[Karmic Man]

Originally Posted by koastal

M4 not GT4

I know but the M4 has more power than the GT4 so should be even faster on the straight still.

[GMe90]

If you buy this car with a DCT, you have completely missed the point of the car in my opinion. Who cares if it's two tenths quicker to 60? 4.2 to 60 for the MT is insanely fast and much faster than you can hope to use on the road.

[GMe90]

Originally Posted by ASAP

an f80 will win anywhere there isnt a dead stop involved...

Except on the track. Watch the Motor Trend M2 v. M4?Shoot Out on YouTube. The M2 beat the M4 around Willow Springs with Randy Pobst behind the wheel.

[kylejdavidson]

Originally Posted by GMe90

If you buy this car with a DCT, you have completely missed the point of the car in my opinion. Who cares if it's two tenths quicker to 60? 4.2 to 60 for the MT is insanely fast and much faster than you can hope to use on the road.

Or they just have different preferences and priorities. My cars have been split evenly between manual and DCT, plenty of advantages and enjoyment to be found in both.

[trey100]

Originally Posted by koastal

Thats not what i was querying.

I believe the M4 figures are questionable.

M4 -1.5 secs quicker to 110 mph ???

Why is that hard to believe? It's not clear from your post.

[CaryTheLabelGuy]

Originally Posted by GMe90

Except on the track. Watch the Motor Trend M2 v. M4?Shoot Out on YouTube. The M2 beat the M4 around Willow Springs with Randy Pobst behind the wheel.

On short, technical tracks, the M2 would be slightly faster than the M4. That's for several reasons, but most of which is because the M4 has considerably more power and has a harder time putting that power down, especially on corner exit. As compared to the M2, which is perfectly powered for its chassis and has a shorter wheel base.

However, the M4 will easily pull away from the M2 on longer, faster tracks. The M4 ZCP would be a hard contender for the M2 on shorter tracks. The ZCP can put the power down better, makes more power and can out-handle the non-ZCP M4.

[koastal]

Originally Posted by GMe90

If you buy this car with a DCT, you have completely missed the point of the car in my opinion. Who cares if it's two tenths quicker to 60? 4.2 to 60 for the MT is insanely fast and much faster than you can hope to use on the road.

Yeah - Nah

Entitled to your opinion. You obviously dont track. Which means you will be missing the point of this car.

Or if you do track, you would think nothing of putting on stickier tyres.

The DCT is akin to modifying the car to make it faster. Its just in this case the factory offers it as an option with warranty.

I personally find driving a DCT just as engaging as driving a manual - just faster.

[CaryTheLabelGuy]

Originally Posted by koastal

Yeah - Nah

Entitled to your opinion. You obviously dont track. Which means you will be missing the point of this car.

Or if you do track, you would think nothing of putting on stickier tyres.

The DCT is akin to modifying the car to make it faster. Its just in this case the factory offers it as an option with warranty.

I personally find driving a DCT just as engaging as driving a manual - just faster.

I went for a 6MT MY15 M4 to a DCT MY16 M4 ZCP. I don't really miss the 6MT now. This DCT is INSANELY good and tons of fun.

[GMe90]

Originally Posted by koastal

Yeah - Nah

Entitled to your opinion. You obviously dont track. Which means you will be missing the point of this car.

Or if you do track, you would think nothing of putting on stickier tyres.

The DCT is akin to modifying the car to make it faster. Its just in this case the factory offers it as an option with warranty.

I personally find driving a DCT just as engaging as driving a manual - just faster.

I don't go to race tracks, but that's because there aren't any where I live. I would definitely like to go in the future even though, truth be told, I don't think I would be very fast. I think you have to probably be an adrenaline junky type of guy (which I am not) to be fast on a race track. But I view BMWs more as really awesome road cars. If I started regularly tracking cars, I'd probably buy a dedicated track car, like the Corvette Stingray. I'm glad you enjoy your DCT. Cheers!

