[Evil///M]

FWIW, I drove the M2 and M4 back to back and the S55 felt way more torquey down in the lower RPM range.

It was at that point that I made the decision that I was going to wait for the M2C, and not purchase that M2 I drove... Although it was super tempting!

[carl44]

I tracked Lotus's for 8 years first an Elise then an Exige S . After a while never looked at the tach just shifted when it stopped pulling . Usually about 7500, think reline was 8k. carl

[FSU_Logan]

Originally Posted by carl44

I tracked Lotus's for 8 years first an Elise then an Exige S . After a while never looked at the tach just shifted when it stopped pulling . Usually about 7500, think reline was 8k. carl

I want an Elise!

[BlkSVT]

As on the other thread where this started, I still feel like when guys talk about similar power level cars, and "low end torque" comes up -- in most applications it has little to do with numbers and a dyno plot, but more part-throttle responsiveness and mapping. No?

Unless something has changed, any dyno run is going to start at some random low-ish RPM, and the operator goes full-throttle in 4th or 5th gear (something close to 1:1 ratio), and leaves it there. Correct? That's the only condition a dyno makes sense: full throttle. Anything else makes no sense when testing max capability and generating numbers

I seriously doubt any of us here are going to stay in a high gear, go wide open and wait for all that "torque" a dyno plot showed to pull us through what should actually have been a downshift situation

From another perspective, if I let my buddy drive and want to demo all that awesome low-end, do i say leave it in 4th and then floor it? WTF, No!

Sounds to me like that low-end responsiveness, where you can ride that torque bubble part throttle is where the M2 might be stronger in day-to-day? I agree, that kind of tuning is satisfying to live with, especially in point-and-shoot daily grind commute. ...but it has nothing to do with a dyno plot or numbers

Am I justifying something here? Nah, IDGAF. Sounds like maybe the M2 has better low end responsiveness(?) That's all cool. M2. M2C. Both awesome choices

[chris719]

Originally Posted by BlkSVT

As on the other thread where this started, I still feel like when guys talk about similar power level cars, and "low end torque" comes up -- in most applications it has little to do with numbers and a dyno plot, but more part-throttle responsiveness and mapping. No?

Unless something has changed, any dyno run is going to start at some random low-ish RPM, and the operator goes full-throttle in 4th or 5th gear (something close to 1:1 ratio), and leaves it there. Correct? That's the only condition a dyno makes sense: full throttle. Anything else makes no sense when testing max capability and generating numbers

I seriously doubt any of us here are going to stay in a high gear, go wide open and wait for all that "torque" a dyno plot showed to pull us through what should actually have been a downshift situation

From another perspective, if I let my buddy drive and want to demo all that awesome low-end, do i say leave it in 4th and then floor it? WTF, No!

Sounds to me like that low-end responsiveness, where you can ride that torque bubble part throttle is where the M2 might be stronger in day-to-day? I agree, that kind of tuning is satisfying to live with, especially in point-and-shoot daily grind commute. ...but it has nothing to do with a dyno plot or numbers

Am I justifying something here? Nah, IDGAF. Sounds like maybe the M2 has better low end responsiveness(?) That's all cool. M2. M2C. Both awesome choices

Looking at 2 different dyno graphs, M2C is making equivalent torque by 2700 RPM and more at every point after that. Up to you if that matters. I am sure at least part of the perceived responsiveness difference is the throttle mapping. I noticed when driving M4 and M2 back to back at M School the M2 settings all felt more sensitive at part throttle and it was actually easier to break the tires loose from a standstill. In Sport+ it was almost too sensitive to be usable IMO.

[Proctor750]

In Formula One the Torque Demand Map is very important for drive-ability and in many cases they LIMIT the torque on purpose depending on conditions/track/setup etc. Limiting torque isn't always a bad thing. Sometimes you need more low speed grip.

Watch the new M5 drag race a dodge demon (albeit unprepared surface and rwd vs awd) but torque delivery has a lot to do with what happened there.

Track focused cars have to have a balance of multiple systems, you can't just peg the chart on torque and expect to not suffer somewhere else in drive-ability, unless of course you have a dyno queen.