Affordable "Thiel type" speakers are?

Well, just for the record Drjay, I've heard both speakers many times in many different rooms with various gear, and I have a differing opinion on the 2.4's vs. the 3.5's. IMHO, not only do the sealed box 3.5's go deeper, but are tighter and better better defined in the bass, as well as more coherent too, than the passive radiator 2.4's. The 3.5's do show bass limitations when called upon to play low bass LOUDLY. YMMV.

Don Vito
If you got out there and heard both speakers with a good low feedback amp
You would appriciate that its the phase correct area that they are both connected. They both play live recorded music with superb tonality while also preserving overtones thats where other speakers are much different.

Hi Unsound,
I totally respect your opinion and you are a gentleman whose inputs in past posts have helped me a great deal in getting my main system to the point I am truly happy with it. What I personally prefer most in the 2.4s over my 3.5s is the detail. I notice more of everything from top to bottom in a recording with the 2.4s and do not feel that this is due to frequency response issues. As Gary at Thiel says, "2.4s reveal everything in the recording whether you like it or not."
I see that a legitimate point of view of this could be that the 2.4s have crossed the line from wonderfully detailed into being "clinical or hyperarticulate". I certainly don't feel my 3.5s are lifeless or homogenized, so it seems perfectly appropriate to describe them as more coherent. As you point out it is a matter of personal preference.
If I run across some affordable Audio Physics I will certainly try to audition them since their design philosophy suggests they might have a lot of the 2.4 characteristics that I like, but my intuition tells me moving to Thiel 2.3s, although a worthy suggestion, would feel like a lateral move.
Based on all the input so far it appears that my best bet is to be more patient and just keep looking for 3.6s, which from all I've read, are somewhat more detailed than the 3.5s. I am, however, still open to any other suggestions.
Thanks to All

"I think the Vandersteens share a lot in common with the Thiels"

I always considered Vandersteens and Thiels opposites.

When you say you feel the 2.3s would "feel like a lateral move" are you referencing the 3.5s or 2.4s?

My understanding was you were trying to upgrade the 3.5s, but were very happy with the 2.4s as they are.

The 2.3s are a lateral move from the 2.4s, but my demoing suggests they are "better" sounding, more-modern design than the 3.6. Sonically 2.3s sound far more like the 2.4 than the 3.6. The 3.6 will play louder & deeper with enough power, but to my ear the 2.3 & 2.4 have more of those 'Thiel' characteristics you describe than do the older-school 3.6. 3.6 designed in '92 vs 2.3 clean-slate design in '98.

And in some ways the 2.3 lateral move may even exceed the 2.4s for you with tighter (though not deeper) bass, more perceived midrange detail, and marginally better soundstaging. Your subject line is "Affordable 'Thiel type' speakers are?" -- actual Thiel speakers for $1200!

OK, I've argued my case far enough :-)