[GMe90]

Originally Posted by CaryTheLabelGuy

On short, technical tracks, the M2 would be slightly faster than the M4. That's for several reasons, but most of which is because the M4 has considerably more power and has a harder time putting that power down, especially on corner exit. As compared to the M2, which is perfectly powered for its chassis and has a shorter wheel base.

However, the M4 will easily pull away from the M2 on longer, faster tracks. The M4 ZCP would be a hard contender for the M2 on shorter tracks. The ZCP can put the power down better, makes more power and can out-handle the non-ZCP M4.

The Motor Trend guys were saying that the M2 is much more predictable and confidence inspiring than the M4. I think that's a huge factor in how fast one can drive. I test drove a Mustang GT and didn't feel like I was one with the car. I bet I'd be much faster in a BMW than a Mustang because of BMWs' predictive nature.

[CanAutM3]

Originally Posted by koastal

Doesnt quite make sense those figures from car and driver
If the M4 was really 1.5 secs faster to 110 mph - That would mean it is also be approx 1.5 secs faster over the 1/4

For the record i took a trip to drags trip on wed and the M2 trapped 113.48 mph at 12.7 - no launch control

You cannot do such a correlation between time-to-speed and time-to-distance. The M4 traps quite faster than the M2. According to the C&D results, the M4 needs 12.0 second to reach 119mph at which point it passes the ¼ mile while the M2 needs 12.5 seconds to reach 113mph when it passes the ¼ mile mark. This is all consistent with the time-to-speed acceleration numbers. That means the M4 is at least 26m (~90 feet) ahead of the M2 when the M2 crosses the ¼ mile line. That is a substantial difference.

[MachinesWithSouls]

First, let me start of by saying I love the M2 and would own one if I had room in my stable.

But, I think this car is just another step away from what M used to be. The fact that its performance is identical to an e9x M3 shines a light on it clearly. M used to be speed, but with theatrics. The sound, the feel. You used to get that more with e-gen cars. I can't say I'm tempted to trade in my e92 for an M2.

A direct sales comparison would never be possible. The 1M never sold in large quantities, and now BMW doesn't make an NA engine. But given where we are, I think this is by far the best car M currently makes.

[Mako]

Originally Posted by Ummm2

An AWD 500hp+ M3/M4 would put down insane numbers if that's your kind of thing.

It would probably be 79,000 pounds though.

Actually with more weight saving in the next gen M3 the AWD shouldn't weigh any more than the current one and will put down the power much better. The engine is already capable of 500hp. Rear biased AWD.

X4M is probably closest we will ever see.

[hellrotm]

C/D TEST RESULTS (E90 M3 DCT):

Zero to 60 mph: 4.3 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 9.9 sec
Zero to 150 mph: 26.0 sec
Street start, 5-60 mph: 4.9 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 12.7 sec @ 113 mph
Top speed (governor limited): 161 mph
Braking, 70-0 mph: 147 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.96 g

C/D TEST RESULTS(M2 DCT):

Zero to 60 mph: 4.0 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 9.6 sec
Zero to 130 mph: 18.3 sec
Zero to 150 mph: 28.6 sec
Rolling start, 5-60 mph: 4.4 sec
Top gear, 30-50 mph: 2.4 sec
Top gear, 50-70 mph: 2.9 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 12.5 sec @ 113 mph
Top speed (governor limited): 163 mph
Braking, 70-0 mph: 155 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.99 g

[CanAutM3]

Originally Posted by BlackJetE90

C/D TEST RESULTS (E90 M3 DCT):

Zero to 60 mph: 4.3 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 9.9 sec
Zero to 150 mph: 26.0 sec
Street start, 5-60 mph: 4.9 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 12.7 sec @ 113 mph
Top speed (governor limited): 161 mph
Braking, 70-0 mph: 147 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.96 g

C/D TEST RESULTS(M2 DCT):

