[M2_Purist]

Originally Posted by M3_WC

Case in point the Camaro SS1LE. That car has a world chassis(alpha), world class handling and steering. It weighs over 3,750 lbs.

But it would perform better at 3500 lbs. Weight matters.

[chris719]

Originally Posted by Z435is

I appreciate your description very much actually, as I wasn’t very aware of the new model characteristics... But others and myself are allowed to express disappointment in the way BMW went about this in general. I can process and react to the 150 negatively, especially if everyone knows that weight is critical to dynamics and performance. There are ways they could have mitigated the heft but it wasn’t a priority. I can have my opinion and the weight/dynamics and performance link is fact. I’m allowed to be disappointed. So no, I won’t necessarily just “get it”.

Understood. It just feels like there are a lot of people freaking out about a ~5% weight increase. Sure, we'd like it to go down rather than up.

Originally Posted by Z435is

But it would perform better at 3500 lbs. Weight matters.

Maybe? I guess it depends what you mean by perform. They could always replace the V8 with something else but then it's slower and you're going to disappoint some people. They could downsize the brakes too, but then it won't hold up as well over a long session. Some of that metal may be needed to achieve torsional rigidity targets. I think the only people that could really answer your question are the engineers that worked on the chassis. Of course, with more exotic materials you could probably have it all - but at a price.

FWIW, the designer of the Nissan GT-R always claimed they actually targeted a relatively high weight. I am not 100% convinced, but there is an argument to be made that - for a non-race car - a very light car may be difficult to handle because you can't count on any effective downforce.

[hellrotm]

Originally Posted by Z435is

But it would perform better at 3500 lbs. Weight matters.

No the 6 cylinder Camaro does not perform better.

[seis-speed]

Originally Posted by chris719

Understood. It just feels like there are a lot of people freaking out about a ~5% weight increase. Sure, we'd like it to go down rather than up.

We 'were' freaking out about the additional 120lbs. Then were told that might not be accurate because US cars will not have the particulate filter and will probably come in under that mark - Only to find out - The US car actually weighs more??

This was following the M2's heft that was unusually high for a car with those dimensions and RWD setup. When owning an M2 it never felt like it needed more power, it always felt like it could lose weight and be an even better car.

Seems like BMW could have tackled the emissions issue a lot of different ways they chose power and additional weight, let's see if that is the winning formula?

TBD

[M3_WC]

Originally Posted by seis-speed

Seems like BMW could have tackled the emissions issue a lot of different ways they chose power and additional weight, let's see if that is the winning formula?

TBD

What is your different ways of tackling emissions? Going B58. Certainly not the S58, it would add similar weight. Let’s for argument sake, say they kept the N55 and added an optional Comp pack. The pack added top mount air to water cooling, larger oil coolers, a closed block, larger single turbo to the N55. Along with chassis stiffening via strutbrace and bulkhead bracing. But it added another 100lbs, I’d tick that box instantly. The upgrades easily validate the weight increase. I dont like the ADA and PDC being standard, as those certaintly add up with all the censors, cameras, wiring, etc.

[seis-speed]

Originally Posted by M3_WC

What is your different ways of tackling emissions? Going B58. Certainly not the S58, it would add similar weight. Let’s for argument sake, say they kept the N55 and added an optional Comp pack. The pack added top mount air to water cooling, larger oil coolers, a closed block, larger single turbo to the N55. Along with chassis stiffening via strutbrace and bulkhead bracing. But it added another 100lbs, I’d tick that box instantly. The upgrades easily validate the weight increase. I dont like the ADA and PDC being standard, as those certaintly add up with all the censors, cameras, wiring, etc.

They essentially developed a new model. Sky is the limit....is it not?

No way the engineers could be happy with this kind of weight on a Competition Model that has been designated as the small, tossable, return to basics M. It now weighs more than an F80 Comp that seats 5.

F80 Comp
Curb weight 1595-1661 kg (3516-3662 lbs)
Dimensions 4.63 m (182 in) long, 1.88 m (74 in) wide, 1.43 m (56 in) high
Power / weight 276 ps (272 bhp) / t
Torque / weight 337 Nm (249 lb-ft) /

[chris719]

Originally Posted by seis-speed

They essentially developed a new model. Sky is the limit....is it not?

No way the engineers could be happy with this kind of weight on a Competition Model that has been designated as the small, tossable, return to basics M. It now weighs more than an F80 Comp that seats 5.

F80 Comp
Curb weight 1595-1661 kg (3516-3662 lbs)
Dimensions 4.63 m (182 in) long, 1.88 m (74 in) wide, 1.43 m (56 in) high
Power / weight 276 ps (272 bhp) / t
Torque / weight 337 Nm (249 lb-ft) /

They have a budget to work within. It is entirely possible (and likely) they feel they did the best within the constraints. They added less than 5% weight for things that mostly have a more tangible benefit. They didn't have a mandate to create a CS or CSL car, it's just a replacement for ZCP.

I don't understand the controversy. If you asked M2 owners if they would want these upgrades for free overnight I bet the take rate would be very high indeed.

[M3_WC]

Originally Posted by seis-speed

They essentially developed a new model. Sky is the limit....is it not?

So you are saying M4 money?

[M3_WC]

Originally Posted by chris719

They have a budget to work within. It is entirely possible (and likely) they feel they did the best within the constraints. They added less than 5% weight for things that mostly have a more tangible benefit. They didn't have a mandate to create a CS or CSL car, it's just a replacement for ZCP.

I don't understand the controversy. If you asked M2 owners if they would want these upgrades for free overnight I bet the take rate would be very high indeed.

It would it a lot easier if people would just say...”I wish the car was lighter even if it was another $8-$10k”. Guess what, BMW is offering a bunch of lightweight Mperf parts for that money. So put your money where your mouth is and order up. Or be patient and wait for the maybe or maybe not CSL. So your CSL can weigh as much as the N55 M2.

[Lotus99]

Originally Posted by Spa2k

Because that's what the fat-a$$ buyers in the U.S. want. Why package all this stuff separately (and complicate production), when most buyers (and dealers, for their high-profit, on-the-lot vehicles) order it anyway?

Same lazy ass people who order DCT instead of manual!

[akkando]

Originally Posted by Z435is

I appreciate your description very much actually, as I wasn’t very aware of the new model characteristics... But others and myself are allowed to express disappointment in the way BMW went about this in general. I can process and react to the 150 negatively, especially if everyone knows that weight is critical to dynamics and performance. There are ways they could have mitigated the heft but it wasn’t a priority. I can have my opinion and the weight/dynamics and performance link is fact. I’m allowed to be disappointed. So no, I won’t necessarily just “get it”.

I don't think they could have reduced weight and kept this price point unless they built a performance edition with no nav, manual seats, no park distance control, crappy stereo, maybe thrown in a lighter battery, none of that lane change whatever or pedestrian safety stuff. It wouldn't surprise me if they do this. They can't afford to do a bunch of CF stuff for this car and hit the same price point or re engineer it from scratch.


Honestly I think when the M2 came out people were just happy there was a smaller and lighter M car than the M3/M4, but most didn't stop and think why is this thing so heavy given its size? Now that the M2C is coming and heavier than the M4 people are suddenly realizing it's heavier than it should be, but most this new weight is the S55 engine which isn't a pig, it's the old weight that is disappointing. Additional standard options like the larger brakes, PDC, electric seats are just going to add weight that won't be on the spec sheet of an M4, but understand most M4s don't come bone stock and all those options on the M4 add up the pounds as well, you just won't find those optional pounds on the base model spec sheet, but these additional feature that may be standard on the M2C, do get added the spec sheet.

[CSBM5]

As an aside, the single biggest contributor to the weight difference between the E90 M3 and the F80 M3 is the battery. The Li battery in the F80 weighs 31lbs less than the "normal" AGM battery in the E90 (same physical dimensions, 1/2 the weight). BMW could have chosen to change over to an Li battery system on the M2C, save 30lbs, etc, but I'm sure many would then (later) be crazy over the fact that the Li-ion replacement cost is $1518 (61218047221, BMWNA MSRP) as opposed to less than $200.

[Artemis]

Originally Posted by chris719

It just feels like there are a lot of people freaking out about a ~5% weight increase. Sure, we'd like it to go down rather than up.

The point is, it's like a person with a rather high body mass index. That person gained weight and says to its significant other: "What's the fuss ? OK, I gained wait, but it's only another x %. So you get 'more me'. Love me the way I am. I could lose weight, but the surgery ain't cheap."

Worldwide, approx. 3/4 choses M-DCT for the M2, which further adds around 25 kg to the car. But hey, what's moving around another 25 kg extra when you're already 'sturdy' - the 40 hp power increase will compensate that, no ? And most options add weight too. When the 'average' M2 / M2 Competition is put on scales and also when fuel consumption is measured, you'd be surprised about the real world figures that show up.

And adding all those fancy CF M Performance Parts as stock features to reduce weight, would have made its price prohibitively high within its class (except if it's a (very) special model) + would result into less return on investment for BMW for those parts that likely were initially designed for a 'special model' M2.

The trouble is, when you raise the weight topic, some allergically react as if you're the allegedly frustrated current M2 owner, trying to steal the M2 Competition thunder, raining on the M2 Competition parade. When it rains, it rains. But let's cherish that it still got a 6-cylinder instead of being reduced to a 4-cyl.

So it's about that delicate tipping point when 'a lot' becomes just 'too much'. BMW might as well add 'too heavy' to its 'too much' promo campaign.

[ChrisK]

I'll wait for the reviews before I pass further judgement. BMW knows what they are doing and the test mule videos of the S55 variant M2 look fast as hell.

I'm working on dropping my personal weight, so it's a win win.

[horsepower_and_hounds]

Where are the reviews? People have cars now..... Laggers

[Spa2k]

Originally Posted by m2ruder

Where are the reviews? People have cars now..... Laggers

Who has cars now? Production isn’t scheduled to start until mid-July, and there are rumors that it may be delayed until August. The only M2Cs on the streets now are preproduction models.

[Mavus]

BMW is aware of the weight issue but could not include CF body panels and Li battery @60K and to kill F80/2 stock performance. I hoped they'd offer manual seats as an option.

Here is a quick weight reduction estimate for "better" value parts:

Est. weight reduction:
Light-weight battery -40 (Braile B2618, 18.5 lbs)
CF hood -20 (9Kg)
CF fender (x2) -35 (?)
CF trunk -13 (6Kg)
Total: -108 lbs

CF roof weight reduction is not included due to potential high installation cost.
Lighter wheels are an option also.

Stock powered seats are 57.6 lbs each or total 115.2. The manual seats are 5kg (11lbs) lighter (EU model). Aftermarket seats may offer another 60-70 lbs in weight savings.

The best weight reduction is sunroof delete and comes stock. That is usually around 40-50 lbs.

If anybody has better est. numbers for CF parts please correct it.

[Tag]

Originally Posted by Smooth 330i

BMW is aware of the weight issue but could not include CF body panels and Li battery @60K and to kill F80/2 stock performance. I hoped they'd offer manual seats as an option.

Here is a quick weight reduction estimate for "better" value parts:

Est. weight reduction:
Light-weight battery -40 (Braile B2618, 18.5 lbs)
CF hood -25
CF fender (x2) -35
CF trunk -15
Total: -115 lbs

CF roof weight reduction is not included due to potential high installation cost.
Lighter wheels are an option also.

Stock powered seats are 57.6 lbs each or total 115.2. The manual seats are 5kg (11lbs) lighter (EU model). Aftermarket seats may offer another 60-70 lbs in weight savings.

The best weight reduction is sunroof delete and comes stock. That is usually around 40-50 lbs.

If anybody has better est. numbers for CF parts please correct it.

You can find more accurate numbers for CF parts here.

I don’t know if an AGM battery makes sense. Sure it reduces weight, but in the wrong part. The car is nose heavy, trimming off weight in the rear would lead to more wheel spin and oversteer. It needs weight reduced from the front.

[Poochie]

The brake calipers mutate and change color during track usage; thus, that should be a hint that this car is not a track rat and so the extra weight is negligent on the public streets..

Stop all the bitching already because logically BMW could of made an all aluminum and carbon core car but it would of cost 15k more (M4?) and then everyone would complain about the price and it would not be affordable to BMW's target demographics.

I don't like the fact that the M2C is heavier but it's totally justifiable .. Just like mostly everything in this world that I have grievances with, if you sit down and try to figure out why instead of complaining about it ignorantly..

[ChrisK]

Aren't these weight numbers based on a fully optioned car? I believe the sunroof is approx 30-40lbs.

[Mavus]

Originally Posted by Tag

You can find more accurate numbers for CF parts here.

I don’t know if an AGM battery makes sense. Sure it reduces weight, but in the wrong part. The car is nose heavy, trimming off weight in the rear would lead to more wheel spin and oversteer. It needs weight reduced from the front.

Thx!

The CF hood and fenders reduce weight on the front axle and would offset battery weight decrease to maintain balance.

This is all just to show that there is now OEM option to tackle weight gain.

[Spa2k]

Originally Posted by ChrisK

Aren't these weight numbers based on a fully optioned car? I believe the sunroof is approx 30-40lbs.

U.S. figures are for basic vehicle without options. I don't know what the standard is elsewhere.