Hello Sexy!

[Robert]

Originally Posted by SA135i

AFAIK, there is no space under the floor board. The battery and some other goodies are under there, so no space for a spare.

I wonder how aftermarket tuners are going to route the pipes for a dual exhaust with the battery compartment in the way.

[AwesomeBMW]

Originally Posted by robert

are you flirting with me?

let's keep this G rated here

[roadburn]

>>While grip levels are lower on damp cold roads, turbos LOVE cold air. They may be disappointed on 94F degree day in august with 80% humidity. I'm betting the tradeoff is zero sum: more grip is offset by lot's less boost...


78 degrees Fahrenheit.
23 percent relative humidity.
2 mph sidewind.
0 feet above sea level.

Wait a minute!
Forget about running 0-to-60s.
On a day like that, let's just lay back in the hammock....

[stefan]

What are your guys opinions on these testers getting freakishly fast 1's... I mean C&D's time was unprecedented. Even 5.2 is really, really fast.

[turbomg]

Originally Posted by stefan

What are your guys opinions on these testers getting freakishly fast 1's... I mean C&D's time was unprecedented. Even 5.2 is really, really fast.

You mean ignoring the fact that they don't have to care how badly the clutch is burnt?

Your concern is why magazines do these 10k mile "long term" tests. Even if the factory handed them a "hot" (while they might cherry pick the vehicle, you are crazy if you think they do any extra tuning) car, things will have settled after a few thousand miles.

After those few thousand miles, they typically retest the car in all disciplines. Want to guess what usually happens?

More often than not, the car is faster.

[turbomg]

Originally Posted by stefan

What are your guys opinions on these testers getting freakishly fast 1's.

One more reply.

This is a car with 300+ hp, 330+ by most estimates. It weighs 3200-3400 pounds depending on who you believe.

How is a 5.3 second 0-60 time "freakishly fast" for a car with a 11hp/lb (worst case) power to weight ratio?

This car is effectively the e46 M3 with more torque but less revs. There's nothing freakish about that.

[pumaknight]

Originally Posted by roadburn

>>While grip levels are lower on damp cold roads, turbos LOVE cold air. They may be disappointed on 94F degree day in august with 80% humidity. I'm betting the tradeoff is zero sum: more grip is offset by lot's less boost...


78 degrees Fahrenheit.
23 percent relative humidity.
2 mph sidewind.
0 feet above sea level.

Wait a minute!
Forget about running 0-to-60s.
On a day like that, let's just lay back in the hammock....

[BMW Dreamer]

Thanks for the post. It is fast.

[TP 135i]

Originally Posted by UK135i

TP i would be really interested to hear your thoughts on the comparison of the cayman S you have and the 135i when you get to drive it. I hope you will be doing a comparison review

Yes. I plan do do something along those lines. I don't track my cars so my evaluation should be more along the lines of real world driving, in traffic, on ramps, back roads, etc. The other BIG difference will be the two transmissions which I believe will affect the results. The Cayman is Tiptronic (yuck) and the 135 is manual. I already know that I don't like driving the Tiptronic.
If you're not already aware, the Cayman is my wifes and she preferred the automatic transmission.

[joec63]

Originally Posted by TP 135i

If you're not already aware, the Cayman is my wifes and she preferred the automatic transmission.

We all have to make sacrifices :biggrin:

[stefan]

Originally Posted by turbomg

One more reply.

This is a car with 300+ hp, 330+ by most estimates. It weighs 3200-3400 pounds depending on who you believe.

How is a 5.3 second 0-60 time "freakishly fast" for a car with a 11hp/lb (worst case) power to weight ratio?

This car is effectively the e46 M3 with more torque but less revs. There's nothing freakish about that.

Ok.. "freakish" is a relative term. Not only is the car faster against BMW's standards, it gets a huge variability in 0-60 times across different reviews. You are implying that we should consistently expect a certain time.. (your "weight vs power" argument) in which case you referred to 5.3 seconds.. whereas I'm referring more to the sub-5 seconds times (e.g., C&D). More specifically, I was addressing the variability in times.

I'd agree that cherry picking by BMW is far fetched. But I'd sooner agree with turbomg's explanation. Makes sense.