SCI Pans the 135i

[turbomg]

Originally Posted by SCMike

It sounds like the 135i has more engine than suspension.

Nobody should be surprised by this.

[topvega]

Originally Posted by SCMike

hopefully they are watching the GT-R and the Evo X with some keen interest. The Japanese are knocking on the Porsche/BMW door. They may not yet have the snob appeal, but their engineering is starting to become un-ignorable.

Don't put those two in the same sentence... it is just not right...
The GTR is in a league of it's own right now... the Evo X is ugly and screams teenager...

[Dan203]

The Evo X MR has got two pieces of technology which make it a superior track car.... The S-AWD system and the SST dual clutch transmission. Both of these technologies are extremely high tech and specifically designed to help the car kick ass at the track. The SST helps so much that even professional drivers were shaving 1-2 seconds off their lap times compared to driving the same car with a manual gearbox.

That being said, most people who buy these cars don't go to the track every weekend. A lot will take their cars to the track a few times a year, but for the most part they're going to be used as daily drivers. And the 135i has the Evo beat hands down as a daily driver.

Dan

[Alext]

Whack some Nitrons (or similar) on the 135...hope they come out with some for this car! http://www.nitron.co.uk/shop/index.p...=index&cPath=2

[sciamop]

The Evolution has been getting so much bad press for 'going soft', it's good to see that it's still the best-of-breed in the 'affordable supercars' segment.

Not what I would plunk down $40K on, but still very impressive. Now if Mitsubishi could only bring the same focus to the rest of its line-up! Galant or Eclipse anyone?

[Lester]

Originally Posted by Kokanator135

"shit on a blanket".....Wha??

To clarify - it sticks to the road like shit sticks to a blanket.... kind of a bad analogy, but it just came out that way.

[Dan203]

Originally Posted by Lester

Personally, I find it corners like shit on a blanket

Is that good or bad? I can't tell.

Dan

[amdmaxx]

GT-R is in a legaue of its own, and should not ever be compared to evo, 135, etc.. I agreed..
911 Turbo/ZR1 (although those are more expensive) is more like it.

Originally Posted by topvega

Don't put those two in the same sentence... it is just not right...
The GTR is in a league of it's own right now... the Evo X is ugly and screams teenager...

[buckwheat986]

911 turbo????

i think thats stretching it....

[Spook]

Originally Posted by SCMike

I assume most folks have not actually read the SCI article. This comparison was NOT a track test, but carried out on public highways, mostly in the SoCal high desert mountain passes. Admittedly, the test drivers were probably on the gonzo end of the spectrum, but no drivers' licenses were harmed during the testing. Sure, the Evo X has the crap interior of a cheap rental car and looks only a teenager could love, but SCI stepped back and looked at the integrated engineered design and its performance (including factors of "ride comfort, build quality, and overall refinement"). The Evo IX may have been the proverbial rapid hair-shirt, but the Evo X sounds like a very different proposition. They concluded that the Evo MR was "so vastly superior to the others when it comes to satisfying demanding driving enthusiasts like us that it might as well have been in a class of its own." On the other hand, "the BMW hits higher highs and lower lows, which allowed it to slide into second place by the skin of its teeth."

Am I going to rule out a 135i and plunk down for an Evo X? Hell no (especially since I drive nowhere near the 10/10-ths end of the envelope). But such articles do give one pause. Especially since the Germans pride themselves on their stereotypical engineering prowess - hopefully they are watching the GT-R and the Evo X with some keen interest. The Japanese are knocking on the Porsche/BMW door. They may not yet have the snob appeal, but their engineering is starting to become un-ignorable.

Good comments Mike. I have not had a chance to read the article and I have not driven a 135 with a better suspension over the twisty roads I have access to here in the New Mexico mountains. Maybe that would change my world view and I would mod the 135 a bit. I applaud the Japanese in their efforts on the GT-R and EVO. They appear to be leading the world in innovation. One has to wonder what is going to happen when they finally crack the code and we'll find ourselves looking to Lexus and Infiniti for a balance in sport and livability. They're already on the heels.

-Spook

[adc]

Originally Posted by SCMike

(Mods don't count in my universe.)

Not even from the BMW Performance Catalog? They come with factory warranty...

[whya1?]

The problem is that the STOCK 135 does not make you want to throw it into a corner. The dialed in understeer and more vague steering compared to the other cars makes you back off a smidge when coming through a twisty section. It also weighs quite a bit so you don't get the same feeling as in a lighter sports car.

The car is much like an old muscle car, massive thrust but slightly vague/spooky handling. It has more engine than chassis tuning. It just doesn't have the abilities stock as the other cars they were comparing. It is also hampered by the lack of a LSD or even the option to get one (except aftermarket with no warranty and the elimination of your car's warranty)

As for the day to day driving the people bad mouthing the EVO X really have to take another look. It rides very similar to a stock 135 with sport suspension;those runflats have a significant ride comfort penalty. The EVO is slightly more practical in that it has a full size back seat but lacks a pass thru due to the AWD system.

Looks? I personally think it is a toss up. The EVO X is edgier but i dislike the ackwardly tall greenhouse and hacked rear end of the 1 series.

