BMW 335i blazed 0-60 in 4.8 seconds. Almost beat RS4

2nd place is the 1st loser

there are faster Evos then the RS4/ if you are looking just for fast and that is it then you need to go buy a chevy or something

the RS4 is a low 4 sec car

— IamEvilHomer (View Profile)

Posted on 4/8/2007 7:09:00 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 2   

moron more
there is no coments on the RS4 numbers in this article the article says that the 335 got a 4.8 (the fasted test ever done on this car) BMW quotes 5.5.

then after that you quote Audi's numbers from AOA at 4.8 when Edmunds gets a low 4 sec time that is 1/2 sec faster

GO AWAY

— IamEvilHomer (View Profile)

Posted on 4/8/2007 7:13:57 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 2   

This post seems to have selective amnesia. The referenced Edmunds test of the 2007 BMW 335i coupe mentions that a dealer purchased coupe was compared on the dyno with the one delivered by BMW. The dealer purchased car was substantially detuned from the BMW delivered vehicle. Edmunds states "...But wait, there's more: While Steve's motor gently tapers off as rpm exceeds six grand, our mill continues to make more power until it tops out at 279 at 6,295 rpm, at which point Steve's 335i lags 19 ponies behind. Notably, our car maintains its advantage for the remainder of the rev range..."

http://forums.bimmerforums.com/forum/showthread.php?t=717346

If you combine this with the fact that the detuned BMW 335i has significant overheating problems, it is likely BMW will have to further detune the 335i to get it not to melt down. Luckily this can be done invisibly through firmware and consumers like you and me have no idea. I am sure changing the tuning of the car yourself voids all of the warranties. What I am saying here, is that the car you I get is not the one tested by Edmunds.

http://www.edmunds.com/apps/vdpcontainers/do/vdp/articleId=120061/pageNumber=1

If it is my money, I would save $10,000 and get a fast, reliable car that doesn't "..crawl pathetically back to the pits..." after only 4 laps.

— truthhurts (View Profile)

Posted on 4/8/2007 7:56:53 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 3   

The real question is...why buy an M3? Oops.

— r_driver04 (View Profile)

Posted on 4/9/2007 5:30:32 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1   

yeah but then you gotta drive an EVO!

— rnsaza (View Profile)

Posted on 4/14/2007 10:11:06 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1   

Of course you would't but the rs4, you have no clue what a real sports sedan feels like, since you like lexus.

— jmrA480 (View Profile)

Posted on 4/7/2007 1:11:46 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: -8   

oh mannn, i was hoping there would actually be a good show between the new m3 coupe and the rs4! i guess its going to be the m3 sedan and the rs4 then. and i think i know who the winner is XD

— crazypetrolhead (View Profile)

Posted on 4/7/2007 12:39:11 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 5   

formula 1- the rs4 hit 0-60 in 4.3.

— jmrA480 (View Profile)

Posted on 4/7/2007 1:13:41 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: -3   

4wd (quattro) only adds weight to the car, also adding seconds to the car's performance. Of course the RS4 is worth a lot more than the 335, otherwise you would have to agree that the RS4 is a no brainer since it will def. be much cheaper than the new M3. At this point, doesn't matter which car you drive, it all depends on the driver and his/her preference. Let's see someone (TopGear, whoever) do a comparison test and we'll see what fits you better (like the S4 and M3 shootout they had a few yrs ago).

— quattro4 (View Profile)

Posted on 4/7/2007 12:55:35 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 2   

mromar, I hope you realize you're comparing the 335i's quickest time to the RS4's slowest time, that the 335i tested on Edmunds (Edmunds got this time) was quicker than a stock E92 and that the RS4 has achieved 0-60mph in 4.3 seconds.

This also means, just to let you know, the 335i is as quick as the new M3 (by your logic). The new M3, according to BMW, goes from 0-60 in 4.8 seconds, like the RS4.

I love the 335i, but you're an idiot.

— S4cabriofoxone (View Profile)

Posted on 4/7/2007 1:01:48 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 3   

The E90 335i (saloon/sedan) is a tenth faster than the E92(coupe).

