Comments on: BMW 335i Convertible Test Drive Report

By: jazz1011

jazz1011 — Tue, 06 Mar 2007 15:07:58 +0000

The rear end of the E92 does indeed looks better than the E90.

It certainly blends in with the shape. Not so with the E90 though.

But a 3.0L engine … maybe I’ll give it a pass. My road tax will soar skyhigh even if I can afford it.

Cheers!

By: Hikaru

Hikaru — Mon, 05 Feb 2007 04:38:05 +0000

Holy_Cow has a good sense of humour…..lol

By: soporific

soporific — Sat, 03 Feb 2007 05:35:13 +0000

cire, what are you saying now? that a convertible should look powerful without having power? and how does that make more sense than a car that you claim doesn’t look powerful but actually is? which would you pay more for?
and afterall, there are 320i, 325i and 330i options not to mention the diesel. it’s not like bmw is saying buy the 335 and the 335 only.

imho, don’t think a 3 convertible is supposed to look powerful anyway. even previous 3cabs have had a very low and flat shoulderline with a well-hidden wheel-arch flare. even on this one, its not pronounced but when u look at it, its typical of bangle, you can only see the distinct contours in person not in pictures.

By: Cire

Cire — Fri, 02 Feb 2007 11:34:06 +0000

The rear looks like a merc at a glance. The flare for the wheel arches are gone. Thus, goes the brawn look of the car. It never looked as powerful as the spec claimed to be. The front end have nothing to shout about. It seems out of place with the rest of the body..or is it the other way around?
At some point, the front occupants seems to be sitting too near to the front. It could be becos of the massive overhang of the tail of the convertible.
And all those Hps, you would not likely to have use it at all. Convertibles are to be driven with the top down. A luxury cruise along the hill side, enjoying the cool breeze etc.. Not speeding up some hills or beach side with hair all rumbled up, right? So, the engine is kinda overkill here.
A decent 200hp unit will do the trick. And saves on roadtax and petrol too.

By: mattyboy

mattyboy — Fri, 02 Feb 2007 11:09:04 +0000

LOL @ Holy Cow
I see you went to the same school as me

By: tishaban

tishaban — Fri, 02 Feb 2007 11:08:58 +0000

I disagree, I think the rear lights on the E92/E93 are way better than the E90. The E90 rear looks weird.

By: protonGL

protonGL — Fri, 02 Feb 2007 10:45:15 +0000

really dont like the rear light, looks too sweet, ..to some point it ll take the bold-ness away from BMW , ………………..

By: holy_cow

holy_cow — Fri, 02 Feb 2007 09:57:43 +0000

I can see Mayonaise’s train of reasoning perfectly clearly – BMW starts with B, which is also the first letter in Buttons, which are always found on vending machines; vending machines serve chocolate bars, and chocolate is usually delievered in boxes made of cardboard; cardboard is made in a factory, and factories also make toothpaste, which is clean and white, like snow; snow is found in Scandinavian countries like Sweden, and Swedish women are very desirable. Hence, the Volvo C70 is more desirable than the BMW 3 Convertible.

What? That’s silly? Well, if you think it’s so easy, why don’t you try and think up a more sensible reason as to why someone would find a Volvo more desirable than a BMW?

By: khimfoh

khimfoh — Fri, 02 Feb 2007 09:34:46 +0000

With the top down, the car looks like those utes popularly found in Australia.

By: Mayonaise

Mayonaise — Fri, 02 Feb 2007 08:40:00 +0000

Nice car, but not as desirable as the new C70.

By: pirate

pirate — Fri, 02 Feb 2007 08:29:36 +0000

Good report!
I think the coupe would be good enough for most 335i buyers in Bolehland.