[raysspl]

You can't go wrong with either one. Both are extremely great.

[snaimpally]

The Mustang's secret sauce is the CF wheels. Reducing the wheel weight makes a huge difference. One of the car magazine reviews compared the 350R vs 350 and they commented on how big a difference there was between the two, which they attributed to the CF wheels.

An M2 vs GT350 comparison would have been fairer and would have minimized the price differential.

[Bosozoku]

From the review, about the M2:

"This thing has been built to be driven and not to impress your mates with gimmicks."

M3/4 owners will (pretend to) never understand that statement.

[Bosozoku]

Originally Posted by snaimpally

The Mustang's secret sauce is the CF wheels. Reducing the wheel weight makes a huge difference. ...

What's the rule of thumb?
1 pound less in each of your four wheel+tire assemblies = 100 pounds less car weight?

This is why 20" wheels are a bad idea.
More metal with less rubber is heavier than less metal with more rubber.
20" wheels + tires usually weigh more than 19" (and 18") wheels + tires.
Bad for performance, generally speaking.

[classyfast]

So gt350R betters the m2 and the new Camaro SS betters the m4 at 20k less.....damn everybody is gunning for the M's

[classyfast]

Originally Posted by Bosozoku

What's the rule of thumb?
1 pound less in each of your four wheel+tire assemblies = 100 pounds less car weight?

This is why 20" wheels are a bad idea.
More metal with less rubber is heavier than less metal with more rubber.
20" wheels + tires usually weigh more than 19" (and 18") wheels + tires.
Bad for performance, generally speaking.

Or you could have just said less rotational mass at the wheels, quicker car. I think that's what you were saying right?

[OrangeCrush]

Originally Posted by classyfast

So gt350R betters the m2 and the new Camaro SS betters the m4 at 20k less.....wtf BMW?

Try again. The GT350R is 10k more than the M2. Real life prices put at 30-40k more expensive than the M2. What's next? Corvette beats the M2? WTF BMW?

[classyfast]

Originally Posted by OrangeCrush

Try again. The GT350R is 10k more than the M2. Real life prices put at 30-40k more expensive than the M2. What's next? Corvette beats the M2? WTF BMW?

I know the gt350r is 10-15k more, and I agree the gt350 would have been a better comparison. But that Camaro comparison is right on

[FogCityM3]

There is no denying what Ford did with the GT350/R is astounding and completely flies in the face of the turbo-ization of the automotive industry and is a last hurrah to the glory of high-revving engines and the muscle car era but in a package that can actually handle extremely well on the track. Agree that the GT350R is better value than the M2, assuming you can get close to sticker, which will probably happen over time. If the M2 CSL comes out, would be a tough choice for me.

[bradleyland]

Originally Posted by classyfast

Or you could have just said less rotational mass at the wheels, quicker car. I think that's what you were saying right?

Reduction in rotating mass primarily affects acceleration, but for a car that is driven around a race track, the bigger benefit is in the reduction in unsprung mass. Lower unsprung mass results in more a responsive suspension. Think of it like this, when you drive over a bump, the tire compresses and the wheel bounces upward. The more mass the wheel has, the more damping is required to keep it under control. This damping is wasted energy. You want to run the lowest spring rate and damping you can, while still controlling the cars movement. Reduced unsprung mass helps in this regard. This is, of course, a gross oversimplification of suspension tuning, but that's the general idea.

[classyfast]

Originally Posted by bradleyland

Reduction in rotating mass primarily affects acceleration, but for a car that is driven around a race track, the bigger benefit is in the reduction in unsprung mass. Lower unsprung mass results in more a responsive suspension. Think of it like this, when you drive over a bump, the tire compresses and the wheel bounces upward. The more mass the wheel has, the more damping is required to keep it under control. This damping is wasted energy. You want to run the lowest spring rate and damping you can, while still controlling the cars movement. Reduced unsprung mass helps in this regard. This is, of course, a gross oversimplification of suspension tuning, but that's the general idea.

That was a great explanation, thanks man!

[SGL]

Originally Posted by FogCityM3

There is no denying what Ford did with the GT350/R is astounding and completely flies in the face of the turbo-ization of the automotive industry and is a last hurrah to the glory of high-revving engines and the muscle car era but in a package that can actually handle extremely well on the track. Agree that the GT350R is better value than the M2, assuming you can get close to sticker, which will probably happen over time. If the M2 CSL comes out, would be a tough choice for me.

The standard GT350 without the track package is severely held back on the track without the additional cooling that comes with the package. I ran with my friends GT350 this past weekend and the M2 was super strong on the track, whereas the GT350 would go into limp mode 10 minutes into the session, even though it was 55º. Besides that, the GT350 is amazing, sounds insane and just runs away on the straights.