— adoptgreyhounds (View Profile)

Posted on 4/7/2007 8:04:12 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 2   

and according to bmw the 335i goes 0-60 in 5.5 seconds, with not just edmunds, but several mags hitting 0-60 in 4.8, so whats your point.....not just that but the m3 pricewise competes with the s4, the s4's numbers are lower than the 335i's, coupe or sedan, 2 doors more or less by the way, doesnt make a car faster, alot of coupe variants weigh more or the same so again whats your point. the rs4 no matter what it has on there is no excuse for an a4 that cost $70,000 there is not 2 a4's worth performance or anything else in that thing, it looks like audis competitor the lancer evo, and of course the m3 will be faster than the rs4 if a 335i with 120 less horses has about the same 0-60 times....what a waste of money, and it costs more than an m3 lol, nice vw yeah right

— bmwdrvr (View Profile)

Posted on 4/7/2007 10:19:37 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: -2   

and was bothers me is ignorrant posts from people that obviously dont drive the cars they talk about, by how ignorrant they sound, pullin it out of my ass....your pretty sad all that over 0-60 times, car and driver also got 4.8, why not trying doing a google search and see how many other sites have 0-60 times for not just the coupe but the sedan as well hitting 4.8....sorry the 335i being as fast as the a4 evo, im sorry the rs4, bothers you that much..but if a 3 series with 120 less horses than the rs4 can keep pace with it an m3 with as much power as the rs4 is going to be faster, vw is always playing catch up, but hey with people like you that want them why not make cars that look like evos, and stis, and still cant outrun the competition...grow up

— bmwdrvr (View Profile)

Posted on 4/8/2007 10:04:20 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 0   

Hey man, I don't think you should call people idiots. Thats not cool.

— mitchatlexusofmarin (View Profile)

Posted on 4/8/2007 3:01:11 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 0   

Hey man, I don't think you should call people idiots. That's not cool.

— mitchatlexusofmarin (View Profile)

Posted on 4/8/2007 3:03:06 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 0   

Don't worry S4, the crazy kid can't read and he just make and names with no reason. I found on the bmw website the same numbers as you did: 4.8 seconds, estimated by THE BMW them self. Will see how better will be in real world, but until then S4 is right, Edmunds is the worst magazine/website ever when talking about Audi. They got some slow numbers on all Audi cars, but extremely good no# for BMW, always, I can recall the S6, or S4 and so many others.

In my opinion, 335i is still expensive, the car gets easily to 50k (and over) if you want something decent in it, no just the engine.

Speedwise, the 335i best numbers are 4.8, on the other side the worst numbers I saw for RS4 where 4.8. That makes them equal, you think? I don't think so, there are plenty (plenty , I say) magazines who got less then 4.8. Some 4.5, some 4.3. Edmunds sucks, from my own experience they hate Audis. If you remember they got a modified BMW (faster than the regular 3-series) to compete to an Audi (factory standard). Another time they got the A4 2.0T against to the BMW 330i and they said the Audi is slower-which of course it is they should have compared that Audi against the 225! And not just any 225, but a 4x4 one, to be fair! Otherwise get the front drive A4 against the 225! Not fair, they are never fair, and people who base their opinion on them are just poor informed.

— rg12345 (View Profile)

Posted on 4/8/2007 3:31:27 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 2   

Wow, you are so stupid!

Again, I'm not even going to try to correct you! You're too wrong!

— S4cabriofoxone (View Profile)

Posted on 4/8/2007 11:17:06 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 2   

ddumb arguement

so the bently is not as fast but 120k more
and the lambo is only a little quicker but 200k more ?

the RS4 is a 4.3 car and the 335 is a 5.5 to 4.8 car (if you go downhill with wind at your back)

— IamEvilHomer (View Profile)

Posted on 4/9/2007 1:43:40 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 2   

Ouch.

