[speeddeacon]

Originally Posted by dlk001

Depends on the track, difference between M235i and M2 on track can be huge. See EVO M235i vs M2

M235i = 1:38.9
M2 = 1:35.6

Link please.

[speeddeacon]

Originally Posted by F87queen

Last year I was getting an M235 but instead got a 228i. And now M2 is on the way so I'm happy! I love my 228i even more with this article. I have autocrossed with it so much fun!

Congrats!

[DrShimmy]

The 2 series as a whole is nice, The M2 is alright but I wouldn't trade my 1M for it at all. Twitchy , unrefined and looks like a cartoon as the article mentioned are qualities I adore about my Miranda.

[Kolyan2k]

Originally Posted by dlk001

Depends on the track, difference between M235i and M2 on track can be huge. See EVO M235i vs M2

M235i = 1:38.9
M2 = 1:35.6

They tested DCT M2 vs 6-speed m235i i believe. DCT is track oriented tranny.

Slap LSD and maybe wider rear tires and you should be all set on 235i.

[eclipes]

228i all the way baby

[max_330i]

Personally, I was drooling over the M2 when I first saw it, but was surprised to see the M235i putting up the same numbers in the track test. Honestly, if I were to go out and buy a 2er today, it'd probably be the 228i. Closest in spirit to my 330i

[bryan_G01]

this review is completely biased and I disagree with many things he has to say.

Bottom line is look at the lap times of m2 vs m235. Now add a tune, good tires, brakes to the m235. You have a better car than the m2.

[Kolyan2k]

PS. Back in BMW days, it was straight 6 or nothing, and preferably NA, and 6-speed. A turbo 4 BMW was an enthusiast nightmare. That was pretty much an argument on 328/330 vs 335 since 2006.....it probably still going strong over at e90/92 forum

[pit1]

I think a lot of people are missing their key argument. It's about engagement and fun factor.

Many comments are stuck justifying the M235 to the M2, stating their close performance numbers. I do agree the reviewers were a bit harsh on the 235, but that's the point of journalism.

I've spent a good amount of seat time in the M235 including some BMW driving events. I preferred it over the M3/M4 driving in the same event. It felt lighter, more nimble and more engaging. That said, I always felt there was something missing every time I test drove one. In comparison to my past 135i, it felt numb. The numbers were there, the tossability was there, but the BMW feel was missing.

Confession: I'm an M2 owner, so may be biased, but the M2 provides more than marginal perf gains on the M235. The suspension, steering, sound, and drivetrain tuning provide a level of feedback I haven't felt in a BMW since the E36 M3. Still disconnected in comparison to my old E30, but one of the best in the lineup in a long time.

On the 228, I have to agree with this article. I had a 228 a few weeks back as a loaner. Much of it comes down to "usable power". The same twisty B-roads were more exciting in the 228 than they were the M2. In the M2, you run out of room, stuck running a single gear...in the 228 you could enjoy the act of driving a bit more.

Similar argument, my dad had a M6 and now AMG GT-S, both some of the best driving cars on the planet...but off the track, you just can't experience them.

-It's more fun to drive a slow car fast than a fast car slow. -

[Kolyan2k]

^ it's about the engine too though. There is a reason why people buy V8 and I understand that reason 110%

[winterrogue_F87]

Originally Posted by pit1

I think a lot of people are missing their key argument. It's about engagement and fun factor.

Many comments are stuck justifying the M235 to the M2, stating their close performance numbers. I do agree the reviewers were a bit harsh on the 235, but that's the point of journalism.

I've spent a good amount of seat time in the M235 including some BMW driving events. I preferred it over the M3/M4 driving in the same event. It felt lighter, more nimble and more engaging. That said, I always felt there was something missing every time I test drove one. In comparison to my past 135i, it felt numb. The numbers were there, the tossability was there, but the BMW feel was missing.

Confession: I'm an M2 owner, so may be biased, but the M2 provides more than marginal perf gains on the M235. The suspension, steering, sound, and drivetrain tuning provide a level of feedback I haven't felt in a BMW since the E36 M3. Still disconnected in comparison to my old E30, but one of the best in the lineup in a long time.

On the 228, I have to agree with this article. I had a 228 a few weeks back as a loaner. Much of it comes down to "usable power". The same twisty B-roads were more exciting in the 228 than they were the M2. In the M2, you run out of room, stuck running a single gear...in the 228 you could enjoy the act of driving a bit more.

