RE: BMW M135i (F20) | PH Used Buying Guide

[Speedgirl]

[redacted]

[anonymous-user]

Court_S said:

I’ve got to admit that I quite enjoy the feeling of the torque that a turbo gives you as well.

The best thing about the M3 (E90) power delivery is the torque, unlike the turbocharged engines it was a pussy car, really easy to have fun in. Every new BMW I’ve driven which is turbo’d i have found a handful in the wet, not helped by the standard suspension I know, but mainly the huge step in torque low down. The 140i must be quite annoying without a proper diff and M suspension, especially in a mostly damp country full of roads with lumps and holes

[Limpet]

JD said:

I find the 140i a constant frustration in this weather.

I am hoping that a change from SuperSports to PS4 will be the answer but don’t want to shell out before they are used up in case it makes no difference!

Has anyone made that change? Did it improve the car?

Yes, and yes. The PS4 gave a marked improvement in cold weather traction, with no apparent trade off in warmer conditions. I will caveat that by saying my car was used on the road only, and never saw a track.

[s m]

J4CKO said:

Wonder how much difference a remap/tuning box makes, mine feels like it could be sub 10 to 100 now, need to give it a try, saw that a standard M140i posted a 9.9 so sounds possible.

I know there is a lot faster out there but not sure I want anything massively quicker for the road, am looking at trading it in for a Mustang GT later in the year, suspect the Mustang wont be as quick, or certainly wont feel it.

The Mustang V8 GT tested by Autocar 4 years back with a 6-speed manual box was almost exactly the same time to 100 as the auto M135i
Weighed 200 kilos more which negated the extra poke

[TheMatrix]

One look at it and it’s a no from me regardless of how it performs. One ugly pile of crap.

[s m]

cerb4.5lee said:

I hear what you are saying regards the Mustang and a NA engine delivers the performance so differently. My NA 370Z only really starts to feel quick if you are at 5000rpm and you plant the throttle. A turbo engine will be well up and at it before then for sure.

I know that I should prefer a NA engine with me being a bit of a dinosaur...but a turbo(or two) engine certainly seems to get my juices flowing that little bit more I reckon.

The changes definitely won’t be as fast as the auto M135i and you get 2/3 of the economy but it is a heavier car



It’s low down speeds ( or in high gears ) the in-gear times are slower

[cerb4.5lee]

s m said:

The changes definitely won’t be as fast as the auto M135i and you get 2/3 of the economy but it is a heavier car



It’s low down speeds ( or in high gears ) the in-gear times are slower

I'm quite surprised to see how low the redline is at 6500rpm for a NA engine. My 370Z redlines at 7500rpm in comparison.

I know the 5.0 Mustang is a bit of a bus but I would really love one at some stage for sure. I love the road presence of them and with a little tweak to the exhaust they sound amazing.

Thanks again for putting the stats up.

[anonymous-user]

TheMatrix said:

One look at it and it’s a no from me regardless of how it performs. One ugly pile of crap.

Thanks tot that stunning contribution. As you’ve no garage listed I’ll just say your F40 is great.

[nick30]

selym said:

xjay1337 said:

nick30 said:

Ok not necessarily nonsense the whole points but possibly a bit long winded. No offence intended.

Yet the whole post is less words than the bloody "buyers guide" for which you obviously read!
And bullet point delivery not sure how it can be long winded.

Such a boomer reaction.

What the fk is a 'boomer reaction'?

No idea but if it refers to when I was born then doesn’t apply due to being 80’s

[J4CKO]

nick30 said:

selym said:

xjay1337 said:

nick30 said:

Ok not necessarily nonsense the whole points but possibly a bit long winded. No offence intended.

Yet the whole post is less words than the bloody "buyers guide" for which you obviously read!
And bullet point delivery not sure how it can be long winded.

Such a boomer reaction.

What the fk is a 'boomer reaction'?

No idea but if it refers to when I was born then doesn’t apply due to being 80’s

I tend to disregard any Boomer or Snowflake comments from anyone, I am too young by six years to be a Boomer apparently, assuming Xjay meant Baby Boomer, not a "Boomer" from Left 4 Dead.

[JD]

Limpet said:

Yes, and yes. The PS4 gave a marked improvement in cold weather traction, with no apparent trade off in warmer conditions. I will caveat that by saying my car was used on the road only, and never saw a track.

That is very encouraging thanks, maybe I will make the investment in tyres before I need to get the tc lightbulb changed!

[Court_S]

[redacted]

[Court_S]

yonex said:

The best thing about the M3 (E90) power delivery is the torque, unlike the turbocharged engines it was a pussy car, really easy to have fun in. Every new BMW I’ve driven which is turbo’d i have found a handful in the wet, not helped by the standard suspension I know, but mainly the huge step in torque low down. The 140i must be quite annoying without a proper diff and M suspension, especially in a mostly damp country full of roads with lumps and holes

You’re right, the petrol turbos suffer just like the 330d / 335d which were often criticised for traction in damp conditions. That low down torque makes them easy to drive in the dry but a bit tricky in damp / tricky conditions. The early F8x M cars were pretty spiky to drive by all accounts because of the torque.

[Roncee]

Great package. Not sure what people are expecting for the £ in this modern era of disposable cars.

5 years in mine and only just sold it as fancied a change now. Longest I have kept a vehicle.

All points been mentioned already but:

Rwd hatch - never going to happen again

Adaptive suspension really disguised the rubbish roads when not in the mood

Eibach Springs, oem rear brace and got a stonking deal on a m performance LSD which made it a much better car for not a huge outlay (considering you can sell the lsd on for a fair £)

Extended warranty from bmw covering wear and tear was £360 - personally thought that was a bargain for such a complex car and really important for me as a daily.

£260 road tax

40mpg+ in eco on motorway on cruise control

Interior did not wear or fall to bits in my ownership. Leather on drivers seat still looked great.

Idrive ahead of its time for the year, my pronav would still bong at me every so often warning me of dangerous driving conditions or obstacles - really useful stuff.

In my ownership only 1 thing went wrong and it was an idrive map update. I.e nothing mechanical went wrong.

Servicing reasonable cost at an indy and good intervals

So many aftermarket mods

Michelin ps4 reasonable cost and makes the car much more usable through winter

Such a good daily and when it takes your mood with those minor mods listed above it was enjoyable and easily kept up with a friends m2 on country roads.

Only downside in my opinion but also a silver lining

Not an M car as its a bit ‘soft’.
On the upside its not M money to purchase and run and secondly something non shouty that goes under the radar.

Last chance for learning the joys of RWD (get the LSD fitted) before everyone goes electric.

[Welshbeef]

ScoobyChris said:

Can't believe mine is almost 3 years old - still nothing out there that tempts me to trade it in.

Chris

4.0 TT C63

[s m]

cerb4.5lee said:

I'm quite surprised to see how low the redline is at 6500rpm for a NA engine. My 370Z redlines at 7500rpm in comparison.

I know the 5.0 Mustang is a bit of a bus but I would really love one at some stage for sure. I love the road presence of them and with a little tweak to the exhaust they sound amazing.

Thanks again for putting the stats up.

It was a lot more money but they did do the high-revving GT350R that went to over 8k

The track conditions were wet when it was tested too it’s worth noting - the 60 time might even edge into high 4s in the dry

[saxy]

s m said:

The changes definitely won’t be as fast as the auto M135i and you get 2/3 of the economy but it is a heavier car



It’s low down speeds ( or in high gears ) the in-gear times are slower

Just 61litres of fuel in a 5.0 V8 mustang? That's not gonna be enough haha

[Court_S]

[redacted]

[Frimley111R]

[redacted]

[DangerMonkey]

s m said:

The Mustang V8 GT tested by Autocar 4 years back with a 6-speed manual box was almost exactly the same time to 100 as the auto M135i
Weighed 200 kilos more which negated the extra poke

I drive both in manual guise and the mustang is much slower day to day. You really need to be in the right gear and wring the engine for it to shift. It's just the nature of the beast - I'm not knocking it in any way - the coyote engine is impressive, surprisingly rev-able for a yank V8. With the M-lites it's the low down torque that makes progress easy.