330d vs 335d

panthro · 17 Dec 2010 at 11:38

Ive been asking a few BMW related questions recently, but not because Im considering buying another car soon, just out of pure curiosity.
Does the extra performance the 335d engine offer, justify the extra cost over the 330d engine?
Ive read that the 335d returns close to petrol engined mpg figures and that the 330d has much better fuel economy without sacrificing too much power. So, whats the point of the 335d?

RSClio · 17 Dec 2010 at 12:33

I once had a play with a 335d, Haha seriously fast motors for an burner!!

/Cool story bro!!

[TW]Fox · 17 Dec 2010 at 12:34

The big difference between them is that the 335d is available only as an automatic, whereas the 330d is also available as a manual.

In the real world, away from BMW's figures, the autos are a bit more thirsty than the manuals.

The 335d is a useful amount quicker than an M57 engined 330d but the late 08 onwards cars get the newer engine with 245bhp which is closes the performance gap by quite a bit.

Clown · 17 Dec 2010 at 14:14

Was speaking to someone about the 330d. He seemed to think it turned into an M3 after a remap. I didn't know any better to argue with him so I just said that I would rather the M3 if only for the badge on the back

paradigm · 17 Dec 2010 at 14:19

Clown said:
Was speaking to someone about the 330d. He seemed to think it turned into an M3 after a remap. I didn't know any better to argue with him so I just said that I would rather the M3 if only for the badge on the back

An e9x 335d might turn into something that rivals an E46 M3 in straight line performance, but that's about it.

Saytan · 17 Dec 2010 at 14:32

the x35D engine is considerably more complex and fragile. Which is all ok under warranty, but if it's not, i know where my dollar would go...

[TW]Fox · 17 Dec 2010 at 14:35

Saytan said:
the x35D engine is considerably more complex and fragile. Which is all ok under warranty, but if it's not, i know where my dollar would go...

Considerably more complex? It's an M57 with a different turbocharger arrangement (ie there are 2). It is compelx but so is the x30d.

Saytan · 17 Dec 2010 at 14:52

[TW]Fox;18022802 said:
Considerably more complex? It's an M57 with a different turbocharger arrangement (ie there are 2). It is compelx but so is the x30d.

an already fragile engine, with more potential failure points (as you've said yourself before, turbocharger failures are not unknown).

paradigm · 17 Dec 2010 at 15:16

Saytan said:
an already fragile engine, with more potential failure points (as you've said yourself before, turbocharger failures are not unknown).

Fragile?

Complex perhaps.

[TW]Fox · 17 Dec 2010 at 15:26

It has one extra failure point.

Not that it matters because only a fool would run one without a warranty anyway.

Django x2 · 17 Dec 2010 at 15:48

Saytan said:
an already fragile engine, with more potential failure points (as you've said yourself before, turbocharger failures are not unknown).

Fragile? This, the same engine that's been used since 2001 (if not before). I will admit that perhaps recently, they have been pushing it to its boundaries, but 10 years of production of a core unrevised unit doesn't represent fragile.

[TW]Fox · 17 Dec 2010 at 15:54

Lucero said:
Fragile? This, the same engine that's been used since 2001 (if not before). I will admit that perhaps recently, they have been pushing it to its boundaries, but 10 years of production of a core unrevised unit doesn't represent fragile.

Hmm it is a bit fragile (and it dates from 1998) by virtue of its high pressure injecots, turbo and low pressure fuel pump but thats a diesel v petrol issue not a 330d v 335d issue.

And like I said it doesnt really matter as you would be mad not to have a warranty anyway.

panthro · 17 Dec 2010 at 23:00

Cheers, basically confirmed what I thought. I dont think the pro's outweigh the con's on the 335d.

[TW]Fox · 17 Dec 2010 at 23:02

panthro said:
Cheers, basically confirmed what I thought. I dont think the pro's outweigh the con's on the 335d.

I'm not sure thats really true. You probably need to drive both and make your mind up. If you want an automatic there isnt exactly a huge amount of cons of a 335d over a 330d.

J1nxy · 17 Dec 2010 at 23:16

The 335d is noticeably quicker across the whole rev range than the 330d in either revision, but where the engine really shows itself is in flexibility. It will pull hard from 700rpm to the 5000 rpm redline, the auto suites the car very well and lets you exploite the power delivery easily. I can get easily over 44mpg on a decent motorway run and typically average across a tank around 36-40mpg dependent on if my wife was used the car for a lot town driving. Not many near 300 bhp cars car return that sort of figure.

In terms of fragility, its not a diesel specific thing, with the introduction of GDI engines over the last few years the use of high pressure fuel rails and the injectors/pumps which are needed to drive them this is something which will propagate across more and more cars over the coming years along with the use of turbos.

[TW]Fox · 17 Dec 2010 at 23:19

That is completely true - now the petrol sixes are also direct injection the diesels are not really any more unreliable than the petrol engines.

Sigh.

Spamalot · 18 Dec 2010 at 01:37

[TW]Fox;18023144 said:
It has one extra failure point.

Not that it matters because only a fool would run one without a warranty anyway.

I don't understand this. A warranty only spreads the costs, it's can't reduce it (unless the warranty companies makes a lose). The storms might be big but you should be able to weather them if you're spending that sort of cash, no?

Dave L · 18 Dec 2010 at 07:27

The 335d carries a far price premuim over the 330d - but a nicely mapped 330d will give very-near 335d performance.

Only thing that I would have liked over the 330d is the fuel economy of the 335d engine, it is more efficient. On a run, I will return 43/45mpg and running around town it will drop to as low as 32! The autobox sure sups the fuel. On the motorway when the torque convertor locks up, thats where you get the fuel efficiency.

[TW]Fox · 18 Dec 2010 at 08:22

Spamalot said:
I don't understand this. A warranty only spreads the costs, it's can't reduce it (unless the warranty companies makes a lose). The storms might be big but you should be able to weather them if you're spending that sort of cash, no?

How can you not understand, as a concept it is as clear as day. the warranty costs 500ish on a lower mileage car and protects you from 4 figure bills. It just means you can't buy high mileage cars now as you can't warranty them. Yes in many cases the warranty co makes a loss. My parents e60 is with BMW right now with a 1.5k bill. The warranty I got was 420 quid.

The potential bills on cars like this are in the thousands. Don't run one without a warranty.

WJA96 · 18 Dec 2010 at 08:30

J1nxy said:
The 335d is noticeably quicker across the whole rev range than the 330d in either revision, but where the engine really shows itself is in flexibility. It will pull hard from 700rpm to the 5000 rpm redline, the auto suites the car very well and lets you exploite the power delivery easily. I can get easily over 44mpg on a decent motorway run and typically average across a tank around 36-40mpg dependent on if my wife was used the car for a lot town driving. Not many near 300 bhp cars car return that sort of figure.

+1

The engine in the 330d/530d is a VERY good engine, but the one in the 335d/535d is incredible. People talk about being pushed back in their seats in 2.0 turbo diesels and you really have to experience the thrust forwards you feel with the twin-turbo motor. And unlike the single turbo version, the twin-turbo keeps on thrusting you forwards all the way to the redline, just like a petrol engine would.

It's one of the great sadnesses in my life that I don't like the rest of the 535d as I could live with that engine for the rest of my life.