Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Sedans BMW 3-Series BMW 3-series vs Lexus IS
1523 messages, Last post on Aug 27, 2008 at 9:29 PM
You are in the BMW 3-Series Forum. Your Hosts are pat & karens
|
Replying to: brightness04 (Feb 21, 2006 2:36 pm) As I recall the NSX engine itself did not make the car competitive. It was the complete package and particularly the handling that caused the car to be rated high in comparison tests. If I remember correctly…it was usually slower on timed specs than the competition. I know you meant JUST the engine…the 1993, 270hp and 210 lb-ft (at high rpm) of torque does not compare very well to today’s modern engine. The turbo BMW 3 series of 300hp and 295 lb-ft at 1500rpm definitely has a more flexible engine...if specs are your thing that is. Now the IS does have good engine specs, impressive hp and torque, it is virtually on par with the regular 3 series as far as hp per liter. They do have the larger engine, if you can do the larger engine for the same price, and keep fuel consumption down, it is definitely an advantage. As far as being technically superior, I wouldn’t rate either the IS or 330i over the other. What really needs to be compared is what type of engine you can get for what amount of dollars. The M3 (I6) is an example of a normally aspirated engine that produced excellent power but is a little pricey. I would rate the 2.0 S2000 engine above the NSX only because it could be produced for much fewer dollars. I recently clicked on the Edmunds “Head2Head” comparison. For 26K MSRP you can get a 300+hp engine in a chevy, sure it’s a V8 with a 4speed tranny but still gets 28 mpg on the highway. Ok nobody wants an Impala here, especially me, but my point is…was…something or other…turned into rambling 
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: habitat1 (Feb 21, 2006 3:14 pm) I think I was the one who questioned your credibility, and I see another hole in it right now: "Verifiable facts, personal opinions, unsubstantiated claims. There is a difference." You were saying, my good sir... If anybody's credibility should not be challenged, or even insulted in this forum it should be brightness04. He has never verbally abused a single poster on these boards even when people with little knowledge or experience have questioned his. Their reasoning behind their arguments/attacks are that (like yourself) they have never done the same, so therefore, somebody else would not have the opportunity to have done what they said they have done. Very little behind their words. Now, I don't know about you, but I would wager that even if the GS 300's tranny is the same as the IS 350's, the fact that they are different enigine's although from the same GR series family of engines, the gearing is different. Heh, then again, you haven't driven the IS 350. Nevermind. I'd also wager that brightness04 is the most knowledgeable person when it comes to phyisics on these boards, period. More to it than saying it isn't an auto just cus it sounds weird to you. 
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: kdshapiro (Feb 21, 2006 3:01 pm) I owned two 5 series for over a decade, one of which was actually lighter than today's e90, and it did not even have VSC. So I know RWD sports sedans quite well.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: ivan_99 (Feb 21, 2006 3:36 pm) it's ok...we're all guilty of that at some point or another. 
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: habitat1 (Feb 21, 2006 3:14 pm) |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: ivan_99 (Feb 21, 2006 3:36 pm) Only the engine was brought up in this discussion because I was replying to a post about engine. The rest of the car is quite out of the scope of this forum. I know you meant JUST the engine…the 1993, 270hp and 210 lb-ft (at high rpm) of torque does not compare very well to today’s modern engine. The turbo BMW 3 series of 300hp and 295 lb-ft at 1500rpm definitely has a more flexible engine...if specs are your thing that is. In case you missed it, the 320hp 325ft-lb Supra turbo engine of 1993 was comparing to the 2006 BMW turbo engine. The NSX' engine was being compared to the 255hp and 215lb-ft normally aspirated 3L. For 15 year's difference, you are welcome to draw your own conclusions on both the turbo pair and non-turbo pair. BTW, I agree with you that HP/L is a fool's game. What really matters is power, torque and fuel consumption, plus some other detail such as packageability . . . after all we do want some crumple zone 
|
|
|
Replying to: brightness04 (Feb 21, 2006 3:38 pm) And you higlander will slide off the road before a Zamboni! Your example is highly irrelevant. I never bought my BMW because of the way it drives on snow. And I have never slid off any road so far these past eight years in snow-blown Toronto.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: dewey (Feb 21, 2006 3:52 pm) BTW, the irrelevance was exactly what I was trying to point out with KD's 90 in a curve scenerio . . . none of the three cars would be left in a dust at those speeds. It all boils down to tire and road condition if any of them starts sliding. |
|
|
I say let's get back to comparing the subject vehicles and we get farther from that than we've ever been. If anyone wants this comparo to continue, they need to step up and post something appropriate to the topic. |
|
You are here:
Forums
Sedans BMW 3-Series BMW 3-series vs Lexus IS
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2008 Lexus IS 250
2008 Lexus IS 350
2008 BMW 3 Series
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
