[ASAP]

Originally Posted by Brandt51

We got an X5M Comp with 617hp. That's 33% more HP than the M2C! But the X5M is minivan in comparison. The little car is feisty, way fewer techy things and visceral at all speeds. It's just more raw, but confidence inspiring and is always ready for more. I don't mess around with TC off, but I exclusively drive it in sport + and MDM. So a lot of work is done by TC still, but it's still pretty squirly.

When I drive the X5M, its in the sportiest configuration available, except for TC. Keep that in MDM also.Even so, it remains very sedated and civilized despite the monster engine. It will destroy almost anything else on the market regardless of size and cost....and it's really easy. It does all the work and all wheel drive is amazing. It feels at ease doing anything that's considering 'pushing it'.

I absolutely prefer the M2C. And not just because I prefer manual transmissions. It's sporty and leaves me happier knowing that. The raw feeling and doing a good share of the work to be fast is cool.

The one caveat though, on a closed course, I got real surpassed by the X5M with all the TC off and the trans in manual shift mode. (The requirement for launch control and even with the trans in manual mode, it does the shifting during the launch and I forgot) It'll get out of shape real fast without TC. And being new to the rig, I was slapping at every lever thing I could find. Just trying to grab upshifts to get back in line without lifting.

Not to be picky... but wouldn't that number be closer to 50%?

[Brandt51]

Originally Posted by ASAP

Not to be picky... but wouldn't that number be closer to 50%?

Technically, its closer to 34.3%, but since I'm an adult, I refuse to show the equation used (show your work). I know my rights.

[ASAP]

Originally Posted by Brandt51

Technically, its closer to 34.3%, but since I'm an adult, I refuse to show the equation used (show your work). I know my rights.

Your baseline should be the M2C power which is 410.

You're going from 410 to 617.

(617-410)/410 = ~50.4%

Did you just do 410/617 and inverted? That won't work because your baseline is still 410. 207 is ~50% of 410.

[Brandt51]

Originally Posted by ASAP

Your baseline should be the M2C power which is 410.

You're going from 410 to 617.

(617-410)/410 = ~50.4%

Did you just do 410/617 and inverted? That won't work because your baseline is still 410. 207 is ~50% of 410.

I don't think I like your tone mr! I rather be called out in public for doing math wrong, not here on the internet where it'll be saved for all time!

But I think you're right. Dang....log out....

[AlpsRider]

Or... 410 hp is 34% less than 617 hp. It's all in the wording...or did I just have a brain fart.

[Maynard]

Haven't driven the M3comp, but it looks to be even more of a big heavy numbers-game, what I used to think of as the domain of the M5 (autobahn cruiser or cannonball contender, not a track car and almost impossible to get into the fun zone on a back road without risking prison).

But I'm puzzled by all the talk of 'tuned for less low end torque' - the M3/4comp has a huge boost in torque over the M2c, and roughly the same kind of curve to it; the easily available info I have puts the M3 ahead across the board. Probably FEELS a lot more sluggish, given all that weight and 'smoothing'. Also DK where people got 600+hp - I'm seeing more like 500. And as an aside, AWD is a fantastic setup for street performance driving, probably helps improve some on the fun factor: it produces a sort of 4-wheel drift dynamic, even at speeds well below the point where you are actually working the tires hard enough to drift them.

https://www.automobile-catalog.com/c...ition_dkg.html

https://www.automobile-catalog.com/c...mpetition.html

[ASAP]

Originally Posted by AlpsRider

Or... 410 hp is 34% less than 617 hp. It's all in the wording...or did I just have a brain fart.

Damn it lol, your numbers are correct but then your baseline is the 617 HP of the X5M... not the M2C numbers. When you say 33% more of 410 HP, it would only be 545 HP.

Sorry, this bothers me as this is my job.

[pz619]

I don't know about your math.

I'm going to do my own research on facebook.

[MmmmmM2]

I saw a Brooklyn Gray non-comp M3 sedan today, and they sure look a lot better than the M4 IMO.

[DanG]

I have seen several in person. I still can’t get over the looks of the front grill (kidneys).

[richard in NC]

FYI Both statements are correct. The X5MC has 50% more power than the M2C, and the M2C has 34% less power than the X5MC. Depends on the reference.

I was fortunate to drive the new M3/M4 on the Indy road course at the M events. Most statements are correct, the M2C is definitely more raw, but the M3/M4 are plenty capable and track suited. I did have grossly uneven tire pressures the first session with one tire over 50psi but the second session was good and the M4 was quite good and confidence inspiring. I didn't have a chance to truly test low end torque, which is where the X3M's S58 is a let down, especially as compared to the M2C powerband.

PS: I also drove the M4 GT4 (previous gen) a full session. That car is incredible and easy to drive, perfect balance and behavior as you get rewarded for proper driving style big time.

[W///]

Originally Posted by richard in NC

FYI Both statements are correct. The X5MC has 50% more power than the M2C, and the M2C has 34% less power than the X5MC. Depends on the reference.

