[Moflow]

Originally Posted by akkando

My gripe is the character of the engine and how it makes that power on the stock tune, not the total power that it makes or the power relative to the n55. I know it doesn't bother most people, and I know it's making more power than the n55, and I know it's faster making peek power at 5300 rpm to 7k rather than only making peek power at 7600 but I don't like it. The f80 and f80c curve feels better to me. For me personally, the engine character disappoints me in stock form and don't prefer it to the n55. If my m2 caught on fire tomorrow and started looking at m2c as replacement I'd only consider a 2019 or early 2020 so I could flash tune it, or CS of it fell into my lap because it actually rewards for revving it out.

Fair enough. I’m sure I’d also prefer the LCI M3/M4 tune or the Cs tune if given the choice. But if my only choices are “power drops off at high rpm” and “power stays consistent at high rpms” I’ll take the latter.

[Zuzu]

Originally Posted by Cadillac

I had the OG M2 for more than 4 years and travelled over 97,000 KM and now after about 3 months and 4,000 KM of owning the M2 Comp I am not sure I like it more than the OG.
I am in Australia so you have to understand we have very archaic road rules and are not able to push the cars to the limit without losing one's licence.
Both cars are/were DCT but I just feel the OG was more "in tune" especially from 0-60 KMH….more "visceral or raw"?
I can't put my finger on it but they are very different and as for the sound the Comp is seriously embarrassing compared to the OG.
Anyone else had the same experience…just seems the OG to me might have been the sweet spot….I do not track the car.
Other things that are different or good/bad…instrument graphics big improvement, I like the new seats but miss the thigh extenders as I am tall.
Steering wheel feels a little thinner.
I do notice the higher RPM band and certainly in 7th one feels heaps more power.
I think I will get a G87 but it will need to be a manual I think.

Hi mate,
I have also owned both..
OG M2 /DCT / MPE / owned for 3 years with 23,000 Kms when sold.

M2C / 6MT / 2NH Brakes / have had now for 9 months with only 3,400 Kms (due to Covid lock down travel restrictions)

To be honest, even thou the M2C has low mileage , the only thing I actually miss about the OG is the awesome exhaust tone with the MPE. Although, now I have become accustomed to the M2C tone and actually dont mind it with valves open.
I definitively believe the M2C in 6MT does sound better than in DCT form..

As others have said, you get emotionally attached after 3 years ownership and this can cloud your perception..
Enjoy the new car mate and hopefully see you around the Sydney streets soon..

[VisualEcho]

Originally Posted by akkando

My gripe is the character of the engine and how it makes that power on the stock tune, not the total power that it makes or the power relative to the n55.

This is a good way to put it. It's the character.

Before I bought my OG I spent quite a while at the dealership with the cars side by side, and even driving them each several times, one after the other. Stock for stock the cars seemed very weird because I knew the M2C had more power, but it didn't feel as powerful until a certain point. It also felt heavier, but smoother because of it. In short, the OG felt more raw.

[Wolfman’s Brother]

One thing I’ve never seen but want is various M2/M2C dyno charts overlayed. Sure you can cross-reference, but it’s a pain and so many factors come into play.

I want to see:

- Stock/stock
- Stage 2 BM3 M2/Stock M2C
- Stage 2 BM3 M2/ Stage1 (or CS map) BM3 M2C

[Cadillac]

Originally Posted by Zuzu

Hi mate,
I have also owned both..
OG M2 /DCT / MPE / owned for 3 years with 23,000 Kms when sold.

M2C / 6MT / 2NH Brakes / have had now for 9 months with only 3,400 Kms (due to Covid lock down travel restrictions)

To be honest, even thou the M2C has low mileage , the only thing I actually miss about the OG is the awesome exhaust tone with the MPE. Although, now I have become accustomed to the M2C tone and actually dont mind it with valves open.
I definitively believe the M2C in 6MT does sound better than in DCT form..

As others have said, you get emotionally attached after 3 years ownership and this can cloud your perception..
Enjoy the new car mate and hopefully see you around the Sydney streets soon..

