[sibanez]

Looked through this thread and couldn't find a lot of feedback either way. What's the typical delta between the DCT and manual? From what I can tell, the fastest M2s at Nats were manuals, but I can't absolutely say that.

Sold my 128i and am hunting for a M2 to use in BS. Had a manual lined up, but the PPI was a disaster and the owner didn't want to fix or reduce the price.

[SEAT TIME RULES]

Originally Posted by sibanez

Looked through this thread and couldn't find a lot of feedback either way. What's the typical delta between the DCT and manual? From what I can tell, the fastest M2s at Nats were manuals, but I can't absolutely say that.

Sold my 128i and am hunting for a M2 to use in BS. Had a manual lined up, but the PPI was a disaster and the owner didn't want to fix or reduce the price.

I doubt a 6 speed will be faster than DCT. Especially if the course your on has a 2-3-2 shift in it somewhere. DCT's in SOLO 2 work are almost unfair!

[CSBM5]

Originally Posted by SEAT TIME RULES

I doubt a 6 speed will be faster than DCT. Especially if the course your on has a 2-3-2 shift in it somewhere. DCT's in SOLO 2 work are almost unfair!

It's an interesting study. 1st gear in the DCT is super steep reaching 7000rpm at 32.9 mph versus 38.5 mph for the 6MT. Similarly, 2nd peaks at 61.1mph with the DCT versus 68.2 mph with the 6MT. There may be many courses requiring shifting in the DCT where the 6MT is good to stay in 2nd.

Hence, depending on how good you are managing a launch, you can hook the tires easier with a longer 1st gear in the 6MT in addition to being able to manage the rate of weight transfer to the rear with the clutch engagement.

Secondly, the DCT carries 55lb weight penalty everywhere, so it's power/weight ratio is 1.5% less than the 6MT.

[JustAWhisper]

It's hard to determine conclusively because the difference, if there is one, is pretty small. 6MT tends to be a bit more popular because of the lighter weight and easier ProSolo launch, but the M2 that won nationals this year was a DCT.

I think it's basically a wash.

[SEAT TIME RULES]

Originally Posted by CSBM5

It's an interesting study. 1st gear in the DCT is super steep reaching 7000rpm at 32.9 mph versus 38.5 mph for the 6MT. Similarly, 2nd peaks at 61.1mph with the DCT versus 68.2 mph with the 6MT. There may be many courses requiring shifting in the DCT where the 6MT is good to stay in 2nd.

Hence, depending on how good you are managing a launch, you can hook the tires easier with a longer 1st gear in the 6MT in addition to being able to manage the rate of weight transfer to the rear with the clutch engagement.

Secondly, the DCT carries 55lb weight penalty everywhere, so it's power/weight ratio is 1.5% less than the 6MT.

As for launching any manual I always was a bit conservative on launches. Consistency wins almost every time. Again a DCT is more consistent.

An autocross run is like sailboat racing. The person that wins is the one that makes the fewest mistakes. There are fewer variables with a DCT than a 6spd.

I'm a 6 speed fan, but on a Solo 2 course I'd opt for a DCT.


YMMV,
Cheers,
Steve
Former EVO School Instructor

[sibanez]

Originally Posted by SEAT TIME RULES

As for launching any manual I always was a bit conservative on launches. Consistency wins almost every time. Again a DCT is more consistent.

An autocross run is like sailboat racing. The person that wins is the one that makes the fewest mistakes. There are fewer variables with a DCT than a 6spd.

I'm a 6 speed fan, but on a Solo 2 course I'd opt for a DCT.


YMMV,
Cheers,
Steve
Former EVO School Instructor

Thanks, that makes a lot of sense. I've always autocrossed manual cars and have always shifted to second and let it be. For local courses, that's fine, but it's bit me on bigger/faster national-style courses.

Interesting that the winning BS car was a OG M2 with the DCT. Now I'll just need to research maintenance.

Lots of help, appreciate it greatly.

[z3papa]

Originally Posted by JustAWhisper

He was probably running 265's all around because 295's were unobtanium for most of the summer.

All in all, it's a good example of showing that tire width is not everything, but I was running the 275 in the rear since I also couldn't get a 295 in time, and felt a slight (but noticeable) decrease in the ability to put power down, so it's not a non-issue, either.

IDK -- Tony ran the same setup in 19' when he won FS in an E92M3. The issue is whether you want to run square and don't want it too numb, run square and deal with it being numb (aka like Namer did in winning FS this year) or staggered and hate the total imbalance.

[Lappy]

Does anyone know of any street class legal shocks for the m2? I reached out to MCS and they replied that they don't and have no intention of making BS legal shocks for the m2.

[JustAWhisper]

There are very few street-class legal offerings. The only off-the-shelf option that I know of is the Bilstein HD shock. I don't personally know of anyone who's using them. They probably provide a little more rebound, but they tend to slightly raise the ride height on most vehicles (which negatively affects camber), they're more of a truck shock.

