longer than usual people would be questioning what went on cause that's way off. Because they didn't add 2 seconds to every car; it seems they managed to get some off the line ok (see: Volvo) and some they blew it (see: ATS) and it's pretty obvious. And no it doesn't say what tires are on the cars because this test wasn't about due diligence.

So you are complaining that the test doesnt prove that the BMW is the best luxury sport sedan? And you base this with a MT article in which the BMW 328i did finish first? I am completely puzzled by your basis for an arguement as the BMW in the MT, Car & Driver, and Road & Track has bested the competition over and over again. Yet in the MT they said
"
. This is not just a win for the 328i; it's a massacre. A slaughter. Doomsday. Armageddon. I say this with a straight face: There is no competition. Not only was the BMW's first-place finish never in question, but I can't remember a comparison test with such lopsided results."

You mention due diligence, yet not sure what you are arguing for?

Point is again, I don't care who wins, what I want is for them to try a little if they're going to report on car performance. Maybe the BMW would have won anyway but the rest of the placements are bogus as far as I'm concerned because the numbers are crap. I don't know how much clearer I could have been about this.

once again, no contest. the raw scores aren't even close. not to mention the 328i looks great compared to the competition.