[cehlion]

I actually feel much better having read it. Reason being is that these are the 3 finalist cars that I chose from before I ordered my 228i and then changed it to a ED M235i. I drove all 3 exactly as they are spec'd in the article save that the 228i had sports seats (which if you ever driven a non-sport seat car you know how big a deal that is). Also it should be noted the BMW had the best track lap of the 3 as well as being named the most refined, best commuting car, and had the best interior (their words not mine).

As far as driving dynamics go...I had a TOTALLY different take than the authors after driving these 3 cars. I won't go into detail, but your feel free to read my write up in this thread (it's near the bottom).

http://www.2addicts.com/forums/showt...php?p=17399459

[BarryJI]

Excellent, well-informed review, I really enjoyed the read (especially after having test driven the Mustang EdoBoost myself). What did you decide to get?

It's funny, really, people have hailed the new Twos as a return to the stripped-down feistiness of BMW's "classic" small coupes, yet the commitment to luxury and refinement is very much present. There are bound to be tradeoffs.

[cehlion]

Originally Posted by BarryJI

Excellent, well-informed review, I really enjoyed the read (especially after having test driven the Mustang EdoBoost myself). What did you decide to get?

It's funny, really, people have hailed the new Twos as a return to the stripped-down feistiness of BMW's "classic" small coupes, yet the commitment to luxury and refinement is very much present. There are bound to be tradeoffs.

When everyone agrees I suppose that something, but when faced with openly differing reviews, you can't beat a little seat time of your own to make up your mind.

As far as my final order, it was process unfortunately longer than it had to be...

I had a 228i on US order with Msport and Track/Hand. Pkg. with a local dealer at a good price. In an unfortunate common car sales form of douchebaggery, my order was being leapfrogged by folks paying more than I ...This went on for a few months. While this unfolded, I surmised that since M Sport and TH pkg are both standard on the M235i I ought to try same deal (since the price difference less these 2 pkgs was only a few thousand more, but I was told the M235i was a higher demand car and the same deal could not be had.

This all changed when I went ED since ED cars don't come out of allocation. When I made the change I also (using this fine forum) found an ED specialist about 75 miles away that was shockingly totally honest and upfront. I pick up my ED M235i in 8 days in Munich and couldn't be happier with John Wolff from Weatherford BMW. I had a production # a few days after I placed my order. M235i specs: EB, MT, Moon Del, HK sound, Tech pkg. Alum Hex with high gloss black highlight.

[MaximumG]

I read the same article as the OP. They stated in the article that it DID have the track package with Michelin PSS. This is the first thing I thought after I read the article:

A while back, one of the magazines (maybe C&D) did a comparison between 328i and 335i, forgot what suspension it had. The point is that during the comparison, they said that the suspension between both cars is the same, but the extra weight of the larger engine made the car sit tighter and better in corners (or maybe it was the lighter car).

It'll be the same as tuning a suspension on your motorcycle. The static sag of both front and back is extremely important to determine the proper compression of the bike. If I were to gain an extra 20 lbs, the bike would sag lower and the springs would be stiffer.

If the suspension between both M235i and 228i is identical and the suspension is tuned to have a 165 lb German driver in a M235i with a half-full tank, the same springs would essentially be too light for a smaller person driving a 228i.

There's no doubt that the 228i is the more agile sibling compared to the M235i, but if the springs are tuned for the M235i, could it be possible the ones in the 228i are too soft?

BTW, I'm just offering speculations and theories. 228i owners: please don't be offended by what I'm postulating. Most likely I'm wrong.

[jeremicium]

I just got the issue in the mail. It was a pretty scathing article. I was unimpressed with the manual transmission 228 that I drove. I have yet to drive a manual 235, but the 228 felt like a dog compared to the 235s with the ZF transmission, not just in terms of power, but overall feel of the car. I know it's the same platform, but I walked away from the 228 thinking you had to have it with the 8 speed, because paired with the manual it just felt wrong. Weird, because I am not a fan of autos. I have to wonder if maybe the 2 series platform needs that extra power, and the slightly different weight balance to really come alive? How else to account for the review?

That said. I've driven a few FR-S/BRZs and i wasn't as impressed as i expected to be. I did a half day drifting class with the FR-S, and while it is a hell of a lot of car for the money, I didn't feel like it lived up to all the praise.

[BarryJI]

Originally Posted by jeremicium

I know it's the same platform, but I walked away from the 228 thinking you had to have it with the 8 speed, because paired with the manual it just felt wrong. Weird, because I am not a fan of autos.

Interesting. I think the 8-speed box suits the 228i better, too, it makes all that torque readily available in almost all situations. That's important with a hard-working 4-cylinder engine, less so with the V6 in the M235i. If the 8AT were not so good, I would not have considered this combo but it makes the 228i a very fast, sharp-handling car, especially with the THP. I know many people are MT diehards -- me too, this is my first AT in 17 years -- but I'm not talking about personal preference here but rather which transmission gets the best out of this car, having test-driven both.

