Close

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 79
  1. #26
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    1,584
    Rep Points
    2,017.3
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    21


    0 out of 1 members liked this post. Reputation: Yes | No
    I thought you were BUYING the 335is not SELLING it... My bad. I was giving my opinion. To drop 80k (again, thinking you were making a purchase) - I would go with the M3 for track duty. I completely missed the entire point of the thread. Wow.

  2. #27
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    336
    Rep Points
    309.1
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    4



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by inlineS54B32 Click here to enlarge
    I lied - this is my last post... You need to look at TRAP speeds - 108 is FAR behind the M3. I don't know why I am talking about this - you have to be trolling.

    0-100 M3 - 9.4s
    0-100 335is - 11.4


    http://fastestlaps.com/cars/bmw_335is_m_sport.html
    http://fastestlaps.com/cars/bmw_m3_e92.html

    Facts are facts - what you are saying, is completely ridiculous if you are truly being serious.
    Wow looks like "fastestlaps.com" is really good at taking car and drivers number and hitting ctrl-c then ctrl-v. Car and driver is the only publication I have ever seen post the 12.4 number. Also the figures for the 335is of this website I have never heard of has to be from a 6spd. I dont want to get into a 6spd vs dct debate but you could always ask the single turbo 6spd supra that I only pulled on in the shifts what he thinks.

    Try dragtimes, and notice that the fastest time for a stock m3 is a 12.5 with no picture of a timeslip. 12.8 is the fastest with a slip.

  3. #28
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,826
    Rep Points
    31,567.3
    Mentioned
    2065 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by BMWJunkie Click here to enlarge
    Wow looks like "fastestlaps.com" is really good at taking car and drivers number and hitting ctrl-c then ctrl-v. Car and driver is the only publication I have ever seen post the 12.4 number. Also the figures for the 335is of this website I have never heard of has to be from a 6spd. I dont want to get into a 6spd vs dct debate but you could always ask the single turbo 6spd supra that I only pulled on in the shifts what he thinks.

    Try dragtimes, and notice that the fastest time for a stock m3 is a 12.5 with no picture of a timeslip. 12.8 is the fastest with a slip.
    You know that's because the 12.5 comes from a mag right?

  4. #29
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    1,584
    Rep Points
    2,017.3
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    21


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    You know that's because the 12.5 comes from a mag right?
    No, he doesn't know that - he's trolling. No one can be this ridiculous. To top all this off, that car in the magazine was a 6-speed.

    Just to sum up (THESE ARE REAL THINGS THAT @BMWJunkie has said):

    - An M3 weighs a few hundred pounds more than a 335is
    - Even though the 335is is a few SECONDS slower (0-100 MPH) than the M3 in any test found, it doesn't matter
    - All it takes is a differential to make the 335is faster than an M3 - but SHHHH - this is a BMW secret/trick - they didn't want to make the M3 owners mad
    - There are only 200 parts between the cars that differ - even though BMW themselves claim over 80% differ
    - The 100 horsepower advantage that the M3 has doesn't matter because... I don't really know the answer, it just doesn't. (Because N54?)
    - 335is is a Supra killer because of DCT
    - 108 MPH trap speed on the 335is is CLOSE to the M3 @ 114-115 (this is my favorite)
    - A 335is will handle the same by replacing the crappy brake lines off of the 335is with the crappy brake lines off the M3 - oh, plus a subframe and some other suspension parts (the carbon fiber roof and other things that make the M3 have more torsional/structural rigidity don't matter - because ... N54).
    - He has driven EVERY BMW, and thinks the M6 (with 505 HP) is slower than a 335is stock

    Again - my favorite, a 108 trap speed is close to an M3.

    He either doesn't own this car, is screwing around - or is trolling. Remember, this is a BRAND NEW 335is, and he is "just feeling people out" for sale... That's the most ridiculous thing I have heard; in other words, he is trolling and caught me. Click here to enlarge

    Stock for stock, they aren't comparable. A 335is will never compare to an M3 - other than beat it in straight line speed (tuned). Period.

  5. #30
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,826
    Rep Points
    31,567.3
    Mentioned
    2065 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316


    Reputation: Yes | No
    He just doesn't really seem to know what he is talking about but whatever it's a for sale thread.

