anyone ever run their c43 against a bmw 335?? my buddy has a white one he bought it when it first came out, i figured hey lets do a pull for fun and to my suprise, their really not all that fast as everyone seemed to talk about, all i have is gutted intake no cats no resignators, and a tuned ecu , right from 2nd gear i jumped on him by about a car and slowy krept away, at about 140 he let off, im just surprised i though it would of destroyed me.

 

interested to hear.....I'd like to see the run between a C43 and a 135i

 

His 335i must be an auto. Even still I'm surprised you beat him.

 

Well, all the hub-bub is that the 335i realistically is probably closer to 300hp at the wheels and that it can be tuned for (relatively) cheap. Stock it's also decently fast, and I'm surprised a C43 could pull on one.

 

the 135 weighs almost as much as 335- major hype surrounds it for no reason

 

335 are like 5.2-5.3ish stock. with a chip they are in the 4.7-4.8 E46 SMG2 M3 territory. A properly modded C43 or C36 could take them on. remember the 335 is over 3500lbs so its not a light car, so on paper the C43 should beat it b/c its lighter and "more power" (well at least going by specs). The 335 though actually makes 340/340 HP/tq , so that doesn't play out in real life). It might just be a combo of gearing and less weight.

 

The 335is are overrated. I ran one last yr with my 350z from a highway roll. I pulled away slightly. Only have spacer and exhaust.

 

What makes them over rated if some of them stck are running low 13's like the E46 M3

 

Will never happen!

My 332i which is modded runs with the 335i and I know most 350z's modded or stck, including ALL C36's and all C43's could not touch my BMW. When a C36 or C43 runs mid 13's let me know.

 

mine just did

Some punk in a boosted M3 wanted to go, so I told Giselle to buckle up, and then let him have it....of course I was only at 1/2 throttle because I'm breaking in the new cams in my SLR motor.....and then I woke up....and realized I was dreaming

For serial though....your 202 C55 runs high 13's at least, right?

 

Also my bros 04 GTO which is quick as my 350z ran a 335i the outcome was close. But not close with the 6.0L GTO which runs low 13s like the e46.

 

Low 13's hoping for high to mid 12's this spring.

 

The 6.0L GTO runs similar to my car. My car makes ham roast out of E46 M3's and you know how my car runs.
And there are plenty of 6.0L GTO's that run low 13's high 12's.

 

awesome gives me hope for my next project

 

yeah, i have every intension of being that fast real soon.

more importantly, my traction sucks and on the frumroll where this race is likely to happen i'll be quite a bit faster than my 1/4 mile stats will show...

i have every intention of getting my car to the point of being faster than the new m3/c63 to be completely honest...

 

Yeah, I don't believe it.

Even though rated power and weight is the same, the 335i is just geared better with a better power band. It's also "underrated" and closer to 285whp stock (not quite 300).

Easily chipped for $500-$1500 putting them at very low 13s (E46 M3 killers, but no LSD).

I don't think an NA C43 will grab a 335i, especially if the 335i has anything done to it.

The transmission is a huge weakness to the C43.

 

ok. look.

i dont think the C43 or C36 for that matter holds a candle to the performance of a C32. I raced a 335i sedan in my C32, which has a pulley, and i pulled maybe a half a car. those cars are very UNDERrated in terms of power.

+1. Go on some forums. I am an active member on both E90post.com and Bimmerforums.com. The 335i is quite underrated from the factory. I have seen dynos of 300hp to the wheels. Here you go: http://www.dragtimes.com/BMW-335i-Timeslip-9852.html

As far as the 135i comment, it weights 150 lbs lighter. And in case you guys were wondering, every 100 lbs lighter on a car is considered about .1 s in the quarter mile. You bet that will make a difference.

Once again, look on some forums as some dynos. These cars are NOT underrated. BMW reports numbers lower than the actually are so as not to compete with its higher status/model M3. Anyone compare dynos of stock E55s (S/c ones) and SL55's? Same idea. Different numbers are reported so as not to compete with its upper division cars.

As far as the highway roll with the 350Z, that is somewhat believable that you pulled away slightly. The 335i has two tiny tiny turbos. These arent built for highway runs. Go race an STI on the highway. You will see the same thing happen.

