5.1 Sec vs 5.2 Sec

[DVDA]

Ok so BMWUSA.com states that 135i's 0-60 time in Manual is 5.1 Seconds and in Auto is 5.2 Seconds

What Automatic setting are they using? Drive, Sport, Steptronic?

Also how close is this to being accurate? Anyone have any actual track results...I have never seen an Auto come so close to Manual

[kingnonis]

Originally Posted by DVDA

Ok so BMWUSA.com states that 135i's 0-60 time in Manual is 5.1 Seconds and in Auto its 5.2 Seconds

What are Automatic setting are they using? Drive, Sport, Steptronic?

Also how close is this to being accurate? Anyone have any actual track results...I have never seen an Auto come so close to Manual

Not very "real world" accurate seems to be the consensus around here. AT will actually do the run faster than MT unless the MT driver is borderline pro at shifting w/stick. From the previous threads on this subject, which there have been a few, that seems to be the conclusion. Also if I remember correctly, there's a member who clocked 4.8 sec on his gtech w/a step on DS or M mode. IMHO it really comes down to the driver where those last tenths of a sec are concerned (launch, shifting, etc)

[DVDA]

I was searching for old posts on the subject but the search feature isnt that great, do you have any of the titles to those threads?

Also do you know the answer to the second question? (What Automatic Mode is the quickest, Sport, Step or Drive)

[///Morgan]

I think that besides from the driver, there are many important factors that may affect such as temperature, humidity, etc etc.

[kingnonis]

Originally Posted by DVDA

I was searching for old posts on the subject but the search feature isnt that great, do you have any of the titles to those threads?

Also do you know the answer to the second question? (What Automatic Mode is the quickest, Sport, Step or Drive)

mm..not sure about the mode the AT is on for bmw's tests, the results of which tend to be on the conservative side. Here is a link I found to a thread by a member who has used the gtech but i think he has a stick..

http://www.1addicts.com/forums/showt...ighlight=gtech

[Tom K.]

IIRC, Road & Track tested a 2008 MT 135i coupe at 4.8" and Car & Driver recorded 4.7" for a Steptronic version.

Tom

[BMW86]

Originally Posted by kingnonis

Not very "real world" accurate seems to be the consensus around here. AT will actually do the run faster than MT unless the MT driver is borderline pro at shifting w/stick. From the previous threads on this subject, which there have been a few, that seems to be the conclusion. Also if I remember correctly, there's a member who clocked 4.8 sec on his gtech w/a step on DS or M mode. IMHO it really comes down to the driver where those last tenths of a sec are concerned (launch, shifting, etc)

That would be me?

I have a 135i with auto transmission and by rev-launching my car in Sports Manual mode the best time for 0-60miles is 4.84seconds but averaging around 4.9*seconds. To get a 0-62miles or 0-100km time you need to add roughly 0.15seconds though.

[DVDA]

Your car is stock BMW86? no performance mods?

If so thats impressive 4.84 seconds with an Auto

[RPM90]

Originally Posted by Tom K.

IIRC, Road & Track tested a 2008 MT 135i coupe at 4.8" and Car & Driver recorded 4.7" for a Steptronic version.

Tom

So, roughly both trans types are as fast. Neither is faster than the other.
The auto will probably give more consistent times as there is not much driver skill involved, whereas a manual driver has to get it right every time.

As you are probably aware, mags do multiple runs and sometimes post the fastest, and sometimes the avg.
There are many on these forums who insist the auto trans faster, but there really isn't much support for that other than insisting it is.
.1 sec is nothing.
Suffice it to say both trans options are FAST. Speaks well of BMW and this version of the Stronic, it wasn't always the case.
Plus, they geared the auto to help it out. Good job.

[BMW86]

Originally Posted by DVDA

Your car is stock BMW86? no performance mods?

If so thats impressive 4.84 seconds with an Auto

Yes my car is completely stock however the 4.84 was an exception. I'm consistently in the 4.9* range for 0-60m. All of these were done on some quiet backroads and my rears don't have much tread left.

[DVDA]

Yeah well I dont really like stick because South Florida traffic SUCKS! but with that said I would tough it out if the times were significantly different...

In the 328i they are about 1.0 second apart and I would get stick only, glad the 135 is so close

[kingnonis]

Originally Posted by BMW86

That would be me?

I have a 135i with auto transmission and by rev-launching my car in Sports Manual mode the best time for 0-60miles is 4.84seconds but averaging around 4.9*seconds. To get a 0-62miles or 0-100km time you need to add roughly 0.15seconds though.

lol...yep i think so.

[x5mad]

Originally Posted by DVDA

Yeah well I dont really like stick because South Florida traffic SUCKS! but with that said I would tough it out if the times were significantly different...

In the 328i they are about 1.0 second apart and I would get stick only, glad the 135 is so close

+1. If the times for the 135 was significantly different I would have got the stick.

