[bk_g80_m3]

So over the weekend I decided to take a test drive of the M235i since it's always intrigued me.

I thought the Golf R was going to be the right choice for me primarily because it has AWD, DSG, it's relatively quick, and has a hatch. (Useful). I use the car primarily to commute and carry my mountain bike.

I had somewhat ruled out the M235i in the past because I never wanted to get a roof rack (thought I'd just use the hatch), but after buying the golf R I realized that VW doesn't allow you to put a hitch rack on the car, and stuffing the bike in the back of the car is a PITA I ended up getting roof rack anyway. It's not so bad. The thought then got into my mind that if having a hatch is no longer a purchase requirement I should look at the M235i.

So I drove the M235i back to back with my Golf R. I'll use bullet points:

M235i
* Steering feel - awesome
* Car is light on its feet
* next to 0 turbo lag
* feels more expensive / luxurious inside
* I love the tire pressure is shown on the nav screen
* styling
* Estoril blue (all time favorite color)
* Engine growl / exhaust sound is fantastic
* great suspension tuning

Golf R
* Quiet - not enough sexy engine growl/burble
* Steering - ok
* Speed - very quick, but in a turbo-laggy 4 cyl way. The 235i is way more torquey
* Way more space
* Seat fits like a glove
* Stereo is great
* Better brake feel / stops on a dime - the M235's brakes seemed to have more pedal travel and bite less
* unsatisfactory warranty experience

Anyone here that bought the M235i over the Golf R kudos to you, I'm envious of your great choice. I would love to have an M235i, but I can't justify the cost involved to switch cars. Unless there is somebody here that needs a four-door and wants to trade with me!

[nike001]

I've noticed what you pointed out about brakes. VW/Audi make pretty touchy brakes in comparison to BMW but it doesn't mean they're better because they're touchy. With VW/Audi cars they seem to have more bite earlier in the pedal - which I hate (Honda/Acura does it too). I guess it takes getting used to though.

BMW seems to have a little bit more brake travel for easier brake moderation.

[abp689]

Just get a dog and take it mountain biking. That'll justify the hatch part for you. Besides, I prefer the roof rack to the hitch for practicality.

Golf R is very interesting to me. Why did you decide R>GTI? Did you try them both out?

[den525]

I test drove both cars before deciding on buying the M235i. For me personally the M235i won hands down, apart from the price (in Australia after negotiating it's 25-30k more). I've owned a MK5 gti before and I loved it, for me I think VW have gone down hill, despite the numbers (power) improving.

Some of the dislikes I found with the Golf R is the average interior, that sat nav screen was not good enough, my sat nav on a mk5 golf was better. Those seats are average in my opinion, very flimsy, once again feels cheap compared with previous VW models.

The engine is great on the Golf R, but not as good as the I6 on the BMW. The M235i is so much more usable day to day, unless you live in places where it's always raining or snowy, the AWD system's "advantage" is non existent.

Anyways, I ended up with the M235i, but even if I wanted/needed the space of a hatch, I'd go with the M135i... Or A45 or S3. As I'd rather pay a little bit more for those little things than feel average in the Golf R.

What the Golf R suits are for those who don't care about the little things, those who buy base model cars (no offensive to anyone obviously as people like different things)

[azw131]

I was considering the Golf R but the manual version wasn't (and still isn't) available. Chris Harris reviewed the cars against one another, and said in measurable ways the Golf may be slightly better. As far as how it feels, however, he preferred the M235i. Personally the lack of a manual as of yet and the difference in sex appeal is what made the decision of taking the 2 very easy for me.

[bk_g80_m3]

Originally Posted by abp689

Just get a dog and take it mountain biking. That'll justify the hatch part for you. Besides, I prefer the roof rack to the hitch for practicality.

Golf R is very interesting to me. Why did you decide R>GTI? Did you try them both out?

Yeah I tried the '15 GTI. Just always felt like the front tires were spinning. It struggled to put the power down.

I had a MKV GTI for many years until the dsg started slipping. I guess that's why I immediately went with VW, I always liked the idea of the R.

Also the reasons about four doors as well for kid duty.

[bk_g80_m3]

Originally Posted by den525

...I'd go with the M135i...

I would have gone with the M135i too if BMW saw a business case for it in the USA.

[mike@x-ph.com]

Thank you for the comparison OP

[MrBucket]

Originally Posted by nike001

I've noticed what you pointed out about brakes. VW/Audi make pretty touchy brakes in comparison to BMW but it doesn't mean they're better because they're touchy. With VW/Audi cars they seem to have more bite earlier in the pedal - which I hate (Honda/Acura does it too). I guess it takes getting used to though.

BMW seems to have a little bit more brake travel for easier brake moderation.

The brakes on the M235i really aren't that great. I'm sure with new pads and fluid it would be a lot better though.

[ABPReader]

.

[uberspeed]

APR does great work, miss that from my VW days.

[mfourn20]

I've got a 228 M Sport and I throw my mtn bike, a 29er hard tail in the back no issue. I thought it'd be a pain because I've always used roof racks. Its a small inconvenience but it beats the added wind noise of a roof rack.

