The 135i is the best BMW

Ender_ · 03-03-2013, 01:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheSt|G

That was the original plan from BMW. Everyone knows the weak link of the 1M is the engine which hardly lives up to what a proper M engine is. And I've had torque loaded BMWs before, it was part of the reason I sold it.

Who's this everyone you speak of?

Yes I know 'everyone' was saying that before any one had driven one but once people had no one said it was the 'weak link'. Maybe you haven't driven one and your being an arm chair reviewer?
I have heard everyone say the power in the 1M is much more usable then the M3.

BrokenVert · 03-03-2013, 01:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ender_

Who's this everyone you speak of?

Yes I know 'everyone' was saying that before any one had driven one but once people had no one said it was the 'weak link'. Maybe you haven't driven one and your being an arm chair reviewer?
I have heard everyone say the power in the 1M is much more usable then the M3.

I find it more useable on a daily basis than my friends E46, which I have some seat time in.

And the N54 in my car is a hell of a lot more useable than my S2000.

P7X · 03-03-2013, 01:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BrokenVert

And the N54 in my car is a hell of a lot more useable than my S2000.

The power, driveability with some practicality does it. Makes a great daily driver!

TheSt|G · 03-03-2013, 09:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ender_

Who's this everyone you speak of?

Yes I know 'everyone' was saying that before any one had driven one but once people had no one said it was the 'weak link'. Maybe you haven't driven one and your being an arm chair reviewer?
I have heard everyone say the power in the 1M is much more usable then the M3.

Everyone as in everyone outside of an insular community that focuses on comparing RWHP numbers, traction issues, and engine problems.

Yes I've driven one and it was fantastic. My take away thought was that if it had a proper engine like a S54 or S65 it would have been the best M car ever period.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BrokenVert

I find it more useable on a daily basis than my friends E46, which I have some seat time in.

And the N54 in my car is a hell of a lot more useable than my S2000.

Today I learned the S2000 has 265 wheel torque. Or in other terms, 17 less than a 135i which is critical for DD.

BrokenVert · 03-03-2013, 09:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheSt|G

Today I learned the S2000 has 265 wheel torque. Or in other terms, 17 less than a 135i which is critical for DD.

Thats gotta be a typo, the AP2 makes something around 165lb/ft, my AP1 made about 150lb/ft

Do you seriously think a 2.3L NA engine makes 265 lb/ft? This is a Honda were talking about man!

TheSt|G · 03-03-2013, 09:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BrokenVert

Thats a typo, the AP2 makes something around 165lb/ft, my AP1 made about 150lb/ft

So basically 120ft/lbs at the wheels.

Or 160ft/lbs less than a S54 with basic bolt ons.

I see why you picked that for a comparison car.

BrokenVert · 03-03-2013, 09:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheSt|G

So basically 120ft/lbs at the wheels.

Or 160ft/lbs less than a S54 with basic bolt ons.

I see why you picked that for a comparison car.

Lets keep this apples to apples and talk stock cars. Things always get murky when we start talking about FBO this and Pilot Super Sports that.

TheSt|G · 03-03-2013, 10:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BrokenVert

Lets keep this apples to apples and talk stock cars. Things always get murky when we start talking about FBO this and Pilot Super Sports that.

Stock the S54 makes more torque per liter than any NA car other than the engine from the 458.

Still a terrible aspect to knock it on.

SteveAZ · 03-04-2013, 04:11 AM

Did you say 458?
Well since you brought it up....

BrokenVert · 03-04-2013, 09:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheSt|G

Stock the S54 makes more torque per liter than any NA car other than the engine from the 458.

Still a terrible aspect to knock it on.

What is? That a stock E46 has far less usable torque than my 135? And especially my old S2000?

My car was bought as a DD and I dont get to flog it as much as I want to. High Revving NA engines are fantastic, but if I never get to use it whats the point?

luv135i · 03-04-2013, 09:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BrokenVert

What is? That a stock E46 has far less usable torque than my 135? And especially my old S2000?

My car was bought as a DD and I dont get to flog it as much as I want to. High Revving NA engines are fantastic, but if I never get to use it whats the point?

Back in my old honda days i always felt like a jackass highschool kid revving the piss out of my engine to 8k+ rpms from stop light to stop light to get power out of the thing

TheSt|G · 03-04-2013, 10:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BrokenVert

What is? That a stock E46 has far less usable torque than my 135? And especially my old S2000?

My car was bought as a DD and I dont get to flog it as much as I want to. High Revving NA engines are fantastic, but if I never get to use it whats the point?

If you care this much about making driving easy and unengaging, it would appear you bought the right car.

BrokenVert · 03-04-2013, 10:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheSt|G

If you care this much about making driving easy and unengaging, it would appear you bought the right car.

I did make the right purchase for myself. The 135 is a wonderful DD.

tuco44 · 03-04-2013, 10:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BrokenVert

I did make the right purchase for myself. The 135 is a wonderful DD.

Ditto

TheSt|G · 03-04-2013, 11:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheSt|G

Everyone as in everyone outside of an insular community that focuses on comparing RWHP numbers, traction issues, and engine problems.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SteveAZ

Did you say 458?
Well since you brought it up....

