[Verbiage]

Originally Posted by Bavarian III

Well, N54 is supposed to have been somewhere around 20/29..

Originally Posted by mechanixhorseman

I get 29 on the highway @ 80mph, and 18-22 in the city. I don't think its unrealistic at all, and that was before the intake upgrade.

Originally Posted by zzzbullseye

Similar here, high 20s highway and 22-24 in mixed conditions.

[FotiosF90M5]

one of the mags got an e90 sedan 6at at 4.8 0-60. cant remember which one it was.

[angler]

Originally Posted by cstavaru

There are comparison dynos on this forum, made by BMS. The N55 has a bit more hp on top, but a bit less low-end torque.

The problem with the N55 is that it has more lag than the N54 (according to BMS butt dynos and real dynos - you can look it up on BMS forums).

i have not read that and it sure does not feel that way when i drove it.

[HPIA4v2]

Originally Posted by angler

i have not read that and it sure does not feel that way when i drove it.

+1



Initial logic, the N55 runs out of breath sooner compare to two turbos in N54 but twin scroll spool faster thus the lag is minimal with less pull at top end. but dyno says otherwise, Only time will tell (with more people drive the new N55 and further tuning).

[citrixscu]

I test drove an N55 today, albeit an automatic and vert at that, a bit different than my current N54 6MT. The car felt pretty good. I would say there was a bit less lag around the 2000rpm mark. All in all, the car was nice. It did lack the throaty exhaust of early-production E92s though.

[dcorn]

Originally Posted by 10beers

Definitely.... I've got 1600 miles on mine and Im lucky to be getting 22 on average. I drove it like suggested for the break in and have only gotten on it once or twice or had it over 100mph while on the autobahn.

I dove my car home from the dealership from Chicago to N. Virginia. 700 miles, averaged 70 mph (80+ most of the way) and got 29 mpg.

[John 070]

I haven't been able to take my car on a trip since getting 37.2 software, but I think the mpgs are intact. I've done a short stint at 73 mph cruise and saw it above 30. But when the car was brand-new it could do 32-33 at 73 mph. I hope they didn't f it up with the software. At least it's not like 29.2 where a guy at the gym said he lost 2-3 mpg and the dealership argued with him saying it's not true and there's no lag.

[elegant]

It is interesting to note that those with N54's love their motor better, while many N55 folks are really happy with their motor. Human nature is interesting -- though very predictable.

FWIW, how many of us can tell 3 more or less HP or 3 more or less TQ? Bottom line is that both motors are great.

For those who want to win the "mine is better and bigger than yours argument," let's wait for tens of dyno runs, all with motors which have 10,000 or more miles on them.

Then, the debates can realistically and factually continue.

[Verbiage]

Originally Posted by elegant

It is interesting to note that those with N54's love their motor better, while many N55 folks are really happy with their motor. Human nature is interesting -- though very predictable.

FWIW, how many of us can tell 3 more or less HP or 3 more or less TQ? Bottom line is that both motors are great.

For those who want to win the "mine is better and bigger than yours argument," let's wait for tens of dyno runs, all with motors which have 10,000 or more miles on them.

Then, the debates can realistically and factually continue.

Let's not start any unnecessary debates here. Both motors are complex machines.

[DASHOCKER]

Originally Posted by L0U

car and driver talks about the 335xi...

Although that puts the 335i xDrive slightly under MSRP heavyweights like the Lexus GS350, the new S4 starts at $46,725. Based on our recent experience, we’d cut back on the dining out for a while and spend the extra few grand for the Audi.

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...dan-quick_spin

The Audi is rubbish.

[335BBS]

Originally Posted by zzzbullseye

Similar here, high 20s highway and 22-24 in mixed conditions.

Fo all of you Canadians......
Havent done the math but the best I ever got in my Audi B7 S4 was about 410 kms per tank (60 liters). My e92 has maxed out at about 650. Significant difference. That is all highway. City it drops to 260 (Audi) and 400 (BMW).

[335BBS]

Originally Posted by DASHOCKER

The Audi is rubbish.

The Audi is rubbish? Unbelievable comment. Have you tried the 335 xi? BMWs all wheel drive is just an inclement weather handling feature. The car sits higher, on smaller wheels with softer suapension. Audis is a performance tool.
That was my experience before buying e92 and confirmed in Bimmer Magazine among others. I just traded a B7 S4.

[bmrowe]

Originally Posted by fotios335i

one of the mags got an e90 sedan 6at at 4.8 0-60. cant remember which one it was.

I think it was motortrend. And it was the automatic, not the manual that they clocked at 4.8s.

[RoundelM3]

Originally Posted by citrixscu

I test drove an N55 today, albeit an automatic and vert at that, a bit different than my current N54 6MT. The car felt pretty good. I would say there was a bit less lag around the 2000rpm mark. All in all, the car was nice. It did lack the throaty exhaust of early-production E92s though.

Interesting...any info on why the earlier cars have a different exhaust note? I did the golf-tee mod on my early-07 e92 and it does seem to be louder than some of the '08 and up cars (those that also have the golf-tee mod) at both idle and on the road.

[Frosty]

.... I have an N54 with 90,000+ miles... still get average 22-24mpg

[5soko]

Road and Track got 4.7 sec 0-60mph for the E90 LCI 335i m-sport with the N54.
Edmunds got 4.8, and car and driver got 4.8 a while back.

[kurizma]

Originally Posted by Frosty

.... I have an N54 with 90,000+ miles... still get average 22-24mpg

2007 335 e92 with 45k miles. I get about 21 mpg combined. on cruise control at 75mph i get close to 30 mpg.

[andy92782]

A 335i with the N54 engine and automatic transmission has an EPA rating of 17/26 mpg.

A 335i with the N55 engine and automatic transmission has an EPA rating of 17/28 mpg.

I was thinking the N55's fuel economy jump would be larger than that but I guess it isn't. Looks like valvetronic buys you 1mpg. I average about 21mpg in my slushbox 335i. At the end of the day, none of this matters. I would never trade in my '07 for an '11 just to save 1mpg. Makes no economic sense, and the other real-world differences between the N54 and N55 and probably too small to care about.

[RFGuy_KCCO]

Does anyone know yet if the N55 has the same HPFP as the N54? Is it possible that BMW may have actually fixed this problem on the N55?

[vase330]

I really don't care which is better, but I also like to point out BMW reserved the N54 motor for the 335is. That surely must say something right?

[dlbrooks18]

Originally Posted by vase330

I really don't care which is better, but I also like to point out BMW reserved the N54 motor for the 335is. That surely must say something right?

+1, and the article mentions the N54's durability

[pDz]

Originally Posted by dlbrooks18

+1, and the article mentions the N54's durability

other articles, though, insinuate that it's an EPA certification gig.