carmudgeons.com - View Single Post

killerdeck · 08-01-2008, 09:34 AM

I have driven the E92. While it is a very good vehicle, I prefer the 135 for just about everything with the exception of the intoxicating engine sounds above 6000 RPM and the overall aggressive looks of the E92. I drove the 135 and M3 back to back and can comment that the 135 was more fun and engaging, had equally if not better brake feel (in sport package format), just as much tossability, with not as much piggishness. In fact, the 135 felt quite a bit faster during many tests and brought a smile to my face throughout almost the entire drive. On the other hand, the E92 was very fun to drive, but only really made me feel intoxicated when it was in the 6000-8000+ RPM range. Driving both, I reset the MPGs before I started both drives and took the same route within 1 hour of each other during the middle of the workday. The M3 averaged 12.8 MPG and the 135 15.9 MPG.

08-01-2008, 09:34 AM	#5
killerdeck Crotchety Join Date: Nov 2003 Carmudgeonly Ride: 2016 BMW M3 Location: Dallas, TX Posts: 1,376	I have driven the E92. While it is a very good vehicle, I prefer the 135 for just about everything with the exception of the intoxicating engine sounds above 6000 RPM and the overall aggressive looks of the E92. I drove the 135 and M3 back to back and can comment that the 135 was more fun and engaging, had equally if not better brake feel (in sport package format), just as much tossability, with not as much piggishness. In fact, the 135 felt quite a bit faster during many tests and brought a smile to my face throughout almost the entire drive. On the other hand, the E92 was very fun to drive, but only really made me feel intoxicated when it was in the 6000-8000+ RPM range. Driving both, I reset the MPGs before I started both drives and took the same route within 1 hour of each other during the middle of the workday. The M3 averaged 12.8 MPG and the 135 15.9 MPG.