CD's new BMW 7 Series Long term Arrival

[Suaviloquent]

Okay....WTF....

 

A 4350 lbs+ luxo boat.

 

0-60 in 4.8, 1/4 in 11.9.

 

26 mpg as observed over two months?!!!! WHAT?!

 

A claimed 320 HP?!!!

 

Impossibru!!! DISCUSS!!!

 

Read More At:

 

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2016-bmw-740i-long-term-test-intro-review

 

[balthazar]

Where's the production CS???

 

- - - - -

And : "people who buy in this tier don't take their sedans to the drag strip, therefore 1/4-mile times are completely irrelevant."

[ccap41]

Those are some impressive numbers.. mostly that underrated 320hp one.. lol

 

The 1/4 mile race it self is not relevant but accelerating to 100-110mph I could still see being very relevant. From a stop...? Not so much.. but I think more than anything it just puts a number to something other cars are measured by therefore making it comparable even if it will never actually be raced.  

[David]

Which year BMW is this auto again? 

 

199XXXXXXXXX?

[Suaviloquent]

I was just shocked by the numbers. Supposedly, this thing is faster than a CT6 3.0TT that weighs less...and has 84 more HP...as well as more torque...

 

Hurrray, suddenly the car is so much BETTER!!!

 

(NO.  )

[ccap41]

Those numbers really are shocking across the board. 

 

I know the S Class and 7 Series get flack for being bland and boring but I like them. I like how they are just big luxury barges w/ a little hidden performance in a body that nobody would guess could scoot. A sleeper for the 0.1% of the time you want to out run a Camaro SS at a stoplight and a super luxurious pamper-machine the other 99.9% of the time. 

[Cmicasa the Great]

First of all BMW  is well known to underrate their vehicles for the sake of hierarchy. Furthermore the numbers:

 

RWD

Curb weight: 4385 lb

 

PERFORMANCE: NEW

 

Zero to 60 mph: 4.8 sec

Zero to 100 mph: 11.9 sec

Zero to 130 mph: 21.6 sec

Rolling start, 5-60 mph: 5.6 sec

Top gear, 30-50 mph: 2.9 sec

Top gear, 50-70 mph: 3.5 sec

Standing ¼-mile: 13.4 sec @ 105 mph

Top speed (mfr's est.): 155 mph

Braking, 70-0 mph: 159 ft

Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.86 g

 

Cadillac CT6

 

AWD

Curb weight: 4371 lb

 

C/D TEST RESULTS:

 

Zero to 60 mph: 5.0 sec

Zero to 100 mph: 12.2 sec

Zero to 140 mph: 26.6 sec

Rolling start, 5-60 mph: 6.7 sec

Top gear, 30-50 mph: 3.1 sec

Top gear, 50-70 mph: 3.5 sec

Standing ¼-mile: 13.5 sec @ 105 mph

Top speed (governor limited, C/D est): 155 mph

Braking, 70-0 mph: 152 ft

Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.86 g

 

 

The Cadillac's numbers are actually more impressive for a few reasons.

 

1) The BMW is BROKEN-IN with over 7000 miles. CT6 was pretty much off the carrier.

2) The Cadillac is AWD and still 14lbs lighter. Engineering FEAT!!!

3) The Braking on the CT6 beats the BMW by 7 ft. Again.. impressive

4) I continue to wonder why ENTHUSIAST use 0-60 when 1/4 Mile times are avail.. but even in that.. the CT6 pretty much equals the BMW... again.. in a brand new vehicle not one broken in 7000+ miles

 

 

Why is the broken in period important? Well.. in a GM vehicle especially.. their cars simply get faster as U clock on miles. U might call me crazy but I bet good money that my Impala now.. with 55K on the ODO can take down a new Camaro or Mustang V6. I won't even get into transmission learning. 

[Suaviloquent]

It's still an interesting find.

 

Road holding numbers were pretty much the same. So even though the CT6 might be more enjoyable to drive when driven hard (totally against the vehicle's intended function) - the handling capabilities seem pretty much even.

