[eatingpizzainthef87rules]

Originally Posted by cntzl

You read all these posts and this is what you came up with? I haven't seen a single post claiming extra 125lbs in the front is better. We are arguing over if BMW did anything to hide that extra weight or to make the car still feel nimble, which is quite possible. If they didn't, it will be a failure on their end and we'll probably see it from the reviews pretty soon. Also, I don't think anyone who is considering this car is about driving around streets wanting to look cool. There are much better cars for that. If you really think people who own a car that has a heavier front end than your M2 are all about show, go check out your local tracks or be my guest at Thunderhill or Laguna Seca in our track days, you'll be surprised!

My m2 has over 3000km of track time, I don’t need to go out to tracks more often.
And yes I do consider anyone who wants a car with 125lbs over the nose more than one that doesn’t for a minimal power gain someone who just wants the latest and greatest for bragging rights.

[M-Pilot]

Originally Posted by bovairdf87

My m2 has over 3000km of track time, I don’t need to go out to tracks more often.
And yes I do consider anyone who wants a car with 125lbs over the nose more than one that doesn’t for a minimal power gain someone who just wants the latest and greatest for bragging rights.

I'll just copy/paste what I replied to you in the other thread:

As I said million times already in these threads, I will wait for the reviews. Also, what is much better or perfect for you may not be the same for someone else. M2 is a great car but it doesn't serve my needs. I want a car that is not only very good at track duty but also on the street as well. I track 10-12 times a year and the rest of my driving is on the street where N55 M2 doesn't do it for me. That's why I went with M4 Comp to begin with. M2 Comp has chance to be a more nimble car than my M4 thanks to its size while still being a rocket with a simple M4 CS flash tune. Saying "people who will buy M2C will do so for bragging rights" is just too shallow. Everyone has their own valid reasons. Who knows, maybe there will be some posers but I wouldn't go as far as making that generalization.

Anyways, glad you are enjoying your cars and I'll be doing the same both on track and streets

[doug_999]

Originally Posted by m34m

With respect to the M3 I agree let's disagree. However I'd say the vast majority of enthusiasts look fondly upon the E90/2 M3 generations and much less so the current. With respect to 1M it's a brilliant car and that's widely known. It's also widely known that it borrowed heavily from the E92 M3. As for turbo engines yes they make lots of torque that also well established. However again I'd argue most enthusiasts prefer and have a connection and passion for NA motors. If you'd like to disagree on this as well, by all means do so however that puts you in the minority again.

At no time did I say I want a car to "stay the same for four years". The point I was trying to make that you intentionally don't want to hear because of your inherent bias is that there's a difference between an evolution and pulling the rug out from under core customers and brand enthusiasts with major changes in short time frames.

I love my E92 M3 and my M2. However I don't like how this brand treats its most loyal customers. I waited a year for that M2 and have had it for 10 months only to learn it's being DROPPED. That's not a change or an evolution. That's an insult and so are those of you that argue that this is OK. Arguing for the sake of it is just annoying and obstructive. Use that little insight in your daily lives.

#1 see post #250
#2 BMW owes you nothing in terms of keeping the car the same - they sold you a car and that car does exactly what they said it would. Nothing changed there - the car didn't get slower or perform worse. You were not cheated.
#3 The fact that they came out with something different (for some very good reasons per post #250) is their choice. How silly of someone to "expect" a company to not advance. To say "damn, them, they change their product every 6 months, I'm not buying one of their gizmos because of that". Wow, just wow.
#4 so I wonder how the 2016 911 Porsche folks feel with the 2017s becoming turbos. Is that a good thing (cause NA is better right?) or a bad thing (cause they pulled the rug out on the 2016 owners). Curious whatcha thinking here...

[Potatohead-M2]

Porsche has got to be the worst example because the predictability of when their models come out and how much of a power bump they will have... Well you can almost set an expensive Swiss watch to it (talking 911’s here).

In the future the NA cars will be looked at like the air cooled cars are now, but the value won’t go crazy because there are a lot more of them. Manuals will also be looked at that way, and maybe even DCT’s as well, although with Porsche specifically they don’t seem to be going into torque converters as much as other brands (or at all).

They have done some crazy things recently like the GT3 Touring but that was 100% built only because of what happened with the 911R reselling gong show and they don’t want that happening again. Same thing with manual trans in the newest GT3.

[stefan]

Originally Posted by bovairdf87

My m2 has over 3000km of track time, I don't need to go out to tracks more often.
And yes I do consider anyone who wants a car with 125lbs over the nose more than one that doesn't for a minimal power gain someone who just wants the latest and greatest for bragging rights.

That's the forum in a nutshell. Every new model is applauded while parroting clearly biased journalists.

[qnet]

Originally Posted by amancuso

Being a BMW enthusiast here in North America, I agree with everything that you've said. People are up in arms because BMW took an M car and upgraded the engine halfway through production and say it's blasphemy and something that's never been done before. WRONG. They did it to the e36 and e36 ZM series. we went from the North American S52 to the S54, and that HP difference was more than what we're getting in the M2! That being said both versions of the e36 variants are fantastic and I wouldn't say no to either. S52 M roadsters and coupes are less than S54s but not by much, especially in coupe guise. Long story short, I'm perfectly happy owning an N55 M2 as it's a fantastic balanced machine.

I agree with your overall premise, but what you're saying isn't entirely correct. The E36 M3 had the S50 and S52 engine from my understanding. The 95 M3 (which I had) had the S50 engine, and 96 thru 99 models had the S52. The differences was a small bump in displacement (3.0 to 3.2), a different intake manifold, and going from OBD1 to 2. Both engines were rated at 240HP.

Your example with the M roasters is more to the point IMO, but those cars are rare.

[eeyang92]

Originally Posted by akkando

Would you want to wait for the S58 cars if they ALL come as AWD with the option at the push of the button to be RWD but only with traction control off? What if they are torque converter automatic only?

If the S58 cars come with the M X-Drive that behaves like the current M5, I'd be pretty happy with that. I don't see any disadvantages - I get to pick the mode that fits the situation best!

AFAIK they're keeping manuals for the next gen M2/M3/M4's. M2 for sure since the manual take rate is so high. For sure I'd go for a manual if available.

I've never driven a DCT so I can't comment on that. My old 328i had the ZF 8-speed which was very smooth and quick, although I can see it being a bit boring on a performance car.

[akkando]

Originally Posted by eeyang92

If the S58 cars come with the M X-Drive that behaves like the current M5, I'd be pretty happy with that. I don't see any disadvantages - I get to pick the mode that fits the situation best!

AFAIK they're keeping manuals for the next gen M2/M3/M4's. M2 for sure since the manual take rate is so high. For sure I'd go for a manual if available.

I've never driven a DCT so I can't comment on that. My old 328i had the ZF 8-speed which was very smooth and quick, although I can see it being a bit boring on a performance car.

One disadvantage is you only get RWD with no traction or stability control, which means a lot of people would use it less. I know I don't feel comfortable running with everything off on the street. Probably even less so with more HP and TQ. I assume it will also add weight to the car. Obviously there are advantages as well depending on what you want. I am positive there are many who don't want AWD at all.

[Poochie]

Originally Posted by akkando

One disadvantage is you only get RWD with no traction or stability control, which means a lot of people would use it less. I know I don't feel comfortable running with everything off on the street. Probably even less so with more HP and TQ. I assume it will also add weight to the car. Obviously there are advantages as well depending on what you want. I am positive there are many who don't want AWD at all.

I didn't know that the AWD/RWD toggle (a la F90 M5) disables the traction, that changes everything..

Do you know if the traction shuts off 100% or does it kicks in MDM stability as an option, at least

[amancuso]

Originally Posted by qnet

I agree with your overall premise, but what you're saying isn't entirely correct. The E36 M3 had the S50 and S52 engine from my understanding. The 95 M3 (which I had) had the S50 engine, and 96 thru 99 models had the S52. The differences was a small bump in displacement (3.0 to 3.2), a different intake manifold, and going from OBD1 to 2. Both engines were rated at 240HP.

Your example with the M roasters is more to the point IMO, but those cars are rare.

Yes true, unless you count the NA vs. ROW e36 M engines. As for the M roadsters, I see them all the time. It happens when you're an area rep for the ZSCCA.

[zFrostyy]

If you're worried about residual value that much in my opinion the N55 is a much better engine than the S55. It's more dynamic, proven, and it sounds leagues better especially if you have the right exhaust on it (cough) Dinan (cough). I would bet in the long term it holds better value than the S55 variant especially since it was only produced for 2-3 years whereas they're trying to put the S55 in damn near everything within a quarter mile of an M badge.

IMO the S55 sounds sporty but no more special than 'any other' sporty engine. The N55 is one of my favorite sounding engines with the Dinan exhaust and it's the only engine i've enjoyed an aftermarket exhaust on more than stock. There is no aftermarket exhaust that doesn't make the S55 sound like a lawnmower choking on concrete.

I think the M2C is interesting but sports car companies always push forward like that. Especially BMW. I personally like my M2 more than any of its competitors including within brand. Getting a car with the idea in mind that it will always be the best or even the best for the next year is setting yourself up for dissapointment. If that's your mentality you should accept you're buying the car as a status symbol and not for the actual experience(s) it can deliver. There's always new and better cars coming out within and outside of the pricerange.

It's like the saying this is my rifle and there are many like it but this one is mine. Goes for cars too. If you're this put off by BMW I encourage you to develop more of a relationship with your car; go on road trips & canyon drives or take her to the track. That's where the M2 shines.

[doug_999]

Originally Posted by qnet

I agree with your overall premise, but what you're saying isn't entirely correct. The E36 M3 had the S50 and S52 engine from my understanding. The 95 M3 (which I had) had the S50 engine, and 96 thru 99 models had the S52. The differences was a small bump in displacement (3.0 to 3.2), a different intake manifold, and going from OBD1 to 2. Both engines were rated at 240HP.

Your example with the M roasters is more to the point IMO, but those cars are rare.

It happens in other BMWs too... there was the 2004/2005 545 replaced by the 2006 550 (which ended production after 9 months I believe) only to be replaced by the updated 2007 550. I had one of those "rare" 2006s - and yes, plenty of people back then said the 545 was better/faster and the fact was the 2007 had some cool stuff I didn't have - but I wasn't upset, it was just progress.

[Bluenose-2er]

Originally Posted by cntzl

...the rest of my driving is on the street where N55 M2 doesn't do it for me.

Remind me to stay off the streets where you drive if you need more than the M2 can offer in your street driving

[Bluenose-2er]

Originally Posted by doug_999

#2 BMW owes you nothing in terms of keeping the car the same - they sold you a car and that car does exactly what they said it would.

Well... except for the "closed deck"

[M-Pilot]

Originally Posted by Bluenose-2er

Remind me to stay off the streets where you drive if you need more than the M2 can offer in your street driving

Lol thought someone would say that. My comment doesn't necessarily translate to a high speed or top speed run Even though there are places I quite often reach triple digits in Mexico, I was mainly referring to the acceleration merging into highway, taking over someone on a two lane road etc. There isn't probably much difference in 0-60 but rolling acceleration of the M4 is something that I couldn't find in the M2 for obvious reasons.

Edit: This doesn't mean M2 isn't fast enough for doing those things I mentioned above. I just like the quicker acceleration.

[pimp4cheddar]

Originally Posted by afwares

If this is true - and sales numbers say you're wrong - it was a great mistake for us. If it had come with the S55, we wouldn't be buying it. This is one "mistake" that worked out for us.

Marketing blunders are Coke thinking they can change the recipe without fans being upset, or Chevy trying to export a car to Latin America called the "Nova"...which translates to "No Go". Those are marketing blunders. Choosing an engine which won Ward's Best Engines 3 years in a row, and tuning it up to 0-60 in 4.5, and then selling them faster than they can build them doesn't seem like much of a mistake. But that's just my opinion, and as another member here once reminded me, "opinions are dark mysterious places and nobody wants to know about yours."

I see both of these comments have owners that purchased an M2...so I get it's a delicate issue.

I'm not sure who "US" qualify as...but this was a shit example of a marketing push for a car that was built up, heavily criticized and then relaunched as a ZCP version with everything the original should have had. Tsk Tsk BMW.

They didn't sell them faster then they could build...they purposely didn't build that many for this reason. Scarcity is a fluid term...and the issue was NOT the actual production of the M2 in terms of manufacturing limitation, but more so what the team at BMW decided they wanted to produce.

Remember when people bought the M2 and then attempted to sell it for $70k...and none of them sold? It's like the Tulip Craze all over again.

Originally Posted by Kid Eh

Seriously? How so?

The upgrades were limited, the price reflected this - we all know this (including you). Hence the reason why so many people are pissed about this ZCP...which is really what the car should have been when originally launched.

No one buying an M5 says, "I can't believe the Comp Package will have a completely different engine, completely different seats, larger brakes, etc".

Instead they make a thread and ask, "Should I hold off for the ZCP Option as it seems the wheels and exhaust will be updated along with a tweaked version of the suspension...is it worth the $5k?"



I'm not shitting on anyone who bought the M2 so far...my frustration is aimed towards BMW for the entire management of this car. Find me another ZCP BMW has ever done that introduced as many MASSIVE upgrades like this example...




At the end of the day - enjoy what you have. If anyone is that upset, then buy the new version.

[Fear-Mongrel]

Originally Posted by pimp4cheddar

I'm not shitting on anyone who bought the M2 so far...my frustration is aimed towards BMW for the entire management of this car.

I don't want to ignore your response, and normally I'd take more time to respond, but our perspectives are so far apart, I disagree with you so completely, it's like we're using different Internets. In the amount of time it would take for us to find any common ground we could probably earn enough money to go buy ourselves a couple of well-equipped Competitions so probably best to just agree to disagree.

[Luongo]

It laughable how many of the current owners are deluding themselves into thinking that their instantly outdated M2 is somehow superior to the ZCP with a proper M engine, M seats and M mirrors, etc.

I almost traded in my 981 Boxster for a 2018 M2 last fall at MSRP. If I had made the trade back then, I would be as mad as the OP is right now. There is a zero chance that any car enthusiast will choose a pre 2018 M2 over the 2019+ model in the used car market 2-3 years down the line unless there is a significant discount. I won’t even consider the older version with a souped up M235i engine if I were in the market for one.

BMW is giving the middle finger to the early adopters of M2 and I can totally see why the OP is saying that he won’t be buying another BMW. At least with Porsche, 981 kept the same engine from 2013-2016 and everyone knew that the 718 will have a newer engine. People who prefer naturally aspirated engines bought 2016 model and people who prefer a smaller 4 banger turbo engines waited for 2017 model as Porsche followed the industry standard upgrade schedule.

[Fear-Mongrel]

Originally Posted by Luongo

as Porsche followed the industry standard upgrade schedule.

Can someone please post a link to the industry standard upgrade schedule. I did not know there was one, and I'd like to read more about it. Thanks in advance.

[Luongo]

Originally Posted by afwares

Can someone please post a link to the industry standard upgrade schedule. I did not know there was one, and I'd like to read more about it. Thanks in advance.

https://www.autotrader.com/car-shopp...el-cycl-239246

You never see an LCI model getting ditched after one year.

[KristianS]

I've resisted getting involved in this for a while and I don't generally have a problem with life cycle updates but I do feel very slightly annoyed by this.The mirrors and seats don't bother me at all but the fact that they've now dumped a 'proper' M engine in it seems a fair bit different to your average changes during a model run. It's not a subtle change!! I'm not sure any other proper M car has had a none M developed engine previously and most variants used same engine e.g. CSL etc. Yes I'm aware that the N55 has S55 parts and is a really great engine but I do feel like they've gone some way to producing the car they always should have now. That does make it feel like a pretty poor judgement.

What I do know is that the N55 is still a great car and in std trim, there's unlikely to be a big difference between the two cars performance/ handling wise and I have a Mineral Grey car which should remain quite rare!!😀 I'm sure the new car will move things on though, which is good.

[Cavpilot2k]

So basically the OP is pissed that a few MY's after he got his car, something newer and more powerful came out to replace it?
That's the dumbest/funniest thing I've read lately!
There will ALWAYS be something newer and more powerful just around the corner.
: