Never posted this before, but a couple of months back, I met up with a friend who just got a used 07' auto BMW 335i Coupe. We did a run on a nearby street starting at 20mph in first gear. We honked 3 times, and on the third honk, we went for it. I slammed it into second gear, spinning my tires and pulled a little bit on him (maybe half a fender) till about 60mph. Then, once we both shifted into 3rd, his car starting pulling on me, leaving me by about 1 and a half car lengths until we both shut off.

After we were done, he gave me a thumbs up and told me that he wished his car was manual like mine was. All in all, I know his car is faster, but I was extremely impressed on how well my 8 year old car kept up with his supposedly "innovated" BMW.

 

nice run

 

 

So just because a stock auto 335i did not blow the doors off a modded CLS6 its "Supposedly Innovated"? A Neon SRT4 will blow your doors off with just a few mods, so does that make it innovative? Really?

Good run non the less. But you know for the money you spent on that Icebox $for$ into the 335i he will blow your doors of with a JB (Juicebox).

 

Nice run, good to see your car did well against him. But you know he would've walked you easily if he was MT as well.

Stay safe.

 

 

Just in case you didn't already know, I said it happened a couple months back. I didn't have any performance mods at that time aside from my Exhaust. Also, I said his car is supposedly "innovated" because that's what you always hear about these newer BMW's. I'm basically saying that my older, more simply designed Acura can make his fancy pants modern-era BMW look like it's not all that much.

I understand that modding that car can make it into a beast, but this race was stock for stock, (besides my exhaust), so talking about mods is virtually irrelevant.

 

There's more to a car than straight-line speed.

 

Thanks, that was the point I was trying to make. Clearly right over his head.

 

I've owned two CL-S6's... one fully modded (Forced Induction, coils, sways, BBK 13 flat @ 110 mph) and I will say the 335 handles better stock than the upgraded suspension CL-S and just maybe a hair slower in stock form then my CLS with a High Boost Pulley. This was well over 10k close to 15k in upgrades, so no, your logic is false. A CL with just mufflers will still be nearly a second behind in the 1/4 and 335i's are much easier to get off the line.

 

real races are from a stand still. none-the-less good run. i dont think people dislike you, i believe they dont like your fan-boy-ism for a car that isnt really "fast"

 

^ I think everybody goes through that phase with a new car. I used to think my Accord was a sports sedan

 

I do think Stock CL-S's are fast . I just think you get more power for what you pay vs the 335, not to mention that the CL is based on a 2001 design....

 

You can't compare cost to power, though, because there's so much more to a car. I'd be willing to bet the Bimmer has a superior interior.

 

not really, more like having all the little technology bits and pieces (like having little electric arms that push the seat belts forward, so the driver and passenger don't have to reach back for them; or having the seat "power slide" forward for rear passengers to get in instead of flipping a lever and pushing the seat forward manually like on the CL)) , and having prestige of the name

 

Considering the newest CL is 8 years old, I'd bet the build quality is a little bit superior, as is the IP, radio/sound system, etc.

 

I have actually sat in and driven my other friend's 335, and it obviously did handle better (not as much as you'd think though), and the seats were rock hard compared to my CL-S.

 

Thanks

Thanks

Actually, the auto 335's have been proven to be faster than the Manuals (I'd still take the stick over auto any day though). Also, thanks, I try to keep these runs safe as possible, and I don't do them too often.

Thanks

 

Next time if your more clear about what your trying to preach, it won't have to go over people's heads

 

Jacob^^^^^



Sorry man, but I thought that it was pretty clear what direction I was going.
Let me try this.

Just because a great automobile as the 335i is, did not pull harder then it did on your cls6 does not make it, as you said "supposedly innovative".

I (now this is my opinion not fact) view the 335i as a far superior automobile.

You think the CLS6 is a better car and thats your right. I'm just sticking up for the Beemer. By your resoning in your post, inorder for the 335i to be "Innovative" it should have beat you by a larger margin.

Now this part is fact.

Take a look at who has won more "International Engines of the year" awards. Guess what? It's not Honda! So I do consider BMW a very innovative auto maker.
http://www.ukipme.com/engineoftheyear/previous04.html

When you get to that page press "ctrl" "F" then type BMW and you will see 46 matches, then type Honda and you will get 22 matches. This is from 1999 to 2009. If you look close at the years you will see BMW has 3 to 4 different engines for EVERY year. Where as Honda as far I see only has 2 per year, and only 6 out of the 10 yrs covered.

And if you look at Wards. The the N55 found in the "11 335i is a 10 best. No Honda motors in this group.

http://wardsauto.com/ar/names_best_engines_101207/

 

but then again Honda just improves upon existing motors to extract more power and make it more reliable VS coming out with different engines all the time, that are not proven reliability wise; so they would not even be considered for Wards list because they have not "changed" enough

 

No where I searched saiys that an engine must be new or changed for Wards to consider it.


"""""""Ward's 10 Best Engines is an annual list of the ten "best" automobile engines available in the U.S. market, that are selected by Ward's AutoWorld magazine. The list was started in 1994, and has been drawn every year since then.

