[silverado]

Originally Posted by ChrisK

Hate to do this (this is not a MT vs DCT debate).

DCT is not an automatic, but an automated manual. It has no torque converter, and two wet clutches.
In manual mode, it will not shift into the next gear like an Auto, but hit/bounce off the red-line just like a MT.

I agree with your other points.

Not an MT vs DCT vs AT debate either, and I'm for MT all the way, but for accuracy's sake...

The ZF8 AT in cars like the m235 behaves exactly as you described above as well in manual mode.

[ChrisK]

Originally Posted by silverado

Not an MT vs DCT vs AT debate either, and I'm for MT all the way, but for accuracy's sake...

The ZF8 AT in cars like the m235 behaves exactly as you described above as well in manual mode.

Not the same. It has a torque converter. It's a full blown Automatic transmission.

I have a bad feeling the next M3/M4 will be only AT.

[silverado]

Originally Posted by ChrisK

Not the same. It has a torque converter. It's a full blown Automatic transmission.

I had highlighted the part where they behave the same. Of course AT is not like DCT in other ways.

[M3 Adjuster]

Originally Posted by Tag

Or it's slightly lighter than the M4 if you think they factored in the sunroof with the M2c weight and the heavier brakes. : I gave up trying to figure it all out, waiting for it to actually be weighed and to see some reviews.

I'm not worried about kooky things like " factoring for inflation." remember.... ..

the BMW USA spec sheet is the BMW USA spec sheet. However the hell it was calculated for the M2 competition is the same way it was done for the M4 (which also has a sunroof available by the way..)

And.. until I see a car on a set of scales... I am inclined to go with the US spec sheets... at least they can be made sense of.. plus it's the product I would receive when ordering.

I'm never going to get a Euro spec model if I order it here... and we know there are US federalization items that may not be needed in Europe and vice versa (can you say WLTP exhaust? ) so.... looking at those specs really does me no good.

[M3_WC]

Originally Posted by ChrisK

I wonder what wheels are included in this weight spec. 788M would be the assumption (if standard), but who knows.

So far the 788M has been standard in all countries. With the 437M being a no cost option. Some countries have small charge for all black finish on 788M.

This is from M Performance parts presser, "In conjunction with the new 19 inch M Performance forged wheel Y-spoke style 763 M the unsprung masses are reduced by 3.2 kilograms compared to the standard 19 inch wheel." The reduced by 3.2kg, I believe was in reference to the 788M. I know Mr. got some conflicting info, but its hard to believe the 788M are not the heavier wheels.

763M
F - 9.262 kg(x2=18.852 kg)
R - 9.884 kg(x2=19.798 kg)
38.62 kg or 85.14 lbs

437M
F - 10.000 kg(2x=20 kg)
R - 10.500 kg(x2=21 kg)
41 kg or 90.39 lbs

788M
85.14 + 7.05=92.19 lbs

[Tag]

Originally Posted by M3 Adjuster

I'm not worried about factoring for inflation. . remember.. ..

the BMW USA spec sheet is the BMW spec sheet. However the hell it was calculated for the M2 is the same way it was done for the M4.

And.. until I see a car on a set of scales... I am inclined to go with the US spec sheets... at least they can be made sense of.. plus it's the product I would receive when ordering. I'm never going to get a Euro spec model if I order it here... so....

Well, you're taking a very simplistic look at it I guess. Sounds like you're done burning calories trying to figure it all out, so am I.

TL;DR, we won't know for certain until it's weighed.

What I was saying is what a few members pointed out regarding the sunroof and brakes. Technically for US weight it must include options that are sold with 33% or more cars. We have no way of knowing how many cars get ordered with a sunroof, but it's a possibility it's over 33%. The M3/4's come with a CF roof. I can easily see people that want a sunroof deciding against them so they can have a CF roof, which would mean that weight isn't factored in for the M3/4. As far as the brakes go, if they're standard on the M2c they add weight. The M3/4 don't offer the upgraded iron brakes. So to recap, if the sunroof weighs ~40-lbs and the brakes are ~20-lbs more that's a good 60-lbs right there.

[silverado]

Originally Posted by M3_WC

They say they don't care, but why waste your time in every thread. I feel like the ones that do care but say they don't, out themselves by how much they post and what they post.

I agree the current M2 is great. BMW M got the Competition(some thought it would be nose heavy) weight distribution correct. It was tested for over a year on the ring and backroads. M further refined the steering, stability control, chassis. They nearly touch everything. I have no doubt the M2C is going to be a great car too.

