[amw896]

Originally Posted by wtfbrah

2016 M235i M Performance edition with every option imaginable, or, 2017 M240i with just Cold Weather, HK, and driver assistance, for the same price, which would you choose?

I'm leaning towards the '16 but the extra torque of the 17 would surely be noticeable, right?

does every option include the m performance LSD? if yes, case closed, go with the 2016.

[raleedy]

If you are leasing, check the lease terms. Last I heard, they were a lot less favorable for the 2017 than for the 2016. This is counter-intuitive, to me, but there it is. If it were me, the higher option level and the extra year of maintenance, along with the brake pad and disc coverage for maintenance would definitely tip the scales toward the 2016.

[morphomeman]

I had not understood until just now that this whole discussion was hypothetical, which makes the answer simple.
Look around for a '16 in a few months when you are ready to close the deal. If you find a '16 then that suits your needs and if the price is right, then start weighing your options and see if you can get a good deal on the '16 as last year's model.
You should know up front if you want to buy or lease, since that will make a major difference in your costs.
Also, if you don't want the '16, you will be looking at two months of wait time (unless you are willing to buy a current model year car off the lot, which I never am).
So come back later and start a new thread.
IMHO, the mechanical differences between the model years are irrelevant. There will always be mechanical differences.
Good luck!

[wtfbrah]

Originally Posted by raleedy

If you are leasing, check the lease terms. Last I heard, they were a lot less favorable for the 2017 than for the 2016. This is counter-intuitive, to me, but there it is. If it were me, the higher option level and the extra year of maintenance, along with the brake pad and disc coverage for maintenance would definitely tip the scales toward the 2016.

The lease terms definitely suck for 2017 models, but I don't know if that's a permanent change. The 2016 residual is like 61% whereas the new 17s are going for 55% residual.

Originally Posted by amw896

does every option include the m performance LSD? if yes, case closed, go with the 2016.

Nope, it doesn't. So I guess, not every option.

[Cyberdemon]

Originally Posted by wtfbrah

The lease terms definitely suck for 2017 models, but I don't know if that's a permanent change. The 2016 residual is like 61% whereas the new 17s are going for 55% residual.

It's not permanent, this is standard operating procedure when the new model year comes out. The dealer needs an incentive to liquidate the now obsolete 2016 models. By providing a higher residual they are incentivizing you to buy those cars so they get off the lot. Usually this also includes cash incentives as well on 2016 models.

You are always going to better buying the "oldest" car the dealer has - they want them off the lot.

If you ever look around and see dealers that have 2014 or 2015 cars left over they usually carry huge cash discounts, but obviously can't be leased anymore.

[Tony88]

Originally Posted by wtfbrah

Well, only question is if I can still find a '16 on the lot in 2 -3 months or so. That's the biggest reason I want to build a 2017 - I don't want the car for another 2-3 months. I'm going out of the country.

If it were me and I was going to be waiting a few more months anyway, I would just go for the 2017. Or I would most likely just keep saving and wait for the 2018 LCI

[wtfbrah]

Originally Posted by Tony88

If it were me and I was going to be waiting a few more months anyway, I would just go for the 2017. Or I would most likely just keep saving and wait for the 2018 LCI

Yeah I decided to say fuck it and go for the 2017 and I actually will save up a little more cash over the next month or two to use as a down payment so I can own my M240i instead of leasing. With a 720 I assume I can be approved for BMW select.

[Dylan86]

OP, where are you located? The "M Performance Edition" was a limited run in 2015 only, on 50 units only brought to Canada. All I'm saying is that if your dealership is trying to sell a '16 MPE, it's not a legit model and they probably just added the parts themselves to recreate the MPE model, which is fine because it's essentially the same shit.. Just port installed vice factory installed.

For that, I'd say get the '17 in your case.

[midwest 340xi 6sp]

Originally Posted by wtfbrah

Yeah I decided to say fuck it and go for the 2017 and I actually will save up a little more cash over the next month or two to use as a down payment so I can own my M240i instead of leasing. With a 720 I assume I can be approved for BMW select.

Oh man, dont give them a dime down on a lease!!

[wtfbrah]

Originally Posted by Midwest M235i

Oh man, dont give them a dime down on a lease!!

I don't want to, but for a 50k car with a 55% residual, you're looking at $625/mo before any money factor or taxes, so probably $700/mo+ with both of those things included.

[SchmullisBob]

Originally Posted by wtfbrah

2016 M235i M Performance edition with every option imaginable, or, 2017 M240i with just Cold Weather, HK, and driver assistance, for the same price, which would you choose?

I'm leaning towards the '16 but the extra torque of the 17 would surely be noticeable, right?

Go for the 2016. The engine performance difference is minimal. Plus the N55 has been around long enough that the bugs have been worked out.

