[c1pher]

And I am not bashing the GT350. I think the engine and drivetrain are great. The engine and exhaust sound incredible. And what they did with the GT350, basically a skunk works car to improve a coupe designed for a four cylinder eco boost street car and get it to perform at that level is impressive at the price it’s offered. But it isn’t comparable to the more purpose built cars.

[nachob]

Originally Posted by akkando

Well maybe BMW should step up to the plate then.

Yes! Word. Amen!

Car and Driver was bmw number one fan for 25 years until they lost their way. Now that CD has not supported the direction BMW has gone in, people say they're anti bmw. Nothing could be further from the truth. CD is into driving and they evaluate cars on that criteria which hurts bmw because that is where they have gone down. Notice they talk about steering feedback, braking and brake feel. All those things that bmw ruled on for years and no longer do. So the fanboys can bury their head in the sand but that will never push bmw to get their act together. The 1M and M2 were the result of a backlash against a stream of ever bigger, heavier techno laden luxo cruisers with M badges. Guess what everything after the 1M is gaining weight and again becoming more techno laden to the point that the brakes appear to be confused now. So people can do two things. Bury the head in the sand and say CD is wrong or be honest and tell bmw to step up and make cars that are the ultimate driving machine not the ultimate 0-60 machine which will now go to every all wheel drive electric car.

[izzyM2]

Why are the M2C brakes crap, I thought they are even more superior than M2?

[stein_325i]

Originally Posted by izzyM2

Why are the M2C brakes crap, I thought they are even more superior than M2?

I found their comment on the brakes to be very weird as in the previous review they mentioned that they were great even after a hard day on the track. Maybe this was a bad test model? Either way, all 4 cars are good in their own right and would be great to own (although that Supra needs a manual!)

I definitely agree with C/D on the steering feel. Its pretty embarrassing that not only was Toyota given a BMW to call the Supra, but hell they tuned the steering on the Supra better than every single BMW in the lineup, c'mon BMW, you have the technology to do better and to stop getting constantly mocked and criticized by automotive journalists and buyers for your steering. I get why cars like the 330i and X3 don't have any feel, as they're your bread and butter for sales, but M cars should have steering feel. Were pretty much coming up on one entire decade since EPS came to BMW, and I honestly feel like the improvements aren't good enough throughout the 10 years they've had to tune/modify it. Even some of the mainstream brands are surpassing BMW in steering feel, it's getting a bit ridiculous that BMW would choose to do this especially on M cars.

[csbear]

I have driven all these cars except the Supra. I would have gone:

1. GT350: It has its issues: average interior, oil burning, looks too much like any other Mustang, ZL1 is the superior performance car, etc. But it excels at every performance category...including the AMAZING sound. Of all the cars listed here, it has the most soul...easily. And at the end of the day, thats what sports cars are about.

2. M2C: I listed my car 2nd, but decided to get it over the GT350 because Mustangs are too damn common. And I liked the M2C looks a lot more. Two important factors to me, but factors that are not really part of this current showdown. I do agree about the steering. BMW really needs to stop being scared about steering with a high-level of feedback.

3. 718: Still a fun car, but severely overpriced. I don't care about its better track numbers, I am not paying $80,000+ (718 S) for a terrible sounding 4cyl. And the sales numbers agree with me. A small, somewhat impractical sports car with a 4 cyl is going to scare people away in the $60K to $100K price range

4. Supra: Last because: 1) I KNOW it is not better than the GT350. 2) Chris Harris prefers the M2C over the Supra easily. I trust his opinion more than C&D 3) It is easy to see that a Toyota sports car is not besting a Porsche Cayman, no matter what stupid C&D says.

Honestly, the clincher is C&D putting the Supra second. The M2C, GT350, and 718 are just plain better, more capable cars than the Supra...which I actually have a fondness for. I agree, the steering in the M2C is not the best of the bunch, but completely disregarding the M2Cs superior motor vs the Supra's motor is ridiculous. What? Going really fast doesn't matter anymore?