[N & M]

Originally Posted by DRTMGRT

I love how the article mentioned the lack of M mirrors, and a CFR. Trolls

Journalists have to find something.

For years people kept going on about M diluting its brand and straying from the path of driving dynamics. People kept talking about the ideal of the original M3 and its purity. The cost of M cars was an issue as well.

Well M2 is a drivers car, it is affobale and original M3 did not have CFR or M mirrors; what is it exactly that is more M? Style or substance?

[N & M]

Originally Posted by F87LUV

And faster

Reality and economics would have made such a car more expensive and made the M3/M4 redundant.

[DRTMGRT]

Originally Posted by N & M

Journalists have to find something.

For years people kept going on about M diluting its brand and straying from the path of driving dynamics. People kept talking about the ideal of the original M3 and its purity. The cost of M cars was an issue as well.

Well M2 is a drivers car, it is affobale and original M3 did not have CFR or M mirrors; what is it exactly that is more M? Style or substance?

Substance all the way. In my opinion The M2 accomplished what it set out to do. Bring in an M car that is decently priced, and is fun to drive. It doesn't matter how it stacks up to other cars. It's the individual experience that really matters here. I can't be certain, but I don't think that BMW intended on winning over other brand loyalists, especially those who may be in the market for American muscle. The demographic is more likely purists who don't want to forget to enjoy a daily commute, and show up at a track that very weekend. While I have not yet driven the M2, it seemingly transcends worlds effortlessly. I love a good exhaust note as much as the next guy or gal, but I've had roaring V8s before, and man it can get old as DD. That didn't stop me for revving a bit here and there. I'm a car guy. Ha ha ha

[scoobysaurus]

Originally Posted by OrangeCrush

Try again. The GT350R is 10k more than the M2. Real life prices put at 30-40k more expensive than the M2. What's next? Corvette beats the M2? WTF BMW?

Since you bring up price, the Corvette Stingray DOES cost as much as an M2 so as per your logic it's a better comparison than the GT350R.

[F87LUV]

Originally Posted by N & M

Reality and economics would have made such a car more expensive and made the M3/M4 redundant.

Why do people keep saying that? Sticker price between my M2 and a similarly equipped M3 that I almost got instead is $16,000!!! You're telling me they didn't have ANY room to improve on certain things? That's just silly. I get that they don't want it close to M3/4 but come on now....

[F87LUV]

Originally Posted by scoobysaurus

Since you bring up price, the Corvette Stingray DOES cost as much as an M2 so as per your logic it's a better comparison than the GT350R.

Actually I could've gotten a stingray for about $7000 less since they're so heavily discounted.

[Roundown]

Originally Posted by techwhiz

The M2 should be faster. For the coin it should have an engine closer to the M3/4. It should be at least a twin turbo. Maybe drop the water/air intercooler.

It's not surprising to me that people gawk at the GT350R and ignore the M2.

I saw one in person yesterday along with the new Ford GT at Laguna Seca. Dang!

Anyway good article.

A2W IC is heavy, expensive and likely unnecessary for the platform.

If they increase boost on a GTS, CRT or CSL model, we might see water injection (itself not the free of weight penalty).

Either way, M2 seems to be about balance, not brute force. I thought the TG article was balanced and accurate.

[bradleyland]

Originally Posted by SGL

The standard GT350 without the track package is severely held back on the track without the additional cooling that comes with the package. I ran with my friends GT350 this past weekend and the M2 was super strong on the track, whereas the GT350 would go into limp mode 10 minutes into the session, even though it was 55º. Besides that, the GT350 is amazing, sounds insane and just runs away on the straights.

Yeah, I've heard the same. Seems the issue is transmission cooling related, which is resolved with the track package. That was one of my main points with regard to the GT350 vs M2. You kind of have to get some options on the GT350, which starts to push the price up quite a bit. Isn't the track package over $6k?

[marcva]

Originally Posted by bradleyland

How much weight savings do M-mirrors and CFR deliver though? IIRC, the roof is about 12 lbs, which isn't really moving the needle.

I agree 100% that the M2 needs a serious diet, but the changes need to happen at a fundamental level. The 2-series platform shares too much with the 3-series. Until BMW addresses weight savings as a top priority at a platform (chassis) level, we won't see a lightweight M2.

(I'm not saying it's not possible; I'm saying CFR and mirrors aren't the solution)

You'll also drive the car to a totally different price point.

[CERF04ZHP]

Originally Posted by vladberca

I don't see the GT 350 R the direct rival of M2... 😮

M4 GTS vs. GT350R is a better contest