Car and Driver acceleration times for 335i sedan and coupe are incorrect.

I fail to believe that the BMW 335i sedan can be quicker than the 335i coupe, for a number of reasons.

First, the 335i sedan weighs 3,592 pounds with manual versus the 335i coupe's 3,571 pounds (also with manual). The coupe is lighter by 21 pounds.

Second, the 335i coupe has better weight distribution than the sedan. The 335i sedan's weight distribution with manual is 51.5 front and 48.5 rear. The 335i coupe's weight distributioin is 51.2 front and 48.8 rear (also with manual). The coupe has better weight distribution

Third, BMW lists the official 0-60 time of the coupe as 5.3 seconds with manual and 5.5 seconds with automatic versus 5.4 seconds for the manual and 5.6 seconds for the automatic sedan.

Not to mention, the coupe is lower to the ground than the sedan by nearly two inches.

The coupe was an automatic where as the sedan was a manual. If we look at BMW official times, the coupe with automatic is supposed to go 0-60 in 5.5 seconds and the sedan with manual in 5.4 seconds. That is where there is a .1 second favor for the sedan (4.8) versus 4.9 for the coupe.

Now if we look at the official BMW times for a BMW 335i coupe with manual it is listed as 5.3 seconds versus the 5.4 for the manual sedan.

Therefore if two manual 335is were tested on the same day, one a coupe and the other a sedan, the coupe would be faster on average.

I believe Car and Driver has incorrectly performed their test, and if a random test was done the coupe would be faster than the sedan on the average.

caguy518caguy518 - 9/30/2006 8:55:52 PM
+7 Boost
wow, .1 seconds! Different testing conditions, different transmissions, differents cars. Does it really matter? That .1 seconds will not make a difference in the real world, so you realize how small that is?


Agent004Agent004 - 9/30/2006 9:12:02 PM
+2 Boost
This is splitting hairs, you're talking about 1/10th of a second. A driver could shift the sedan faster and produce a better 0-60 time, or he could shift the coupe faster and get a faster 0-60 time.


  • The tires could be different

  • The amount of fuel in the car

  • The F/R weight ratio

  • Engine tolerances

  • Wind

  • Conspiracy


You name it, it could be the reason...


BimmerFanBimmerFan - 10/1/2006 4:04:50 PM
+1 Boost
Agent 004, you forgot Gobal Warming and possibly even Bill Clinton. LOL!


ryaajusryaajus - 9/30/2006 9:35:27 PM
+3 Boost
Germannut...You definitely have the right name. Who on earth cares?


crackityjonescrackityjones - 10/1/2006 12:00:25 AM
-1 Boost
Stop bashing this guy. If you have better things to do, then do them. He's here posting things for you to respond to. Without posts there's nothing to read. W

ith all the claims BMW makes about its cars, it is strange that a sedan would beat a coupe. This is fair game stuff and par for the course around here, so go back and cuddle with your family if you're bored by it.


BMW530iBMW530i - 10/1/2006 4:52:32 AM
+1 Boost
Someone clear me up a bit. I didn't read the Car and Driver reviews of the 335i sedan and coupe yet.

Perhaps the "slower" car was equipped with an A/T?


TimETimE - 10/1/2006 6:54:10 AM
+1 Boost
Go check the articles again: coupe came with AT, while sedan had MT. And that's the answer to your question!


RupertRupert - 10/1/2006 7:28:51 AM
+1 Boost
exactly, the coupe had a/t, the sedan was m/t. of course it's faster!


BMW530iBMW530i - 10/1/2006 8:24:40 AM
+3 Boost
DING DING


kart1kart1 - 10/1/2006 10:28:32 AM
+1 Boost
WOW: I don't know what to say: about the post or the discussion.

Power to weight ratios 11.97 vs 11.90. The advantage of the manual makes the car faster. There are more things too, but the main thing is the transmission. Also why are you taking into account manufacturer estimates, they are usually conservative.


S4cabriofoxS4cabriofox - 10/1/2006 10:36:16 AM
+2 Boost
GermanNut... you're getting a little crazy about this.

If I were in your position, I'd get a coupe.

It's not that hard- just pick one! Sedan, or the better-looking and quicker coupe?


2JZSoarer2JZSoarer - 10/1/2006 1:54:10 PM
0 Boost
I told you guys that C&D is full of crap !!!


GermanNutGermanNut - 10/1/2006 3:15:41 PM
0 Boost
I'm not stating this for myself. I believe that almost all of Car and Driver's times are nonsense.

Why is it that Car and Driver almost ALWAYS gets the fastest time on any car they test and no other magazine comes close???

The difference of .1 second is due to the manual sedan vs. automatic coupe for the 335i's.

The coupe is faster, but Car and Driver gets the fastest time on what seems like every car they test.


Storm9Storm9 - 10/1/2006 9:07:28 PM
+1 Boost
Who cares?????????
Get a coupe if u like it,
and get a sedan if u want a practical car.

No one focking cares, what a pointless post.


vcowmanvcowman - 10/1/2006 9:43:10 PM
+1 Boost
nut you are f'in retarted bro.


awsomeaudiawsomeaudi - 10/1/2006 9:56:23 PM
+1 Boost
Reasons you should not read car and driver
1. they get the news 2 moths late
2. they are not acurate
3. they are sort of biased on some brands


awsomeaudiawsomeaudi - 10/1/2006 9:57:26 PM
+1 Boost
Reasons you should not read car and driver
1. they get the news 2 moths late
2. they are not acurate
3. they are sort of biased on some brands


S4cabriofoxS4cabriofox - 10/1/2006 10:07:19 PM
+1 Boost
No, they're REALLY biased-- towards BMW, of course, and Honda.

Road & Track is good, as well as Motor Trend (they get the news pretty early).


00JT00JT - 10/2/2006 3:45:07 AM
+1 Boost
Agreed and they are very anti-Toyota


awsomeaudiawsomeaudi - 10/1/2006 11:53:07 PM
+1 Boost
Ok Just dont read car and driver period . PERIOD .



1970toyotamarc1970toyotamarc - 10/2/2006 3:38:21 PM
+1 Boost
agreed


GermanNutGermanNut - 10/2/2006 3:01:56 PM
+1 Boost
logical, don't you ever stop your pro-BMW rants?
Copyright 2026 AutoSpies.com, LLC