[aerobod]

Originally Posted by insanedc

It certainly doesn't feel 60/40 regardless of what the spec sheet says. The understeer in this car is significantly worse than Audi which is known (infamous) for understeer. My point here is that they must be disabled to have any fun in the car. Otherwise, it's an understeering mess.

Bottom line, the car just isn't well sorted. Maybe the 435/440 is better. I don't know. The A5 certainly is, without question.

The stock tyre pressures on the BMW are far too understeer biased. Running decent summer tyres with the same pressure on all 4 corners helps a lot. In terms of speed around a track, from the people who run S5s and M240i xDrives at our local track, the stock M240i is faster, close to the RS5 and significantly faster than an A5.

The interesting thing is that our bone stock RWD M240i is just as fast as a cammed (~450bhp) Corvette C5 Z06 around the same track, as my son found when he drove both.

[KennyFSU]

I've only taken my N55 xdrive to the drag strip and was able to cut a 1.8" 60' bone stock on RFT using LC lol

[insanedc]

Originally Posted by aerobod

The stock tyre pressures on the BMW are far too understeer biased. Running decent summer tyres with the same pressure on all 4 corners helps a lot. In terms of speed around a track, from the people who run S5s and M240i xDrives at our local track, the stock M240i is faster, close to the RS5 and significantly faster than an A5.

The interesting thing is that our bone stock RWD M240i is just as fast as a cammed (~450bhp) Corvette C5 Z06 around the same track, as my son found when he drove both.

I can believe that. I think that the S5 is a bit of a mess. It doesn't do anything well. It's more GT, but it really doesn't do GT very well. It absolutely isn't a sports car. I don't know why anyone would take one to the track.

I would expect that the 240 would be faster around a track than an A5. The difference in power alone would overcome any potential handling differences. My point was in the general feel of both cars from a daily-driver perspective, plus a bit of spirited driving.

If I was in the market for a sporty coupe right now, and it had to be AWD, I would probably lean towards the C43. The 235/240 is just too compromised in AWD form IMO in driving feel and dynamics. I bought my A5 as a GT alternative to my 235. Imagine my surprise when I found the suspension significantly better sorted than the 235 and more fun to drive in the twisties.

[harma24]

To each there own I guess. I test drove an A3, CLA and C300 and was severely underwhelmed by all three (even more so once I test drove an M235).

As for the C43, that starts about $10k higher than the M240xi. For that money, you can get into M2 territory. I haven't driven either, but if you're looking for sporty, my money's on the M2C over the C43. (Granted, you lose AWD)

[insanedc]

Originally Posted by harma24

To each there own I guess. I test drove an A3, CLA and C300 and was severely underwhelmed by all three (even more so once I test drove an M235).

As for the C43, that starts about $10k higher than the M240xi. For that money, you can get into M2 territory. I haven't driven either, but if you're looking for sporty, my money's on the M2C over the C43. (Granted, you lose AWD)

That's why I said AWD. The M2 is a very tail-happy RWD car and has a very different driving dynamic to an AWD car. I was absolutely not interested in having such a tail-happy car. The cars you drove are clearly not sporty and don't even pretend to be (unless you are talking about AMG models).

Again, it depends on what you are looking for. A lot of people will be happy with the 235/240 xdrive, especially if they haven't driven anything better. I was until I drove the competition, which I should have done BEFORE I made my purchase. I put too much weight on spec sheets and forum opinions to influence my purchase decision combined with not enough seat time.

Lesson learned.

[Rick.Null]

Originally Posted by insanedc

That's why I said AWD. The M2 is a very tail-happy RWD car and has a very different driving dynamic to an AWD car. I was absolutely not interested in having such a tail-happy car. The cars you drove are clearly not sporty and don't even pretend to be (unless you are talking about AMG models).

Again, it depends on what you are looking for. A lot of people will be happy with the 235/240 xdrive, especially if they haven't driven anything better. I was until I drove the competition, which I should have done BEFORE I made my purchase. I put too much weight on spec sheets and forum opinions to influence my purchase decision combined with not enough seat time.

Lesson learned.

I haaaate that there isn't an M2 convertible.

[TrboMike]

Originally Posted by Rick.Null

I haaaate that there isn't an M2 convertible.

Sawzall will fit that problem.

[Rick.Null]

Originally Posted by TrboMike

Sawzall will fit that problem.

I have envisioned every single time I have looked at an M2C. Seriously. Chop that roof off already! Take my money!

[RoundelM3]

X-drive isn't going to do much for any 2-series, even highly-tuned. Too much powertrain loss from the transfer case, front diff and axles. If you're making 500+ whp, it would help deliver the power, but otherwise it doesn't buy you anything. If you want to eliminate the understeer on a 2-series, put wider tires on the front. As for the M2, it has significantly wider track both front and rear, and commensurately wider tires, just like the F8x M3 and M4.

[harma24]

Originally Posted by insanedc

The cars you drove are clearly not sporty and don't even pretend to be (unless you are talking about AMG models).

I agree, none of them were sporty; that's why I went with the 2 series. But, the cars I drove are the same price point as the 2-series.

If you're criteria is solely sporty AWD 4-seat coupe, there are a lot of options, including cars like the AMG C43, M8 and GTC4Lusso. But comparing a $133k M8 or a >$300k Ferrari to a BMW 2-Series is pointless as those vehicles are clearly not in the same class despite the fact that they are both AWD 4-seat coupes. At a >20% price premium over the M240xi, neither is the AMG C43.

If you're criteria is sporty AWD 4-seat coupe under $50k (USD), the field is significantly narrowed. You cannot expect AMG or full M (or Ferrari) performance at a considerably lower price point.

[insanedc]

Originally Posted by harma24

I agree, none of them were sporty; that's why I went with the 2 series. But, the cars I drove are the same price point as the 2-series.

If you're criteria is solely sporty AWD 4-seat coupe, there are a lot of options, including cars like the AMG C43, M8 and GTC4Lusso. But comparing a $133k M8 or a >$300k Ferrari to a BMW 2-Series is pointless as those vehicles are clearly not in the same class despite the fact that they are both AWD 4-seat coupes. At a >20% price premium over the M240xi, neither is the AMG C43.

If you're criteria is sporty AWD 4-seat coupe under $50k (USD), the field is significantly narrowed. You cannot expect AMG or full M (or Ferrari) performance at a considerably lower price point.

It also depends if you are looking new or used. If considering used, the prices become significantly closer. You're right, options are very limited under 50K new. I would rather compromise and buy a slightly used car than compromise on the driving experience. Not everyone wants to do that and I understand.

New versus new, you get what you pay for and I maintain that the 235/240 xdrive provide a compromised driving experience. I thought that the 235 would be a keeper, but I was wrong. I plan to keep it for another year or so then move on. I don't dislike driving the car, which is the only reason I haven't sold it yet. But, that said, it's far from great. Go drive an Alfa Romeo Guila and you will quickly realize that that is how the 2 series should be but isn't close in overall driving dynamics. And these cars are the same price.