I trust this guy more than C&D:

https://youtu.be/WIjf6YaC_fg?t=194

[D22M2]

Originally Posted by nachob

Yes! Word. Amen!

Car and Driver was bmw number one fan for 25 years until they lost their way. Now that CD has not supported the direction BMW has gone in, people say they're anti bmw. Nothing could be further from the truth. CD is into driving and they evaluate cars on that criteria which hurts bmw because that is where they have gone down. Notice they talk about steering feedback, braking and brake feel. All those things that bmw ruled on for years and no longer do. So the fanboys can bury their head in the sand but that will never push bmw to get their act together. The 1M and M2 were the result of a backlash against a stream of ever bigger, heavier techno laden luxo cruisers with M badges. Guess what everything after the 1M is gaining weight and again becoming more techno laden to the point that the brakes appear to be confused now. So people can do two things. Bury the head in the sand and say CD is wrong or be honest and tell bmw to step up and make cars that are the ultimate driving machine not the ultimate 0-60 machine which will now go to every all wheel drive electric car.

SPOT ON

[5.M0NSTER]

Originally Posted by c1pher

And again tires make a huge difference. If the GT350 didn’t have cup tires on, which are one step above actual track tires, it wouldn’t have performed nearly as spectacularly. Or look at it the other way around and put cup tires on the other three cars and they smoke the GT350. Read this article where they compare the Stingray against GT350 and they are both wearing Pilot Super Sports. GT350 gets 1.0G compared to the Corvette’s 1.05.

Don't get me wrong, as a Sports Car there is no argument a Porsche is superior in nearly every way. This is not what I'm arguing. As a matter of fact comparing a 2 seater Porsche to any Mustang is apples and oranges in my mind.

And in 2016 I watched a GT350 own an F80 M4 and E92 M3 at the track. It was wearing Pilot Super Sports. Cup2s are just now standard in 2019. It was way faster than my old Mustang which also was able to get by the 2 BMWs but just barely.

My point is that a GT350 is faster on most tracks than an M2C or M4. And same tire won't give the other 2 the edge. With the chassies stiffness, suspension tuning and magnetic dampers being 1/2 the equation. The high revs and power going all the way to 8000rm being the other half. Cup2s make it even better.

And by the way, in the lighting lap GT350 came ahead of the Stingray. So there is that.

From the past editions:
Camaro ZL1 1LE (2017) - 2:45.7
Camaro ZL1 (2017) - 2:50.1
GT350R (2016) - 2:51.8
Stingray (2014) - 2:53.8
Mustang GT PP2 - 2:53.8
Camaro SS 1LE - 2:54.8
BMW M2 (2016) - 3:01.9

[bri1042]

Looking back at the styling categories, and the total point spread overall puts another spin on this. I can't say that the M2C deserves any more points (since it is sort of boring on the inside...uh...classic...), but the Mustang would absolutely score lower if I did the scoring. While I like the gauge cluster, and the toggle switches are cute, the rest of the front dash area of Mustang is a huge downside when I've sat in the car. it looks bulbous and very overdone. I wouldn't give it more than a 5, it's one of the worst looking interiors on any car in its price range. Also, I know one person who would give the Supra that high of an Exterior Styling score. I like it just fine, but would drop it one point for the fake vents. Everyone other car enthusiast friend I have dislikes it more than I do. Exterior ranking: 718, M2C, Supra, Mustang. Interior: 718, Supra, M2C, Mustang. And after that, the Mustang probably lost the test.

Outside of quality, that's a totally subjective score. We'd probably all come up with a different ranking of the four...it shouldn't be counted for points unless a particular car is particularly atrocious (so, a 0 or less score maybe). It's always been dumb to use it in a total on a ranking list.

