Article Comments - 2007 BMW 335i Coupe Full Test

18 messages, Last post on Apr 21, 2007 at 8:39 PM

You are in the BMW 318ti Forum. Your Host is claires

What is this discussion about? BMW 3 Series, Coupe

Article comments for Full Test: 2007 BMW 335i Coupe - BMW has created the ultimate all-around sport coupe. (more)

Outline

Messages Page 1 of 2: 1; 2; Prev; Next; Last

#1 of 18 Article Comments: 2007 BMW 335i Coupe Full Test by KarenS HOST Nov 27, 2006 (9:45 am)
Check out our 2007 335i full test. Post your comments here! Full Test: 2007 BMW 335i Coupe
#2 of 18 BMW 335i Coupe by mobar Nov 27, 2006 (1:26 pm)
Summed up in 1 word: Amazing
#3 of 18 BMW slipped Edmunds a ringer! by jaserb Nov 27, 2006 (2:33 pm)
So, it's not just a little bit strange that the press car has that extra half PSI of boost over the customer car, and not the other way around? Kudos to Edmunds to getting it on a dyno to figure out what was up, but why didn't they make a bigger stink about it? They should have called someone at BMW on the carpet. Oh, and I hope poor Sophie feels better. -Jason Replies to this message: blueguydotcom (Nov 27, 2006 4:16 pm) jaserb (Nov 27, 2006 6:32 pm) threxx (Nov 28, 2006 12:28 pm) and 5 more...
#4 of 18 Car and Driver Test Comments by circlew Nov 27, 2006 (3:08 pm)
MARK GILLIES The BMW 335i may just be the best car in the world at the moment, if you balance performance, style, and sheer driving pleasure against value for the dollar. It has replaced the outgoing E46 M3 as the car I would buy as my daily driver, particularly since it is far more forgiving over broken pavement yet still has the suds to allow you to kick the tail out of line when you’re in hooligan mode. I even like the way it looks, which is an admission for someone who has generally loathed the Bangle/van Hooydonk experiment with ugliness at BMW. The car’s only fault? An interior that still looks low-rent compared with the beautifully crafted cabin of the old 3-series. DAVE VANDERWERP There are few things we’d change on the current 3-series, but until now, it had somewhat average horsepower. The ’07 335i matches the performance of an E46 M3 but without the raspy metallic scream or compromised ride quality, and it packs the strongest midrange ever felt in a 3-series. Don’t worry, BMW didn’t forget that we all love its smooth, quick-revving inline-sixes, so the turbo engine conceals its newfound boost with a shockingly linear power delivery all the way to the high 7000-rpm redline. Even the classic six-cylinder sound is retained. Long-running benchmarks don’t have to lead on every front, but now the 3-series does just that. CSABA CSERE The current BMW 3.0-liter inline-six offers such a sublime combination of power, refinement, light weight, and efficiency that I was not jazzed by the prospect of seeing twin turbos bolted onto it. Why compromise throttle response, economy, and weight for just 45 more ponies? But the new engine delivers broadband performance way beyond its specs, shaving nearly a second from the 330i’s quarter-mile time. And it does so with only a hint of turbo lag — at 1500 rpm — and the same turbine smoothness that makes all BMW engines so delicious. There’s a reason the company’s initials stand for Bavarian Motor Works.
#5 of 18 CD Test Results and Specs by circlew Nov 27, 2006 (3:35 pm)
2007 BMW 335i Coupe - Specs 1 \| 2 \| 3 \| 4 (continued) BMW 335i Vehicle type: front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 4-passenger, 2-door coupe Price as tested: $45,720 Price and option breakdown: base BMW 335i (includes $695 freight), $41,295; Premium package (includes universal garage-door opener, auto-dimming rearview mirror with compass, and lumbar support), $2450; Sport package (consists of 18-inch alloy wheels, sport seats, and increased top-speed limiter), $1000; heated front seats, $500; metallic paint, $475 Major standard accessories: power windows, seats, locks, and