[IN54NITY]

Originally Posted by BTM

If you'll note the asterisk I did mention that the weight for the E92xi MT does not seem to be in line with the rest of the numbers. It is however what is reported on BMW's website. Looking at the difference between E92 AT i/xi at 177lbs seems to be more in line with the rest of the weight differences for the E90 chassis

BTM, thanks very much for the data compilation! FWIW, I just had my car (2009 e92 335xi) corner balanced (and alignment) with 6/10 tank of fuel and me in driver's seat (185lbs).

1062 left front
1007 right front
945 left rear
911 right rear

Total: 3925 lbs (In my best Scottish: "It's a fiiiiiine booooat.")

Now 3925 - 185 = 3740 lbs.

6/10 * ~16 = ~9.6 gallons * 6lb/gal = ~58 lbs of fuel

3740 - 58 = 3682 lbs = ~3700 lbs dry (no fuel), with 7 qts oil, water in radiator.

My point is, you are correct. 3582 != 3700

P.S. Wow, maybe someone at BMW website fat fingered a 5 instead of a 6. ?? 3582 --> 3682 ??

[BTM]

^^WOW good info man...it definitely seemed like a typo to me. Notice that the weight for the E92 335i AT and E92 335xi MT is the same 3582...

[Kolyan2k]

Originally Posted by ruxp

The short explanation is that people are just parroting something they heard, but don't actually have any understanding of.

It is true that many don't understand some things, but I must repeat myself, I don't want to relie on my experience or the lack of it, this is why I trust the pros from CD and BMW themselves. And both pretty much say that xdrive is safety feature.

lots of people confuse the big names (evo, sti, quattro) in awd which were designed for performance with xdrive which was designed for safety.

[TheStigsTwin]

Originally Posted by Kolyan2k

It is true that many don't understand some things, but I must repeat myself, I don't want to relie on my experience or the lack of it, this is why I trust the pros from CD and BMW themselves. And both pretty much say that xdrive is safety feature.

lots of people confuse the big names (evo, sti, quattro) in awd which were designed for performance with xdrive which was designed for safety.

Yeah but what is so annoying and condescending about these posts of yours is the implication that the xi is not designed for performance AND safety. The car, it's numbers and many many drivers go completely against that implication. Still, for whatever reason, many 335i drivers feel better about themselves by pushing hard the theory that an xi is not a performance car. Sad really, that to prop up one car they feel they need to put down another.

[ptd23]

whats the difference if i decide to get the m-sport from the sport option?

[ABerry]

Originally Posted by TheStigsTwin

Yeah but what is so annoying and condescending about these posts of yours is the implication that the xi is not designed for performance AND safety. The car, it's numbers and many many drivers go completely against that implication. Still, for whatever reason, many 335i drivers feel better about themselves by pushing hard the theory that an xi is not a performance car. Sad really, that to prop up one car they feel they need to put down another.

human nature.. why do you think racism exists? Sorry for my rant, but it isn't enough for one to say this is better, you have to degrade the competition otherwise your side has no clout

my 2 cents, it rains here consistently in Oregon, but went with the i because I have a lifted jeep as my other driver because of that I went with what is the better "sports car" and to me I've always believed RWD>AWD for sports cars.. whether that is true or not who knows, but with the right tires grip 40mph+ won't be an issue and the lower weight (by about 200lbs), closer to 50/50 distribution than the xi, and better mpg made me believe it was so

I also think people repeat the xi was made for safety because it doesn't have an option for sport suspension, and it is marketed towards people living in weather conditions necessary for AWD, whereas 335 is marketed towards speed (pictures off their website, and brochures, not my thinking)

[Kolyan2k]

Originally Posted by TheStigsTwin

Yeah but what is so annoying and condescending about these posts of yours is the implication that the xi is not designed for performance AND safety. The car, it's numbers and many many drivers go completely against that implication. Still, for whatever reason, many 335i drivers feel better about themselves by pushing hard the theory that an xi is not a performance car. Sad really, that to prop up one car they feel they need to put down another.

Well first of all I never said its NOT designed for performamce AND safety. I said its a safety option that's not designed for performance. Its pretty much a fact.

I don't like to argue I vs xi, because I think both are pretty much equal, but the thing that sets me off, is when xi people call xdrive a performance feature. This is why I am posting here, not because I have something against xdrive.

[faz]

In addition to our 328i, we also have an X5.

If the X5 came in a RWD configuration, I would have bought that configuration.

Why deal with the complexity (higher maintenance cost and repair costs going forward) if you have no use for the 'x' drive?

In Canada (where I used to live more than a decade ago), I would have preferred and only bought a FWD or an AWD.

In California, RWD is my first choice.

[IN54NITY]

Such passsssssssion on here, better than a day-time soap.

[Nikolas]

Funny that the Xi as tested recently is faster than the i in both 0-60 and 1/4 mile times as well as holding a faster lap time at the Hockenheim track! Pretty good performance for a safety feature.

[ABerry]

Originally Posted by Nikolas

Funny that the Xi as tested recently is faster than the i in both 0-60 and 1/4 mile times as well as holding a faster lap time at the Hockenheim track! Pretty good performance for a safety feature.

nikolas.. we were all to cheap to pay the extra 3k for the X in front of our I

OK

[cb1111]

There is so much mis-information in this thread that I think I'll throw in my two cent's worth.

Let's start with tires.