 

But - we don't know when they did the instrumented tests. Maybe they did them before they were broken in or not.

 

Besides - most press vehicles do accumulate miles. Unless you know exactly how many miles the CT6 has during most of it's tests, it's still a big assumption. Some CT6 first drives were obviously prepro's, which do have decent miles on them.

[Cmicasa the Great]

It's still an interesting find.

 

Road holding numbers were pretty much the same. So even though the CT6 might be more enjoyable to drive when driven hard (totally against the vehicle's intended function) - the handling capabilities seem pretty much even.

 

But - we don't know when they did the instrumented tests. Maybe they did them before they were broken in or not.

 

Besides - most press vehicles do accumulate miles. Unless you know exactly how many miles the CT6 has during most of it's tests, it's still a big assumption. Some CT6 first drives were obviously prepro's, which do have decent miles on them.

 

 

Here we go with this... 

 

Listen.  They clearly state that the BMW was at 7160 miles. and that it had been in the fleet for 2 months. Meaning.. I doubt that BMW dropped off a crip new 740i to C&D when this 2 month period began. That it was a probably broken-in, or at the very least had 3K on the ODO before they got it.

 

Oh.. the picture below tells me that the Cadillac wasn't broken in.. and that just like about 99% of time.. I'm right.. and U ain't

 

C&D 3.0LTT CT6

[Suaviloquent]

More interesting tidbits - BMW only sells that LWB in U.S, but does not apply the "L" badge anymore.

 

And the claimed acceleration for xDrive models is even faster. 

 

Maybe a huge difference has got to be the transmission as well. So maybe the 320 hp is the amount the engine makes at the wheels.

[Suaviloquent]

More interesting tidbits - BMW only sells that LWB in U.S, but does not apply the "L" badge anymore.

 

And the claimed acceleration for xDrive models is even faster. 

 

Maybe a huge difference has got to be the transmission as well. So maybe the 320 hp is the amount the engine makes at the wheels.

 

 

It's still an interesting find.

 

Road holding numbers were pretty much the same. So even though the CT6 might be more enjoyable to drive when driven hard (totally against the vehicle's intended function) - the handling capabilities seem pretty much even.

 

But - we don't know when they did the instrumented tests. Maybe they did them before they were broken in or not.

 

Besides - most press vehicles do accumulate miles. Unless you know exactly how many miles the CT6 has during most of it's tests, it's still a big assumption. Some CT6 first drives were obviously prepro's, which do have decent miles on them.

 

 

Here we go with this... 

 

Listen.  They clearly state that the BMW was at 7160 miles. and that it had been in the fleet for 2 months. Meaning.. I doubt that BMW dropped off a crip new 740i to C&D when this 2 month period began. That it was a probably broken-in, or at the very least had 3K on the ODO before they got it.

 

Oh.. the picture below tells me that the Cadillac wasn't broken in.. and that just like about 99% of time.. I'm right.. and U ain't

 

C&D 3.0LTT CT6

 

 

I asked for proof,  and now you gave it. Anyways, it still don't mean the instrumented tests weren't done before.

 

It doesn't matter. The 750 in all variants, including being a LWB only in the US, weighing more and making less power is always faster. It's interesting.

 

Here's the thing - some people just don't get it. I find it interesting all the nonsense over the CT6 being called a flagship beater,  when it ain't a flagship. I like it for what it is, not what people pretend it is. Ask Johan about that.

[ccap41]

 

Why is the broken in period important? Well.. in a GM vehicle especially.. their cars simply get faster as U clock on miles. U might call me crazy but I bet good money that my Impala now.. with 55K on the ODO can take down a new Camaro or Mustang V6. I won't even get into transmission learning. 

 

You are joking, right..? There is a break-in period and then there are accumulated miles.. Your Impala is not gaining power/torque as it surpasses 55k miles.. It's just the science of wearing materials and friction. 