Similar argument, my dad had a M6 and now AMG GT-S, both some of the best driving cars on the planet...but off the track, you just can't experience them.

-It's more fun to drive a slow car fast than a fast car slow. -

I approve this message

[DarkstarZero]

This seems to match up with my 228 ZTR impressions:

http://www.2addicts.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1189021

[speeddeacon]

Originally Posted by pit1

I think a lot of people are missing their key argument. It's about engagement and fun factor.

Similar argument, my dad had a M6 and now AMG GT-S, both some of the best driving cars on the planet...but off the track, you just can't experience them.

-It's more fun to drive a slow car fast than a fast car slow. -

Since speed on the street is relatively slow and is equal across the models, the more pertinent question then becomes is it more fun to drive a slow car slowly or a fast car slowly?

[Bbb34]

Haven't tried the other two, but 228 loaner I had for 4 days was just great fun to drive. I was very pleasantly surprised by the engine and balance of the car, and never felt I needed "more" for normal daily driving on public roads.

[Sportstick]

Originally Posted by Kolyan2k

PS. Back in BMW days, it was straight 6 or nothing, and preferably NA, and 6-speed. A turbo 4 BMW was an enthusiast nightmare. That was pretty much an argument on 328/330 vs 335 since 2006.....it probably still going strong over at e90/92 forum

Further back in the BMW day, it was NA 4-cylinder and the question was carburetor or fuel injection (moment of respect for the tii) and where to find a 4 speed manual in stock!

[moke]

Originally Posted by cmiller219

I drove the M2 yesterday. It pulls a tad harder and exhaust was louder but it had M perf. Interior exactly the same as the M235. I would say to go from a M235 to a M2 would be a waste of time and money unless you really need to tell someone you have a true M car. Not worth the switch to me. Only was up from M235 to me would be M3 or M4 anything else is either a step backwards or in the same direction.

Same conclusion for me. I've had two 235s and one 228.
I drove the m2 and immediately felt I needed to go m3 or m4 next.
Wasn't a big enough jump for me.

[qnet]

Originally Posted by Sportstick

Further back in the BMW day, it was NA 4-cylinder and the question was carburetor or fuel injection (moment of respect for the tii) and where to find a 4 speed manual in stock!

I'm getting old. I remember those days. When I was a teen and getting into cars, BMW's to me weren't considered performance cars because they had small engines, compared to Mustangs and Camaros. Having said that, I didn't know that much about BMW's back then, they just seemed like nice cars for wealthy people.

[Bosozoku]

Originally Posted by cmiller219

I would say to go from a M235 to a M2 would be a waste of time and money unless you really need to tell someone you have a true M car. Not worth the switch to me.

The M2 and M235i are almost exactly the same price, fully equipped.
Many costly M235i options are standard in the M2.

[Bosozoku]

Originally Posted by speeddeacon

Since speed on the street is relatively slow and is equal across the models, the more pertinent question then becomes is it more fun to drive a slow car slowly or a fast car slowly?

Fast car slowly.

Of course, if you plan to track your car, the M2 is the obvious choice over any other 2-Series.
And for many, a better choice than the M3/4.

[SmittyM3]

Honestly I would have liked them to toss in an E46 M3 and see how that compared. After having owned multiple M3's I still go back to that car... That's the car that gets the best spot in my garage.

[DarkstarZero]

Originally Posted by speeddeacon

Since speed on the street is relatively slow and is equal across the models, the more pertinent question then becomes is it more fun to drive a slow car slowly or a fast car slowly?

Building a fast car that can go fast is an impressive feat. Building a fast car that can drive in a composed manner when going slowly, equally impressive. But a fast car that's fun to drive slow... that's a win. - Matt Farah

[fancyfl1ght]

The most powerfully letter in the alphabet, is now just a tune, fancy brakes, exhaust, and some body and suspension bits. Oh, I forgot the LSD.

All stuff you can do yourself.

But if your a typical consumer, don't really care about cars, typically lease for a few years, have a fit when the car gets scratched, and go on to another Nissan GTR as another diversion because real life is oh so boring. . .this M car is for you.

I felt the same way with 1 series M coupe. Turbocharging has eliminated any advantage M cars used to have.

I think its safe to say, experienced BMW owners (people who buy instead of lease), who know the brand, and enjoy working on their cars, will naturally gravitate to the 228i. Easiest car I have had the pleasure of working with.