— r_driver04 (View Profile)

Posted on 4/9/2007 5:33:30 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1   

stop wining, your just like the other audi posters on here any excuse for their lowly vw counterparts to be better than the benchmark bmw, edmunds is not the only site that has that time, and bmw quotes 5.5 for the 335i mags are getting almost a full second quicker 0-60 than bmw, bmw is saying 4.8 for the m3, do the math, the best the rs4 has ever gotten with 120 more horses than the 335i is 5 tenths quicker than the 335i, LOGICALLY if the m3 is the faster car of course it will blow the doors off the a4 evo, if the REGULAR model 3 series is that close to the fastest time the a4 evo has gotten. and the same time in most mags as the 335i 300hp vs 420 hp both engines are running 4.8 of course the m3 will be faster than this car, the 335i is not the performance model....poor audi always playing follow the leader

— bmwdrvr (View Profile)

Posted on 4/10/2007 10:22:42 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1   

The 335i that Edmunds received for the test shown here was a questionably tuned vehicle.

— GermanNut (View Profile)

Posted on 4/7/2007 1:23:50 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 0   

I do not think you read the Edmunds article correctly. It WAS a press vehicle and it was compared to a vehicle owned by Steve Harrison. The Dyno comparison essentially proved that BMW sent out a souped up press vehicle that Joe consumer would not be buying. My guess is that the car sent out by BMW would live through the warranty period without a total melt down.

— truthhurts (View Profile)

Posted on 4/8/2007 8:17:03 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 2   

Plus, the BMW 335i is fast.

As we learned in our full test, the 335i is substantially quicker than BMW's own claims. Our test car (a questionably tuned press vehicle) smoked to 60 mph in only 4.8 seconds and eclipsed the quarter-mile in 13.3 seconds at almost 106 mph.

— GermanNut (View Profile)

Posted on 4/7/2007 1:25:44 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 3   

So does Audi. Hence the 4.2 seconds for the RS4 when the Audi estimated time is 4.8

— GermanNut (View Profile)

Posted on 4/7/2007 1:30:24 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 2   

Cusrious to see an RS5 compete with an M3.... or maybe a test between the M3 Sedan against the RS4.... apples to apples you know.... not coupe vs sedan, cause everyone knows sedans weigh more. I like BMWs but I don't see this comparison really fair. Compare the redesigned RS4 to a new BMW even. Not 5 yr old model to not even a year old model...

— atomicbri (View Profile)

Posted on 4/7/2007 1:42:19 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1   

tthat is 7 years old and the Rs4 is just starting it's last year of production in this model. (we order the 2008 next month)

look for the Rs5 to be the right car for the new M3 and both cars will be close to the same age

— IamEvilHomer (View Profile)

Posted on 4/9/2007 1:48:19 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 0   

The A5 will kill this garbeg.

— AudiKing (View Profile)

Posted on 4/7/2007 1:48:42 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: -4   

llol

— IamEvilHomer (View Profile)

Posted on 4/9/2007 2:51:04 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1   

Lexus and enthusiast should never be said in the same sentence. Now go drive your daddys cars and dream about owning one someday.

— jmrA480 (View Profile)

Posted on 4/7/2007 4:12:59 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 0   

bmw made it harder on themself, because now they have to make the m3 really fast in order to get sells.

— trd1 (View Profile)

Posted on 4/7/2007 2:04:55 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: -2   

I've seen 0-60 of 4.3 and 1/4 mile times up to 12.8 seconds for the RS4

— Heyhuub (View Profile)

Posted on 4/7/2007 2:10:57 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1   

Can't they just standardise the acceleration times to 0-62mph based on 0-100km/h instead of 0-60mph...very irritating!

— Wazz (View Profile)

Posted on 4/7/2007 2:37:23 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 2   

I'm an automotive engineer. It's kind of unfair the way BMW tuned/engineered the 335i engine. We're in a horsepower war and a company like BMW can set up a twin turbo to produce extrordinary amounts of power and torque to beat most benchmarks they're aiming at. It's far more difficult to do this with a naturally aspirated internal combustion engine. Frankly, the real horsepower that the 335i develops is somewhat greater than what they are advertising, and they could easily turn the "spigot" up even higher when they desire.

— BMW995 (View Profile)

Posted on 4/7/2007 2:37:49 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 0   

BMW does not state horsepower at the wheels. Matter of fact, if you read the Edmunds review you will find that the horsepower at the wheels was in the 270's.

