German Muscle vs. Japanese Hustle (335i vs IS350)

[Jaimecbr900]

They've put the turbos on for driveability, but not for power.

Ummm, you smoking crack???? So according to YOU, the turbos were NOT added for power but to make the car "DRIVE" better????? That makes about as much sense as having sex with a prostitute without a condom....NONE at all.

When you look at this I6 vs the outgoing M3's I6, the 3.2 liter M3 engine it made 333hp in its regular NA trim and 350hp in its CSL trim. BMW has made powerful, reliable (albiet expensive) NA motors for years, so lexus making ultra-powerful, reliable NA motors or the fact that BMW requires turbos to keep up is just a cop out.

Apples to 747's. Even below you admit that the M series is NOT a comparo with the IS350, so why compare their engines then????

I think BMW did this more to improve the driveability of the car. To "keep up", if they wanted to do all out power, they could easily crank the boost, or add larger turbos, but they decided to reign things in to keep the torque peak high, yet even. The way it was engineered, the power comes on extremely early ,peaks early and is very broad. Contrast this to the high strung lexus motor, its apples and oranges, but due to the earlier peaking torque, the bimmer is going to take off earlier, no doubt about that.

To quote you, this is all a "cop out". So let me get this straight, BMW put in twin turbos NOT to regain their sports sedan performance title but for driveability yet all you talk about here refers to PERFORMANCE.....how's that work again? BTW, the ONLY reason they have a torque curve as nice as they do IS the twin turbos, no other reason.

However, to say they "require" turbos is bullshit. If anything, lexus/toyota delved into turbos much more than bmw with the Supras/ soarer etc. Until this particular car, BMW has always been known for its powerful, high revving NA motors and if you wanted to go that route, you know an M3 would easily trounce the IS350.

Wow, and BMW delved into airplanes before Toyota......what's that got to do with the price of tea in China?

Name a factory STOCK turbo Lexus. Name one. That's what I said, right? Not Toyota, Not Nissan, Not Mitsubishi....LEXUS has always and continue to make remarkably reliable NA motors in their entire line. BMW USED to be the same way. The real bottomline is that in a comparo test you should NOT be able to compare an NA motor to a TT motor if you are going to put so much emphasis on "performance" because that truly is an uneven playing field. THAT was my point.

Its a nice car, but the m3 of old, or an M3 CSl would destroy the IS....but they're in two different classes entirely. All i'm saying is that BMW make legendary NA motors. Don't take that away from them.

So why compare them or bring it up? My car is faster than a stock Lexus too, so why would that be a comparo? I know of several turbo IS3's that would smoke an M3. Again, what's that got to do with it? The comparison is of an IS350 vs 335i, not M series. As you acknowledge, it's not a fair comparo otherwise.

[superboost]

Ummm, you smoking crack???? So according to YOU, the turbos were NOT added for power but to make the car "DRIVE" better????? That makes about as much sense as having sex with a prostitute without a condom....NONE at all.




Apples to 747's. Even below you admit that the M series is NOT a comparo with the IS350, so why compare their engines then????



To quote you, this is all a "cop out". So let me get this straight, BMW put in twin turbos NOT to regain their sports sedan performance title but for driveability yet all you talk about here refers to PERFORMANCE.....how's that work again? BTW, the ONLY reason they have a torque curve as nice as they do IS the twin turbos, no other reason.



Wow, and BMW delved into airplanes before Toyota......what's that got to do with the price of tea in China?

Name a factory STOCK turbo Lexus. Name one. That's what I said, right? Not Toyota, Not Nissan, Not Mitsubishi....LEXUS has always and continue to make remarkably reliable NA motors in their entire line. BMW USED to be the same way. The real bottomline is that in a comparo test you should NOT be able to compare an NA motor to a TT motor if you are going to put so much emphasis on "performance" because that truly is an uneven playing field. THAT was my point.



So why compare them or bring it up? My car is faster than a stock Lexus too, so why would that be a comparo? I know of several turbo IS3's that would smoke an M3. Again, what's that got to do with it? The comparison is of an IS350 vs 335i, not M series. As you acknowledge, it's not a fair comparo otherwise.

The m-series chasis is certainly no comparo to the IS, but the engines sure are. You want to go NA to NA, then you'd compare the motors, the chasis of the M-series is a 2 door sports sedan. The IS is a 4 door. However, you can compare motors till the cows come home because as you know, lexus/toyoto tended to put the 2jz motor in many a car both sporty and non, same as bmw did with their I6. Your bias is showing sir. I, myself do not own a bimmer nor have I owned a lexus. I admire the powerplants of both cars, but i'm a turbo volvo lover lol.