I know several people who run MCS, but the shocks have to be modified to make them street-class legal. I know ProPartsUSA will order MCS shocks and then make them street-class legal for you, but they also revalve them to be very stiff. Their philosophy is to control roll under street class rules by adding a ton of compression and rebound. It kind of works and some people do really well with that kind of setup, but others (including myself) have tried it and don't like it.

I'm still running on stock shocks, as are many (most?) others. A high end shock is definitely an improvement, but unless you're willing to go through all of the cost and work to make a race shock legal, there's not really any better option than stock. Unlike older BMW's, the stock shocks on this car are valved kinda OK for autocross and track duty (at least with the stock spring rate). There's a reason Bilstein, Koni, etc. haven't bothered to market inexpensive off-the-shelf shocks for the car.

[sibanez]

Originally Posted by Lappy

Does anyone know of any street class legal shocks for the m2? I reached out to MCS and they replied that they don't and have no intention of making BS legal shocks for the m2.

I just spoke with Chris at Redshift and they are able to custom valve rear shocks for our cars that will be BS legal. The BS winner at Nats this year was running Penske rear shocks from what I was told, so this seems to be an important upgrade (from what I can tell, these cars do need a bit more rear shock for solo).

All in, you'd be looking at roughly $650: https://store.redshiftmotorsports.co...ompdampers.htm

[digitalseance]

Originally Posted by JustAWhisper

The only off-the-shelf option that I know of is the Bilstein HD shock. I don't personally know of anyone who's using them. They probably provide a little more rebound, but they tend to slightly raise the ride height on most vehicles (which negatively affects camber), they're more of a truck shock.

I'm running the bilstein hd's. Only two local events on them and there were other environmental factors but the initial feeling is they are definitely stiffer but maybe only by 10-15%. I did not notice a difference in ride height.

[Lappy]

In the event anyone is looking, the TCKline shocks from the coilover kit are legal. Rears are direct bolt on, fronts they Charge 120 per shock to make stock springs work.

[AlpinewhiteM2C]

Originally Posted by Lappy

In the event anyone is looking, the TCKline shocks from the coilover kit are legal. Rears are direct bolt on, fronts they Charge 120 per shock to make stock springs work.

Do you know if the modification to the front shocks will allow you to run their coilver kit as well as stock springs or can you only run stock springs or lowering springs with similar perch requirements going forward?

[dabootski]

Originally Posted by Lappy

Does anyone know of any street class legal shocks for the m2? I reached out to MCS and they replied that they don't and have no intention of making BS legal shocks for the m2.

I've run a set of MCS 2 way, non-remotes custom built for B Street on my OG M2 the past couple seasons and will be posting them for sale soon if you're interested. These were purchased from Jeff @ ProPartsUSA with his recommended valving. My co-driver Jay and I had much success running these at SCCA national tour events the last 2 years and really felt they improved the handling the car, especially on lower grip sites which we struggled with the previous 2 years on stock dampers.

The improved handling from compression increase unfortunately does come at the expense of a harsher street ride. If that's a concern, I wouldn't hesitate to valve these a bit softer as we never ran them anywhere near full stiff except at Lincoln airpark which is a high grip surface. One other thing to consider with the MCS/ProPartsUSA setup is the slightly different end link mount location on the strut. I had custom length Ground Control endlinks built for this since the Dinan end links were too long. Those will come with the setup.

[Lappy]

Figure I would update this post with my solution to a 100 percent legal MCS shock. You need to either cut your stock perches, or find some from a member that did the sleeved lowering kit. Once you acquire the stock perches the modifications are relatively simple, cut the bottom of the perch level, removing the endlink tab completely, and clamp it on the mcs with collars top and bottom. You can line the mcs shock where the stock perch will sit with a 12 inch inner bicycle tube to ensure a tight fit and no wiggle prior to clamping, also assures the perch is centered on the shock. Once you center and clock everything, measure from the hub to the top of the perch on your stock shock, and set the MCS to be the same. From memory this equaled about 7 and 1/4 inches on my car. Let me know if you guys have any questions.





Please note, that current offerings are not legal and you can be protested if someone wants to go that route. Flipping the spring upside down is not legal, running supra perches is also not legal. Unless you want to have a spring perch made, this seems like the easiest option that retains correct orientation of the spring, includes isolators and clocks everything the same as factory. Let me know if you have any questions.

[Lappy]

Another thing I am trying to maximize tire size and choice on a m2c:
19x9 Et30 SM-10 with 7.5mm spacer running 275/30/19 660s
18x10 ET33 SM-10 with 295/35/18 Ao52s

The diameter difference is essentially stock and everything fits well. I tested it with only 1.7 degree of camber in the rear and it doesn't rub autocrossing, however it did slightly rub the rear fender liner on a massive dip at highway speeds. For 2022 I'm going to dial in 1.9 degrees and in the rear and that should solve it.

[RN53]

As we get closer to the start of the season I'm starting to shop for tires. I'm not seeing anything new so far that is going to be of help. Will the consensus for the M2C still be the 275/30/19 front 275/35/19 rear RT660s?

[AlpinewhiteM2C]

Originally Posted by RN53

As we get closer to the start of the season I'm starting to shop for tires. I'm not seeing anything new so far that is going to be of help. Will the consensus for the M2C still be the 275/30/19 front 275/35/19 rear RT660s?

