[chris719]

Originally Posted by m2ss

^^^ The F87 looks so much better it's not even funny...

The front and sides do, in Comp or CS guise. The G87 looks better from the rear in my opinion. I didn't like it at first but the design is growing on me.

[chris719]

Originally Posted by Bumpinjeep

Don't you dare bring your sound logic into this. The G87 may be substantially faster, offer more grip, ride substantially better, have a next level interior, better shifter, better seating position, carbin fiber roof, $30K seats (yes, thats how much they cost if you try to buy them at the parts counter), gets compliments virtually every time its driven, Yada Yada Yada, but it won't have one thing, the approval of a bitter F87 owner.
I also have owned both and completely agree with you, as many many others do. Does that make the F87 a bad car? No, of course not. It's going to go down as one of BMWs best. Especially the Competition model. It was peak BMW and will for sure be a classic. If I could have both, I would, I think a lot of G series owners would.

I do think there is one thing I read here often on the F87 forums that is a cliche and not correct. That is that the F87 is "analog". Now, maybe the G87 is more artificial feeling, but the F87 already has some kind of synthetic feel to the controls except the brakes. It's really not even close to what my Z4M felt like in that regard and getting back into my Mazda 3 reinforces that. I feel like it's great in spite of that. It's not a problem, but I think the true feel left the building way before F87.

[FMOS Racing]

It's interesting to me, because I spend more time inside a car than looking at it, the interior is a huge selling point, and I just can't handle the Star Trek interior of the G87. It's just not my thing at all. Both of my E9x cars were single-humps. If I could've gotten my F10 (or my F87 for that matter) without a screen, I would have. I spend practically every minute in my car with the screen shut off. Thus, a "next level" interior is actually a huge negative for me.

It's all subjective and probably dates me, but even as a technophile, having a more "analog" car has always had a higher appeal to me than gadgetry. One of the huge components of choosing the M2C over an M3 (what I actually went to the dealership to buy) or M4 was that the M2C was so much simpler and raw.

Of course, we're talking about someone who went from a 550i M-sport to a Challenger, and who chose the Scat Pack version over the SRT because it was less "gizmonic." I happily daily-drive a 30 year old pickup truck (talk about a conversation piece). A big selling point of my Chevy SS sedan over a CTS-V is that it is less complicated, and still has knobs on the dash.

I'm happy I've had the opportunity to experience the M2C. I'm obviously not in the target demographic for the G87.

[flybigjet]

Every time I look at the front (in person on a photo), all I can think of is "Dodge Charger".

[Distinct]

If you showed the F87 and G87 to anyone that doesn't know already, and asked which one is the latest version of the M2? Everyone is guaranteed to choose the F87 for all the reasons that everyone has stated. The design of the G87 is not simpler elegance, it's just ugly.

[m2ss]

There is no denying the performance, why wrap it in lego?