[Goombeh]

Originally Posted by redux

Unfortunately there's no video comparing the laps. Judging from experience, the driver was probably working their ass of in the 1M to get that close to the M2.

That's possible, I've read many reviews that state that the 1M was not a novice friendly car, and that to get the best out of it you'd better have some car control. In contrast, the M2 was much easier to access for performance as it was kinder and made you a better driver than you were.

If it's outright effortless pace you want, the M2 is better surely. If it's a bit of a challenge you want, then I suppose the 1M may be more satisfying. So BMW have made a car for both kinds of driver....... Perfect. The guys who want it really easy and safe buy RS3's.

[M3 Adjuster]

Originally Posted by Goombeh

That's possible, I've read many reviews that state that the 1M was not a novice friendly car, and that to get the best out of it you'd better have some car control. In contrast, the M2 was much easier to access for performance as it was kinder and made you a better driver than you were.

If it's outright effortless pace you want, the M2 is better surely. If it's a bit of a challenge you want, then I suppose the 1M may be more satisfying. So BMW have made a car for both kinds of driver....... Perfect. The guys who want it really easy and safe buy RS3's.

[c1pher]

This is a very interesting article and thank you for sharing. When I drove the M235i and 228i MSport like a bazillion times, I similarly noticed the ease at which the 228 drove. It does have a 50/50 balance and getting an honest 36mpg doesn't suck. Yeah the motor doesn't sound so hot though. And the stage 1 tune is a cost effective power mod. I also didn't want to spend more money on the 235i when all reports said the M2 was coming sometime, which I definitely plan to trade up for next year.

[qnet]

Originally Posted by XutvJet

The 228i in that test was on 225/245r18 Michelin Pilot Super Sports just like the M235. There were no run flats in the test.

The M235 has a staggering 1.7% greater mass on the front end than a 228i and massive .8% greater front end mass compared to the M2 and some people act the M235 behaves like a FWD car Only R&T has been rather negative regarding the M235 and for the most part it's been one specific writer at R&T. All other mags have been in love with the M235. Automobile magazine wrote an absolutely gushing review of their longterm M235.

The 228i is an awesome car doubt, but rather slow, IMO. 9+mph difference in 1/4 mile trapspeed is massive.

I didn't know anything about the 228i until I came on this forum. It seems like a nice car. I read and watched info about the m235i, before I bought it; and it was all positive. This is the first article I've read that was so negative. I love My m235i but would still take an M2 out of the three cars tested. I just like the way it looks.

[Viffermike]

Originally Posted by XutvJet

The 228i in that test was on 225/245r18 Michelin Pilot Super Sports just like the M235. There were no run flats in the test.

The M235 has a staggering 1.7% greater mass on the front end than a 228i and massive .8% greater front end mass compared to the M2 and some people act the M235 behaves like a FWD car Only R&T has been rather negative regarding the M235 and for the most part it's been one specific writer at R&T. All other mags have been in love with the M235. Automobile magazine wrote an absolutely gushing review of their longterm M235.

The 228i is an awesome car doubt, but rather slow, IMO. 9+mph difference in 1/4 mile trapspeed is massive.

And how often exactly will you or anyone else be going 100mph-plus on public streets?

Re-read the points of my post. I didn't argue that the 235 isn't a faster car. I argued that it's not as fun or as well balanced a car for everyday use. It's hundreds pounds heavier overall, too. That takes its toll.

And folks, it's not like the 228 is slow. It's not a dog, by any stretch. So don't even try to say it is. (Now my old '06 Mini Cooper? That car was a relative dog speed-wise. But DAMN it was a fun car to drive.)

I missed that the 228 has PSSs on it. Interesting that R&T felt compelled to alter OEM in that case ... and, again, it tells us nothing new because it's well known that regular tires perform better than RFTs on pretty much any car they're installed on.

[Kolyan2k]

Originally Posted by Viffermike

And how often exactly will you or anyone else be going 100mph-plus on public streets?

Re-read the points of my post. I didn't argue that the 235 isn't a faster car. I argued that it's not as fun or as well balanced a car for everyday use. It's hundreds pounds heavier overall, too. That takes its toll.

And folks, it's not like the 228 is slow. It's not a dog, by any stretch. So don't even try to say it is. (Now my old '06 Mini Cooper? That car was a relative dog speed-wise. But DAMN it was a fun car to drive.)

I missed that the 228 has PSSs on it. Interesting that R&T felt compelled to alter OEM in that case ... and, again, it tells us nothing new because it's well known that regular tires perform better than RFTs on pretty much any car they're installed on.

not hundreds, its about 150 in front and 40 at the rear. also as i said before, weight is not really everything, many modern performance cars weight close to 4000 pounds and will run circles around none-m cars including x28. Read reviews on S550 coupe and its 4800 weight, due to proper drivertrain you cant even feel that weight. the difference is so slight between x28 and x35 that getting M-performance LSD on x35 will make cornering much better then x28 and it will be VERY noticeable.

As far as is x328 slow or not.....havent driven one, but my S2000 makes 240hp and weights 2850 lbs....its slow, sometime painfully slow. Its light years ahead in every department except for power vs m325i, N55 engine is why I switched....for now

EDIT: also we are not even taking in consideration that suspension on M325i might be different to compensate for extra 150lbs in front. I dont really care myself so not going to look up the part numbers etc

[Tpeterson]

Originally Posted by Viffermike

I missed that the 228 has PSSs on it. Interesting that R&T felt compelled to alter OEM in that case ... and, again, it tells us nothing new because it's well known that regular tires perform better than RFTs on pretty much any car they're installed on.

The 228i with Msport can be ordered with PSS tires in MY2016.I was confused when I saw those tires on their test car also with the standard single piston,floating caliper brakes.I thought it was a typo,but the PSS's are available with THP and Msport this MY according to build your own at BMWUSA.

[P7X]

The 1 series has much better steering than the 2 series and the 128i is lighter than all these cars and therefore clearly a better car. Really not sure why BMW built the 2 series line at all.

[jeremicium]

Originally Posted by P7X

The 1 series has much better steering than the 2 series and the 128i is lighter than all these cars and therefore clearly a better car. Really not sure why BMW built the 2 series line at all.

I know your joking...and I do think the 2 series is a great line of cars. If the timing was better i'd probably have got the M2 instead of the M4. That said. I've had my fill of turbo engines...give me a good NA engine any day.

Last weekend I did a BMWCCA tour from the Seattle area to Hurricane Ridge in the Olympic mountains. I was behind a beautiful red 128i that had an amazing sounding exhaust.

I read an article years ago where of course the author pontificated about the 128i being the last true BMW available. We'll keep hearing that crap about one car or another time after time. But I think a 128 with the 6 speed and that sweet, slightly underpowered NA straight 6 is the last Purist BMW. I know, opinion are like assholes.

As far as the article, mostly poorly written and full of absurd statements..235i is like a Buick. Come on. I think R&T is still the better of the car mags. They just slipped up this time.

One other thing. The 228 with the manual tranny disappointed the hell out of me. Much better paired with the ZF.

Out

[2msport]

Originally Posted by XutvJet

The 228i is an awesome car doubt, but rather slow, IMO. 9+mph difference in 1/4 mile trapspeed is massive.

I agree a 9mph difference is a lot, if it were true. Don't read into those figures too much. The 228 6speed is NOT 5.5 0-60. 5.1 is more correct if shifted well.

Car magazines calculate and alter these numbers based on temps and conditions. So their figures should definitely be taken with a grain of salt. That 0-60 time shows that clearly.

[2msport]

Originally Posted by jeremicium

One other thing. The 228 with the manual tranny disappointed the hell out of me. Much better paired with the ZF.

Out

Care to elaborate? I've always wanted to drive and compare the 2 but haven't been able to. Everyone I've asked/reviews read on this forum said they actually feel very similar for being two different tranys. I would assume the ZF would be nicer though.

[XutvJet]

Originally Posted by 2msport

I agree a 9mph difference is a lot, if it were true. Don't read into those figures too much. The 228 6speed is NOT 5.5 0-60. 5.1 is more correct if shifted well.

So by that rationale, the same would apply to the M235, no?

[2msport]

Originally Posted by XutvJet

So by that rationale, the same would apply to the M235, no?

Yes but not necessarily equally. Depends how they adjust the times. Ie. maybe their calc was done on a different day or other variables. So I wouldn't say its a 1 to 1 increase or decrease between cars. All I know is thats how they do it. The 4.6 0-60 on the 235 is correct though. I'd say the stock trap speed on the 228 is closer to 101. 98 is low...

[Kiwi]

Originally Posted by P7X

The 1 series has much better steering than the 2 series and the 128i is lighter than all these cars and therefore clearly a better car. Really not sure why BMW built the 2 series line at all.

The 1 series steering is better as I have both in my garage. America would not understand as they don't have the 1 series.

[XutvJet]

Originally Posted by 2msport

I'd say the stock trap speed on the 228 is closer to 101. 98 is low...

Don't forgot though, the automatics tend to post ~2mph higher trap speeds and are around .2 seconds quicker because they lose no boost on the shift and can brake boost for a harder launch (plus the torque converter increase torque multiplication of the launch as well over a manual). This is the first test I've seen for a 228i 6MT. All I've read about are tested automatics which were tested to run ~upper 13s@100mph.

[2msport]

Originally Posted by XutvJet

Don't forgot though, the automatics tend to post ~2mph higher trap speeds and are around .2 seconds quicker because they lose no boost on the shift and can brake boost for a harder launch (plus the torque converter increase torque multiplication of the launch as well over a manual). This is the first test I've seen for a 228i 6MT. All I've read about are tested automatics which were tested to run ~upper 13s@100mph.

Very good point and exactly what I was referring to in knowing that the numbers didn't add up. 4.9 0-60 for the auto has been commonly seen. (Stock) edit: splitting hairs but I've seen 13.5-13.7 @ 101 in numerous cases.

[Kolyan2k]

All BMW number are equally conservative and can easily be improved with addition of M-PERFORMANCE LSD

[3.0L]

Originally Posted by 2msport

Care to elaborate? I've always wanted to drive and compare the 2 but haven't been able to. Everyone I've asked/reviews read on this forum said they actually feel very similar for being two different tranys. I would assume the ZF would be nicer though.

The ZF is quicker, too:

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...-tested-review

[davesaddiction]

Read the article in the magazine, was pleasantly surprised by the result, and came here for the discussion. Nice to know BMW still makes an entry-level car that's as rewarding as this one. Would've liked to see a similarly spec-ed representative from the E46 & E90 generations for this comparison.

I'm still eagerly awaiting the M2, 1M, M4, and E46 & E92 M3 supercomparo...

[davesaddiction]

Originally Posted by Paul-Bracq-BMW

I was very surprised too: the 228i could be BMW's greatest secret. Just add the M performance LSD, a chip to increase power, M performance coilovers and brakes and it could be the successor to the E30 M3!

What would a 228i so equipped cost? Still $10k less than an M2?

[Viffermike]

Originally Posted by Kolyan2k

not hundreds, its about 150 in front and 40 at the rear. also as i said before, weight is not really everything, many modern performance cars weight close to 4000 pounds and will run circles around none-m cars including x28. Read reviews on S550 coupe and its 4800 weight, due to proper drivertrain you cant even feel that weight. the difference is so slight between x28 and x35 that getting M-performance LSD on x35 will make cornering much better then x28 and it will be VERY noticeable.

As far as is x328 slow or not.....havent driven one, but my S2000 makes 240hp and weights 2850 lbs....its slow, sometime painfully slow. Its light years ahead in every department except for power vs m325i, N55 engine is why I switched....for now

EDIT: also we are not even taking in consideration that suspension on M325i might be different to compensate for extra 150lbs in front. I dont really care myself so not going to look up the part numbers etc

I'm trying reeeeealllly hard not to roll my eyes, or to take a deep breath before a lonnnng sigh ... oh, damn. Too late.

(By the way: Last time I checked, 150 + 40 = 190, which rounds up to 200. That qualifies as 'hundreds'. Nice try.)

[Hops128i]

Originally Posted by P7X

The 1 series has much better steering than the 2 series and the 128i is lighter than all these cars and therefore clearly a better car. Really not sure why BMW built the 2 series line at all.

There's a thread somewhere around here, i can't find it, that starts a track car build with a stripped 228i manual... and it weighed in at 3100lbs.