[dxb335d]

I've drag raced a 335d for years standard vs modified, far quicker modified even from a standing start, if needs a proper diff most definitely but just like a 335i & M135i do as well.

[matlough]

Originally Posted by chris_s1

I had a 'play' with a M135i the other week on some backroads and there absolutely nothing in it when we hit the gas, did several goes with him behind me and I couldn't shake him, then I let him lead and he couldn't pull away. These were all when rolling already, I suspect being lighter, from a standing start he would have got me.

I'm remapped and I assume he was stock, if I had been running stock I would have been toast, was really impressed with it

I can't wait to get mine

I'm hoping I won't notice to much difference between my remapped 335i and the M lite!

[Cyprio]

Originally Posted by Kerr

People use the POD as reference but depending how the track is prepared and what the conditions are, santa pod brings the biggest swing in times.

The d doesn't have the character, feel, fun or amusement of the I. After driving the d they are classes apart.

The I is faster prior tuning and afterwards too.

We go over the same stuff every month here.

Hmm, I recently had the loan of a 335i Touring for a day and it didn't feel any quicker than my 335d;in fact it reminded me of my previous 330i but quicker of course.
I'm no expert - just my honest opinion.

[Apl440i or 335d?]

Originally Posted by chris_s1

I had a 'play' with a M135i the other week on some backroads and there absolutely nothing in it when we hit the gas, did several goes with him behind me and I couldn't shake him, then I let him lead and he couldn't pull away. These were all when rolling already, I suspect being lighter, from a standing start he would have got me.

I'm remapped and I assume he was stock, if I had been running stock I would have been toast, was really impressed with it

Thanks Chris

Exactally the type of real world experience I was hoping to un-earth.

This forum is full of useful people and info.

Pub battle settled!

[Nick the Greek]

To go faster you'd be better off investing your money in some one on one profess driving tuition rather than a remap.

[Irnbrukid]

Originally Posted by Kerr

People use the POD as reference but depending how the track is prepared and what the conditions are, santa pod brings the biggest swing in times.

The d doesn't have the character, feel, fun or amusement of the I. After driving the d they are classes apart.

The I is faster prior tuning and afterwards too.

We go over the same stuff every month here.

Well where do want times from, make your mind up. The best way is to have the two cars do the same run at same time, then you will have the answer to the question which is fastest and by how much.

I think the D can provide these 'fun or amusement' It's character may be a bit different but i think that's all down to the way the power is delivered. In what way is the feel different, front end feel a bit lighter with better turn in. Classes apart my ass take your i blinkers off

Faster by what a few tenths, obviously it will be a lot faster when tuned as more power can be extracted from it.

Just because the D isn't for you, you can't slate it horses for courses. for someone who does 15k per yr it's a great car, with practically the same performance as the i... it's a no brainer.

And for once i agree with Carl on something!

[Kerr]

Originally Posted by Irnbrukid

Well where do want times from, make your mind up. The best way is to have the two cars do the same run at same time, then you will have the answer to the question which is fastest and by how much.

I think the D can provide these 'fun or amusement' It's character may be a bit different but i think that's all down to the way the power is delivered. In what way is the feel different, front end feel a bit lighter with better turn in. Classes apart my ass take your i blinkers off

Faster by what a few tenths, obviously it will be a lot faster when tuned as more power can be extracted from it.

Just because the D isn't for you, you can't slate it horses for courses. for someone who does 15k per yr it's a great car, with practically the same performance as the i... it's a no brainer.

And for once i agree with Carl on something!

This argument will go round in circles at it always does with each disputing what is what and extracting little details to suit their argument.

It is getting exceedingly tedious on this site.

Official figures for the 335i 0-60mph is 5.5/5.4 depending on gear box.

335d is 6.1secs.

Various tests get the 335i 0-60 in 5.4 secs and 0-100mph in 12.4secs. Figures do range from very low 12 to higher 12s.

The 335d times are 6secs and 13.7secs for 100mph.

I should never have used classes apart, but I do think the I is significantly better in my opinion.

