[Spa2k]

Just because you don't like what magazine writers say about a vehicle doesn't mean they're wrong - it just means what they wrote is what they exprienced, using the hundred or more cars they test and drive over the course of a year as points of reference. YMMV. I'll bet in the next installment, we'll find out that some if the back pain complaints were due to the seats, not the suspension.

[bobert]

Originally Posted by jam3v

Hopefully the M2 can stay shielded from reviews like this that don't make it a point to differentiate between personal preference and what the car was intended to do.

Things like "ride stiffness" end up on the cons list even though the car is performing exactly the way it was designed.

You wouldn't review a Porsche 911 and list rear seat leg room as a con, would you?

I didn't think it was a 'bad' review - I think they have to point out the obvious drawbacks, however minor, like saying the new Miata has a small trunk and not much interior room. Just like the M2 was designed to handle very well, the Miata was designed to be very small & lightweight. Note that both are on their 10Best List - I think they've given the car plenty of love.

[blackholescion]

Go drive an STi then report back about the M2's stiff/harsh ride. Whatever Hans tunes the BMW dampers needs a massive raise because the ride quality is amazing for the car it is.

[IS+1]

It seems like car magazines love to take one small negative and completely blow it out of proportion, just for effect if nothing else. Just like Motor Trend and the whole crooked seat issue.

"Several staffers have complained about back pain"???!!

Seriously?? Who is C&D hiring these days?

[gtaM2]

personally i found my EVO X more comfortable but i really dont care as i like the way the M2 drives as opposed to some of the other more comfortable cars that make me feel like im driving a boat

[mssVT98]

Originally Posted by AngryBaby

On truly bad roads, especially "wavy" as opposed to simply poorly surfaced, it can be annoying.

This is a great way to describe it. The car is definitely stiff... it's an M car, so... yeah. But last week when I was in southern CT/northern NY I was on an older section of concrete highway, and the expansion joints were terrible. "Wavy" is a good way to put it. I found myself wondering if it was this bad for everyone (it wasn't). A sharp bounce over every joint was uncomfortable enough to make me slow down so I didn't think I'd get bounced off the road.

Everywhere else it's just firm, and nicely so to me.

[Ian ///M]

Comments section is trash -- good article , there was no critiques about the overall driving experience , so they have to rag on squeaks and rattles ? My differential squeaks, when pulling out of a parking spot..but rattles? from what? MPE? Lol

[boostm3]

I used to drive an E36 M3 with a Dinan Koni suspension.. For the last 7 years Ive been driving a 135i MSport with runflats. To me, the 135i MSport is the harshest ride Ive ever driven over rough roads... The stock runflats on that car remind me of semi pneumatic tires, such is the stiffness of the side walls. The Dinan Koni suspension wasnt what Id call cushy, but compared to the 135i Msport with runflats, maybe it was.

Im about a month away from my M2 which Ive never driven before, but Ive been told if I didnt find the Dinan Koni suspension too harsh, I wont find the M2 too harsh either.. And compared to my circa 2011 runflats on my 135i, Im expecting it to be not as jarring over sharp bumps and potholes as that. Hopefully, my expectations are not out of line.

Comments??

[McPurrs]

Stiff ride? The deuce is easily twice as easy on the roads than my 135i was.

[boostm3]

Originally Posted by McPurrs

Stiff ride? The deuce is easily twice as easy on the roads than my 135i was.

YAY. Thats what I was hoping to hear. I dont know how much of the harshness is the 135i suspension and how much can be attributed to the 2011 iteration of runflats, but I suspect its those runflats most of all.

[Spa2k]

If you look in the dictionary under "stiff ride," you'll see a picture of my short-wheelbase MINI JCW hardtop with nonadjustable sport suspension and run-flats. And my daily-driver Roman chariot is even worse. The M2 is also very stiff, especially on Midwestern roads, but is still very compliant.

[M2Nebula]

Objectively speaking, I thought the whole article sucked. How many f'n times are they gonna repeat themselves about their weenie backs hurting. It wasn't even written that well. Screw them, the M2 ride is not even close to being to stiff. In fact, I find it a more comfortable ride than my X1 and Acura. Basically, I smelled allot of hate overall when reading this review. Maybe they should just sit home in their massage chairs and watch TV.

[bobert]

I'm amazed by the number of ppl commenting on this thread who seem to be seriously offended by the C/D article. How dare they say anything bad about our beloved little M2!

[ChrisK]

When I first got my M2, it felt a tad stiff. After 3k miles it definitely softened up some. I have MPS tires. I have no issues using my m2 as a DD.

I equate the M2 ride to my old e92 ZCP with EDC on. Feels about the same.

[auf Deutsch]

Originally Posted by bobert

I'm amazed by the number of ppl commenting on this thread who seem to be seriously offended by the C/D article. How dare they say anything bad about our beloved little M2!

Besides the complaints about the stiff ride and diff recall, they love the car. Calling it a 4-wheel sport bike and the definition of RWD dynamics are quite the compliments.

[M2Nebula]

Not offended in the least here. How many times are they going to repeat themselves on one issue though. To me it was inaccurate and a terrible read. They were trying to be witty and it came across all wrong. Just calling it out as bad journalism.

[pissclams]

Originally Posted by M2Nebula

Not offended in the least here. How many times are they going to repeat themselves on one issue though. To me it was inaccurate and a terrible read. They were trying to be witty and it came across all wrong. Just calling it out as bad journalism.

FAKE NEWS!

[Spa2k]

Originally Posted by M2Nebula

Not offended in the least here. How many times are they going to repeat themselves on one issue though. To me it was inaccurate and a terrible read. They were trying to be witty and it came across all wrong. Just calling it out as bad journalism.

It's not bad journalism, it's reporting an issue multiple trained and experienced evaluators discovered. No car is perfect. Just because they pissed in your Wheaties with a criticism of your baby doesn't make them wrong. And guess what? You can share your thoughts too, even if they're subjective and wrong in other posters' opinions.

[OSee]

Not bad journalism in my opinion. But the comments are hilarious. Car and Driver demo would rather a GT350 or Ford RS.

[McPurrs]

Originally Posted by boostm3

YAY. Thats what I was hoping to hear. I dont know how much of the harshness is the 135i suspension and how much can be attributed to the 2011 iteration of runflats, but I suspect its those runflats most of all.

Oh the runflats were certainly most of the problem.

[F87 Old Guy]

To stiff, not to this 62 year old with back problems. I use mine as a DD and I have 13000 miles on it. My wife's X1 M Sport with run flats is MUCH stiffer. The M2 is a high performance sports car, deal with it or go buy a 7 series.

[jtfields]

Originally Posted by bobert

I'm amazed by the number of ppl commenting on this thread who seem to be seriously offended by the C/D article. How dare they say anything bad about our beloved little M2!

I wasn't offended. In fact, overall I thought it was a good review. I was just surprised that they found the ride so stiff. I like the way it rides and I don't have the best back in the world. Especially given that these are people who drive cars for a living. I'm willing to bet they've driven in many cars with a stiffer ride than the M2. I think they just exaggerate it for effect.