[DanG]

Originally Posted by termigni

don't buy your car for others to compliment. who cares about what they think?

I agree. I bought my M2 to impress me.

[Big boi m5]

Originally Posted by GoneIn4Secs

At least we got a dual clutch and not stupid granny auto!

Haha yeah the M2 is 10x better in that regard. No argument from me. ZF8 is reliable but that's all the praise I'll give it

[Artemis]

Originally Posted by SleepingBMW

The 1M is smaller lighter

Size versus weight fact check:

1M:


M2:

[Artemis]

Originally Posted by SleepingBMW

If you're going to weigh 3600 lbs it's better to spread it out over a longer wheel base and improve handling rather than condense it into a short wheel base canon ball

• 1M = 4380mm (172.44in) | wheelbase: 2660mm (104.72in)
• 981 GT4 = 4438mm (174.72in) | wheelbase: 2474mm (97.40in)
• 718 GT4 = 4456mm (175.43in) | wheelbase: 2484mm (97.80in)
• M2 Competition = 4461mm (175.63in) | wheelbase: 2693mm (106.02in)
• M2 CS = 4461mm (175.63in) | wheelbase: 2693mm (106.02in)
• original M2 = 4468mm (175.91in) | wheelbase: 2693mm (106.02in)
• E46 M3 = 4492mm (176.85in) | wheelbase: 2731mm (107.52in)

Proper preparation for future canyon stints:

[Moflow]

Originally Posted by Artemis

• 1M = 4380mm (172.44in) | wheelbase: 2660mm (104.72in)
• 981 GT4 = 4438mm (174.72in) | wheelbase: 2474mm (97.40in)
• 718 GT4 = 4456mm (175.43in) | wheelbase: 2484mm (97.80in)
• M2 Competition = 4461mm (175.63in) | wheelbase: 2693mm (106.02in)
• M2 CS = 4461mm (175.63in) | wheelbase: 2693mm (106.02in)
• original M2 = 4468mm (175.91in) | wheelbase: 2693mm (106.02in)
• E46 M3 = 4492mm (176.85in) | wheelbase: 2731mm (107.52in)

Proper preparation for future canyon stints:
Attachment 2153336

Yup.

I generally agree with much of the list he had, but the thing about a shorter wheelbase being bad is a head scratcher.

Yes, you can absolutely have a wheelbase that is too short resulting in twitchy and unstable handling, but the 3-series/4-series is nowhere near that point yet. It has the opposite problem. Having a shorter wheelbase leaves the 2-series feeling a lot more nimble despite weighing the same as the 4-series.

[Big boi m5]

Originally Posted by Moflow

Yup.

I generally agree with much of the list he had, but the thing about a shorter wheelbase being bad is a head scratcher.

Yes, you can absolutely have a wheelbase that is too short resulting in twitchy and unstable handling, but the 3-series/4-series is nowhere near that point yet. It has the opposite problem. Having a shorter wheelbase leaves the 2-series feeling a lot more nimble despite weighing the same as the 4-series.

Longer wheel base = better pitch and yaw control which allows softer springs which generally increases mechanical grip.

The M4 is inherently more stable becuase is this and more comfortable on the road as well.

Since bmw generally tunes all the M cars to handle similar (planted with a hint of understeer) the M2 is a much harsher ride to achieve the same bmw feel that the M4 and M8 have. The M8 is naturally more comfortable on the highway and probably capable of carrying more speed in corners than the M2, but it weighs considerably more which ends up balancing out the lap times. (Also the cost is double!)

Normally you'd be fine sacrificing a bit of grip and control for a smaller wheel base because normally smaller size comes with less weight which means less braking and more time at speed and this faster.

Since the M2 weighs the same as the M4, really you're just buying a squirrely M4.

Twitchy and wild is some people's cup of tea.

But that sort of gets to heart of the M2 being a little less exciting than its predecessor and the M8 or the big Boys.

The M2 is an afterthought of the 2 series chassis which doesn't have any of the weight saving stuff the 8 series gets like CF and aluminum. So when they 'M' carifyied it carried over a lot of the bad stuff of the chassis.

If you ever get the chance try towing an E30 M3 and then an M2 with the same truck and you'll be in shock at BMWs 2002 'successor'.

I loved the M2C i drove. So please reminder I gave the M5C an A and the M2C an A-/B+ because if bmw really didn't design the M2 with the same care as the M5. They didn't realize people would even want it until well after it was too late to 'do it right'.

2 series doesn't make much profit for them and making a 2 series chassis with mostly aluminum instead of steel hurts already low profit margins on the car.

Just a reality. Maybe next gens M2 will have more doors open to it.

The car is like a black hole. A tiny but MASSIVE car At the same time.

Bmw is looking at a special platform M car because the CLAR stuff is just too heavy to be focused properly.

[GoneIn4Secs]

Originally Posted by SleepingBMW

Longer wheel base = better pitch and yaw control which allows softer springs which generally increases mechanical grip.

The M4 is inherently more stable becuase is this and more comfortable on the road as well.