Anyways, I've driven both and I"ll give it to the bimmer. The reason why you add turbos to improve driveability is because there is this little force that turbos tend to add to an engine known as torque. Torque moves the car. Torque gets the car off the line sooner. HP and torque working together move the car down the road at a high rate of speed, which we are all fond of. Now if said vehicle is turbo charged in such a way as to allow the torque to come in sooner, it will accelerate faster, easier and more linearly than its NA cousin...Hence more driveable. The m3 on the other hand actually still makes more power than its boosted derivative, yet the turbo'd cousin will move off the line sooner and be more driveable as a result due to the greater (earlier) torque.

And lets not compare turbo IS3's to turbo M3s. We all know how beastly they can get.

All I'm saying is that you can't necessarily chump off the new 3 series anymore than the IS. BMW has been making high performance NA 6 cyl engines for a long, long time. The m3 is testament to that. Lexus/Toyota too has been making high performance turbo 6 cyl engines for a long, long time. You've got 2 or 3 generations of Supra, the soarer and other cars that allow show this quite clearly. However, its pretty clear they're trying to leap frog each other and BMW just jumped a little farther.....

Now if next gen, Toyota/Lexus decides to boost the IS, i'm sure it would be pretty cool. After all, they've been doing it longer/more than BMW have. They should have greater experience.

[Jaimecbr900]

Anyways, I've driven both and I"ll give it to the bimmer. The reason why you add turbos to improve driveability is because there is this little force that turbos tend to add to an engine known as torque. Torque moves the car. Torque gets the car off the line sooner. HP and torque working together move the car down the road at a high rate of speed, which we are all fond of. Now if said vehicle is turbo charged in such a way as to allow the torque to come in sooner, it will accelerate faster, easier and more linearly than its NA cousin...Hence more driveable. The m3 on the other hand actually still makes more power than its boosted derivative, yet the turbo'd cousin will move off the line sooner and be more driveable as a result due to the greater (earlier) torque.

You obviously didn't get what I was trying to say.

NA vs NA, the Lexus STILL does and DID beat the BMW head-to-head. No question about that. THAT is my point. NA to NA is a true even keel level playing field comparo. Last year, the IS350 beat the 3 series BMW by more than a full sec to 60 and about the same in the 1/4. That's TROUNCING. THAT is the main reason why the twins were added to the 3 series and NOT the M series. That they added more torque and better off the line.....well, DUHHHHH!!! My whole direct point is simple:

Without the twins the BMW's performance compared to the IS350's is WHAT????? Look it up. Look back at previous head-to-head tests. The BMW has always had the incredible chassis and handling. No question. Just as the fit and finish go to the Lexus too. No question. But when you compare raw performance numbers, it is IMO highly unfair and biased if you compare an FI car with an NA car, even IF the HP numbers are close to each other because......drum roll......TORQUE....which in the NA motor can only come from ONE place whereas in the turbo motor is a function of simply turning up the boost. Get what I'm saying?

And lets not compare turbo IS3's to turbo M3s. We all know how beastly they can get.

I used this to illustrate how it wasn't fair to the M3 to pit it against a TURBO IS300 either. TURBO IS's SHOULD romp on NA M3's.....THAT is the point. It's NOT a fair comparo. Just like it's silly for everyone to be all goo goo and ga ga over BMW's 335 hitting 300 HP and great torque.....DUH, it has 2 turbos.....DUR, DUR!!!

Now if next gen, Toyota/Lexus decides to boost the IS, i'm sure it would be pretty cool. After all, they've been doing it longer/more than BMW have. They should have greater experience.

Look, I'm not a blinders on Lexus diehard. I love all kinds of cars, some BMW's included. Lexus is going to counter next year with the IS-F, although I think that's more geared toward competing with the M series. I actually like the look and technology behind the 335i. I've not yet driven one, but I'm certain I'll love it when I do. I wouldn't take anything away from a car that's a perenial winner. No doubt about it.

I just wanted to point out how it's ironic that all the automotive world and spectators are all a buzz about this "IS350 Killer" when if you want to truly break it down.....they did add twins to get to the same HP level that the Lexus has NA. Right or wrong? They did get beat rather handedly when it was NA vs NA. Right or wrong? Like I said above, the 335i is a very cool car. It has gobs of additional potential on top of already great attributes. Not taking anything at all away from them at all. I'm merely pointing out that it is not entirely fair to compare an NA car to an FI car as if they were complete equals because there is no way they can be IMO.