Shopping: BMW 335i and alternatives

[ro51092]

Get the 2.0T. The 3.2 is not worth it.

[Raza]

Get the 2.0T. The 3.2 is not worth it.

2.0T with the automatic won't be quick enough for him. 

[ro51092]

2.0T with the automatic won't be quick enough for him. 

3.2 with the auto is 0-60 in 7.5 seconds. the 2.0T auto is in the high 6's. I've timed one on a test drive.

[Raza]

3.2 with the auto is 0-60 in 7.5 seconds. the 2.0T auto is in the high 6's. I've timed one on a test drive.

According to the manufacturer, the 3.2 is 6.7 and the 2.0T is 7.5 seconds. 

[TheIntrepid]

3.2 with the auto is 0-60 in 7.5 seconds. the 2.0T auto is in the high 6's. I've timed one on a test drive.

Ro, man, sorry, but if the 2.0T engine was faster, there's no point in them offering a 3.2

[Colonel Cadillac]

Ro, man, sorry, but if the 2.0T engine was faster, there's no point in them offering a 3.2

Audi offered on the previous generation A6 a 2.7T V6 and a 4.2 V8, and the 2.7T was faster.

The 4.2 might have had a bit more passing power though.

[ifcar]

Ro, man, sorry, but if the 2.0T engine was faster, there's no point in them offering a 3.2

It's a lot quieter.

[nickdrinkwater]

According to the manufacturer, the 3.2 is 6.7 and the 2.0T is 7.5 seconds. 

Honestly, how often is your brother going to be doing 0-60 flat out?  I think the 2.0T would provide plenty of power, be more economical and save a considerable amount on the list price.

[1 BAD 7]

1st choice = BMW 335i

Positives for the 335i is the engine, chassis and prestige. Negative is price.

2nd choice = G35
Positive is that for the price of 328i you get a more powerfull car with plenty of features. It is not as good as the 335i dynamics wise. But it comes darn close to it then any other car on market.

[Colonel Cadillac]

I don't think price is that large a consideration. He does drive an E320, and that's around 50 I believe.

[565]

You know this debate whether the 2.0T is faster sparked some interest from me, and I decided to do some mag digging. The problem was most of the 2.0T tested were manual, while the 3.2 tended to be automatic.? Well here's what I found.


From our favorite magazine, C&D tested a 2.0T manual to be 0-60 at 7.2 sec. and quartermile at 15.5 @92mph.

http://www.caranddriver.com/roadtests/9478/audi-a4-20t-quattro-page4.html

And C&D tested the 3.2 automatic at 15.7 secs in the quartermile, the online version didn't have more data.

http://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons/10387/2005-audi-a4-32-quattro.html


From Motortrend I only managed to find a 3.2 automatic time.? It was 0-60 at 7.1 and quartermile at 15.1 @ 93.4 mph

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/sedan/112_0509_sport_sedan_comparison/specs_price.html

Just when things looked good for the 3.2 auto, I found a R&T time of 6.4 0-60mph and 14.9 @ 94.2 mph for the quarter for the 2.0T manual

http://www.roadandtrack.com/article.asp?section_id=31&article_id=2482

So I guess it's hard to say.? The fastest time is from R&T for the 2.0T manual.? Also across the same magazine (C&D) the 2.0 manual is also faster.? But one can see alot of variation in the times, and considering the 2.0T in question here is automatic, it could really swing either way.? But I can't really say one is faster than the other.? I do find it interesting Audi has such little straightline distinction between the cars, a far cry from say a 335i's complete and utter destruction of a 328i in a race.

[ro51092]

Ro, man, sorry, but if the 2.0T engine was faster, there's no point in them offering a 3.2

Sorry bro, but Audi already did this with the A6 4.2 and the 2.7T. Also, 3.2 V6 sounds a lot better than 2.0L I4. People would pay extra for the V6 when they're just getting a quieter and more powerful engine (that's actually slower), just like the C5 A6.

[TheIntrepid]

Sorry bro, but Audi already did this with the A6 4.2 and the 2.7T. Also, 3.2 V6 sounds a lot better than 2.0L I4. People would pay extra for the V6 when they're just getting a quieter and more powerful engine (that's actually slower), just like the C5 A6.

OOPS.

[ifcar]

Except in this case, Audi quotes the 3.2 as being quicker than the 2.0.

[saxonyron]

Okay, so I'm back. Drove a fully spec'd 3.2.

.... The handbrake is also tucked away neatly under the armrest, which means you have to move the armrest to use the handbrake, and because the armrest is in a weird position, getting to the shifter is odd, which made me thankful for the paddles. Other than that rather glaring fault, the interior ergonomics were very good.

