History is bunk. Although cars like the Jaguar XK120, Shelby Mustang and Porsche 911 have become legends, their modern equivalents offer far superior driving dynamics. And greater reliability. And safety. But it is their "soul" that resonates: the combination of icnoclastic style and man – machine zeitgeist. So when enthusiasts (and BMW PR) started comparing the new 135i to Bimmer's venerable 2002, expectations were sky high. The reality is more like a fat guy limbo dancing under a pole raised six feet off the ground.
My paranoid-delusional theory: BMW intentionally botched the 135i. If executed properly and sold with a mid- to upper-20s price tag, the 1-Series would have eaten the 3-Series' breakfast, lunch and dinner. Not to mention the toll it would have taken on sales of the BMW-owned MINI. So The Boys from Bavaria grabbed a 3-Series, screwed it up a bit, kept the hatch for the Eurozone and said "here is your entry level car."
Even a quick glance tells you BMW doesn't believe in reincarnation. The 2002's huge greenhouse dominated its exterior. The 135i is the exact opposite. The new Bimmer's beltline rides absurdly high; an accurate indication of submariner visibility. Even by modern BMW standards, the 1-Series is a bit of an odd duck. The front end is contempo BMW, but the headlights are more cubist X3 than sleek 7-Series. The trunk looks like it's taller than it is deep. There is nothing iconic or beautiful about the 135i. It's a rolling caricature of a virtually identical car.
In fact, the 1-Series' looks like a trash-compacted 3-Series coupe. Yes, the 135i continues Chris Bangle's axles of power flame-surfaced design theme (and how). And yes, some elements are distinctly appealing. The base of the rear pillar, for example, has a lovely retro curve to it. But when compared to the form-follows-function minimalism of its alleged ancestor, the 1-Series coupe is nothing more than an automotive affectation.
The 135i's interior offers a welcome return to basics. Bargain hunters will be well pleased that the materials deployed throughout the 135i's cabin are virtually identical (in quality) to those found in the 3-Series. The 135i's dash design is considerably better. The center stack is oriented toward the driver– a BMW interior hallmark I've missed in the years since BMW realized the orthodontists leasing their cars didn't give a damn.
Dentists' chairs are more comfortable than 135i's standard-issue front seats; even if you include the drilling. The seats' inverse side bolstering places you on top of a leatherette covered hill. Continuing a less noble BMW tradition, righting this ergonomic wrong costs big bucks. That'll be $1500 for leather and another grand for sport seats– which come packaged with Shadowline Exterior Trim, an M-Leather-Wrapped Steering Wheel, Increased Top Speed Limit and all-caps spelling.
The 135i's back chairs will not accommodate anyone: you, me, children, smaller children, junior members of The Lollipop Guild or Jay Shoemaker's chihuahua. The rear accommodations are barely sufficient for a decent-sized backpack, never mind a pair of homo sapiens. Not that it matters. The 135i's front seats are mounted so close together you can't reach into the back. And now, the good news…
Thanks to its 300 horsepower turbocharged inline six, driving the 135i is like strapping yourself to a Flüssigkeitsrakete. Until you get used to the thrust, ramming the tach needle into the red line transforms the neophyte into nothing more than spam in a can, flung at the horizon by God's own right hand. BMW says the zero to sixty sprint takes just 5.1 seconds. I doubt it. It seems much faster. And yet, after a while, the 135i leaves red-blooded drivers wanting more gears, more space and a higher speed limit (see: above). It's too bad the rest of the car is just luggage.
The 135i's dynamics are distinctly "piano like." By this I mean it drives as if there's a piano strapped to the roof. And no wonder, the 135i tips the scales at 3373lbs. (When BMW and Edmunds described the 135i as the 2002's successor, they must have been talking about the 2002 model year 330i.) Even with the mighty mill motivating the mass, despite the fact that it's lighter than the equally powerful 335i, the 135i feels heavy on its feet. Don't get me wrong: there's plenty of grip. But someone forgot to add nimbleness.
