335i is very nice, but mama don't like it.....

Downsize again. No substitute for a supercharged V8s.

Originally Posted by 3ismagic#

Hasn't "mama" ever heard of a test drive?

Uh, yes. She test drove a 335i, an E350, a CTS DI V6 Sport, and more. And she drove a 2001 330i for 3 years. What could go wrong?

Originally Posted by Chris90

Downsize again. No substitute for a supercharged V8s.

You got that right. I tried to get her to test drive a Shelby GT500. She wouldn't do it, probably afraid she would like it. I would have bought a GT500 as a keeper.

Originally Posted by Turbo6

You got that right. I tried to get her to test drive a Shelby GT500. She wouldn't do it, probably afraid she would like it. I would have bought a GT500 as a keeper.

Turbo I hate to say it but you guys are obviously a muscle car family. BMW was a totally wrong way to go.

Originally Posted by Turbo6

You got that right. I tried to get her to test drive a Shelby GT500. She wouldn't do it, probably afraid she would like it. I would have bought a GT500 as a keeper.

Your mama is clearly not BJ's type.

Originally Posted by voip-ninja

Well, sure. CTS-V is also a car with a $60+ base price that can top out at $75,000. The 335i is practically pedestrian by comparison. The CTS-V also gets something like 13 mpg. Yippee.

I think it gets in the high 20s in MPG on the highway. I drove my ZO6 up to PA from FL last week and averaged 26.5 MPG with an average speed of 73.8 MPH.

A BMW can't compare in MPG either!

Originally Posted by Turbo6

You got that right. I tried to get her to test drive a Shelby GT500. She wouldn't do it, probably afraid she would like it. I would have bought a GT500 as a keeper.

Funny, that's the same reason I haven't driven a Boss 302. Or a Porsche.

Originally Posted by Chris90

Funny, that's the same reason I haven't driven a Boss 302. Or a Porsche.

Funny you said that as I am test driving a Porsche this afternoon, a 1998 Porsche 911S (993) C2 Cab with under 20,000 miles. I was not been really considering another car, but a friend of mine saw this one and said I really needed to take a look.

I have had an interest in a GT3 since I drive one back in 2004, but I just can't justify the large sticker price in my mind.

Originally Posted by beden1

Funny you said that as I am test driving a Porsche this afternoon, a 1998 Porsche 911S (993) C2 Cab with under 20,000 miles. I was not been really considering another car, but a friend of mine saw this one and said I really needed to take a look.

Sounds like it'll be a $50k car. I love the 993 but that's just crazy money. Used 997 GT3 can't be that much more than that.

Originally Posted by Chris90

Sounds like it'll be a $50k car. I love the 993 but that's just crazy money. Used 997 GT3 can't be that much more than that.

I think the money is going to be flexible as it is being sold privately by the elderly widow of the original owner (it was his baby) who passed away earlier this year. I love the power and handling of the GT3 but I think I would prefer another convertible. This one weighs about 3,200+ lbs which is a hell of a lot lighter than my 335is vert.

I just figured it wouldn't hurt to test it out.

There is going to be a big difference. CTS-V is made to compete with the M5 so basically you just went from like a M5 to 335i

Originally Posted by beden1

I think it gets in the high 20s in MPG on the highway. I drove my ZO6 up to PA from FL last week and averaged 26.5 MPG with an average speed of 73.8 MPH.

A BMW can't compare in MPG either!

14 city, 19 highway, 16 combined, according to fuel economy reports. 335i does quite a bit better, although someone buying either a 335i or CTS-V is probably not concerned with fuel economy.

Originally Posted by ric124

There is going to be a big difference. CTS-V is made to compete with the M5 so basically you just went from like a M5 to 335i

Many 335i drivers with the N54 motor swore they could match a stock M3 with a stage 2 or 3 tune. But the N55 motor is limited in tuning potential.

Still, for under $400, mama can bump the torque another 50 ft-lbs in her new 335i. Given that it is a much lighter car than her ex-car, the CTS-V, I think it might be enough to save the deal.

I am also curious if mama had tried the sport mode in her 335i. Although from my 335i test drives, it probably did not make much difference.

There are often ways to make mama happy without her changing her ride partner, if you know what I mean.

Originally Posted by dtc100

Many 335i drivers with the N54 motor swore they could match a stock M3 with a stage 2 or 3 tune. But the N55 motor is limited in tuning potential.

Still, for under $400, mama can bump the torque another 50 ft-lbs in her new 335i. Given that it is a much lighter car than her ex-car, the CTS-V, I think it might be enough to save the deal.

I am also curious if mama had tried the sport mode in her 335i. Although from my 335i test drives, it probably did not make much difference.

Go test drive a CTS-V and then come back and tell us how using sport mode in a 335i, or how a $400 stage whatever is going to make a 335i produce the power of the supercharged 8 cylinder engine in the Cadillac?

Originally Posted by voip-ninja

14 city, 19 highway, 16 combined, according to fuel economy reports. 335i does quite a bit better, although someone buying either a 335i or CTS-V is probably not concerned with fuel economy.

I just looked it up and found the same information you listed. I very surprised, actually! I guess trying to use the turbos and superchargers as replacements for displacement is a failure when it comes to MPG.

Originally Posted by beden1

Go test drive a CTS-V and then come back and tell us how using sport mode in a 335i, or how a $400 stage whatever is going to make a 335i produce the power of the supercharged 8 cylinder engine in the Cadillac?

So you really believe a 335 has to produce the same power output to go as fast as her CTS-V with about 700 lbs more weight?

