Maybe the question is a bit rhetorical. I have a Dinan S3 running 5.5 PSI of boost and I had a 335 turbo with a little bit of work done to it chase me down and we gave it a pretty good run. I should say that I think he is a bit faster than I am (not by much but he started to come from behind me at about 145-150mph, which I found shocking. I wanted to ask the message board how fast these things are, and aside from changing out my pullies to get more boost what could I do to make sure he isn't faster next time? Is there anything that I can do that wont cost me a fortune? I guess I thought it was a bit crazy that a 335 with a $500 dollar chip is faster than an M3 with a $17k super charger. Any suggestions?
two ideas: One make sure you're on a track (I'm assuming track here - right?) that has a nice slow corner or two and let him melt his inside rear tire on the exit. that'll give you a good jump. Or you can try to run with him long enough that he goes into limp mode from overheating. the 335 engine makes an astounding amount of torque stock and a tweak or two puts it in supercar class. Getting old is a bitch.
No easy way to say this, so I'm just gonna say it: He'll beat you almost every time. I have an e92 M3, and my sister has an e92 335i that she sent to Dinan, and she can take me on a straight shot 6 times out of 10. However, the rear diff gives my M car the edge on the twisties. At the end of the day I swallowed my pride, but took comfort in the fact that a M car will always look better than a 335i. The bottom line is that the Inline-Six Twin Turbo is a wonder of an engine, with nearly limitless possibilities when it comes to boosting HP, much the same way the mid-90's Supras can put out astonishing numbers. Oh, and I should also tell you that you can send a 135i to Dinan and get that little sucker to damn near 400hp and your total out of pocket is gonna be around 40k.
wow! thks for the headsup between a e92 M3 and a 335i challenge, very helpful since Im in the process of deciding between that and the C63 AMG. Well, seems like my decision is swaying more and more each day on the latter
E92 M3 I wasn't all that impressed with the e92 m3 to be honest; especially for an 8 cylinder. I drove it right before I bought my Dinan-S3-R and it wasn't nearly as fast as I thought it should be. Let's put it this way, If my Dinan car is faster than the e92 m3 (i have a 2003 Dinan S3-R, which is basically an m3 with intercooler, supercharger, high flow throatle bodies, exhaust, breaks, suspension, sway bars, chip, intake) and the 330i with a chip is faster than me, you would get killed by one in an e92 M. If I hadn't found my Dinan car for a really good price I was going to buy a Porsche Turbo; but I am really happy I found it so I can stay a bmw guy. I also don't like that they changed the window button placement, and changed form a turn key to a push button start... but I'm really lame and pickey. I'm not going to advocate moving to the Benz but if all out speed is what your looking for the e92 is not your car. I think it will handle much better and be a whole lot more fun to drive though...
Yeah, having driven a couple AMG cars in the recent past my take on them is that they are phenomenal at the drag strip, and that is about it. They can take corners better than a "regular" Merc, but still no where near as precise in the corners as other sports cars. When I was shopping I also considered just sending my e46 M3 to Dinan, but I really loved the sound and feel of the e92 M3 once I drove it. Maybe I got lucky, but I am getting 0-60 times in the 4.1-4.3 range consistently now that my initial break-in period is over. I also looked at the 911, but when I finished configuring the car with the same options that I would have in the M3 the 911 was 106k PLUS TAX!! It simply wasn't worth 40k more than the e92 (granted a 911 is iconic, and a bulletproof daily driver as well, but seriously how you can start @ 70k and end up over 100k in options is insane). Again, what I was most surprised with the e92 was it's handling and balance. If you really want to be wow-ed by the car you have to drive one on a twisty road with some elevation changes (perfect for my in the Northeast). It wails like an F1 car, and is as precise as a scalpel when taking turns. This is also where a e92 M3 would take a chipped 335i with ease because the rear diff on the M is much better than the one they put on the 335i. I still think that if someone is shopping for a car now, and doesn't want to spend the 75k on the M3, buy the 135 and send it to Dinan. You still wont have the rear diff, but my god will that little car move.
Also, I assume u meant the 335i with a chip. There is no way a 330i should be any where near a S-3 Dinan car. Moving the window buttons to the door seemed odd to me as well, but the push button start i like (i got the convenience package so the key never has to leave my jacket pocket). WIth out that package though you still have to stick the key in the dash, then push the button, adding a step. Silly. Next up for me is an Eismann Exhaust system, followed by a Dinan intake (when the finally get around to releasing it). I also didn't like that iDrive is basically forced on me. Sure, you do not need to get it, but then you get stuck with the most jarring suspension in the world. With the tech package though my e92 M3 actually has a more comfortable ride than my friends 5 series xi, and my fathers 335xi, but if i want to hit the track I just put it in M-Mode and the thing tightens up like A-Rod in the bottom of the 9th. Having just gotten back from driving through Bear Mountain NY I am very pleased with the new M3. You really can't appreciate the engineering in this until you trash it through hairpins. I pulled away from a new STi with ease (considering the lightweight and the STi's AWD system that impressed me).
my apologies I did mean the 335i. I'm shocked to hear how fast your 0-60 times are. While I haven't timed mine they say I should only do 0-62 in 4-4.2 seconds depending on how hard I beat on it. This thing is really solid though and I am very happy with the Dinan car. Any chances you'll be going to oktoberfest with the CCA? I think i'll probably show up and I'd love to race around with you on the track and see how you compare
latest Bimmer says 335i can't hold a candle to new M3 great comparo write up. the M3 got the looks and the personality.
The 335 can't run fast or hard for long periods of time. At my last track event I had two different 335 owners tell me that they lost power while running. As if the turbos shut down. In fact they had. Turns out that they have a documented over heating problem as well as break fade. Not to mention the handling is not up to par with the E46 M3. You must of just had an off day. E46 M3 looks so much better than the E92
You guys assume the gearing in the cars is similar, which it's not. The 335i's gearing is on average 13% shorter (16% in 1st and only 8% in 6th). The shorter gearing helps the 335i's acceleration exponentially. Put a 3.91 or 4.10 final gear in the M3 and watch it blow past the 335i. In addition, the 335i's power drops like a lead brick at 5600 for horses and 5000 for torque. A well geared M3 will eat a chiped 335i even without a supercharger. It'll also give a new M3 a run for its money. Three things make a E46 M3 a better M car, and much quicker. 1) Get rid of the US header. 2) Install a shorter final gear. 3) Install better brakes.
My 2 cents I just sold a Dinan S2 335i that was supposed to be putting down 384 hp and 435 ft lbs of torque. I bought an e90 M3. Without a doubt the 335i is quicker in short bursts in a straight line. The extra 130 or so ft lbs of torque coming on as low as 2000 rpm makes a world of difference. The M3 simply can't keep up. However, there is no comparison in how the two cars handle the road. I don't have edc(couldn't find one that had it and the other options I wanted - different packages in Canada I think) so in the interest of having less hassle factor when the car is out of warranty I went for the standard suspension - less to break I thought. Last night I took my favorite nearby curvy road and was absolutely astounded by how the M3 took it - even short shifting at 5500 or less (Ok maybe once over 6000 coming out of a 2nd gear corner) the car simply turns in a way that inspires confidence that the 335i, even with 19 inch Dinan wheels and new rubber, couldn't. At a recent BMW advanced driver training school I went to they had 4 M3's and the rest were 335i's. The M3's were for the instructors. I asked the instructor about the difference between the two cars and he said for low speed work the 335i was awesome but as soon as the tables turned to anything that involved higher speed cornering or high rpm work the 335i became a bit of a cumbersome appliance (his words not mine). Obviously we are splitting hairs as both are outstanding cars. Even a stock steptronic 335i is amazingly fast though, even the Dinan car had trouble with my buddy in his stock slushbox 335i if he got a bit of a jump. My advice, look for some corners, I think in a quarter mile race it would be a dead heat, in a stop light grand prix maybe not... Good comparo between my old and new cars here: http://www.bmwblog.com/2008/05/31/dinan-335i-vs-e92-m3/
Where do you get your information? 335i gear ratios (manual): 1st: 4.06 2nd: 2.40 3rd: 1.58 4th: 1.19 5th: 1.00 6th: 0.87 final drive: 3.08 E46 M3 gear ratios: 1st: 4.23 2nd: 2.53 3rd: 1.67 4th: 1.23 5th: 1.00 6th: 0.83 final drive: 3.62 In EVERY GEAR except for 6th, the E46 M3 has a shorter ratio. Factor in the final gear ratio the M3 is nearly 22% shorter than the 335i in first gear, 24% shorter in 2nd, 24% shorter in 3rd, 21% shorter in 4th, 18% shorter in 5th, and 12% shorter in 6th. None of the numbers you quoted had any numerical accuracy based on stock gearing ratios.
Guess rear tire circumference has nothing to do with it? No wait, it does. Nonetheless I hastily confused my Z4 M specs with the E46 M3. As for the E46 M3 vs. 335, the gearing is shorter, but due to the additional 1,000 rpms on top, the M3 is theoretically faster in 5th and 6th. Sorry for the confusion and thanks for waking me up!
Huh? The rear wheel/tire diameter difference between the two is a whopping 3.4%. Again, how you arrived at the fact that the 335i's gearing is "shorter" in any of the gears compared to the M3 is beyond me. 335i sports package rear tires: 255/35/18 overall diameter 25" E46 M3 rear tires: 255/40/18 overall diameter 26" And how did you confuse Z4 M specs with the E46 M3? The gear ratios are nearly identical: E46 M3 gear ratios: 1st: 4.23 2nd: 2.53 3rd: 1.67 4th: 1.23 5th: 1.00 6th: 0.83 final drive: 3.62 Z4 M gear ratios: 1st: 4.35 2nd: 2.50 3rd: 1.67 4th: 1.23 5th: 1.00 6th: 0.85 final drive: 3.62 As you can see, the first two gears and the last gear are the only gears that are different between the Z4 M and the E46 M3, and the difference is negligible. The Z4 M ratios are significantly closer to the E46 M3 than it is to the 335i. Again, the gearing is shorter in EVERY GEAR in the E46 M3. So your original statement that the 335i is shorter in the first few gears are wrong, and the simple fact is the E46 M3 doesn't need a 3.91 or 4.10 gear to "stay" with a stock 335i. The E46 M3 is theoretically faster in every gear. The E46 M3 is lighter to boot.
It's not tire diameter, it's tire circumference that matters and yes it makes an appreciable difference. Why do you think the 135i is faster (accelerating) than a 335i? All else being essentially equal, the smaller tire circumference makes for an overall lower gearing. Gears are chosen carefully and specifically for the application, which includes compromises for desired terminal speed and economy. With that, the motor's power delivery is a factor and therefore in order to appreciate and understand the gearing choices (and to make comparisons) you must look at the motor's redline, transmission gear ratios, final drive, and tire circumference. Just to compare transmission gear ratios and final drive ratios is incomplete and tells you little. Ultimately, none of this truly explains why a car or engine has an advantage over the other, and therefore makes one car faster than another. What does matter far more is average wheel horsepower output. Peak power means little, yet that's what seems to capture the most attention. In comparing a N54 to a S54 for example, the N54 produces 223 whp across the entire rev range (2,000 rpm to redline, averaged) where a S54 produces around 237. So guess which engine is better at making usable power? This is largely because the N54 has a big drop in power from peak at 5600 rpms to redline at 7000 rpms (torque too, but from 5000 onwards). But it still needs to rev to 7000 for terminal speed in each gear. Bottomline is my car, and similarly the E46 M3, have an advantage in power output (and in vehicle weight). The advantage is increased if a lower final gear is substituted as it makes the car rev even faster and reach terminal speed per gear sooner. Also, the S54 takes the most advantage of its revs as peak power comes at the redline. Furthermore, if you look at only the upper half of the rpm range (as would be utilized in racing applications) to compare high average power, the N54 jumps to 243 and the S54 to 271, which is double the whp difference (28) vs. the average of the entire rpm range (14). Interestingly as well, the N54's peak power comes at the mid point of the rpm range. That means as the rev counter climbs, the engine is producing less and less power (and torque). No thanks. That couldn't be more opposite of M motors. With all the power front loaded, it makes normal driving more effortless, and gives the feeling of having more power than is actually there. Similarly this is why many Harley Davidson riders feel their bikes have much power, which they don't. Anyway, people can like whatever they wish. I don't like the N54 for too many reasons to list. Chipping a N54 may boost power considerably, but where in the rpm range? It matters. As the saying goes, "Peak power sells cars. High average power wins races!" As Steve Dinan says, the final drive gear change is the best bang for the buck mod to make a Z4 M or E46 M3 accelerate faster. This mod alone helps take full advantage of the S54's superior power delivery. Want it to accelerate even faster and put more usable power to the ground? Speaking for my car, there's the RPI ram air scoop/hi flow filter, UUC lightweight flywheel/clutch, software, headers, high flow cats, pulleys, etc. And don't forget the CDV mod! All these combined will make one very fast user-friendly and reliable car under all conditions. And getting rid of the Conti's and swapping for lighter wheels would make an appreciable difference as well in terms of acceleration and grip. In case anyone is wondering, the E92 M3's high average power is 251 whp and 330 average whp for the upper half of the rpm range. That's only 14 and 59 whp respectively more than my Z4 M, which isn't a lot considering the weight differences in the two cars. BTW, I have a local friend with a 690 hp E46 M3. Somebody earlier commented about the E46 M3's age meaning time has passed it by. Well, all E46 M3's have far more potential than a 335, today and tomorrow too. Cheers!
