• Car and Driver tests the 2014 F22 M235i and loves it - 12.9 @ 109 1/4 mile, 3525 pound curb weight

      With the departure of the BMW E82 1M the closest car available to fill the void is the new 2014 BMW M235i. An M2 is on the way but until it arrives we have the 2014 F22 M235i. Unlike the E82 1M, the M235i is available with an 8-speed automatic transmission. Normally that would mean BimmerBoost would rip into the car stating it is designed for teenage girls to be able to park easily and that the M badge on there is just for marketing but there is a manual transmission option (although no dual clutch transmission option).


      This car does not have a limited slip differential which is another difference from the E82 1M and yet another argument for the letter M standing for marketing. Or possibly money, as extra money will get you a limited slip differential. Ok now let's get to the stuff Car and Driver likes.

      They seem to dig the 320 horsepower and 330 lb-ft of torque 3.0 liter inline-6 turbocharged N55 motor. The performance certainly supports their impressions with 0-60 in 4.3 seconds and the 1/4 mile taking 12.9 seconds at 109 miles per hour. Not quite E92 M3 (Car and Driver recorded a 12.7 @ 114 1/4 mile for the manual E92 M3) or E82 1M performance but close enough.

      Despite the lack of the limited slip differential on this test car it managed .94g on the skidpad. Good grip although this does not show capability in transitions on a roadcourse. Car and Driver for whatever reason does not do a slalom test.

      They conclude their review by saying you get 100% of the E92 M3's performance for 2/3's the price which is just... well, wrong. It is also just kind of stupid to say. Their own testing shows the M3 to be faster especially at speed and obviously on a race track it would handily beat the F22 M235i (without going into limp mode). The naturally aspirated V8 engine is also more responsive and the E92 M3 is only 27 pounds heavier. Yes, the M235i is not much lighter with a curb weight of 3525 pounds.

      If one starts adding in options (like a limited slip differential) the M235i is no longer 2/3's the price. It does not offer 100% of the outgoing M3's performance but it does offer a package that offers great fun factor at a reasonable price point which is what a BMW is supposed to do. BMW's are supposed to be well balanced (the M235i is a little nose heavy at 52.7 of its weight on the front) and fun to drive cars with all around capability. The M235i somewhat gets back to that. It's a shame the other models in the lineup have strayed so far from this formula.

      This article was originally published in forum thread: C&D: M235i "100% of the E92 M3's performance for 2/3 the price" started by richpike View original post
      Comments 19 Comments
      1. leo985i's Avatar
        leo985i -
        How is this car so heavy? I thought it was lighter than the previous 135i.
      1. inlineS54B32's Avatar
        inlineS54B32 -
        I read the article and thought the same thing.

        These days, people will take this quote (this was front page news on another site) and honestly think it's as capable as an M3. I really don't understand why someone would want to "diminish" another car just because they get to test something new (or is it that the test driver is mindless?). It's infuriating to me, I just don't get bending the truth for no reason...

        I love people that are into cars, and love to learn from others - but these types of things stop people from "moving forward". It's like quoting 0-60 times on the front page of some magazine, and announcing a "new king" - like it's some accomplishment; yeah, maybe it was in 1990 - when the "powerful car" had 300 horsepower. Today, it's meaningless.

        Look at those stats:

        0-100 - 10.8 seconds for the M235i; oh, only over a FULL SECOND slower than an M3? We'll call it even - even though at 100 MPH, the M3 would be like 70-80 feet ahead of the other car (travelling 1405 ft/sec @ 100mph)... Pretty close though.
        0-130 - the comparison is almost comical... We are talking nearly 7 full seconds of difference at this point... I won't even bother with the distance travelled.

        Yep, basically an M3 for 2/3rd the price, but it has a crappier suspension, brakes, engine, transmission. But, it's the same car - pretty much.

        Nailed it C&D!

        ---

        Don't mean to take away from the car, it seems to be a good value I guess? 50k? IDK after thinking about it for another second, spend the extra 20 and get the real thing. /rant
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by inlineS54B32 Click here to enlarge
        I read the article and thought the same thing.

        These days, people will take this quote (this was front page news on another site) and honestly think it's as capable as an M3. I really don't understand why someone would want to "diminish" another car just because they get to test something new (or is it that the test driver is mindless?). It's infuriating to me, I just don't get bending the truth for no reason...

        I love people that are into cars, and love to learn from others - but these types of things stop people from "moving forward". It's like quoting 0-60 times on the front page of some magazine, and announcing a "new king" - like it's some accomplishment; yeah, maybe it was in 1990 - when the "powerful car" had 300 horsepower. Today, it's meaningless.

        Look at those stats:

        0-100 - 10.8 seconds for the M235i; oh, only over a FULL SECOND slower than an M3? We'll call it even - even though at 100 MPH, the M3 would be like 70-80 feet ahead of the other car (travelling 1405 ft/sec @ 100mph)... Pretty close though.
        0-130 - the comparison is almost comical... We are talking nearly 7 full seconds of difference at this point... I won't even bother with the distance travelled.

        Yep, basically an M3 for 2/3rd the price, but it has a crappier suspension, brakes, engine, transmission. But, it's the same car - pretty much.

        Nailed it C&D!

        ---

        Don't mean to take away from the car, it seems to be a good value I guess? 50k? IDK after thinking about it for another second, spend the extra 20 and get the real thing. /rant
        A statement of 100% implies it is equal. It isn't, their own testing shows this.

        Is the M235i a great car? Yes it is. Is an M3? Of course not. Does throwing statements in about the M3 bolster it somehow? Even if the statements are completely false?

        It's not even a good review. They focus on the acceleration figures of the powerlpant rather than stating how the powerplant feels in relation to the M3. If you are going to throw the M3 in there, at least analyze the different feel between the two.

        This isn't good journalism. The data is nice to have but the substance of this review is weak and not to mention wrong.
      1. 135idct's Avatar
        135idct -
        Car and Driver always fake numbers..
      1. Sered's Avatar
        Sered -
        Yeah, 109mph is moving for a 3500lb/320hp car. Not sure if I buy that they did that on an actual 1/4 mile track
      1. inlineS54B32's Avatar
        inlineS54B32 -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
        This isn't good journalism. The data is nice to have but the substance of this review is weak and not to mention wrong.
        It's sad to me, because this is how people first (usually) get into cars. I can remember waiting for my R&T/Motortrend when I was younger, and would flip to the meat of the newest article to get the specs on the latest car. Now it's all a bunch of fluff to make a car look good. I have read very few articles describe (very well) the difference in response/engine - and why the M3 is so "different" than say this car (or anything in the past). It's not all numbers in that regard. Getting off topic, but thank god for forums. Saved my sanity. Click here to enlarge


        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sered Click here to enlarge
        Yeah, 109mph is moving for a 3500lb/320hp car. Not sure if I buy that they did that on an actual 1/4 mile track
        Yeah, for sure - it's a quick car, no doubt about it. I am not sure I buy the 109 trap either - just not enough power for that weight.
      1. bigdnno98's Avatar
        bigdnno98 -
        How the hell does this car weight 300lbs more than a 135i??? WTF BMW?
      1. bigdnno98's Avatar
        bigdnno98 -
        While the 4.3 0-60 is very impressive, it's certainly no e92 M3. Even I agree with that.
      1. ezec63's Avatar
        ezec63 -
        WTF are these guys smoking?? No Limited Slip diff, turbo that runs out of steam after 5000 rpm, Non M tuned suspension/chassis/balance, slushbox auto, etc yuppp e92 m3 comes to mind .. Clowns !
        On another note the n55 has to be the most whored out engine ever made its literally in every single bmw which with the new grand coupes, GT wagons, x4 is a lot of cars does not feel special at all. Combined with the ZF 8 speed auto that's in so many cars of different brands. Not special at all ...
      1. leveraged sellout's Avatar
        leveraged sellout -
        Not sure where you guys are getting this idea that it should be an M car with a name like "M235i"...there's been M Performance cars since the 70's...the E12 M535i, the E28 M535i...there's others as well. This is nothing new. It's simply a tuned-up normal car. Seems to perform well given the weight, which is disappointing for sure. Other than that, seems like a nice car.
      1. Sered's Avatar
        Sered -
        FYI, the car IS available with a LSD option now. I don't think it's as good as the M3/M4 diff, but its supposedly much better than stock.
      1. ezec63's Avatar
        ezec63 -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by leveraged sellout Click here to enlarge
        Not sure where you guys are getting this idea that it should be an M car with a name like "M235i"...there's been M Performance cars since the 70's...the E12 M535i, the E28 M535i...there's others as well. This is nothing new. It's simply a tuned-up normal car. Seems to perform well given the weight, which is disappointing for sure. Other than that, seems like a nice car.
        Its not us getting that idea its the brilliant guys at Car and Driver saying its 100% E92 performance for 75% price
      1. richpike's Avatar
        richpike -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by ezec63 Click here to enlarge
        Its not us getting that idea its the brilliant guys at Car and Driver saying its 100% E92 performance for 75% price
        66.67% Click here to enlarge

        -Rich Click here to enlarge
      1. ezec63's Avatar
        ezec63 -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by richpike Click here to enlarge
        66.67% Click here to enlarge

        -Rich Click here to enlarge
        Durrrrrrp 3/4ths 2/3rds all the same BS Click here to enlarge
      1. richpike's Avatar
        richpike -
        I was just playing. Totally agree with you. It's the enginerd in me - couldn't help it.

        -Rich
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by inlineS54B32 Click here to enlarge
        It's sad to me, because this is how people first (usually) get into cars. I can remember waiting for my R&T/Motortrend when I was younger, and would flip to the meat of the newest article to get the specs on the latest car. Now it's all a bunch of fluff to make a car look good. I have read very few articles describe (very well) the difference in response/engine - and why the M3 is so "different" than say this car (or anything in the past). It's not all numbers in that regard. Getting off topic, but thank god for forums. Saved my sanity. Click here to enlarge

        Yeah, for sure - it's a quick car, no doubt about it. I am not sure I buy the 109 trap either - just not enough power for that weight.
        The internet has somewhat killed the magazines. My room is still filled with old car mags. Stacks upon stacks...

        Now we get info so quickly and easily (and for free) that I rarely even bother with the magazines. This review though wouldn't make print at least it shouldn't. It just seems like a quick internet review.

        Quality has taken a hit.
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by leveraged sellout Click here to enlarge
        Not sure where you guys are getting this idea that it should be an M car with a name like "M235i"...there's been M Performance cars since the 70's...the E12 M535i, the E28 M535i...there's others as well. This is nothing new. It's simply a tuned-up normal car. Seems to perform well given the weight, which is disappointing for sure. Other than that, seems like a nice car.
        Those weren't M Performance cars which is a new development but they also were built when what an 'M' car was supposed to be was not clearly defined. Regardless, we know this isn't an M car but if you are using the M badge and it seriously is only there for marketing... what's the point?
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sered Click here to enlarge
        FYI, the car IS available with a LSD option now. I don't think it's as good as the M3/M4 diff, but its supposedly much better than stock.
        That is mentioned in the article...
      1. leveraged sellout's Avatar
        leveraged sellout -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
        Those weren't M Performance cars which is a new development but they also were built when what an 'M' car was supposed to be was not clearly defined. Regardless, we know this isn't an M car but if you are using the M badge and it seriously is only there for marketing... what's the point?
        I mean at some point, it's all semantics when it comes to these half-breed cars...until they start making M cars with no actual M parts I'll be ok with it. The fawning by C&D might be a little over the top, I'll definitely agree to that. I don't even really read the magazines for a definitive opinion anymore, just more for entertainment when I have the time.