[IEDEI]

Originally Posted by SCOTT26

It's not a disappointment when it actually makes perfect sense.
In the time I spent with the M4 I came to realise that using a detuned engine in the M2 kind of takes the spotlight away from the M4.

The M4 is the kind of car that is developed with a passion , a complete synergy which makes the car absolutely brilliant. Everything that is developed for the M4 should stay exclusively with the M4 . M4 works because of its sheer assistance to the technology , engine and the overall precision.

The M2 has to forge its own identity but not be a poor relation.
A four cylinder will not only progress identity but allow for new innovations especially for this segment especially when the focus is heavily on Precision than extra numbers.

thanks for your input as always Scott. Since the 1M is so legendary already----wouldn't that be something to build off instead of totally deviating? or are they trying to make the M2 better and very different than the 1M (very very hard, IMO). I always thought the M2 would build off the 1M just like the 2-series is evolving from the same idea as the 1-series. After all the M235 is not much more than a heavier, electronically gussied up version of the 135is.

[kyleb350]

I think a reasonable expectation for power would be 320-350hp. Getting that out of an I4 without lag, though, will be extremely tough. I hope BMW trickles some of the S55 engine tech down to reduce lag. Perhaps they could increase the 2.0L displacement a bit, who knows.

Keeping in line with the M4, the weight savings would put it somewhere in the 3100 lbs range, unless they go hardcore and take out the back seats.

The resulting power/torque to weight ratio would definitely put it at the top of it's class. By contrast, the CLA45 is 3600 lbs and the 2-seater TT RS is 3300 lbs.

[SW19]

Originally Posted by Ramos

Yes the management at BMW should keep telling themselves that a 4 cylinder M2 makes perfect sense and completely ignore what their potential customers are telling them.. That's the way to go!!

Totally agree,I appreciate the info from Scott26 but he is starting to sound like a politician.

[bradleyland]

Originally Posted by SCOTT26

It's not a disappointment when it actually makes perfect sense.
In the time I spent with the M4 I came to realise that using a detuned engine in the M2 kind of takes the spotlight away from the M4.

The M4 is the kind of car that is developed with a passion , a complete synergy which makes the car absolutely brilliant. Everything that is developed for the M4 should stay exclusively with the M4 . M4 works because of its sheer assistance to the technology , engine and the overall precision.

The M2 has to forge its own identity but not be a poor relation.
A four cylinder will not only progress identity but allow for new innovations especially for this segment especially when the focus is heavily on Precision than extra numbers.

Being completely honest, I find some of this concerning. The reasoning behind the move to an I4 is honest, only if it genuinely makes the M2 a better car. Maintaining the M4's exclusivity makes business sense, but if the consequence is that the M2 is intentionally hamstrung... well that sucks.

I get that the M2 needs to forge its own identity, but I sure hope the folks at M are paying attention to the feedback in these forums. Even the reasonable folks are going to hold the M2 to an incredibly high standard. The 1M was a raging success because it was built on a formula that blew people's minds: small car, big engine, crazy wide stance. If the M2 has to make too many compromises to protect its older brothers, BMW will have a flop on their hands.

[sdpauly]

Originally Posted by SCOTT26

It's not a disappointment when it actually makes perfect sense.
In the time I spent with the M4 I came to realise that using a detuned engine in the M2 kind of takes the spotlight away from the M4.

The M4 is the kind of car that is developed with a passion , a complete synergy which makes the car absolutely brilliant. Everything that is developed for the M4 should stay exclusively with the M4 . M4 works because of its sheer assistance to the technology , engine and the overall precision.

The M2 has to forge its own identity but not be a poor relation.
A four cylinder will not only progress identity but allow for new innovations especially for this segment especially when the focus is heavily on Precision than extra numbers.

