[Bamm1]

The first instrumented test of the 2016 BMW 340i xDrive has been published.

Shame on Ford for even mentioning the 320 hp / 330 ftlb BMW in the same sentence as the Fusion Sport.

The very Fusion Sport-like 3831 lbs. automatic running on 10mm thinner Grand Touring All Season Pirelli Cinturato P7 tires posted the following numbers:

0-60: 4.1 sec

1/4 Mile: 12.7 @ 108.3mph.

 

[Thor]

That's a **** of a launch for the bimmer. Who did the test?

 

[bugout]

car and driver did a full instrumented test on the RWD back in Feb with 4.8 to 60.. The AWD can't be faster..

2016 BMW 340i Test ? Review ? Car and Driver

 

[Thor]

ah, found it, edmunds. Those are some really quick times for the power, heck of a launch. a 108 in the 1/4 is about where an LS2 GTO is stock. Definitely an underrated car.....it does cost about 75% more than the fusion sport though

 

[Chancellorbunchy]

Holy sh*t!!!

 

[escape]

Looks like Autobytel got 4.2 seconds as well...

 

[elronino]

Looks like Autobytel got 4.2 seconds as well...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ERrNVj7Kaxo

 

[falkin42]

BMW will even tell you that the AWD is faster than the RWD. I think the extra traction really helps out, especially with all seasons.

 

[Bamm1]

I thought the 335i xDrive was crazy fast and now the BMW 340i xDrive is close to half a second faster in the major performance measures (60, 1/4 mile, etc.). Plus the fuel economy is way better than it should be for It's performance. It looks like it is going to lose 1 mpg in each measure when run through the new 2017 test methods.

It is expensive but given were you are starting with the Fusion Sport I am not seeing just a tune catching the 340. I have yet to see just a tune knock 2 seconds off the zero to sixty time.

Let's also face facts. Ford asked me to compare these two cars. Lord knows why......

 

[Kevin74]

Let's also face facts. Ford asked me to compare these two cars. Lord knows why......

Ok,ok,ok. Look I agree that someone in Ford marketing my have gotten their pants wet when they were told the Fusion Sports HP and torque numbers. Let's not forget that most of us on this forum did as well. Should they have tried to compare it to the BMW? Probably not. These are marketers, salesman, people who are paid to promote the car. Not car guys/gals. Let's just get over it. The Sport is an excellent car. It is not nor should it be compared to a car that costs tens of thousands more. Although some here seem/claim to be cross shopping these cars, 99% of the car buying public wouldn't even consider it. If one more person says "but Ford told me to compare them", and uses that for a reason why the car sucks...... Come on people. If you want to tell me how the Accord, Camry, Maxima or such are better, than great. These could be valid points, criticisms. I too expected more from the Sport in say 0-60 for example. I don't want this forum to just be showering the Sport with accolades but let's be real.

 

[Bamm1]

Ok,ok,ok. Look I agree that someone in Ford marketing my have gotten their pants wet when they were told the Fusion Sports HP and torque numbers. Let's not forget that most of us on this forum did as well. Should they have tried to compare it to the BMW? Probably not. These are marketers, salesman, people who are paid to promote the car. Not car guys/gals. Let's just get over it. The Sport is an excellent car. It is not nor should it be compared to a car that costs tens of thousands more. Although some here seem/claim to be cross shopping these cars, 99% of the car buying public wouldn't even consider it. If one more person says "but Ford told me to compare them", and uses that for a reason why the car sucks...... Come on people. If you want to tell me how the Accord, Camry, Maximai or such are better, than great. These could be valid points, criticisms. I too expected more from the Sport in say 0-60 for example. I don't want this forum to just be showering the Sport with accolades but let's be real.

My biggest issue is with Ford's new business mantra of over promising and under delivering.

They called out the BMW 340i and then proceeded to tie the Accord V6 to 60, get beat by it to 100 and tie it in the 1/4 while trapping 5 mph less. But don't worry you get "Honda Accord performance" with a substantial mpg deficit.

The Camry V6 and Passat V6 also beat it to 100 and trap 5+ mph higher in the 1/4 with much less hp.

The Sport is slower than every single car Ford called out in its "Tremendous Torque" press release as well.

Who exactly does this car appeal to now?

Based on Ford's marketing it would seem it was targeting the performance minded mid-size sedan shopper. But I call shenanigans there.

As soon as the average mid-size sedan shopper, who might be cross shopping all the V6 entries, see the mpg stats I think they will likely be out too.

 

[Kevin74]

I'm not willing to concede until I see official performance tests that the Sport is not faster than said Accord.

