2011 335is: Is anyone else a little pissed?

[M3 vert]

Originally Posted by alms21

How often do you take that vert to the track?

As much as anyone else, in the wet and dry

Infact my diehard enthusiast comment was obviously for the
E92 M3

However, even the M3 E93 vert is still regarded as the enthusiast's convertible

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...take_road_test

Enjoy

[M3 vert]

Originally Posted by brava09

I am pissed only because it's snow and freezing and my amazing M3 sits in the garrage....can't wait for the spring

+ 1 Same here

[MVF4Rrider]

Originally Posted by MKParris

I wouldnt go that far. Its only the rear gear that is about .75 bigger than the 335i, that may make help to equalize (since the s65 has a torque deficit to the n54) but its not far more, assuming both are manual transmissions.

Slight engine torque deficit to 5,000 rpms but the gearing changes things to yield a force (torque to the ground if you will) advantage for the M3 starting below 3,000 rpms. Both manuals. When you factor in mass the acceleration difference is similar through to 4,000 rpms but very pronounced afterwards through to redline (+30% at redline). What you're measuring against between the 2 motors is an ultra flat torque curve (S65) vs. a front loaded torquey motor with a massive drop (comparatively) in torque after 5,000 rpms (N54). As they say, peak power sells cars. High average power wins races. BMW is not stupid. It's really worthless to compare the power differences of the two cars when all out performance is the topic at hand.

[brava09]

Originally Posted by adc

They don't have snow tires in Europe?

I love driving the M in the wet/snow...

they do, but the roads are so full of dirty things so that I do not feel comfortable exposing my M3 to such conditions....but in about one month the winter should be gone

[mkoesel]

Originally Posted by M3 vert

As much as anyone else, in the wet and dry

Props to you M3 vert. I've never really considered taking my car to a track due to local tracks (from what I have heard) not allowing convertibles unless the are equipped with a roll cage.

[frenchM3dreamer]

you guys have to stop those M3 vs... threads... everytime it turns out the M3 is an awesome car and everybody loves it, and that makes me want one even more especially vs 335's... JK

as far as taking a vert to a track, i think this argument is meaningless... sure, if you're part of the 0.01 % of the population who can really drive a car to the limit on a track, you will feel the 400 lbs difference and slightly less rigid chassis / car...

but for 95 % of week-end racers who are just looking for fun in a controlled environment, coupe or cabrio doesnt matter as long as you have fun...

and with an E93 you can actually go home with the wind in your hair and stop straight at the beach to show off

Take care people !

Pat

[adc]

Originally Posted by brava09

they do, but the roads are so full of dirty things so that I do not feel comfortable exposing my M3 to such conditions

Eh, the M3 receives the same rust/paint/underbody protection as any other 3 series variant. It's not some exotic thing that needs extra protection (although cars like Ferarri and Lambo these days are made mostly from aluminum/CF so rust isn't a factor anymore).

Go ahead - drive your M3 in the winter, let others drool over it.
And wash it more frequently.

[Optherion]

335is has no suspension improvements or changes does it?

[adc]

Originally Posted by Optherion

335is has no suspension improvements or changes does it?

None. Same suspension, same tires.

More power, and the same open diff.

[brava09]

Originally Posted by adc

None. Same suspension, same tires.

More power, and the same open diff.

It will struggle to put the power down, much like my 335i struggled....1st and 2nd gear a real disaster

[alms21]

I agree props to M3Vert for tracking his Vert and using the car where it really shines.

[LemonOne]

Originally Posted by alms21

I agree props to M3Vert for tracking his Vert and using the car where it really shines.

[M3 vert]

Originally Posted by mkoesel

Props to you M3 vert. I've never really considered taking my car to a track due to local tracks (from what I have heard) not allowing convertibles unless the are equipped with a roll cage.

Thanks!

There was a 996 GT3 with a roll cage and everything a racer would have.

However, even E46 M3 Cabs come on the tracks too

Try taking your E93 as well, you will have an awesome time, I can guarantee it

[M3 vert]

Originally Posted by alms21

I agree props to M3Vert for tracking his Vert and using the car where it really shines.

You asked and I told you

[mtla4]

Being honest I don't care about the new 335is nor M1. I'm just waiting for my car to be sold and drive an M3. That car will be a keeper. Not just a disposable car that you lease and bring back after 2 years. Folks this 335is is exactly what the old 330CI ZHP was back in 03-04-05-06. This kind reminds me of the A4 S-Line cars. It has some ///M parts but is no M car...just like my 135I is.

[RevFreak14]

Originally Posted by NewM3driver

How many here have watched the auto spied vid on the new 335is and came away feeling that BMW is making the 335 just a bit too close to the M3 for considerably less money.

Further, they have the thing set up with a very aggressive sports exhaust, a really nice steering wheel and a bunch of other really nice touches that are not available on the M3. There is even a button that allows 7 seconds of 375 ft/lbs of torque when you want it... awesome new headlights and interior finishes.

