[VCP]

Ok go easy there big guy. The M4 is far more substantial from a quality and luxury point. Not every M4 buyer needs to get out for lap times. I own M4, M4GTS, M2LCI and the M2 is quite um, cheap by comparison. Fantastic car but..

Originally Posted by MSurge

Ordered a 6 speed. Wrong.

It’s obviously significant - same engine, less weight. The M4 has just been rendered obsolete.

[Eddien123]

Originally Posted by MSurge

Ordered a 6 speed. Wrong.

ItÂ’s obviously significant - same engine, less weight. The M4 has just been rendered obsolete.

Well if it makes you enjoy your car more. But here's some of the reasons the m4 is still better.
1- more power as stock
2- more options available
3- waaay better interior options (m2 black only is awful. Black leather is boring and it's not even merino leather which sucks)
4- m4 looks... so much better
5- it will likely still be faster than the m2 and with the same engines, it won't be possible to definitively say the m2 will be the better car to tune.
6- better wheel options (m2 comp wheels are terrible and need a swap as soon as you get it home)

I don't own an m4 and honestly plan to get an M2C eventually but come on man let's be real here. The m4 is far from obsolete.

[M3_WC]

Originally Posted by AlpsRider

Maybe the CF driveshaft delete has more to do with a 4 tier M line and less to do with the partical filter.

It is the particulate filter. Look up the size of these things on diesel cars. It will be placed inline between downpipes and muffler. A slimmer steel driveshaft is needed for clearances. Euro M2C has it in the actual muffler.

[akkando]

Originally Posted by Eddien123

Well if it makes you enjoy your car more. But here's some of the reasons the m4 is still better.
1- more power as stock
2- more options available
3- waaay better interior options (m2 black only is awful. Black leather is boring and it's not even merino leather which sucks)
4- m4 looks... so much better
5- it will likely still be faster than the m2 and with the same engines, it won't be possible to definitively say the m2 will be the better car to tune.
6- better wheel options (m2 comp wheels are terrible and need a swap as soon as you get it home)

I don't own an m4 and honestly plan to get an M2C eventually but come on man let's be real here. The m4 is far from obsolete.

Unless it's a well put together individual M4, most of them look terrible. Mineral Gray to Mineral Gray M4 to M2, the M2 looks great and the M4 looks awful. It's got weird folds on the front bumper design like some weird pug face, size of a barge, bad tail light design, fenders are not sexy.

I don't really see why and M4 would be faster if they had the same tires and same state of engine tune, but perhaps bone stock the M2C won't always be faster.

[Eddien123]

Originally Posted by akkando

Unless it's a well put together individual M4, most of them look terrible. Mineral Gray to Mineral Gray M4 to M2, the M2 looks great and the M4 looks awful.

I don't really see why and M4 would be faster if they had the same tires and same state of engine tune, but perhaps bone stock the M2C won't always be faster.

Fair point and to be honest its just a pissing contest. If you're buying these two cars for straight line speed you're buying the wrong car. The speed difference is going to be negligible. MT vs DCT, drivers, options, amount of fuel. All plays a role. They're both very quick we can leave it at that.

[Fangi0]

Even with all the commonality of parts that they share, M2C and M4 are 2 very different vehicles --targeting different segments/choices.

The larger, more luxurious, more potent M4, is slightly lighter (about maxed out in weight savings measures from factory), features EDC, and more room in the back.

If money were no issue and I had to choose between the two, for a daily driver in average roads yet still multipurpose performance machine, I would take the M4ZCP over the M2C.

Otherwise the M2C.

https://jalopnik.com/the-bmw-m2-is-o...-m4-1759763699

[KristianS]

Originally Posted by M3_WC

Incorrect, you quoted someone posting Euro weights. Each figure posted was 100% correct.


No, you are quoting weights from UK site. The person you quoted was posting Euro weights that include 68kg and 7kg for each car weight listed. You are the one comparing two different weight types. Which is why you posted this question..."Where did you get this from? The M4 weighs 1560kg, stated here."

It is simple really, you are getting confused.

Euro site:
1625 kg - M2C MT
1635 kg - M4 MT

UK site:
1550 kg - M2C MT
1560 kg - M4 MT


It doesn't matter what you weigh. You just need to compare the same type of weights, when comparing these cars. EU kerb weight is always 75kg more than DIN. The European Union adds this 75kg ballast to account for a driver and a small amount of luggage. If not comparing Euro weights, as you quoted unladen from UK for M4. You then need to use unladen for M2C, which is 1550.

