[Jamesons Viggen]

Originally Posted by fyun89

Okay, I admit that I was too quick on that claim. However, the subtle increase in performance wouldn't increase the 0-60 more than 0.2 seconds as the guy above said. Besides, shouldn't you think the original manufacturer's test should be more accurate than the Auto Review sites? BMW is conservative, but they don't shuffle around numbers incorrectly.

Actually, 10whp is usually worth a tenth or so off the 1/4 mile and nearly as much in 0-60. So if the PPK makes 20whp, yep-that can be .2 seconds.

BMWs numbers are not so accurate, often varying widely compared to 3rd party reviews such as weights of the cars(due to varying equipment) hp ratings of crank vs wheelhp/calculated actual crank hp and lastly, 0-60 times etc. BMW has a way of providing plenty of bogus info. For the longest time they did not make it known that MSport/Sport Xdrives did NOT come with the 704 sport suspension. Whoops.

[Jamesons Viggen]

Originally Posted by buildbright

BMW underates everything that way it's a surprise, not a dissapointment. X-Drive might have some benefit with launch control but without it acceleration times are no better or worse. Period.

Well it COULD be-but no one has the balls to do it lol.

See Xdrive really aids traction from a dig, but RWD is not exactly crap from a dig in the dry. BUT, Xdrive should handle a high RPM clutch dump with no drama that would have an RWD car just smoking tires. Mags admit to doing 5k clutch drops in manual Xdrives in order to get times that beat the RWD car.

So yeah, an XDrive can be faster at launch. But show me who wants to do a 5k clutch drop in order to do it. Meanwhile, an RWD 6mt, typically should need no more than 2500rpms to launch with just the right amount of wheelspin. Controlled wheelspin is GOOD on launch. That is why AWD cars, its very easy to bog the hell out of a launch-you need MORE revs, otherwise what traction are you taking advantage of to offset the added weight?

See for yourself. Go race a WRX from a light with a guy who soft launches at 1-2k. Then have him launch at 5500.

[YellowMellow]

2013+ 335i xDrive w/M-Sport is a sweet car and would take it over a RWD 335i w/M-Sport any day. Granted a RWD 335i is a sweet car in its own right and I would take that over any BMW competitor.

My wife has a E91 xDrive Touring and its a nice ride. If BMW made a 335 xDrive Touring we would be all over it.

[buildbright]

Originally Posted by Jamesons Viggen

Well it COULD be-but no one has the balls to do it lol.

See Xdrive really aids traction from a dig, but RWD is not exactly crap from a dig in the dry. BUT, Xdrive should handle a high RPM clutch dump with no drama that would have an RWD car just smoking tires. Mags admit to doing 5k clutch drops in manual Xdrives in order to get times that beat the RWD car.

So yeah, an XDrive can be faster at launch. But show me who wants to do a 5k clutch drop in order to do it. Meanwhile, an RWD 6mt, typically should need no more than 2500rpms to launch with just the right amount of wheelspin. Controlled wheelspin is GOOD on launch. That is why AWD cars, its very easy to bog the hell out of a launch-you need MORE revs, otherwise what traction are you taking advantage of to offset the added weight?

See for yourself. Go race a WRX from a light with a guy who soft launches at 1-2k. Then have him launch at 5500.

I was talking about the Autos. I agree a 6MT RWD will lose to the Xdrive but not the Automatic. I torque break mine from 1500 to 2000 RPMs which shoots my car out of the hole like a rocket. I can even hook on Stage 2 with E85. I have beaten some fast cars like this.

[300hp]

Originally Posted by buildbright

I was talking about the Autos. I agree a 6MT RWD will lose to the Xdrive but not the Automatic. I torque break mine from 1500 to 2000 RPMs which shoots my car out of the hole like a rocket. I can even hook on Stage 2 with E85. I have beaten some fast cars like this.

If you get a chance post your times from your launches. I have PPK and I have a video of a 0-60 launch around 4.7s. I dont need to launch mine, 4.7 is adequate when launching from idle. MT did it in 4.4 when launching their car, thats all I need to know.

[300hp]

Originally Posted by Jamesons Viggen

Yeah, BMW is claiming a .3 second gap between RWD and AWD but the MotorTrend tests if anything support it being smaller. The MotorTrend XDrive with PPK should show at least a 20whp difference which should account for 1-2 tenths of the gap. So in actuality, removing the PPK would likely have the AWD advantage down to a tenth or two or so. Perhaps the next RWD test car will have the PPK and we will see.