Tires are the only thing that connect you with the ground. If the ground is slippery, then FWD or AWD or anything else won't help you if you are using the incorrect tires. AWD will not get you through snow with summer performance tires.

Drive systems

It is the totality of the design and the circumstances that determine which is better. Audi, Subaru and others made their name on the rally circuit based solely on AWD.

AWD can be a performance system or a safety system or a combination of both.

AWD with winter tires is the best system in snow and ice. It will give you more "go" power but the AWD doesn't help with stopping or steering - the tires do.

RWD shines when it comes to pure performance on dry maintained roads. Without electronic nannies, traction can be difficult in slippery conditions.

FWD has more traction (all else being equal) in slippery conditions but makes for a relatively poor "pure performance" car.

The driver

The most important part of the equation. Nobody here is a really good driver. We all think we are, but until we've gone to the driving schools we have no clue how bad we really are. We are using less than a 10th of our car's potential but we insist on modding it to get more performance. Mod yourself first and you'll have a faster car.

The bottom line

Drive systems depend on your requirements. Given that we do not drive our cars to their limits (often we exceed the laws of physics but that is because we aren't driving right) I would offer the following suggestion:

Predominantly dry roads - RWD
Slippery surfaces often - FWD
Slippery surfaces very often - AWD

They will all "perform" the same given our lack of real driving skills.

[BTM]

Originally Posted by Nikolas

Funny that the Xi as tested recently is faster than the i in both 0-60 and 1/4 mile times as well as holding a faster lap time at the Hockenheim track! Pretty good performance for a safety feature.

Go back to page 2 where we discussed the supposed Hockenheim lap times. There is much good reason to doubt that the 2 times are in fact comparable when it comes to variables like driver, weather, transmission, tires, etc. as none of that is actually provided in the citation for the lap times.

[Nikolas]

Originally Posted by ABerry

nikolas.. we were all to cheap to pay the extra 3k for the X in front of our I

OK

Fair enough. I don't have mine anymore either. I just always thought it was funny how the i vs xi was always based on assumptions. Now that real data is out there, there is always an excuse. I have yet to see any test data showing the i faster than the xi in both straight line and track performance. The only real data out there shows the opposite.

[Nikolas]

Originally Posted by BTM

Go back to page 2 where we discussed the supposed Hockenheim lap times. There is much good reason to doubt that the 2 times are in fact comparable when it comes to variables like driver, weather, transmission, tires, etc. as none of that is actually provided in the citation for the lap times.

My point is - there is no data showing the opposite. Every test done so far - C&D, Lap times, the comparo by MT all showed faster lap times and straight line performance with the XI. At lest those tests actually show real numbers and not presumptions.

[ABerry]

Originally Posted by Nikolas

Fair enough. I don't have mine anymore either. I just always thought it was funny how the i vs xi was always based on assumptions. Now that real data is out there, there is always an excuse. I have yet to see any test data showing the i faster than the xi in both straight line and track performance. The only real data out there shows the opposite.

if it is, the crazy amount of variables won't allow us to prove it... I think it's a stupid argument in the first place, 335>328 sure... but the mildly different results from the XI to the I are pointless.. although I do think the best designed race cars from nascar, to formula 1 are RWD for a reason

[Nikolas]

Originally Posted by ABerry

if it is, the crazy amount of variables won't allow us to prove it... I think it's a stupid argument in the first place, 335>328 sure... but the mildly different results from the XI to the I are pointless.. although I do think the best designed race cars from nascar, to formula 1 are RWD for a reason

Yes they are. In Nascar they are based upon the production vehicle. AWD is not permitted in Formula 1. Also the cost to maintain, and less fuel efficiency play a huge role in not running AWD in endurance racing.

If you are referring to performance and handling reasons, watch this series.

[IN54NITY]

Expounding/appending on cb's post, the mod list (note the top 3):

1. Driver
2. Driver
3. Driver
4. Tires
5. Suspension
6. Weight
7. Power
8. Brakes

Where does xi vs i fit in? xi helps in '5' somewhat, with traction, but is a detriment to '6'. AWD can help, case in point, Audi dominated the GTs back in the 90s, even with ~additional~ weight penalties. For fun, see this too: http://i.autoblog.com/2010/04/25/nis...eight-penalty/

Back to work.

[BTM]

Originally Posted by Nikolas

My point is - there is no data showing the opposite. Every test done so far - C&D, Lap times, the comparo by MT all showed faster lap times and straight line performance with the XI. At lest those tests actually show real numbers and not presumptions.

Right, there is no definitive data going either way. I was merely rebutting those who claimed I was being ridiculous for preferring the handling of the i to the xi and attempted to refute my subjective experiences with unverifiable and non-transparent lap times. I have never claimed one to be faster around a track than another, because I use my car on the street, so it is irrelevant to me. I am more concerned with steering feel and handling in day to day situations. There is much more to good handling from the consumer's point of view than the ability to get around a track quickly. I will gladly give up .2 sec to 60 or unquantifiable increases in aggregate cornering speed to drive the car that IMO offers a favorable driving experience 3/4 of the year, and is far from unlivable for the 1/4 of it many of us call winter.

[cb1111]

Originally Posted by aleckzandr

Expounding/appending on cb's post, the mod list (note the top 3):

1. Driver
2. Driver
3. Driver
4. Tires
5. Suspension
6. Weight
7. Power
8. Brakes

You forgot

9. Driver
10.Driver

[mmisterio]

XI or I?!

[ABerry]

if your worried about traction xi.. if your not then i

leave it at that