Furthermore, the C43 has a better chance at higher speeds, such as on the highway up to 140 b/c it is a V8, not a tiny twin-turbo 6 cylinder motor.

I am quite surprised that e30t387's C43 beat him. The car must have not been broken in properly.

wow....ok first off, 0-60 times are NOT accurate. you cannot compare 0-60 times. there is something calling traction issues and powerband issues that affects these things. there was just a thread the other day about this. The SLR Mclaren does 0-60 in 3.6 seconds? Is that accurate? No....the SLR doesnt hook up from a dig. If it did, it would probably run low 3's or even high 2's. For a comparison, the Porsche 911 GT2 also does 0-60 in 3.6 seconds. A more accurate factor to compare is the trap speed. This takes many different things into consideration. In this case, the SLR traps about 128, whereas the GT2 at about 124.

btw, just to address the 0-60 times, Edmunds.com reached a 0-60 time of 4.8 seconds in a 335i and a 0-60 of 5.8 seconds in a C43. Pretty significant difference. Requires lots of modding and tuning to make up that gap. Not to mention that the C43 stock traps at about 99mph in a 14.4 1/4 mile time while the stock 335i runs a 13.6 at 105 mph.

While the 335i is not a light car about 3570 lbs, i wouldnt call the C43 much lighter. It weights in at 3460 lbs. Only about 100 lbs

In response to your "chip" comment, they dont make chips for it. It is a "piggyback." Currently, the Stage 0 piggyback made by vishnutuning has seen 0-60 times of 4.4 and the stage 1 piggyback 4.2 seconds. I wouldnt call that slow. Not to mention that these cars trap at about 111 with just a piggyback.

C43s on paper look better? Let's see they weigh 100 lbs lighter. And a stock C43 has 302 hp and 302 tq (crank numbers) with that peak torque number coming in at 3250 rpms. Sounds like good numbers at a nice RPM rate. But wait......according to CarandDriver.com, the 335i puts out its torque as low as....1400 rpm. Much lower, thus it gets off the line much faster. Both put out the same peak hp at the same rpm, so looks like the 335i, underrated from the factory, is at an advantage.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by silence
the 135 weighs almost as much as 335- major hype surrounds it for no reason

As far as the 135i comment, it weights 150 lbs lighter. And in case you guys were wondering, every 100 lbs lighter on a car is considered about .1 s in the quarter mile. You bet that will make a difference.



wow does that ever make you look like a dumb$$%&- "in case you guys were wondering" you're going to come in here and tell me how much of a difference weight makes? Think I didn't know that rule of thumb (which isn't directly applicable in this situation anyways)...? You also spelled weighs wrong I definitely didn't say that the weight wouldn't make a difference, only that the 135 isn't the answer many people have hyped it up to be. Rather, it's just a cheaper slightly smaller wannabe version of the larger car. If they had made a 3000 lb or even 3200 lb car that would be an entirely different story (as i had initially expected way back 4 or 5 years ago when i first heard they might try the compact market again stateside).

dyno #s vary greatly depending on what brand of dyno your on and the weather conditions etc., comparing graphs is about meaningless. There is not doubt in my mind though that the "35" bmw motor is underrated and very powerful as well as easily tuneable (to a point). Wouldn't trade it for a V8, but it's a great powerplant.

as far as C43 or C36 not holding a candle to the C32 performance wise... shall we race? regardless of that it's very clear our cars are superior in build quality, reliability, and aesthetics.

lastly, where did you get that weight number for the C43?

 

"As far as the highway roll with the 350Z, that is somewhat believable that you pulled away slightly. The 335i has two tiny tiny turbos. These arent built for highway runs. Go race an STI on the highway. You will see the same thing happen."

good luck beating a tuned sti on the highway or anywhere else with those 350z mods


for the record, i don't believe any 350z kept up with a 335 either... I've spent quite a bit of time messing around on the freeway with a friend in his 350z with more done and THAT car couldn't keep up with my C43 on the freeway when IT WAS STOCK.