You might want to re-read my post. I'm not at all confused. There's ~2kg difference between an M2 and M4 regardless of whether they are with fuel and passenger or not. The overall weight might increase but so long as you use the same driver and fuel weight, the difference doesn't change. Gearhead999s original post did not post like for like weights as he (or she) had the M4 a good deal heavier which it isn't, fact! So, they were not posting comparative weights. Your figures are correct and comparative, just like mine were. Reel your neck in!

I think you are also confusing the M2C. I have not mentioned the M2C only the M2. The M4 is lighter than the M2C! I'll go a step further. If there's about 2kg difference between an M2 and M4, and the M2C is quite a bit heavier (55kg I think)'than the M2, then it must be heavier than the M4, no? Both my figures are unladen (includes 68kg driver and 7kg of luggage and 90%full fuel tank) weights for M2 and M4 as specified in the UK brochure, 1570(M2) v 1572(M4).

[M3_WC]

Originally Posted by KristianS

Gearhead999s original post did not post like for like weights as he (or she) had the M4 a good deal heavier which it isn't, fact!

What are you talking about? They are like for like, all the weights posted are Euro weights.

Fact, you still are confused.

Originally Posted by Gearhead999s

ccording to BMW DE:

1570 kg - M2 MT
1595 kg - M2 DCT

1625 kg - M2C MT
1650 kg - M2C DCT

1635 kg - M4 MT
1660 kg - M4 DCT

Please point out above which weights are incorrect.

[hellrotm]

Originally Posted by KristianS

You might want to re-read my post. I'm not at all confused. There's ~2kg difference between an M2 and M4 regardless of whether they are with fuel and passenger or not. The overall weight might increase but so long as you use the same driver and fuel weight, the difference doesn't change. Gearhead999s original post did not post like for like weights as he (or she) had the M4 a good deal heavier which it isn't, fact! So, they were not posting comparative weights. Your figures are correct and comparative, just like mine were. Reel your neck in!

I think you are also confusing the M2C. I have not mentioned the M2C only the M2. The M4 is lighter than the M2C! I'll go a step further. If there's about 2kg difference between an M2 and M4, and the M2C is quite a bit heavier (55kg I think)'than the M2, then it must be heavier than the M4, no? Both my figures are unladen (includes 68kg driver and 7kg of luggage and 90%full fuel tank) weights for M2 and M4 as specified in the UK brochure, 1570(M2) v 1572(M4).

Posted a couple posts back on different weight types. First off, UK unladen is the weight of the vehicle when it’s not carrying any passengers, goods or other items. The M4 weight you have from brochures is not with driver and luggage. You are quoting unladen DIN or some number near it. The M2 number you have quoted is the EU weight which includes 68kg driver and 7kg luggage.

Unladen EU Weight = Weight of Car with 90% fuel, 68 kg driver, 7 kg cargo
Unladen DIN Weight = Weight of Car with 90% fuel, no driver, no cargo

We have the published Unladen EU and Unladen DIN weights of M2, M2C, M4.

DIN - M2 1495, M2C 1550, M4 1560
EU - M2 1570, M2C 1625, M4 1635

Either weight type you use, the M2 is 65kg lighter than the M4 and the M2C is 10kg lighter than the M4.

[KristianS]

Originally Posted by M3_WC

What are you talking about? They are like for like, all the weights posted are Euro weights.

Fact, you still are confused.



Please point out above which weights are incorrect.

I'm not confused, fundamentally I agree with everything you say (which you'd know if you'd read my posts properly) with the exception of one point. According to my brochures there is 2kg difference between the M2 and M4, not ~65kg. That is why I am saying those figures are not like for like,may be my brochures are wrong. See pic of M4 brochure.

BlackjetE90, I agree with you and posted the same facts and figures in the post you replied to.

Cheers!

[KristianS]

M2 brochure weight

[beppeM3+123d]

Originally Posted by voyagergab

Are you a troll?

Ahahah ahahahah ahahah I think that m2c will be faster than any other M of Bmw.

[zenmaster]

Originally Posted by MSurge

I’m sure the S55 can be easily modded to produce the same output as in the M4.

Why? Because you expect BMW to not make any changes to fuel system and/or turbos when creating lower performance M2C? Do you already know why the M2C power and torque curves are different? Are you hoping it's just a different boost map? Seems doubtful. I think they could make several changes to the S55 to lower performance and still call it an S55.

[boostm3]

Originally Posted by MSurge

Ordered a 6 speed. Wrong.

It’s obviously significant - same engine, less weight. The M4 has just been rendered obsolete.

Fix your avatar verbiage.. Youre obviously not driving a 2019 M2 Comp

[M-Pilot]

Originally Posted by zenmaster

Why? Because you expect BMW to not make any changes to fuel system and/or turbos when creating lower performance M2C? Do you already know why the M2C power and torque curves are different? Are you hoping it's just a different boost map? Seems doubtful. I think they could make several changes to the S55 to lower performance and still call it an S55.

@MR. already confirmed this in his interviews with FvM (CEO of BMW M) and other BMW M staff. According to what he heard from these guys, it's just a detuned S55 with the same turbos and same hardware (you can take a look at his post history or PM him). Also, making turbo or other hardware changes in the S55 just to put a hard limit on the tuning potential of M2c would indeed be more costly for BMW in terms of R&D. Don't get me wrong, I'm still just as doubtful as you are and looking forward to seeing the real world tuning attempts on M2C.

[///M Houbi]

Page 3 shows the power/torque diagram. This does not look like a „natural“ limitation to me...

https://www.press.bmwgroup.com/globa...79885EN/407061

To me this is what a pure software limitation looks like.

[thesaintjameshotel]

Originally Posted by afwares

You just can't type this and hit enter. I mean, you can, but something in your brain should be telling you to stop and think about it first. The only metric by which you can possibly call the M4 obsolete is if you plan for 100% of your miles to be track miles and the expectation is the M2C will be a faster track car, and that's an assumption that is premature. Only then could you even remotely say the M2C renders the M4 the wrong choice. But if 100% of your miles will be track miles, why are you dropping $60K on a car with a bunch of gadgets that only add weight but zero utility (iDrive, power windows, etc.)? Go buy something much lighter, much cheaper, and mod the hell out of it specifically for track thrashing. Once you admit that some of the driving will be on regular roads, you're crazy to call the M4 obsolete. It has a longer wheel base and different ride quality, it has dramatically better leather available, and many more colors, just to name a few obvious advantages. I just saw one in Erding, outside Munich, in Java Green with matching Green interior trim and my wife had to drag me away. Talk about sexy. If that's obsolete, I'd love to wake up tomorrow and find a big pile of obsolete sitting in my driveway.

Actually though—according to MSurge, you're just jealous because he's "paid and ordered" an m2c. "Paid".
You sir, now have an inferior car.
Because he says so.

[thesaintjameshotel]

Originally Posted by voyagergab

Are you a troll?

The dude literally got called out by Artemis in a different thread.
The Artemis who is the most respected dude on the entire forum.

[IncredibleNewt]

Originally Posted by zenmaster

Why? Because you expect BMW to not make any changes to fuel system and/or turbos when creating lower performance M2C? Do you already know why the M2C power and torque curves are different? Are you hoping it's just a different boost map? Seems doubtful. I think they could make several changes to the S55 to lower performance and still call it an S55.

This seems rather defensive. He can't speculate, same as you are? People in this thread are seriously trippin' out that he even would speculate that the M2 Competition could be quicker with a tune? God forbid. The immediate reaction to him posting his thoughts and opinions was hostility. I had assumed this was a forum for adults.

[IncredibleNewt]

Originally Posted by thesaintjameshotel

Actually though—according to MSurge, you're just jealous because he's "paid and ordered" an m2c. "Paid".
You sir, now have an inferior car.
Because he says so.

You seem to be butthurt from the previous thread, and figured you'd take that garbage over here into his new thread. You literally replied to zero posts between them, and came into this thread to attack the guy. How very mature of you.

[boostm3]

Originally Posted by MSurge

I’m sure the S55 can be easily modded to produce the same output as in the M4.
And it’s well known that the output of the S55 is under-stated in the M3/4.

So with the same power and less weight, the M2C will be faster than the M4!!

HUH.. Are you serious? You can mod a 1965 Chevy Corvair to outperform an M4.. SO WHAT?!! How can you compare a modded car to a stock one and come to any conclusion when comparing stock car to stock car, as you indicate in your thread title except that the modded car in stock form is slower. What a pointless thread.

If you stick a firecracker in the ass of a horse, he'll probably outrun the M4 also.

[zenmaster]

Originally Posted by IncredibleNewt

This seems rather defensive. He can't speculate, same as you are? People in this thread are seriously trippin' out that he even would speculate that the M2 Competition could be quicker with a tune? God forbid. The immediate reaction to him posting his thoughts and opinions was hostility. I had assumed this was a forum for adults.

Dude, in what universe is someone speculating when they are sure of something. Many people read posts to learn things. If a statement is made, it can be questioned without assumption of hostile intent. Don't drag your issues into this.