I was fortunate to drive the new M3/M4 on the Indy road course at the M events. Most statements are correct, the M2C is definitely more raw, but the M3/M4 are plenty capable and track suited. I did have grossly uneven tire pressures the first session with one tire over 50psi but the second session was good and the M4 was quite good and confidence inspiring. I didn't have a chance to truly test low end torque, which is where the X3M's S58 is a let down, especially as compared to the M2C powerband.

PS: I also drove the M4 GT4 (previous gen) a full session. That car is incredible and easy to drive, perfect balance and behavior as you get rewarded for proper driving style big time.

This is awesome! What a fun day.

I will tell you, that while the low end torque is still not quite as nice as the S55's, the programming in the S58 in the G8x and LCI F9x is an improvement over the earlier F97/8.

[Brandt51]

Originally Posted by AlpsRider

Or... 410 hp is 34% less than 617 hp. It's all in the wording...or did I just have a brain fart.

Let's go with the wording. My grammar is famously terrible and I already come to terms with that.

[AlpsRider]

Originally Posted by Brandt51

Let's go with the wording. My grammar is famously terrible and I already come to terms with that.

Y'ahight mate.

[ASAP]

So did anyone here about the stop sale on the S58?

I am willing to bet long term, the S55 will be the M reliability king.

[akkando]

Originally Posted by ASAP

So did anyone here about the stop sale on the S58?

I am willing to bet long term, the S55 will be the M reliability king.

It looks like it's just s58 cars made in a certain small window so probably not design flaw but bad batch of a part.

[ASAP]

Originally Posted by akkando

It looks like it's just s58 cars made in a certain small window so probably not design flaw but bad batch of a part.

2nd time it's happened in a year... X3Ms had the same issue.

[ASAP]

Fwiw, I think from a reliability aspect, bmw blew the S55 out of the water. Outside of a few isolated crank hub issues, the engine is borderline bulletproof.

[Spydert]

Originally Posted by richard in NC

FYI Both statements are correct. The X5MC has 50% more power than the M2C, and the M2C has 34% less power than the X5MC. Depends on the reference.

I was fortunate to drive the new M3/M4 on the Indy road course at the M events. Most statements are correct, the M2C is definitely more raw, but the M3/M4 are plenty capable and track suited. I did have grossly uneven tire pressures the first session with one tire over 50psi but the second session was good and the M4 was quite good and confidence inspiring. I didn't have a chance to truly test low end torque, which is where the X3M's S58 is a let down, especially as compared to the M2C powerband.

PS: I also drove the M4 GT4 (previous gen) a full session. That car is incredible and easy to drive, perfect balance and behavior as you get rewarded for proper driving style big time.

That red M4 actually looks nice. Grille and all.

[m2c_6mt]

I actually just drove a Brooklyn Grey M3C for a couple days over Christmas. Check out my quick ~7min review below. I'd agree with a lot of the comments already made:

• Extremely capable & confidence-inspiring...huge grip (even in RWD guise) and relentless power, from ~3k in second gear to...triple digits.
• Limits are so high that you can't enjoy it as much on the street as the M2C.
• Heavy, yes, but it hides the weight pretty well. Strangely, for a car this size, the interior doesn't seem that spacious.
• Not as ugly as people make it out to be. The grill actually works well in the darker colors, greys, and white (IMO). Aggressive design but definitely isn't as timeless as the M2/M2C.

[(K)]

Originally Posted by m2c_6mt

I actually just drove a Brooklyn Grey M3C for a couple days over Christmas. Check out my quick ~7min review below. I'd agree with a lot of the comments already made:

• Extremely capable & confidence-inspiring...huge grip (even in RWD guise) and relentless power, from ~3k in second gear to...triple digits.
• Limits are so high that you can't enjoy it as much on the street as the M2C.
• Heavy, yes, but it hides the weight pretty well. Strangely, for a car this size, the interior doesn't seem that spacious.
• Not as ugly as people make it out to be. The grill actually works well in the darker colors, greys, and white (IMO). Aggressive design but definitely isn't as timeless as the M2/M2C.

Your second point gives away a lot about the new generation cars. The M2C is already overkill for the street, I imagine the G80 cars to be near inaccessible.

[6speed_M2]

I would assume it's a different experience when you're pushing the car. I'm sure it's just as capable, if not more capable handling/power wise when you're going 8-10/10ths.

It comes down to the feel and the vibe of the car. The M3 is a relatively large sedan. It's tough comparing that feeling to that of a light weight coupe. The M2 is unique with it's go-kart size. It should also have less sound insulation and that makes a difference as well.

My M2 weighed in at 3390lbs. The auto M3 would be around 3700-3950lbs. That extra level of comfort, weight and disconnection to the sounds and harshness of the road is what makes me want the M3 for the daily driver, but would steer some towards the M2 instead.