  6. #31
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    336
    Rep Points
    309.1
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    4



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Wow dude. You got it all figured out from $#@! you read on the internet. Everything I've stated is due to REAL WORLD EXPERIENCE. Yes, my OLD 335is that I had for two years running 19psi on e85 made m5's and m6's feel slow. See any stock m6's running 11's? I have also had a 335is and a m3 dct on lifts right next to each other half apart. Measuring, comparing, checking, doing research. Reason I don't believe everything bmw says is because the performance numbers they release rarely match up 100% to the real world.

    I never said there were only 200 parts that were different, only that I changed 200 parts not the 20 you assumed I did.

    I'll let the videos and timeslips do the talking when I'm ready.

  7. #32
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    13,460
    Rep Points
    58.0
    Mentioned
    318 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by BMWJunkie Click here to enlarge
    Stock turbo e85 n54's getting 450ish hp and 500tq. Not to mention my 335is weighs 3480lbs. m3's are around 3700-3800 if im not mistaken.

    What im getting at is that anyone who loves the N54 this brings everything about an M3 that makes it "better" and puts it all in one package.
    you are mistaken

  8. #33
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    13,460
    Rep Points
    58.0
    Mentioned
    318 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by BMWJunkie Click here to enlarge
    Wow looks like "fastestlaps.com" is really good at taking car and drivers number and hitting ctrl-c then ctrl-v. Car and driver is the only publication I have ever seen post the 12.4 number. Also the figures for the 335is of this website I have never heard of has to be from a 6spd. I dont want to get into a 6spd vs dct debate but you could always ask the single turbo 6spd supra that I only pulled on in the shifts what he thinks.

    Try dragtimes, and notice that the fastest time for a stock m3 is a 12.5 with no picture of a timeslip. 12.8 is the fastest with a slip.
    you know, i ran 12.5 @115 stock right..

  9. #34
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    California
    Posts
    675
    Rep Points
    986.1
    Mentioned
    31 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Reputation: Yes | No
    My stock DCT m3 ran 107 MPH over and over again. I never seen anything higher. 109 with full catless exhaust and intake.

  10. #35
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,826
    Rep Points
    31,567.3
    Mentioned
    2065 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by keikdasneak Click here to enlarge
    My stock DCT m3 ran 107 MPH over and over again. I never seen anything higher. 109 with full catless exhaust and intake.
    That's pretty slow where at and what weather? I ran 106 in my E46 M3...

  11. #36
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    California
    Posts
    675
    Rep Points
    986.1
    Mentioned
    31 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    That's pretty slow where at and what weather? I ran 106 in my E46 M3...
    Actually now that I look at my old time slips it was 109 mph completely stock. I ran 10 times that day and it kept doing 109 mph no matter what I did.

    about 90 degrees Famoso Raceway.

  12. #37
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,826
    Rep Points
    31,567.3
    Mentioned
    2065 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by keikdasneak Click here to enlarge
    Actually now that I look at my old time slips it was 109 mph completely stock. I ran 10 times that day and it kept doing 109 mph no matter what I did.

    about 90 degrees Famoso Raceway.
    That sounds more like it especially at Famoso in that weather.

  13. #38
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    160
    Rep Points
    487.1
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    5


    Reputation: Yes | No
    The title irks me, its not a Hybrid of an M3 lol. My 135i takes alot of M3 parts, but I'd never call it a cross between an M3 and a 135i. Similarly, sharing the N54 and chassis and 80% of the parts from a 1M doesn't make mine a hybrid 135i / 1M. Kind of silly logic there.

    Regardless, I do appreciate a job well done transforming your 335is into a well performing machine. Best of luck with your sale.
    Click here to enlarge
    471whp on E85

  14. #39
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    336
    Rep Points
    309.1
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    4



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by inlineS54B32 Click here to enlarge
    - All it takes is a differential to make the 335is faster than an M3 - but SHHHH - this is a BMW secret/trick - they didn't want to make the M3 owners mad
    http://www.m5board.com/vbulletin/e60...k-results.html

    Wonder how many tenths it would be good for if his car had a DCT.

  15. #40
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    336
    Rep Points
    309.1
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    4



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge
    Attached Images Attached Images  

  16. #41
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    1,584
    Rep Points
    2,017.3
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    21


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by BMWJunkie Click here to enlarge
    http://www.m5board.com/vbulletin/e60...k-results.html

    Wonder how many tenths it would be good for if his car had a DCT.
    I don't think I need to explain this - but you understand why this works on an M5, but wouldn't work on a 335i, right?

