[M3 Adjuster]

Originally Posted by red-sauerkraut

Price is the deciding factor.

But still weak sauce IMO.

You should drop the " not a real M engine " comment from your vernacular, if you are worried about weak sauce.

You are what you eat.


While I would love to have a lighter, perhaps higher revving 4 cylinder motor, in a lighter overall car... The fact that the M2 is coming with an N55 and not an S20 or S55 wouldn't make me stop from buying it...

I already took and passed that test when i bought the 1M

[Artemis]

Originally Posted by IS3andME

And what if M Division had decided to do a high strung 4 pot and put it in this car? Then what would say?

Originally Posted by M3 Adjuster

It probably would have made me put my 1m up for sale immediately, had they made an S20 powered M2.

A four banger = less weight. Hm, let's see if BMW considers that option for an M2 CSL.

Originally Posted by SCOTT26

They did evaluate 4 cylinders for application in the M2.
We have a four cylinder with Power eDrive and eBoost which can produce around 450 PS.

[swagon]

Yeah, but the sound! Turbo four cylinders sound so damn boring. I6 over I4 all day every day.

[RLBB]

Originally Posted by Artemis

A four banger = less weight. Hm, let's see if BMW considers that option for an M2 CSL.

I don't think that would happen. Even if it's less weight, the engine is inferior to a six.

[Bemo]

Originally Posted by RLBB

I don't think that would happen. Even if it's less weight, the engine is inferior to a six.

Agreed and enough of these cylinder based weight savings already!! There are more weight savings to be derived elsewhere, bastardizing the engine down to an I4 shouldn't be the only focus.

[Celestion]

I'm probably in the minority here, but my fantasy engine for the M2 would be a twin, electrically assisted turbocharged "S20" 4-cyl, making ~385hp at 7400rpm. In terms of quantifiable handling dynamics, a lightweight car is way more important than having 2 additional cylinders. Lightweight-ness is one of the main factors in why the Cayman and Miata are similarly fun to drive despite being nowhere near each other in terms of raw performance.

As for the sound, if they really tried hard, I'm sure they could get a 4-cyl to sound great.

[fuddman]

Originally Posted by Artemis

A four banger = less weight. Hm, let's see if BMW considers that option for an M2 CSL.

IMO, the only way a 4 banger goes into a future M2 is if there already is a 4 banger in the M3/M4.
The 4 engine was left out of the M2 deliberately because it was felt a 4 banging M2 would draw customers away from a (very profitable) 6 banging M3/M4. A good way to predict whether or not a goodie gets added to the M2 is to determine how that goodie affects the sales of the M3/M4. So, look for a 4 banging M3/M4 to happen first.
I think future racing versions of the M2 are going to be developed to compete with Cayman GT4. But even those developments will, IMO, be subordinated to the above mentioned M3/M4 profit .

[IS3andME]

Originally Posted by RLBB

I don't think that would happen. Even if it's less weight, the engine is inferior to a six.

Huh? This came with a 4 and not a 6, yet the 325i had a 6.

[Celestion]

Originally Posted by fuddman

IMO, the only way a 4 banger goes into a future M2 is if there already is a 4 banger in the M3/M4.
The 4 engine was left out of the M2 deliberately because it was felt a 4 banging M2 would draw customers away from a (very profitable) 6 banging M3/M4. A good way to predict whether or not a goodie gets added to the M2 is to determine how that goodie affects the sales of the M3/M4. So, look for a 4 banging M3/M4 to happen first.
I think future racing versions of the M2 are going to be developed to compete with Cayman GT4. But even those developments will, IMO, be subordinated to the above mentioned M3/M4 profit .

A good way to prevent a nearly as fast and better handling m2 from cannibalizing m4 sales would've been to go with a 4-cyl. By going with 6-cyl in the m2, I feel that they may be artificially limiting the HP, so as not to cannibalize the more profitable m4.

[W///]

Originally Posted by Celestion

A good way to prevent a nearly as fast and better handling m2 from cannibalizing m4 sales would've been to go with a 4-cyl. By going with 6-cyl in the m2, I feel that they may be artificially limiting the HP, so as not to cannibalize the more profitable m4.

Agreed. But you just cannot convince everyone that. You can already see some people not OK with the idea of a 4 pot. And if you go 4 pot, then you'll have people saying the car needs AT LEAST 400hp or else they are buying a Cayman.

Poor M2 never stands a chance haha.

