335i F30 0-60 in 4.7s + DCT?

[cacofonix]

No flames please Genuine question ...

The new 335i F30 has been tested at 0-60 in 4.7s. Also offers DCT. What is M-owners' take on this considering that the 2012 M3 also does around the same (4.4s?) ...

I don't want to be on par with performance after spending 70 grand ... BMW advertises 5.5+ seconds on the F30 335i, but seems not to be the case ... Confused.

I hope the M3 thrashes the F30 335i on handling ...

[aajami]

I don't think it comes with DCT. I believe it's an 8-speed automatic transmission from ZF.

As for comparisons, there are none. I test drove the F30 335i and the E92M remains on a completely different level of performance in all categories. It's an altogether different car.

[Rekrul]

Originally Posted by cacofonix

No flames please Genuine question ...

The new 335i F30 has been tested at 0-60 in 4.7s. Also offers DCT. What is M-owners' take on this considering that the 2012 M3 also does around the same (4.4s?) ...

I don't want to be on par with performance after spending 70 grand ... BMW advertises 5.5+ seconds on the F30 335i, but seems not to be the case ... Confused.

Don't buy a M3 if your concern is 0-60 times. The M3 will still obliterate the f30 335. I'm actually surprised, it seems like the new high end 3 series is always very similar in performance to the late M3. Makes me think the new M3 isn't going to be that much of a jump in performance like the e9x was compared to the e46 M3.

[cacofonix]

Originally Posted by aajami

I don't think it comes with DCT. I believe it's an 8-speed automatic transmission from ZF.

As for comparisons, there are none. I test drove the F30 335i and the E92M remains on a completely different level of performance in all categories. It's an altogether different car.

Good to hear

You are right I think:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BMW_3_S...F30%29#Gearbox

[LarThaL]

Originally Posted by cacofonix

No flames please Genuine question ...

The new 335i F30 has been tested at 0-60 in 4.7s. Also offers DCT. What is M-owners' take on this considering that the 2012 M3 also does around the same (4.4s?) ...

I don't want to be on par with performance after spending 70 grand ... BMW advertises 5.5+ seconds on the F30 335i, but seems not to be the case ... Confused.

There a comes a point where a car is "fast enough" The M3 is well past this point. Speed is only one component of performance and/or driving enjoyment. The M3 excels because it is supremely balanced in all aspects of its execution. If you want pure speed, just get a Honda Civic and slap 20lbs of boost on it. You will have a car that will smoke an M3 at 1/3rd the cost.

Just decide how fast is fast enough for you. After you have made that decision, look at other aspects of the car.

[Black Gold]

The 335 is an 8 speed auto and drives nothing like an m3. Handling, braking and steering are extremely different in each car. I owned a modded 335 before and my roommate owns a 335i m sport.

[Erhan]

Originally Posted by cacofonix

No flames please Genuine question ...

The new 335i F30 has been tested at 0-60 in 4.7s. Also offers DCT. What is M-owners' take on this considering that the 2012 M3 also does around the same (4.4s?) ...

I don't want to be on par with performance after spending 70 grand ... BMW advertises 5.5+ seconds on the F30 335i, but seems not to be the case ... Confused.

I hope the M3 thrashes the F30 335i on handling ...

performance != 0-60 time

[aus]

Originally Posted by VVG

There a comes a point where a car is "fast enough" The M3 is well past this point. Speed is only one component of performance and/or driving enjoyment. The M3 excels because it is supremely balanced in all aspects of its execution. If you want pure speed, just get a Honda Civic and slap 20lbs of boost on it. You will have a car that will smoke an M3 at 1/3rd the cost.

Just decide how fast is fast enough for you. After you have made that decision, look at other aspects of the car.

+1.

I have a hard time using 414 HP on the track, let alone the streets. Straight line speed is no interesting to me at all when you're in the 4 second range to 60, or 12-13 second range to 1/4 mile.

0-60 is now more about grip than power now. 1/4 mile is a better number to look at IMO.

.

[highyo]

my dinan stage 2 550i (xdrive) can give M3 run for its money on the straight and narrow (and i have torched m3s on the highway) but there is a reason why i am buying an M3 for myself. that's why i never understood launch mode for this thing. who cares?

[BMWNTHZST]

As an over all car the M3 wins hands down. Like others have said 0-60 in the mid 4 is good my in book for any car. You need to think about the whole package and what the M3 can offer you compared to a 335i.

I say drive both and see for yourself.

Good luck!

[Alex07M3]

I don't know why 0-60 is still used as a data to evaluate performance , it just confuse people more then anything ! Now that cars have so much power , 0-60 has become a lot more about traction then performance ! Everytime I see a serious article that only give the 0-60 , I just can't help it !!

[LarThaL]

Originally Posted by Alex07M3

I don't know why 0-60 is still used as a data to evaluate performance , it just confuse people more then anything ! Now that cars have so much power , 0-60 has become a lot more about traction then performance ! Everytime I see a serious article that only give the 0-60 , I just can't help it !!