[Suaviloquent]

None of this changes the way I feel about the CT6. I don't mention it enough, but usually, my sole major criteria is always the way the vehicle looks - and the rest of the stuff just has to be par or if it's better then there is icing on the cake.

 

The CT6 compared to the 7 Series - it's far away better looking. I like the way the interior looks too over the 7 or S or A8, but I can concede that the Germans just have an upper hand on materials used.

[ccap41]

None of this changes the way I feel about the CT6. I don't mention it enough, but usually, my sole major criteria is always the way the vehicle looks - and the rest of the stuff just has to be par or if it's better then there is icing on the cake.

 

The CT6 compared to the 7 Series - it's far away better looking. I like the way the interior looks too over the 7 or S or A8, but I can concede that the Germans just have an upper hand on materials used.

In all reality cars today are so competitive with each other in so many categories that really is what it boils down to... what do you think looks the best. 

 

A tenth or two here or there, a half inch here or there really doesn't matter. 1mpg..? Doesn't matter. 10hp/tq? Doesn't matter. 

 

As for the S/7/CT6/A8 I like the looks of the CT6 second to the boring and lame looking S Class. There's still just something about it that screams "presence" over the others. CT6 is definitely the "sharpest"(no pun intended) of the bunch. 

Edited June 23, 2016 by ccap41

[FordCosworth]

 

Why is the broken in period important? Well.. in a GM vehicle especially.. their cars simply get faster as U clock on miles. U might call me crazy but I bet good money that my Impala now.. with 55K on the ODO can take down a new Camaro or Mustang V6. I won't even get into transmission learning. 

 

 

Ya right. Is your car stock? No current gen stock Impala can take down a new V-6 Camaro or V-6 Mustang.

 

Crazy is not what I'd call you.

[Cmicasa the Great]

 

Why is the broken in period important? Well.. in a GM vehicle especially.. their cars simply get faster as U clock on miles. U might call me crazy but I bet good money that my Impala now.. with 55K on the ODO can take down a new Camaro or Mustang V6. I won't even get into transmission learning.

 

Ya right. Is your car stock? No current gen stock Impala can take down a new V-6 Camaro or V-6 Mustang.

 

Crazy is not what I'd call you.

U kno what U can do.. Oh. I prefaced what I said with "I bet good money..."

 

what's effin sad.. is the results. While the PURPOSE BUILT Sports coupe Mustang can certainly beat my full-size family car Impala V6 right off the truck.. it ain't by very much at all. 

 

2014 Chevy Impala V6

 

C/D TEST RESULTS:

 

Zero to 60 mph: 6.0 sec

Zero to 100 mph: 15.5 sec

Zero to 130 mph: 34.5 sec

Rolling start, 5-60 mph: 6.2 sec

Top gear, 30-50 mph: 3.4 sec

Top gear, 50-70 mph: 4.0 sec

Standing ¼-mile: 14.8 sec @ 97 mph

Top speed (drag limited): 149 mph

Braking, 70-0 mph: 178 ft

Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.82 g

 

C/D TEST RESULTS:

 

2015 Ford Mustang V6

 

Zero to 60 mph: 5.5 sec

Zero to 100 mph: 13.4 sec

Zero to 120 mph: 20.4 sec

Rolling start, 5-60 mph: 5.9 sec

Top gear, 30-50 mph: 3.3 sec

Top gear, 50-70 mph: 3.9 sec

Standing ¼-mile: 14.1 sec @ 102 sec

Top speed (governor limited): 124 mph

Braking, 70-0 mph: 164 ft

Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.86 g

 

 Look at the 30-50.. the 50-70.. almost identical. Even the coveted 0-60 isn't anything that far off. And JEEZUS CHRIST... I can attest to the fact that my Impala can hit at least 140MPH, but are U telling me that the Ford Mustangh.. the FORD MUSTANG.. can only go up to 124mph??? 

[FordCosworth]

Why is the broken in period important? Well.. in a GM vehicle especially.. their cars simply get faster as U clock on miles. U might call me crazy but I bet good money that my Impala now.. with 55K on the ODO can take down a new Camaro or Mustang V6. I won't even get into transmission learning.