As I said before, they need to apply this same "passion" to a SMALLER car. This does not take away anything from the M4 except its gargantuan size. There is not technical reason that I am aware of why the S55 powertrain couldn't be squeezed into the M2. A 4-cyl turbo is NOT what I want to replace my twin-turbo N54. The S55 seems like a natural evolution for me. If I wanted the size I could have bought a 335i or even an M3.

Again, I will be massively disappointed if BMW screws this up and puts a turbo 4 in the M2. I have driven the N20 328i and no thanks. 4-cylinder turbos anre twitchy, laggy, and peaky and do not have the same dynamics as an inline 6. I feel like I would be taking a step down moving to a 4 cylinder. 4 cylinders make me think of hondas and toyotas... Inline 6 makes me think BMW. I dont want to buy an M4 not because I can't afford one, but because it is TOO BIG.

Basically I'm saying "BMW come take my money" if you put the S55 in the M2. If not, forget it, I won't be buying any BMW next and I will have to start looking at something else.

Highly disappointed.

[Aust350z]

Originally Posted by Ramos

Yes the management at BMW should keep telling themselves that a 4 cylinder M2 makes perfect sense and completely ignore what their potential customers are telling them.. That's the way to go!!

Exactly. I can't wait for my 2 series Active Tourer!

Originally Posted by kyleb350

Keeping in line with the M4, the weight savings would put it somewhere in the 3100 lbs range, unless they go hardcore and take out the back seats.

I think your right with 3,100lbs.

I'd really like 1,350kgs (~3000lbs). But to achieve BMW would need to find 180kgs (~400 lbs) compared to M235i Euro weight of 1,530kgs (~3,400lbs).

I4 N20 over I6 N55 already nets 60kg (~130lbs). (Ignoring some weight increase needed for S20).

Assume 5% weight reduction (M4 savings) for using carbon-fibre plastics nets 80kgs (180lbs).

This still leaves us around 40-45kg (90-100lbs) short. Can they get 7.5% weight reduction? If they could - where would it come from?

Originally Posted by bradleyland

The 1M was a raging success because it was built on a formula that blew people's minds: small car, big engine, crazy wide stance. If the M2 has to make too many compromises to protect its older brothers, BMW will have a flop on their hands.

+1. Very well put.

[BMWJS]

Originally Posted by Aust350z

Exactly. I can't wait for my 2 series Active Tourer!



I think your right with 3,100lbs.

I'd really like 1,350kgs (~3000lbs). But to achieve BMW would need to find 180kgs (~400 lbs) compared to M235i Euro weight of 1,530kgs (~3,400lbs).

I4 N20 over I6 N55 already nets 60kg (~130lbs). (Ignoring some weight increase needed for S20).

Assume 5% weight reduction (M4 savings) for using carbon-fibre plastics nets 80kgs (180lbs).

This still leaves us around 40-45kg (90-100lbs) short. Can they get 7.5% weight reduction? If they could - where would it come from?



+1. Very well put.

If Scott's input regarding extensive use of carbon fiber is put into action, BMW should be able to bring the M2 in under 3000 lbs. All things considered, a 6 cylinder will still make it a better car!

[Rupes]

Everyone seems to think the option should be either a turbo 4 or turbo 6, but I would love a nice 350ish HP naturally aspirated inline 6. That would be awesome. Keeps the M4 unique, and gives the 2 series a unique, but less powerful engine.

I just hate the idea of a 4 cylinder, regardless of HP, lightness, smoothness, etc.

[IEDEI]

to follow up what almost all of us are saying here, i'd like to add that:

i'd rather have a 3100 lb M2 with an inline-6 than to have a 2975 lb M2 with a 4-banger.

[ORIGIN M.]

Originally Posted by Levi

M2 with M4 engine an CF would be awesome, but you really believe BMW will build a car that is better than an M4?

Better to some yet not better to everybody.

And the average joe that can afford the m4 will never think about the m2. Imagine that.