But even as is, I think it's pretty obvious that the M2 vs M3/4 are pretty different cars with different purposes, regardless of which engine goes in the M2.

[Celestion]

Originally Posted by W///

Agreed. But you just cannot convince everyone that. You can already see some people not OK with the idea of a 4 pot. And if you go 4 pot, then you'll have people saying the car needs AT LEAST 400hp or else they are buying a Cayman.

Poor M2 never stands a chance haha.

But even as is, I think it's pretty obvious that the M2 vs M3/4 are pretty different cars with different purposes, regardless of which engine goes in the M2.

Indeed. I think once the press experiences the performance benefits of Porsche's performance-oriented 4-cyl design, the market will start to take 4-cyl seriously. I'd bet BMW is actually just waiting on Porsche to condition the market for 4-cyl love, before going primetime with their own high-performance 4-cyl.

[ORIGIN M.]

Low numbers made it easier to swallow on the 1M, and while I am not sure I will buy a M2 to snack on, I may just go for the M4 because it has all the good eats.

Originally Posted by M3 Adjuster

You should drop the " not a real M engine " comment...

[fuddman]

Originally Posted by Celestion

A good way to prevent a nearly as fast and better handling m2 from cannibalizing m4 sales would've been to go with a 4-cyl.

I have to admit I once agreed with your point of view.
But, as I said, BMW, evidently, had a 4 banger on the shelf ready to go in the M2; but, they dropped the idea for fear of messing with M3/M4 sales. The fear was the 4 engine would make the M2 a very unique M car. After a bit of thought, I understand that concern. Uniqueness, after all, is something most every M3/M4 driver is searching for. That's why I think they were right to fear that buyer impulse.

[M3 Adjuster]

Originally Posted by swagon

Yeah, but the sound! Turbo four cylinders sound so damn boring. I6 over I4 all day every day.

So do turbo sixes... so what does it matter?

What you are really saying is... Turbo 4s from Subaru and Mitsubishi sound boring... because you've not hear a BMW turbo 4... and more than likely.. if you are like the majority of Bimwads today.. you've never really heard a BMW 4 cylinder either..

[M3 Adjuster]

Originally Posted by Bemo

Agreed and enough of these cylinder based weight savings already!! There are more weight savings to be derived elsewhere, bastardizing the engine down to an I4 shouldn't be the only focus.

Wow.. you should speak more highly of bastardizing engines. The last BMW Bastarized 4 cylinder came from a vehicle called the M1.. It was called an S14.... and was developed by shaving 2 cylinders off the block of a BMW 6 cylinder motor...

it was kinda popular.... oh wait... still is today.. perhaps you've heard ot it?

Originally Posted by Celestion

I'm probably in the minority here, but my fantasy engine for the M2 would be a twin, electrically assisted turbocharged "S20" 4-cyl, making ~385hp at 7400rpm. In terms of quantifiable handling dynamics, a lightweight car is way more important than having 2 additional cylinders. Lightweight-ness is one of the main factors in why the Cayman and Miata are similarly fun to drive despite being nowhere near each other in terms of raw performance.

As for the sound, if they really tried hard, I'm sure they could get a 4-cyl to sound great.

LOL. BMW fans of current day are tone deaf. They only think BMW makes 6 cylinder motors that sound good LOL

the lightness of the Cayman is something the 1M couldn't touch... otherwise it really would pretty much kill the Cayman on every front.... The Cayman is a lighter car and also has phenomenal steering.... and don't forget to Keep in Mind that it is also has electric power steering..

[W///]

Originally Posted by M3 Adjuster

So do turbo sixes... so what does it matter?

What you are really saying is... Turbo 4s from Subaru and Mitsubishi sound boring... because you've not hear a BMW turbo 4... and more than likely.. if you are like the majority of Bimwads today.. you've never really heard a BMW 4 cylinder either..

Ok that sounds bloody terrific. I find it hilarious that at lower RPM's, it sounds just like my M20 did aka sewing machines.

I have yet to hear an N20 sound that good though unfortunately.

[M3 Adjuster]

Originally Posted by W///

Ok that sounds bloody terrific. I find it hilarious that at lower RPM's, it sounds just like my M20 did aka sewing machines.

I have yet to hear an N20 sound that good though unfortunately.

Natch.. Note that I didn't trot out an M42 for your listening pleasure.. An S20 would be specifically developed for a sporting application..

[RLBB]

Originally Posted by IS3andME

Huh? This came with a 4 and not a 6, yet the 325i had a 6.

True, but things have changed a lot since. Different requirements, different power outputs, etc...

A 4-cyl M2 would be a tough sell and we can all agree to that. Even if it makes 500 HP (nearly impossible without an eDrive), we would all complain first about its sound. Even a 3-cyl sounds better (stock) than the 4-cyl.

[DDR MFS]

Good discussions but adding my thoughts as my lease will be finishing up this coming January.

Currently have an E92 335is and love the car but desire more. I rolled the dice and went with DCT and will never go back pending costs of new car. I autocross and occasionally track, and am married. Four seats vs two with two "seats" in the back vs a straight two door are definitely a factor. Next car will continue to be a daily driver too.

I got to drive the F80 during the one day M course at BMW Performance Center and LOVED it. Felt wonderfully balanced, loved the torque and the seating position felt amazing. Car did whatever you asked it too and, on the long laps, really shined. Looks are gorgeous for me. It retains some of the "boxiness" and angular lines that E30/E36 had. Four doors and a trunk make it perfect. The steering was a little muted at first but I felt it in no way hindered the experience for the day and how hard we were pushing the cars.

M4 was just as fun but I agree in that the lines are not as pleasing and, frankly, the seating position felt cramped and the visibility was not to my liking. Sort of felt like the current Camaro; felt like I could be manning a gunnery position in a WWI tank. Great car but if I am in F 3/4 series M cars, I would definitely get the M3. Also sick of the contortionist positions that my friends/parents have to default to when they take short trips (am I getting old )

The ringer is the 981 Cayman. I had a 370Z with sport package prior to my E92 and was happy to see it go and get the usable room, globs of torque, and race additives (oil cooler, better exhaust, etc). HOWEVER, I would go back to a two door for the Cayman. The chassis, the steering, and the feel are truly special. Test driving a 2.7 with PDK was unreal. I would option a base with PDK, PASM, Xenons, and the sport wheel with manual sport seats, but even then I am in 60K range, and you start contemplating a stripper M3 or 981 Cayman S. Some of these options are just ridiculously priced, but then again it is a P-car.

Then you have the M2 which for me is, hopefully, the center of this Venn Diagram. Hoping for a great DD that will play on the track and at the auto-X, while providing some minor creature comforts and ease for daily use. I really only want Sat Radio, but if it doesn't make the car go faster, I don't really see it needing to be on the car. Comfortable seating and convenience are really what I like.

I am hesitant to reserve a spot to build given the lack of information on the vehicle, and frankly, when the initial MSRP is released, will seriously help me know where my cash is going. Price it up to the optioned Cayman/M3 range, and it will eliminate itself pending I can get a similarly awesome lease akin to what I have on the 335is. However, if priced lower and not being grossly padded by the dealer, it may be that or a Cayman pending the possibility of a future family.

Just putting out my thoughts. Anyone debating the Cayman/Boxster, M2/3/4 as well? I know this gets hashed out a lot and they are all very different experiences, but eager to hear thoughts.

[RLBB]

Originally Posted by M3 Adjuster

You should drop the " not a real M engine " comment from your vernacular, if you are worried about weak sauce.

You are what you eat.


While I would love to have a lighter, perhaps higher revving 4 cylinder motor, in a lighter overall car... The fact that the M2 is coming with an N55 and not an S20 or S55 wouldn't make me stop from buying it...

I already took and passed that test when i bought the 1M

People said the same about the 1M and look how that turned out. The M2 is a monster on track, that comes from BMW sources, and it will surprise everyone how well it drives.

The N55 engine in the M2 does come with some S55 parts, like oil pump for example.

[Celestion]

Originally Posted by RLBB

People said the same about the 1M and look how that turned out. The M2 is a monster on track, that comes from BMW sources, and it will surprise everyone how well it drives.

The N55 engine in the M2 does come with some S55 parts, like oil pump for example.

Interesting.... Are you saying the M2 is going to use the m4's sump design? That'd be pretty sweet if so.

[Spook410]

Everyone is different.. even among this group which is so keenly interested in the M2 that we are speculating upon the speculation. For me, the M3/M4 is simply too large and heavy. I liked my E36 M3 from long ago and my more recent, though reliability flawed, 135. I'm looking for something like those.

I probably should look at the Cayman. I suppose if the S version had the Base price tag I would already have one. Need to get over my aversion to used cars.