[kivyee]

Originally Posted by aerobod

Depending on the test, the M235i will perform that acceleration in about 4 seconds, whereas the 228i takes about 6 seconds, this means the M235i needs about 120m to accelerate 80-130km/h, whereas the 228i needs 180m, so the passing manoever is possible in a significantly shorter space with the M235i

Actually distance travelled = 1/2*acceleration*time^2. So if your time figures are correct, it will take the 228i more than twice the distance to accelerate to the same speed.

[SammT]

Originally Posted by emtrey

Do you not think changing the exhaust would make the car sound more like the 235i?

NO--it may be louder but you will never hear the smoothness of the 6 cyl and disguise the wheaziness/diesel like rattle of any 4 cylinder.

The 6 cylinder may be overkill for the street but its an amazing drivetrain package that is worth the difference IMHO.

ps. The punishing ride comments are over the top. The 235 only rides slightly firmer than our 335 sedan.

Yeah the 6 cylinder does sound rather glorious, I was speaking to my dad earlier about it and he was saying about the bigger engines tend to be better.

Originally Posted by msej449

I wouldn't be looking at a 230i vs an M235i for two ends of the spectrum. Personally (and these are always subjective discussions) I'd be looking at something completely different as the 'sensible' end, possibly diesel. If you're going to get a 230i then for me, the premium to move up to the M235i is relatively small - whether I end up using all its capabilities is secondary. Which is what I did, as you'd expect from my post.

Problem is with such low mileage every year I've been told to go with petrol over diesel but yeah you're right. It's about £300 extra a year on road tax and insurance over the 228i plus running costs, which isn't massive.

Originally Posted by Rayscott

228ix Msport vert here. More than enough power for me and it handles great. 10K after 2 years as I just drive it locally. Plan to keep it a long time. I have a mechanic friend who will take good care of it after warranty expires. I am constantly getting compliments on the Estoril/oyster. My best vehicle ever.

Ah do you do a mixture of different driving? Or mainly motorways? I plan on having the car for a good few years which is why I want to make the right decision on it. Yeah the colour has really grown on me! The more I see it now the more I like it.

[babaikram]

Originally Posted by Sportstick

It's worth a few minutes to read this, including the data tables at the end.

https://www.roadandtrack.com/car-cul...mparison-test/

But another magazine says this:

https://gearpatrol.com/2016/12/23/ge...-actually-buy/

[Sportstick]

Originally Posted by babaikram

But another magazine says this:

https://gearpatrol.com/2016/12/23/ge...-actually-buy/

Not a “but”. I agree with them. Read the title. Buy a M240 over a M2, M3, M4. An analogous argument, just among a higher performance/price set of cars. The same logic applies here comparing 228 to 235 for this OPs needs. If he started this thread saying he prioritized absolute acceleration and exhaust sound over all else, we wouldn’t be into four pages here. But, he didn’t, so we’re trying to address his situation, not each of our own.

[aerobod]

Originally Posted by kivyee

Actually distance travelled = 1/2*acceleration*time^2. So if your time figures are correct, it will take the 228i more than twice the distance to accelerate to the same speed.

Correct, but acceleration and time are correlated and resolve to distance = 0.5*(initial_velocity+final_velocity)*time, as acceleration is rate of velocity change with time.

[kivyee]

Originally Posted by aerobod

Correct, but acceleration and time are correlated and resolve to distance = 0.5*(initial_velocity+final_velocity)*time, as acceleration is rate of velocity change with time.

So how's this any different from what I said or change the fact that distance is going to be likely about twice from 228i vs 235i?

[albertw]

Originally Posted by kivyee

Actually distance travelled = 1/2*acceleration*time^2. So if your time figures are correct, it will take the 228i more than twice the distance to accelerate to the same speed.

I'm sure most people have tuned out this part of the discussion, but for some people it's an important issue in deciding between the 228/230 and 235/240.

Your formula applies to distance from a standing start. To get the correct answer, you can use it to get the extra distance each car travels while it's accelerating, and add that to the distance each travels in either 4 or 6 seconds if they had stayed at 80 km/hr. That gives part of the correct comparison of passing distances, which is roughly mid-way between your numbers and aerobod's.

However another factor is that when an oncoming car appears just as you are committed to the pass, the more time you take to make the pass the closer it will be to you when you finish. So I think your estimate of the difference in passing distance needed for the 228 vs 235 is about right. The bottom line is a small difference in acceleration makes a big difference in distance needed to do a pass safely.

Well that's true until the law of diminishing returns set in. The M240i is about in the sweet spot. A faster accelerating car, such as an M3, isn't going save much distance because it reduces only the time spent passing, not the time spent deciding it is safe to pass and changing lanes.

[Rayscott]

I read the R & T write up and that convinced me to by the 228. Another reason is the fact that I am 74 and living on a fixed income. The 228 fit my budget better and I have no regrets. It is more than enough for me and I would have just been wasting my money on a M235 as I would never drive it to it's limit and I don't drive the 228 to its limit. It's all about driving a slow car fast and the 228 is more than fast enough for me. It reminds me of my 2 S2000's. Fun to drive, great balance and handling and that 9K RPM was magical. If you want faster do some modding.

[kivyee]

Originally Posted by kivyee

So how's this any different from what I said or change the fact that distance is going to be likely about twice from 228i vs 235i?

Actually never mind I actually did the math and your distance ratio is correct, the m235 will take about 2/3 the distance of the 228i to get to the same speed, given the initial 4 and 6s acceleration times. This is what happens when you try to ball park without doing the math

[aerobod]

Originally Posted by kivyee

So how's this any different from what I said or change the fact that distance is going to be likely about twice from 228i vs 235i?

Bearing in mind over a small interval that the basic equations of motion assume consistent acceleration, you only looked at distance relative to the acceleration component (“distance travelled = 1/2*acceleration*time^2”), you need to add in the distance covered due to the initial velocity, too. (initial_velocity*time).

So the consequent distance if both cars are accelerating at their own rates that are approximately constant, in this case will be 50% longer for the 228i than the M235i.

Edit: Sorry, I replied before I saw albertw and your additional comments, looks like we are on the same page now.

[kivyee]

Originally Posted by albertw

I'm sure most people have tuned out this part of the discussion, but for some people it's an important issue in deciding between the 228/230 and 235/240.

Your formula applies to distance from a standing start. To get the correct answer, you can use it to get the extra distance each car travels while it's accelerating, and add that to the distance each travels in either 4 or 6 seconds if they had stayed at 80 km/hr. That gives part of the correct comparison of passing distances, which is roughly mid-way between your numbers and aerobod's.

However another factor is that when an oncoming car appears just as you are committed to the pass, the more time you take to make the pass the closer it will be to you when you finish. So I think your estimate of the difference in passing distance needed for the 228 vs 235 is about right. The bottom line is a small difference in acceleration makes a big difference in distance needed to do a pass safely.

Well that's true until the law of diminishing returns set in. The M240i is about in the sweet spot. A faster accelerating car, such as an M3, isn't going save much distance because it reduces only the time spent passing, not the time spent deciding it is safe to pass and changing lanes.

You are right, you need to add the distance calculated from the starting speed over the same time frame to give the absolute additional distance added.

[kivyee]

OK you guys got me geeking out...Pulled out the trusty old note pad. Driving.ca put the 80 to 120kmh acceleration times at 4.2 and 5.1s for m235i and 228i respectively. This calculates out to an absolute distance travelled of 116.7m vs 141.7m.

[Rayscott]

Originally Posted by Kolyan2k

Yeah I would take that article with a grain of salt. Same magazine released an article saying 228i was like the worst BMW they drove and both Mustang and Subaru BRZ are much better drivers cars

I don't pay much attention to car mags. My 228 suits me fine and I could care less what they compare it to. I chose it because of the way it drives and looks compared to a Mustang which are everywhere and the ugly Subaru.

[Sportstick]

Originally Posted by Rayscott

I don't pay much attention to car mags. My 228 suits me fine and I could care less what they compare it to.

How much less?

[Speedwell-Industries]

Originally Posted by Sportstick

How much less?

[Kolyan2k]

Originally Posted by Rayscott

I don't pay much attention to car mags. My 228 suits me fine and I could care less what they compare it to. I chose it because of the way it drives and looks compared to a Mustang which are everywhere and the ugly Subaru.

I dont care either. Its just that article keeps popping up that 228 is better then M2, which its not. And then same mag said that Mustang and Subaru are both better then 228

[BEM-S4]

Originally Posted by Kolyan2k

I dont care either. Its just that article keeps popping up that 228 is better then M2, which its not. And then same mag said that Mustang and Subaru are both better then 228

It's all relative. My X5 is a higher performance car on certain days than my Dinan S2 M235 - shitty weather days, days that I need to drive into the city and not get a flat or bend a rim, days I want to be able to park and not freak out...

[3rdcoast228i]

The 228i suits my needs very well, it's a fantastic car.

[hwntime]

Originally Posted by albertw

I'm sure most people have tuned out this part of the discussion, but for some people it's an important issue in deciding between the 228/230 and 235/240.

Your formula applies to distance from a standing start. To get the correct answer, you can use it to get the extra distance each car travels while it's accelerating, and add that to the distance each travels in either 4 or 6 seconds if they had stayed at 80 km/hr. That gives part of the correct comparison of passing distances, which is roughly mid-way between your numbers and aerobod's.

However another factor is that when an oncoming car appears just as you are committed to the pass, the more time you take to make the pass the closer it will be to you when you finish. So I think your estimate of the difference in passing distance needed for the 228 vs 235 is about right. The bottom line is a small difference in acceleration makes a big difference in distance needed to do a pass safely.

Well that's true until the law of diminishing returns set in. The M240i is about in the sweet spot. A faster accelerating car, such as an M3, isn't going save much distance because it reduces only the time spent passing, not the time spent deciding it is safe to pass and changing lanes.

Y'all need to stop speaking in alien LOL

[Luftwaffe1O1]

Look guys, all arguments aside, this is entirely subjective to what the car will be used for. Had we been discussing specific tasks, like best overall track car, or best car for overtaking on the freeway.

But a street driven daily car will really vary depending on needs. I personally would not want the 228/230, that does not mean that I cannot see the obvious appeal of one. They are great, if the M235i is 90% of an M2, the 228/230 is 90%+ of an M235i.

This is performance wise...

Now daily usability etc, this varies greatly person to person and what they need. For me, the 6cylinder cars were the choice purely on the fact that I wanted the torque, I wanted the faster car. I didn't care about daily driveablity and the M2 wasn't out yet, so as far as the 2 series was concerned the M235i was the best I could get.

But if you just want a nice daily, and zip around twisty roads, and don't particularly care that you have the faster model, you are probably wasting your money going for the M235/240.

[ralawren]

Originally Posted by Luftwaffe1O1

Look guys, all arguments aside, this is entirely subjective to what the car will be used for. Had we been discussing specific tasks, like best overall track car, or best car for overtaking on the freeway.

But a street driven daily car will really vary depending on needs. I personally would not want the 228/230, that does not mean that I cannot see the obvious appeal of one. They are great, if the M235i is 90% of an M2, the 228/230 is 90%+ of an M235i.

This is performance wise...

Now daily usability etc, this varies greatly person to person and what they need. For me, the 6cylinder cars were the choice purely on the fact that I wanted the torque, I wanted the faster car. I didn't care about daily driveablity and the M2 wasn't out yet, so as far as the 2 series was concerned the M235i was the best I could get.

But if you just want a nice daily, and zip around twisty roads, and don't particularly care that you have the faster model, you are probably wasting your money going for the M235/240.

I really like my 228i as a DD and for touring the backroads. There is an opportunity for BMW to tighten up the suspension, improve the exhaust and sell the car as a M228i. The body roll needs to be reduced, camber adjustments made available in the front and a more aggressive exhaust.

I know the owner can do this thru mods on there own but this shouldn't cost BMW much to produce and they are all about niche markets.

They could also do a 228is with a similar approach but skip the exhaust and make it more a touring car. I would buy either one.

[Tyresian]

Originally Posted by ralawren

I really like my 228i as a DD and for touring the backroads. There is an opportunity for BMW to tighten up the suspension, improve the exhaust and sell the car as a M228i. The body roll needs to be reduced, camber adjustments made available in the front and a more aggressive exhaust.

I know the owner can do this thru mods on there own but this shouldn't cost BMW much to produce and they are all about niche markets.

They could also do a 228is with a similar approach but skip the exhaust and make it more a touring car. I would buy either one.

You can get the Track Handling Package to get the same suspension as the M235/M240.

As for more power, I'd love to see an M230 with the improved B46/B48 engine that is coming to the X2 M35 (B48A20T1). But it doesn't matter too much for me since I just picked up my car and I actually preferred the x-drive suspension on my 230 over the M Adaptive Suspension on my local roads. (The adaptive was super bouncy or jarring on local highways, where the x-drive is actually a good balance, but certainly not perfect)

https://www.bmwblog.com/2017/11/20/b...-planned-2018/