Thank you for proving my point.

Obioban · 03-04-2013, 12:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BrokenVert

What is? That a stock E46 has far less usable torque than my 135? And especially my old S2000?

My car was bought as a DD and I dont get to flog it as much as I want to. High Revving NA engines are fantastic, but if I never get to use it whats the point?

lolwut?

S54 makes more torque per liter than any other NA engine other the Ferrari 458 (and has 1.2 L more than the S2000), as well as making >80% of it's torque from 2200rpm to redline (stock). Significantly more than the S2000 (including torque per lb) and at much lower RPM. If your S2000 feels torquier... his S54 is broken in some way.

BrokenVert · 03-04-2013, 01:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Obioban

lolwut?

S54 makes more torque per liter than any other NA engine other the Ferrari 458 (and has 1.2 L more than the S2000), as well as making >80% of it's torque from 2200rpm to redline (stock). Significantly more than the S2000 (including torque per lb) and at much lower RPM. If your S2000 feels torquier... his S54 is broken in some way.

I never said my S2000 felt like it had more torque than my 135.

I said that my 135 has more useble torque than my friends E46 and my old S2000 <- both are high strung NA engines.

The S2000 was my only car before I bought my 135.

BForbes · 03-04-2013, 02:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BrokenVert

I never said my S2000 felt like it had more torque than my 135.

I said that my 135 has more useble torque than my friends E46 and my old S2000 <- both are high strung NA engines.

The S2000 was my only car before I bought my 135.

As a former s2k owner I would have to agree its far more usable. You're always in the right gear.

Ghost135 · 03-04-2013, 02:52 PM

More proof that the 135 is the best

Ender_ · 03-04-2013, 04:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheSt|G

Everyone as in everyone outside of an insular community that focuses on comparing RWHP numbers, traction issues, and engine problems.

Yes I've driven one and it was fantastic. My take away thought was that if it had a proper engine like a S54 or S65 it would have been the best M car ever period.

Name some names, again I haven't heard ANYONE of any authority/experience say its the wrong engine after driving it, and no someone who makes a screen name called "The Stig" doesn't count.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheSt|G

Today I learned the S2000 has 265 wheel torque. Or in other terms, 17 less than a 135i which is critical for DD.

Wow you are off by about 100TQ on this one.

Your creditably is dwindling fast...

TheSt|G · 03-04-2013, 05:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ender_

Name some names, again I haven't heard ANYONE of any authority/experience say its the wrong engine after driving it, and no someone who makes a screen name called "The Stig" doesn't count.

Oh no, he likes Top Gear. Heaven forbid like many other forum handles it relates to an interest the person has. It must have a deeper meaning!

Not sure what "name" you want me to name. The common consensus in every review I've read and from driving it is "wonderful car where you don't care about the engine because it is so much fun from a handling perspective".

That doesn't mean it wouldn't be better with something like a S65 in it, which clearly didn't happen to keep it from crushing the M3.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ender_

Wow you are off by about 100TQ on this one.

Your creditably is dwindling fast...

Are you really this dense?

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sarcasm

ParkNuts · 03-05-2013, 11:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheSt|G

Oh no, he likes Top Gear. Heaven forbid like many other forum handles it relates to an interest the person has. It must have a deeper meaning!

Not sure what "name" you want me to name. The common consensus in every review I've read and from driving it is "wonderful car where you don't care about the engine because it is so much fun from a handling perspective".

That doesn't mean it wouldn't be better with something like a S65 in it, which clearly didn't happen to keep it from crushing the M3.

Are you really this dense?

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sarcasm

Dude, you weren't being sarcastic, you were straight up making a claim. I suppose sarcasm font was needed because it couldn't have been detected any other way. You sound butt hurt and on the attack in every post in this thread.

From what I've read in reviews, those who were concerned that the motor wasn't the correct selection for an M car ended up loving the usable power. I suppose you're going to hate on the new M5 bc it's a V8tt?

03-04-2013, 04:11 AM	#31
SteveAZ Captain 60 Rep 654 Posts Drives: 135i Cab Join Date: Jul 2012 Location: Phoenix, AZ iTrader: (5)	Did you say 458? Well since you brought it up.... __________________ 2008 E88--Fuel-It! Stage 4 LPFP & PI--PS2 turbos--JB4/MHD--FBO--662whp/604wtq 2011 E90--Fuel-It! S2BL LPFP and PI--PS2 Turbo--JB4/MHD--FBO--546whp/589wtq 2013 Mini JCW--Tune--DP--FMIC--a couple Fuel-It! goodies--265whp/320wtq 2013 F10--JB4/BM3 2015 F82--Fuel-It! Stage 3 LPFP & PI--PS2 Turbos-- JB4/BM3-FBO
	Appreciate 0

03-04-2013, 02:52 PM	#41
Ghost135 Race me 9 Rep 182 Posts Drives: 2008 135i Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: North Jersey iTrader: (2)	More proof that the 135 is the best __________________
	Appreciate 0