 

Ya right. Is your car stock? No current gen stock Impala can take down a new V-6 Camaro or V-6 Mustang.

 

Crazy is not what I'd call you.

U kno what U can do.. Oh. I prefaced what I said with "I bet good money..."

 

what's effin sad.. is the results. While the PURPOSE BUILT Sports coupe Mustang can certainly beat my full-size family car Impala V6 right off the truck.. it ain't by very much at all. 

 

2014 Chevy Impala V6

 

C/D TEST RESULTS:

 

Zero to 60 mph: 6.0 sec

Zero to 100 mph: 15.5 sec

Zero to 130 mph: 34.5 sec

Rolling start, 5-60 mph: 6.2 sec

Top gear, 30-50 mph: 3.4 sec

Top gear, 50-70 mph: 4.0 sec

Standing ¼-mile: 14.8 sec @ 97 mph

Top speed (drag limited): 149 mph

Braking, 70-0 mph: 178 ft

Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.82 g

 

C/D TEST RESULTS:

 

2015 Ford Mustang V6

 

Zero to 60 mph: 5.5 sec

Zero to 100 mph: 13.4 sec

Zero to 120 mph: 20.4 sec

Rolling start, 5-60 mph: 5.9 sec

Top gear, 30-50 mph: 3.3 sec

Top gear, 50-70 mph: 3.9 sec

Standing ¼-mile: 14.1 sec @ 102 sec

Top speed (governor limited): 124 mph

Braking, 70-0 mph: 164 ft

Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.86 g

 

 Look at the 30-50.. the 50-70.. almost identical. Even the coveted 0-60 isn't anything that far off. And JEEZUS CHRIST... I can attest to the fact that my Impala can hit at least 140MPH, but are U telling me that the Ford Mustangh.. the FORD MUSTANG.. can only go up to 124mph??? 

Thanks for correcting your error.

[Cmicasa the Great]

 

 

 

Why is the broken in period important? Well.. in a GM vehicle especially.. their cars simply get faster as U clock on miles. U might call me crazy but I bet good money that my Impala now.. with 55K on the ODO can take down a new Camaro or Mustang V6. I won't even get into transmission learning.

 

Ya right. Is your car stock? No current gen stock Impala can take down a new V-6 Camaro or V-6 Mustang.

 

Crazy is not what I'd call you.

U kno what U can do.. Oh. I prefaced what I said with "I bet good money..."

 

what's effin sad.. is the results. While the PURPOSE BUILT Sports coupe Mustang can certainly beat my full-size family car Impala V6 right off the truck.. it ain't by very much at all. 

 

2014 Chevy Impala V6

 

C/D TEST RESULTS:

 

Zero to 60 mph: 6.0 sec

Zero to 100 mph: 15.5 sec

Zero to 130 mph: 34.5 sec

Rolling start, 5-60 mph: 6.2 sec

Top gear, 30-50 mph: 3.4 sec

Top gear, 50-70 mph: 4.0 sec

Standing ¼-mile: 14.8 sec @ 97 mph

Top speed (drag limited): 149 mph

Braking, 70-0 mph: 178 ft

Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.82 g

 

C/D TEST RESULTS:

 

2015 Ford Mustang V6

 

Zero to 60 mph: 5.5 sec

Zero to 100 mph: 13.4 sec

Zero to 120 mph: 20.4 sec

Rolling start, 5-60 mph: 5.9 sec

Top gear, 30-50 mph: 3.3 sec

Top gear, 50-70 mph: 3.9 sec

Standing ¼-mile: 14.1 sec @ 102 sec

Top speed (governor limited): 124 mph

Braking, 70-0 mph: 164 ft

Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.86 g

 

 Look at the 30-50.. the 50-70.. almost identical. Even the coveted 0-60 isn't anything that far off. And JEEZUS CHRIST... I can attest to the fact that my Impala can hit at least 140MPH, but are U telling me that the Ford Mustangh.. the FORD MUSTANG.. can only go up to 124mph??? 