Well it is still a good indicator of who would smoke who at a stoplight drag. It is, therefore, a good indicator of the most common competitive automotive predicamant most people will experience. There is also no doubt that slingshot acceleration is fun. Still, for me, the M3 is sufficient, even in this regard. It already gets up to very dangerous street speeds very quickly. Cars are getting ridiculously fast these days. This is race car fast not too long ago. And I don't see public roads being constucted like racetracks.

[Alex07M3]

Originally Posted by VVG

Well it is still a good indicator of who would smoke who at a stoplight drag. It is, therefore, a good indicator of the most common competitive automotive predicamant most people will experience. There is also no doubt that slingshot acceleration is fun. Still, for me, the M3 is sufficient, even in this regard. It already gets up to very dangerous street speeds very quickly. Cars are getting ridiculously fast these days. This is race car fast not too long ago. And I don't see public roads being constucted like racetracks.

Well , I'm not proud to say that but in my life I did A LOT of race in the streets , hundreds ,and I don't even remember once have started a race on a dead stop at a stoplight ,sure in part because I always drove AWD cars so I would've smoked pretty much anything on the start but mainly it's because for me starting a race from a dead stop is not a good indicator of how fast a car can go , too much variables like traction and drivers skills . So for those same reasons , that's why I don't find 0-60 too much relevant ! Personnally , when I race someone , it's not how fast he is that I want to know but how fast his car is compared to mine ! To each his own taste !

[gblansten]

Originally Posted by VVG

There a comes a point where a car is "fast enough" The M3 is well past this point. Speed is only one component of performance and/or driving enjoyment. The M3 excels because it is supremely balanced in all aspects of its execution. If you want pure speed, just get a Honda Civic and slap 20lbs of boost on it. You will have a car that will smoke an M3 at 1/3rd the cost.

Just decide how fast is fast enough for you. After you have made that decision, look at other aspects of the car.

I would not have agreed with you on this a few years ago. But after having a C63 and now a M3 I'm comfortable with the current level of performance. These cars are already fun on roads and highways and you can hardly do much with them that doesn't put you in legal jeopardy.

If BMW can make the F3x fun and have it be in the low 4's with great handling etc then I'm okay with that.

[SchnellM3]

Originally Posted by VVG

There a comes a point where a car is "fast enough" The M3 is well past this point. Speed is only one component of performance and/or driving enjoyment. The M3 excels because it is supremely balanced in all aspects of its execution. If you want pure speed, just get a Honda Civic and slap 20lbs of boost on it. You will have a car that will smoke an M3 at 1/3rd the cost.

Just decide how fast is fast enough for you. After you have made that decision, look at other aspects of the car.

Well said

[K-M3]

Originally Posted by Rekrul

Don't buy a M3 if your concern is 0-60 times.

totally agree with this part of the comment!!!! dont look at times.... they never tell the whole story. see what you like or dont like about the feel of a car. There are people who like the instant torque of a 335i and then there are some like me who love NA high revving machines. It depends on what you seek in a car.

I dont mean to put any car down. each has its own merits. But I do agree that the M3 does feel special. I have driven all the versions of the E9X 3 series and after recently getting my hands on a 2012 E92 M3 coupe, I have no regrets of taking the leap. Everything feels chunkier on the M3, the interior, exterior and above all the engine. It does have somewhat less low end torque (nothing to affect daily driving) but it is soo much fun gassing it up to hear that V8 intake roar. Cant comment on the exhaust at 8300 rpm 'cause I havent reached up there yet, car is currently in for its 1200 mile service ......

so see what you like in a car. If knowing the times and stats floats your boat, then go that way. If its the subtleties that tickle you, then definitely the M3....no doubts about it!!!!!!

enjoy in good health and get what you like when you want!!!!! cheers!!!!!

[Nati Beastcat]

My friend drove my E90 yesterday. He's drives a 69 Camaro that runs low 9's in the 1/4 on the weekends. He looked at me after 10 min. and said this thing is perfect for a street car! "@6800 rpm going from 2nd to 3rd your already breaking the law.... what more could you want". Coming from a guy that drives a sub 3 sec 0-60 car regularly i'll take that as a compliment. I'm seeing these cars come out now and i'm shaking my head. A 600+ hp Mustang GT500 that goes 200 mph lmao.... WHY? Look I love horsepower as much as the next guy but where does it stop? Camaro ZL1, Corvette ZR1, GT500 its getting crazy stupid.

[Da M3nace]

Originally Posted by cacofonix

No flames please Genuine question ...

The new 335i F30 has been tested at 0-60 in 4.7s. Also offers DCT. What is M-owners' take on this considering that the 2012 M3 also does around the same (4.4s?) ...

I don't want to be on par with performance after spending 70 grand ... BMW advertises 5.5+ seconds on the F30 335i, but seems not to be the case ... Confused.

I hope the M3 thrashes the F30 335i on handling ...

TY TY TY. I brought up this same question in a different post. Nice to see constructive opinions here. I got flamed a little on mine. Bunch of tards. A good question none the less.