I agree. I'm sure the M2C will be a great car as well and that the changes from the M2 will more than compensate for the 150 lb weight increase.

And I'm a recent M2 owner who loves his car and won't upgrade, but hoping to see the M2C become another great success.

[M-Pilot]

Originally Posted by M3_WC

So far the 788M has been standard in all countries. With the 437M being a no cost option. Some countries have small charge for all black finish on 788M.

This is from M Performance parts presser, "In conjunction with the new 19 inch M Performance forged wheel Y-spoke style 763 M the unsprung masses are reduced by 3.2 kilograms compared to the standard 19 inch wheel." The reduced by 3.2kg, I believe was in reference to the 788M. I know Mr. got some conflicting info, but its hard to believe the 788M are not the heavier wheels.

763M - 38.3lbs
788M - 38.3lbs +7lbs=45.3lbs
437M - 41lbs

According to the 763M weight spec thread, 763Ms are 7.64lbs lighter compared to the 437Ms. Here is the breakdown:

763M
-------
Front: 20.75 lbs
Rear: 21.80 lbs
Total: 85.10 lbs

437M
-------
Front: 23 lbs
Rear: 23.37 lbs
Total: 92.74 lbs

[Tag]

Coworker just walked into my office a minute ago and saw me on bimmerpost. The following conversation happened.

CW: What are you looking at?
Me: M2 Competition.
CW: What's that?
Me: It's an M4 that's been rear ended and is now 8-1/2" shorter.
CW:
Me: Sooo, what's up; what do you need?

[M3_WC]

Originally Posted by cntzl

Where are these numbers from? According to the 763M weight spec thread, 763Ms are 7.64lbs lighter compared to the 437Ms. Here is the breakdown:


763M
-------
Front: 20.75 lbs
Rear: 21.80 lbs
Total: 85.10 lbs

437M
-------
Front: 23 lbs
Rear: 23.37 lbs
Total: 92.74 lbs

Same place that thread got them from. https://www.etkbmw.com/bmw/EN/search.../BMW+M2/ECE/36

Yes, I f*cked up I didn't convert kg to lbs. Only converted the 3.2kg to lbs. FAIL!

763M
F - 9.262 kg(x2=18.852 kg)
R - 9.884 kg(x2=19.798 kg)
38.62 kg or 85.14 lbs

437M
F - 10.000 kg(2x=20 kg)
R - 10.500 kg(x2=21 kg)
41 kg or 90.39 lbs

788M
85.14 + 7.05=92.19 lbs

[M3 Adjuster]

Originally Posted by Tag

Well, you're taking a very simplistic look at it I guess. Sounds like you're done burning calories trying to figure it all out, so am I.

TL;DR, we won't know for certain until it's weighed.

What I was saying is what a few members pointed out regarding the sunroof and brakes. Technically for US weight it must include options that are sold with 33% or more cars. We have no way of knowing how many cars get ordered with a sunroof, but it's a possibility it's over 33%. The M3/4's come with a CF roof. I can easily see people that want a sunroof deciding against them so they can have a CF roof, which would mean that weight isn't factored in for the M3/4. As far as the brakes go, if they're standard on the M2c they add weight. The M3/4 don't offer the upgraded iron brakes. So to recap, if the sunroof weighs ~40-lbs and the brakes are ~20-lbs more that's a good 60-lbs right there.

I just went to the web page and the sunroof option is available for the M4 as a no cost option.
so.. If the take rate for the sunroof option on an M4 is 33%... then that item would be factored in the M4 weight too right?

Are you really going to sit around and try and parse out the take rate for M2 and M4 sunroofs? So far.. the actual US take rate for the OG M2 sunroof is ZERO isn't it? IIRC it wasn't an option on the US OG M2 at all.. it was an option in Canada though.

[M3_WC]

Originally Posted by M3 Adjuster

I just went to the web page and the sunroof option is available for the M4 as a no cost option.
so.. If the take rate for the sunroof option on an M4 is 33%... then that item would be factored in the M4 weight too right?

Are you really going to sit around and try and parse out the take rate for M2 and M4 sunroofs? So far.. the actual US take rate for the OG M2 sunroof is ZERO isn't it? IIRC it wasn't an option on the US OG M2 at all.. it was an option in Canada though.

What he said is plausible and what you say is plausible. Quit arguing, it is pointless and unknowable at the moment what makes up the weight. We will know by end of year once owners put their cars on scales with different options.

[M3 Adjuster]

Originally Posted by M3_WC

What he said is plausible and what you say is plausible. Quit arguing, it is pointless and unknowable at the moment what makes up the weight. We will know by end of year once owners put their cars on scales with different options.

arguing makes the time pass by more quickly..

besides.. once people start putting them on scales.. we will have more to argue about like...

Are we sure the scales were zeroed? Are we sure someone wasn't putting their foot on scale during a measurement... ?
was the car full of fuel or only half full..?. was there a driver in the car or not.... ? is merino leather heavier than Dakota?
were all the measurements made on the same day on the same scale ... ?

[Tag]

Originally Posted by M3 Adjuster

I just went to the web page and the sunroof option is available for the M4 as a no cost option.
so.. If the take rate for the sunroof option on an M4 is 33%... then that item would be factored in the M4 weight too right?

My point was how many would give up a CF roof for a sunroof, free or not? I don't think it would be many, but none of us know.

Originally Posted by M3 Adjuster

Are you really going to sit around and try and parse out the take rate for M2 and M4 sunroofs? So far.. the actual US take rate for sunroof is ZERO isn't it?

IIRC it wasn't an option on the US OG M2 at all.. it was an option in Canada though.

For US the sunroof wasn't offered until MY18 LCI. They couldn't add that weight to the specs before, because it wasn't offered yet. They also couldn't add if for MY18, because sales numbers weren't in yet. I'm not justifying it one way or another, but I'm not ruling it out either. I know just as much as you and everyone else here on how many M2's got sold with sunroofs, which is no idea at all.

[Tag]

Originally Posted by M3_WC

What he said is plausible and what you say is plausible. Quit arguing, it is pointless and unknowable at the moment what makes up the weight. We will know by end of year once owners put their cars on scales with different options.

It's not arguing if you're right.

JK, M3 Adjuster and I get along just fine, we just have different opinions from time to time.

[ChrisK]

Originally Posted by silverado

I had highlighted the part where they behave the same. Of course AT is not like DCT in other ways.

No worries. I didn't see the hi-lighted.

[ChrisK]

Originally Posted by M3 Adjuster

arguing makes the time pass by more quickly..

besides.. once people start putting them on scales.. we will have more to argue about like...

Are we sure the scales were zeroed? Are we sure someone wasn't putting their foot on scale during a measurement... ?
was the car full of fuel or only half full..?. was there a driver in the car or not.... ? is merino leather heavier than Dakota?
were all the measurements made on the same day on the same scale ... ?

Amen brother!

[Cavpilot2k]

Originally Posted by Tag

Me: It's an M4 that's been rear ended and is now 8-1/2" shorter.

Not rear-ended - the term you're looking for is "right-sized".

[Who's on first]

Originally Posted by M3 Adjuster

arguing makes the time pass by more quickly..

besides.. once people start putting them on scales.. we will have more to argue about like...

Are we sure the scales were zeroed? Are we sure someone wasn't putting their foot on scale during a measurement... ?
was the car full of fuel or only half full..?. was there a driver in the car or not.... ? is merino leather heavier than Dakota?
were all the measurements made on the same day on the same scale ... ?

Don't forget... 91 fuel weighs less then 93.

Then... you have to talk about which station said fuel is from.

Shell's additives are derived from F1 .. so clearly they weigh less the Exxon's additives.

[DarkstarZero]

After many years on track over many cars, I can say that weight in the passenger seat (or in the middle of the car) doesn't make as much of a difference as weight at both ends.

So long as the bulk of this weight is between the axles, it's going to be noticeable but only barely. If the weight is ON any of the axles, it'll be very noticeable and the car will not feel as tossable - which is why we all bought the M2.

[psuibmw]

That is ought to be non-US spec, the driver is 75 KG

[mToronto]

Originally Posted by M3_WC

Same place that thread got them from. https://www.etkbmw.com/bmw/EN/search.../BMW+M2/ECE/36

Yes, I f*cked up I didn't convert kg to lbs. Only converted the 3.2kg to lbs. FAIL!

763M
F - 9.262 kg(x2=18.852 kg)
R - 9.884 kg(x2=19.798 kg)
38.62 kg or 85.14 lbs

437M
F - 10.000 kg(2x=20 kg)
R - 10.500 kg(x2=21 kg)
41 kg or 90.39 lbs

788M
85.14 + 7.05=92.19 lbs

I thought the general consensus was that the new 788M wheels were lighter than the standard 437M wheels. That seems to be what this article explained. Do we know for a fact this isn't the case?