Like I said before gents, you cannot compare the MT test with the C/D test. Different tires, different driver, different tracks, too many variables.

Per MT:
335i x drive 4.4, 13@ 105.4
335i rwd 4.7, 13.3@ 103.9

both cars are wearing the same non staggered set up.

You can come up with any permutations you want after removing or adding PPK. However I think it will be a great leap of faith to assume the rwd will surpass these times.

Good luck

[Kayani_1]

F30 benefits more form such an upgrade does not surprise me as it is worse from the factory. So I can understand where you are coming from. However, what you are not understanding is that you can only improve the feel and feedback so much when part of the blame sits dead square on electric steering wheel. Now without improving it via software upgrade or redesign this lack can never be fully over come. You have to fix both parts of the equation before getting the full and complete desired results.

As for the BMW already busy doing the software upgrades on electric steering wheel. I am hoping and praying that it works.


I have not driven every variable of F30 available out there. I have driven at least a dozen F30 328i with 8-speed auto for more then 2 weeks at a time and no matter what you put it in Eco, Normal or Sport the result is negligible and does nothing to improve the feel or feedback. Now I have driven almost all variables of E90 and E92 all the way from basic 328i to M3. I can tell you that basic E90 to basic F30 is comparing apples to apples. The basic E90 is hands down better in overall satisfaction that provides the driver based on feel and feedback coming via steering wheel. So I am comparing apples to apples not apples to oranges.

Now where the credit is due that is the power upgrade. I love the power upgrade that the inline-4 turbo provides. Yet it is not as smooth or free revving as the inline-6 and it sounds horrible at start up all the way until the engine is well warmed up. Even after that the noise and vibrations leave a lot to be desired. These are simple fact based on my driving experiences of both cars. If you deny that the inline-6 is more smoother, free revving and nicer sounding then I do not believe you are being 100% honest. Because anybody who has driven both for a long period of time will tell you the NA inline-6 wins on all those areas except for out right power of inline-4 turbo.

Now that being said I am hoping that maybe I can meet up with some one who has a modified suspension M-sport F30 335i or 328i to do a side by side comparison with my car.

Originally Posted by Jamesons Viggen

I don't know if you quite read what I wrote.

The F30 benefits MORE from suspension/tire modifications than the E90 due to the factory state of hardware.

BMW has chosen to go softer on the F30. If you had Koni or other aftermarket hardware installed on both with similar attributes, the F30 has more to gain.

And again, E90 335 vs F30 335, you still have to option the 335 accordingly to have a good experience or you will be left like you have hating on the F30 for steering and handling. Did you know the F30 already has multiple PNs for the steering rack due to revised software for more feel? You literally could drive one and have less steering feel than a car right next to it. There are members of the forum that have had two F30s and separated by a few months and found the updated steering to be superior.

Lastly, the N20 does not suffer from poor NVH-that is crap. It suffers from a lack of noise, there is very very little vibration, often having to check the car is running, and harshness-not sure where we are getting that from. Does it have the same NVH levels as an I6, no. But an increase in something does not mean bad-if it's beyond expectation or very noticeable sure. Lets not get so caught up in heresy and reading what others write-mmkay.

And I will say it again, if the 328 you drove had the standard suspension, its BAD. I drove one. I would not buy one. If you want to dislike the car, keep doing it. If you had money in your hand for an F30 but wanted to make sure before crossing off your list, you would drive a car with the right setup. Until you do, you are speaking from only experiencing part of what is being offered. I have driven every F30 offering in 328 and 335 and all lines and configurations as well as the E90. I have only missed out on a 335 F30 with a manual. I am telling you the base suspension car leaves a bad flavor for a BMW owner for a reason. If I had driven that car instead of the 6mt Sport RWD first, I would have NEVER bought one.

[Jamesons Viggen]

Originally Posted by 300hp

Like I said before gents, you cannot compare the MT test with the C/D test. Different tires, different driver, different tracks, too many variables.

Per MT:
335i x drive 4.4, 13@ 105.4
335i rwd 4.7, 13.3@ 103.9

both cars are wearing the same non staggered set up.

You can come up with any permutations you want after removing or adding PPK. However I think it will be a great leap of faith to assume the rwd will surpass these times.

Good luck

I am not mixing and matching test data.

PPK makes a pretty much known and agreed upon increase to the wheels. That increase in power gets to the wheels, and in turn affects a cars measurements of power including things such as trap speeds. This is just math. It is not something that needs to be proven. It's not something invented to prove anyone wrong.