[hieu1004]

Originally Posted by VVG

There a comes a point where a car is "fast enough" The M3 is well past this point. Speed is only one component of performance and/or driving enjoyment. The M3 excels because it is supremely balanced in all aspects of its execution. If you want pure speed, just get a Honda Civic and slap 20lbs of boost on it. You will have a car that will smoke an M3 at 1/3rd the cost.

Just decide how fast is fast enough for you. After you have made that decision, look at other aspects of the car.

Agreed.

OP: I don't need to repeat what the others have said, but almost everyone brings up good points. When looking at a car, one should look at the entire package. This is purely subjective (my own opinion), but there aren't a whole lot of cars out there (aside from exotics, purpose-oriented sports cars, etc.) that truly gives you 'the ultimate driving experience' or 'connects' you to the road as well as an M3. Again, that's just my own opinion based on my 'limited' experience. The 335 is indeed a great car in it's own right and is wonderful for those that don't need the what the M3 delivers.

[bruce.augenstein@comcast.]

Originally Posted by VVG

Well it is still a good indicator of who would smoke who at a stoplight drag. It is, therefore, a good indicator of the most common competitive automotive predicamant most people will experience...

It may be something of an indicator, but it's far from a good one.

Reason: Time to speed is almost completely disassociated from time to distance.

One car may reach 60 mph before another car, but it may be behind at the time (and catching up), even with (and about to pull ahead) or ahead of the other car and pulling away. There is simply no way to tell from an 0-60 time.

The most definitive thing you can say about an 0-60 time is that the car with the lower time has a better than 50% chance of being ahead at 60. Still, as an example, if an American-spec Audi TTRS can get to 60 in about the same time as an M3, it will almost certainly be ahead of the bimmer at the time because of the Audi's launch capability.

Capiche?

Pop quiz in regard to time-to-speed vs time-to-distance:

Car A does zero to 100 in about 11.8 seconds, and zero to 108 in 13.2.
Car B does zero to 100 in 13.2 seconds, and zero to 108 in about 15 seconds.

Question: Who's ahead at 100? (either car's 100)

BRAAAP!! Wrong! Thank you for playing!

In this case, car B was a GMC Syclone AWD turbo pickup in the right lane at Atco dragway in southern Jersey, while car A was me in a '93 LT-1 six-speed Corvette. At the green, I got a pretty decent launch, but with AWD and pre-loading the turbo against his torque converter, he launched like a ball bearing out of a slingshot, and I spent the entire quarter mile with right foot on the floor, rowing the gearbox in an effort to catch up.

At the finish line, we were essentially side by side, with me loping by at a fast jog. Other than the win light in his lane, the time slips said it all:

Me: 13.22 at 108 and change.
Him: 13.21 at 100.

Moral: Don't bother with 0-60 times. If you're interested in comparing your car with somebody else's, quarter mile times, and even more important, quarter mile trap speeds, are a more reliable guide as to the faster car.

Bruce

[Alex07M3]

Originally Posted by bruce.augenstein@comcast.

It may be something of an indicator, but it's far from a good one.

Reason: Time to speed is almost completely disassociated from time to distance.

One car may reach 60 mph before another car, but it may be behind at the time (and catching up), even with (and about to pull ahead) or ahead of the other car and pulling away. There is simply no way to tell from an 0-60 time.

The most definitive thing you can say about an 0-60 time is that the car with the lower time has a better than 50% chance of being ahead at 60. Still, as an example, if an American-spec Audi TTRS can get to 60 in about the same time as an M3, it will almost certainly be ahead of the bimmer at the time because of the Audi's launch capability.

Capiche?

Pop quiz in regard to time-to-speed vs time-to-distance:

Car A does zero to 100 in about 11.8 seconds, and zero to 108 in 13.2.
Car B does zero to 100 in 13.2 seconds, and zero to 108 in about 15 seconds.

Question: Who's ahead at 100? (either car's 100)

BRAAAP!! Wrong! Thank you for playing!

In this case, car B was a GMC Syclone AWD turbo pickup in the right lane at Atco dragway in southern Jersey, while car A was me in a '93 LT-1 six-speed Corvette. At the green, I got a pretty decent launch, but with AWD and pre-loading the turbo against his torque converter, he launched like a ball bearing out of a slingshot, and I spent the entire quarter mile with right foot on the floor, rowing the gearbox in an effort to catch up.

At the finish line, we were essentially side by side, with me loping by at a fast jog. Other than the win light in his lane, the time slips said it all:

Me: 13.22 at 108 and change.
Him: 13.21 at 100.

Moral: Don't bother with 0-60 times. If you're interested in comparing your car with somebody else's, quarter mile times, and even more important, quarter mile trap speeds, are a more reliable guide as to the faster car.

Bruce

completly agreed , 0-60 meant something when Ferrari's had 250hp !!

[bruce.augenstein@comcast.]

Originally Posted by Alex07M3

completly agreed , 0-60 meant something when Ferrari's had 250hp !!

My main point was that 0-60 times don't mean much at all (and haven't), for the reasons mentioned.