Hopefully the S3 will prevail! I think the 135 is quicker out of the box than the S3 though isn't it?
Hopefully the S3 will prevail! I think the 135 is quicker out of the box than the S3 though isn't it?
Urrrrmmm this should be very interesting as I dont rate the R32 at all after testing it & cant stand BMW's, like to know the result.
Like you say, out the box power I would think the BMW would be top trumps-3.0 turbo`d against 2.0 turbo...hopefully the S3 will win overall though!!! All nice cars, I really like the 135 coupe...
PNH80
Low life livin' the high life.
- Joined
- Feb 9, 2008
- Messages
- 1,633
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 36
I know it's an Audi forum but the 135 is supposed to be an absolute gem and performance wise quite close to the old M3. We all know Top Gear love their power slides as well so i wouldn't get your hopes up on this one. The S3 will win it on looks and cabin quality but as a drivers car the BMW should kill it.
Like you say, out the box power I would think the BMW would be top trumps-3.0 turbo`d against 2.0 turbo...hopefully the S3 will win overall though!!! All nice cars, I really like the 135 coupe...
Just looked it up. 306bhp stock, 0-62 in 5.2 - that is pretty quick! I wonder what a remap would give it!
Thats going to be crazy power with a remap...I said a while back that when I eventually change I would at least have a look at a 135 coupe, may have to stray over to the BMW forum to see if anyone has looked into a remap on one?
They are a pretty small car so with that much power & RWD they must be a bit lairy in the wet-even standard!
PNH80
Low life livin' the high life.
- Joined
- Feb 9, 2008
- Messages
- 1,633
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 36
306 bhp stock? Through the back wheels in a 'small' hatchback? Thats got to be one hell of a car. BMW or not....I mean seriously
That's an old one. It was published on the magazine about one year ago.
I do not remeber the exact result but I recall the Stig was very impressed with the S3 (the test was on wet tarmac).
Maybe I still have the magazine at home...
I do not remeber the exact result but I recall the Stig was very impressed with the S3 (the test was on wet tarmac).
Maybe I still have the magazine at home...
The 135i looks ugly IMHO like it's been put in a vice , decent interior though , and the engaine is a cracker that also puts out more than book figures.
More power and RWD you would have to go for for the BM as the most fun car there.
When's this on?
p
More power and RWD you would have to go for for the BM as the most fun car there.
When's this on?
p
306 bhp stock? Through the back wheels in a 'small' hatchback? Thats got to be one hell of a car. BMW or not....I mean seriously
Yeah, credit where credit is due, that does look like a stonking car on paper. Most BMW styling makes me vomit, but the 135 looks quite nice IMO (Z4 hard top looks the dogs too!)
I know it's stupid but the BMW badge would put me off buying one with my own money.
They re map to around 360-370 bhp then its bye bye e46 m3!!!! i have only driven the 123d which was pretty good actually. I have driven the 335i which is what i would choose as it looks much better, its like an s3 on steroids!!!
This was in the magazine at the end of 2006 I think.
I believe the S3 won it, with the BMW 2nd then the R32 - just tried searching it and found the following info:
Lap times round the track (wet conditions - hence poorer BMW performance):
S3 1.33
R32 1.35.4
BMW 1.36.9
I seem to recall the article was very complimentary to the S3
I believe the S3 won it, with the BMW 2nd then the R32 - just tried searching it and found the following info:
Lap times round the track (wet conditions - hence poorer BMW performance):
S3 1.33
R32 1.35.4
BMW 1.36.9
I seem to recall the article was very complimentary to the S3
PNH80
Low life livin' the high life.
- Joined
- Feb 9, 2008
- Messages
- 1,633
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 36
Currently my ONLY gripe with BMW is the cabin designs. They're just not particularly wonderful places to be considering the prices.
Before anyone starts saying 'it's the driving experience which counts'.... Yes but it's the same as going to a restaurant for a lovely meal... then having to sit on a box and eat off your knee. Has to be the whole package doesn't it.
I can live with the 3 series interior but i find my girlfriends Z4 a bit bare and the 1 series looks a bit on the basic side as well...
Considering those laptimes it sure was a 130 an not the 135.
Also the 135 isnt out for that long (presuming this test is from 2006.
Also the 135 isnt out for that long (presuming this test is from 2006.
EVO did a group test with the S3 and the 130i M sport , Mazda 3 , Alfa Brera.