Originally Posted by Kayani_1

F30 benefits more form such an upgrade does not surprise me as it is worse from the factory. So I can understand where you are coming from. However, what you are not understanding is that you can only improve the feel and feedback so much when part of the blame sits dead square on electric steering wheel. Now without improving it via software upgrade or redesign this lack can never be fully over come. You have to fix both parts of the equation before getting the full and complete desired results.

As for the BMW already busy doing the software upgrades on electric steering wheel. I am hoping and praying that it works.


I have not driven every variable of F30 available out there. I have driven at least a dozen F30 328i with 8-speed auto for more then 2 weeks at a time and no matter what you put it in Eco, Normal or Sport the result is negligible and does nothing to improve the feel or feedback. Now I have driven almost all variables of E90 and E92 all the way from basic 328i to M3. I can tell you that basic E90 to basic F30 is comparing apples to apples. The basic E90 is hands down better in overall satisfaction that provides the driver based on feel and feedback coming via steering wheel. So I am comparing apples to apples not apples to oranges.

Now where the credit is due that is the power upgrade. I love the power upgrade that the inline-4 turbo provides. Yet it is not as smooth or free revving as the inline-6 and it sounds horrible at start up all the way until the engine is well warmed up. Even after that the noise and vibrations leave a lot to be desired. These are simple fact based on my driving experiences of both cars. If you deny that the inline-6 is more smoother, free revving and nicer sounding then I do not believe you are being 100% honest. Because anybody who has driven both for a long period of time will tell you the NA inline-6 wins on all those areas except for out right power of inline-4 turbo.

Now that being said I am hoping that maybe I can meet up with some one who has a modified suspension M-sport F30 335i or 328i to do a side by side comparison with my car.

I have said tons of times the N52 is a great sounding and smooth engine. I have never denied that.

If your biggest gripe is the electronic steering, that is the best thing about it because software changes are going to be a continual improvement.

In terms of benefits of each car to common modifications.

I hate fake knockers...but if you have two equally attractive girls, one a small A-cup, the other a full C-cup-give them both implants for D's, who had more to gain and will show a larger impact? The F30 has more to gain as it was a bit crippled by the factory(low dust pads on the non MSport, softer suspension on the base cars, LOW rolling resistance tires, 225mm narrow tires on even summer sport tired cars, EPS tuning that was a bit light to shut up the people who complained previously).

[KevRyd]

Good for you I believe you have beat the shit out of the steering propaganda!

You can have your e90, I hope you love it when you roll the odo because a love like that should be forever! You like truck-like steering, I dont. you think the x90 is better good for you!

Hace a nice day!

Originally Posted by Kayani_1

The E9x 335i vs F30 335i is a different story. There is no power upgrade that causes you to look over the huge flaw in lack of feel and feedback. If you can upgrade the F30 with a trick suspension upgrade so can you a E9x car. Bottom line is you can't over come the inherit flaw of the electric steering wheel when comparing two cars of equal level of mods.

It might be just a little easier to swallow the pill in a 4 cylinder turbo vs inline-6due to power upgrade. However, it does come at the expense of relatively poor NVH of the 4 cylinder engine compared to the inline-6. So with lack of that steering feel and poor NVH sort of cause it to be draw for me based on power improvement and MPG.

As for F30 335i vs E9x 335i like I said earlier there is no such moral victory. In a comparison of driving both a standard suspension F30 328i in sport + vs a standard suspension E9x. The E9x wins hands down for me in steering feel and overall feedback.

[rallybull]

An rwd car will always have that traction disadvantage compared to an xdrive when torque is very high (1st gear). So the 0-60 numbers will suffer (and are largely useless).

However, in a real world scenario such as passing from 45 to 75, the RWD should be faster due to advantages of lesser weight and lesser transmission losses.

Is that not right?

[Jamesons Viggen]

Originally Posted by tojo_m

An rwd car will always have that traction disadvantage compared to an xdrive when torque is very high (1st gear). So the 0-60 numbers will suffer (and are largely useless).

However, in a real world scenario such as passing from 45 to 75, the RWD should be faster due to advantages of lesser weight and lesser transmission losses.

Is that not right?

In simplest terms, the higher the speed, the more likely the RWD car gains BACK the advantage from the AWD car which had it starting from off the line. At what point it flips, at what speed-that is different from car to car. For the 335's, it might be 100mph, it might be 120, who knows. You would need two identically equipped cars in RWD and AWD to find out.

