[Robin_NL]

Originally Posted by SleepingBMW

In Germany it competes with a 2 door Yaris.



M2 is fun but it really really is a bad M car.
it's not got a real race car.

Are you gonna make me laugh every day now?

Originally Posted by SleepingBMW

shares an engine with the 2x Daytona 24 hour winning version of the same car.

Well, a S63 engine is a marvellous piece of engineering, but the race engine is called P63. Why would that be.

Last year I was at a trackday at the Nordschleife and drove at the Grand Prix Strecke. Just sayin...



Cheers
Robin

[535i MSport]

Originally Posted by rjd598

This is like when everyone says they'll buy a wagon version of an M3, but when it comes time to pay up very few would actually pony up the cash. It's all hypotheticals, but just based on human nature most are going to choose the M8 if both cars cost the same.

I love the M2c and want one right now, but again if the prices were the same I'd choose the M8. Just being honest.

I did - Almost...

[BigKutta]

There is never one answer for everyone. Is the M8>M5>M4/M3>M2. Well logically that makes sense. Each is faster, more luxurious, more expensive (flashy!), shows more prestige, makes the owner look like he has a big d**k, etc. etc. And as someone posted above, if all were the same price, most people would pick the most expensive one. But life is not like that, and we make choices / trade-offs, and not everyone needs the flashiest car.

For me the M2C checked every box that I wanted. 1) Not flashy (not sure I can say that standing close to the car seeing the wide hips), 2) doesn't solicit unwanted attention, but is 3) beautiful, 4) fast and powerful to get my kicks (at least usable power), 5) relatively inexpensive (I could have bought an M5 but chose not to), 6) small and nimble/tossable, and 7) largely voted as one of the best BMWs on the road (I've seen every Youtube review). And on top of that, I've loved the M2 from the time I first saw one a couple of years ago. Reminded me on the S54 M Coupe which I love. I have friends who own supercars and I couldnt care to own one. I'm very happy with my M2C

[stein_325i]

Originally Posted by 535i MSport

I did - Almost...

Everytime I see your C63 Wagon on here I get more and more jealous that we don't have one! I love the E63S but it'd be cool to have a cheaper and smaller high performance wagon here in the US.

[AlpsRider]

I know that it's not the fashion or cool, but station wagons make so much more sense than SUVs. The fuel consumption of those big SUV tires and the high center of gravity are both negatives for SUVs.

[adc]

Originally Posted by AlpsRider

I know that it's not the fashion or cool, but station wagons make so much more sense than SUVs. The fuel consumption of those big SUV tires and the high center of gravity are both negatives for SUVs.

BS.

My X3 with the N55 gets the same daily fuel economy as my M3, yet it’s more spacious, comfortable and with better visibility. Tows and carries stuff on its roof, etc. I would not want a 3 series wagon instead.

If you compared it with a Chevy Suburban maybe you have a point, but there are many models in between that make sense.

[AlpsRider]

Originally Posted by adc

BS.

My X3 with the N55 gets the same daily fuel economy as my M3, yet it’s more spacious, comfortable and with better visibility. Tows and carries stuff on its roof, etc. I would not want a 3 series wagon instead.

If you compared it with a Chevy Suburban maybe you have a point, but there are many models in between that make sense.

You shouldn't compare your SUV to an M car....seriously. Most people don't tow nor go off road. It's physics man.
Some things to think about, air drag coefficient and weight in addition to huge fat tires and high center of gravity.

[TheRealOrosie]

Originally Posted by AlpsRider

I know that it's not the fashion or cool, but station wagons make so much more sense than SUVs. The fuel consumption of those big SUV tires and the high center of gravity are both negatives for SUVs.

Yes...but it should be! Wagons/Avants are so much cooler than SUVs. The Europeans have it right.

[adc]

Originally Posted by SleepingBMW

Yeah you got me, technically none of these CLAR platform cars are sports cars from the Z4 on up to the 8 series.

But I do mean In the vague sense of the term. The M8 does have a bunch of carbon fiber borrowed from the 7 series, massive brakes, adjustable brake bias, proper suspension set up for the Nurburgring Grand Prix Strecke, shares an engine with the 2x Daytona 24 hour winning version of the same car.