sunroof; remote locking; A/C; cruise control; tilting and telescoping steering wheel; rear defroster Sound system: BMW AM-FM radio/CD player, 13 speakers ENGINE Type: twin-turbocharged and intercooled inline-6, aluminum block and head Bore x stroke: 3.31 x 3.53 in, 84.0 x 89.6mm Displacement: 182 cu in, 2979cc Compression ratio: 10.5:1 Fuel-delivery system: direct injection Turbocharger: Mitsubishi Maximum boost pressure: 8.5 psi Valve gear: chain-driven double overhead cams, 4 valves per cylinder, hydraulic lifters, variable intake- and exhaust-valve timing Power (SAE net): 300 bhp 5800 rpm Torque (SAE net): 300 lb-ft 1400 rpm Redline: 7000 rpm DRIVETRAIN Transmission: 6-speed manual Final-drive ratio: 3.08:1 Gear: Ratio: Mph/1000 rpm Max test speed I 4.06 5.8 40 mph (7000 rpm) II 2.40 9.7 68 mph (7000 rpm) III 1.58 14.8 104 mph (7000 rpm) IV 1.19 19.7 138 mph (7000 rpm) V 1.00 23.4 144 mph (6150 rpm) VI 0.87 26.9 144 mph (5350 rpm) DIMENSIONS Wheelbase: 108.7 in Track, front/rear: 59.1/59.6 in Length/width/height: 180.3/70.2/54.2 in Drag area, Cd (0.30) x frontal area (22.7 sq ft, est): 6.8 sq ft Curb weight: 3557 lb Weight distribution, F/R: 51.1/48.9% Curb weight per horsepower: 11.9 lb Fuel capacity: 15.9 gal CHASSIS/BODY Type: unit construction Body material: welded steel stampings and injection-molded thermoplastic INTERIOR SAE volume, front seat: 49 cu ft rear seat: 37 cu ft trunk: 11 cu ft Front-seat adjustments: fore-and-aft, seatback angle, front height, rear height, lumbar support, upper side bolsters, thigh support Restraint systems, front: manual 3-point belts; driver and passenger front, side, and curtain airbags rear: manual 3-point belts, curtain airbags SUSPENSION Front: ind, strut located by 1 lateral link and 1 diagonal link, coil springs, anti-roll bar Rear: ind; 2 lateral links, 2 diagonal links, and 1 toe-control link per side; coil springs; anti-roll bar STEERING Type: rack-and-pinion with variable hydraulic power assist Steering ratio: 16.0:1 Turns lock-to-lock: 3.0 Turning circle curb-to-curb: 36.1 ft BRAKES Type: hydraulic with vacuum power assist, anti-lock control, and electronic panic assist Front: 13.7 x 1.2-in vented disc Rear: 13.2 x 0.9-in vented disc WHEELS AND TIRES Wheel size: F: 8.0 x 18 in, R: 8.5 x 18 in Wheel type: cast aluminum Tires: Bridgestone Potenza RE050A RFT; F: 225/40R-18 88W, R: 255/35R-18 90W Test inflation pressures, F/R: 33/35 psi Spare: none C/D TEST RESULTS ACCELERATION Seconds Zero to 30 mph 1.9 40 mph 2.6 50 mph 3.8 60 mph 4.9 70 mph 6.5 80 mph 8.1 90 mph 9.9 100 mph 12.1 110 mph 15.0 120 mph 17.9 130 mph 21.6 140 mph 28.0 Street start, 5-60 mph: 5.6 Top-gear acceleration, 30-50 mph: 6.5 50-70 mph: 6.0 Standing 1/4 mile: 13.6 sec 105 mph Top speed (drag limited): 144 mph BRAKING 70-0 mph impending lockup: 160 ft HANDLING Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.87 g Understeer: minimal moderate excessive FUEL ECONOMY EPA city driving: 19 mpg EPA highway driving: 28 mpg C/D observed: 18 mpg INTERIOR SOUND LEVEL Idle: 49 dBA Full-throttle acceleration: 75 dBA 70-mph cruising: 69 dBA It's interesting that the fuel econpmy drops with the turbo's. I'm sure it's due to the nature of the test, leaning toward performance. The bottom line is BMW is on the offensive with this series vs. the G, IS, and A/S4. Regards, OW
#6 of 18 Re: BMW slipped Edmunds a ringer! [jaserb] by blueguydotcom Nov 27, 2006 (4:16 pm)
Replying to: jaserb (Nov 27, 2006 2:33 pm) Um, actually if you dig around on the forums (bimmerfest, e90post.com) you'll see many, many dynos and there's always variation. The following is related to stock v. tuned 335i cars: http://www.e90post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=37515 As you can see the 335 has tremendous amount of space for massive power gains. Replies to this message: jaserb (Nov 27, 2006 6:32 pm) threxx (Nov 28, 2006 12:28 pm) circlew (Nov 28, 2006 1:23 pm) and 4 more...
#7 of 18 Re: BMW slipped Edmunds a ringer! [blueguydotcom] by jaserb Nov 27, 2006 (6:32 pm)
Replying to: blueguydotcom (Nov 27, 2006 4:16 pm) Yeah, but this is same dyno, same day, with very different boost measurements on totally stock cars. I'm no turbo tuning expert, but either one car had some bad / low octane gas or the boost control is set differently between the two cars. All that said, what a fantastic car. -Jason Replies to this message: threxx (Nov 28, 2006 12:28 pm) circlew (Nov 28, 2006 1:23 pm) threxx (Nov 28, 2006 2:32 pm) and 3 more...
#8 of 18 Re: BMW slipped Edmunds a ringer! [jaserb] by threxx Nov 28, 2006 (12:28 pm)
Replying to: jaserb (Nov 27, 2006 6:32 pm) Yes, I agree - all dyno test results tend to have some variation due to different temperature, humidity, mileage on the car, small differences in the way the car/motor was built that particular day, general 'luck of the draw' factors, and especially the machine that was used to dyno being different, often times not even close to the same make and model of dyno machine or testing methods. But in this case everything should have been almost identical. In fact they WERE almost identical until almost 6000 on the nose. Same day, same dynometer, I doubt the temp or humidity changed dramatically in such a short passage of time. And, I could be wrong but aren't modern day turbo cars very closely monitored by the engine control unit to the point where the ECU would easily see the extra half a pound of extra boost and cut back on it unless it had been programmed to use that much boost? I suppose the best way to get an idea if this is possibly an ethical issue with BMW trying to sneak in a 'slight' ringer to Edmunds (and possibly others) would be to have some other private BMW owners actually monitor their stock boost on the dyno. If everyone else is consistantly half a pound lower at high RPM then I think the answer here is obvious. Heck, it may already be pretty obvious to Edmunds but they don't risk making BMW mad and/or the off chance that they make a false accusation... so they've left it up to us to 'connect the dots'? Replies to this message: circlew (Nov 28, 2006 1:23 pm) threxx (Nov 28, 2006 2:32 pm) circlew (Nov 28, 2006 2:41 pm) and 2 more...
#9 of 18 Re: BMW slipped Edmunds a ringer! [threxx] by circlew Nov 28, 2006 (1:23 pm)
Replying to: threxx (Nov 28, 2006 12:28 pm) It really doesn't matter if this is true or not. The bottom line is there was no major mechanical or electronic differences that were apparent. I like the fact that this test was done to show variations car to car. I assume we would ask the testing editors of C&D, R&T, Automobile, Etc. to continue the dyno results vs. other cars not in any given road test to see if apples = apples or if there is a marketing factor involved. Let's test the testers, so to speak. Regards, OW Replies to this message: threxx (Nov 28, 2006 2:32 pm) circlew (Nov 28, 2006 2:41 pm) threxx (Nov 28, 2006 7:29 pm) and 1 more...
#10 of 18 Re: BMW slipped Edmunds a ringer! [circlew] by threxx Nov 28, 2006 (2:32 pm)
Replying to: circlew (Nov 28, 2006 1:23 pm) Maximum boost being half a pound high on stock trim is possibly the result of a change to the ECU (electronics) which affects the mechanicals and results in a pretty major power increase across the upper RPM range (where acceleration tests will be improved) I'd say it does matter from an ethical standpoint if BMW is trying to slip slightly modded tester cars to the magazines and editorials. It doesn't change the fact that it's still a great performing car for the money, but it might cause people to watch BMW test vehicles a little more closely to see if they're playing fair and if the numbers the magazines put up for acceleration tests are truly realistic for the cars being sold to consumers. Replies to this message: circlew (Nov 28, 2006 2:41 pm) threxx (Nov 28, 2006 7:29 pm) blue330xi (Dec 03, 2006 11:38 pm)