The reasons for the auto in the 135 being almost identical is due to 2 things I think - 1) gearing as stated above 2) the auto is far more superior to the 128/125 and is a ZF box.

Which leads me to another point. Why oh why does BMW make the gearing so tall? By that I mean each gear has such a wide spread of capable road speeds. Makes 6th gear ratio almost redundant. 6th is geared in the region of 280km/h + (170+). Who is going to need that? Would have been better to do shorter gearing and thus improving on the acceleration times even further (top speed will be reduced but as said before who really needs 280km/h +??)
I can only think of 1 reason and that is to stop the 135 from embarrassing the e92 M3.

An example of the gearing would be the new z4. Top model has same engine with identical outputs. weight = 1600kg. 135i convertible in manual form = 1600kg

However the maunal Z4 sprints to 62mph in 5.2secs whereas the 135i convertible in manual does it in 5.6 secs. (the drag coefficient will also make some difference but not 0.4 sec difference). So had BMW done similar gearing ratios to the Z4 we would have an even quicker (accelerating) 135i with some loss of top end - which I would be more than happy with!

[oneill3]

Is it possible to change the gearing ratio? What would be involved?

[tbird]

The discussion/debate on the 0-60 times is on multiple threads. There are certainly differences between MT and AT, and of course coupe and vert. For a vert, add .1 roughly. For MT vs AT, nowadays there seems to be little difference with the quality of AT and the shifting capabilities in current AT technology. There is also of course the point of how the car was tested, meaning did the driver(s) turn off the compressor and also do the full shutdown of DSC/DTC?

The general consensus is this. BMW reports 5.3, but BMW is known for giving slower times. In multiple magazines, the time has been 4.7-4.8 for stock.

What would be interesting to see, is that when BMW releases its Performance Kit in the states, when the mags will pick up a coupe, put on the performance kit, performance exhaust, and then accurately set the car to run the fastest, and then see what time it gets for a stock 135. My guess/hope will be 4.4-4.5, fingers crossed.

On a side note, just for fun comparison, the new 2010 Mustang, Ford repeatedly claims it can do 4.3, but both Car & Driver and Automotive Week put Ford to the test and asked them to prove it on the track, and both times Ford could not beat the magazine's testers who were pulling 4.9 repeatedly. Both mags, ALL drivers, all got 4.9 for 0-60.

So, a 520hp Mustang is slower than a 306hp 135. The thought of that just makes me so freaking happy that I can throw that in the face of the idiots who go out and spend $50,000 on an Avis/Hertz rental car warmover.

[x5mad]

Originally Posted by oneill3

Is it possible to change the gearing ratio? What would be involved?

I would assume it is possible to change the gearing but I am no expert in this. Howeve I have been researching and it looks like it would be a mechanical job. Perhaps the gearing itself or the final drive ratio.

Picture this - in my previous post a 1600kg Z4 manual can get from 0-62mph in 5.2 secs. If the 135 coupe had similar gearing then 'official' times would be something like 4.9-5.0 secs (for 0-62mph). But take into account that most magazines are getting approx 0.3-0.4 secs quicker then real world figures would then be something like 4.6 - 4.7 secs. That is well and truly e92 M3 territory. I am convinced BMW knew this and dialled back the gearing so as not to embaress the M3.

This is something I wouldnt mind looking into as trade off would be lower top speed (280km/h down to 260km/h perhaps? I can live with that) and higer revs in each gear - but there are six and 6th gear at motorway speeds would still be quite acceptable at perhaps 2.3-2.5k revs at 100km/h?

My 2 cents. But I am sure its probably not that simple as an aftermarket thought! Damn BMW!

[imported_mega]

you can change the gearing, throw in lower gears from the auto, and a lsd at the same time

[zbladejr]

From my experience over the past year I'd point out a couple of key points that are relevant to my everyday driving experience.

First, the TT engine in the 135i is handicapped by the long throw gearbox, the gearing and the loss of boost between shifts in the MT (the AT holds boost longer).
While the car is very fast, it's not M3 fast in anything but straight line. Now, add a piggyback and the car is faster.

For those who say BMW purposefully made it slower than the M3....I disagree on following grounds:

1. BMW knows the long and deep history of tuning for the BMW crowd and therefore realizes that getting as fast as the M3 for 0-60 is child's play.

2. At$35k, the 135i's mission is separate and different than the $60K M3. I know there's a handfull of folks on here who say 'I have the money, but I preffer the 135i'. That's nice, but really not statistically significant. The 135i is for people that want a true BMW sports car but cannot afford an M3.....for now. It'll be interesting to see how many trade-up in coming years.

3. When the 135i was dreamed up; during the time of plenty, it was a segmentation play on the enthusiast crowd - sort of the Cayman to the 911 for Porsche. A car that in some ways is better than it's big brother, but is always the little brother. Case in point - Cayman versus GT2. Similar goodness coming with M3 CSL (don't have on good authority other than history tends to repeat itself).