Since bmw generally tunes all the M cars to handle similar (planted with a hint of understeer) the M2 is a much harsher ride to achieve the same bmw feel that the M4 and M8 have. The M8 is naturally more comfortable on the highway and probably capable of carrying more speed in corners than the M2, but it weighs considerably more which ends up balancing out the lap times. (Also the cost is double!)

Normally you'd be fine sacrificing a bit of grip and control for a smaller wheel base because normally smaller size comes with less weight which means less braking and more time at speed and this faster.

Since the M2 weighs the same as the M4, really you're just buying a squirrely M4.

Twitchy and wild is some people's cup of tea.

But that sort of gets to heart of the M2 being a little less exciting than its predecessor and the M8 or the big Boys.

The M2 is an afterthought of the 2 series chassis which doesn't have any of the weight saving stuff the 8 series gets like CF and aluminum. So when they 'M' carifyied it carried over a lot of the bad stuff of the chassis.

If you ever get the chance try towing an E30 M3 and then an M2 with the same truck and you'll be in shock at BMWs 2002 'successor'.

I loved the M2C i drove. So please reminder I gave the M5C an A and the M2C an A-/B+ because if bmw really didn't design the M2 with the same care as the M5. They didn't realize people would even want it until well after it was too late to 'do it right'.

2 series doesn't make much profit for them and making a 2 series chassis with mostly aluminum instead of steel hurts already low profit margins on the car.

Just a reality. Maybe next gens M2 will have more doors open to it.

The car is like a black hole. A tiny but MASSIVE car At the same time.

Bmw is looking at a special platform M car because the CLAR stuff is just too heavy to be focused properly.

So how come the platform that bmw has had focus it o dedicate and build from scratch (f80/82) those cars are great speed missiles admittedly by car experts, but they are not touted as fun to drive as this afterthought of a chassis the f87?

I think i remmeber someone saying that M cars were more about handling than power,


(I think most ppl are more dazzled by just having the official stamp of M car, with the luxury interior and bells and whistles, than treating these cars as performance driver cars)

To answer the OP, if bmw themselves gave the M2 more respect in official literature and releases, M owners would too, but most ppl are followers and need to be told what to like rather than base it on their own opinions

[PLF69]

Well well..

[seis-speed]

Originally Posted by Artemis

My Avatar

Never buy a car for HP or testing numbers, always buy the most nimble, fun, balanced car on offer.

[SeanWRT]

Originally Posted by SleepingBMW

In short the M3 and M5 have 40 years of prestige and the M2 is the 1Ms fat ugly sister.

[seis-speed]

Originally Posted by Artemis

Size versus weight fact check:

1M:
Attachment 2153305

M2:
Attachment 2153306

I have owned both and weighed both, the 1M is about 150lbs lighter than the M2.

You own both cars, is your 1M not lighter in Europe?
Never trust BMW on weights. On BMW USA they had the OG DCT weighing less than the 6MT. I even contacted them about the mistake and it was never addressed.

I recently parked my 1M near an M2 comp and everyone was surprised how much smaller the 1M was, it is fairly significant in person. The 1M just feels much smaller and lighter.

[Artemis]

Originally Posted by seis-speed

Never trust BMW on weights.

Remember Andreas Preuninger recently trying to talk his way out in interviews when tackling the topic of the 80kg weight increase - on paper - of the 718 GT4 (2019) compared to the 981 GT4 (2015) (1420 kg vs 1340 kg), emphasizing that it's only about 30kg extra rather than 80kg extra.

See from 13:28 to 15:21 in this video (comparing spec sheets: "it's deceiving, deceiving").

Fair enough, but that implies that the 1340kg figure quoted by Porsche back in 2015 for the bare-bones 981 GT4 was actually not representative for GT4 cars sold 'in real life' and would be around 1390kg when weighed with nowadays standards.

Last June, in the Sport Auto interview, AP also disclosed that for 'delete' features "the take-rate is at maximum 2%": see from 12:51 to 13:25 in this video.

So though the 1340 kg figure may be technically true for the 981 GT4 and back then the car could have been ordered that way, but that won't be the usual GT4 sold 'in real life' back then.

Good thing that regulations force car manufacturers to provide figures (weight, fuel consumption, range, emissions) that are closer to 'real life'.

[F87EVO]

Originally Posted by M3GymNut

I respect the M2C not the M2.

Lol , who cares what you respect !

[Moflow]

Originally Posted by SleepingBMW

Longer wheel base = better pitch and yaw control which allows softer springs which generally increases mechanical grip.

The M4 is inherently more stable becuase is this and more comfortable on the road as well.

Since bmw generally tunes all the M cars to handle similar (planted with a hint of understeer) the M2 is a much harsher ride to achieve the same bmw feel that the M4 and M8 have. The M8 is naturally more comfortable on the highway and probably capable of carrying more speed in corners than the M2, but it weighs considerably more which ends up balancing out the lap times. (Also the cost is double!)

Normally you'd be fine sacrificing a bit of grip and control for a smaller wheel base because normally smaller size comes with less weight which means less braking and more time at speed and this faster.

