BMW 335d Specs, Pics, and November Sale Date

Justin Berkowitz
by Justin Berkowitz
bmw 335d specs pics and november sale date

Oil lovers, [wait to] start your engines! The BMW 335d won't make it stateside until November. But Camaro-like, that hasn't stopped press releases nor live photos from hitting the webs. The diesel 3's estimated EPA ratings of 23/33 blow the 335i's fuel consumption out of the water. But if BMW is smart, they won't market the 335d as a fuel efficient sedan. All of Paul Neidermeyer's usual diesel critiques apply here: more expensive to buy, more expensive to fuel and not vastly more fuel efficient. Ah but– the 265 horsepower, oil-fed twin-turbo straight six will produce with a tug boat-like 425 ft.-lbs. of torque. That's more twist than the 335i. Hell, that's more than the M3. Other than the fact that the 335d and 335xd (all wheel drive) will be autobox only (don't kvetch – Europeans won't get this car with a manual either), the stump-pulling 335d makes a convincing case for itself as the thinking man's sports sedan. With the 335i starting at $39k, I'd put my random guess on a sticker around $42k.

Pics of the US spec car "in the wild" at

Join the conversation
4 of 16 comments
  • Whatdoiknow1 Whatdoiknow1 on Aug 07, 2008

    Ummm, what are the EPA figures for the 328i?

  • BuckD BuckD on Aug 07, 2008

    Thank you Jesus, for answering my automotive prayers. If only, in your infinite wisdom, you had seen fit to make the price point near to that of a Hyundai Elantra, I could have afforded buying one.

  • JEC JEC on Aug 07, 2008

    40 some mpg should be possible... in imperial MPG, not US mpg. You can exceed 40 imp. with a diesel S-class (6 cyl) or the aforemention A8 (V8) if you are gentle. It's not the rated MPG though, typically the reviews I used to read would get slightly better highway mileage than rated, at least on the Mercedes models. With all that torque, you really don't have to cane them very much to get around, and you can eek out some very impressive mileage with a light foot. I'd buy one. I looooove torque. Extra fuel economy is icing on the cake, even if its "only" 20% better on paper (which is a pretty big improvement in my book).

  • JJ JJ on Aug 07, 2008

    @XCSC That last point is a good one...The first one I think not so much. First of all, Manual transmissions are usually more fuel efficient by a significant amount. You can see with BMWs German car configurator that the mileage numbers (verbrauch) are usually significantly better for the manual cars than their slushbox counterparts. I don't think the lack of MT driving skills of the average US citizen (let's be honest) could completely mitigate that, especially not when they can actually drive a stig shift in the first place, (assumimg nobody buys an MT car while not being able to drive it). Also, on the topic of automatics shifting faster than MTs, I say no. Only now, with DSGs, PDKs and KDGs 'autoboxes' achieve very short shifting times, however, the standard slushbox still found in most cars, including the 335d, can't touch MTs which you can easily show by comparing 0-60 or 50-80 times. My guess is the enthousiasts looking for a manual would more likely opt for a 335i or M3, while the ones looking for a long range cruiser like the 335d, given the characteristics of the car, would probably opt for an autobox anyway. One has to understand that a 335d isn't a darty sportscar, and shifting gears with that much torque and a flat HP-curve isn't that much use either way, so BMW probably decided to not pretend to make something it's not by fronting with a manual.