Thanks for correcting your error.

 

 

 

 

Error? Where did I make an error?? Again.. my comment was "I bet.." Still no proof until I get out here and challenge some dumb ass stupid enough to buy a new V6 MustARD over a Camaro.. or RENTING one.. since that's seeming the way that Ford is bumping sales..  so we'll see. 

[FordCosworth]

 

 

 

 

Why is the broken in period important? Well.. in a GM vehicle especially.. their cars simply get faster as U clock on miles. U might call me crazy but I bet good money that my Impala now.. with 55K on the ODO can take down a new Camaro or Mustang V6. I won't even get into transmission learning.

 

Ya right. Is your car stock? No current gen stock Impala can take down a new V-6 Camaro or V-6 Mustang.

 

Crazy is not what I'd call you.

U kno what U can do.. Oh. I prefaced what I said with "I bet good money..."

 

what's effin sad.. is the results. While the PURPOSE BUILT Sports coupe Mustang can certainly beat my full-size family car Impala V6 right off the truck.. it ain't by very much at all. 

 

2014 Chevy Impala V6

 

C/D TEST RESULTS:

 

Zero to 60 mph: 6.0 sec

Zero to 100 mph: 15.5 sec

Zero to 130 mph: 34.5 sec

Rolling start, 5-60 mph: 6.2 sec

Top gear, 30-50 mph: 3.4 sec

Top gear, 50-70 mph: 4.0 sec

Standing ¼-mile: 14.8 sec @ 97 mph

Top speed (drag limited): 149 mph

Braking, 70-0 mph: 178 ft

Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.82 g

 

C/D TEST RESULTS:

 

2015 Ford Mustang V6

 

Zero to 60 mph: 5.5 sec

Zero to 100 mph: 13.4 sec

Zero to 120 mph: 20.4 sec

Rolling start, 5-60 mph: 5.9 sec

Top gear, 30-50 mph: 3.3 sec

Top gear, 50-70 mph: 3.9 sec

Standing ¼-mile: 14.1 sec @ 102 sec

Top speed (governor limited): 124 mph

Braking, 70-0 mph: 164 ft

Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.86 g

 

 Look at the 30-50.. the 50-70.. almost identical. Even the coveted 0-60 isn't anything that far off. And JEEZUS CHRIST... I can attest to the fact that my Impala can hit at least 140MPH, but are U telling me that the Ford Mustangh.. the FORD MUSTANG.. can only go up to 124mph??? 

Thanks for correcting your error.

 

 

 

 

Error? Where did I make an error?? Again.. my comment was "I bet.." Still no proof until I get out here and challenge some dumb ass stupid enough to buy a new V6 MustARD over a Camaro.. or RENTING one.. since that's seeming the way that Ford is bumping sales..  so we'll see. 

 

 

MustARD and dumb ass? 

 

You seem a little upset that your money you'd " bet " would be better off donated to a charity. At least that money would go to a good cause.

[smk4565]

The 740's numbers don't surprise me.  Most BMW 35i/40i badged cars are underrated.  The "300 horsepower"  335i a few years ago on dyno tests was showing it probably made more like 330 hp, the 740i might make 340-350 hp but they call it 320.  It also makes peak torque at 1,350 rpm so you are instantly at max pulling power and that ZF transmission whips through those first couple gears fast.  Audi uses ZF transmissions also, look at their launch times.  4.8 seconds is quick for a full size sedan, had I not read that I would have guessed about 5 seconds flat, but I am not shocked to see 4.8.   26 mpg makes sense too, a lot of BMW's have re-gen braking and capacitors to save on alternator load, engine start-stop, etc., my friend has a 535 diesel that does that to squeeze extra mpg's out.  Sort of like the Mazda i-eloop thing does.  

[Suaviloquent]

The xDrive model is actually quoted by BMW as being faster.

 

Mind boggling, but not one large luxury sedan lives on the strip, so who the hell does this matter to anyways?