Thanks, I am pretty sure you are right.
I live in Melbourne now so next week will head to Bathurst for the big race and the first chance to take the new M2C on a good road trip.
I do seriously enjoy the M2C and looking forward to keeping it as long as the OG.

[VisualEcho]

Originally Posted by Wolfman’s Brother

One thing I’ve never seen but want is various M2/M2C dyno charts overlayed. Sure you can cross-reference, but it’s a pain and so many factors come into play.

I want to see:

- Stock/stock
- Stage 2 BM3 M2/Stock M2C
- Stage 2 BM3 M2/ Stage1 (or CS map) BM3 M2C

This is a hard thing to accomplish. While going down the rabbit hole the other day on something else I found a company that did dyno plots on a stock M2 vs M2C vs M3, but it's on my work computer. I can post it later. They did BM3 on the M2 as well.

I think it was this tuner:

I'll post the graphs from work if no one else does.

In short, a M2C provides minimal performance gains over the OG, although the dyno plot doesn't look that different. Stage 2 OG clearly puts it ahead of the stock M2C, but the Stage 2 M2C is a whole different animal, like forget even keeping up in a Stage 2 OG.

[ASAP]

Without getting into too many details or doing much research-

In my mind the comparo that I've always made is what would be the most common setup on both cars. Let's disregard stock cars and say 1 for 1, OG vs M2C.

M2 - FBO, stock turbo protuned on 93

M2C - FBO (which is really just downpipe as no other boltons warrant any gains) protuned on 93

Those 2 setups above to me, would be the most common and I would say that in the above scenario, the M2C would run away from the M2 with probably an additional 5 mph in the quarter and probably like a 390 WHP to 470 WHP comparo... massive difference.

[DanG]

Originally Posted by ASAP

Without getting into too many details or doing much research-

In my mind the comparo that I've always made is what would be the most common setup on both cars. Let's disregard stock cars and say 1 for 1, OG vs M2C.

M2 - FBO, stock turbo protuned on 93

M2C - FBO (which is really just downpipe as no other boltons warrant any gains) protuned on 93

Those 2 setups above to me, would be the most common and I would say that in the above scenario, the M2C would run away from the M2 with probably an additional 5 mph in the quarter and probably like a 390 WHP to 470 WHP comparo... massive difference.

Let’s be honest. The most common is stock power in both cars.

[ASAP]

Originally Posted by DanG

Let’s be honest. The most common is stock power in both cars.

the m2c still wins by a lot lol

[David.m]

Originally Posted by Cadillac

Thanks, I am pretty sure you are right.
I live in Melbourne now so next week will head to Bathurst for the big race and the first chance to take the new M2C on a good road trip.
I do seriously enjoy the M2C and looking forward to keeping it as long as the OG.

Be careful driving to Bathurst, don't want to see a pic of your car on the Vic or NSW Pol FB pages

You know you've got many of the best driving roads in the country 2.5-3hrs drive from Melbourne. If you can get there mid-week there is little if any traffic, was down there last week (2800km in 3 days).

On the car, I'm thinking a lot of what you're feeling is down to sound, you don't need to be going hard for the OG to sound great (& make you feel great). The only 'performance' differences between the cars is engine/strut bracing and the wear/tear of 97K km. The problem with our opinions/feelings about cars is that they are just that and they're influenced by biases (good & bad). If it was possible to do blind A/B testing opinions would be very different (& more reliable).
I don't think the G87 is going to be any better except in a straight line.

[VisualEcho]

Originally Posted by ASAP

Without getting into too many details or doing much research-

In my mind the comparo that I've always made is what would be the most common setup on both cars. Let's disregard stock cars and say 1 for 1, OG vs M2C.

M2 - FBO, stock turbo protuned on 93

M2C - FBO (which is really just downpipe as no other boltons warrant any gains) protuned on 93

Those 2 setups above to me, would be the most common and I would say that in the above scenario, the M2C would run away from the M2 with probably an additional 5 mph in the quarter and probably like a 390 WHP to 470 WHP comparo... massive difference.

I agree, but think the difference is even more pronounced. No possible way a S2OG will get anywhere near an S2M2C, as the S2M2C is just a whole different animal at that point. So if guys are wanting that kind of power, it's M2C all the way.

