[booforty]

fatter drivers + great humidity = faster car

[willhollin]

Originally Posted by booforty

fatter drivers + great humidity = faster car

FOR THE WIN

[NFS]

Still feel that 330i 0-100 is less than 16 secs.

Says 15.7 here:

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...ecs_price.html

and 15.3 here:

http://bmw.jbcarpages.com/3series/2006/index4.php

calculated figure based on drag coefficient, power and weight is 15.75 here:

http://www.letstorquebhp.com/rwd.asp

Even tried timing this (although the camerawork hurts my eyes) which I reckon is 15 secs

[dxb335d]

Originally Posted by NFS

Why would it be quicker in the US then?

Humidity, elevation levels etc.

US 335i run low 13's stock 1/4mile, here in the UK they run high 13's.

Originally Posted by NFS

Still feel that 330i 0-100 is less than 16 secs.

Says 15.7 here:

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...ecs_price.html

and 15.3 here:

http://bmw.jbcarpages.com/3series/2006/index4.php

calculated figure based on drag coefficient, power and weight is 15.75 here:

http://www.letstorquebhp.com/rwd.asp

Even tried timing this (although the camerawork hurts my eyes) which I reckon is 15 secs

Not being funny mate but those sites are again american.

The calculated websites are usually wrong and the video again is american.

dont be so down about 16 odd secs mate its good. If you want 11-12 secs get a 335 of somesort.

[NFS]

Originally Posted by dxb335d

Humidity, elevation levels etc.

US 335i run low 13's stock 1/4mile, here in the UK they run high 13's.



Not being funny mate but those sites are again american.

The calculated websites are usually wrong and the video again is american.

dont be so down about 16 odd secs mate its good. If you want 11-12 secs get a 335 of somesort.

I don't have a problem if it's 16+ secs. I just thought it was quicker than that from what I had read elsewhere.

So we have what 1/2 sec difference between US and UK 335i 1/4 mile times?

So if you assume the same 1/2 sec difference between US and UK 330i times that puts the 330i around 15.5 for the 1/4 mile, which then suggests a 0-100 time close to 16 secs, but 16+

1/4 mile isn't my thing at all and I had no idea that there was such a difference between UK and US.

Out of curiousity I'm going to time a 0-100mph run in my car and see how it goes.

The main reason I thought it seemed wrong is that from 90-105 the car is pulling very hard right in the power band and at Snetterton that's where my car made serious progress against slighter slower stuff.

[edowen]

FFS. Who gives a shit about .5 of a second to 100 on a car that isnt by 99.9% of people going to be at santa pod every weekend (and if it is, you are buying the wrong car) - I mean really? - will you really notice the difference?

I'd be more concernd about the mid range, in gear times in REALISTIC speeds - i.e. 50-70 etc.

[CD]

Originally Posted by edowen

FFS. Who gives a shit about .5 of a second to 100 on a car that isnt by 99.9% of people going to be at santa pod every weekend (and if it is, you are buying the wrong car) - I mean really? - will you really notice the difference?

I'd be more concernd about the mid range, in gear times in REALISTIC speeds - i.e. 50-70 etc.

+1 ... definately agree there, for me its all about the feel of the car not just the 1/100 of a second differences personally i preffer the allmighty power delivery of the big bmw diesels, thats just me everyone is different. Whilst people own the cars they do no one is going to change their side of the fence whatever the argument ... i think its about time we agree to disagree on this topic !

on the subject of auto boxes though, i do love mine, and wouldnt go back by choice to a manual (but i maybe just getting lazy ) It was quite funny when i was looking at the car initially at the dealers, my dad cam along with me and when the sales guy said the 335D only came in auto my dads responce was '' thats only for old men '' ... we went out on a test drive, i drove and he sat in the rear. The expression on his face when we returned to the dealership was priceless, i think hes changed his mind on the modern auto boxes now ! Mind i think the last auto he drove was a bit prehistoric. Auto boxes are excellent, i wouldnt be back to a manual in a hurry, allthough i must have the paddles

[NFS]

Originally Posted by edowen

FFS. Who gives a shit about .5 of a second to 100 on a car that isnt by 99.9% of people going to be at santa pod every weekend (and if it is, you are buying the wrong car) - I mean really? - will you really notice the difference?

I'd be more concernd about the mid range, in gear times in REALISTIC speeds - i.e. 50-70 etc.

To be honest I don't particularly care either.

However, earlier in this thread, Carl said that a remapped 330d would do 0-100 in 13 + secs and that a stock 330i would do it in 16 + secs.