I feel these "special" items should be reserved for those that are paying top dollar for the M cars, and I fully intend to write BMW NA (the president of North American sales, perhaps) and let them know I am not happy. I have purchased 12 or 13 BMW's going back through the years and for the first time I feel like I am on the shitty end of the stick here.

Am I the only one feeling like this?

Wow. I actually couldn't disagree more. The other day I posted on another thread saying the 335is was a pointless car. The base MSRP is going to be about $51k. The base MSRP on an M3 sedan is $55k, and the couple $58k. Assuming DCT, and all other options are priced the same (no reason they shouldn't be) your talking about a car that has 100 hp less, has an inferior suspension, and no change to the differential. Why would you pay for that car when for $4 or $5k more you can have an M3 sedan. The base 335i coupe is about $42k. They are going to charge $9k more for a 20 hp upgrade and an M body kit??? And yes I understand the 335 is much easier to tune, but if your going to tune it why wouldn't you just get the standard 335i??? I'll bet you could get much more than an extra 20 hp with $9k. Just doesn't make sense to me. Opinions?????

[MKParris]

Originally Posted by MVF4Rrider

Slight engine torque deficit to 5,000 rpms but the gearing changes things to yield a force (torque to the ground if you will) advantage for the M3 starting below 3,000 rpms. Both manuals. When you factor in mass the acceleration difference is similar through to 4,000 rpms but very pronounced afterwards through to redline (+30% at redline). What you're measuring against between the 2 motors is an ultra flat torque curve (S65) vs. a front loaded torquey motor with a massive drop (comparatively) in torque after 5,000 rpms (N54). As they say, peak power sells cars. High average power wins races. BMW is not stupid. It's really worthless to compare the power differences of the two cars when all out performance is the topic at hand.

What i think would be intriguing would be putting the M3 fd ratio into a 1/335i. The cars would probably have the probably run a very similar e.t. Obviously the M3 would have a 7-8 mph higher trap which would translate into better e.t.s if they were on drs or slicks, but from the 1/4s ive seen most are running high 12s and low 13s at about 110.

Its just upsetting to me to see the only real way in a straight line for the S65 to really outshine the n54 is to use the higher FD..

[adc]

Originally Posted by MKParris

Its just upsetting to me to see the only real way in a straight line for the S65 to really outshine the n54 is to use the higher FD..

Why? They're just different tools to achieve specific acceleration targets.

[adc]

Originally Posted by M3 vert

Thanks!

There was a 996 GT3 with a roll cage and everything a racer would have.

However, even E46 M3 Cabs come on the tracks too

Try taking your E93 as well, you will have an awesome time, I can guarantee it

It seems many (the majority? of) tracks in the US won't allow factory-spec convertibles on track. You have to weld in a rollbar and then they put it to the "broomstick test" every time you show up on track. For those unfamiliar with the test, they put you in the car with your helmet on and your top has to be below a broomstick place between the windshield and the rollbar.

It's one of the main reasons why I ended up with the sedan, my wife wanted the convertible...

[MVF4Rrider]

Originally Posted by MKParris

Its just upsetting to me to see the only real way in a straight line for the S65 to really outshine the n54 is to use the higher FD..

I don't think the final drive ratio is the real culprit. M cars are geared too tall (to squeeze a bit more fuel economy I assume and make it more suitable for the average buyer, not enthusiast) and therefore their final drive ratio is not the most advantageous. Again, the S65's flat torque to near redline means the force is still very great all the way to redline. The N54's significant drop in torque across the final 2,000 rpms means it can't use all the revs in every gear. Your car is actually quicker if you redline the 1st 2 gears then start shifting at a 500 rpm less increment with each subsequent gear change. If you do shift at redline in 3rd gear through to 6th gear you'll find the motor is producing less force in each gear than what's available in the next gear at the new rpm post shift. M engines are opposite due to the much flatter torque curve. Shifting at redline (or higher) always ensures you've maximized available torque and therefore force.

Reason I say M cars are geared too tall as theoretical speeds with stock gearing is over 200 mph. That's unnecessary. I'd rather trade a little top end speed for more force (grunt). Plus, in all but top gear the additional force would allow the use of a higher gear at a given mph thus actually improving fuel economy with 6th gear being the exception.

[mkoesel]

Originally Posted by M3 vert

You asked and I told you

Heh heh, and here I had actually read it as if he were conceding something to you. Maybe not.

Some people will never be satisfied I guess. Enjoy that car, and ignore the haters and the bitterness they love to spread.

[alms21]

Originally Posted by mkoesel

Heh heh, and here I had actually read it as if he were conceding something to you. Maybe not.

Some people will never be satisfied I guess. Enjoy that car, and ignore the haters and the bitterness they love to spread.

You read it the way it was intended. Giving him for tracking the car.

I guess I can say nothing to please you people. Oh well.

Once again Vert -- good on you for tracking it. Pics look cool as hell as well.