I'm not really going to carry on as the same stuff gets posted on this same topic every single week without fail.

You may as well just use the search button and re-read the threads rather than wasting more time posting the same stuff as that has been covered 1 million times before.

Many people are delighted with them so let's just leave it at than and enjoy our own cars.

[dxb335d]

We all know that the press 335i's with 330-340HP did 0-100mph in 12 something seconds. Customer cars do 0-100mph in the same time as standard 335d's as we have seen in independent tests.

You think the 335i is better than 335d, that's opinion.

I know fact, the older E46 M3 is better than the both.

[Apl440i or 335d?]

Sorry guys, I did not mean to start the age old argument of Si vs DCi, it was a more SPECIFIC question of a mapped 335d vs a stock M135i. SPECIFIC.

I think we all know the pros and cons of both fuels for motive power, and there is no answer to what's better, as it depends on personal preference, budget, general outlook on life!

I guess soon we will be throwing Hydrogen and Electric motors into the arguement....

I have got some good answers, can we stop now before we all fall out over a question that was not posed in the first place?......

[matlough]

It's snowing!! :-)

[E60525d]

Originally Posted by Kerr

This argument will go round in circles at it always does with each disputing what is what and extracting little details to suit their argument.

It is getting exceedingly tedious on this site.

I agree, its seems like every other week there is a 335i vs 335d debate. Both have there pro's and con's, it just depends on what is right for you.

Both great cars though.

Originally Posted by dxb335d

I know fact, the older E46 M3 is better than the both.

Off course it is. Your hardly going to go from 335d to E46 M3 and then say the 335d was a better car.

[phil200tdi]

So we've concluded that a mapped 335d will hang with an M135i. 350hp vs 320bhp - is this really a shock to anyone?!

[webwysard]

Originally Posted by E60525d

Off course it is. Your hardly going to go from 335d to E46 M3 and then say the 335d was a better car.

+1 lol.

[Cyprio]

Here's a review by BMW Magazine on the 335i / 335d debate. It makes some interesting reading if nothing else.

I'm no expert so don't go beating me up over it - go talk to them.

http://www.evolveautomotive.com/e9x-.../335d-286_735/

[SteveC]

Originally Posted by dxb335d

We all know that the press 335i's with 330-340HP did 0-100mph in 12 something seconds. Customer cars do 0-100mph in the same time as standard 335d's as we have seen in independent tests.

You think the 335i is better than 335d, that's opinion.

I know fact, the older E46 M3 is better than the both.

Yup, that's true. Hard to beat that combination of 332 n/a hp, 8000 rpm redline, M-suspension and M-diff.

[Kerr]

Originally Posted by Cyprio

Here's a review by BMW Magazine on the 335i / 335d debate. It makes some interesting reading if nothing else.

I'm no expert so don't go beating me up over it - go talk to them.

http://www.evolveautomotive.com/e9x-.../335d-286_735/

That's where the press car story comes from and I knew that was coming.

0-100mph in 11.7 secs in a remapped 335i is pathetic. What does that say about Evolve's remap?

Guys have posted figures showing very low 10s. Similar to the E92 M3.

There is guys posting 12s standing quarter mile times with terminals over 110mph.

You don't gain 10mph per second at over 100mph.

Standard cars are getting well into the 13s at 103-4mph standard. That wouldn't be possible if the car was only able to do 0-100mph in Evolve's claimed times.

As I say, everyone will extract certain facts to suit the story and that magazine article/advertisement is the main one to hang on to.

Heading over old ground again.

Aren't Evolve known for being a bit dodgy anyways?

[Irnbrukid]

Originally Posted by Kerr

This argument will go round in circles at it always does with each disputing what is what and extracting little details to suit their argument.

It is getting exceedingly tedious on this site.

Official figures for the 335i 0-60mph is 5.5/5.4 depending on gear box.

335d is 6.1secs.

Various tests get the 335i 0-60 in 5.4 secs and 0-100mph in 12.4secs. Figures do range from very low 12 to higher 12s.

The 335d times are 6secs and 13.7secs for 100mph.