I am personally interested in getting a 128 and modding the suspension but am concerned about the cost. The 128 is a good amount of power in that i can still use the power band and not just floor it and then stomp on the brakes. The 135 is better suited to the Autobahn then backroad carving. Too fast and it throws off the overall balance of the car. (and there IS such a thing)

[sciamop]

Too fast and it throws off the overall balance of the car.

Agreed. But it's imbalanced in a good way!

[john970]

Originally Posted by buckwheat986

911 turbo????

i think thats stretching it....

The GTR is faster than a 911 turbo on most tracks, not really a stretch. GT2 will beat it, though.

[tonytigerking]

I don't get it. This is the same 135i that was going competitively against Cayman in Fifth Gear? But it sucks a cornering?

[john970]

pans the 135i? It got second out of 4 on one consideration, driving at the limit...

misleading title...

[adc]

Originally Posted by whya1?

The problem is that the STOCK 135 does not make you want to throw it into a corner. The dialed in understeer and more vague steering compared to the other cars makes you back off a smidge when coming through a twisty section. It also weighs quite a bit so you don't get the same feeling as in a lighter sports car.

Your experiences were different than mine - could it be possible that your tester had improper tire pressures?

As to the weight, the Evo weighs more than the 135 - so it's all a question of how stiff the suspension is set up (springs, sway whatever) and how quick the rack is. In fact, since BMW includes the weight of the driver + 90% fuel load + 7kg of luggage in the quoted weight, it can be significantly lighter than some of the competition.

There aren't many cars in the same performance envelope that are lighter than the 135, IMO. It gets a reputation as a lardy thing, but by comparison it isn't really. :iono:



I think the biggest disfavor is the runflats. I am running all season non-runflats on my 335i (PZero M+S) and recently drove a stock 335i and boy, what a (negative) difference those runflats make. Heavier steering, muted responses, a generally "greasy" feeling and harsh over potholes - their only positive trait was the progressive breakaway (like butter). They basically throw a wet blanket over the entire front end...

[Spook]

" As for the day to day driving the people bad mouthing the EVO X really have to take another look. It rides very similar to a stock 135 with sport suspension;those runflats have a significant ride comfort penalty. The EVO is slightly more practical in that it has a full size back seat but lacks a pass thru due to the AWD system."
---------------------------------------------------------------

I didn't test drive the EVO because I couldn't get past the materials, looks, and I kept seeing a Lancer, not a world class sports platform. However, Motor Trend says, "Over potholes and expansion joints, the Evo crashes like an empty Danish cookie tin. On long hauls, the stiff chassis tuning and lack of sound-deadening lay siege to the senses. After a freeway stint in both, technical editor Kim Reynolds opines, "The Evo is just like a 135i with less sound-deadening material and its suspension completely welded together."

Doesn't sound like a good starting point for a daily driver. Someone said you can tune the 135 up but you can't refine an EVO. I think that is likely correct.

-Spook

[R32]

Any abrupt use of the throttle or brakes provokes all sorts of disconcerting body movements followed ultimately by significant understeer.

On the other hand, "the BMW hits higher highs and lower lows, which allowed it to slide into second place by the skin of its teeth."

sounds like driving lessons are in order. i guess even a sports car magazine writer/reviewer would need a reminder that rwd cars are harder to manage at the limit than an awd one, especially one which literally has every conceivable traction and stability mechanism currently available. he would also need to learn the benefits of avoiding abrupt inputs, as well as the joy of managing weight transfer for the sake of traction.

"throw" an R32 (my car) or evo into a corner, don't chicken out on the gas, and you come out on the other side looking like a hero. it is fun, but ultimately is it that challenging? i suspect that in the short amount of time that a reviewer gets to drive a car, he will extract more potential of an awd car than he would from a rwd car.

higher highs and lower lows? to be sure the rwd bmw will punish your mistakes and reward your skill more than an awd car.

[amdmaxx]

GT2 is a purpuse build machine, like V-spec will be.
So may I say in advance: V-spec will beat GT2?
think 350lb lighter, think 75 more hp than current GT-R.

Originally Posted by john970

The GTR is faster than a 911 turbo on most tracks, not really a stretch. GT2 will beat it, though.

[adc]

Originally Posted by amdmaxx

GT2 is a purpuse build machine, like V-spec will be.
So may I say in advance: V-spec will beat GT2?
think 350lb lighter, think 75 more hp than current GT-R.

I don't know - it will still be some 500lbs heavier, with similar levels of power and torque. So will AWD count more than the weight difference? I'll be sure to watch that episode...

[Tom K.]

Originally Posted by adc

I think the biggest disfavor is the runflats. I am running all season non-runflats on my 335i (PZero M+S) and recently drove a stock 335i and boy, what a (negative) difference those runflats make. Heavier steering, muted responses, a generally "greasy" feeling and harsh over potholes - their only positive trait was the progressive breakaway (like butter). They basically throw a wet blanket over the entire front end...

Did the 335i have the SP? If not, you probably drove on the Bridgestone Turanza EL42 all-seasons which have gotten generally crappy reviews. Try the Potenza 050As which come with the SP on both the 335i and the 135i (but not the 128i SP) and you might alter your opinion.
Tom