Sport Cup 2 temps: They ran a slalom test. The tires had to be up to temp for it. This wasn't just a "road test". My other ding on the things is that it's absolutely true that it's difficult to get them up to temps on normal road trips (though I don't think it's impossible...). I've thought seriously about buying 768M's for my car but I'm looking at buying them bare to avoid getting the SC2's. There's no way they'd be the right tire for daily non-winter driving in Portland. If I bought a car that came with them standard, I'd probably have to pull them as soon as August ended.

[c1pher]

Originally Posted by 5.M0NSTER

Don't get me wrong, as a Sports Car there is no argument a Porsche is superior in nearly every way. This is not what I'm arguing. As a matter of fact comparing a 2 seater Porsche to any Mustang is apples and oranges in my mind.

And in 2016 I watched a GT350 own an F80 M4 and E92 M3 at the track. It was wearing Pilot Super Sports. Cup2s are just now standard in 2019. It was way faster than my old Mustang which also was able to get by the 2 BMWs but just barely.

My point is that a GT350 is faster on most tracks than an M2C or M4. And same tire won't give the other 2 the edge. With the chassies stiffness, suspension tuning and magnetic dampers being 1/2 the equation. The high revs and power going all the way to 8000rm being the other half. Cup2s make it even better.

And by the way, in the lighting lap GT350 came ahead of the Stingray. So there is that.

From the past editions:
Camaro ZL1 1LE (2017) - 2:45.7
Camaro ZL1 (2017) - 2:50.1
GT350R (2016) - 2:51.8
Stingray (2014) - 2:53.8
Mustang GT PP2 - 2:53.8
Camaro SS 1LE - 2:54.8
BMW M2 (2016) - 3:01.9

I think the LL is a good benchmark but unfortunately they can’t guarantee the same conditions. I like the other compare because they were done together under the same conditions. But yes they are close.

[greasypeanut]

Motor Trend also did a comparison but without the gt350. Still the same order. Supra, cayman, m2c.

I would have the gt350 myself but as someone who tracks about 5-6 times a year the cost of tires is crazy.

[MystroX5]

I read that article. It was horrid they couldn’t figure out how to operate the brakes. I was done after that. If they were playing with their own money I know which one they would buy and it wouldn’t be the Ford or the Toyota.

[Hingle Mccringleberry]

Originally Posted by LuvMyE92

I can see them dinging the steering, which isn't Porsche sharp but certainly is better than the rather distant and numb Mustang, but the brakes, really? Unless the M2C is for some reason worse than the OG, I think the brakes are typical BMW-excellent.

I agree, the Cayman would/should have won if not for the 4-cylinder. Back when it was a 6, it was the pinnacle of sports car greatness.

I traded a '16 Cayman GTS PDK NA 6-cylinder for a '20 M2C 6MT so here is my 2 cents...

I loved the NA Cayman exhaust in sport mode! It was eargasmic! But overall, am enjoying the M2C in so many other ways. M2C is definitely faster on track. It seems to just keep pulling so much harder past 80 mph. I think it handles about as well as a Cayman with the factory set-up (in my experience the front camber from Porsche was way wrong in stock form, but an easy fix). Haven't driven the 4 cylinder version of a Cayman, so I can't comment about the car in the comparison, but I have a hard time believing the base model would be better than the M2C...

One thing I don't 100% like about the M2 is that it isn't as comfortable as the Cayman for daily driving. Suspension is firm/harsh and sometimes difficult to take in certain situations. It feels like the PASM on the Cayman in the sport setting, which I always felt was really too harsh for anything but the track.

I certainly considered a GT350, but my wife wouldn't let me get one because she's kind of a snob (but a really lovely person nonetheless!)

Supra is Fugly! I'll leave it at that

That being said would consider a new GT4 without carbon seats if I could get an allocation and get rid of my M2C, but not much else is tickling my fancy... Also, when I use the configurator, I have a hard time building one for less than twice what I paid for my car...