[Aust350z]

Originally Posted by BMWJS

If Scott's input regarding extensive use of carbon fiber is put into action, BMW should be able to bring the M2 in under 3000 lbs. All things considered, a 6 cylinder will still make it a better car!

Possibly. Hopefully. They achieved a 7.8% decrease in weight from the standard M3 with the E46 M3 CSL.

[tdizzle]

Originally Posted by red-sauerkraut

Better to some yet not better to everybody.

And the average joe that can afford the m4 will never think about the m2. Imagine that.

Given that an equally optioned out, to the extend one can, m235 is priced really close to a 335 do we really expect this car to happen, be a true substantial upgrade over the m235 and not creep on m4 prices?

Honest question. I tried to build a m235 comparatively equipped to my f30 335 and the price difference was about $4k and came around $53k. I can see a well equipped m2 nearing $65k.

I'm all for a m2 but, at over $60k and knowing BMW will protect the m4, I can see people having a hard time justifying it over a m4. But I guess the same can be said for a fully optioned 335... Im surprised how close in size, weight, and price the 2 series is to the 4 series.

Side point, it looks like there is a good chance of the 2 series "race" car being made available so there's that too.

[andnkuhn]

i vote for inline 6 for the record....

this car wont be come out for a couple years in that time they will want 30+ mpg and will realistically put a 4cylinder in the M2, can they do a tri-turbo? do tri-turbos exist now? how about in a few years.

[Aust350z]

Originally Posted by andnkuhn

can they do a tri-turbo? do tri-turbos exist now? how about in a few years.

Yes tri turbos exisit now and at BMW. Specifically the 3.0l I6 Diesel found in the M50d variants.

Not sure what would be involved with tri-turboing a 2.0 I4... maybe a baby one that is produces full boost between 500-1300rpm to remove turbo lag

[crqflier]

Originally Posted by bradleyland

Now I'm curious which FWD VW cars had an inline mounted 1.8T?

My point was really that you can make some minor engineering changes and dual-purpose an engine to save costs. I think you knew that though.

B5.5 Passat (2002-2005). 1.8t inline. Yup. Got your point - which is why I said my comment didn't really matter.

[Itgb]

Originally Posted by sdpauly

As I said before, they need to apply this same "passion" to a SMALLER car. This does not take away anything from the M4 except its gargantuan size. There is not technical reason that I am aware of why the S55 powertrain couldn't be squeezed into the M2. A 4-cyl turbo is NOT what I want to replace my twin-turbo N54. The S55 seems like a natural evolution for me. If I wanted the size I could have bought a 335i or even an M3.

Again, I will be massively disappointed if BMW screws this up and puts a turbo 4 in the M2. I have driven the N20 328i and no thanks. 4-cylinder turbos anre twitchy, laggy, and peaky and do not have the same dynamics as an inline 6. I feel like I would be taking a step down moving to a 4 cylinder. 4 cylinders make me think of hondas and toyotas... Inline 6 makes me think BMW. I dont want to buy an M4 not because I can't afford one, but because it is TOO BIG.

Basically I'm saying "BMW come take my money" if you put the S55 in the M2. If not, forget it, I won't be buying any BMW next and I will have to start looking at something else.

Highly disappointed.

Why don't you buy a M235i? It's supposedly faster than a 1M out of the box, so throw on some M Performance goodies like the LSD & coilovers and call it a day.

[HBspeed]

Originally Posted by SCOTT26

It's not a disappointment when it actually makes perfect sense.
In the time I spent with the M4 I came to realise that using a detuned engine in the M2 kind of takes the spotlight away from the M4.

The M4 is the kind of car that is developed with a passion , a complete synergy which makes the car absolutely brilliant. Everything that is developed for the M4 should stay exclusively with the M4 . M4 works because of its sheer assistance to the technology , engine and the overall precision.

The M2 has to forge its own identity but not be a poor relation.
A four cylinder will not only progress identity but allow for new innovations especially for this segment especially when the focus is heavily on Precision than extra numbers.

