maybe a bit old news, but did you see it?
As I had speculated and said, it's weight distribution (not as close to 50/50 as the 335i Coupe or Sedan even) and taller overall height makes it roll and understeer pretty badly.
Unlike the 335i Coupe which can easily be power oversteered and doesn't plow as much, they were a bit disappointed by the 135i's track ability.
They also weren't impressed by it's 6 piston brakes either, said they faded pretty significantly.
They seemed to like the car and thought it had potential but would need minor mods (rear sway bar and track pads) to start to make it a bit more of a neutral track car.
As a couple other mags have seen so far, they seemed to have weighed the 135i and 335i Coupe and found they were about 130 lbs apart.
Strangely they stated BMW stated the 135i and 335i Coupe both had 0-62 mph times of 5.3 seconds. I thought that BMW listed the 135i's 0-62 kph time as .2 seconds faster and it's 0-124 kph time as .1 seconds faster than the 335i.
That might have changed a bit in final testing, IDK.
But I'd still think the 135i is around .1 seconds faster to 60 (being it's lighter) but may not be any faster to 120 mph since it's less aerodynamic.
The 135i also has 10 mm skinnier tires which might make it a bit harder to launch as well without wheelspin.
Anyway, I was somewhat surprised by the 135i's ability on the track doesn't seem to be up to the 335i Coupes stock for stock.
I knew the fact it was more front heavy and taller would hurt it's handling a bit, but thought it would be offset by it's lighter weight.
29KVIEWS
30REPLIES
0APPRECIATES
17ACTIVE PEOPLE
02-03-2008LAST POST
01-29-2008
01-29-2008
Driver72
Brigadier General
384
REP
4.5K
POSTS
01-29-2008
01-29-2008
O-cha
Brigadier General
263
REP
4.7K
POSTS
335 plows plenty as well.
01-29-2008
01-29-2008
canucklion
pull my finger to get your kinder® surprise
152
REP
10.5K
POSTS
At first, I thought the advantage of 135i's lighter curb weight would 'outweigh' the disadvantage of its ugliness. But as more news articles are coming out, it seems the weight difference is minimal.
Well, who knows maybe 135i will grow on me like an ugly girl with a nice personality.
Well, who knows maybe 135i will grow on me like an ugly girl with a nice personality.
01-29-2008
01-29-2008
canucklion
pull my finger to get your kinder® surprise
152
REP
10.5K
POSTS
be that as it may, the 135i is being marketed as a truer sporty car than the 335i.
O-cha wrote335 plows plenty as well.
01-29-2008
01-29-2008
Driver72
Brigadier General
384
REP
4.5K
POSTS
O-cha wroteYes, as do pretty much any front engine car, but not nearly what the 135i supposedly does.335 plows plenty as well.
The 135i Coupe has about 2% more of it's weight over the front wheels than the 335i Coupe does.
Rotating the 335i around with the throttle is easy, Sports Car International stated they thought the 135i would be also, but said they really could not, trying to use the throttle to get it to rotate they stated just resulted in the front end plowing even more.
Again, I'm sure there are three things working against the 135i here.
More weight on the front wheels
Taller car which makes center of gravity higher, which mean more roll
Shorter wheelbase so it's less planted
But as Canuck stated, it's the fact the 135i is being marketed as the sportier car. I've had my doubts all along after seeing the 135i's dimensions/specs.
And after talking to the #2 guy of BMW USA seconds after the 135i's North American debut here in LA and seeing more mag tests of the 135i, that just does not seem to be the case.
I'm sure with a bit of modding it will be even better though, but as Sports Car International eluded too, many will spend the extra $5K and just get the 335i Coupe. Just based on looks alone the 335i Coupe is worth $5K more to me.
01-29-2008
01-29-2008
GAM3OVR85
Major General
326
REP
8K
POSTS
canucklion wroteWell, who knows maybe 135i will grow on me like an ugly girl with a nice personality.
01-30-2008
01-30-2008
Robert
Major General
475
REP
7K
POSTS
How about a non-professional review from a 335i vert owner.
http://www.1addicts.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3855
http://www.1addicts.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3855
You are right it's more rear bias as shown on BMW NA webpage. 47.7/52.3 %As I had speculated and said, it's weight distribution (not as close to 50/50 as the 335i Coupe or Sedan even) and taller overall height makes it roll and understeer pretty badly.