[Cyberdemon]

It seems like for all the "Scathing" they give it they also mention it's the most comfortable, has the best cabin and ride quality and is the fastest. They seem to be basing the quality of the car based on how it kicks it's ass out. From those people on here who are tracking their 228i's I also have a hard time buying some of the commentary without a grain of salt.

I am also suspect that they describe the 228i's balance as "Severe understeer" - and the FR-S as "Mild understeer" something seems wrong with that in my mind when you can get the FR-S to kick the back out at 20mph due to the Prius tires that offer no grip.

Part of me wonders if the high grip limit of the Michelins combined with the low body holding limit of the non-sports seats (which are horrendous and should just be discontinued) meant that they were sliding out of the seat before they ever hit the limits of the tires.

I have a hard time understanding their logic of the "Chassis" not doing it's job when the chassis is no different from the M235i, it's just burdened with less weight. And I have yet to read a review of the M235i that has anything but praise for the handling given the number of awards the car has gotten.

But *shrug* it is what it is - can't please everybody and the boy racer crowd should encourage people to buy the FR-S/BRZ anyways since it's a great little car and more car manufacturers need to be making lightweight RWD sports cars again.

[PrematureApex]

Originally Posted by Cyberdemon

I am also suspect that they describe the 228i's balance as "Severe understeer" - and the FR-S as "Mild understeer" something seems wrong with that in my mind when you can get the FR-S to kick the back out at 20mph due to the Prius tires that offer no grip.

Do you not know what understeer is? It has nothing to do with ultimate grip levels, it has to do with chassis balance, aka which end breaks away first.

If a chassis understeers, generally speaking it will understeer with R comps on it, or the crappiest tires you can find. Likewise, if it's neutral, it will be neutral regardless of the tire choice.

The FRS is widely known as having a lively rear end. It doesn't have a lot of understeer. The 2, and just about all other BMWs, come from the factory with a healthy bit of understeer built into them.

There is no way you could say with a straight face that the 2 doesn't have more understeer than the FRS. There's VERY few street cars sold today with such propensity to rotate than the FRS (even moreso than the BRZ, actually).

[Cyberdemon]

Originally Posted by PrematureApex

Do you not know what understeer is? It has nothing to do with ultimate grip levels, it has to do with chassis balance, aka which end breaks away first.

If a chassis understeers, generally speaking it will understeer with R comps on it, or the crappiest tires you can find. Likewise, if it's neutral, it will be neutral regardless of the tire choice.

The FRS is widely known as having a lively rear end. It doesn't have a lot of understeer. The 2, and just about all other BMWs, come from the factory with a healthy bit of understeer built into them.

There is no way you could say with a straight face that the 2 doesn't have more understeer than the FRS. There's VERY few street cars sold today with such propensity to rotate than the FRS (even moreso than the BRZ, actually).

No what is understeer. Is that the bottom of a cow?

I didn't say that the 2 wouldn't tend understeer MORE than an FR-S. And I agree it does tend to understeer, especially with the staggered tire setup. Tire setup will effect which end breaks away - the square tire setup reduces understeer because you are shifting the grip regardless of chassis balance. The same thing goes for the higher biased rear PSI that people always wonder why BMW's run.

My point is - if the criteria is on a sliding scale - I would have a hard time characterizing the chassis on the 2 as [b]severe[b] understeer.

A Toyota Camry I would classify as "severe understeer". A 2 series I would consider as being biased towards slight understeer - like almost every RWD car these days to prevent people from crashing them instantly the first time someone hits the limit.

That's why when they characterize the FR-S as having "mild understeer" I find it hard to buy. If you put that car into a corner at speed it wants to rotate on a dime, I find it hard to believe you could get that car to understeer into a corner under almost any situation unless you were trying to force it to understeer by plowing into a corner.

[PrematureApex]

Originally Posted by Cyberdemon

That's why when they characterize the FR-S as having "mild understeer" I find it hard to buy. If you put that car into a corner at speed it wants to rotate on a dime, I find it hard to believe you could get that car to understeer into a corner under almost any situation unless you were trying to force it to understeer by plowing into a corner.

The FRS understeers very slightly in steady-state cornering (e.g. circling a skidpad), but is very, very easy to get rotating. Normally a slight throttle lift/application, etc. is all it takes. Depending

On the other hand, it is pretty darn hard without purposefully upsetting the car or whacking the loud pedal, to get an F22 out of its just-about-terminal push.

In any case, mild, severe, etc. I'm sure are used as relative terms within a given comparison.