[cptobvious]

Originally Posted by MystroX5

I read that article. It was horrid they couldn’t figure out how to operate the brakes. I was done after that. If they were playing with their own money I know which one they would buy and it wouldn’t be the Ford or the Toyota.

You know, I really do think you've absolutely hit the nail on the head here. It's fun reading reviews, and I've probably watched 30,476 hours of Youtube videos on cars, but in the end I simply NEVER trust what the journalist has to say about the car. Not that they're not TRYING to be objective, but in the end, they're not "playing with their own money."

In economics, there's a very clear understanding that there's "stated preference" (which is just another way to say "lies") and there's "revealed preference" (which is "watch what the person actually does, because you can't fake your actual actions"). Everybody lies. We all lie, whether we know it or not. But, our actions are our actions.

And when you spend your own money on something, that unequivocally reveals your true preferences.

https://f87.bimmerpost.com/forums/sh....php?t=1416313

Judging from that amazing thread "Besides the M2, what other cars are in your garage," revealed preference seems to indicate either: a) you buy the M2 because your garage already has a GT2 RS, a 488 Pista, and a Vantage V12, and this is just another high performance fun car that you had to have, or b) you've gotten to a point in life where you'd previously driven the S2000 and the BRZ, and you can finally afford to move up in performance to an M2.

Revealed preference seems to show that if you can afford the M2, you're buying it because it's a fun performance car. I don't remember seeing any GT350's or Supra's in any of those garages. Lots and lots of Caymans though.

Then again, I suppose if we were to entirely rely on revealed preference when it comes to automotive journalists, we'd have to believe that the Miata is the world's most AMAZING car. Funny. I think journo's universally LOVE the Miata because it's the only remotely sporty, fun car they can afford - in the same way that Chris Harris gets an erection every time he sits in a hot hatch. He's just reliving the wonders of his youth, but I can't imagine that he'd take a Civic Type R over a Ferrari now that he can afford Ferrari's!

[///Mowgli]

Originally Posted by turley59

I traded a '16 Cayman GTS PDK NA 6-cylinder for a '20 M2C 6MT so here is my 2 cents...

I loved the NA Cayman exhaust in sport mode! It was eargasmic! But overall, am enjoying the M2C in so many other ways. M2C is definitely faster on track. It seems to just keep pulling so much harder past 80 mph. I think it handles about as well as a Cayman with the factory set-up (in my experience the front camber from Porsche was way wrong in stock form, but an easy fix). Haven't driven the 4 cylinder version of a Cayman, so I can't comment about the car in the comparison, but I have a hard time believing the base model would be better than the M2C...

One thing I don't 100% like about the M2 is that it isn't as comfortable as the Cayman for daily driving. Suspension is firm/harsh and sometimes difficult to take in certain situations. It feels like the PASM on the Cayman in the sport setting, which I always felt was really too harsh for anything but the track.

How would you rate the steering in the Cayman compared with the M2/M2C? I keep reading that it's really direct and has great feel but when I drove a 981 Boxster S (I assume they both have similar steering setups) I was a bit disappointed with the steering ratio. Needed to turn it a bit more than I expected. It was also lacking feel. Not what I expected at all.

I'm planning to buy an M2C but I'm concerned that steering feel might be lacking too.

[Wern3r]

The GT350 is the only focused car in the test ofc it will win this type of test.
If they would take in to account the potential of each car the order would be different.

[1mm2]

Originally Posted by bri1042

Everyone other car enthusiast friend I have dislikes it more than I do. Exterior ranking: 718, M2C, Supra, Mustang. Interior: 718, Supra, M2C, Mustang. And after that, the Mustang probably lost the test.

I agree with you but find these things so subjective it's not funny.

I find the M2C better looking than the 718 due to aggressive stance but that's just me. The Stang simply does nothing for me (maybe because it looks big) and I find the Supra a bit ugly.

They should keep these aspects off the scoring.

