[M2Competition]

I know my title seems like the clickbait titles by the youtubers to make you watch their movies

Let my try to make my point.. Everybody talks about how amazing the naturally aspirated high reving engines like the GT3 or 458. I agree that those engines are really good but they become alive over 6,500rpm. In low rpms they are not much to write home about. I used to own a 458 and even though it was an amazing car that handled liked a go-cart, it didn't have much torque under 6.5K rpm. So considering that 80% of driving typically happens at under 6.5K rpm (unless you are on track), it is almost like your engine doesn't feel that special 80% of the time.

Considering that the torque curve is all the way at its peak starting at ~2,500 rpm, I enjoy a lot more of my driving experience with the S55 in my M2C.

I'm not really trying to start an endless my car is better than your car discussion but I'm curious if there are others who prefer the high-torque on low rpm character of the new turbo engines like S55 compared to the high reving NA engines that are considered magical by the most.

[Commanderwiggin]

High revving, flat torque racing motors are always going to be my preference...and when you slap a turbo to those puppies they really perform. But even NA they're still better motors than the S55.

[MrOhnoez]

IMO the joy of a low torque high revving car is not the performance, but the joy of the drive.
The car urges you to go faster, and faster push it just a bit more.
It's all about the experience.
I love the M2C engine I really do, but there's just the aural experience, the joy having to sit in those higher revs to properly experience it.
I always say Porsche NAILS it with their engines, it has this lovely change in tone at about 4k rpm, then another at 5.5k then another at about 7k, and you start getting into the GT3s and it just get's better and better. That car could have 100 hp and if it had the same sound, I'd still take it.

[sfade]

I am a newer M2C owner and do not have a lot to compare to, but I do like the driveability and usability of the engine in everyday street driving. However, I raced a Triumph Daytona 675 for a few years in the supersport class. It didn't have a lot of torque but would just pull and come alive from 10k-16k RPM. It was so addictive and the sound was intoxicating! I know that feeling and love being up in the high revs. When the bike was street legal it kinda sucked b/c you couldn't explore its potential. I don't track the M2C so I am happy the S55 is the way it is. The right tool for the right purpose and your enjoyment is all the better. i.e. quasi race-kitted cars as daily drivers, adventure bikes as offroad bikes, and my favorite...fully kitted out offroad rigs never to see dirt.

[Brokenbones]

Yes modern turbo cars give phenomenal immediate low end grunt but wringing out the last rpm when pushing a high reving low torque NA hard will always be more satisfying and visceral. Loved when my old s2000’s cam switched and the engine went mental with a staccato raw metallic ripsaw shriek filling your ears. The docile new born puppy puttering around town becomes a viscious wolf when you spank it. NA v turbo, the other manual vs DCT argument

[OG Shark]

Party zone of a high revving NA > low end grunt of a turbo

[AlpsRider]

The M2 CS tune loaded on an M2C is pure music. It really does drive like a NA engine with the stick. It won't pin you to the seat like a 3rd party tune but it is so smooth and shifts like a dream.

[Gizmo 335i]

Originally Posted by AlpsRider

The M2 CS tune loaded on an M2C is pure music. It really does drive like a NA engine with the stick. It won't pin you to the seat like a 3rd party tune but it is so smooth and shifts like a dream.

Is that the Bootmod CS tune?

[AlpsRider]

Originally Posted by Gizmo 335i

Is that the Bootmod CS tune?

Yes, it shifts better than any tune I've tried. It shifts way better than the stock tune which is awful.

[Gizmo 335i]

Originally Posted by AlpsRider

Yes, it shifts better than any tune I've tried. It shifts way better than the stock tune which is awful.

Good to know, thanks.

[Brokenbones]

Funny how much has changed in turbo cars with their massive wave of lag free low end torque. My old WRX was a complete liability off boost until 4-5k when the engine whistled and violently lunged towards the horizon...

[AlpsRider]

Originally Posted by Brokenbones

Funny how much has changed in turbo cars with their massive wave of lag free low end torque. My old WRX was a complete liability off boost until 4-5k when the engine whistled and violently lunged towards the horizon...

My Nissan Silvia was the same way, no power and then a neck wrenching snap. I'll have to admit that at the time I really enjoyed it 😂

[Brokenbones]

Originally Posted by AlpsRider

My Nissan Silvia was the same way, no power and then a neck wrenching snap. I'll have to admit that at the time I really enjoyed it 😂

Always loved the Silva’s clean lines. An upcoming classic? Hard to find a good one.

Loved that turbo thrust... still do.

[No Boost]

Originally Posted by Brokenbones

Funny how much has changed in turbo cars with their massive wave of lag free low end torque. My old WRX was a complete liability off boost until 4-5k when the engine whistled and violently lunged towards the horizon...

Originally Posted by AlpsRider

My Nissan Silvia was the same way, no power and then a neck wrenching snap. I'll have to admit that at the time I really enjoyed it ��

Originally Posted by Brokenbones

Loved that turbo thrust... still do.

Then we swapped in a bigger turbo which only increased the delayed whiplash effect. Harping back to the days when turbo cars were few and far between and considered, to a degree , superior than their N/A counterparts. Nowadays, even the shittiest McEconoboxes incorporate turbos for easy power and better fuel economy. Oh well, at least everything isn't EV yet.

