[AESZ4]

Originally Posted by jmg

The base price of the M2 is $52K. The base price of the 2006 Z4 M Roadster was $53k. The point you are tying to make is perplexing. You drive a 10 yr old BMW, of course your going to save money by not buying a brand new $60k M2. Your also saving money by not buying a $16k Honda Fit, what's your point?

his point is, he drives a second or third hand 10yr old Z4M, and he can't afford to spend money on a newer car so he justifies to his girlfriend that his car is every bit as good and that he's not a wank.

[AESZ4]

Originally Posted by jmg

The base price of the M2 is $52K. The base price of the 2006 Z4 M Roadster was $53k. The point you are tying to make is perplexing. You drive a 10 yr old BMW, of course your going to save money by not buying a brand new $60k M2. Your also saving money by not buying a $16k Honda Fit, what's your point?

his point is, he drives a second or third hand 10yr old Z4M, and he can't afford to spend money on a newer car so he justifies to his girlfriend that his car is every bit as good and that he's not a wank.

[paliknight]

Originally Posted by CanAutM3

9 seconds difference between the M2 and M4 according to AMS/SA Supertest.

no. thats falsified data. the M2 is proven to be faster than the M4 around a track. duh.

[CanAutM3]

Originally Posted by TheObviousChild

Maybe I'm being naive, but I wouldn't think anything around a 10 second difference on a 12.9 mile track lap time would really big a big deal at all.

One second per minute lap is not a negligible difference.

[CanAutM3]

Originally Posted by MM135

Will be interesting to see this done again once the M2 CS is out with the S55

Yup, and race it against the M4CS

[jmg]

Originally Posted by AESZ4

his point is, he drives a second or third hand 10yr old Z4M, and he can't afford to spend money on a newer car so he justifies to his girlfriend that his car is every bit as good and that he's not a wank.

I don't know how accurate that is, but I lol'ed.

[MNoob]

Originally Posted by AESZ4

his point is, he drives a second or third hand 10yr old Z4M, and he can't afford to spend money on a newer car so he justifies to his girlfriend that his car is every bit as good and that he's not a wank.

I once tried to explain to my wife that I'm not a wank. didn't work.

[SeanWRT]

You call 113 anomaly but there is a 107 for DCT that you listed as a valid data point. Fair to say you're just biased a little bit.

Car drag performance test results reported by China journalists and magazines have been always lower than USA counterparts, yet nobody here sees M2's 400m(2 meters less than 1/4 mile) trap time below 180kph (112mph). It's been normally 181~183kph.

Originally Posted by Motorsportenterprise

I've seen the 113 test, and I'd call it an anomaly as most other tests don't have it trapping that even with DCT. Manual is surely slower. I'd say 107 for the manual and 110 for the DCT is reasonable...

106.8 trap - 6mt
http://www.motortrend.com/cars/fiat/...r-s-toyota-86/

110 trap with DCT
http://www.motortrend.com/cars/fiat/...r-s-toyota-86/

111 with DCT
http://www.roadandtrack.com/car-cult...test/?zoomable

110 with DCT
http://www.motorweek.org/reviews/road_tests/2016-bmw-m2

107 with DCT
http://www.motortrend.com/cars/bmw/m...val-good-gets/

[BoxKing]

Originally Posted by CanAutM3

Yup, and race it against the M4CS

A better comparison might be against the M4 GTS.
The M2CS would be getting a new engine vs. just a heightened tune on a ZCP>CS M4.

[The Choosey begger]

Originally Posted by Garage5

The M4 should have been faster on the roll. I wonder if any of the DCT cars used launch control off the line. I don't think I hear any cars bouncing off the LC limiter. I am a little surprised about the M2. It felt much faster when I drove one.

I have a Z4M coupe and a M2 would slaughter it. My S54 M coupe slaughters the Z4M as well. I don't think any of the three were ever meant to go fast straight.

Since we have a new M5 being released, is there any word on a new 6 series? Or is that hype being over taken with the news of the 8 series?

The car journos always try to show the M4 in the worst light possible, no surprise there.

Like how the M4 ran 12,1 against the goolia sport, guys here run high 11's in 3,000 Density Altitude which is bad air all day.

[ChrisK]

Originally Posted by CanAutM3

9 seconds difference between the M2 and M4 according to AMS/SA Supertest.

I trust BMW's numbers.

http://www.bmwblog.com/2015/10/13/bm...r-than-e92-m3/

The M2 runs the Nurburgring in 7:58 minutes, 7 seconds faster than the V8 E92 M3.The BMW 1M ran the Nurburgring in 8:12 seconds, while the M3 CSL ran the same lap in 7:50 seconds. The standard BMW M4 Coupe recorded a lap time of 7:52 minutes. By any standards, the M2 is a fast car and ready for the track.

Bottom line...I cant drive either car anywhere near those times <never actually>.

The M2 is my 4th M car.

M Roaster
e46 M3
e92 M3
f87 M2

I like the M2's size. I can find a Honda Civic that can out 0-60 these M-cars. Who cares!

[M-Pilot]

Originally Posted by clemsonkev

every TRACK test I have seen has the M2 going AS FAST or FASTER than M4, M5 and M6. True Story.

But if straight line is your thing, get yer Dodge Demon. LMAO.

Really? I love seeing comments like this implying M2 is the king of handling while M4 is a pig that can't do shit aside from straight line racing. Most of the M owners don't even track their cars to know their handling limits. Believe it or not, many people are even afraid to fully turn off the DSC. But I guess it's easier to come here and brag about track times of the almighty M2. I'm not denying the value that M2 delivers. Of course it's pretty damn impressive for a car that is lacking almost 100hp to hang with or outperform more powerful cars. But I bet most of those who call the M4 a boat didn't even get to explore its limits on a track. I personally have more than 10 track days under my belt and try to track my car once a month. I love the handling and the power delivery of my M4 on the track. Would I like an M2? Sure, I will probably get one when they dump the N55 and put a more powerful engine that is not maxed out straight from the factory in it. At the end of the day, I don't live on a race track and straight line speed matters too, at least to me. If we go back to your original statement, I think it's now clear how some people may prefer amazing track performance and straight line speed at the same time, which M3 and M4 offers.

[SeanWRT]

Originally Posted by anglo

The car journos always try to show the M4 in the worst light possible, no surprise there.

Like how the M4 ran 12,1 against the goolia sport, guys here run high 11's in 3,000 Density Altitude which is bad air all day.

Owning a last gen m3 sedan, I didn't see that happened to E9X. It has been all the praise and even some of them are just hype I'd say honestly.

Try think about why on F80/82.

[Sleeper]

So what am I missing here?

The F80/82 is (relative to the F87) -
1. Faster in a straight line;
2. As fast or faster on a short track;
3. Faster on a long track (and (1) - (3) despite being ridiculously "under-tired" from the factory);
4. Better body lines and exterior features (subjective, I guess);
5. Nicer interior, by far (not sure this is common knowledge, but Dakota leather is the same material used to wrap dead bodies); and
6. Way more tuning potential.

Oh, journalists said it's the last real ///M car. It's a driver's car. Right.

So why is everyone arguing?

Each model has its place in the hierarchy, and its performance follows suit. Not sure why it's such a surprise, and why the level of indignation is so extreme.

This thread has been fun reading.

Ps. The guy who referred to the few (or many?) who sold their F80/82 to go back to the E90/92...

[MSups6]

Originally Posted by anglo

The car journos always try to show the M4 in the worst light possible, no surprise there.

Like how the M4 ran 12,1 against the goolia sport, guys here run high 11's in 3,000 Density Altitude which is bad air all day.

Or maybe its just it having inferior performance to its rivals being less a drivers car oh especially that awful current bmw steering feel whatnot.

Bimmer hit it out of the ball park looks wise, just didn't manage the performance fitting it.

[SeanWRT]

It's understandable people defend what they have, but do that by insulting isn't really tasteful. I believe having you as an owner/defender adds to the dislike of this gen m3, a sentiment shared by more than many, globally.

Originally Posted by Sleeper

So what am I missing here?

