[Davil]

Looks like a decent enough car for lots of people. Not for me though. But I’ll have a drive when it hits the dealers.

I expect it will be like the G82. Fast, incredibly capable but not really a driver’s car. A bit like Porsche these days. More a clinical weapon to get from a) to b) as quickly as possible with the least possible fuss.

If that’s what floats your boat then go for it. If that’s what you are after then it’s a definite winner. Nothing wrong with that!

[Kroghj1]

Originally Posted by Gib007

Lots of comments on YouTube are hilarious at how much they *hate* the new M2's look and I sit here thinking it looks better than the old M2 because it's much more muscular-looking.

Same.. 1M was my favorite “attainable” car when it came out due to the bulldog stance.

F87 always looked too soft and frumpy for me so I never bought one. I found I did like them in person in dark colors but never enough to pull the trigger.

G87 side profile / fender flares sold me instantly.

[pabrognara]

Originally Posted by Ilyam5

Exactly. M2 has a different tune when the torque is available in the range vs M3
Original X3m was tuned that way. (they fixed it in LCI)

watch Joe Achiles video at 19:35

Perhaps this issue is not present in AT version?

[Jimjamz]

Looks like the F87 CS is a keeper. Just can’t get my thrills from the current G gen M cars. After 15 years of BMW’s, since the CS I’ve put down money on a Porsche and a Lotus. What is happening?

[CJ]

Originally Posted by Ravenseal

I’m waiting for SavageGeese. That’s the only internet reviewer opinion I care about.

[Ilyam5]

Originally Posted by pabrognara

Perhaps this issue is not present in AT version?

Auto box hides it better with shorter gearing but the issue is lower boost vs m4. Here is card and drivers quote

‘ The main difference is that while the M2 makes the same 406 lb-ft of torque at the same 2650 rpm as the M4's headier tune, its thrust builds more progressively as revs increase. With slightly less turbo boost to manage—17.4 psi versus the base M4's 18.9—it's easier to feed in the power without upsetting the car's hold on the road.’

[DFW_M]

Originally Posted by Kroghj1

Same.. 1M was my favorite “attainable” car when it came out due to the bulldog stance.

F87 always looked too soft and frumpy for me so I never bought one. I found I did like them in person in dark colors but never enough to pull the trigger.

G87 side profile / fender flares sold me instantly.

If the looks of the G87 is what you were sold on "instantly", good for you
It is like when people try to tell me -- when I saw those buck teeth on the g22 non shadow, I was sold!

IMO, you cannot compare the looks of the F87 (grace, strength, flowing) vs G87 (looks like my 9 year old put it together....and forgot a few pieces of it...).

But, as always, looks are subjective...

[CodeSlinger]

Originally Posted by DFW_M

If the looks of the G87 is what you were sold on "instantly", good for you
It is like when people try to tell me -- when I saw those buck teeth on the g22 non shadow, I was sold!

IMO, you cannot compare the looks of the F87 (grace, strength, flowing) vs G87 (looks like my 9 year old put it together....and forgot a few pieces of it...).

But, as always, looks are subjective...

Your 9 year old should start a car design company then lol.

This has been discussed and debated many times, so not looking to get into a bitter argument here haha. But IMO the f87 has a great front end, if a bit dated now (so many creases, very late 2010's), however the rear end looked very economy car. From the rear 3/4 the g87 is a wildly better looking car (to me).

Link: https://cdn.bmwblog.com/wp-content/u...arter-view.jpg

Couple that with the beefy fenders it's a winner for me. The front bumper took me a bit longer to come to terms with, but the f15 style air intakes are dope.

Every car has good and bad angles, the f87 (IMO had some really bad ones) but was all in all a nice car. I have the same feelings towards the g87, I think a year or two of them being on the road will normalize the blocky/aggressive look quite a bit.

[Ghostrider.1127]

Originally Posted by DFW_M

But, as always, looks are subjective...

Exactly , that´s why i never bought a G80/81/82/83
the beaver teeth

[deneed4spd]

Originally Posted by Ghostrider.1127

Exactly , that´s why i never bought a G80/81/82/83
the beaver teeth

It’s just funny how bigger and bigger the front buck teeth is getting. Just reminds me of this article back in the day. https://www.theonion.com/fuck-everyt...des-1819584036

[JustChris]

Wow the whole F87 crowd is out….

[M_Power Rob]

Originally Posted by Ghostrider.1127

Exactly , that´s why i never bought a G80/81/82/83
the beaver teeth

They did screw up matching the eyes to the headlights.

[DFW_M]

Originally Posted by CodeSlinger

Your 9 year old should start a car design company then lol.

This has been discussed and debated many times, so not looking to get into a bitter argument here haha. But IMO the f87 has a great front end, if a bit dated now (so many creases, very late 2010's), however the rear end looked very economy car. From the rear 3/4 the g87 is a wildly better looking car (to me).

Link: https://cdn.bmwblog.com/wp-content/u...arter-view.jpg

Couple that with the beefy fenders it's a winner for me. The front bumper took me a bit longer to come to terms with, but the f15 style air intakes are dope.

Every car has good and bad angles, the f87 (IMO had some really bad ones) but was all in all a nice car. I have the same feelings towards the g87, I think a year or two of them being on the road will normalize the blocky/aggressive look quite a bit.

Definitely not an argument since the looks are subjective, but again, to emphasize the G87 rear angle (to me -- horrendous) as a plus tells me how different our views are...
(though I agree, that angle did look like something was missing on the F87)...

[Ghostrider.1127]

Originally Posted by JustChris

Wow the whole F87 crowd has is out.

Wait for the supraS members
Plus the F87 remember me everytime my old 2017 M240iX convertible ... ( not a bad car at all , simply the look is dated in 2023)

[zero21]

Originally Posted by Ilyam5

Auto box hides it better with shorter gearing but the issue is lower boost vs m4. Here is card and drivers quote

‘ The main difference is that while the M2 makes the same 406 lb-ft of torque at the same 2650 rpm as the M4's headier tune, its thrust builds more progressively as revs increase. With slightly less turbo boost to manage—17.4 psi versus the base M4's 18.9—it's easier to feed in the power without upsetting the car's hold on the road.’

That literally doesn't make sense unless the torque dives off afterward.

BMW said it's the same torque line in their marketing material. So either a) that was a lie or b) the M3/M4 make more than they said (which we know is true).

Once again, it's apparent this car will be an absolute monster with a tune and some basic lightweighting/forged wheels.

Edit: I said it before and I'll say it again - if you don't want to void your warranty, get some forged wheels and CSL strutbrace and M perf parts and have a blast if you've owned previous high performance cars. Or if you're relatively new, just live with just the standard awesome car until you get to the point where you want OEM+.

[deneed4spd]

Originally Posted by zero21

That literally doesn't make sense unless the torque dives off afterward.

BMW said it's the same torque line in their marketing material. So either a) that was a lie or b) the M3/M4 make more than they said (which we know is true).

Once again, it's apparent this car will be an absolute monster with a tune and some basic lightweighting/forged wheels.

A set of good forged wheels sure gets the price closer to its sibling. Tack on that it might be better suited with an auto, ponder if one should just get a m4 for a little bit more.

[DFW_M]

Originally Posted by Ghostrider.1127

Exactly , that´s why i never bought a G80/81/82/83
the beaver teeth

you are showing the g22 not the g8x in the picture. The front is very different. Though, unnecessary on both, the g22, non-shadow front grilles (in your picture) are ridiculous, I am not sure why would anyone get excited about that.

[zero21]

Originally Posted by deneed4spd

A set of good forged wheels sure gets the price closer to its sibling. Tack on that it might be better suited with an auto, ponder if one should just get a m4 for a little bit more.

Yeah that's the question - load up your M2 to have better performance and smaller car than a base M4, or buy an M4 and grab the extras an M2 can't get: Merino leather, etc.

Choice is clear to me.

[Ghostrider.1127]

Originally Posted by DFW_M

you are showing the g22 not the g8x in the picture. The front is very different. Though, unnecessary on both, the g22, non-shadow front grilles (in your picture) are ridiculous, I am not sure why would anyone get excited about that.

Some rodent smoked too much between a damm and another ....

[wavyyyy]

I normally really like and agree with
Throttle House but watching other reviews, I feel like maybe their car was busted? I noticed they had sports seats and a sunroof, while the other reviewers even with a Toronto Red that loved it had buckets and a carbon roof, meaning different car.

[T_U_D]

Originally Posted by JustinHEMI

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it appears that these review cars are all sporting Michelins. I hope that bodes well for the rest of us.

Fingers crossed!

I noticed that as well. I did not see any of them having the Pirelli tires. Part of me wonders if this is an intentional as the automotive press seems to prefer Michelin tires? Did you notice several of them even went out of their way to mention that the car had MPS4S?

[T_U_D]

This review went live an hour ago.

Edit, the first few minutes in and my thoughts are this individual is clearly not a BMW fanboy when he made the comment about the quad exhaust being on a six cylinder. Hmm… the quad exhaust first appeared on a BMW six cylinder. The Z3 M Roadster in fact. The next one was when he stated that his demo car may have been produced in Germany.