....There's not a lot of rear legroom, which is worrying, frankly, since his car is usually the one we take when a bunch of us (friends, not family) take when we go out. But, I don't think he'll care much.

.....Although, there is one other thing that seems strange to me. The throttle response is razor sharp. Too sharp, almost; it seems artificially boosted, and the car seems to hold on to your inputs even when you let off. So, if you were accelerating and then you let off the gas, it would continue to accelerate for a moment before laying off. Maybe it's because of the engine's torque curve, but I've never driven another car that does this. Ron, have you noticed anything like that?

Nice review, Raza!  I agree about the handbrake - everything in the car is so well laid out, but the handbrake lifts the armrest up an inch when it's fully engaged. Sort of annoying, but I don't even think about it any more.  As for the throttle, you're right.  It sort of hangs onto the revs when you blip the throttle.  Not as satisfying a heel-toe car as my A6 was. Don't know if that's the throttle mapping or a direct lazy linkage, but I do wish the revs would drop quicker.  Ro51092, do you have the same experience?

[850CSi]

I wouldn't want to pay nearly $40K for a car with a 4-banger.

And there's no way the 2.0T is faster than the 3.2 with the same transmission.

[ro51092]

I wouldn't want to pay nearly $40K for a car with a 4-banger.

I would.


My car ain't bad either.

[850CSi]

Nice review, Raza!? I agree about the handbrake - everything in the car is so well laid out, but the handbrake lifts the armrest up an inch when it's fully engaged. Sort of annoying, but I don't even think about it any more.?

Yeah, that bothered me in my old car too.

[Eye of the Tiger]

pwn3d! 

[saxonyron]

I wouldn't want to pay nearly $40K for a car with a 4-banger.

I would have agreed before I got my A4.  I never even think about the cylinder count - I just enjoy the acceleration. The FSI engine's torque curve gives a real nice delivery.  You just don't feel like you're in a 4 cyl....until I go to the pump and calculate my 25 mpg. 

[ro51092]

Nice review, Raza!  I agree about the handbrake - everything in the car is so well laid out, but the handbrake lifts the armrest up an inch when it's fully engaged. Sort of annoying, but I don't even think about it any more.  As for the throttle, you're right.  It sort of hangs onto the revs when you blip the throttle.  Not as satisfying a heel-toe car as my A6 was. Don't know if that's the throttle mapping or a direct lazy linkage, but I do wish the revs would drop quicker.  Ro51092, do you have the same experience?

I get that same thing.

[saxonyron]

Yeah, that bothered me in my old car too.

You mean the B6 did that too????  I do love Audis, but that is sort of an easy to fix faux pas.  Wassupwiddat?

[Eye of the Tiger]

The revs not dropping quickly might be something just programed into the ECU for emissions. They tend to do that with many cars nowadays.?

[MidnightDave]

IS350 FTW! 0-60 that is...oh, and quarter mile, and dealer experience IMO, don't rule it out till you test drive one and get a taste of the Lexus experience and fun it is to run 0-60 flat sometimes. 

[MexicoCityM3]

You know what I'd get out of those options.

In any case, if getting the A4 I would also go with the 2.0T.

Since your brother wants an auto, make sure to test that when you drive the 335i. The BMW mags are raving about the auto trans in that car. Its a ZF unit that supposedly shifts well and really quickly. The trans in the 335i is different from the one in the 328i. 335i is ZF while 328i is GM. The GM unit is not bad but the ZF is getting rave reviews.

I'd like to get your impressions.

[Raghavan]

Ro pwned 850.
I'd get the 335.

[ro51092]

You mean the B6 did that too????  I do love Audis, but that is sort of an easy to fix faux pas.  Wassupwiddat?

The handbrake position really is a pain in the ass. BTW, why does that door lock button in the back lock, but not unlock?

[Raghavan]

The handbrake position really is a pain in the ass. BTW, why does that door lock button in the back lock, but not unlock?

So kids can't open the door by accident?

[ro51092]

So kids can't open the door by accident?

But the doors dont have conventional locks. If you lock the doors, and pull the handle 1 time, it will unlock, the second it will open. But I guess thats what child lock is for. I just dont think I'd have put those locks on the doors had I been the one designing it.

[Raghavan]

Oh, i hate cars that unlock when you pull the handle once. Sometimes i pull the door handle after i lock it just to make sure it's completely closed.
I did that on a Jetta once while the car was moving. Scared the crap out of me when the door opened.