Originally Posted by dtc100

So you really believe a 335 has to produce the same power output to go as fast as her CTS-V with about 700 lbs more weight?

As I said, please actually drive a CTS-V so you can understand how your question is not logical.

Originally Posted by dtc100

Many 335i drivers with the N54 motor swore they could match a stock M3 with a stage 2 or 3 tune. But the N55 motor is limited in tuning potential.

Still, for under $400, mama can bump the torque another 50 ft-lbs in her new 335i. Given that it is a much lighter car than her ex-car, the CTS-V, I think it might be enough to save the deal.

CTS-V is about 15% heavier than the 335i. So you're gonna need 475 lb-ft of torque out of the 335i to feel as punchy.

Originally Posted by beden1

As I said, please actually drive a CTS-V so you can understand how your question is not logical.

The 335i with N54 and JB4 makes hp in the mid 400, did 0-60 in 3.5s.

The stock CTS-V does 0-60 in 3.9s.

The stock F30 335i does 0-60 in 5.1s, 335ix in 4.8s. A tuned F30 can probably do 0-60 in the low 4, add that to mama's goal of downsizing, and trying to feel nimble and young, why not?

Originally Posted by dtc100

So you really believe a 335 has to produce the same power output to go as fast as her CTS-V with about 700 lbs more weight?

Look at beden1's signature. He know of what he speaks.

Originally Posted by jlukja

Look at beden1's signature. He know of what he speaks.

Does he know what the hot mama wants? If mere power rating was what she wanted, she would not have taken home the 335i.

For all the braggings in the signatures, I have rarely detected any sign of them understanding or even having any knowledge of their mamas.

BTW, GM just hit me with a spam email titled "Mama said it's nice to share, the ride, that is..."

I am freaking out now.

Originally Posted by dtc100

Does he know what the hot mama wants? If mere power rating was what she wanted, she would not have taken home the 335i.

For all the braggings in the signatures, I have rarely detected any sign of them understanding or even having any knowledge of their mamas.

For comparison sake:

2013 BMW 335i sedan= 3,979 lbs., 300 HP @ 5,800 RPMs and 300 Ft. lbs. of torque @ 1,200 to 5,000 RPMs. (According to Left Hand News) does 0-60 in 5.3 seconds (they quoted 5.0 seconds 0 to 60 for the 2012 335is with 330 HP)

2012 Cadillac CTS-V sedan= 4,220 lbs. (241 lbs. heavier), 556 HP @ 6,100 RPMs and 551 Ft. lbs. of torque @ 3,800 RPMs. (According to Left Hand News) does 0-60 in 3.9 seconds, which is 1.1 seconds faster than the 335is which has been tweaked at the factory. That's a very large difference, especially when the numbers no doubt become wider apart the longer the distance and the faster the acceleration.

As I said, it aint going to happen with your $400 upgrade to get the 335i even close in the same ballpark as the CTS-V's power performance. And, don't forget, the CTS-V also handles extremely well!

Originally Posted by beden1

For comparison sake:

2013 BMW 335i sedan= 3,979 lbs., 300 HP @ 5,800 RPMs and 300 Ft. lbs. of torque @ 1,200 to 5,000 RPMs. (According to Left Hand News) does 0-60 in 5.3 seconds (they quoted 5.0 seconds 0 to 60 for the 2012 335is with 330 HP)

2012 Cadillac CTS-V sedan= 4,220 lbs. (241 lbs. heavier), 556 HP @ 6,100 RPMs and 551 Ft. lbs. of torque @ 3,800 RPMs. (According to Left Hand News) does 0-60 in 3.9 seconds, which is 1.1 seconds faster than the 335is which has been tweaked at the factory. That's a very large difference, especially when the numbers no doubt become wider apart the longer the distance and the faster the acceleration.

As I said, it aint going to happen with your $400 upgrade to get the 335i even close in the same ballpark as the CTS-V's power performance. And, don't forget, the CTS-V also handles extremely well!

I don't know where you got your numbers. According to BMWUSA, the 2013 335i AT weighs around 3500 lbs, does 0-60 in 5.1s. The 335ix AT is heavier, yet not near 3900 lbs, but does 0-60 in 4.8s due to being an AWD. We know BMW tends to be conservative on the numbers.

As far as the longer the pull, the faster the CTS-V is, yes, but I doubt mama does long pulls at all. I think she just does not like the initial neck snapping acceleration enough, which actually will be easier to rectify with a tune in the 335i, than trying to beat the CTS-V's 0-60 time.

I am thinking what mama needs in addition to the tune, replace the RFTs with a set of sticky summer go-flat tires. They will help mama during the launch. Keep those RFTs in storage and put them back on before the lease return to avoid the hefty RFT wear and tear charges.

Originally Posted by dtc100

I don't know where you got your numbers. According to BMWUSA, the 2013 335i AT weighs around 3500 lbs, does 0-60 in 5.1s. The 335ix AT is heavier, yet not near 3900 lbs, but does 0-60 in 4.8s due to being an AWD. We know BMW tends to be conservative on the numbers.

As far as the longer the pull, the faster the CTS-V is, yes, but I doubt mama does long pulls at all. I think she just does not like the initial neck snapping acceleration enough, which actually will be easier to rectify with a tune in the 335i, than trying to beat the CTS-V's 0-60 time.

I am thinking what mama needs in addition to the tune, replace the RFTs with a set of sticky summer go-flat tires. They will help mama during the launch. Keep those RFTs in storage and put them back on before the lease return to avoid the hefty RFT wear and tear charges.

MotorTrend got 4.7