Engines must be available in regular-production vehicles on sale in the U.S. market no later than the first quarter of the year. To be eligible, the engine also must be available in a vehicle with a base price of no more than $54,000 (for 2007 list). During a 2-month testing period, Ward's editors evaluate each engine according to a number of objective and subjective criteria in everyday driving situations – there is no instrumented testing. The selection takes into account power and torque output, noise, vibration and harshness (NVH) levels, technical relevance, and basic comparative numbers. Each engine competes against all others.""""""""""

So your attempt to take away from BMW engineers and sway favor to Honda was not very well done.

And the fact that the car must have a base price of $54k should swing favor to Honda since there are far more Honda's below that base price. Where as the beemers have more cars above $54k.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying there is anything wrong with Honda engines. But the awards should speak for there selves.

I'll just say it!

If BMW's are not innovative auto makers then why do they have more engines earning more top awards then any other manufacture including companies from Japan?

 

every honda has a base price under $54k, except for the NSX, which is not made anymore FYI

and don't get me wrong, BMW make more power consistently (when they are running correctly ), especially with the double VANOS, but how often does that VANOS system break (compared to say VTEC breaking) ALOT more often (like here is one of a M3 failure: http://m3 forum.net/m3forum/showthread.php?t=212573 ; just delete the space i created) where you hear of VTEC engines going 100k miles easily with regular oil changes, and no issues with it

so basically what i see it comes down to, is that the Japan companies go more for the reliability factor, instead of tossing in the latest and greatest technology that is bound to break at some point




edit: and look at the price it would have been to repair it, if not covered by warrenty (normally on Honda's it is either a low oil, a dirty filter screen, or a defective pressure switch which is all easily remedied

 

Thats what I'm talking about when I say Innovative, that latest and greatest tech.

Ok, I see the point you are making.That holds more water then the last post. I don't think anyone can argue about Honda's reliability. Well unless you own a autotragic cls! But even I know this is a isolated thing.

I was never arguing Honda's reliability that was not the point of any of my posts.

 

CH46ESeaKnight- It's not always about performance. Yes, the only thing I did mention in the beginning of the thread was just our speed comparison, but looking at it in a broad manner, the CL-S delivers way more. As Fries mentioned, reliability wise, the CL-S will always dominate the 335, and most of those cars haven't even reached 4 years old yet. Also, the interior of the CL-S is comphier (not sure if that's a word). For the price of a 335, it better be messaging my ass in 12 different variations while applying lotion imported from the galapagos islands at the same time

 

fixed , and that can easily be fixed too (but i had bought the car knowing it had a f@cked auto already (and i milked it for another 20k), and wanted to convert it anyways; but then again my car was an unusual case (a couple of people have had the same issue with it puking itself) but my 5th gear had burned itself down to bare metal




also every car has it own sets of issues (like our mounts and it making your exhaust move forward and hit your rear sway bar ; yes there are scratches from the right muffler's connection hitting it [f@cking clunks], which where not there two months ago, and FYI all my mounts are less then 6 months old; but shot already basically), just some brands have alot more then others

 

edit: just saw your post above mine. I'm keeping the lotion though....

 

Just so you know a 2003 CLS6 was only about (key word here "about") $4,900.00 less then a 2007 335I when taken into account the inflation from 2003 to 2007 of about (again key word "about") 18.9%. And that is not the base price used on the 335I. 2003 CLS6 msrp was about 32K and I know there were not many options avalible on the cls to run up the price (they were all pretty much standard all the options I mean, which is a good thing). Price as tested for a 335i I used was around 43k. But the base 335i was about 39k in 2007. I know a fully loaded 335i can get up there so I used a arond the middle of the road price of around 43k.

So really not that huge of a difference. But I would like to know more about this lotion from the Galapagos Islands!!!! Sounds exotic! lol We will be going there in 2013. All expenses paid! Can't wait!

 

but beware it makes your hair turn red/ginger like

 

Yeah but gingers do it big. Shawn White status son.

 

You make some good points, theres no doubting you, but come on look at the year difference lol! The CL comes from a 2001 design using parts from Hondas as early as the 90's. That by itself says alot.

 

The McLaren F1 was released in 1992

 

BMW is better.

Why?


Rear wheel drive.

 

fixed

 

Honda has all wheel drive.

Honda does not have rear wheel drive.

 

^^^ but we were talking about the CL though, which FYI never came in AWD


and if you really want to fight it out, try the NSX or S2000

 

Even more reason the CL is inferior.

S2000 = Still will lose to a 335
NSX = Priced closer to a Vette and would get smoked by one.

Try again

 

S2000= toss on a turbo or supercharger, and they are not horribly priced to begin with, so even if you bought the S2K new, it still be under the price of the 335, and faster
NSX = a little overpriced, but you are going more for handling then straight line performance then




btw you just said Honda had no RWD which indeed they do

 

Errrr, they dont. Look at the 2010-up lineup.

Look at Acuras 2006-up lineup as well.

And if you want to talk about handling, the NSX was great in the early 90s. Vettes arent nearly as bad as everyone makes them out to be either.

 

^^^ you never put a year constraint on it ; and even then Honda had 4wd back in 1990 or so with that Civic wagon