An odd comparo but an entertaining read nonetheless. It is the auto-tranny BMW against the auto tranny EVO X.


"Maybe this was a mistake," come the murmurs from the test track. Part of the rationale behind this odd pairing was the BMW claim that the 135i sprints to 60 mph in 5.1 seconds, just a tick under what we've seen out of the manual Evo GSR. How do we explain our 135i consistently ripping off 4.7-second runs to 60, a full half-second faster than our Evo MR's fancy launch controlled sprint? We can't."


"From the first turn of the steering wheel, it's clear these two are as dynamically different as they come. The 135i's M-sport wheel is thick and meaty like Thanksgiving gravy and returns direct, seemingly telepathic sensations-until you drive the Evo."

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/coupes...ison/index.html

 

Why did they test Run Flats vs. Track Tires?

The EVO will be faster around the track but I'd like to have seen how close they really would have been.

 

I wonder why BMW (Porsche for that matter as well) don't offer a LSD on their cars? Even if as an option surely some people would buy.

From what I recall the stock BMW turbo is stronger than it's rated and has 50% more displacement and 50% more cylinders and less weight so it's got to be quicker than the EVO X at least in a straight line.

If BMW is less at the track it's likely something to do with not being able to put all the power down as well it should.

 

The 135i has the electronic LSD on it.

I'd give more of the issue to the tires and suspension set up. The EVO is a trackable car off the show room floor.

The BMW seems to win at everything but the track (based on this review).

Since 99.99999999% of buyers never race on a track with their cars, I kinda get BMW's point.

 

They stated in the article that the Evo was 3.5 seconds faster around the track, but looking at the final page with lap times, it says 10 seconds!!

 

The Evo has some of the same goodness as the GT-R. It performs beyond expectations of what such a heavy car with mediocre acceleration numbers should be able to achieve. Every comparison test so far of the US market Evo vs US market STI has the Evo outperforming the lighter and more powerful STI on the track. It comes down to the Evo's great tires and S-AWC system.

 

The Evo is the better looking and performing car.

 

Because that's how the cars come out of the showroom. It'd be nice to see a standardized test.

On another note, I'd gladly like to see someone put a Z06 on the same tires its Porsche competitors come with, instead of the POS runflats, and run it around the 'ring.

 

that statement is totally false..

also, how do you see BMWs point? To not offer a LDS? What's the harm if people are spending $2K + on an LSD aftermarket why can't BMW offer it as an option and have people pay for it if it's wanted.

If a LSD was not wanted (by some) there would not be an aftermarket LSD correct?

The logic does not make sense, I mean it's like saying no one would buy a more powerful Cayman that's why Porsche doesn't offer one. The fact is Porsche doesn't want the Cayman to step on the toes of the 911 and maybe BMW doesn't want 335i or 135i to step on the toes of the M car.

Do you think the M cars have LSD for a reason? Do you think an electronic diff is the same as a LSD if so why don't they put that on the M-cars or Porsche on the GT3s etc.?

If BMW offers a 135tti and it has a LSD you mean no one would buy one because 99.9999999999999999% of people don't take their cars to the track?

 

The EVO's acceleration times are so-so, but its track time is impressive.