— truthhurts (View Profile)

Posted on 4/8/2007 8:56:40 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1   

I've read that they can make somewhere in the 400HP with minimal tuning. Again, why buy an M3? And I love M cars but BMW may have a problem here. Then again, it's an M car and they always sell no matter what.

— r_driver04 (View Profile)

Posted on 4/9/2007 5:36:07 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1   

So, whats the point of the M3?

— no1listensanyway (View Profile)

Posted on 4/7/2007 3:03:22 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 0   

I dont think that is gonna challenge the rs4. I mean the zonda-f and the murcielago for instance. the lambo is about HALF the price of the F and matches up to its time!!!
By the way, I think the RS4 is waaaayyy better lookin than the bimmer but thats just my opinion.

— Talli (View Profile)

Posted on 4/7/2007 3:08:19 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 0   

Here is a more balanced review of the 335i coupe.
From none other then jeremy Clarkson himself.

http://driving.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/driving/jeremy_clarkson/article1264971.ece

bets bits
"You need to think of it as a painting by the world’s greatest artist. Yes, the brush strokes are magnificent. Yes, the texture is superb. Yes, the perspective is world class and the detailing is better than you’d get from Leonardo.

But what he’s actually painted in this case is big dog turd."

— izfuney (View Profile)

Posted on 4/7/2007 3:10:52 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 0   

he didn't like the M5

— IamEvilHomer (View Profile)

Posted on 4/9/2007 1:49:40 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 2   

i have an 07 RS4 and it is really a terrific car. hats off to BMW for such a quick 3 series. lets not forget that the turbo boost can be easily tweeked for more power and probably much shorter engine life in return. keep in mind that the RS4 is a four door with AWD and still crazy fast. i test drove a 335i. nice but not equal to an RS4 in any way. the upcoming M3 will without a doubt be quicker than the RS4 but how much quicker will it actually be? all the people who complain about the Audi's sticker price in comparison to the 335i are going to have a field day with when the M3 is only 1 or 2 tenths quicker than an RS4 and 3 to 4 clicks quicker than a 335i.

— RS4inPA (View Profile)

Posted on 4/7/2007 4:24:59 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 5   

Why was a comparison between the RS4 and 335i even made? BMW gets no respect in my book. How hard is it to keep turbocharging the same I6 to produce power advantages? Even the IS350 pumps out 306 horses naturally-aspirated. The 335i uses the same I6 across the board but with two tubochargers still only producing 300hp.

30K more for an RS4 over a 335i is totally justifiable. This article is simply hype in wake of the release of the new M3 which does not appear to have that much of a lead on the RS4 as of yet.

— AudiLexus (View Profile)

Posted on 4/7/2007 4:27:01 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: -1   

I believe BMW says 0-62mph (100km/h) in 4.8s, not 0-60mph. So 0-60 time should be ~4.6s

8.4lb/hp = 3528lbs, not as light as expected considering BMW claims many light weight materials used.

12.4L/100km = 18.97mpg, $2,000 gas guzzler tax, which IS-F will not have.

— SupraNeverBack (View Profile)

Posted on 4/7/2007 4:47:25 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: -4   

Guys, have you not heard the sound the RS4 produces? Even when you start to roll slowly the engine is purring ready to pounce on the pavement giving every horsepower it's got. It's truly remarkable. The 335i is a good car as well but between these two the 335i is obviously the more practical one.

— Agent63 (View Profile)

Posted on 4/7/2007 4:59:45 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 2   

The RS4 has done 0-60 in as little as 4.3 seconds. It all depends on the test conditions and engine miles. Plus the Edmunds folks got a ringer. The RS4 is 1/2 quicker than the 335i, which is a big difference.

— chewy (View Profile)

Posted on 4/7/2007 5:22:00 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 0   

At least 2 tests got the RS4 in 4.3 seconds. Like I said, the RS4 engine only gets better with miles.

— chewy (View Profile)

Posted on 4/7/2007 10:36:19 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1   

GO READ ROAD & TRACK AUGUST 2006!!! THE RS4 WAS COMPARED TO THE C4S, AND THAT'S WHERE IT GOT THE 0-60 IN 4.3 TIME!!!