Since the M2 weighs the same as the M4, really you're just buying a squirrely M4.

Twitchy and wild is some people's cup of tea.

Fair enough, I don't disagree with you on any of the math, I think its just a preference thing. "A squirrely M4" isn't a description i'd argue against. I'd just also say that BMW messed up by not making the M4 inherently squirrely enough for my (and more than a few reviewers) preferences. The M2C fixes that.

As for vehicle weight being lies from BMW...at least we don't have Ferraris or Lamborghinis. Nobody lies about their vehicle weights as much as those two italian companies. McLaren is also fond of quoting dry weight....which...why would I ever need to know how much my car weighs without coolant, oil or gasoline in it?

[F87EVO]

Originally Posted by c1pher

I think there are a couple things going on that have kind of been touched on. First, like the 1 Series M (BMW was careful not to call it and actual M car), the OG M2 is really just the entry level car with some upspecced M parts in it. While they both were fun to drive and great performers, they are honestly a bit of frankensteins for their respective day. The M2C now has an S coded engine, but of course BMW hobbled it a little so it wouldn't have the same output as the M3/4. Which is why the M2CS is coming. And everyone knows the real M car is the M3 that started it all. All the reviews in the world that say the M2 is the real M3 doesn't change the badge the factory put on it. So in some sense the M purists probably look at M2 owners as posers to some extent.

The other part of it is like the 911/Cayman comparison. When you say 911, everyone knows you have a Porsche, that's all you have to say. They know what it looks like and that it's an incredible car. If you say Cayman, half the time you have to then explain its a Porsche to some people. And others know if you had the money, you probably would have gotten the 911 instead of the Cayman. I own a 718 and love it but can tell you there's even snobbery within the Cayman crowd saying the 718 is terrible due to going back to flat four. It doesn't matter that my car outperforms all previous Cayman before it.

Originally Posted by M3GymNut

I respect the M2C not the M2.

The 1M wasnt a real m car because it was a partsbin car? Actually that is why is so special ! Its like a custom vehicle by M ! As well the reason wasnt because it wasnt a real m car , the real reason its because the original M1 was a supercar and they didnt want to just introduce the 1M as an M1 because of the legacy. With that being said , the Z4M X3/4/5/6M are not true m cars either ! Wait until the next M1 to see what a car will be .

[M3GymNut]

Originally Posted by BlueF87M2

Lol , who cares what you respect !

No one, that's why it's called an opinion.

Looks like you own an OG M2.

[1mm2]

Originally Posted by seis-speed

I recently parked my 1M near an M2 comp and everyone was surprised how much smaller the 1M was, it is fairly significant in person. The 1M just feels much smaller and lighter.

Exactly, the feel is key.

Just like the weight difference between the M2 and M3 is negligible yet the M2 feels like a stealth fighter while the M3 feels like the carrier it took off from...

[F87EVO]

Originally Posted by M3GymNut

No one, that's why it's called an opinion.

Looks like you own an OG M2.

Originally Posted by M3GymNut

I respect the M2C not the M2.

Do you think i was waiting for your opinion about the og m2 whether its an M car or not !? Or do you really think that an M car comes with S engine and wing mirrors (1M came with those mirrors by the way) . Do some research on the original M3. Do you even now on what engine block is based? S14 engine is based on the M10 block just like the N55 block. The original M1 M5 M6 as well didnt used S designation on their engines , those engines were M88 . The OG M2 engine its not just a regular BMW engine . Just because they couldnt renamed it with an S designation (because S55 was introduced earlier than the M2 so the "S" was already taken doesnt mean at all that that was not an M car.

[BallHog5873]

Originally Posted by nioh_lbbm2

you might be experiencing some major "grass is greener on the other side" syndrome. No one is shunning the M2

THIS

[Artemis]

Originally Posted by M3GymNut

No one, that's why it's called an opinion.
Looks like you own an OG M2.

Do us all a favor: enter a bar of team supporters and shout "Listen folks, I do not respect your team. It ain't the real deal. But hey, that's my opinion. Now get me a beer, please."

Let us know what happened next.

[F87EVO]

Originally Posted by Artemis

Do us all a favor: enter a bar of team supporters and shout "Listen folks, I do not respect your team. It ain't the real deal. But hey, that's my opinion. Now get me a beer, please."
Let us know what happened next.

Hahah , personally i respect each opinion , but the fact that someone decides on his own that this is an M car or not , just shows the knowledge. Jeremy clarkson for example is a well respected guy i think almost from everyone , he even states that the M2 is the best M car BMW has EVER made , and just by that statement , at least you should respect the fact that this is an M car .

[M3GymNut]

Originally Posted by Artemis

Do us all a favor: enter a bar of team supporters and shout "Listen folks, I do not respect your team. It ain't the real deal. But hey, that's my opinion. Now get me a beer, please."

Let us know what happened next.

Well then I guess the actions of those other individuals will show their true colors. That's exactly why this world is the way it is. No matter what anybody says there's always criticism that leads to hate and being cynical when it should just end on agreeing to disagree.