  17. #42
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    336
    Rep Points
    309.1
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    4



    Reputation: Yes | No
    You probably should explain it because I don't know anything.

  18. #43
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    336
    Rep Points
    309.1
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    4



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by inlineS54B32 Click here to enlarge
    Simplified - (power = RPM * Torque) - so, for every extra RPM that the S65 spins over the 335i, you have to make another ft-lb of torque.
    M3 230wtq x 8500rpm = 1955000
    335is 350wtq x 5700rpm = 1995000

    Sounds like a valid argument.

  19. #44
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    1,584
    Rep Points
    2,017.3
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    21


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by BMWJunkie Click here to enlarge
    M3 230wtq x 8500rpm = 1955000
    335is 350wtq x 5700rpm = 1995000

    Sounds like a valid argument.

    Right - that's the point... BECAUSE of the high RPMs you can take advantage of shortened gearing. Otherwise - you would be shifting so often it will offset the gain. With a DCT, you will of course be in a MUCH position since it's nearly instant, but with only 1,000-1500 RPMs or so to play with (guessing here) after every shift, it's going to be "different" to say the least.

    There is a reason most people actually go TALLER on the 335i - instead of trying to take advantage of RPMs (in this car there isn't much to play with) - they offset that with more torque (boost) - and throw a taller gear on. There is an article/post about this somewhere on the forum - I will dig it up.

  20. #45
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    1,584
    Rep Points
    2,017.3
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    21


    Reputation: Yes | No
    I think the S65 makes a lot more torque than 230 by the way... At the crank, it's right near 300 - and looking at a few graphs, I see most are above 250 - and most are in the 265 range stock.

  21. #46
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,826
    Rep Points
    31,567.3
    Mentioned
    2065 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by BMWJunkie Click here to enlarge
    M3 230wtq x 8500rpm = 1955000
    335is 350wtq x 5700rpm = 1995000

    Sounds like a valid argument.
    Now do 530+ wheel torque for the M3 at 85000 rpm.

  22. #47
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,826
    Rep Points
    31,567.3
    Mentioned
    2065 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by inlineS54B32 Click here to enlarge
    I think the S65 makes a lot more torque than 230 by the way... At the crank, it's right near 300 - and looking at a few graphs, I see most are above 250 - and most are in the 265 range stock.
    Yes, it does.

  23. #48
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    73
    Rep Points
    84.0
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    3 out of 4 members liked this post. Reputation: Yes | No
    Not sure if this debate is still going on. I agree with everything the folks have said here in regards to the m3. I will add however the parts the OP put on the 335 do not come close. 85 percent of the m3 has different parts than the 335. Some notable stuff is chassis stiffness, extra reinforcements, bracing and stiffness which is a huge part of its ability to handle as well as it does. Its not just the bolt on stuff like shocks etc. It has much beefier strut tower braces, again a big reason for handling.

    Weight is 3550-3600 btw

    Hood is aluminum.

    S65 is shorter and further back in the engine bay making weight distribution better.

    Mdct is a lot different than the dct in the 335is

    Subframes themselves are stronger, lighter and have other components that you did not add. Unsprung weight in lighter subframes, lighter wheels and lighter suspension parts is a huge benefit in handling with lower unsprung weight.

    Carbon fiber roof on the M3 coupe- 60 pounds less weight than the sunroof 335is on the heighest point of the car.

    M3 seats are the best in any bmw and way better.

    M3 steering is heavier and the steering rack and ratio is sportier and takes less turning to move the car-less lock to lock and more direct feeling.

    Really you made a car that is not even close. Not even a good try to be honest. And you "will let it go for 80k"? LOL that is just some hilarious $#@!

    Flat paneled underbody really helps reduce lift and stability at high speeds

    This is just off the top of my head. Its odd the OP replaced the driveshaft. There is no benefit to what you did with that. Even a carbon fiber driveshaft that is much lighter actually makes almost zero difference in performance

  24. #49
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,826
    Rep Points
    31,567.3
    Mentioned
    2065 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Wannbm5 Click here to enlarge
    Not sure if this debate is still going on. I agree with everything the folks have said here in regards to the m3. I will add however the parts the OP put on the 335 do not come close. 85 percent of the m3 has different parts than the 335. Some notable stuff is chassis stiffness, extra reinforcements, bracing and stiffness which is a huge part of its ability to handle as well as it does. Its not just the bolt on stuff like shocks etc. It has much beefier strut tower braces, again a big reason for handling.