[Karmic Man]

Turbo cars were more exciting for me in the JDM era because of the ease of tunability and their ferocious grunt when boosted...MR2 GTS, RX7, S14, S15 Silvia, STi III Type R, STi IV coupe, Evo 3,4,6,9, Supra, R32 GTR...Integra Type R though handled brilliantly, had a small 1.8 that lag all the way to the redline. It's not until I drove a Porsche 987 Boxster in 2.7L that I thought an NA engine can felt so much better than a FBO S15 with a custom tune. Ferrari F430's V8, 981 Cayman GT4's 3.8, E46 3.2, E92 M3's V8 all felt better than a FBO N54. But the 350/370Z & S2000 felt gutless when compared to a boosted 4G63 Evo.

NA to me is about no lag, rich refinement and turbo engine is about boosted grunt, lots of it.

The S55 changed my perception on turbo engines that strong power = big lag. My 1M on stage 1+ intercooler was quite laggy. Not as bad as a boosted Evo though. Brute power from the S55 is always only a finger tip away and it gives you power when you need it, no waiting. It's one of the best turbo charged engine I have driven.

[Dav3]

Originally Posted by M2Competition

I know my title seems like the clickbait titles by the youtubers to make you watch their movies

Let my try to make my point.. Everybody talks about how amazing the naturally aspirated high reving engines like the GT3 or 458. I agree that those engines are really good but they become alive over 6,500rpm. In low rpms they are not much to write home about. I used to own a 458 and even though it was an amazing car that handled liked a go-cart, it didn't have much torque under 6.5K rpm. So considering that 80% of driving typically happens at under 6.5K rpm (unless you are on track), it is almost like your engine doesn't feel that special 80% of the time.

Considering that the torque curve is all the way at its peak starting at ~2,500 rpm, I enjoy a lot more of my driving experience with the S55 in my M2C.

I'm not really trying to start an endless my car is better than your car discussion but I'm curious if there are others who prefer the high-torque on low rpm character of the new turbo engines like S55 compared to the high reving NA engines that are considered magical by the most.

While NA engines tend to be a bit dull below a certain rpm range, if we are talking about regular street use, the flip side of the arguement is that the S55 tends to have a bit too much torque (settings dependant). With the engine set on Sport/Sport+ the ride can get real jittery and jumpy.

Either way, I like both but its an apples and oranges comparison.

[AndrewC1989]

Completely agree. I really hate having to wind an engine out and drive it at the redline to get it going. A few years back when I was in the market for something to replace my E46 M3 I test drove an E60 M5 and an E92 M3 and they were all noise and no go. Ended up getting a tuned N54 instead and the feeling it gave me was like nothing I've ever felt. The low-end torque was sublime. Being able to downshift and pass a car with 0 effort is so intoxicating. I think the only NA car I've ever driven that actually made me feel alive was a V12 Murciélago, but since I don't have that kind of money I'll happily live with a turbo'd straight 6. FI > NA for me.

[M2Competition]

As it is mentioned in some of the replies, it makes sense to separate the old school turbos from the new ones like S55. I used to have a 997 body 911 Turbo which was no different than a regular 997 Carrera until you hit 6,000rpm. Most people love the 997 Turbo which never did it for me. On the other hand, I had the chance to drive the 992 Carrera S at the LA Porsche Experience Center which has the new school turbo setup that was intoxicating with the instant torque and endless power. I'm not trying to make this about the P-cars but the new school Turbo engines such as S55 and Carrera S have something unique that most other cars don't have.. In relatively small displacement, having flat torque curve that starts around 2,000rpm is a great trade-off to consider compared to the great sound/experience of high rpm NA engines.

[M2Competition]

Originally Posted by Dav3

While NA engines tend to be a bit dull below a certain rpm range, if we are talking about regular street use, the flip side of the arguement is that the S55 tends to have a bit too much torque (settings dependant). With the engine set on Sport/Sport+ the ride can get real jittery and jumpy.

Either way, I like both but its an apples and oranges comparison.

I'm not sure if your jittery/jumpy comment is related to DCT because I drive my MT car at only sport plus MDM setting with no such complaint.

[ROASTM]

This is an interesting thread. As the owner of both an M2C and an e46 M, I will say, the engine in each of the cars provides me drastically different forms of entertainment, and both are awesome. The low end power of the S55 is addicting, as others above have said, and the ability to pass other cars in just about any gear at any speed is awesome, and something that the S54 in the e46 surely lacks - that being said, there is absolutely something to be said for pure NA power in a high revving motor.
I love both cars equally, for different reasons, and have no intention of getting rid of either of them ever (and have owned the e46 for nearly 10 years now), but I would've bought a new 2020 model of the e46 M3 over the M2C if it was possible.

[chris719]

The turbos are better 90% of the time. The screamers are fun on track or if you are somewhere where you can really hammer it and stay on it. Those high revving engines give a character to the car that may not otherwise be there. The NA high rev M engines really forced you to drive the car a certain way.

[chris719]

Originally Posted by AlpsRider

Yes, it shifts better than any tune I've tried. It shifts way better than the stock tune which is awful.

What do you mean by shifts better? The lag after shifting?