[BarryJI]

A looser car is more fun and it's nice to feel you can get a little sideways in a corner, but understeer is faster (all other things being equal) which explains why the pushy 228i gets the fastest lap times in this review. There is a very fast, sweeping (it would be fifth gear in an MT, so it's fast) freeway transition near me that allows me to really commit, taking the racing line (strictly when conditions permit) and, yes, I've never felt the slightest inclination in this car to rotate. It feels like if I get too fast in the corner the car will push; that is why understeer is safer, if less glamorous; it makes you have to lift off the throttle. You can still make a car go fast with it, as Fernando Alonso can testify.

[Pyewacket69]

Sometimes it's more about driver comfort that the car's maximum abilities.

I got into a M235 manual coming from a 2007 Z4 coupe, because entry and exit of the coupe always aggravated my already wrecked my lower back.

It was a thrill once you were seated, but payback the next day was hell.

While there's no question some buy a car for maximum performance, it's just not always the case. I get the same joy out of the 235 now, with none of the pain.

[3.0L]

I just read the BMW 228i vs. Mustang vs. Scion FR-S comparison in my June issue of R & T. While the 228i's numbers compare well with the other two cars, I question R & T's statement that the 228i suffers from "severe understeer." How can a 50/50% weight distribution car have severe understeer?

[jeremicium]

Originally Posted by PrematureApex

Do you not know what understeer is? It has nothing to do with ultimate grip levels, it has to do with chassis balance, aka which end breaks away first.

If a chassis understeers, generally speaking it will understeer with R comps on it, or the crappiest tires you can find. Likewise, if it's neutral, it will be neutral regardless of the tire choice.

The FRS is widely known as having a lively rear end. It doesn't have a lot of understeer. The 2, and just about all other BMWs, come from the factory with a healthy bit of understeer built into them.

There is no way you could say with a straight face that the 2 doesn't have more understeer than the FRS. There's VERY few street cars sold today with such propensity to rotate than the FRS (even moreso than the BRZ, actually).

You can't lecture on the definition of understeer when your user name implies that you miss the apex frequently.

[PrematureApex]

Originally Posted by 3.0L

I just read the BMW 228i vs. Mustang vs. Scion FR-S comparison in my June issue of R & T. While the 228i's numbers compare well with the other two cars, I question R & T's statement that the 228i suffers from "severe understeer." How can a 50/50% weight distribution car have severe understeer?

Very easily. The stock staggered tires for one. Then spring rates, shock/strut tuning, etc. It's much more than weight distribution.

Now in their defense, BMW (as well as most other makes) dial in some understeer for safety reasons.

But it takes about 1 corner on a roadcourse, or an autox, to realize the the 2 suffers from significant push in steady-state cornering. Not as bad as a stock 135, which is pretty relentless.

My E46 M3...also a health push in stock form.

What was the last BMW that came from the factory with a lively rear end, or at least something respectable neutral? E36 M? The Z3M was pretty hooligan I guess.

[PrematureApex]

Originally Posted by jeremicium

You can't lecture on the definition of understeer when your user name implies that you miss the apex frequently.

I push wide...I know all about it!

[caycep]

What do they mean by "pogo"ing around? is it how the suspension responds with or without bouncing from when the wheels gain and lose traction?

Would be interesting to see if any of the GSR folks who have been tracking this thing weigh in.

[PrematureApex]

Originally Posted by caycep

What do they mean by "pogo"ing around? is it how the suspension responds with or without bouncing from when the wheels gain and lose traction?

Would be interesting to see if any of the GSR folks who have been tracking this thing weigh in.

It's a combination of things, but that description absolutely hits home, and I've used the same term before.

There's so much windup in super-soft the rear subframe bushings and the front control arm bushings, that when you load them up, they tend to create a rubber-band-like affected.

Combine that with weak shocks, and you have a car that jumps and hops around a LOT under high cornering loads, especially when encountering mid-corner bumps. Sometimes it feels like the car would jump half a lane over hitting a midcorner bump near the limit to traction.

Not hard things to correct mind you, but it creates an, ummm, entertaining if sloppy, experience when driving the car. Very disconnected.

IMHO, BMW had to resort to the pathetic bushings and dampening in order to get a reasonable-enough ride with the god forsaken runflats. Pull the runflats off, however, and you're left with an even worse situation. As you now have a chassis tuned (aka softened) for the runflats, and you've just introduced yet another source of compliance.

Again, all this stuff is much more apparently only when approaching or exceeding the limits of traction.

As a DD, or just generally driven at reasonable speeds, it's a very nice place to be.

But if you're going to drive it hard, just about everything from the E90 up needs much stiffer rear subframe bushings, front control arm bushings, and a set of Bilstein HDs or Koni yellows...if nothing else.

[overcoil]

Originally Posted by caycep

What do they mean by "pogo"ing around? is it how the suspension responds with or without bouncing from when the wheels gain and lose traction?

Would be interesting to see if any of the GSR folks who have been tracking this thing weigh in.

Without reading the article, yeah you hit a dip or crest a hill at speed and the suspension has a series of compression and rebounds. But it gets complicated: if your on smooth road fine, but if your traveling over potholes and expansion joints and typically crappy roads of urban America what some people complain about on the track or at the limit is what allows for less driver fatigue in urban or poor road conditions. And probably the biggest factor on the 228 set-up is that the engineers wanted good wet cornering speeds on typical U.S. multi-lane through-ways, the kind you find coming out of major cosmopolitan areas.

[NYHoustonman]

Originally Posted by Cyberdemon

It seems like for all the "Scathing" they give it they also mention it's the most comfortable, has the best cabin and ride quality and is the fastest. They seem to be basing the quality of the car based on how it kicks it's ass out. From those people on here who are tracking their 228i's I also have a hard time buying some of the commentary without a grain of salt.

I am also suspect that they describe the 228i's balance as "Severe understeer" - and the FR-S as "Mild understeer" something seems wrong with that in my mind when you can get the FR-S to kick the back out at 20mph due to the Prius tires that offer no grip.

Part of me wonders if the high grip limit of the Michelins combined with the low body holding limit of the non-sports seats (which are horrendous and should just be discontinued) meant that they were sliding out of the seat before they ever hit the limits of the tires.

I have a hard time understanding their logic of the "Chassis" not doing it's job when the chassis is no different from the M235i, it's just burdened with less weight. And I have yet to read a review of the M235i that has anything but praise for the handling given the number of awards the car has gotten.

But *shrug* it is what it is - can't please everybody and the boy racer crowd should encourage people to buy the FR-S/BRZ anyways since it's a great little car and more car manufacturers need to be making lightweight RWD sports cars again.

I skimmed this article yesterday and came here hoping to find exactly this discussion.

I found myself wondering if the 228i would be better served by 225-width tires all around. The 225-245 setup works on the M235i, just as the 225-255 setup works on the E46 M3, because those cars have more than enough power to break the rear end free on demand. The 228i doesn't, and when you don't have that power, the only thing you're going to get is the same understeer you get in the other two cars. It's not that the M235i has a 'neutral' chassis by comparison, it's just that the 228i in this spec is over-tired and as a result perhaps not as engaging. Which calls the claim of 'severe understeer' into question, for me.

This review reminds me of a great column by Jack ('I hate the M235i xDrive') Baruth:
http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/201...of-understeer/

As others have said, I'd like to believe the authors in this case know what they're talking about, as I've always liked Road & Track, but in general complaints of understeer are made by drivers who don't understand the limits of a particular car.

[caycep]

Originally Posted by PrematureApex

It's a combination of things, but that description absolutely hits home, and I've used the same term before.

There's so much windup in super-soft the rear subframe bushings and the front control arm bushings, that when you load them up, they tend to create a rubber-band-like affected.

Combine that with weak shocks, and you have a car that jumps and hops around a LOT under high cornering loads, especially when encountering mid-corner bumps. Sometimes it feels like the car would jump half a lane over hitting a midcorner bump near the limit to traction.

Not hard things to correct mind you, but it creates an, ummm, entertaining if sloppy, experience when driving the car. Very disconnected.

IMHO, BMW had to resort to the pathetic bushings and dampening in order to get a reasonable-enough ride with the god forsaken runflats. Pull the runflats off, however, and you're left with an even worse situation. As you now have a chassis tuned (aka softened) for the runflats, and you've just introduced yet another source of compliance.

Again, all this stuff is much more apparently only when approaching or exceeding the limits of traction.

As a DD, or just generally driven at reasonable speeds, it's a very nice place to be.

But if you're going to drive it hard, just about everything from the E90 up needs much stiffer rear subframe bushings, front control arm bushings, and a set of Bilstein HDs or Koni yellows...if nothing else.

Yeesh, when I drove the e90 (very very briefly on daily driver circumstances) it felt rock hard on the suspension compared with the e46!

[PrematureApex]

Originally Posted by caycep

Yeesh, when I drove the e90 (very very briefly on daily driver circumstances) it felt rock hard on the suspension compared with the e46!

Well, much of that comes down to the specific model/package, but in general, that's not far off. The E46 was teh days of BMW's awesome shock tuning allowing them to run soft spring rates and retain a decent ride.

The E90 was probably on horrid runflats, no doubt it felt rock hard.

But more generally, we're not really talking about how stiff the suspension is overall.

My 135 has all the junk bushings removed and runs a set of Bilsteins. it not only doesn't experience the same "pogoing" it did when stock, but it also rides MUCH better. No more crashing over bumps, constantly smacking into the bump stops, etc. Wife loves the increased ride comfort, and it no longer feels like so unplanted when being leaned on.

Same with our M3. You can fix the E90's issues, AND wind up with a car that rides much better.