I should never have used classes apart, but I do think the I is significantly better in my opinion.

I'm not really going to carry on as the same stuff gets posted on this same topic every single week without fail.

You may as well just use the search button and re-read the threads rather than wasting more time posting the same stuff as that has been covered 1 million times before.

Many people are delighted with them so let's just leave it at than and enjoy our own cars.

So you want to use official figures. I dont think it matters which ones we use there is hardly any difference in speed between them.

As you say it depends where you get your figures from they will look better for each car depending on where theyre from.

They are all good cars at the end of the day, you pays your money you take your choice.

[dxb335d]

Originally Posted by E60525d

I agree, its seems like every other week there is a 335i vs 335d debate. Both have there pro's and con's, it just depends on what is right for you.

Both great cars though.



Off course it is. Your hardly going to go from 335d to E46 M3 and then say the 335d was a better car.

I tell it as it is buddy, the E46 M3 is a wonderful car to drive, you can't compare 335's with it.

Obviously having not driven one for any length of time you don't know that.

I know of E92 M3 owners who say they Prefered their previous E46 M3 even though it isn't as quick.

Originally Posted by SteveC

Yup, that's true. Hard to beat that combination of 332 n/a hp, 8000 rpm redline, M-suspension and M-diff.

Steve, you obviously understand where in coming from.

[dxb335d]

Originally Posted by Kerr

That's where the press car story comes from and I knew that was coming.

0-100mph in 11.7 secs in a remapped 335i is pathetic. What does that say about Evolve's remap?

Guys have posted figures showing very low 10s. Similar to the E92 M3.

There is guys posting 12s standing quarter mile times with terminals over 110mphI

You don't gain 10mph per second at over 100mph.

Standard cars are getting well into the 13s at 103-4mph standard. That wouldn't be possible if the car was only able to do 0-100mph in Evolve's claimed times.

As I say, everyone will extract certain facts to suit the story and that magazine article/advertisement is the main one to hang on to.

Heading over old ground again.

Aren't Evolve known for being a bit dodgy anyways?

The press car thing was known back in 2006, nothing to do with Evolve. They also highlighted it a few years later with that article.

[Cyprio]

Originally Posted by Kerr

That's where the press car story comes from and I knew that was coming.

0-100mph in 11.7 secs in a remapped 335i is pathetic. What does that say about Evolve's remap?

Guys have posted figures showing very low 10s. Similar to the E92 M3.

There is guys posting 12s standing quarter mile times with terminals over 110mph.

You don't gain 10mph per second at over 100mph.

Standard cars are getting well into the 13s at 103-4mph standard. That wouldn't be possible if the car was only able to do 0-100mph in Evolve's claimed times.

As I say, everyone will extract certain facts to suit the story and that magazine article/advertisement is the main one to hang on to.

Heading over old ground again.

Aren't Evolve known for being a bit dodgy anyways?

Ooooooooooooh

Over to Evolve for an answer to that one!

[E60525d]

Originally Posted by dxb335d

Obviously having not driven one for any length of time you don't know that.

Im not sure how you can come to that conclusion??? Everyone looks for different things when buying cars so thats why there is always debates.

Just because you "prefer" the E46 M3, it doesnt mean that its a better car for everyone than 335's. To some people 1/4 miles are important like yourself but i would say to most people its completely irrelevant.

Originally Posted by dxb335d

I know of E92 M3 owners who say they Prefered their previous E46 M3 even though it isn't as quick.

Your probably right but i reckon there are far more E9x M3 owners who prefer the newer model compared to the 12+ year old E46.

[Irnbrukid]

Originally Posted by E60525d

Im not sure how you can come to that conclusion??? Everyone looks for different things when buying cars so thats why there is always debates.

Just because you "prefer" the E46 M3, it doesnt mean that its a better car for everyone than 335's. To some people 1/4 miles are important like yourself but i would say to most people its completely irrelevant.

Don't worry the next car Carl has will be the best thing since sliced bread, like the dxb was when he had it.

*the e46 M3 is one of the greats though