Last post on Dec 06, 2013 at 7:58 AM
You are in the Sedans
What is this discussion about?
BMW 3 Series, Infiniti G37, Acura TL, Lexus IS 350, Mercedes-Benz C-Class, Cadillac CTS, Volvo S60, Audi A4, Acura TSX, Car Comparisons, Sedan
#7432 of 16984 Re: Chips. readerreader......... [joe131]
Jan 01, 2007 (3:33 pm)
And then after that new M3 comes out with the V-10, some chip company will come out with a chip to increase its horsepower too, right?And then I'll pose the same question: Why didn't BMW just put the higher performance chip into it in the first place if increased performance is so easy?
Emissions, an ability to offer more performance easily later on, a decision not to intrude on the power levels of the next step up, etc.
I suppose you'll answer because BMW ain't dumb, it just must protect the upcoming 2009 M5?
Look at Audi's work with the 1.8T. In 2001 you could get it with 150 hp in the Jetta/Passat. In 2002 the power was bumped to 180 but structurally nothing was different. The exhaust was slightly different but really what changed: ecu. That same engine in the TT made 225 hp.
And what was VW protecting by not putting higher performance chips in those you mentioned?
See above. The 150 hp 2001 Jetta v. 180 hp 2001 A4 and TT. Eventually VW put the A4 and Jetta at the same power levels as they realized most people don't opt for a Jetta over an A4 or vice versa. Currently the 2.0T in the A4, A3, Jetta, Passat and GTI makes 200 hp. Well, the upcoming TT will make 220 hp - same engine.
Oh, and the 335i is 300 HP and 300 Torque. Just drove a coupe a couple weeks ago. Pretty car.)
Again,do some research. Dynos show the 335i makes ~330/330. BMW's marketing guys say 300/300. The SAE rules make it impossible to overrate an engine (like honda did the TL for years) but they don't bar a company from underrating the engine.
Why underrate the 335i? Two reasons:
1. The competition is around the 300s. So to stay level but offer more performance BMW simply claims 300/300. If the G35 or IS350 sees a bump to 320, BMW can match without ever changing a thing.
2. The last year of the M3 and even the upcoming e9x M3. The current M3 is a lame duck. At 50k+ it's a hardsell to push someone into an e46 M3 when the e9x 335i makes the same power for less money. The e9x M3 will make far more power but really the performance reward won't be huge. So BMW must make the gulf seem large enough on paper to entice people to drop 65k of so for an e9x M3 in 08.
#7433 of 16984 Re: Chips void factory warranties. [kdshapiro]
Jan 01, 2007 (3:37 pm)
KD vishnu is selling a Xede for the 335i. I posted the dyno on it. He's charging around $1400 for it. The power gains are immense.
#7434 of 16984 335i Dyno Result
Jan 01, 2007 (3:59 pm)
According to automobilemag.com, the 335i posted 275 RWHP on its dyno run.
335i Dyno Graph
#7435 of 16984 Re: 335i Dyno Result [louiswei]
Jan 01, 2007 (4:35 pm)
275 RWHP. Allowing for a 15% driveline loss, that equals about 325 HP at the crank.
Based on the curb weight, gearing, and 1/4 mile times, I'd say 320-330 is about right.
#7437 of 16984 Re: Chips. readerreader......... [spiritinthesky]
Jan 01, 2007 (5:01 pm)
My nephew recently purchased a 335i sedan. While it diplays impressive acceleration for a "regular" 3 series, the overall performance still falls well short of the M3, especially in the area of handling. What distinguishes the M3 from all of its competition is near 911 quality steering and handling. You don't get that with an aftermarket Dinan chip. And the 335i, while an ELLPS segment leader, will never play with a 911 around a track, chipped or not.
Ah, but keep in mind: an M3 is 10-20k more expensive than a comparably equipped 335i. You can add some serious mods to a 335i sedans and come in well under 50k without even trying. Out of the box, the 335i posts near e46 M3 handling and performance numbers - check the lap times of the 335i. Remove the RFTs, slap on a chip, add thicker roll bars and maybe some springs/shocks and you have an easy e46 M3 beater (a car that's really old school at this point).
BTW, I have no loyalty to BMW or the M models. I feel the V8 in the e9x M3 is a very bad idea. Using a modified version of the torque-deficient M engine from the M5 and M6 is a super bad idea, IMHO.
#7438 of 16984 Re: 335i Dyno Result [fedlawman]
Jan 01, 2007 (5:26 pm)
Allowing for a 15% driveline loss
Using the "15% rule", it'll be interesting to find out other ELLPS' dyno results as well. Maybe it's not only the BMW whom underrated its engine.
Edit: Found it, from www.dragtimes.com:
All stock configuration (with # besides the horsepower):
2006 Acura TL: 223.04 RWHP (= 262 HP before 15% loss, Official: 258 HP)
2007 BMW 335i: 275.89 RWHP (= 325 HP before 15% loss, Official: 300 HP)
2005 Infiniti G35 Coupe: 242.20 RWHP (= 285 HP before 15% loss, Official: 298 HP)
2006 Lexus IS350: 268.4 RWHP (= 316 HP before 15% loss, Official: 306 HP)
#7439 of 16984 Re: 335i Dyno Result [louiswei]
Jan 01, 2007 (8:08 pm)
Just an fyi - One of the mags (or maybe edmunds, I really don't recall) posted a 299.xx on a dyno run. You can search for it. That is probably the exception rather than the norm, but it does show the engine is a very capable one.
#7441 of 16984 Re: 335i Dyno Result [blueguydotcom]
Jan 02, 2007 (6:40 am)
it seems turbo cars typically vary quite a bit from the factory. Turbos are also affected more severely by temperatures.
I don't doubt there is someone out there somewhere who finds their 335i to be 300hp, as the factory specifies. And maybe that's why BMW rated it that way. Just a theory.