I'm digging into this further because the idea of a 3 second gap between the 2 cars seems amazing to me. If the figures are correct, then it speaks volumes about the 330d's ability with a simple bit of ECU tweaking.

However, the 330i time seems high to me, purely on the basis that it's right in the powerband from around 80-105mph in third gear. That should mean that it's laying down a lot of torque at the wheels because it's in a low gear.

In which case I'm struggling to see how the 330d could gain so much ground on it.

Apologies to anyone who finds that boring. For me this isn't an argument and I don't particularly mind if Carl proves his point (I suspect he probably will because he is the official drag times 'statto' for the board).

If anything I'm just trying to understand if and how it would be possible for a 3 second gap to develop by 100mph.

[booforty]

I'm afraid Carl is once again talking

[gIzzE]

Take two cars that are the same weight and the same BHP and they will do it in the same time, doesn't matter what the torque is.

Now I would guess that a remapped 23i bhp 330d to say 370 bhp, against a stock 330i with 258bhp would have pretty similar bhp per tonne?? There is no way that the 330d would be 3 seconds quicker to 100mph.

[dxb335d]

Originally Posted by edowen

FFS. Who gives a shit about .5 of a second to 100 on a car that isnt by 99.9% of people going to be at santa pod every weekend (and if it is, you are buying the wrong car) - I mean really? - will you really notice the difference?

I'd be more concernd about the mid range, in gear times in REALISTIC speeds - i.e. 50-70 etc.

Realistically my car is quick enough to do 60-160 in rush hour mate

Originally Posted by NFS

To be honest I don't particularly care either.

However, earlier in this thread, Carl said that a remapped 330d would do 0-100 in 13 + secs and that a stock 330i would do it in 16 + secs.

I'm digging into this further because the idea of a 3 second gap between the 2 cars seems amazing to me. If the figures are correct, then it speaks volumes about the 330d's ability with a simple bit of ECU tweaking.

However, the 330i time seems high to me, purely on the basis that it's right in the powerband from around 80-105mph in third gear. That should mean that it's laying down a lot of torque at the wheels because it's in a low gear.

In which case I'm struggling to see how the 330d could gain so much ground on it.

Apologies to anyone who finds that boring. For me this isn't an argument and I don't particularly mind if Carl proves his point (I suspect he probably will because he is the official drag times 'statto' for the board).

If anything I'm just trying to understand if and how it would be possible for a 3 second gap to develop by 100mph.

Forget how hard your car pulls in third. A 335d is in 5th geaR By 110mph and it still does 0-100 in late 11's mate.... So your argument about pulling hard is irrelevant..

Does not matter how hard it pulls in third.

I am guestimating a 330d could do it in late 13's but aint seen it.. Realistically i doubt it, more 14.5 ish
I rekon a mapped 330d will do the standing 1/4mile in low 14's at 98-99mph.

Originally Posted by gIzzE

Take two cars that are the same weight and the same BHP and they will do it in the same time, doesn't matter what the torque is.

Now I would guess that a remapped 23i bhp 330d to say 370 bhp, against a stock 330i with 258bhp would have pretty similar bhp per tonne?? There is no way that the 330d would be 3 seconds quicker to 100mph.

If thats the case, explain how a mapped 335d with 45-50bhp down on a mapped 335i matches it 0-100....
Therefore apply the same logic to 330d and 330i with a 270bhp 330d (More not LESS HP than its petrol counterpart) and a 258bhp 330i the diesel should be quicker. By a margin, not massive but a good gap.





Paul

[gIzzE]

Originally Posted by dxb335d

If thats the case, explain how a mapped 335d with 45-50bhp down on a mapped 335i matches it 0-100....

It doesn't!

My mapped 335i touring left my mates mapped 335d coupe everytime, and the coupe is a lighter car.

Originally Posted by dxb335d

Therefore apply the same logic to 330d and 330i with a 270bhp 330d (More not LESS HP than its petrol counterpart) and a 258bhp 330i the diesel should be quicker. By a margin, not massive but a good gap.

Yeah if there weigh the same, but if the BHP per ton is the same they will do it in the same time.

[dxb335d]

Originally Posted by gIzzE

It doesn't!

My mapped 335i touring left my mates mapped 335d coupe everytime, and the coupe is a lighter car.






Yeah if there weigh the same, but if the BHP per ton is the same they will do it in the same time.

Thats very strange, i have gone to lots of meets now and run lots of times with 335i, coupe to coupe. Ask anyone ive run with stock for stock the 335d is just as fast once rolling.

Tuned ok James 400bhp is a HEAVY VERT, But ive run quicker at the pod.