[Cal]

OP, great review of both cars! I have the M235i, but am also very intrigued by the Golf VII R! I even frequent vwvortex on occasion and really admire the passion the enthusiasts have for VWs in general. I often question whether the R would have been a better choice given the cheaper price of admission, plus the fact that it performs almost as good as the m235i. Oh yeah, I also like the aftermarket VWs have in general (APR,Eurodyne, etc) compared to our cars. Flash tunes seem to be more readily available, affordable, vs the piggyback tunes for our cars. Also, tunes on the Golf R really wake up that car. I'm amazed (and envious) at the power and performance levels of tuned Golf R's. Wish we had the same types of tunes (performance, cost, etc).

The manual transmission will be available for the Golf R in the 2016 model year (in a few months).

[moldcad]

OP, interesting write-up on the two cars; I'm also a happy owner of the Golf R mk7 DSG and BMW M235i RWD, 8AT, LSD. My observations differ from yours in some points, but one thing is sure: both are absolutely great cars. Plus - even if similar (mainly in size) - they are completely different machines to drive; I just love picking one or the other and always have all this power and sportiness available!

PS One thing stands out in comparison: the seats are much better in the R than in the 2 (generally speaking, all interior is better thought out and executed in the R, imho).

[ABPReader]

.

[BMW GENIUS]

A buddy of mine at work here at my dealership has a MKVII Golf R and we both went at it from a dig and I was surprised to see that I only had him by a little over half a car. That AWD and DSG make up huge ground against my RWD and 6MT.

[bizzyqu]

I've test drove both of these and I still don't know which one I want. Both excellent.

[bk_g80_m3]

Wow lots of love for the R. Thanks for the replies. It's a good car in all measurable aspects sure. But there is a general "sanitized" feel to it. It seems to me at least to have less soul right out of the box. I don't plan on modding the car so that's not a big consideration for me.

0-60 is great and all of that stuff for sure but it feels more like a really fast small luxury car rather than a sports car. I test drove the '15 sti as well. Outside of the cheap feel of the car it had more character and sporty feel as well. The M235i feels more classic, sporty and connected to the road. The driving experience pound for pound is more engaging.

I also have a JCW mini which is very slow compared to either the R or the M235i but it's way more fun to drive than the R. The M235i I felt subjectively held its own on the fun to drive front.

Like I said if someone wants to trade and exchange a little bit of money I'm down.

[nike001]

Originally Posted by MrBucket

The brakes on the M235i really aren't that great. I'm sure with new pads and fluid it would be a lot better though.

Says who/Compared to what? Sure it may not have the longevity since they're not vented and floating rotors but who cares? They're not the best brakes on a stock car but they have more than enough bite for anything 99% of us will throw at it.

MotorTrend stats:
M3/4 60-0 --------> 104
E92 M3 60-0------> 107
1M 60-0 ----------> 105
M235i 60-0 -------> 103

Not saying the 235 is better, just proving my case that it hangs with the M cars... stock for stock, 60-0.

[den525]

Originally Posted by jet_00

OP, if you're bored with the golf 7 R... go to APR and do a stage 2 build.. 3.6sec 0-60, 11.7sec for 1/4 mile... it should become fun as hell

It's insane what you can get out of a 4cyl turbo engine these days!!

Originally Posted by uberspeed

APR does great work, miss that from my VW days.

Yes, that's what I miss most about not owning a VW or a car with a large aftermarket scene.

I know it's not really the tuner's fault in the BMW scene, as BMW have high security in their ECU systems.

But I do miss the simplicity of a flash tune that you can get from APR or whoever.

No offense to JB4 owners or tuners or resellers, but I'd never put one of those JB4 systems in my car, it just doesn't feel safe or right.

Ps. before I get flamed, I know people will come on and say it's reliable and work wonders, that's not the point. It's more flash tune vs piggyback tuning.

[den525]

Originally Posted by nike001

Says who/Compared to what? Sure it may not have the longevity since they're not vented and floating rotors but who cares? They're not the best brakes on a stock car but they have more than enough bite for anything 99% of us will throw at it.

MotorTrend stats:
M3/4 60-0 --------> 104
E92 M3 60-0------> 107
1M 60-0 ----------> 105
M235i 60-0 -------> 103

Not saying the 235 is better, just proving my case that it hangs with the M cars... stock for stock, 60-0.

I do somewhat agree with your statement those brakes are more than enough for day-to-day use.

However, those stats doesn't reflect the M235i brakes being "good" as we have to take the kerb weight of the car into consideration, as M235i is the lightest out of the bunch.

M3/4 1560kg
E92 M3 1580kg
1M 1495kg
M235i 1470kg

[nike001]

Originally Posted by den525

However, those stats doesn't reflect the M235i brakes being "good" as we have to take the kerb weight of the car into consideration, as M235i is the lightest out of the bunch.

Also true, but I don't think the weight differences offset braking distance equally.