Sigh... Circumference is calculated by a simple formula. This is basic algebra that anyone with a middle school education, even here in the United States, should know. Circumference = 2 * Radius * Pi. 2 * Radius = Diameter. Therefore Circumference = Diameter * Pi. Pi is a CONSTANT. Whatever ratio is the difference between the two circumference is the same exact ratio between the two diameters. Circumference of the tires matters not if you have the diameter of the tires, and that difference is what determines which one is taller or shorter. I don't know why you bother to bring up a useless stat like average HP, since in performance applications average HP means squat. HP is the integral (okay, this is calculus stuff so you may have to have actually finished high school to understand this) of the Torqu/RPM chart. There's a good reason why NOBODY in the industry talks about average HP, since average HP in any range is highly dependent on the amount of torque made in that RPM range. If engine A makes most of its torque down low (like say, one of the fancy turbo diesels), it's average HP will be much higher between 0-3,000 RPM than the vaunted S65 engine because the majority of the torque on the S65 is made up top. Yet we all know the E92 M3 is faster than the E92 335d. Why? Because the diesel is rev limited at ~5,000 RPM while the S65 revs all the way up to 8,400 RPM. I don't like to single anyone out, and I'm sure the CCA won't appreciate this, but most of everything you posted here on these forums are utter non-sense.
Well, I shouldn't even bother as I normally have no desire to converse with people who don't know how to be civil and respectful. Not agreeing with someone is not an excuse to be an ass, at least in my book. Ultimately, the point was to introduce something other than peak power numbers as conclusions to hasty comparisons. Sure it's a simple measurement, but it has merit to show in a single number the power one can expect across a rpm range. And of course, the more rpms the more advantegous typically as you so kindly pointed out, but not always the case. My 4 cylinder MV Agusta's 1000cc engine compared to the typical Japanese in-line 4 1000cc engine couldn't have a more different power delivery characteristic, even though peak power is similar. My bike's motor actually produces more hp and at far fewer revs (several thousand less). For an in-line 4 it has tremendous low end grunt and revs almost lightswitch fast all the way to its 195 crank hp limit (it's not stock). I'm certainly no mechanical engineer, but I know how I enjoy an engine to produce power, which is why I prefer NA motors with a strong midrange punch and upper end rush. My comparison of the N54 vs. S54 is largely a statement on my preference in respect to power delivery. I've driven 4,000 miles in a 135i and the motor was a bit disappointing. I seem to be in the minority as most seem to love the off-idle grunt and power within the lower half of the rev range. Great. More power to them, no pun intended. But I've always enjoyed winding motors out (since the 70s riding Kawasaki 2 stroke triples), and with that there's no fun factor in the N54 for me. So for what that's worth...
Gentlemen, lighten up. We are here because we enjoy BMW's...remember. See link to comparison between the 135i, 335i and stock e46 M3. I drive an M3 because to me it is the pinnacle of BMW engineering in a form I can afford. I Iiked my 335i alot, but I LOVE the M3. Completely different car in so many ways...much more fun to drive imho. Lacks a bit of grunt in comparison to the 335i but I don't miss it. The gas mileage sure stinks though! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ZGwpifULe4
If you think about it, 99.5% of people (estimated) won't care about average horsepower this, or wheel circumference that. What it all comes down to the is the driving experience, at least for us Bimmerheads, so let's try to remember that before we make arses of ourselves.