The 135i's steering is a big part of the problem; its ponderousness makes turn-in an unnecessarily onerous chore. The 135i's manual transmission doesn't help matters. Like most latter day Bimmers, the clutch is a two-footer that engages with rubbery imprecision. And while the 335i has a most excellent ZF automatic transmission, the 135i does not. The smaller car's French-made six-speed auto is jerkier and more dim-witted than its big brother's cog swapper.
With the 135i, BMW decided to have its cake and ate it too. Maybe that's why the 135i is so fat. I guess BMW couldn't offer a beautiful, affordable, spirited entry level car below the 3-Series, but not have a car below the 3-Series. Rather than "make it fun" or "make it practical," BMW sent us a slightly smaller, marginally less expensive, much less attractive 3-Series. Damn it's quick. But a 2002 for 2008 it most definitely is not.
172 Comments on “2008 BMW 135i Review...”
Back to TopLeave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
You can also login using Facebook Connect.
What I think BMW missed out on was the opportunity to offer an Audi A3, Golf GTi-eating 135i hatchback!
But then it would have lost some snob-yuppy appeal, and we all know it’s a no-no.
The coupe 1-series is really ugly, more so than most current BMWs (which is saying quite something). I rode in a 120d hatchback and was quite impressed by its driving dynamics (although I can’t compare with a 3-series). Too bad this one seems to be bungled.
$43,000 for that seems steep, even though it’s cheaper than a $50k 335i coupe. Jeez, aren’t BMW prices absurdly high nowadays?
Also, I think there’s a typo in fuel economy: 15 highway mpg with a manual for 26 with an auto? seems unlikely. And by the way, is the manual really worse in city driving than the automatic?
The aftermarket for seats, accessories and performance chips will have some wiggle room for these cars
Typo alert! The highway mileage should be 17/25. It’s been corrected.
$43,000 for this car???
A foreclosed and nearly abandoned home in Detroit proper would be far more amusing.
Time has dimmed memories somewhat, but in the early 70s, when I was in high school and some of my bepimpled classmates were having testosterone displays over whether the Vega or the Pinto was better (this was around the time of the Oil Embargo), my English teacher’s red 2002 seemed the epitome of exotic elegance in sporty small transport. To think, here was a car made by a company that only 30 years before was making engines for Focke-Wulf fighters that were giving fits to Spitfires and Allied bombers. It seemed like such an engineering marvel compared to Detroit’s attempts at sporty small cars, one of the contributors to the image of industrial Germany’s rise from the ashes of the 1940s.
Within a few years, I had had the chance to take some drives in other peoples’ 2002s, and even the odd 1600 here and there (which seemed just as fun, even with a smaller but lighter engine up front). It’s safe to say those drives fixed what a BMW SHOULD be in my mind. Only two liters, maybe ca. 100 hp in non-Tii mode, four speeds on the shifter, and sometimes a bum synchro in 2nd gear. But what fun!
Nowadays when I see another 3 Series on the road, I rarely think about the exotic nature of the 2002, but more likely Dan Neil’s quip that the 3s are so numerous on LA highways he decided to call them Bavarian Roaches.
I think it was simply too much to expect the 135i to be a reincarnation of that iconic BMW. Memory is a powerful thing, even if it’s a bit foggy.
It doesn’t help that even with all that the 135 has for it under the hood, it still runs north of $43k in tested trim. That red ‘71 2002 cost around $4k back then. What would the inflation adjusted price be now?
Seems we have a different take on this one as well. I drove one the same day I drove a Jag XF. Liked driving this one, didn’t care for the XF.
That said, the 135i is such an incremental change from the 335i it’s necessary to ask, “Why bother?” It is a bit quicker, and a bit more agile than an already quick and agile car. (I personally like the heavier steering.) But the differences aren’t large enough to justify a second model. Especially when so much practicality is sacrificed.
In other words, it’s an excellent driving experience, but largely because the 3 on which it is based also provides an excellent experience. Like you, I’d like to see a curb weight (much) closer to 3,000 pounds.
And so I suppose that an excellent driver’s car can at the same time be a disappointment.
With TrueDelta, I hope to have some reliability results soon, but this will depend on how quickly owners join up and participate in our research:
http://www.truedelta.com/reliability.php
Well, this is faster than the Z4 coupe 3.0si and cheaper than the Z4 M-coupe. So it does have that going for it. But still, I haven’t read a positive review for the 135i yet that reaches the level of fawning that BMW usually receives.
It’s pretty sad that BMW’s giant SAC is a better vehicle than their small 300hp coupe.
How refreshing. Finally, an auto journalist has the bravery to give the first negative review of this silly, overpriced little beast.
In my opinion, BMW should have just re-introduced its 4cyl hatchback that failed in the 1990s. The time is right for it. Now, every other manufacturer is planning 4cyl RWD cars and Bimmer is stuck with this thing.
Who wants to take bets that people will cross-shop this with the new Solstice hardtop, and choose the Pontiac? Now THAT’S embarrassing!
I wonder how this car would have turned out if BMW didn’t own Mini.
Would the 1 series have become a 4 cyl with the 128 being the top model? Could they have made it lighter?
I think as much as they didn’t want to eat away at 3 series sales, they equally didn’t want to mess with Mini and Mini Clubman sales.
So with that said – the BMW 2002, and it’s legacy are history.
I wonder what they will do with Triumph?
Wow, best review of this car I’ve read. Of course that’s only because I agree with it all. I do love BMW leatherette, though. I have fond memories of its ruggedness from my dad’s 320i. However, at this price I always find petrochemical cows a bit hard to swallow.
Thank you for that very honest assessment of a car that most dare not speak ill of. I recently had a drive in a 07 328i and the seats in that car were as you described the seats in this one. Are they the same?
mxfive4,
I think you nailed it, with the Mini Cooper S in the product mix, there is no room for a true entry level BMW.
I’m done with BMW, at least for now. The 1992 325i was sold last night and I just dont see replacing it with a any current BMW sold in the USA. Too bad, because I loved the way that car drove and even looked, as well as the BMW motorcycle that was my first introduction to the BMW brand.
I would prefer a nicely restored 2002ti any day!
We start the week with Jonny’s X6 review and end it with Justin’s 135i write-up.
What perfect symmetry. Proper book-ends, these.
Whether doing ubersoovie or kleincoupe, the blue propeller boys have fat and ugly down to a science.
Having seen a few 135i’s running about town already, I second Justin’s negative comments and square them. In the flesh, this car is quite possibly even more unappealing than it is in photos.
BMW. You’ve lost the plot.
As a younger, not-rich, driving enthusiast who also uses his car to carry quite a bit of gear now and then, the 120d has been my dream car since introduction. When BMW announced they were finally bringing the 1-series to the US, I figured my venerable ‘98 Impreza wagon might be seeing retirement sooner than later. Nope.
The car division could use a lesson from Motorrad – reasonably priced do-it-all vehicles that get great mileage yet retain fantastic driving dynamics are always best-sellers.
My BMW of choice will continue to be the F650GS.
Ok, one quip with the review, the rear seats are not that bad. I sat comfortably behind a 5′10″ driver. Ok, I’m not what you would call a large man but the rear seat room is not on the Audi TT, Porsche 911 level, it is a real seat.
Unfortunately I haven’t driven this yet, but I see where you are coming from. I can’t argue with the overly fat argument or the stlying issues. When comparing this car to what it should have been it falls short. However, having driven a 335i, I can’t imagine that it isn’t simply awesome. Anything wrapped around that engine would be awesome, much less a 335i minus 200lbs of bulk. Plus, with some basic aftermarket tweaks like an LSD and a chip there are very few cars that will be able to run with the 135i including the new M3. Start throwing carbon fiber and other lightweight components on it and it will be all that it should have been and more. Hopefully, BMW will do this for us and come out with the 135tii or a 123tii turbo.
I was really looking forward to this review, but now I feel somewhat disillusioned. I wanted to like this car. Admittedly, I’m no BMW expert nor historian, so the attachment they claim to the 2002 has little effect on me. I’m wondering if the car would be better-received if they didn’t pimp heritage so much in the ads. Still, at this price, an entry level performance coupe ought to be free of any critics. Disappointing…
Clarkson gave the coupe 5 stars. Pity, I had hoped BMW knew what it was doing, that somehow the 1 series overcame the flaws on paper.
Mr. Berkowitz, thank you for not pulling our the BMW free pass like so many other publications and writers have done. I disliked reading all the hype in the run-up to the US release of this car and I’m glad to hear the opinions of someone willing to go against the grain.
I still haven’t seen one in person, but the more photos I see of the 1 the less I like it. It’s basically a 9/10 scale 3 series, but the sedan not the coupe. It offers no real reason to buy it, because everything including size, weight, and cost are 9/10s a 3 series.
And the new 3 series is a beautiful design to me, they just nailed the coupe’s proportions. Why bother getting a 1, get a 3!
Lest we forget that there is a substantial class of no-nothing young (under 35) lawyers, doctors, and consultants getting paid close or more than 200K per year. The kind of people who get new Blackberrys & I-pods phones every six months, have the latest flat screen tvs, use too much hair gel, think that a $500 bar/restaurant tab for a Friday nite is par for the course, have monthly rents in the thousands, and thrive on competing with each other.
BMW has nailed the demographic once again. If BMW were concerned with bringing a fresh, quirky, and interesting product to North America, we would have gotten a 128 1-series hatch (or as others have mentioned a 120d) or something. Nope, that’s not what the yuppies want. Fast or SUV.
Sounds from the review like this is a BMW designed by people who take the bus to work. Competent and reliable, good on-paper performance stats (it is a BMW, after all), but with all the soul of a primer-gray Trabant in base trim.
I’m an under 25 year old consultant and I wouldn’t be caught dead in this thing. If someone is trying to ‘compete’ with his car, an ugly, compact, poor-man’s 3-Series isn’t going to impress many people. Neither will any of the ubiquitous 3-Series models, with the exception of the M3 in certain enthusiast circles
So the other night, I pulled out the pictures of my old BMWs…my 1974 2002 is still the car that calls the most to my inner-car lust. Even though it was a 21 year old car when I bought it, that car was just…just…right. I also owned a Euro-spec 318i (E30, thank you)…minimalist, light on it’s feet, and thanks to some slight handling mods, cornered like nobody’s business. Moved up to a 1993 325is..and then my lifelong love affair with BMW pretty much dried up. Bangle ruined it for me. Sure, my wife and I are still looking at a Z3 down the road to play with, but that’s it. I had high hopes for the little (relatively speaking, obviously) 1-series. If it had come out several hundred pounds lighter, perhaps with a blown four cylinder somewhere in the low $20s, I’d be considering one. But damn…$43k for a slightly shrunken 3-series? With the X6 and now this, one has to wonder what the folks over at Bayrische Motoren Werke are thinking? Then again, maybe they know the American market TOO well and will sell a gazillion of these beasts…just not to me. Now excuse me while I go back to day dreaming about my days in the good ol’ 2-double oh-2.
In the end, the only reason to get this car is for the hatchback. Oops, can’t get the hatch in the US.
Anyone looking to buy one of these would be better off with the 3. It will cost you less in the long run, because the 3 is going to hold it’s value better.
If they would bring a lighter, more economical, but still fun to drive car to the plate, they could find a new set of customers at a time they really need them. Instead of a homerun, they took the walk.
I’m confused by a couple of sentences in this review:
The 2002’s huge greenhouse dominated its exterior design; the airy cockpit made the car feel a lot smaller than its dimensions indicated.
How did its air cockpit make it feel smaller? Wouldn’t it have made it feel bigger than its compact dimensions would have suggested?
Bargain hunters will be pleased that the materials deployed throughout the 135i’s cabin are virtually to those found in the 3-Series.
Virtually what? Identical?
A decent sized backpack back is just about out of the question.
Back there?
wow, didn’t realize this one doesn’t have the ZF transmission… so much for having a solid drivetrain. good engine, though.
omnivore :
Point two and three (the 1-Series’ interior’s similarity to the 3-Series and the backpack issue) were my bad. I’ve edited the text to clarify.
Justin will address the other question.
[NB: After complaints from several commentators, in the interests of editorial transparency, TTAC will no longer remove comments that point out our errors after we've fixed the text. Unless the mistakes are so completely dumb they make us look like total idiots.]
I had the BMW 2000, which was a 4-door big brother to the 2002. Great engine and the best clutch I have ever experienced in a car. Not the best looking car, though. It was roomy, quiet, and handled great. Plenty of power once the smog pump was disabled. The seats weren’t particularly bolstered but were super comfortable. I used to set the valve clearance just to admire the beautiful head cover casting. I rate that 2000 as arguably the best car I have ever owned. Only bug in the years I owned it was a front wheel bearing. I finally traded it on a new 260Z.
The 2002 was easier to get in and out of as well. I was shocked when I looked at this car at how uncomfortable I was.
My mistake, though. I’d just looked at Minis and the Smart. They were nice and roomy.
I rented a 318i 4 door sedan (salloon) in the UK about 7 years ago while I was there on vacation, and it was civilized (civilised?) and competent. It had a usable amount of power, not excessively stupid.
Four cylinders. Automatic. Four doors. Green. But, BMW! (At the rental agency in Scotland, they obviously said to themselves “American…. give him the automatic” when they didn’t know I learned how to drive on two stick shift cars, a 1973 VW Beetle and a 1973 GMC Sprint SS 454 with rock-crusher).
We need the four cylinder BMW’s here, BMW. In both the 1 series (for singletons with no passenger needs) and 3 series.
After the hype for this car, I still didn’t get it. The distance between this and the 3er, as noted in other comments, won’t appeal to the status-seeking crowd, and those looking for a budget BMW aren’t served, unless the $36k base price is more common than for other BMWs.
The spirit of lightweight fun lives on in the Mini, Miata, and Elise/Exige. The Germans won’t reprise the 2002 or the GTI, with their original spirits, any time soon. Plaid doesn’t make you look thin with what, 3300lbs of ass to haul?
This car IS a slightly shortened 3 series. And who started all that 2002 stuff? If it was BMW, it was pure marketing hype. If it was the bimmer fans, they have only themselves to blame.
IMHO, as I’ve been saying for months, they screwed the pooch by not offering the 5-door hatchback:
1. The layout is already being lapped up by buyers of the Mazda3, 4-door GTI, or Impreza/WRX. The old “Americans don’t want hatchbacks” thing is dying quickly.
2. They removed the rear doors and cargo room, which MIGHT have made the car better overall and at least offered a layout that the 3-series doesn’t really have.
The whole idea of an 90%-scale 3-series seems ridiculous to me, especially when it’s not designed as some kind of lightweight stripper version.
Agreed wholeheartedly that the market is ready for a new incarnation of the old 318ti.
I test drove a 128 last weekend and came away with a more positive impression. My impressions: LOOKS: Better in person than in the pics, Tight and agressive. It made the 3 series coupe parked next to it look like a soft porker. INTEROR: fantastic! Beautiful leather and a high quality look. Nice traditional look without being overstyled. No cheap silver plastic (are you listening Lexus, Acura?) Sport Seats are a must.I found them comfortable. Backseats are useless as expected. POWER: Good, but will not overly impress. Did not care for the 6 speet AT. It was a little too busy for me. I would take the manual. RIDE: I liked it. It wasn’t harsh and road noise was not excessive. HANDLING: I didn’t have the opportunity to push it. Better than my 4Runner! OTHER: Options are expensive! choose with care or the car will cost alot. I would take this over a 3 series.
It doesn’t help that even with all that the 135 has for it under the hood, it still runs north of $43k in tested trim. That red ‘71 2002 cost around $4k back then. What would the inflation adjusted price be now?
Assuming an average annual inflation of 3%, $12,000.
Based on the review, I’m surprised this expensive, fat, ugly, but somehow small (it takes talent to combine those three attributes in a single automobile) car got three stars.
Maybe we Americans (for the most part) are the the tacky, tasteless, boring, soulless, bunch that will simply drive any stupid 3box car or SUV with a designer badge on the hood, that the rest of the world see us as.
Maybe we do “give it up so easy” that automakers like BMW know that they dont even need to try hard to please us.
Maybe we are that frivolous with our cash that BMW and the like know that they easily make madd profit on silly items like navigation systems that they sell for $2000 but can be had in the local Target for $500. In the meantime cut numerous little corners on their cars to the point were they ARE actually nothing more than RWD Accords.
Hell even Toyota know that it does not take much if any effort to make a buck in the USA. Americans dont pay attention to jack so build one extremely nice model and than bait and switch with much lower quality. “Hey its a Toyota, right” Not for nothing but GM, Ford, and Chysler got away with that crap for half a century!
Hatchbacks??? Why, Americas will simply take out a second mortgage and buy a second car like any SUV. No better yet they will drive a $50,000 6000lb luxury SUV and than pay someone to deliver whatever they buy but refuse to dirty their “truck” up with.
Make a crappy little sub-compact with build quality less than a Civic or Fit call it a Mini and fools in America will spend $30,000 on a $15,000 car!
This is America folks and those 1 series will sell. They are arriving just in time to maintain sales as the 3 series is becoming to expensive for America. They will also allow 3 series posers to feel better that they have now moved up the BMW foodchain by default.
Umm…yeah. I think I’ll go back to pining for that Evo MR.
Good job Justin – the best review I have read of this car yet.
What a wasted opportunity the 135 coupe is. I have been renting 120d hatchbacks in Europe ever since they became available and love them. Practical, economical, a flexible engine for urban driving and a bag of fun to drive. The 120d hatch is a great all-round package. The 135 coupe is neither practical, nor economical and is resting the defense of it’s $45 price tag entirely on its performance which comes up short.
If you want pocket rocket performance then an STi, EVO, RX-8, 350Z or R32 Golf can get you as many or more thrills for less money. I never thought I’d say this but the 135 makes the Audi A3 3.2 look like a sensible choice.
I think BMW product planners felt had trouble “defining” the 1-series – especially in US trim.
On the one hand, the car had to be different, a real alternative to the 3-series that would possibly a attract younger busyers the brand. On the other, both the 128i and the 135i had to be every bit a BMW, with inline 6 engines and hallmark BMW handling. Most of all, the execs in Munich were determined not to repeat the 318ti hatchback experiment characterized by an underwhelming car that slightly tainted what a BMW in America was supposed to be.
Long story short, both the 135i and 128i are too expensive BMW missed a real opportunity to offer a lighter 1-series that was still every bit of a BMW but could be had well-optioned for about $30k. At that price point, it would have been king vs. the Audi A3 2.0T, the Acura TSX’s and the Volvo C30. It’s hard to say what class the 1-series is in, and who it will compete with. As exciting as the 135i maybe, don’t be surprised if the 128i sells it by a good margin. The only way to justify the 1-series is by buying a lightly optioned 128i with a manual and calling it a day.
When I see a BMW. there are only 3 things that come into my mind.
1. It is from Germany
2. Horspower
and
3.still a Bimmer.
Look at the Driver’s Cockpit it so plain and boring. A $40,000 car is just too much to bear.
I can buy 2 Mitsubishi Lancer GTS fully loaded with 650 watts system w/ sub-woofer, Navigation system,Paddle shifter,17 inch wheels, heated leather seats, CVTransmission etc etc for 17,850 and I can beat a 3 series in 4.5 a seconds in 0-60 and also you can buy 1 used Kia with 6 cd player, foglights and much more.
Who wants a Bimmer? Not me
A $40,000 entry-level car? Ugly, cramped and too heavy? What were they thinking??
It doesn’t help that even with all that the 135 has for it under the hood, it still runs north of $43k in tested trim. That red ‘71 2002 cost around $4k back then. What would the inflation adjusted price be now?
per the infaltion calculator I found,
http://www.westegg.com/inflation/
What cost $4000 in 1971 would cost $21140.12 in 2007.
I think I did the right thing buying a MINI. Same problems with the back seats, but at least the leather sport seats were cheaper, and are really, really nice. And coming in well under $30K for a fairly loaded up car that drives/handles great. And I am getting just over 40MPG with mostly highway driving.
A 5 door hatch on a small scale would have been very cool. But, if BMW had done some sort of hatch, it could have bit into sales of tricked out MINI S’s and and the Clubman. Besides, their last hatch version in the 3 series flopped so badly the remaining few on the road are probably collectible.
If I had $45 to spend on a car, the 1-series wouldnt be it…
The poor base seats remind me of the ignition system: the default configuration is lousy, so you have to pony up for the expensive upgrade.
For those who haven’t witnessed the stupidity of the BMW ignition sequence… you insert a “key” into the dashboard and then
turn it to start the engine like in any normal carpush a different button located above the key to start the car. Turning off involves the needless multi-operation sequence in reverse. Or, instead, you can pay an extra $500 for a proximity sensor that means you don’t have to insert the key… just push the start button. Well, there is one good thing: BMW finally stopped hiding the key slot behind the steering wheel.Wow…just wow. I don’t know how many people are just utterly missing this car.
The looks, I’ll grant. It’s not a natural car. Ugly? I don’t think so, personally. But it’s not classic. It’s not sexy. But then again, I don’t think the 2002 is either, either.
But everything else? My god people.
For $35k, you can now get into one of the most perfect drivetrains known to man. The 6-speed trans in this car is supposed to be a slightly revised version of the 335i (mainly has a shorter shifter). I’ve driven the 335…which was damn near perfect and could perhaps use a shorter shfiter.
The suspension layout is identical. The car now has regenerative braking and superior brakes.
In an age in which young buyers are throwing down 35k for STIs and EVOs (and I don’t see a shortage of them), BMW has offered a car that can outperform both of them on dry roads and racetracks. And let’s face it, the people who buy the STI and EVO “because it has 4 doors” are few and far between.
The interior is e90 +25%. Functional cupholders? Check. Slightly more driver oriented? Check. Cleaner design and execution. Here it is!
If you’ve ever raved about the 335, if you’ve ever gone to bmwusa.com and priced one out just for fun, if you’ve ever told yourself you don’t need 4-doors, then you should love this car.
It’s the 3-series with a step taken towards the sportier side of the horizon. Shorter, 200 pounds less (lets face it, that’s a ton of weight less in this day and age), a little less refined in the guttural way.
Why is it the 2002 reborn? It’s not. But it’s BMW taking a step towards the 2002. Less expensive, less big, and all the important stuff has been given to it or improved upon (i.e. 6-piston front brakes, better rear diff power control).
And here we are 40+ comments into a mediocre review of this car, lamenting it.
I’m proud of BMW for taking this risk. I hope it does so well that they continue it and bring the 5-door hatchback version. I think it’s a glorious car with the disadvantage of now being as good looking as the e90 coupe, but being better performer.
Those who deride the 1 but praise the 335i coupe, suspend your pistonhead priveleges. You have succumbed to negativity about auxiliary subjects, and ignored the performance capabilities.
Joe
Omnivore-
How did its air cockpit make it feel smaller? Wouldn’t it have made it feel bigger than its compact dimensions would have suggested?
Good question. What I meant was that the airy cockpit made the car feel like it had more space inside, but that the exterior of the car was a compact and easily managed size. With lots of glass in the 2002, you could see all the way around you, see the corners of the car, the road, etc.
On the other hand, the 1-Series is cramped inside but because it’s like looking out from a pillbox, it’s difficult to tell where the bumpers end, and the car just seems to overwhelm you.
The 1er as sold everywhere except North America comes as a 3-door (think Golf) and 5-door (think A3). Why in the heck BMW didn’t bring THOSE cars here is beyond me. Instead, they brought a 135i here and totally screwed the pooch.
Our stateside aversion to hatchbacks is what made this car look like the goofy rolling caricature it is. Executed as a 5-door hatch (like the rest of the world sees), it’s a striking design. As a 2-door coupe, it’s plain awkward.
The value/weight/size/power cyclic continuum of despair needs no further discussion in its absurdity. I will say though that the “piano” snick made me spit milk through my nose.
Forty-Three Tousand Dollars???
Forty-Three Thousand?
Really? F-O-R-T-Y T-H-R-E-E?
With plastic seat covers?
There are BMW suckers born every minute.
Thanks, I’ll take a G35S any day.
Rubes.