[heavyD^2]

Originally Posted by greasypeanut

Motor Trend also did a comparison but without the gt350. Still the same order. Supra, cayman, m2c.

I would have the gt350 myself but as someone who tracks about 5-6 times a year the cost of tires is crazy.

Yeah there is no conspiracy and some here simply need to accept that as good as the M2C is that it's porky weight holds it back and there are some solid alternatives that do some things better.

[warrenw]

I just don't understand how they could give it last place based on brakes. Knockback? Come on, it doesn't come like that from the factory - obviously BMW gave them an abused press car.

Whatevs.

[SilverScotty]

Originally Posted by warrenw

I just don't understand how they could give it last place based on brakes. Knockback? Come on, it doesn't come like that from the factory - obviously BMW gave them an abused press car.

Whatevs.

Exactly. Nearly every review mentions how the brakes are a standout on the M2C, and in this comparison it's the biggest complaint. Nobody would give a good score to a car that doesn't work properly. Just disappointing that was the case here as I just keep wondering where it would have placed if this weren't the case.

Regardless, the M2C is what I wanted, so that is what I got. I honestly like the mustang but wanted something a little more subtle. I'd still like to hear the scream of that V8 but I have ZERO complaints about the S55. Love how it pulls at any speed.

[Moflow]

Originally Posted by ///Mowgli

How would you rate the steering in the Cayman compared with the M2/M2C? I keep reading that it's really direct and has great feel but when I drove a 981 Boxster S (I assume they both have similar steering setups) I was a bit disappointed with the steering ratio. Needed to turn it a bit more than I expected. It was also lacking feel. Not what I expected at all.

I'm planning to buy an M2C but I'm concerned that steering feel might be lacking too.

I've never driven a Boxster, but I daylied 350Z with a nice hydraulic setup for about 13 years before switching to the M2C and I drive the cars back to back from time to time.

The steering feel in the Z is good enough that just driving around normally, you can really feel all the little bumps and imperfections in quite a bit of detail. If you love driving, just driving normally and feeling everything thats happening with the front tires can actually be its own kind of (mild) fun.

The M2C still provides some feel, you can tell one pavement surface from another and bumps are still transmitted through the wheel to your hands. In addition, when you're actually pushing the car up to 7 or 8 tenths, the wheel weights up really nicely and naturally and though i've only had tiny hints of oversteer, the M2C gives every indication that it will perform with a ton of linearity and predictability when it comes to controlling a slide.

But it doesn't provide that sheer fidelity when it comes to pavement texture thats available in the Z. Hit a bunch of tiny bumps in the Z and it feels just like that. Hit a bunch of tiny bumps in the M2C and it feels like you hit the same bump a bunch of times over and over again.

Hopefully that was helpful, considering i completely ignored half of what you asked about.

[McSmash]

Originally Posted by warrenw

I just don't understand how they could give it last place based on brakes. Knockback? Come on, it doesn't come like that from the factory - obviously BMW gave them an abused press car.

Whatevs.

FWIW, I have been autocrossing the M2C pretty hard the last six months and recently started getting some serious brake fade and knockback after only two runs. It's only very recently started doing that, so maybe it happens when the pads get worn or I just need another fluid flush? New pads are on order, so let's see if that helps...

Either way, not sure if it's fair to judge a car based on that, but it seems like a possible issue with the M2C.

[ChrisK]

Originally Posted by ///Mowgli

How would you rate the steering in the Cayman compared with the M2/M2C? I keep reading that it's really direct and has great feel but when I drove a 981 Boxster S (I assume they both have similar steering setups) I was a bit disappointed with the steering ratio. Needed to turn it a bit more than I expected. It was also lacking feel. Not what I expected at all.

I'm planning to buy an M2C but I'm concerned that steering feel might be lacking too.

I had 2019 718 for three days (loaner). IMHO, on the street - the M2C wins in speed and handling.