You not read BMWcAR MAG? 0.1 secs between tuned examples of the 335 0-100.


The mapped 330d will be heavier, and its still faster.

CAPARO T1 has double the power to weight ratio of a Veyron, the Veyron still beats it to 100mph and kills it thereafter.

[NFS]

Originally Posted by dxb335d

Forget how hard your car pulls in third. A 335d is in 5th geaR By 110mph and it still does 0-100 in late 11's mate.... So your argument about pulling hard is irrelevant..

Does not matter how hard it pulls in third.

It's not irrelevant though Carl. It's absolutely key to the rate of acceleration.

Acceleration is directly related to torque at the wheels, which is in turn a function of the engine torque multiplied by the gear ratio.

In third gear, from 4000 rpm up to the redline, I have got an average of 210 lb.ft of torque at the engine which gives me 350 lb.ft at the wheels (ratio is 1.67:1)

I know it's over simplifying, but if the 330d is in 4th and 5th over the same speed range then the gear ratios are 1.26:1 and 1:1. So although the 330d has superior engine torque (380 lb.ft) because the 330i is still in third right through to 100mph the torque at the wheels is likely to be similar.

In fact, whilst looking for a 330d torque curve I just came accross this article:

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...330d_road_test

All the tests were done in the US, so that takes care of the humidity question etc.

These guys found that the 330d did the 1/4 mile in 14.5 secs @97 mph, whilst the 330i did it in 14.4 secs @ 98mph

In fact they said:

Originally Posted by Car and Driver

It might feel faster, but the 330d is actually a bit slower

Adding 1/2 sec to these figures to make them 'UK relevant' would still see the 330i hitting 100mph in close to 15 secs.

Adding a remap to the 330d would clearly make it quicker than a stock 330i on a straightforward 0-100mph run. However, I really don't see that there is evidence to support your idea of a 3 second difference.

On a track, I see them being more evenly matched, due to the 330i's gearing advantage and lighter weight.

[edowen]

[dxb335d]

Originally Posted by NFS

It's not irrelevant though Carl. It's absolutely key to the rate of acceleration.

Acceleration is directly related to torque at the wheels, which is in turn a function of the engine torque multiplied by the gear ratio.

In third gear, from 4000 rpm up to the redline, I have got an average of 210 lb.ft of torque at the engine which gives me 350 lb.ft at the wheels (ratio is 1.67:1)

I know it's over simplifying, but if the 330d is in 4th and 5th over the same speed range then the gear ratios are 1.26:1 and 1:1. So although the 330d has superior engine torque (380 lb.ft) because the 330i is still in third right through to 100mph the torque at the wheels is likely to be similar.

In fact, whilst looking for a 330d torque curve I just came accross this article:

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...330d_road_test

All the tests were done in the US, so that takes care of the humidity question etc.

These guys found that the 330d did the 1/4 mile in 14.5 secs @97 mph, whilst the 330i did it in 14.4 secs @ 98mph

In fact they said:



Adding 1/2 sec to these figures to make them 'UK relevant' would still see the 330i hitting 100mph in close to 15 secs.

Adding a remap to the 330d would clearly make it quicker than a stock 330i on a straightforward 0-100mph run. However, I really don't see that there is evidence to support your idea of a 3 second difference.

On a track, I see them being more evenly matched, due to the 330i's gearing advantage and lighter weight.

Mate like i said, im well into 4th before 100mph and still accelerate like a tosser.

Just shows you, STOCK for STOCK the 330i and 330d are similary matched, from a standing start, rolling the 330d would edge away. Map the 330d and its quicker.



I didnt say 3 second diff, more like 1.5-2.

Go and time yours for peats sake. Get video of it too.


On track evenly matched? stock for stock yes, the modded 330d i think would be quicker.

[dxb335d]

Originally Posted by edowen

sad individual. Dont like the discussion and not have anything to comment, DONT POST.

[NFS]

Originally Posted by dxb335d

Mate like i said, im well into 4th before 100mph and still accelerate like a tosser.

Just shows you, STOCK for STOCK the 330i and 330d are similary matched, from a standing start, rolling the 330d would edge away. Map the 330d and its quicker.

I didnt say 3 second diff, more like 1.5-2.

Go and time yours for peats sake. Get video of it too.

On track evenly matched? stock for stock yes, the modded 330d i think would be quicker.

Fair enough Carl. The point I am making is that the 'tosser like' acceleration the 330d driver would experience in 4th and 5th will be similar to the acceleration achieved by my car in 3rd, because the gearing allows me to deliver more torque to the wheels even though I am making less at the engine.