 

[Frizz2112]

I'm not willing to concede until I see official performance tests that the Sport is not faster than said Accord.

Exactly. People are going off the deep end based on a couple of videos showing half assed runs in a brand new car. Comparing fully instrumented, professional tests of Accords, etc, to the infamous "0-60" Fusion sport video is apples to oranges.

 

[BOT_ROCKET]

Exactly. People are going off the deep end based on a couple of videos showing half assed runs in a brand new car. Comparing fully instrumented, professional tests of Accords, etc, to the infamous "0-60" Fusion sport video is apples to sauerkraut.

i bolded the correction. We still have no idea how fast the Sport can be. A few amateur videos and a track run or two are not enough to convince me that its not as fast as it should be. Even if its not the fastest car in its class, imo, it's still the coolest. Thats what truly matters, too. My opinion is the one that matters. This car is perfect... for me. Are there faster cars? yup. Are there more practical cars? yup. Are there better looking cars? yeah, but not many. Are there cars that are better in every category? Probably not at that price point.

All that said, i know this is a thread about Fords claims vs reality. Did Ford claim the Sport was faster, or did Ford claim it was more powerful?

 

[OX1]

i bolded the correction. We still have no idea how fast the Sport can be. A few amateur videos and a track run or two are not enough to convince me that its not as fast as it should be. Even if its not the fastest car in its class, imo, it's still the coolest. Thats what truly matters, too. My opinion is the one that matters. This car is perfect... for me. Are there faster cars? yup. Are there more practical cars? yup. Are there better looking cars? yeah, but not many. Are there cars that are better in every category? Probably not at that price point.

All that said, i know this is a thread about Fords claims vs reality. Did Ford claim the Sport was faster, or did Ford claim it was more powerful?

I'm not sure why anyone thinks it should be faster than what was stated so far, the sport has a 5-700 lb weight disadvantage vs the V6 2WD competitors (power to weight is almost identical). Unfortunately, weight make everything worse, except maybe ride quality. I do think comparing the sport to cars that cost even 5 grand more is pointless.

 

[drbob1]

I think the feeling of betrayal some of us are expressing IS related to Ford's marketing. They claimed a 5 second 0-60 time. The car feels far from that on the one drive I've had, and no instrumented testing has refuted the fact that it's slow. AWD, despite the 200# weight disadvantage, should improve 0-60 times because it removes wheelspin from the equation. Some folks may be satisfied with the tech but if I'm paying nearly $40k for a car that's supposed to have enough power to run 5 seconds (should actually be lower than that) then I'd like to be happy with performance. Otherwise a certified Audi, or a MKZ at a few thousand more is a better deal.

 

[escape]

I think the feeling of betrayal some of us are expressing IS related to Ford's marketing. They claimed a 5 second 0-60 time.

There has been so much discussion on this, I actually lost track. Was it Ford corporate that made this claim or was it some dealer sales person?

 

[BOT_ROCKET]

I think the feeling of betrayal some of us are expressing IS related to Ford's marketing. They claimed a 5 second 0-60 time. The car feels far from that on the one drive I've had, and no instrumented testing has refuted the fact that it's slow. AWD, despite the 200# weight disadvantage, should improve 0-60 times because it removes wheelspin from the equation. Some folks may be satisfied with the tech but if I'm paying nearly $40k for a car that's supposed to have enough power to run 5 seconds (should actually be lower than that) then I'd like to be happy with performance. Otherwise a certified Audi, or a MKZ at a few thousand more is a better deal.

Ive run 3 0-60s with my gps. One was 5.6 seconds at 90 degrees with my 2 kids in the back seat with 87 octane, and 2 5.0 second runs at 72 degrees, just me, with 91 octane. All with fewer than 500 miles on the clock. This IS a 5 second car. I guarantee that the Sport will run legit instrumented 4s under the right conditions.

 

[Frizz2112]

Ive run 3 0-60s with my gps. One was 5.6 seconds at 90 degrees with my 2 kids in the back seat with 87 octane, and 2 5.0 second runs at 72 degrees, just me, with 91 octane. All with fewer than 500 miles on the clock. This IS a 5 second car. I guarantee that the Sport will run legit instrumented 4s under the right conditions.

This has been my impression as well, although I admit that this is just an impression since I have not done a proper test. I'm just over 500 miles on mine, and the last time I drove it I swore that it felt stronger than before, but again, this could easily be my imagination.

 

[Kevin74]

There has been so much discussion on this, I actually lost track. Was it Ford corporate that made this claim or was it some dealer sales person?

It was stated by a salesman in a video made by his dealership.