Originally Posted by DanG

Let’s be honest. The most common is stock power in both cars.

I agree with this too. The M2C allows the normal M-Car BMW owner to have somewhat more of that cake without messing with it (and the CS even more). When that happens, the average hot-dog S2OG owner will run him down (by a fair margin). But in the event that the M2C owner isn't the normal M-Car guy, and wants to mod his car, it's curtains for the OG.

[Cadillac]

Originally Posted by David.m

Be careful driving to Bathurst, don't want to see a pic of your car on the Vic or NSW Pol FB pages

You know you've got many of the best driving roads in the country 2.5-3hrs drive from Melbourne. If you can get there mid-week there is little if any traffic, was down there last week (2800km in 3 days).

On the car, I'm thinking a lot of what you're feeling is down to sound, you don't need to be going hard for the OG to sound great (& make you feel great). The only 'performance' differences between the cars is engine/strut bracing and the wear/tear of 97K km. The problem with our opinions/feelings about cars is that they are just that and they're influenced by biases (good & bad). If it was possible to do blind A/B testing opinions would be very different (& more reliable).
I don't think the G87 is going to be any better except in a straight line.

Thanks for the feedback, I am sure you are right.
I will do everything possible to stay off the police FB pages😂
Looking forward to the trip, I have a reason for business to go to Wagga a lot but due to Covid this is curtailed.
Some good back roads there that I normally take so hopefully as I will come back via Wagga..another opportunity to open up a little.

[Aim.F32]

Originally Posted by VisualEcho

This is a hard thing to accomplish. While going down the rabbit hole the other day on something else I found a company that did dyno plots on a stock M2 vs M2C vs M3, but it's on my work computer. I can post it later. They did BM3 on the M2 as well.

I think it was this tuner:

I'll post the graphs from work if no one else does.

In short, a M2C provides minimal performance gains over the OG, although the dyno plot doesn't look that different. Stage 2 OG clearly puts it ahead of the stock M2C, but the Stage 2 M2C is a whole different animal, like forget even keeping up in a Stage 2 OG.

These guys have also tuned a local M2C which is currently pushing 700hp...

[Maynard]

This video shows (but not emphasizing) the biggest diff - the air-to-water intercooler on the s55 is so much less prone to heat soak, so you can actually have the power for more than just that first cool run. Towards the end, even with the aftermarket intercooler, he is showing back to back runs with high end drop off. On track this becomes fairly significant, not so much on the street. ASAP (above) is also neglecting the option of an improved cooling radiator on the s55, which will increase this effect further (or permit even more aggressive tuning - as per Dinan/Carbahn; Roundel quoted Steve D as saying he has an 800hp M2c/cs in his shop now).

Aside from all of this though, I feel like people are missing the point in pursuit of bench-racing glory. Car performance for non-pros is about feel and character, not that last 0.1 second. Trying to boil it down to numbers is missing the point. Drive what you love, love what you drive, and assume that is true for that other guy in that other car too.

[ASAP]

Originally Posted by Maynard

This video shows (but not emphasizing) the biggest diff - the air-to-water intercooler on the s55 is so much less prone to heat soak, so you can actually have the power for more than just that first cool run. Towards the end, even with the aftermarket intercooler, he is showing back to back runs with high end drop off. On track this becomes fairly significant, not so much on the street. ASAP (above) is also neglecting the option of an improved cooling radiator on the s55, which will increase this effect further (or permit even more aggressive tuning - as per Dinan/Carbahn; Roundel quoted Steve D as saying he has an 800hp M2c/cs in his shop now).

Aside from all of this though, I feel like people are missing the point in pursuit of bench-racing glory. Car performance for non-pros is about feel and character, not that last 0.1 second. Trying to boil it down to numbers is missing the point. Drive what you love, love what you drive, and assume that is true for that other guy in that other car too.

I actually never look at hp numbers as that is indeed just numbers chasing... what matters to me is performance. This is why I look at 1/4 mile trap speed the most... there are very significant differences between the n55 and s55 under almost all scenarios since the small N55 turbo just runs out of breath top end... hence there is a more obvious hardware limitation than basic sw tuning.