— S4cabriofoxone (View Profile)

Posted on 4/8/2007 1:19:34 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1   

funny , with your name you would think you have some common sense. First off no one cares about your uncle or your friend or the fact you wish you had a 335i.

Yes the RS4 got to 60 in 4.3 sec, and no your Uncle didnt get it that fast, but I am pretty sure the guy driving for car and driver was a professional driver and your Uncles not. Just because your uncle can't get it to 60 in 4.3, doesnt mean it hasnt happened.Also , how many miles are on both cars, is the vettes engine broken in, is the RS4's not. So are we suppose to take your word that the RS4 can't get to 60 in 4.3 sec over a Car magazine with professional drivers that has been doing this for years, just because your uncle cant? Please stop making stupid comments like that.

Come on , use some Common sense, "COMMON SENSE". What a joke of a name. That like roseanne Barr's screen name being "Hotlesbo".

— jmrA480 (View Profile)

Posted on 4/9/2007 12:33:46 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 2   

S4- dont waste your time with this j@ckass, he is basing his comment off the fact his uncle can't get it to 60 in 4.3 sec. I doubt 99% could, but that doesn't mean it can't. Guys, these mags use professional drivers, not commonsense's uncle.

— jmrA480 (View Profile)

Posted on 4/9/2007 12:39:47 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 3   

you uncle should learn how to drive a manual transmission properly.

— 07mcs (View Profile)

Posted on 4/9/2007 1:32:34 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 3   

HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!! Just think what the NEW M3 will do do its competition>!!!!!!! LOL. Step aside EVERYONE!

— razzy23 (View Profile)

Posted on 4/7/2007 5:25:34 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 2   

True, and the all wheel drive in the RS4 will result in quicker real world times as most roads aren't test track grippy.

— chewy (View Profile)

Posted on 4/7/2007 5:32:24 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 0   

You know folks, you all should cherish that a new BMW comes along and almost beats a really high performance version of the Audi. This allows for the next Audi to be better, then BMW tries to up the ante again....a cycle that gives us car fans better and better cars! I love BMWs but I respect the Audi and Mercedes, each are unique in their own way. Lexus now (don't hate too much Lexusfanboys out there) but it will take them a long time to shake off the shackles of being a Toyota. They are good, built to perfection no doubt, but they do not quite possess a soul. Its hard to explain unless you put all of these cars side by side and test to test. Then you can really tell the Lexus feels plain. In its handling, in its looks, in its feel. I am not saying they are bad, they just lack heritage and their own "feel". It doesn't help that their transmissions in some models use the same typography as the ones in Toyota so it looks just like a Toyota Auto tranny in a Lexus.
So bring on newer better cars so my favorite company can keep going back to the board to make the next gen even better!

— atomicbri (View Profile)

Posted on 4/7/2007 8:44:57 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 6   

damed thats a badazz Beamer, i tilt my hat off 2 the 335i too.

Atomicbri, Lexus Does have soul in there own way, when the last time you drove a IS,GS even an LS, them cars got it!!!

— Denali (View Profile)

Posted on 4/8/2007 12:41:23 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1   

mromar1, I even know more about the new M3 than you.

You didn't know that it got 0-60 in 4.8 seconds, according to BMW (conservative estimate, like the RS4's 4.8). You continuously refuse to acknowledge this fact, and that this also makes the 335i (by your logic) "as quick" as the new M3, even though it's not. It's not as quick as the RS4, either.

You also didn't know that it has 420hp, not 400.

Before I tell you, how much torque do you think it has?

— S4cabriofoxone (View Profile)

Posted on 4/8/2007 1:06:16 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1   

if you launch your car from standstill more than a dozen times, getting these acceleration figures, you may want to opt for the car with lower cost of drivetrain replacement.

the 0-60 thing is way overdone.

4.2 seconds...4.5 seconds...5.5 seconds...whatever

if that's the only difference you see between these cars, your missing some of their best attributes.

i have no doubt that if you geared the audi like a dump truck, it would hit 60mph in under 4 sec.

both are nice. both have different purposes.

— 1995e34 (View Profile)

Posted on 4/8/2007 2:57:32 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 3   

Well aside from the acceleration performance arguments, the RS4 would clearly be the better track car hands down. It cruises through the slalom nearly 2mph faster than the 335i.

Now would I fish out the extra 25k for the RS4? No. I think the RS4 is over-priced. However I would take an RS4 over an M5 any day for reasons such as; it's better looking, it's just as fast, it’s cheaper in price, & it's a more capable athlete out on the track.

— MunichRob (View Profile)

Posted on 4/8/2007 4:59:05 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 3   

the is-f should probably be compared to the enzo and veyron. why would you even compare it to a low end taxi like a bmw?

— 1995e34 (View Profile)

Posted on 4/8/2007 11:40:21 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 5   

This is getting out of hand.....

I mean Im a BMW hardcore and I still admit the RS4 is better than the 335i..... its MEANT to be better. BMW didnt even look at the RS4 when they designed the 335i, they were aiming below it. But those numbers on the 335i are amazing I must say. Thats far better than anyone expected from the non M car. BMW did a great job with this one. Also, you shouldnt argue that much about the acceleration times, they may differ between car to car or because of many different driving conditions.

I cant wait for the new BMW M3, its going to be the benchmark once again for awhile, then the next gen. RS4, then next M3 etc. Its just a cycle which helps us to get better cars.... competition is good.
If you like a BMW more, buy a BMW. If you like Audi more, buy an Audi. Dont try convincing people that this or that is better, because its all subjective.

Now Im waiting for the best car in the world...... the New M3....... I cant wait XD

— M53R (View Profile)

Posted on 4/8/2007 9:59:23 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 8   

Dumbass, the BMW you are referring to is an 1990 model, that probably needed new belts, hoses and all.... was probably a banger car some kids parents bought em and it hasn't had a tune up in years. You are acting like it is the 2008 that blew up. Get a life dude....I know a few Lexus ES250s from around that same year that have broken down...BECAUSE THEY ARE OLD AND NOT KEPT UP! You really sound ignorant on here dude.

— atomicbri (View Profile)

Posted on 4/8/2007 12:23:00 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 3   

500 lbs or 230 kg difference between the rs4 and 335i.
there is your answer as to why the 335i is on the heels of the rs4. and if the m3 is around 3500lbs or 1600kg, then maybe, MAYBE, the current rs4 has lost its crown (still waiting on final production specs on the is-f , COME ON LEXUS!!!)
0-60mph or 0-100kph are just bragging rights. who knows, maybe the rs4 can pull it off seeing the m5 has been slammed for over-all performance and driving dynamics compared to the audi and merc counterparts. so hold your fingers on typing until an independent tester can ring the RS4 Vs. M3 e92 (Vs. IS-F, ???)

— WeAreMad (View Profile)

Posted on 4/8/2007 11:02:39 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: -2   

i agree. i wonder though, will m3's sound be more rs4 growl/grunt or ferrari f430 screamer. hopefully a combination of both.

— WeAreMad (View Profile)

Posted on 4/8/2007 12:38:53 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 2   

Cars from Audi, Lexus and Mercedes-Benz that beat/have beaten their respective BMW competitors...

Audi:

A3 vs. 1 Series

S4 vs. E46 M3

RS4 vs. E46 M3

S6 vs. M5

C2 RS6 vs. E39 M5

A8 vs. 7 Series

-------

Lexus:

LS vs. 7 Series

I forgot about any of the others...

-------

Mercedes-Benz:

E-Class vs. 5 Series

E55 AMG vs. E39 M5

E63 AMG vs. E60 M5

SL vs. 6 Series

CLS55 vs. E60 M5

S-Class vs. 7 Series

-------

There you have it.

— S4cabriofoxone (View Profile)

Posted on 4/8/2007 11:25:10 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1   

To all but momar, this would be an unbiased question.
Since I hate both models equally, why would anyone buy an M5 if the 335i is a split hair faster and around $25,000 cheaper? It's a driver's car, who cares if the passengers are cramped.

I believe the last M5 would smoke the last M3, both of which must be rolling in their graves.