 

wow...well thank you for the positive feedback.

im glad you noticed my spelling error. i guess a long day at medical school it too blame. not to mention that the both the "g" and "h" key are right near the "t" key. my bad. hopefully my 40 on the MCAT meets with your approval, being that you are so critical of my grammar and punctuation. this isn't an english forum. and if you want to get so damn technical, you missed a comma between your words "cheaper" and "slightly." But I won't judge and criticize you for it.

you said you dont understand the major hype behind the 135. well, besides being 150 lbs lighter (and I apologize for offending of you in reminding of you of the rule; i'm sure there are people on this forum who don't know it), the 135i also has a near perfect 50/50 weight distribution. It is smaller, more nimbler, and will outhandle the 335i. Sure, it's not a GT-R in that it blows away tons of competition, but hey, it's a start in the right direction. It isn't even that much cheaper. the 335i sedan starts at 38.9K and the 135i start at 34.9K.

as far as dynos, i am well aware that different dynos and conditions can result in different obtained data. i was merely providing an example that may suggest that these cars are underrated. As far as tunability, the quickest 335i on stock turbos just recently ran an 11.2 at 121. Several are running high 11s at 117 and many, many in the low 12s. Not bad for tiny, stock turbos.

you want to race? sure....your sig does say yours is supercharged if I am reading it correctly. as far as stock numbers, no....they dont really compare.

C43: 14.4 @99
C36: 14.4 @ 97.7
C32:13.6 @ 105.4

i'm not going to comment on the 6 mph difference between the C43 and C32 trap speeds b/c im assuming you already know that is a big difference in trap speeds

oh, and saw this while surfing the web:
caranddriver quote: "AMG claims the C32 can accelerate to 62 mph (100 km/h) in 5.2 seconds, 1.3 seconds quicker than the C43 and 0.5 second faster than the mighty E55 AMG [not s/c] sedan."

curbweight numbers:

http://www.motortrend.com/cars/2000/...pecifications/
which says that it weighs 1564 kgs = 3440.8 lbs

http://www.edmunds.com/used/2000/mer...650/specs.html
which says that it weighs 3448 lbs

here too: https://mbworld.org/forums/showthrea...43+curb+weight
not sure if you were referring to the C32 or the 335i. If you are talking about the C32, my roommate has a fullstage II STI (full turboback, intake, and COB (access port). and yes, i do pull on it on the highway. 350z? dont those have the same motors as the G35? Want to see a video of my race with a turbo'd G35? It's on youtube right now and i'll post the link if you want to see it.

if you were referring to a stock 335i? sure that will be a different outcome. I KNOW a 335i wont take a tuned STI on the highway or a modded 350z.

 

i'm shocked his sti isn't faster- has it been on a dyno?

he has a similar set-up to my little 2.0 wrx currently and it doesn't sound like his car is as fast as i'd expect it to be relatively.

i know the C32 is faster out of the box than C3/C43 but that isn't a "can't hold a candle to" situation.

bragging about medical school probably holds more weight on forums populated with owners of cheaper cars. I doubt too many people on here (even lowly C43 owners) are likely to be impressed. That said, congratulations! Where are you in school?

back to the 135i debate... you say "it's a start". I agree, sort of- it still isn't an E36 M3 with 340 hp... which to me it seems like it absolutely had to be more than...

 

HOW? You'll have to cut at least mid 12 sec times and run over 110mph with your HPS setup. If you had a 5.5L in there with the S/C there would be no doubt about it.
My C43 also weighed without me in it(-200lbs),no spare tire and jack,no tools 3362 lbs.

 

 

I think you will, or be very close, especially if things go as planned. You will always have traction issues, learn to feather and lets find an LSD. Ever look at the torque curve on my dynos. There is no curve, its like a tow truck. It seems we have the same ideas in route to get this power. I'm a turtle so you should have these things finished long before me...As far as blocks go I would only consider maybe the 5.0 block at this point since I have recently spoke with another 5.5 HPS customer who feels the MP90 is maxed trying to fill 5.5 liters. With 4.3L to fill the HPS kit makes almost as much as it does on the 5.5L. Naturally aspirated I would got 5.5L without a thought. I think that there is a good amount of "free power" to be wrung out of our setup in terms of parasitic loss including heat, intake/exhaust flow, etc...added boost is just icing on the cake. All this comming from a guy that still hasn't gone to the 1/4 track yet

I do have spankage of some pretty fast cars which confirms that my car isn't right

I'll get some 335 footage in the spring for yall! I've got a black one at my disposal for spankin...stock I might add.

 

I tried one in my E55. Not too hard. We were both trailing an E63. Now that is fast!!!