[verbs]

Originally Posted by Jamesons Viggen

In simplest terms, the higher the speed, the more likely the RWD car gains BACK the advantage from the AWD car which had it starting from off the line. At what point it flips, at what speed-that is different from car to car. For the 335's, it might be 100mph, it might be 120, who knows. You would need two identically equipped cars in RWD and AWD to find out.

Its going to be a lot lower speeds than that.

[4wheelspin]

All I know is my 335 xdrive with PPK is fast. Really fast. From the line. Or passing. I don't need more. And if a RWD 335 passes me, god bless them. I'm still happy. Very happy.

[rallybull]

Originally Posted by 4wheelspin

All I know is my 335 xdrive with PPK is fast. Really fast. From the line. Or passing. I don't need more. And if a RWD 335 passes me, god bless them. I'm still happy. Very happy.

[rallybull]

Originally Posted by Jamesons Viggen

In simplest terms, the higher the speed, the more likely the RWD car gains BACK the advantage from the AWD car which had it starting from off the line. At what point it flips, at what speed-that is different from car to car. For the 335's, it might be 100mph, it might be 120, who knows. You would need two identically equipped cars in RWD and AWD to find out.

Originally Posted by verbs

Its going to be a lot lower speeds than that.

This is how I understand it and it seems logical...

* RWD will be faster than AWD if it can avoid tire slipping (due to excessive torque)
* Which means basically finding out at full throttle and given the road conditions and quality of tires at what gear would the effective torque (engine torque multiplied by gear multiplier ratio) drop to a point that avoids tire slipping.
* Once we find out that highest gear and that highest rpm beyond which the torque is no longer capable of slipping the tires, we can derive the corresponding speed. It is at this point that RWD will start gaining over the AWD.

Based on my limited experience with testing the 0 to 60s on my car with stock crappy AS tires on well paved dry roads, I noticed that the torque beyond 1st gear (in the 8AT) is not enough to cause tire slippage. So my guestimate is that the RWD would have the advantage after about 35 mph (when gear changes from 1st to 2nd). But by this time the AWD has already gained a lot to manage the better 0-60 time.

[300hp]

Originally Posted by Jamesons Viggen

In simplest terms, the higher the speed, the more likely the RWD car gains BACK the advantage from the AWD car which had it starting from off the line. At what point it flips, at what speed-that is different from car to car. For the 335's, it might be 100mph, it might be 120, who knows. You would need two identically equipped cars in RWD and AWD to find out.

We agree again.

You posted that article from CD, why we nixed the rwd. They said the rwd will only catch up around 120mph. This is beyond the 1/4 mile since both reach the 1/4 around 105mph.

It's a slow grind for the rwd to catch up from a stop.

[300hp]

I had been trying to find what the track results were for the E90 335i from MT. I found this:

http://www.g37driver.com/images/MT-g37-4.jpg

5.1 to 60 and 13.7@104mph
(Auto) N54

This is for the coupe. Now car and driver for the E90 manual coupe had
4.9 and 13.6@105mph (N54).

If this consistency is maintained (cd posts better results than MT) and this seems to be the case for the F30 rwd, CD should be able to take even more time off for the xdrive with PPK.

Update
For the E90 sedan CD had 4.8 and 13.6@106mph for the manual and we all know the CD test for the auto F30 4.6 and 13.5@105mph. This supports Jamesv...claim that MT will trap higher than AT.

For the E90 xdrive manual they had 4.7 to 60 and I think 13.4@ the 1/4.

[Jamesons Viggen]

Originally Posted by verbs

Its going to be a lot lower speeds than that.

Originally Posted by tojo_m

This is how I understand it and it seems logical...

* RWD will be faster than AWD if it can avoid tire slipping (due to excessive torque)
* Which means basically finding out at full throttle and given the road conditions and quality of tires at what gear would the effective torque (engine torque multiplied by gear multiplier ratio) drop to a point that avoids tire slipping.
* Once we find out that highest gear and that highest rpm beyond which the torque is no longer capable of slipping the tires, we can derive the corresponding speed. It is at this point that RWD will start gaining over the AWD.

Based on my limited experience with testing the 0 to 60s on my car with stock crappy AS tires on well paved dry roads, I noticed that the torque beyond 1st gear (in the 8AT) is not enough to cause tire slippage. So my guestimate is that the RWD would have the advantage after about 35 mph (when gear changes from 1st to 2nd). But by this time the AWD has already gained a lot to manage the better 0-60 time.