The above is just my observation - all the points made about the 0-60 times are valid and if that's what sells a car (and to many it is) then it's relevant. But from my 10K miles, I'd be happy to trade-off a couple tenths to get a more complete and linear power package. A lighter M3 would fit that bill.......if I could afford one. Until that day, the 135i is great - even though I've never timed it 0-60....though have modded to make faster - guess I'm a 1addict!

[Angry3]

Originally Posted by x5mad

I would assume it is possible to change the gearing but I am no expert in this. Howeve I have been researching and it looks like it would be a mechanical job. Perhaps the gearing itself or the final drive ratio.

Picture this - in my previous post a 1600kg Z4 manual can get from 0-62mph in 5.2 secs. If the 135 coupe had similar gearing then 'official' times would be something like 4.9-5.0 secs (for 0-62mph). But take into account that most magazines are getting approx 0.3-0.4 secs quicker then real world figures would then be something like 4.6 - 4.7 secs. That is well and truly e92 M3 territory. I am convinced BMW knew this and dialled back the gearing so as not to embaress the M3.

This is something I wouldnt mind looking into as trade off would be lower top speed (280km/h down to 260km/h perhaps? I can live with that) and higer revs in each gear - but there are six and 6th gear at motorway speeds would still be quite acceptable at perhaps 2.3-2.5k revs at 100km/h?

My 2 cents. But I am sure its probably not that simple as an aftermarket thought! Damn BMW!

The problem with going to even more gear is the impact on fuel economy and noise at highway speeds. BMW has to gear the car so that its in the efficiency sweet spot at common highway speeds. In the US a typical interstate highway speed is 75 mph, and the car can't be turning 3500 rpms there. Also, you get to a point where more gear doesn't help acceleration because you are limited by tire traction.

The Step 135 is geared perfectly IMO. There's no way I would consider going to a shorter rear end, heck this car is geared very short compared to my GTO and other V8 cars I've owned in the past.

[jeremyc74]

Originally Posted by tbird

So, a 520hp Mustang is slower than a 306hp 135. The thought of that just makes me so freaking happy that I can throw that in the face of the idiots who go out and spend $50,000 on an Avis/Hertz rental car warmover.

Now why did you have to pull that BS and drag a totally unrelated car into this?

Do you realize what that warmed over rental car will do to a 135i on a track? It's UGLY.

[imported_mega]

Originally Posted by jeremyc74

Now why did you have to pull that BS and drag a totally unrelated car into this?

Do you realize what that warmed over rental car will do to a 135i on a track? It's UGLY.

is it?

it does not spec that good, i've never driven one

0.88g and the slalom at 67.4 mph via road and track, the 135i did it at .91 and 70.6 mph

[jeremyc74]

Originally Posted by imported_mega

is it?

it does not spec that good, i've never driven one

0.88g and the slalom at 67.4 mph via road and track, the 135i did it at .91 and 70.6 mph

You should probably stop bashing cars you've never driven. There's more to being fast on a track than skidpad and slalom times.

How does an 8 second gap grab you? The car isn't set up for drag racing, and the 0-60 times suffer because of it. Take a look at its trap speed if you want an indication of what it's going to look like next to a 135i on the highway.

Not bad for a warmed over rental car (note the 911 Turbo that was tested at the same time)

Chevrolet Corvette C6- 3:03.6 (2007)
Cadillac CTS-V- 3:04.0 (2008)
Lotus Exige S- 3:04.5 (2007)
Audi R8- 3:04.6 (2007)
BMW M3- 3:05.6 (2008)
Porsche 997 Turbo- 3:05.8 (2007)
Ford Shelby GT500- 3:05.9 (2007)
Mercedes Benz C63 AMG- 3:06.5 (2008)
Lotus Elise- 3:09.2 (2006)
Chevy Corvette C6- 3:09.3 (2006)
Porsche Cayman S- 3:09.5 (2006)
BMW M6- 3:10.0 (2006)
BMW 335i Coupe- 3:10.5 (2007)
Ford Shelby GT500 3:11.0 (2006) [ECU issues slowed car]
Audi RS4- 3:11.2 (2007)
BMW Z4 M- 3:11.7 (2007)
Nissan 350Z Track 3:12.5 (2006)
Chevrolet Cobalt SS Turbocharged 3:13.0 (2008)
Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution X MR SSTT (semi-auto)- 3:13.3 (2008)
Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution IX MR- 3:13.5 (2006)
BMW 135i (steptronic automatic)- 3:13.7 (2008)
Lexus IS F- 3:14.0 (2008)
Audi S5- 3:14.6 (2008)
Honda S2000 CR- 3:15.0 (2008)
Pontiac Solstice GXP- 3:15.7 (2007)
Mazda Speed 3- 3:16.0 (2007)
Dodge Challenger SRT8- 3:16.3 (2008)