The F80/82 is (relative to the F87) -
1. Faster in a straight line;
2. As fast or faster on a short track;
3. Faster on a long track (and (1) - (3) despite being ridiculously "under-tired" from the factory);
4. Better body lines and exterior features (subjective, I guess);
5. Nicer interior, by far (not sure this is common knowledge, but Dakota leather is the same material used to wrap dead bodies); and
6. Way more tuning potential.

Oh, journalists said it's the last real ///M car. It's a driver's car. Right.

So why is everyone arguing?

Each model has its place in the hierarchy, and its performance follows suit. Not sure why it's such a surprise, and why the level of indignation is so extreme.

This thread has been fun reading.

Ps. The guy who referred to the few (or many?) who sold their F80/82 to go back to the E90/92...

[M6-Coupe]

The whole comparison and result are pointless...
M6 is the fastest M car from dig or rolling. Noway M4 can beat M6... I had both
Looks like the driver of M6 doesn't know how to launch the car...

[Wills2]

Originally Posted by M6-Coupe

The whole comparison and result are pointless...
M6 is the fastest M car from dig or rolling. Noway M4 can beat M6... I had both
Looks like the driver of M6 doesn't know how to launch the car...

From a dig to say 60 there is basically nothing in it between M3/4/5/6 but my M3 is easier to launch than my old F10 M5 huge traction issues with that car.

But it's just a bit of fun, I like the car wow videos, too many people take themselves and their cars far too seriously.

[spellbmw]

I, for one, will never be racing my M2; it's not my thing. I'll definitely enjoy spirited-driving here in the Pacific Northwest, up into Canada and down to San Diego....but race it, never. I might track it for fun, but probably not. I'm a BMW biker at heart and my 135i has been a blast with its PPK, PE and SSK...and I have over 121,000 miles on my MY2010 and will continue to enjoy it when the M2 finally arrives after my European Delivery in October.

Buy what you want for whatever reason you have and enjoy the hell out of it while you yet have life to live. And know others do the same thing; their desires, their reasons, their choices. I'm glad we are all different; it' d be a bland, boring and lifeless world without our differences.

[The Choosey begger]

Originally Posted by SeanWRT

Owning a last gen m3 sedan, I didn't see that happened to E9X. It has been all the praise and even some of them are just hype I'd say honestly.

Try think about why on F80/82.

i owned an E92 M3 when it came out, it got plenty negatives. It got too big and the 1 M was the true M3. lol

[The Choosey begger]

Originally Posted by MSups6

Or maybe its just it having inferior performance to its rivals being less a drivers car oh especially that awful current bmw steering feel whatnot.

Bimmer hit it out of the ball park looks wise, just didn't manage the performance fitting it.

Around the track the F80 spanks the Goolia sport.

It's sad most car journos cant get the M3 in the 11's as so many amateurs have in worst than ideal DA's.

[SeanWRT]

Originally Posted by anglo

i owned an E92 M3 when it came out, it got plenty negatives. It got too big and the 1 M was the true M3. lol

I think you're a bit confused, my friend. 1M came out in 2010 and hit the market in mid 2011 when E9X M3's has been already on the road for almost three years and was approaching LCI.

To be fair, among the overwhelming praises, there was first some critic of E9X being heavier than previous generation, which is perfectly legitimate. But fact is, steering is fine, 4.0 V8 is fascinating (then) and gearbox (DCT gen1 vs SMG) is a huge improvement. Not until 1M came out, had people come to realize what it really means to a M car to have a right size/wheelbase. The turbocharged 1M was considered "more fun" due to the size and balance.

Other than these critics, E9X M3 has been consistently compared to 911 WITH S in every aspect (nobody today seriously does that with F80/82 gen), is still easily rated as the annual best car by C&D and MT.

M2 today is a refined 1M, while M3/4 is a different car than E9X, with a huge step off M track. That's even the prevailing opinion inside BMW, but there is little they can do to change that because everything should be based on long wheelbase 3 series. I took HPDE training on Aug 20 at Shanghai F1 racetrack and met Cl**s (I'm not supposed to publicize his name), a senior BMW HPDE global trainer/manager, who spoke in private on M car:
"Well...it's probably my age coming into play, I prefer older generations of M cars. From current lineup, it is the 1M and M2 that represents M the best in my opinion". BTW, this man felt sorry for me because he thought I have a M4.