I've listened to both, and it is very important to listen to the latest version of the 802D. IMO, B&W really improved them, but for some reason didn't update the designations at all.
That said, I prefer the Salon2 and purchased them. Not only did I prefer the overall spectral balance of the Salon2s, but their bass is significantly better than the 802D's, and IMO so is the important woofer-to-midrange transition on grand piano. The real clincher for me, though, is that to this day I've never heard the B&W 800D or 802D image well front-to-back. The newest 802D disappeared in the side-to-side soundstage, even putting images beyond the speaker positions when appropriate, but I could never close my eyes and get that feeling of having the images come out at me, and the Salon2s do that in spades. The Salon2s are extraordinary in this regard. It might just be the dealer set-ups I've heard with the B&Ws, but I heard pretty much the same thing in two different venues.
One comment I would make is that if you haven't heard the Salon2s you might think 802Ds are about as good it gets. Or, you might not be as sensitive to a 3D soundstage as I am. Or you might like the fact that the 800D/802D have more "bite" in the upper mids and highs than the Salon2s do. Some people just prefer a more up-front balance, and then the 802Ds might sound superior.
Another impression I had is that, IMO, the B&Ws have better cosmetics than the Revels. The 800D and 802D look and feel sumptuous. The wood finishes, especially, are luxurious. The Salon2s, either finish, have a shiny, almost plastic look to them. In black the Salon2 looks very sleek and high-tech, almost like Apple did the design, but the B&Ws look like Aston Martin did it, if you know what I mean.
FWIW, it's been eight months now, and I still marvel at the sound of the Salon2s.