I was on this setup last year at 30psi front/ 30-32psi rear depending on whether I wanted the rear to be looser. I'm running a Hotchkis front swaybar as well. Several OG M2s ran this set up or 295 square A052s on 18 wheels. For me the set up felt pretty good but i did find that I could get the rear to break loose fairly easy w/ throttle inputs. Maybe this is a function of the M2C having a bit more torque than the OG M2. This year I picked up another set of wheels and will be trying 255/275 Yokohama A052 staggered set up on those wheels. I'm interested to see how each set up compares to each other in the upcoming testing sessions in March.

[RN53]

Originally Posted by AlpinewhiteM2C

I was on this setup last year at 30psi front/ 30-32psi rear depending on whether I wanted the rear to be looser. I'm running a Hotchkis front swaybar as well. Several OG M2s ran this set up or 295 square A052s on 18 wheels. For me the set up felt pretty good but i did find that I could get the rear to break loose fairly easy w/ throttle inputs. Maybe this is a function of the M2C having a bit more torque than the OG M2. This year I picked up another set of wheels and will be trying 255/275 Yokohama A052 staggered set up on those wheels. I'm interested to see how each set up compares to each other in the upcoming testing sessions in March.

I ran the A052's on my Civic Type R last year and really did not like them as much as the RE71R's I ran the previous year. I definitely struggled with them as the heat increased in the tires.

[JustAWhisper]

Originally Posted by RN53

I ran the A052's on my Civic Type R last year and really did not like them as much as the RE71R's I ran the previous year. I definitely struggled with them as the heat increased in the tires.

That is because A052's are poorly matched with a Civic Type R.

A052's are the fastest street tire on the market today, but they have soft sidewalls that easily overheat with excessive rollover. A heavier (all modern street cars except the Miata are heavy) FWD strut suspension vehicle like your Civic was likely murdering those sidewalls, which hurts performance and tire life. The RE-71R, in contrast had a much stiffer sidewall and held up better, despite being a slower compound.

The M2 has much better front camber retention and better weight distribution than the Civic. With camber correction hubs I'm getting 65+ runs out of my front tires, which is decent for a street-class car and a good indication that I'm not overheating the tires too much, though I still heat up and wear faster on the outside. Lighter ST cars with even more camber are getting 100 runs.


The top three tires right now are Yokohama A052, Falken RT660, and Nanking CR-S.

The Falkens are more similar to RE-71R's with a somewhat stiff sidewall with good turn-in response and are the cheapest to run. However, they need a bit of heat in them to turn on and they just flat out don't work at some low-grip autocross sites like Fontana.

A052's work from the first run and have insane grip, and they even work in the wet. However, they have a mushy feel and wear aggressively, on top of being the priciest to boot.

I haven't tried Nanking's yet, but they are supposedly more similar to A052's at a cheaper cost. I know more folks are starting to try them with A052's having supply issues. I'm considering trying them next. They're only available through Phil's Tire Service.

[AlpinewhiteM2C]

Originally Posted by AlpinewhiteM2C

I was on this setup last year at 30psi front/ 30-32psi rear depending on whether I wanted the rear to be looser. I'm running a Hotchkis front swaybar as well. Several OG M2s ran this set up or 295 square A052s on 18 wheels. For me the set up felt pretty good but i did find that I could get the rear to break loose fairly easy w/ throttle inputs. Maybe this is a function of the M2C having a bit more torque than the OG M2. This year I picked up another set of wheels and will be trying 255/275 Yokohama A052 staggered set up on those wheels. I'm interested to see how each set up compares to each other in the upcoming testing sessions in March.

Quick update on 255/275 A052 set up from this past weekend. Still cold in the PNW so weekend temps were low 40s to start and warmed up to the mid 50s but it was dry. First thing I noticed w/ A052s vs RT660s were the Yoks had grip even at low temps right from the start whereas the RT660s needed a run or two before they would start working. Had to run more presssure on the Yoks (36 front/ 34 rear) to keep the shoulders happy. I did get a bit more push with the staggered Yoks setup (255/275) vs square RT660 (275 all around). Overall fairly impressed with the Yoks. Need more time with them to get a better feel for turn in vs the RT660s.

[Lappy]

Originally Posted by AlpinewhiteM2C

Quick update on 255/275 A052 set up from this past weekend. Still cold in the PNW so weekend temps were low 40s to start and warmed up to the mid 50s but it was dry. First thing I noticed w/ A052s vs RT660s were the Yoks had grip even at low temps right from the start whereas the RT660s needed a run or two before they would start working. Had to run more presssure on the Yoks (36 front/ 34 rear) to keep the shoulders happy. I did get a bit more push with the staggered Yoks setup (255/275) vs square RT660 (275 all around). Overall fairly impressed with the Yoks. Need more time with them to get a better feel for turn in vs the RT660s.

Are you running a FSB? Based on my findings last year, a fsb on a m2c and even the OG is not the correct answer. The car just turns to a hateful plow machine even on the softest settings compared to the oem fsb.