What you say about the S55 intercooler is true but it signifcantly less pronounced than on the N55s air to air setup... throwing a downpipe on an S55 vs putting everything other bolt on yields very limited results as opposed to an N55.

[therealm3]

Originally Posted by MmmmmM2

This reminds me of when I test drove my M2C. I was like, "This car isn't that much faster than my 340i".

However, after a week of ownership, I realized just how MUCH faster it was than my 340i. Yes, my 340i with MPPSK sounded WAY better, but I kind of like the sound of the M2C. It's very unique.

Interesting. I had the same response when I test drove an m2c last year. Didn't really feel faster than my 340. So I hesitated to order one. And now I am kinda back in the market and kicking myself with todays pricing and availability.

[Cadillac]

Originally Posted by David.m

Be careful driving to Bathurst, don't want to see a pic of your car on the Vic or NSW Pol FB pages

You know you've got many of the best driving roads in the country 2.5-3hrs drive from Melbourne. If you can get there mid-week there is little if any traffic, was down there last week (2800km in 3 days).

On the car, I'm thinking a lot of what you're feeling is down to sound, you don't need to be going hard for the OG to sound great (& make you feel great). The only 'performance' differences between the cars is engine/strut bracing and the wear/tear of 97K km. The problem with our opinions/feelings about cars is that they are just that and they're influenced by biases (good & bad). If it was possible to do blind A/B testing opinions would be very different (& more reliable).
I don't think the G87 is going to be any better except in a straight line.

Did over 700km to Milthorpe NSW from Melbourne on the way to Bathurst tomorrow and was able to finally get a feel for the difference…a couple of high speed overtaking opportunities showed the difference…wow I really noticed the top end and since the windows and sunroof were open the sound when pushed was pretty good.
Different animal for sure more capable to be honest when driving hard.

[EDWYER]

Long live the OG!

[Brandt51]

Originally Posted by Cadillac

I am in Australia so you have to understand we have very archaic road rules and are not able to push the cars to the limit without losing one's licence.

I enjoyed my 1993 Geo Metro more than the M2C because the USA also has similar road laws.

[richard in NC]

Originally Posted by Brandt51

I enjoyed my 1993 Geo Metro more than the M2C because the USA also has similar road laws.

I had a 1995 Mitsubishi 3000GT VR-4 with a vibration problem. I took it into the shop and the only loaner I could get was a Geo Metro. I was squalling tires trying to drive it home near the speed limit on a twisty road. I was used to the VR-4 able to go 25 over through the same curves. Funny thing the Geo Metro had a vibration far worse and would shake itself to death over 55 mph.

[VisualEcho]

Originally Posted by richard in NC

I had a 1995 Mitsubishi 3000GT VR-4 with a vibration problem. I took it into the shop and the only loaner I could get was a Geo Metro. I was squalling tires trying to drive it home near the speed limit on a twisty road. I was used to the VR-4 able to go 25 over through the same curves. Funny thing the Geo Metro had a vibration far worse and would shake itself to death over 55 mph.

They say it's more fun to drive a slow car fast than a fast car slow.

Personally, I'd rather drive a fast car slow because the feel of the car is more important to me than the position of the needle.

[Moflow]

Originally Posted by VisualEcho

They say it's more fun to drive a slow car fast than a fast car slow.

Personally, I'd rather drive a fast car slow because the feel of the car is more important to me than the position of the needle.

I dunno, I think there's truth to the saying, but driving a fast car slow can also be fun.

Driving a fast car fast is obviously the most fun you can have though, and its a good argument for actually buying a faster car. I'd rather have a car that can reach those high peaks of enjoyment when it really needs to.

That said, my favorite slow car has to be the Mercedes 240D when fitted with their underrated 4-speed manual. You can drive that car at 10/10ths and the tires will squeal, the car will lean, you'll feel the RWD and you'll have to manage traction. But you won't really be going much over the speed limit. I've always wanted to try putting 4 space-savers on one just to see if I could get that "rally car driver on a gravel road" feel with one 24/7, but I don't have the space for such a dumb (yet potentially hilariously) project.