Zero to 60 mph: 4.0 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 9.6 sec
Zero to 130 mph: 18.3 sec
Zero to 150 mph: 28.6 sec
Rolling start, 5-60 mph: 4.4 sec
Top gear, 30-50 mph: 2.4 sec
Top gear, 50-70 mph: 2.9 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 12.5 sec @ 113 mph
Top speed (governor limited): 163 mph
Braking, 70-0 mph: 155 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.99 g

You had to pick the worst one for the E9X

Here's another one: http://media.caranddriver.com/files/...10-comparo.pdf

I think it is fair to say the E9X M3 and the M2 are pretty evenly matched.

[Nine Lives]

Originally Posted by BlackJetE90

C/D TEST RESULTS (E90 M3 DCT):

Zero to 60 mph: 4.3 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 9.9 sec
Zero to 150 mph: 26.0 sec
Street start, 5-60 mph: 4.9 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 12.7 sec @ 113 mph
Top speed (governor limited): 161 mph
Braking, 70-0 mph: 147 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.96 g

C/D TEST RESULTS(M2 DCT):

Zero to 60 mph: 4.0 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 9.6 sec
Zero to 130 mph: 18.3 sec
Zero to 150 mph: 28.6 sec
Rolling start, 5-60 mph: 4.4 sec
Top gear, 30-50 mph: 2.4 sec
Top gear, 50-70 mph: 2.9 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 12.5 sec @ 113 mph
Top speed (governor limited): 163 mph
Braking, 70-0 mph: 155 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.99 g

Surprised at the 70-0 braking distances between the two.I always thought the braking was one of the weakest pointers on my e92 m3.

[Robin_NL]

Originally Posted by Nine Lives

Surprised at the 70-0 braking distances between the two.I always thought the braking was one of the weakest pointers on my e92 m3.

It is. No worries If you do that 10 times with E9x M3 your brakes literally are about to be on fire, been there done that(trackday)...

Cheers
Robin

[OrangeCrush]

Originally Posted by Artemis

Yup.

http://www.autoevolution.com/news/bm...ts-107878.html

Originally Posted by 8600RPM

Dead even

And the M3 had an exhaust with tune. Was the M2 stock?

[OrangeCrush]

Originally Posted by SoManyBlueCars

First, let me start of by saying I love the M2 and would own one if I had room in my stable.

But, I think this car is just another step away from what M used to be. The fact that its performance is identical to an e9x M3 shines a light on it clearly. M used to be speed, but with theatrics. The sound, the feel. You used to get that more with e-gen cars. I can't say I'm tempted to trade in my e92 for an M2.

A direct sales comparison would never be possible. The 1M never sold in large quantities, and now BMW doesn't make an NA engine. But given where we are, I think this is by far the best car M currently makes.

So when you test drove the M2, what about the sound and feel did you not like?

[PrematureApex]

Originally Posted by PhoenixWolf

Why is the rolling start 5-60mph at 4.4 seconds? Shouldn't it be faster than the 0-60mph time of 4.0 seconds?

Nope, they never are really, for any car. From 0, you can launch at a higher RPM using all of your available traction to put more power down right at clutch-off.

At 5 mph, the engine is flat, off boost and at very low RPM when you get on the throttle.

[OrangeCrush]

Originally Posted by GMe90

If you buy this car with a DCT, you have completely missed the point of the car in my opinion. Who cares if it's two tenths quicker to 60? 4.2 to 60 for the MT is insanely fast and much faster than you can hope to use on the road.

Well, had a 1M for 5 years and now own an M2 DCT and it is just as fun if not more and I contribute some of the fun factor to the DCT. Just my opinion though. But, I can assure you that I haven't completely missed the point of the M2.

[gtr]

Originally Posted by Nine Lives

Surprised at the 70-0 braking distances between the two.I always thought the braking was one of the weakest pointers on my e92 m3.

Try doing that 10 time in a row and then compare braking distant.