By comparison the 2 series was never designed to be 'M' ready. They thought the M235i would top the 2 series. Why? Because the 2 series is an economy line. In Germany it competes with a 2 door Yaris. It doesn't make much money. They thus filled the chassis with steel to reduce overhead and increase profitability. When the US of A guys were begging for it they eventually relented and did a suspension tune and gave you a marked up 2 series. The Competition saw retuned suspension and the S55 engine, detuned.

M2 is fun but it really really is a bad M car. It's not light weight. It's not powerful, it's not got a real race car. Next time they will do better since M2 is a success. Or maybe they won't see a need to do better since everyone praises that fat pig and it's cheap to make.

Your posts are full of guesswork, assumptions, and outright false information.

The 2 series coupe does not compete with a Yaris, that’s a silly statement.

The 2 series was penciled in from the beginning with a top M variant. That’s due to the model cycle, there is no place for “throwing things together and see if they work”, everything is planned in advance. It didn’t get all the CF treatment the M4 got just to keep the price reasonable, not because of any engineering constraints. The same reason for the initial engine choice, to keep the cost down.

The M2 definitely has a race car, which shares a lot more components with the M2CS than the M8 GTE shares with the M8C. In fact the M8 race car is almost a silhouette racer, it has so little in common with the street version.

In another post you state the M2 was “filled with steel” or some such nonsense. Just so you know, all of these cars are filled with steel. All these cars’ structural components (what you might call the chassis) are made of steel, CLAR platform be damned. Plastic, CF or CFRP parts are limited to the exterior body panels (trunk, fenders, hood, spoilers). I’m not saying they don’t contribute to the righteous goal of reduced weight but it’s not as if the actual cars were made of the light stuff.

And when BMW finally decided to pursue the CS, and added all those CF parts, they ended up with an $85k 2 series. Not the best price range for a small coupe.


I think I understand where you are coming from with your comments. You are in the completely wrong demographic for an M car as you don’t want to put up with the rigour/discomfort on the street yet you never track your cars so you’d never discover the true differences between an M performance and an M car.

Doesn’t mean they don’t exist, or that they aren’t large.

[xxyion]

Originally Posted by BigKutta

There is never one answer for everyone. Is the M8>M5>M4/M3>M2. Well logically that makes sense. Each is faster, more luxurious, more expensive (flashy!), shows more prestige, makes the owner look like he has a big d**k, etc. etc. And as someone posted above, if all were the same price, most people would pick the most expensive one. But life is not like that, and we make choices / trade-offs, and not everyone needs the flashiest car.

For me the M2C checked every box that I wanted. 1) Not flashy (not sure I can say that standing close to the car seeing the wide hips), 2) doesn't solicit unwanted attention, but is 3) beautiful, 4) fast and powerful to get my kicks (at least usable power), 5) relatively inexpensive (I could have bought an M5 but chose not to), 6) small and nimble/tossable, and 7) largely voted as one of the best BMWs on the road (I've seen every Youtube review). And on top of that, I've loved the M2 from the time I first saw one a couple of years ago. Reminded me on the S54 M Coupe which I love. I have friends who own supercars and I couldnt care to own one. I'm very happy with my M2C

I totally agree with you for boxes checked on the M2C. And honestly i wouldnt get the "most expensive one" if all were the same price. A lot of the other models dont do anything for me. The M3 and M5 both are sedans which i didnt want. The M8 doesnt look good to me and looks too long, and the M4 doesnt have the dimensions or body lines i'm looking for.

My friend has a 428i and i have a 230i and i prefer my 230i in the looks department. I also tend to lean towards smaller cars in general so for me the M2c just fit everything perfectly. Also not to mention i think it looks the most agressive out of the bunch.

[adc]

Originally Posted by AlpsRider

You shouldn't compare your SUV to an M car....seriously. Most people don't tow nor go off road. It's physics man.
Some things to think about, air drag coefficient and weight in addition to huge fat tires and high center of gravity.

I was just making sure you understood I wasn’t comparing the 4 cyl version but rather the 6 cyl turbo.

The official fuel consumption specs are in favor of the F31 335i xDrive, at 30 mpg vs 28mpg for the F25 X3 with the same drivetrain. So while you are absolutely correct in theory, in practice the difference is small, and to most people buying the turbo 6 cyl variants, completely irrelevant.

However the X3 is the more practical and comfortable of the two, without a doubt. And the one available in the US with this motorization, where we could only get the F31 with a 4 cylinder. I’ve actually taken the pain to drive/compare them, and the 3 series wagon didn’t come on top. No thanks.

You shouldn’t regurgitate everything you’ve read as “common sense” on the internet. There are many perfectly valid reasons to prefer an SUV to a wagon and you shouldn’t generalize just based on your preferences.

[AlpsRider]

You are generalizing on your preference that they are more practical and more comfortable. I'm stating facts about design and stating my preference. I have driven many SUVs. There hasn't been a single one that I've enjoyed driving, to me they are boats. The only one that I might consider would be the Macan.
People can drive what they want, that's fine.
I'm not regurgitating from the internet common sense. I'm quite capable of having my own common sense as I see it. I'm sure many people like SUVs for popularity, style and practicality. SUV on.

[Moflow]

I'm a huge fan of wagons over SUV's. If you've got an SUV and a wagon of approximately equal sizes (interior wise) with the same engine, the wagon is going to be more aerodynamic, handle better on the road, get better mileage, have a lower center of gravity and generally be better at anything performance car oriented.

SUV's are absolutely working with a handicap when it comes to on road behavior. That doesn't mean they can't be good (hey man, i've driven a Macan GTS, no doubt about it, in a vacuum it's a damn fine vehicle) but it does mean they would drive better if they weren't...you know....a foot off the ground.

That very fact would always bother the crap out of me if I owned an SUV. However, it's also a thing that wouldn't necessarily bother other people, which is totally fine. And that's to say nothing of the actual very real reasons one might want an SUV (like, driving on surfaces that are NOT smooth asphalt, or simply because there aren't very many wagons in the U.S. and SUV's are undeniably practical.)

So in theory, i don't like them, but in practice? I kinda get it.

Side note: I went to New Orleans a while back and i've never seen a city with such bad pavement. I feel like you'd have to be mildly insane to drive anything around there without a bunch of ground clearance. If I lived there, i'd put a lot of thought into buying a quick SUV. I'd just make sure my tires weren't too low profile.

Anyway, i don't like em for me, but I don't judge either. People have their reasons.

[adc]

Originally Posted by Moflow

I'm a huge fan of wagons over SUV's. If you've got an SUV and a wagon of approximately equal sizes (interior wise) with the same engine, the wagon is going to be more aerodynamic, handle better on the road, get better mileage, have a lower center of gravity and generally be better at anything performance car oriented.

SUV's are absolutely working with a handicap when it comes to on road behavior. That doesn't mean they can't be good (hey man, i've driven a Macan GTS, no doubt about it, in a vacuum it's a damn fine vehicle) but it does mean they would drive better if they weren't...you know....a foot off the ground.

That very fact would always bother the crap out of me if I owned an SUV. However, it's also a thing that wouldn't necessarily bother other people, which is totally fine. And that's to say nothing of the actual very real reasons one might want an SUV (like, driving on surfaces that are NOT smooth asphalt, or simply because there aren't very many wagons in the U.S. and SUV's are undeniably practical.)

So in theory, i don't like them, but in practice? I kinda get it.

Side note: I went to New Orleans a while back and i've never seen a city with such bad pavement. I feel like you'd have to be mildly insane to drive anything around there without a bunch of ground clearance. If I lived there, i'd put a lot of thought into buying a quick SUV. I'd just make sure my tires weren't too low profile.

Anyway, i don't like em for me, but I don't judge either. People have their reasons.

Hey it’s simple and you’ve nailed it in the first paragraph. To get a wagon with the same interior space as the X3, I’d have to buy a Mercedes E class, since BMW doesn’t do wagons anymore. That would raise the cost and still not get me out of the “boat” scenario, unless going for an AMG product ($$$).

As for the rest, I’ll confidently put up my X3 3.5i against other thighs like Volvo or Buick wagons, handling wise. I would even take it on track if they’d let me, for the shock factor and inevitable conversations after.

I daily drive my M3, and in fact I chose the 4 door for the added practicality to ferry kids to sports practice. It does everything it was designed to do, including Home Depot runs, for some things. But for other tasks, it just won’t do.

There is really no way out if you need a big family vehicle. I’ve tried.

[adc]

Originally Posted by AlpsRider

You are generalizing on your preference that they are more practical and more comfortable. I'm stating facts about design and stating my preference. I have driven many SUVs. There hasn't been a single one that I've enjoyed driving, to me they are boats. The only one that I might consider would be the Macan.
People can drive what they want, that's fine.
I'm not regurgitating from the internet common sense. I'm quite capable of having my own common sense as I see it. I'm sure many people like SUVs for popularity, style and practicality. SUV on.

So go ahead and buy a wagon. I’m very curious what you will pick.

[richard in NC]

SUV's can't handle.....

I witnessed an X4M do the BMW Performance Center autocross in 84 seconds, bone stock with 3 passengers. Most M2/M3/M4s were 86-90 seconds, many with suspension mods and r-comp tires.

Granted the X4M was driven by Mike Renner, an expert with home track advantage. But the point is NO ONE beat his X4M time, regardless of track car. It CAN get the job done.

PS: I rode with him in an M5 Comp but it was un-timed so I can't compare.

Now, back to pros and cons. Yes the height of an SUV compromises handling, all other things being equal but it brings several advantages too. Ride comfort, ease of ingress/egress (using X3/X4 as an example), visibility in traffic, ability to deal with deep snow, and ability to go off pavement without fear of scraping the heck out of the underside.

[pz619]

Originally Posted by adc

BS.

My X3 with the N55 gets the same daily fuel economy as my M3, yet it’s more spacious, comfortable and with better visibility. Tows and carries stuff on its roof, etc. I would not want a 3 series wagon instead.

If you compared it with a Chevy Suburban maybe you have a point, but there are many models in between that make sense.

How is this bs? Your preference, maybe. It’s pretty much undeniable that a wagon is a better platform for performance than an SUV. Can SUV’s perform better than a competitive wagon? Sure, but it’s fighting physics to get there.

[AlpsRider]

Originally Posted by adc

So go ahead and buy a wagon. I’m very curious what you will pick.

My original comment:

"I know that it's not the fashion or cool, but station wagons make so much more sense than SUVs. The fuel consumption of those big SUV tires and the high center of gravity are both negatives for SUVs."

This was a comment about SUVs in General. This includes Suburbans, Explorers, Navigators and Escalades as well as the psuedo crossovers. I believe my statement to be correct. It's true that high performance sport wagons aren't offered in the US anymore which is due to the publics obsession with bigger is better.
I think you somehow took my statement as an attack at BMW SUVs. It was not meant that way it was meant as a general statement as to where the market has headed in the US. In Europe where station wagons, Breaks, Avant or whatever you want to call them are still popular they can have performance and space.
If I needed a wagon I'd probably want an RS 4 Avant or at least an S4 Avant which is more affordable. However as you've pointed out the're not available in the US anymore.

[Big boi m5]

Originally Posted by Robin_NL

Are you gonna make me laugh every day now?





Well, a S63 engine is a marvellous piece of engineering, but the race engine is called P63. Why would that be.

Last year I was at a trackday at the Nordschleife and drove at the Grand Prix Strecke. Just sayin...



Cheers
Robin

An M6 GTE is 90% M6 production according to Jens himself.

Sounds great I am jealous, I've been on the Indianapolis Motor Speedway GP course and oval. I'll get the Nordschliefe but in a rental sadly. Mine won't be going overseas.

Cheers.

[Big boi m5]

Originally Posted by TheRealOrosie

I had an F90 M5 for a year and a half, dumped it for an M2C and have never been happier.

The M5 is a sick car, fast as hell....but the sound, the tranny and the weight all kinda killed it for me after a while. My 6MT M2C checks all the boxes (for me) at this point in my life (semi-retired, no commute).

It makes no sense to generalize, as everyone has different wants and needs. Just because the M5 costs twice as much, and is faster in a strait line doesn't make it a better all around car for everyone.

And yes, I know we are talking about the M8 vs M2 in this thread...but Joe brought up the M5 comparison, and the 30k delta is not that crazy once you go over 6 figures, IMO.

I've driven both as well. The M2 feels great, it hides its weight well. But I did / do enjoy the M5s power more than the illusion of the M2s small size.

I'm excited to see what the next gen M2 brings to the table. I said already. Comparing the F90 to the F87 isn't fair. The F87 is closer is more fairly paired against the F10. Which also uses much more steel. The F90 is new and the next M2 will be it's 'rival'.

Really the M cars are set up to do achieve similar performance in varying sizes. Ideally they're not 'better' but they're all great at different sizes and comfort levels.