For me 'quicker' is not about 1/4 mile times, it's about making general progress from A-B in a variety of situations. Whilst the diesels have clear in gear advantage due to their massive torque, the 330i can fight that with it's gearing. Provided you are in the right gear at the right time then, then I maintain that a 330i is not necessarily slower than a 330d (even mapped). This would be especially true on a track, where the 330i's gearing and lighter weight would help even more.

Anyway - my main point of disagreement here was this statement:

Originally Posted by fandangler

0-100 stock 335d 13's, so a mapped 330d 13's too....

a stock 330i is in the 16's. (0-100)

To my untrained eye it did look as if you were suggesting a 3 second difference to 100mph.

Now you are saying 1.5-2 secs (which I can accept)

[dxb335d]

Mate, your car is advantaged on a standing start..... Over my car. I am still doing 3-4 secs faster to 100mph.

In gear, (with you in the right gear) I would still pull away.

Now if the two stock cars are similar standing start acceleration wise, then rolling the 330d would have it (330D) Best bet is to get togther with another driver who has a 330d and do some comparative tests.



the acceleration you feel in 3rd will not be as hard as a 335d in 4th and 5th as one is quite a deal faster.

nOW I believe a VERY GOOD 330i will do 15 odd secs to 100 with a very good driver.

Round a track i would always have believed that a 330i would be quicker than a 330d.
(stock vs stock)

But im not so sure now after BMWcarmags feature.


Yes i was assuming a mapped 330d is as quoick as a stock 335d, but in all honesty i rekon there not quite as fast. Now if a mapped 330d is as fast as a stock 335d, it will quite EASILY beat a 330i.

But i dont think they are. Some one go down the pod and prove me wrong please.


But 13.9 secs vs 16 secs is 2.1 secs not 3 Mate

[edowen]

Originally Posted by dxb335d

sad individual. Dont like the discussion and not have anything to comment, DONT POST.

Why am I sad Carlos? Interestingly I did stick up for you when you went too far and caused the whole of Pistonheads to decide you where sad.

Actually if anyone is sad, it is someone who is so anally retentive about the last micro second to 60 of a deisel coupe.

And yes, I know it is a good car, I had one.

This thread started as one topic, and has turned into a school ground banter about my car is faster than yours. As usual with your threads.

lol. http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/s...mapped+%2B335d

[NFS]

Originally Posted by edowen

This thread started as one topic, and has turned into a school ground banter about my car is faster than yours. As usual with your threads.

No-one is making you read this thread.

The debate I just had with Carl was as far from playground banter as you could possibly get.

If you aren't interested then do something else, but please don't try to dictate what other people talk about.

I've met Carl a couple of times now and he is a decent lad. He may occasionally express his views in an annoying way, but his posts in this thread have (in my opinion) been intelligent and measured.

I've read some of the threads on Pistonheads and I'm sorry to say that they crossed the line from good natured banter to out and out bullying. One of the reasons I like this forum is that we don't do that here.

[NFS]

Originally Posted by dxb335d

Mate, your car is advantaged on a standing start..... Over my car. I am still doing 3-4 secs faster to 100mph.

In gear, (with you in the right gear) I would still pull away.

Now if the two stock cars are similar standing start acceleration wise, then rolling the 330d would have it (330D) Best bet is to get togther with another driver who has a 330d and do some comparative tests.

the acceleration you feel in 3rd will not be as hard as a 335d in 4th and 5th as one is quite a deal faster.

nOW I believe a VERY GOOD 330i will do 15 odd secs to 100 with a very good driver.

Round a track i would always have believed that a 330i would be quicker than a 330d.
(stock vs stock)

But im not so sure now after BMWcarmags feature.


Yes i was assuming a mapped 330d is as quoick as a stock 335d, but in all honesty i rekon there not quite as fast. Now if a mapped 330d is as fast as a stock 335d, it will quite EASILY beat a 330i.

But i dont think they are. Some one go down the pod and prove me wrong please.


But 13.9 secs vs 16 secs is 2.1 secs not 3 Mate

I have no doubt that the 335d (especially after a remap) is quicker than a stock 330i. I saw that very clearly at Snetterton, when you went past me on the long straight when I had my foot planted to the floor.

My view is that a mapped 330d will be almost, but not quite, on pace with a 335d.

That makes it a bit faster than a 330i in a straight line, but in mixed driving or or on a track it would depend.

When I talked about acceleration, I was saying that, because of the gearing advantage, the pull in a 330i in 3rd would be similar to that in a 330d in 4th or 5th.

The 335d has sufficient additional torque to offset any gearing advantage.