I have to wonder, when writing this was the engine strategy used by Mercedes or Audi ever taken under consideration?

I have never heard anyone complain about the C63 AMG being a "poor relation" because it uses a detuned version of the engine used in the E63, S63, CL63, CLS63 and SL63.

I have never heard anyone complain that the "spotlight" was taken away from the E63, S63, CL63, CLS63 and SL63... because the C63 used the same engine in a car placed lower in the size and marketing hierarchy.

Like wise I have never heard anyone say such things regarding the fact that the RS4/RS5 use the same engine as the R8 V8.

Rather I surmise that BMW wishes to employ the 911 vs Cayman marketing model. Artificially limiting its best and lightest chassis/platform for a sports car... in order to protect the inferior more obese one.

[IS3andME]

Originally Posted by BMWJS

I hear you but I can't help that I am disappointed. I believe a 6 cylinder is the better choice of engines and I love the smoothness, sound, power delivery, etc. of the 6 cylinder that I currently own.

Maybe the underlying problem is that M doesn't do "bespoked" engines anymore, and you only really have the N55/S55 to play around with, in terms of inline 6s. The 1M was a quick ensemble, and the M3 used a V8. Now that the M3/M4 has downsized to the I6 (S55), and the 2 series having the N55, it wouldn't make sense for BMW M to just detune the S55 for the M2. Especially since the 1M had a different engine to the e9x M3, thus separating them.

Also, I do think having a 4 cylinder gives M Division a certain amount of play room. What can they do with a turbo 4? This is a question no one has really answered? It's kinda like, "What if Honda made a 4 door S2000 with a turbo?"

[sdpauly]

Originally Posted by Itgb

Why don't you buy a M235i? It's supposedly faster than a 1M out of the box, so throw on some M Performance goodies like the LSD & coilovers and call it a day.

Have you seen how much an M235i is going to weigh? I doubt its going to be much (if any) of a performance improvement over my 1er. I would rather keep my 135 at this point, toss a jb4 in it, and drive it into the ground. Looks like this first go round with the 2 series isn't for me...

[sdpauly]

Originally Posted by HBspeed

I have never heard anyone complain about the C63 AMG being a "poor relation" because it uses a detuned version of the engine used in the E63, S63, CL63, CLS63 and SL63.

Completely agree.

[BMW269]

Many on here look at I4 vs. I6 only from a perspective of number of cylinders. But we have to look at this case from what I would call a quality perspective.

If I say the M4's S55 engine is crap, it is just a cheaply tuned N55, sold for a über-premium price, many will disagree. An they are right to some extent, the S55 is more than just a tuned N55, it is not "cheap" as one could think (has still to be proven with R&D financial numbers compared to S65, but will never happen).

Shortly said, in ///Mystic language, the S55 is a "true" M engine. So an S55 in an M2, even detuned, I'm fine with that.

But will that happen? NO. Why? Because M2 would be to close to M4, and with the same power output as the M4 it would be in all ways faster than the M4. BMW will not allow this just a Porsche does not allow the Cayman to be faster than a 911. Even the Cayman GTS will not the 350 PS output that the 911 Carrera has.

So do you want a really cheaply tuned N55 in the M2? Me not. I then prefer a I4 that is reengineered like the S55 has been. I could consider that a true M engine, but a tuned N55, what the S55 is not, has no place in an M car.

So as the M2 is unlikely the get the S55 M engine, I prefer a true M I4 than a cheap I6.

To support this point: 325i E30 ("cheap" I6) or M3 E30 (true M I4)?

[Gaviin]

I seriously don't understand this whole concept of not wanting the lower numbered models outperforming the higher numbered. I mean, smaller cars *should* be faster, particularly on the track. If you want more doors, leg room, and luxury, then you should expect some performance trade-offs and you should expect to pay more.

The current approach strikes me as very small-minded thinking... "bigger number car must be faster!!!"