    Weight is 3550-3600 btw

    Hood is aluminum.

    S65 is shorter and further back in the engine bay making weight distribution better.

    Mdct is a lot different than the dct in the 335is

    Subframes themselves are stronger, lighter and have other components that you did not add. Unsprung weight in lighter subframes, lighter wheels and lighter suspension parts is a huge benefit in handling with lower unsprung weight.

    Carbon fiber roof on the M3 coupe- 60 pounds less weight than the sunroof 335is on the heighest point of the car.

    M3 seats are the best in any bmw and way better.

    M3 steering is heavier and the steering rack and ratio is sportier and takes less turning to move the car-less lock to lock and more direct feeling.

    Really you made a car that is not even close. Not even a good try to be honest. And you "will let it go for 80k"? LOL that is just some hilarious $#@!

    Flat paneled underbody really helps reduce lift and stability at high speeds

    This is just off the top of my head. Its odd the OP replaced the driveshaft. There is no benefit to what you did with that. Even a carbon fiber driveshaft that is much lighter actually makes almost zero difference in performance
    You sir are welcome to stay, great post.

    The 335 versus M3 debate is idiotic, as evidenced here.

  25. #50
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    336
    Rep Points
    309.1
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    4



    1 out of 1 members liked this post. Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Wannbm5 Click here to enlarge
    Not sure if this debate is still going on. I agree with everything the folks have said here in regards to the m3. I will add however the parts the OP put on the 335 do not come close. 85 percent of the m3 has different parts than the 335. Some notable stuff is chassis stiffness, extra reinforcements, bracing and stiffness which is a huge part of its ability to handle as well as it does. Its not just the bolt on stuff like shocks etc. It has much beefier strut tower braces, again a big reason for handling.

    Weight is 3550-3600 btw

    Hood is aluminum.

    S65 is shorter and further back in the engine bay making weight distribution better.

    Mdct is a lot different than the dct in the 335is

    Subframes themselves are stronger, lighter and have other components that you did not add. Unsprung weight in lighter subframes, lighter wheels and lighter suspension parts is a huge benefit in handling with lower unsprung weight.

    Carbon fiber roof on the M3 coupe- 60 pounds less weight than the sunroof 335is on the heighest point of the car.

    M3 seats are the best in any bmw and way better.

    M3 steering is heavier and the steering rack and ratio is sportier and takes less turning to move the car-less lock to lock and more direct feeling.

    Really you made a car that is not even close. Not even a good try to be honest. And you "will let it go for 80k"? LOL that is just some hilarious $#@!

    Flat paneled underbody really helps reduce lift and stability at high speeds

    This is just off the top of my head. Its odd the OP replaced the driveshaft. There is no benefit to what you did with that. Even a carbon fiber driveshaft that is much lighter actually makes almost zero difference in performance

    I have to disagree with you on a few of your points.

    The chassis of an m3 has rigidity due to the strut bar and underbody bracing. These components are BOLT ON the body of the car is the same. If you ever worked on one of these cars you would know that.

    The driveshaft of the m3 is required not because its a performance upgrade. It is larger and heavier. The reason it is required is because the m3 diff is bolted to the driveshaft differently then a 335. If you are going to use a m3 diff, you are required to use a m3 driveshaft and m3 axles. Again, if you ever even looked at the underside of both vehicles, you would know this, but obviously you haven't.

    The s65 engine is indeed shorter but it is wider and sits further forward in the engine compartment. That is why with the m3 driveshaft needs to be shortened to perform this swap.

    The dct is the SAME, only difference is programming.

    I did swap the rear subframe, and all components in the rear of the vehicle. Not sure how you are even making this argument. I completely agree with you that the aluminum control arms and more rigid subframe and mounts are a huge benefit. Thats why I used them Click here to enlarge

    The m3 rack does have a closer ratio for lock to lock, but since my swap I have found that the m3 steering is the way it is due to geometry of the front knuckle. The mounting point of the tie rod to the knuckle is moved further forward creating a more direct feel and less steering effort. It is a great upgrade and does feel very direct and precise.

    All bmws being currently produced have a flat panel underbody, but since its pretty clear you have never been under or worked on bmws you would have no idea.

    Next time you come up with stuff off the top of your head at least try and make sure its accurate.

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •