[slowbrick]

This is a polarizing car period. To each their own. I love the performance, hate the interior. If you really care about numbers, why even shop german cars. GM and Ford make plenty for similar pricing that murder everything everyone else has mentioned. Buy those and move on.

The real question I love to ask in these posts are what is your driving level? Lets see what you can really do with 350-400bhp on the track or twisties. Otherwise 5-6-7-800bhp isnt going to do shit for you if you dont know what you are really doing. It really a my dick is bigger than yours bragging rights thing. See it every weekend I show up to Sebring or Homestead. 100k cars with sub 4 second 0-60s getting passed by 300whp miatas...I just laugh

[medphysdave]

Lol, I had one of those miatas. It was so much fun at the HPDEs. There was a lot of butthurt going on.

[Glounk]

The M2 has a single tiny turbo and i greatly appreciate this while driving and for this pleasure i forget the numbers i could get with a big or bi-tri-quadri-turbos or with an instant torque electrical engine

[McPurrs]

Originally Posted by stylinexpat

Was looking into a new M2 but then Nurburgring numbers along with 1/4 Mike numbers are not all that great. 0-60 numbers are same as new 2018 Golf R. The Golf R might even be quicker around Nurburgring track. 7:58 is not all that great

Maybe you should rent or buy both and do your own ring laps... then tell us what is and isn't a good time. Below 8 on the ring is plenty good.

[krizze]

I annihilated a 2016 RS3 on the Autobahn we started from about 50mph and he kept up until around 120mph when i started to really pull away don't know about the times but i believe BMW severely understate the times because of all the tests and reviews the M2 was always faster then the M4 on track.... and they can't have M4 customers complaining the M2 is quicker and cheaper!

[aerobat]

Originally Posted by stylinexpat

Was looking into a new M2 but then Nurburgring numbers along with 1/4 Mike numbers are not all that great. 0-60 numbers are same as new 2018 Golf R. The Golf R might even be quicker around Nurburgring track. 7:58 is not all that great

I think you should watch Top Gear "The Perfect Road Trip" where a Porsche Cayman beats a Pagani Huayra on Monza.
On paper, Pagani is "slightly" faster.

[stylinexpat]

Originally Posted by aerobat

I think you should watch Top Gear "The Perfect Road Trip" where a Porsche Cayman beats a Pagani Huayra on Monza.
On paper, Pagani is "slightly" faster.

I owned a Cayman S for 2 years. Car was fast and a lot of fun. If you were easy on throttle that car could get 30 MPG. Only bad part about the car was seating position as I could not decline seat back enough to be comfortable on long freeway/highway trips. Had the Cayman S allowed me to recline seats back like on a Audi TT I would have never sold that car.

[DivideBYZero]

Don't care.

[stylinexpat]

Originally Posted by Twix

A lot of the slowness of the M2 at speed comes from the extra cooling and downforce added. If you look at the cD of the M2, it's actually pretty horrible in comparison to most road going cars, there are even pick-up trucks with a better cD. But, the M2 has better cooling and decent stock front end downforce.

But really, how often are you racing at speeds above 100 MPH on public roads? Hopefully never unless you're in Germany on the Autobahn.

As for the 1/4 mile times, yeah it's slow. It also isn't set up for drag racing whatsoever. The gearing is way too short, the tires have zero sidewall and the rear suspension is way too stiff.

Want to go drag racing? Buy a Challenger. Want to go circuit racing, buy a Cayman. Want the best of both worlds and the ability to travel long distance comfortably, buy an M2. It's a well rounded jack-of-all-trades, master of none.

I did see the CD numbers on the M2 and they are not so great. Mercedes does a good job on the CD numbers. They help fuel economy and high speed acceleration. Low CD numbers also help keep noise levels down in car

[six-n-twins53]

What's this gas mileage thing you guys keep talking about? My m5 was barely in double digits and i loved every minute of it

[oldmanstyle]

Originally Posted by chris719

Drag coefficient without frontal area is meaningless though.

Frontal area without drag coefficient is meaningless too.

[F87_LCI]

These posts kill me...If the OP could do sub 10 on the ring with a GTR i'll eat my hat.

A Golf R is...still a Golf. My wife drives a Golf.

[OSee]

Originally Posted by six-n-twins53

What's this gas mileage thing you guys keep talking about? My m5 was barely in double digits and i loved every minute of it

I managed to get 8mpg on one particularly exciting trip in my 63.

20mpg would be heaven sent.

[Franzino]

Originally Posted by mtoosexy

True, but I bet the M2 is a Blast to drive!... Wouldn't catch me dead owning a Golf R.
I have not driven an M2 but i have driven a Golf R...Golf R=meh

My personal opinion: I dont care about times... if i did, i would buy an RS3 sedan instead of the M2 for ROUGHLY the same $.

Care about 1/4 mile times? Get a push button-go fast Tesla

Good luck in your car search!! I hope you find the right one for you!

+1 same here...could not care less...it drives great and is fast enough that is all what matters to me in this car.

[hoyasaxa]

Originally Posted by Franzino

+1 same here...could not care less...it drives great and is fast enough that is all what matters to me in this car.

Lots of people in this thread making excuses for the M2 like this--it's "good enough" for me. There's no need.

OP is trolling.

The Golf R is slower than the M2 to 60, even though it (sort of) has AWD.
The Golf R is significantly slower than the M2 5-60.

In every objective measure, the Golf R is slower than the M2, and it is also slower around a track.

The fact that the 2018 Golf R is getting the 7-speed DSG, which is likely the same "s-tronic" transmission already in the S3, isn't going to change anything. It's going to have a slightly shorter 1st gear and a super-overdrive 7th gear for cruising and better fuel economy.

The M2 is already faster than the TTS and the S3 in a straight line. It is (at least) even with a TTRS around a track (TTRS has barely managed understeer and plows into corners). There's nothing to see here. Pack up and go home.

[akkando]

Originally Posted by krizze

I annihilated a 2016 RS3 on the Autobahn we started from about 50mph and he kept up until around 120mph when i started to really pull away don't know about the times but i believe BMW severely understate the times because of all the tests and reviews the M2 was always faster then the M4 on track.... and they can't have M4 customers complaining the M2 is quicker and cheaper!

I'm so confused. Someone on this forum who has a bunch of Porsches and tracks their cars said their M2 was getting left in the dust by a stock Audi S3 whenever they got to the straightaway. Seems the m240i also starts to pass the M2 once you get up to about 90. Shrug. I don't know what to believe.

[hoyasaxa]

Originally Posted by akkando

I'm so confused. Someone on this forum who has a bunch of Porsches and tracks their cars said their M2 was getting left in the dust by a stock Audi S3 whenever they got to the straightaway. Seems the m240i also starts to pass the M2 once you get up to about 90. Shrug. I don't know what to believe.

My suspicion is that the M2 was a manual, given it was being tracked by someone on this forum who was likely an enthusiast. These are the C&D test results for the 6MT M2:

Originally Posted by 6MT M2

Zero to 60 mph: 4.2 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 10.0 sec
Zero to 120 mph: 14.5 sec
Zero to 150 mph: 27.0 sec
Rolling start, 5-60 mph: 4.7 sec
Top gear, 30-50 mph: 5.7 sec
Top gear, 50-70 mph: 4.7 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 12.7 sec @ 113 mph
Top speed (governor limited): 164 mph
Braking, 70-0 mph: 159 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.99 g

http://archive.is/ASueL [sidebar got lost, see original URL]


http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...ll-test-review

The S3 would have been a so-called stronic (the brand name of Audi's double-clutch gearbox). These are the C&D test results for that car:

Originally Posted by stronic S3

Zero to 60 mph: 4.4 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 10.8 sec
Zero to 130 mph: 19.7 sec
Street start, 5-60 mph: 5.6 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 12.9 sec @ 108 mph
Top speed (gov ltd, mfr's est): 155 mph
Braking, 70-0 mph: 160 ft

http://archive.is/2HKFL


http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...ed-test-review

The manual M2 is still quicker than the double-clutch S3, but it's pretty close. Gear changes in the manual M2 mean you're coming off throttle, the turbo is spooling down, complete the gear change, and then back on throttle. But in a double-clutch car, the second clutch is already holding the next gear, the change is near instantaneous, and you never come off throttle, so the turbo doesn't spool down.

By comparison, here are the numbers for the DCT M2. Notice the quicker quarter-mile time, four tenths faster than the S3, and the rolling start, three tenths faster than the 6MT M2.

Originally Posted by DCT M2

Zero to 60 mph: 4.0 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 9.6 sec
Zero to 130 mph: 18.3 sec
Zero to 150 mph: 28.6 sec
Rolling start, 5-60 mph: 4.4 sec
Top gear, 30-50 mph: 2.4 sec
Top gear, 50-70 mph: 2.9 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 12.5 sec @ 113 mph
Top speed (governor limited): 163 mph [Note: this car must have had M Driver's Package]

http://archive.is/j1EMW [sidebar lost again. see original url]


http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...ic-test-review

The bottom-line is that it's important to compare apples-to-apples.

The M2 is a quick car. A lot of reviews say it starts getting short of breath after 100mph, and that might be true, but the numbers suggest that it's still significantly quicker to vmax than the competition.

[McPurrs]

Originally Posted by LagunaSecaBlue

These posts kill me...If the OP could do sub 10 on the ring with a GTR i'll eat my hat.

A Golf R is...still a Golf. My wife drives a Golf.

You nailed it here.

[stylinexpat]

Yes, the M2 has a better and stronger motor. The main point was one would have figured that BMW would have pulled off some better numbers around Nurburgring. The VW GTI clubsport pulled a ring time of 7:43 which is about 15 seconds faster. Would have thought that the M2 with wider tires and a stronger engine with supposedly a better chassis would have gotten better lap times. In a straight line though it seems quite obvious that the M2 would be the faster car. My point is that I wish BMW would have pulled in some better numbers as I really like the new M2. The M2 looks better and has a stronger motor of the two. Lap times and fuel economy wise the Golf seems to win. Depends on how one wishes to compare them I suppose. They are two different cars. This also might explain why Chris Harris said that the Chassis on the R seemed more compliant when compared to the 235i M in the comparison video. The fun factor the BMW wins he said and I would agree

[GimmeanM]

Originally Posted by stylinexpat

Yes, the M2 has a better and stronger motor. The main point was one would have figured that BMW would have pulled off some better numbers around Nurburgring. The VW GTI clubsport pulled a ring time of 7:43 which is about 15 seconds faster. Would have thought that the M2 with wider tires and a stronger engine with supposedly a better chassis would have gotten better lap times. In a straight line though it seems quite obvious that the M2 would be the faster car. My point is that I wish BMW would have pulled in some better numbers as I really like the new M2. The M2 looks better and has a stronger motor of the two. Lap times and fuel economy wise the Golf seems to win. Depends on how one wishes to compare them I suppose. They are two different cars. This also might explain why Chris Harris said that the Chassis on the R seemed more compliant when compared to the 235i M in the comparison video. The fun factor the BMW wins he said and I would agree

Tires. Cup 2 vs PSS.

[3Si]

Civic Type R should be your car.

[hoyasaxa]

The VW clubsport was also missing a back seat. This is nonsense. None of which matters anyway, because I doubt most of us could get anywhere close to the 7:58 time on our own. (Or have the balls to try.)