335i - 380bhp/420lb ft !
335i - 380bhp/420lb ft !
Author
Discussion

Job38

Original Poster:

1,973 posts

266 months

Wednesday 29th October 2008
quotequote all
Was reading BMW Car magazine last night, article about re-mapping.
Apparently the 335i and more alarmingly 135i (presumably) can be re-mapped to provide 380bhp and 420lb ft !!! eek

That's unbelievable performance from a 3.5L straight six.
Even makes my CSi look a bit limp with 380bhp and 410lb ft irked

How would the gearbox and clutch cope with all of that based on how strong the CSi gearbox is reputed to be to cope with all that torque?

ps., I know the 335d can be re-mapped to even higher levels but they're autos so don't count wink

mmm-five

12,382 posts

314 months

Wednesday 29th October 2008
quotequote all
Why so unbelievable?

The 20 year old s38b36 M5 engine was 3.5 litres and produced 315bhp normally aspirated - strap a pair of turbos on that and it will give you 'upto' 1200bhp (Google VS Motor for info).

andye30m3

3,499 posts

284 months

Wednesday 29th October 2008
quotequote all
I would have though 380 from a turbo charged 3.5 was very easy, 100bhp per liter from N/A is becoming quite common.


andye30m3

3,499 posts

284 months

Wednesday 29th October 2008
quotequote all
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Doh!, what size is it? I don't really know anything about the new BMW's.

noneedtolift

888 posts

253 months

Wednesday 29th October 2008
quotequote all
Job38 said:
Was reading BMW Car magazine last night, article about re-mapping.
Apparently the 335i and more alarmingly 135i (presumably) can be re-mapped to provide 380bhp and 420lb ft !!! eek

That's unbelievable performance from a 3.5L straight six.
Even makes my CSi look a bit limp with 380bhp and 410lb ft irked

How would the gearbox and clutch cope with all of that based on how strong the CSi gearbox is reputed to be to cope with all that torque?

ps., I know the 335d can be re-mapped to even higher levels but they're autos so don't count wink
I run a Jucie Box Stage III in mine (335i touring manual) and I reckon I'm getting about 360/370 bhp at the flywheel (its approx. 340 bhp and 350 ft-lbs @ the wheels) - totally transformed the car. Same driveability but loads more power. Done about 10.000kms many of them fast Autobahn kilometers. Only bugger is that it's still limited to 250 kph.




roofer

5,136 posts

241 months

Wednesday 29th October 2008
quotequote all
Its a waste without a trip to Birds to have the diff sorted...imho.

PJR

2,616 posts

242 months

Wednesday 29th October 2008
quotequote all
anonymous said:
[redacted]
lol hehelaugh


Still, imagine what fun a nigh on 400bhp 1 series would be! eekrotate
Screw the polar bears and kittens..

P,

8Tech

2,212 posts

228 months

Wednesday 29th October 2008
quotequote all
Things to consider;

Honda had 100+bhp/litre in 1978 Normally Aspirated,

Most all BMW "M" cars have made 100+bhp/litre since 1991

Chipped "street" RS Turbo made 130bhp/litre in 1986

Poor old 850CSi is a Single overhead cam, 2v per cylinder engine from the 70's, but they will do 200,000m easy if looked after.
Lets see a 380bhp 335i at 200,000m, or even 50,000m. Turbos and engines on order by Direct Debit?

Respectable figures for 2008 I would say are 110bhp/litre NA, 150bhp/litre FI. Both for a production vehicle.

Just to compare, a good RS500 Cosworth would make 550-600bhp/2 litres in 1987.

Terry Kizers Kawasaki made 737bhp from 1.5 litres in 2000 on a STREET BIKE! Gulp.

BMW F1 engine made 1000bhp/litre in qualifying trim in the 80's

In conclusion, 380bhp is not really impressive for the chipped 335i twin turbo motor in road trim ( this level available since 1986) but will make for a very rapid, small car....that is the point, a SMALL CAR.


madou

366 posts

281 months

Wednesday 29th October 2008
quotequote all
8Tech said:
In conclusion, 380bhp is not really impressive for the chipped 335i twin turbo motor in road trim ( this level available since 1986) but will make for a very rapid, small car....that is the point, a SMALL CAR.
I have never seen a compressor flow map, or details of the strength of this motor, so find it difficult to understand how much stretch is involved to achieve this power level compared to standard

900T-R

20,406 posts

287 months

Wednesday 29th October 2008
quotequote all
8Tech said:
Chipped "street" RS Turbo made 130bhp/litre in 1986
I doubt it was 'chipped' if only for the fact that it ran on Bosch K-Jet mechanical fuel injection... hehe

carlovers

424 posts

223 months

Wednesday 29th October 2008
quotequote all
anonymous said:
[redacted]

Cyclone1

2,614 posts

276 months

Thursday 30th October 2008
quotequote all
The article is referring to the remapping of the 335i's done by Evolve.

Next month's edition of BMW Car Magazine has a feature on the remapped 335i as part of an article on the comparison between remapped and standard models, from a performance perspective. Should make interesting reading.

Jules.

Job38

Original Poster:

1,973 posts

266 months

Thursday 30th October 2008
quotequote all
Yup, that's what's got me thinking.
All that power and torque in a small car with a manual box and rear drive like the 135i scratchchin

Despite that I'm still not sure I could live with the pig-in-lipstick looks!

clonmult

10,529 posts

239 months

Thursday 30th October 2008
quotequote all
Job38 said:
Was reading BMW Car magazine last night, article about re-mapping.
Apparently the 335i and more alarmingly 135i (presumably) can be re-mapped to provide 380bhp and 420lb ft !!! eek

That's unbelievable performance from a 3.5L straight six.
Even makes my CSi look a bit limp with 380bhp and 410lb ft irked

How would the gearbox and clutch cope with all of that based on how strong the CSi gearbox is reputed to be to cope with all that torque?

ps., I know the 335d can be re-mapped to even higher levels but they're autos so don't count wink
The 335d can't be mapped up the 380bhp ... yet.

But 380bhp should make for a reasonable turn of pace. It'd be awesome in a 135i, but then is the 135 much lighter than a 335? They're still both pretty lardy ....

noneedtolift

888 posts

253 months

Thursday 30th October 2008
quotequote all
roofer said:
Its a waste without a trip to Birds to have the diff sorted...imho.
You are probably right there, however it doesn't bother me in day to day driving. What is buggering me a bit is the long gearing though. It could do with a lot shorter final (reaches top speed in 5th).

finnie

166 posts

216 months

Thursday 30th October 2008
quotequote all
I currently run a manual 335i with an SSTYT chip. It really is amazing. It adds around 40bhp at the wheels (so the company says anyway) and having had it off for a week while the car was serviced recently i can testify that the SSTT is amazing, it really makes the standard car feel like a snail. I am getting very tempted by a plug and play JB3 for even more power. I work in USA so luckily have the access to some very cheap products!

clonmult

10,529 posts

239 months

Thursday 30th October 2008
quotequote all
anonymous said:
[redacted]
They're both heffers ....

I had a black 1 series cabrio with the roof up pull in front of me a few days back. First thought was "feck, how ugly" quickly followed by "feck, its ugly *and* fat!"

dxb335d

2,905 posts

225 months

Thursday 30th October 2008
quotequote all
think there is 40kg difference between the 135i and 335i.

Ranger 6

7,695 posts

279 months

Friday 31st October 2008
quotequote all
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Respectable yes - my std 130i has 88.3 bhp per litre and would hope there's a little more to come wink

moff135

59 posts

220 months

Tuesday 4th November 2008
quotequote all
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Fat in comparison to what?
135i = 1560
350Z = 1534
R32 = 1515

I would imagine that the MB C Class Coupe is heavier still as is the Brera. It's an unfortunate sign of the times frown

Others...
335i = 1600
335d = 1655
M3 = 1655
S5 = 1630

I do concede that Audi have done a great job with the S3 1450, but the 135 has noticeably more power smile

Remember the that the 1 series coupe is not far off the same size as the E92. The space in the rear is about the same, but the boot is bigger in the E92.

The weight certainly does not affect the performance, even as stock it's mighty fast for a 1 series, only M cars are faster in the BMW range.

Not sure how manufacturers are supposed to keep the weight down with all the EU regulations? I can only see new cars getting heavier, although I do think that weight reduction is a key driver for making cars more efficient over the next decade.