The S3 was faster to 60 faster to 100 and faster round the track.
" the S3 is the logical choice , but the winner on point with all it's faults is the BMW "
p
The S3 was faster to 60 faster to 100 and faster round the track.
" the S3 is the logical choice , but the winner on point with all it's faults is the BMW "
p
I'm very pleasantly surprised S3 beat the BMW engine, just goes to show not all about how big the engine is huh, lol, lol
I think realistically S3 would win if you take into account the 4WD, they do make good cars thats just it, every VAG car I've had has been just unbelievably good & cabin design has always been far superior to anyone else's, as someone said BMW cabins are just very lacklustre I think the word is.
Take this site with a pinch of salt it's just a " ball park "
http://www.fastestlaps.com/index.php?page_id=compare&car1=459a7e3125a10&car2=473d6e85e5770
The S3 has a slight edge round a track , while the 135i has the edge at 0-60 and 1/4 of a mile.
Where the 135i really lays it down is 100-150mph the extra power leaves the S3 for dead!
p
http://www.fastestlaps.com/index.php?page_id=compare&car1=459a7e3125a10&car2=473d6e85e5770
The S3 has a slight edge round a track , while the 135i has the edge at 0-60 and 1/4 of a mile.
Where the 135i really lays it down is 100-150mph the extra power leaves the S3 for dead!
p
& what about a mapped S3?
We are talking about a 4 Cyl 2.0 against a V6 3.5 so even though I said its not how big the engine is, when its nearly twice the size & 6 cylinder it will make a little difference, bet the mapped one would leave it for dust or am I wrong?
You would think a remapped S3 would be quicker than a Std 135i , remap the 135i and it's game over.
p
p
Not neccessarily, cause the bmw isnt 4wd so doesnt have the control & power to all 4 no & with a few changes to the S3 like change the haldex so power better distributed, I would hedge my bets on the s3, but we are comparing 2 cars with completely different sized engines aswell, I mean ok get a 120i tuned similar to the S3 & see if that comes close, unlikely IMHO, but 2.0 compared to a V6 3.0, gotta be a level playing field, IMHO again its a stupid comparison, but I'm no maclaren technician thats for sure, lol.
Anyway whats the bhp/torque of the 2 to compare standard?
Anyway whats the bhp/torque of the 2 to compare standard?
Ah I see the confusion, through the posts, everyone's talking about both, still strange comparison.
S3 is 260-280bhp stock , 135i is 306-325bhp stock , to be fair Std v Std or remapped v remapped power wise the S3 is ******* in the wind agaisnt a 3.0 6cyl bi-turbo.
How will it work out on the road? i think it needs to be raining for the S3 the stand a chance.
p
How will it work out on the road? i think it needs to be raining for the S3 the stand a chance.
p
you are still comparing 2 different sized engines, its not a fair comparison, 3ltre v6 against a 4 cyl 2ltre, come on common sense & maths prevails, get a 2ltre tuned 1 series same as s3 then come back to the table, top gear IMHO compared the wrong car, maybe they should have chosen something more sensible, no?? Anyone else??
The 130i m sport is the car in the S3 class, it's still got a bigger engaine than the S3 a 3.0 stright 6.
The S3 is faster.
p
A 120i is a 170hp 4 cylinder normally aspirated engine. It would sure take some work to get it up to S3 power levels, so that is an even worse comparison.
The 135i is a 3.0 straight-six, not a V6.
A perfect comparison just isn't possible, as both firms have different philosophies on engine installation. BMW's performance petrol engines have always tended to be straight-sixes, and they currently have a very impressive range of straight-sixes with very low emissions. Audi on the other hand prefer 4 cylinder turbos throughout their whole engine range. They even recently dumped the 3.2 V6 from the A3, so you can see their way of thinking for the future.
That would be an embarrassment. I've never understood why BMW can get 333 HP out of a 3.2l 6-cylinder engine(M3) and Audi/VW gets 250 HP out of a 3.2l VR6(3.2 A3/R32). Sometimes Audis seem anemic and underpowered.
Just to diffentiate between the 2 models:
130, 3 liter 6 cylinder
135, 3 liter 6 cylinder biturbo
..lol nice smiley
130, 3 liter 6 cylinder
135, 3 liter 6 cylinder biturbo
..lol nice smileyI agree totally. Which is why i presume, the 3.2 A3 wasnt present at the shootout.
