The track times are way off. Here are the official numbers from MotorTrend on the automatic M235i: 4.4 sec & 13.0 sec @ 106.6mph. Even the 228i coupe posts better numbers than in this video.
MotorTrend ran the same car through their tests and it performed much better then here. First it hit 60 MPH in approx 4.6 secs and the 1/4 mile in 13.0 flat, then stopping from 60 ft in 104 Ft. You can see the video on RUclips if you search for it under the MotorTrend channel. I don't know what motor week did here, or if the car has some kind of defect.
How the hell did you guys get a 14 second 1/4 mile? or 0-60 in 5.2 seconds? every magazine and video out there is doing 0-60 in 4.5secs give or take with the 8 speed and 13 sec 1/4 mile!! Even BMW site has it listed as 0-60 in 4.8 , playing it safe for consumers
Yeah, the times tested on here are so slow. If someone didn't research elsewhere such as motortrend, sales would be lost with these performance times posted for a 320hp vehicle. Brakes were disappointing also in stoppage.
"Coupe" doesn't necessarily mean 2 doors. It means "Low roof line." BMW's Gran Coupes, Mercedes CLS, Audi A7 and other "4 door coupes" all have low roof lines compared to their Sedan counterparts, so the rear passengers will have less headroom in a 6 series gran coupe than in a 5 series.
0-60 in the low 5's does translate to a 1/4 mile of 14.0 or so seconds, but the main story is that most automotive magazines got better times by at least .5 seconds across the board compared to Motorweek.
With the auto they were able to put down 4.3 to 60 and 12.9 quarter mile in the last mag I read. The xdrive needs tested but not by these incapable it seems,testers.
I can't believe after 2 years people are still complaining about the test numbers. It's quite obvious really. The Motorweek test car had the standard, all-season, 225/40-18s all the way around. C&D etc. tested with the super sticky Michelin Pilot Super Sport 225/40 and 245/35-18 summer tires. Sticky tires = more traction = better numbers. Stop bitching, and enjoy the video for what it is.
Wow you guys are ignorant to the rest of world prices. Think everywhere else it would be $65k, auto a $3500 option adaptive dampers $900 elec seats $1000 then pay tax on that! You guys have it cheap and still complain??....
A 1990 325i cost $26,000 and got 18/23 EPA mileage with a 0-60mph in 7.5 seconds. With 2.5% inflation, that's $47,000 in today's dollars. The M235i does 0-60 in 4.8 sec for a slightly lower inflation-adjusted price and gets 22/32 mpg. So prices are just as reasonable as 25 years ago. FYI - Motor Trend got a much better 103 feet for 60-0 braking than the 115 shown here.
bugattisteve In the US, it expensive. Sorry to the rest of the wold. Think about it like this... Your not buying a m235i for reliability, not for luxury, then for what? It's no performance bargain, that's for sure. With the new mustang on deck, it's going to slaughter this car and do it for a lot less money. So the question is, for $44k are you getting value for your money?
Djonkie Bonk They recently tested the 2015 Mustang GT and said it was the best handling Mustang ever. It even handles better than the previous BOSS 302 they were saying. The Mustang GT has been ripping around the skid pad at 0.95G(Avg) and better with the track pack since 2010... Damn good considering it had a live rear axle. The independent rear suspension 2015 GT already did one 0.97G(Avg) and one 0.98G(Avg) around the skid pad. But it's the figure 8 and slalom where they said it made the most improvements. Anyway, I no longer get replies via youtube, so unfortunately I won't see your reply.
Nice review, but proof of the fact that a lot of reviewers don't really know much about cars: It's not "I-6", it's just "inline 6". There is no such thing as I-6 !!!
As an Infiniti Q50 owner, I'm no BMW fanboy or whatever they call it lol... Anyway, in every other test I've seen, the BMW M235i Coupe has done 0-60 in the mid 4's and ran 13.0-13.2 @ 106+ 1/4 mile times. Heck, the heavier, less powerful 300 HP / 300 TQ E90 335i sedan with the 6 speed auto had no problem doing 0-60 in the high 4 second range, and had no problem running under 13.5 @ 105 mph through the 1/4 mile bone stock. This driver had a terrible launch, and I wouldn't be surprised if this test was done running into a head wind in hot temps. The M235i can definitely do a lot better than this. Especially with that awesome for an automatic, ZF 8-speed auto trans. I was shocked seeing these terrible numbers for this make and model.
The *BMW **_i3_* could sell like hot buns if *BMW* wanted it to... They manage around 120,000 of the *BMW 3-Series/4-Series* in the US, and over 300,000 of them worldwide each year. The *BMW **_i3_* is a low volume car on purpose. I just wish it was prettier, sportier, and had more electric range.
Its not a low volume car on purpose, its a low volume car because it's extremely time consuming (in comparison with regular chassis) to make a full carbon-fibre chassis. The i3 range is enough, it's designed for mega-citys. It hits 40mph in 3.2 seconds, which will obliterate anything under 300hp at the traffic light, and in most mega cities you won't be doing 0-60 drag races anyway. The design is controversial i admit, it took me some time getting used to it :)
Precisely. Extensive use of carbon fiber materials is purposely directed at limited run, low volume vehicle production. BMW could have built the i3 out of aluminum and been just as strong and lightweight. Instead, they left room under the hood for a wimpy motorcycle engine as generator option. BMW is smarter than that -- so these mistakes were made: on purpose.
Thank You so Much for showing us the breaking performance...Breaking test is so important to me
The track times are way off. Here are the official numbers from MotorTrend on the automatic M235i: 4.4 sec & 13.0 sec @ 106.6mph.
Even the 228i coupe posts better numbers than in this video.
Good to hear. I was going to say, that price tag for 5.0 seconds? I thought we were going backwards for a second!
Motor Trend also has a knack for sweetening up their numbers slightly. 4.7 or 4.8 at 13.3 or so sounds more realistic.
Beautiful car
this car is awesome. The only thing that urks me are those chrome plastic side view mirror housings.
14.0 @ 102? Am I reading that correctly?
MotorTrend ran the same car through their tests and it performed much better then here. First it hit 60 MPH in approx 4.6 secs and the 1/4 mile in 13.0 flat, then stopping from 60 ft in 104 Ft. You can see the video on RUclips if you search for it under the MotorTrend channel. I don't know what motor week did here, or if the car has some kind of defect.
Haha you just mad that your car is sloe
*slow
How the hell did you guys get a 14 second 1/4 mile? or 0-60 in 5.2 seconds? every magazine and video out there is doing 0-60 in 4.5secs give or take with the 8 speed and 13 sec 1/4 mile!! Even BMW site has it listed as 0-60 in 4.8 , playing it safe for consumers
Yeah, the times tested on here are so slow. If someone didn't research elsewhere such as motortrend, sales would be lost with these performance times posted for a 320hp vehicle. Brakes were disappointing also in stoppage.
Nice helmet on the track Ben!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
And if their lame test driver knew how to launch without so much spin he would've got to 60 in 4.6 seconds
How do you explain the 4&6 Series Gran Coupes both being 4 door cars with even numbers?
...really?
It's silly, BMW considers Gran Coupes as coupes not sedans, even with 4 doors.
"Coupe" doesn't necessarily mean 2 doors. It means "Low roof line." BMW's Gran Coupes, Mercedes CLS, Audi A7 and other "4 door coupes" all have low roof lines compared to their Sedan counterparts, so the rear passengers will have less headroom in a 6 series gran coupe than in a 5 series.
noun
1.
Also, coupé. a closed, two-door car shorter than a sedan of the same model.
Shér Khan
The dictionary.com definition is above.
Steve W So according to that it absolutely needs a 4 door model in order to be called a coupe? Does that sound right to you?
woa, 14.0 in 1/4th doesn't sound right... Perhaps you drove on wet pavement?
0-60 in the low 5's does translate to a 1/4 mile of 14.0 or so seconds, but the main story is that most automotive magazines got better times by at least .5 seconds across the board compared to Motorweek.
Isn't that the gimped version of iDrive?
Can never go wrong with a BMW
BMW E60 M5, nuff said.
These guys need to learn how to drive. MotorTrend got 4.5 to 60 and 13 sec in the 1/4 mile. Not to mention their braking specs....
The numbers you are referring to were for the stick with the auto being even faster still.
Wow this is poor numbers... Can't remember which but one magazine got the 228i 0-60 in 4.9 and 1/4 mile in 13.3 something's not right here...
All-season tyres on this example apparently. :) Not the optional summer tyres.
Yea they messed up on timing, the quarter mile is for sure not 14 seconds. Don't know what is going on here.
2015 BMW M235i
Who is doing this testing? Car and driver got 0-60 in 4.4, 1/4 mile in 13.0 and 60-0 braking in 103 ft...
With the auto they were able to put down 4.3 to 60 and 12.9 quarter mile in the last mag I read. The xdrive needs tested but not by these incapable it seems,testers.
4.4 is for the awd not the rwd !!
I can't believe after 2 years people are still complaining about the test numbers. It's quite obvious really. The Motorweek test car had the standard, all-season, 225/40-18s all the way around. C&D etc. tested with the super sticky Michelin Pilot Super Sport 225/40 and 245/35-18 summer tires. Sticky tires = more traction = better numbers. Stop bitching, and enjoy the video for what it is.
That makes sense!
Ironic hipsters in 2014?
Cool car but wow after tax almost 50k for a 2 series BMW is crazy with there prices
Wow you guys are ignorant to the rest of world prices. Think everywhere else it would be $65k, auto a $3500 option adaptive dampers $900 elec seats $1000 then pay tax on that! You guys have it cheap and still complain??....
A 1990 325i cost $26,000 and got 18/23 EPA mileage with a 0-60mph in 7.5 seconds. With 2.5% inflation, that's $47,000 in today's dollars.
The M235i does 0-60 in 4.8 sec for a slightly lower inflation-adjusted price and gets 22/32 mpg.
So prices are just as reasonable as 25 years ago.
FYI - Motor Trend got a much better 103 feet for 60-0 braking than the 115 shown here.
bugattisteve In the US, it expensive. Sorry to the rest of the wold. Think about it like this... Your not buying a m235i for reliability, not for luxury, then for what? It's no performance bargain, that's for sure. With the new mustang on deck, it's going to slaughter this car and do it for a lot less money. So the question is, for $44k are you getting value for your money?
Djonkie Bonk
They recently tested the 2015 Mustang GT and said it was the best handling Mustang ever. It even handles better than the previous BOSS 302 they were saying. The Mustang GT has been ripping around the skid pad at 0.95G(Avg) and better with the track pack since 2010... Damn good considering it had a live rear axle. The independent rear suspension 2015 GT already did one 0.97G(Avg) and one 0.98G(Avg) around the skid pad. But it's the figure 8 and slalom where they said it made the most improvements. Anyway, I no longer get replies via youtube, so unfortunately I won't see your reply.
Chris McSorley'79
Please don't compare a Ford to a BMW...it's laughable.
My car runs a 14.0 and a m235i walked me like a dog
Nice review, but proof of the fact that a lot of reviewers don't really know much about cars: It's not "I-6", it's just "inline 6". There is no such thing as I-6 !!!
I is for inline.
RUclips User idiot...
Use launch control you won't get unnecessary wheelspin like this muppet.
I was starting to like this car until he gave the 1/4 mile time. I'd rather get a STI or WRX.
***** I agree with u 14 secs 1/4 mile too slow for a car like this I wonder who was driving it
As an Infiniti Q50 owner, I'm no BMW fanboy or whatever they call it lol... Anyway, in every other test I've seen, the BMW M235i Coupe has done 0-60 in the mid 4's and ran 13.0-13.2 @ 106+ 1/4 mile times. Heck, the heavier, less powerful 300 HP / 300 TQ E90 335i sedan with the 6 speed auto had no problem doing 0-60 in the high 4 second range, and had no problem running under 13.5 @ 105 mph through the 1/4 mile bone stock. This driver had a terrible launch, and I wouldn't be surprised if this test was done running into a head wind in hot temps. The M235i can definitely do a lot better than this. Especially with that awesome for an automatic, ZF 8-speed auto trans. I was shocked seeing these terrible numbers for this make and model.
Why doesn't the *BMW **_i3_* look like this?
Oh, wait... People would want to buy it then. Ah.
If you ordered an i3 now you would have to wait 18 months to get one, with over 13.000 orders the i3 sells like hot buns.
The *BMW **_i3_* could sell like hot buns if *BMW* wanted it to... They manage around 120,000 of the *BMW 3-Series/4-Series* in the US, and over 300,000 of them worldwide each year. The *BMW **_i3_* is a low volume car on purpose. I just wish it was prettier, sportier, and had more electric range.
Its not a low volume car on purpose, its a low volume car because it's extremely time consuming (in comparison with regular chassis) to make a full carbon-fibre chassis. The i3 range is enough, it's designed for mega-citys. It hits 40mph in 3.2 seconds, which will obliterate anything under 300hp at the traffic light, and in most mega cities you won't be doing 0-60 drag races anyway. The design is controversial i admit, it took me some time getting used to it :)
Precisely. Extensive use of carbon fiber materials is purposely directed at limited run, low volume vehicle production. BMW could have built the i3 out of aluminum and been just as strong and lightweight. Instead, they left room under the hood for a wimpy motorcycle engine as generator option. BMW is smarter than that -- so these mistakes were made: on purpose.
this guys narration is painful..
More like legendary! :D