It could be, or it might not. In the article I linked they said it would take 120mph. But that is from going at 0-120 before the passing takes place and the Xdrive was able to take advantage of the traction.

Lining both cars up from a roll, a certain speed say 60-70-80 and going, that creates a different race. At that point, there is no traction advantage for either car. It takes an silly amount of power to have traction issues from a roll in RWD, I am currently dealing with wheelspin at 50mph in 3rd in the E36. For me to spin at 70mph, I will need about 700hp. So none of these F30s are going to have traction issues from a roll unless it's under 20-30mph.

[Richbot]

I have yet to be asked to accelerate from a standing start more than once in competition. xDrive would be great if the car weighed the same and had the same CG and weight distribution as the rear drive (sDrive? wait for it...) 335, but it doesn't, so it's not. I own a 335xi and it's a turd to drive at more than 7/10ths. It weighs nearly 200lbs more than my M3 sedan. Woopdedoo I can launch hard from a stoplight to 60 without wheelspin, and get a ticket because none of the stoplights around here are in 60mph zones...

xDrive's great if you don't want to worry about traction, terrible for all other purposes IMO

[verbs]

Originally Posted by tojo_m

This is how I understand it and it seems logical...

* RWD will be faster than AWD if it can avoid tire slipping (due to excessive torque)
* Which means basically finding out at full throttle and given the road conditions and quality of tires at what gear would the effective torque (engine torque multiplied by gear multiplier ratio) drop to a point that avoids tire slipping.
* Once we find out that highest gear and that highest rpm beyond which the torque is no longer capable of slipping the tires, we can derive the corresponding speed. It is at this point that RWD will start gaining over the AWD.

Based on my limited experience with testing the 0 to 60s on my car with stock crappy AS tires on well paved dry roads, I noticed that the torque beyond 1st gear (in the 8AT) is not enough to cause tire slippage. So my guestimate is that the RWD would have the advantage after about 35 mph (when gear changes from 1st to 2nd). But by this time the AWD has already gained a lot to manage the better 0-60 time.

That's more or less it. Keep in mind that the 335i only spins one wheel in the rear, so traction could be more of an issue on a tuned car from a roll even above 35mph....tires can make a difference (do you have all season 225's on the back or the staggered summer 255's on the back), etc.

[verbs]

Originally Posted by Jamesons Viggen

It could be, or it might not. In the article I linked they said it would take 120mph. But that is from going at 0-120 before the passing takes place and the Xdrive was able to take advantage of the traction.

It's not an it could be, it wont. There's no way a 335i with just a PPK is going to have traction issues it 100mph from a roll. Not even 80 mph. Not even 60 mph. I say this from not just a common sense standpoint, but as someone who has owned more heavily tuned 335i cars in the past.

Originally Posted by Jamesons Viggen

Lining both cars up from a roll, a certain speed say 60-70-80 and going, that creates a different race. At that point, there is no traction advantage for either car. It takes an silly amount of power to have traction issues from a roll in RWD, I am currently dealing with wheelspin at 50mph in 3rd in the E36. For me to spin at 70mph, I will need about 700hp. So none of these F30s are going to have traction issues from a roll unless it's under 20-30mph.

It may or may not take a silly amount of power to have traction issues from a roll in RWD.....but a huge component of that is the speed you start at. The 335i is also at a traction disadvantage due to it's 1-wheel drive action in the back, and even more so if it's equipped with skinny 225mm all-season tires on the rear which some people have. Other considerations include road conditions (flat/dry vs. bumpy/wet) and tire conditions (bald?)

Your car is an apples to oranges comparison. Your E36 Z3M weighs about what 500lbs less than a 335i? Weight helps prevent wheel spin...and with "roughly" a 50/50 weight distribution, the 335i has about 250lbs more sitting over the back wheels than your Z3M. Obviously there are a number of other car specific considerations, including tires, suspension, gearing, power curve/delivery, limited slip differential, etc.

[verbs]

Originally Posted by Jamesons Viggen

Actually, 10whp is usually worth a tenth or so off the 1/4 mile and nearly as much in 0-60. So if the PPK makes 20whp, yep-that can be .2 seconds.

Keep in mind that tunes on 335i cars tend to give substantial power gains in the low-mid range compared to peak power levels, which can lead to better gains than one would expect (traction permitting).

Look at the 335is cars and their overboost feature in the low/mid range.

Aftermarket tuners (JB4, Dinan, etc) are the same way.


Looking at peak power gains with the PPK doesn't paint accurate enough of a picture when discussing gains in 0-60 or 1/4 mile times.