— huu76 (View Profile)

Posted on 4/8/2007 7:11:38 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: -1   

Why would people buy a Omega when a Timex will do?

this is your type of question. My answer: Because I can afford Omega. Similarly, why I bought E500 instead of say Mitsibushi Evolution. Because E500 has more luxury and style than Evolution. It is slower, but then I don't go racing everyone, plus 0-60mph of under 6 secs. is fast enough for me. It is all about taste and the 335i is not marketed at the same people as the M5 is.

— 07mcs (View Profile)

Posted on 4/9/2007 1:30:27 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 3   

is it just me or did everyone hear about this about 6mos. ago?

— NARunner (View Profile)

Posted on 4/8/2007 7:55:55 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 0   

enthusiast,
"Magic feel" anyone?

— huu76 (View Profile)

Posted on 4/8/2007 10:00:47 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: -1   

Does that "Magic feel" include the times when the car overheats and goes into "limp home mode?" To be fair to BMW, I think this is a new feeling just recently made available by BMW exclusively for 335i owners. :-)

— truthhurts (View Profile)

Posted on 4/9/2007 12:35:15 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: -2   

Enthusiastx11, do you always resort to personal attacks when you your opinion is challenged? This post references an Edmunds article that brings to light the dishonest nature of BMW. BMW provided a tuned 335i test car that does not accurately represent the vehicle available to the consumer. I also provided another reference to a BMW enthusiast forum describing owner overheating problems. To answer your question undoubtedly leading to additional personal attacks, I would consider the following cars:

Infiniti G35/G37
BMW 328i
Lexus IS350

As you can see, a BMW made my list. It simply isn't the undependable lie provided by BMW.

— truthhurts (View Profile)

Posted on 4/9/2007 9:22:53 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1   

such a wonderfully balanced car! given the combination of speed, handling, styling and just plain fun-to-drive factor i can't imagine buying any other compact sport sedan in the under $50k range.

— enthusiastx11 (View Profile)

Posted on 4/9/2007 1:02:49 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 2   

I'm reading through these posts & a couple of you believe the M5 will out-perform the new M3. However BMW has said to expect the M3 to outperfrom the M5 in virtually every aspect.

I believe the M3 will outperform the M6 in everything but acceleration, & like S4 mentioned, when it comes to the RS4 & M3, the one who handles better takes home the crown.

— MunichRob (View Profile)

Posted on 4/9/2007 4:37:09 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 6   

But YOU'RE WRONG!!! You just don't get it!

The RS4 and 335i are NOT COMPETITORS! Nobody's comparing them! Nobody's cross-shopping them! The RS4 has never heard of the 335i, and doesn't care! All the RS4 is thinking about is "M3...M3...M3...M3..."

— S4cabriofoxone (View Profile)

Posted on 4/9/2007 6:50:58 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 2   

but mromar, what you dont get is that was the fastest time ever heard for the 335i and the slowest ever posted for the RS4. Please stop with your crappy posts, everyone on this site can't stand you.

The difference in performance between the new M3 and RS4, if any difference, will be so small that its gonna come down to brand loyality.

— jmrA480 (View Profile)

Posted on 4/9/2007 7:34:26 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1   

Amazingbimmer,
Magic-feel is just another word for viagra. You so called enthusiasts are no better than wine connoisseurs. Just make something up and everyone will agree because you all have no idea what the other is talking about.

Momar,
Piggybacking off of others as usual and giggling like a little girl. Wow. I'm sure enthusiasts are proud to have your intellect among their ranks.

— huu76 (View Profile)

Posted on 4/9/2007 7:15:12 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: -1   

enthusiast,
I believe that's your forte.
I usually include facts on my posts.

momar,
Sure, if you seriously think everyone in every other forum is blind or can't read.

— huu76 (View Profile)

Posted on 4/9/2007 11:26:08 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1   

They are way off on the E46 M3, unless they were driving a convertible, the 0-60 time should be 4.8 to 5 secs max. I have timed myself in my 01' coupe M3 at 4.9 stock with worn tires. This little article is full of B.S.

— ccaarmeerciill (View Profile)

Posted on 7/28/2008 5:32:40 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1