[wtfbrah]

Originally Posted by SchmullisBob

Go for the 2016. The engine performance difference is minimal. Plus the N55 has been around long enough that the bugs have been worked out.

I'm pretty set on the 2017. That way I'll get the car built exactly how I want it - and that way I can also wait a couple months. It's not that I couldn't buy the car now, but I want to save for a few more months and use that extra built up savings to put a bigger down payment on the car.

The B58 has been out for a year or so in the 2016 340i and I've only seen one or two recalls, for manuals.

[Rayscott]

Go for the 235. I just got a 16 228ix Estoril/oyster vert loaded and love it. All I need, the warranty is better and I got a good deal. .2 better to 60 big deal.

[wtfbrah]

Originally Posted by Rayscott

Go for the 235. I just got a 16 228ix Estoril/oyster vert loaded and love it. All I need, the warranty is better and I got a good deal. .2 better to 60 big deal.

I'll for sure shop both, and if the deal on the 2016 is really that much better, I'll go for it. But I would probably want to tune the 2016 engine and get a new intercooler to match 2017 performance anyways so that price discount might be moot.

[BimmerLOVER1234]

Totally go for the B58 man, alot of users have reported it to have less turbo lag than the n55, and also mentioned that that it pulls all the way to the 7k redline, a weakness of the n55. Its already been around for a year as well. Thats not to mention its much more tune friendly than the n55. Many a 340i driver has already stated how impressed they where going from the n55 to the b58 in terms of feel and sound.

1 year into the B58 and a ton of good reviews regarding the benefits of the new engine, i can't imagine picking the n55 over the b58 unless there are some serious clearance deals.

This is also not yet considering the updated zf transmission on the m240i.

Take a look at this video, and see if you still think the engine performance difference, even at stock, is minimal. Its not.

http://www.babybmw.net/viewtopic.php?f=74&t=89245

[ORIGIN M.]

Originally Posted by wtfbrah

2016 M235i M Performance edition with every option imaginable, or, 2017 M240i with just Cold Weather, HK, and driver assistance, for the same price, which would you choose?

I'm leaning towards the '16 but the extra torque of the 17 would surely be noticeable, right?

M240i

G'nite.

[nachob]

Originally Posted by wtfbrah

2016 M235i M Performance edition with every option imaginable, or, 2017 M240i with just Cold Weather, HK, and driver assistance, for the same price, which would you choose?

I'm leaning towards the '16 but the extra torque of the 17 would surely be noticeable, right?

Every option is ruining the car IMHO and adding more weight and goes against what M235 supposedly selling. So I would say go with low option 240 so it's not ruined.

[crbalch]

Originally Posted by nachob

Every option is ruining the car IMHO and adding more weight and goes against what M235 supposedly selling. So I would say go with low option 240 so it's not ruined.

Adding more weight? What kind of silly thing is that to say...

If anything, the M Performance parts reduce weight (carbon). I am racking my brain trying to figure out how adding an inch to the screen for Nav is in turn adding weight. Or are the parking sensors adding this weight you speak of?

[Fugly M3]

Originally Posted by nachob

Every option is ruining the car IMHO and adding more weight and goes against what M235 supposedly selling. So I would say go with low option 240 so it's not ruined.

I'd love to know what a fully optioned moonroof 235/240 weighs...has to be more than the number listed by BMW

[nachob]

Originally Posted by crbalch

Adding more weight? What kind of silly thing is that to say...

If anything, the M Performance parts reduce weight (carbon). I am racking my brain trying to figure out how adding an inch to the screen for Nav is in turn adding weight. Or are the parking sensors adding this weight you speak of?

If outside USA you can get lower weight manual seats no sunroof etc. in USA. Screwed you only get power seats but can still save sunroof weight. All the other stuff adds up too on an already heavy car. So if in us only real weight saving is sunroof.

[wtfbrah]

Originally Posted by nachob

If outside USA you can get lower weight manual seats no sunroof etc. in USA. Screwed you only get power seats but can still save sunroof weight. All the other stuff adds up too on an already heavy car. So if in us only real weight saving is sunroof.

What "other stuff"?

The parking sensors / extra one inch on the nav screen? If I'm not tracking my car and racing in serious competition for prize money, I'd rather have the added convenience of not scraping my front bumper, and being able to navigate more easily, instead of saving the 5lbs at MOST from not having those options - and if I was seriously competing, I probably would want an M2.

[JRMorgan]

If leasing obviously the '16. If buying definitely the '17 for better resale/trade in.


Of the list of options I will never need: driver's assistance. The car should keep you awake and alert and hopefully entertain you enough that you put away your phone and distractions.

The navi is useless IMHO. But it might affect resale so if it's cheap I'd rather have it. It does come in handy in a pinch. I never touch my phone if I'm moving so for quick gas station or food the navi is the way to go.