Anyone moved from 3.0 Si to 35is?

I've gone through a few models upto the 35is, the drive is so much faster and the torque is fantastic. I wish I'd ordered one in the first instance as it's a massive upgrade in power and fun.
 
+1 I bought mine as cruiser with a 'M' matching turn of speed (albeit in a straight line) so more than happy!
 
Z4M_CSL said:
original guvnor said:
I'm not knocking turbo engines per se but I find them dull in comparison to a sweet NA engine. To me there isn't much fun when maximum power is delivered at sub 6k revs as it is on most turbos. I'm sure others feel differently.

Oh well I'm in a minority probably.
Click to expand...

Having both, totally agree with your comments. A N/A engine is a screamer, but there are benefits from turbos, but I have gone down the N/A tune route for both M's. Currently looking at a 4.4/5 stroker conversion and head work on the M3 and a wide-body for Z4M.

However this will make you laugh, I actually drive the 35is in auto mode, don't even use the paddles.... I must be getting old, lol.
Click to expand...

Every morning must be a tough decision for you. Hmmmm, which to drive today? Hang in there buddy, things will get better. ;-).

Your cars look beautiful and a big fan of the red. I had been looking at E92 M3s and also Jag XKRs as an alternative, but felt that they would take the running costs to another level. (Plus I'd be looking at an older car for the same money as a 35is).

Has your M3 proven reliable? What are the running costs like compared to the 35is? In slow city driving is the M3 hard work?
 
CornishRob said:
I test drove a 3.5is today at a dealer closeish to my house. Here are my observations against my E86M.

Lovely noise on startup, but most of the exhaust gas comes out of one side initially, which makes it look a bit silly and fake. Is that normal?
Interior is nice, probably more grown up that the 86. This car was fairly low spec though!

The drive: Well I found the gearbox a bit dim witted in auto, but very good once I used sport and in manual mode. Very quick shifts and smooth. I wasn't a massive fan of the steering which felt light and not very responsive, but it was fine. On a cruise down the dual carriageway, the car was lovely. Quiet, low engine revs and smooth suspension. Much better than the 86.

On booting it around a roundabout and back onto the dual carriageway, it was blatantly obvious that it needs an LSD. Hard acceleration in second with a slightly greasy road in a straight line had the T/C light on a lot. I did the same in the 86 on the exact same bit of road beforehand as a benchmark and it didn't come on once. It also squirmed a lot which the 86 didnt, but this would have been linked to the lack of traction I guess. I don't think it's a massive issue as I believe they can be fitted for a reasonable cost.

Brakes seemed fine, maybe a bit snatchy at low speed, but probably because I was not used to it.

This car was an 11 plate with 12k miles on at 28k. Would I swap mine considering the price difference: No chance.
Would I swap to it if they were equally priced? No, definitely not.

I posted the above as observations, not to start an argument. The 3.5is is a great car, but too soft as a natural upgrade of an e86 in my opinion. I think for me, it would have to be am M3 if I was staying with BMW.

If anyone would like any more specific observations, please feel free to ask.
Click to expand...

Thanks for posting that Rob - that's really interesting.

Have you fitted an LSD to your Z4M?

Interesting that the 35is was having traction issues whilst your M was not under the same conditions. One of the reasons I wrote off the Z4M (well aside from my struggles with heavy manual clutches) was because of its rambunctious reputation.

Very odd that a torque monster like the 35is doesn't have an LSD as standard.

Presumably if retrofitting you'd be looking at a Quaife?
 
Yea is you want lsd then the m is the one.
Havent had lsd on my lotus or 35i and havent needed it.
Maybe if we did more track days we would.
 
CornishRob said:
. . . . . . On booting it around a roundabout and back onto the dual carriageway, it was blatantly obvious that it needs an LSD. Hard acceleration in second with a slightly greasy road in a straight line had the T/C light on a lot. I did the same in the 86 on the exact same bit of road beforehand as a benchmark and it didn't come on once. It also squirmed a lot which the 86 didnt, but this would have been linked to the lack of traction I guess. . . . . . . .
Click to expand...
I think this is more of a tyre issue. I find exactly the same with mine but only at low temperature. Above about 7C the grip is fine and no problem during most of the year but come Autumn/Winter this behaviour starts to occur as the temperature drops, even when it's bone dry. I blame the RFTs - no doubt a LSD would help further but I believe changing to non RFTs would cure 90% of the problem. What was the ambient temperature during your test drive?
 