01-30-2008
01-30-2008
ArmyBimmerDude
Major General
169
REP
5.5K
POSTS
bobbo wroteThe 135 is around 550lbs less than his convertible. Nice review, but come on. Lots of people have driven this car and the reviews have not been favorable. The review was very detailed though.How about a non-professional review from a 335i vert owner.
http://www.1addicts.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3855
You are right it's more rear bias as shown on BMW NA webpage. 47.7/52.3 %
01-30-2008
01-30-2008
Driver72
Brigadier General
384
REP
4.5K
POSTS
bobbo wroteCompared to a 335i Convertible, I don't even have to read his "review" I'm sure it felt, light, fast, and handled, and stopped great.How about a non-professional review from a 335i vert owner.
http://www.1addicts.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3855
You are right it's more rear bias as shown on BMW NA webpage. 47.7/52.3 %
The 335i Convertible is a tank, is noticeably slower than the 335i Coupe, is much more top heavy, squeaks and rattles (from what I've heard) and is not a performance car by any means.
The 335i Convertible weighs 375 lbs more than the 335i Coupe.
That's like having two full size adult males riding in a 335i Coupe all the time. That effects EVERY aspect of performance (from weight distribution, acceleration, braking, cornering, gas mileage, center of gravity...everything).
I just think BMW should of made the 135i a stunning little handler of a car.
Again, I was afraid it wouldn't be the minute I read it's specs/dimensions.
The 335i Coupe on the other hand wasn't suppose to be such an impressive track car, but turned out to be and beats the MUCH smaller and lighter Z4M Coupe around some tracks including Virginia International Raceway.
Doesn't sound like the 135i would.
01-30-2008
01-30-2008
T Bone
Brigadier General
625
REP
4K
POSTS
Driver72 wrote+1 bag of chipsCompared to a 335i Convertible, I don't even have to read his "review" I'm sure it felt, light, fast, and handled, and stopped great.
The 335i Convertible is a tank, is noticeably slower than the 335i Coupe, is much more top heavy, squeaks and rattles (from what I've heard) and is not a performance car by any means.
The 335i Convertible weighs 375 lbs more than the 335i Coupe.
That's like having two full size adult males riding in a 335i Coupe all the time. That effects EVERY aspect of performance (from weight distribution, acceleration, braking, cornering, gas mileage, center of gravity...everything).
I just think BMW should of made the 135i s stunning little handler of a car.
Again, I was afraid it wouldn't be the minute I read it's specs/dimensions.
The 335i Coupe on the other hand wasn't suppose to be such an impressive track car, but turned out to be and beats the MUCH smaller and lighter Z4M Coupe around some tracks including Virginia International Raceway.
Doesn't sound like the 135i would.
And the 135i looks like a shoe, an ugly shoe.
01-30-2008
01-30-2008
DrDomer
Major
43
REP
1.3K
POSTS
T Bone wrote+2. Like I said before, if you debadged it people would call it a Hyundai (of course till you rode in it). Obviously, we are all biased as we have 335i coupes or sedans. Still, it is what it is.+1 bag of chips
And the 135i looks like a shoe, an ugly shoe.
01-30-2008
01-30-2008
T Bone
Brigadier General
625
REP
4K
POSTS
DrDomer wroteIt wouldn't matter what car I owned or was driving at the time....the 1 series is just plain BUTT UGLY.+2. Like I said before, if you debadged it people would call it a Hyundai (of course till you rode in it). Obviously, we are all biased as we have 335i coupes or sedans. Still, it is what it is.
Like Canucklion is saying....they are marketing the 1 series like it is going to be the new 2002.....it is ugly and not-light.
Does BMW think we are all idiots?
01-30-2008
01-30-2008
Year's_End
Lieutenant General
1,359
REP
12.4K
POSTS
I wouldn't call it ugly. I'd say...superficially confused. With some proper mods, I'm sure it wouldn't look too bad. Fix those ugly headlights (Tii did a good job), change those droopy rockers, add a trunklid spoiler, a rear diffuser, and some new wheels. It's a lot of work, but I'm sure it'd pay off in the longrun.
I just see potential. That's all.
I just see potential. That's all.
01-30-2008
01-30-2008
linus
Lieutenant
41
REP
525
POSTS
Tbone, I don't think it's butt ugly, it's actually growing on me. But you're absolutely right - it's not that light. I was expecting a lot lighter and nimbler. There's a lot of marketing hype with this vehicle, but I still think it will sell. The M sport package will help move along sales.
01-30-2008
01-30-2008
canucklion
pull my finger to get your kinder® surprise
152
REP
10.5K
POSTS
BMWs that have grown on me in the past, Z4, 6-series.
BMWs that I have never grown to love: the 7 series with the wonky taillight.
BMWs that I have come to tolerate: X3.
I think 1er will fall into the same category as the X3, it's not horribly ugly, but it is pretty weird looking. There's not one aspect that I like about 1er's design. The headlights look so cartoonish and bug-eyed. The side profile is all pudgy looking, and the tails are pretty blah looking.
BMWs that I have never grown to love: the 7 series with the wonky taillight.
BMWs that I have come to tolerate: X3.
I think 1er will fall into the same category as the X3, it's not horribly ugly, but it is pretty weird looking. There's not one aspect that I like about 1er's design. The headlights look so cartoonish and bug-eyed. The side profile is all pudgy looking, and the tails are pretty blah looking.
linus wroteTbone, I don't think it's butt ugly, it's actually growing on me. But you're absolutely right - it's not that light. I was expecting a lot lighter and nimbler. There's a lot of marketing hype with this vehicle, but I still think it will sell. The M sport package will help move along sales.
01-30-2008
01-30-2008
retrodrive
Lieutenant Colonel
157
REP
1.9K
POSTS
canucklion wrote+1BMWs that have grown on me in the past, Z4, 6-series.
BMWs that I have never grown to love: the 7 series with the wonky taillight.
BMWs that I have come to tolerate: X3.
I think 1er will fall into the same category as the X3, it's not horribly ugly, but it is pretty weird looking. There's not one aspect that I like about 1er's design. The headlights look so cartoonish and bug-eyed. The side profile is all pudgy looking, and the tails are pretty blah looking.
I am actually in the same boat except for I still dislike the x3. I got to see 1 series at San Diego Autoshow and got to sit in it as well. It looks like an ugly fish to me and I could only like the car if it had full Tii setup.
01-30-2008
01-30-2008
dragonfly
Private First Class
28
REP
165
POSTS
If BMW is truly trying to market this car as a performance machine, they are definitely not sending the right message with the looks of the car. It looks too cute and soft with a high upright roofline, cartooney headlights(like someone mentioned) and a droopy side character line(like some weiner dog). They should have made it look a bit meaner, I feel even the new TT looks more aggressive. I actually think the convertible looks better because you don't see the high roof line.
01-30-2008
01-30-2008
canucklion
pull my finger to get your kinder® surprise
152
REP
10.5K
POSTS
hands down the new TT looks way better than the 1er
dragonfly wroteIf BMW is truly trying to market this car as a performance machine, they are definitely not sending the right message with the looks of the car. It looks too cute and soft with a high upright roofline, cartooney headlights(like someone mentioned) and a droopy side character line(like some weiner dog). They should have made it look a bit meaner, I feel even the new TT looks more aggressive. I actually think the convertible looks better because you don't see the high roof line.
01-30-2008
01-30-2008
Year's_End
Lieutenant General
1,359
REP
12.4K
POSTS
The TT isn't a direct competitor with the 1er though. RWD + >300bhp + somewhat useable rear seats = strange class of its own.
01-31-2008
01-31-2008
ScheerSpeed
Major General
480
REP
5.8K
POSTS
canuck is so straight up its hilarious
01-31-2008
01-31-2008
T Bone
Brigadier General
625
REP
4K
POSTS
ScheerSpeed wroteI wonder who would the contest for "fewest words per post" Canucklion or Epacy?canuck is so straight up its hilarious
01-31-2008
01-31-2008
Robert
Major General
475
REP
7K
POSTS
Driver72 wroteBase on which review you read, some rave it as the best handling car next to M3 while others rate it as a sportier 335i coupe. To expect 135i more than a sportier 335i is an unrealistic expectation because bmw buyers look qualities such as cabin noise, ride quality and build quality. I am sure buyers will be up in arms if they drive down the freeway and hear the rear parcel shelf rattling or feel the heat and noise seeping from the engine. There are cars for that and it's a Lotus Elise, Caterham 7, or a Honda S2000. The whole mentality of I want the qualities of everyday luxury and yet the nimbleness or go-kart is contradictory. The closest thing to that is a Cayman S but it loses 2 seats and cargo room. Even then people complain about the pricing of a Porsche or practicality.I just think BMW should of made the 135i a stunning little handler of a car.
Again, I was afraid it wouldn't be the minute I read it's specs/dimensions.
As for looks, people will get use to it. E90 was the ugliest 3 series to date and guess what some people got use to it. Some people still hate it but who cares. Personally, I think BMW's design has gone down hill since the Bangle inspired refreshment rolled out.