Lets be honest the more power you have the better the reason for having an LSD and a car IS always going to have better traction with one than not.
 
Summer runflats aren't designed to operate at their maximum efficiency in low temps hence drop off in performance and grip. better off with winter runflats or dedicated winter tyres with higher silicone content.

Tim.
 
Garvin said:
CornishRob said:
. . . . . . On booting it around a roundabout and back onto the dual carriageway, it was blatantly obvious that it needs an LSD. Hard acceleration in second with a slightly greasy road in a straight line had the T/C light on a lot. I did the same in the 86 on the exact same bit of road beforehand as a benchmark and it didn't come on once. It also squirmed a lot which the 86 didnt, but this would have been linked to the lack of traction I guess. . . . . . . .
Click to expand...
I think this is more of a tyre issue. I find exactly the same with mine but only at low temperature. Above about 7C the grip is fine and no problem during most of the year but come Autumn/Winter this behaviour starts to occur as the temperature drops, even when it's bone dry. I blame the RFTs - no doubt a LSD would help further but I believe changing to non RFTs would cure 90% of the problem. What was the ambient temperature during your test drive?
Click to expand...

Yes, this is a valid point. I have MPS on my car, and I think the 89 had Bridgestone Potenza. The different tyres could have had a difference, although mine are starting to get towards the low side.

The temps were about 7-8 degrees, so the tyres probably arn't performing well, but both tyres should be equally effected.
 
sars said:
Lets be honest the more power you have the better the reason for having an LSD and a car IS always going to have better traction with one than not.
Click to expand...

True.

It's a bit disappointing that BM didn't spec one as standard on the 35is. It wouldn't add much to the overall cost of what is, lets face it, a pretty expensive piece of kit and surely could only improve the drive of the car.
 
I am a bit surprised they didn't rework the 35iS into the M35iS when they face lifted the E89. By that I mean do one of those M-performance jobs on it and offer an LSD as an option.
 
TitanTim said:
Never mind, can't wait to be all electric :)
Click to expand...

I'm sure it will happen and everybody will enjoy the torque that an electric motor provides - no more waiting for revs to rise or turbo's to spool up!
 
original guvnor said:
I am a bit surprised they didn't rework the 35iS into the M35iS when they face lifted the E89. By that I mean do one of those M-performance jobs on it and offer an LSD as an option.
Click to expand...

Same old story, limited market and they're concentrating on mainstream and high end M stuff.
 
CornishRob said:
Garvin said:
CornishRob said:
. . . . . . On booting it around a roundabout and back onto the dual carriageway, it was blatantly obvious that it needs an LSD. Hard acceleration in second with a slightly greasy road in a straight line had the T/C light on a lot. I did the same in the 86 on the exact same bit of road beforehand as a benchmark and it didn't come on once. It also squirmed a lot which the 86 didnt, but this would have been linked to the lack of traction I guess. . . . . . . .
Click to expand...
I think this is more of a tyre issue. I find exactly the same with mine but only at low temperature. Above about 7C the grip is fine and no problem during most of the year but come Autumn/Winter this behaviour starts to occur as the temperature drops, even when it's bone dry. I blame the RFTs - no doubt a LSD would help further but I believe changing to non RFTs would cure 90% of the problem. What was the ambient temperature during your test drive?
Click to expand...

Yes, this is a valid point. I have MPS on my car, and I think the 89 had Bridgestone Potenza. The different tyres could have had a difference, although mine are starting to get towards the low side.

The temps were about 7-8 degrees, so the tyres probably arn't performing well, but both tyres should be equally effected.
Click to expand...
MPS are my absolute favourite tyre. Have run them on many previous cars and never has the grip dropped off like the RE050 RFTs on the Z4. Not sure whether the RFTs have a different compound or whether the stiffer construction results in a much higher degradation of grip at the lower temperatures but something is going on.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom