**Note!** The weight for the previous generation (2016) BMW M2 was pulled from the global media site, which lists it at 1,495 kg (~3,300 lbs, as stated in the video). However, the US media site lists it at 3,450 lbs, and initial weighings from Car and Driver / Motor Trend put it at 3,415 lbs / 3,411 lbs respectively. All of this is to say, despite conflicting info across media sites, is that the likely weight difference is closer to 400 lbs than 500 lbs, as stated in the video. Regardless, a hefty weight bump for the latest generation.
I read some news that the 2024 refresh of the BAC Mono gets an improved engine that sets an incredible new record for BMEP / torque density for naturally aspirated engines with conventional cylinders (road car), beating the engines of Valkyrie, T50, former record holder 458 italia, etc. How is that possible with what appears to be based on a Ford engine? If you can get your hands on the new 2024 version next year maybe you can put it on a dyno.
Every time I watch a video on the new M2, I slowly get used to the looks until they inevitably show a picture of the last gen and it all comes crashing down
@@kayronmercieca8226Fair, but it is cohesive and not a Picasso where all angles are off. The car looks like it has Strabismus Syndrome, especially in the back.
@@LordStaindI wouldn't do that, my experience differs. I didn't see one on the road and went to my dealer. The car looked so bland, granted in white, that I asked whether they have one in the showroom while standing right next to it. I just looked past it like I do with Golfs and Toyotas. For me, it looked even more dull and boring in the flesh.
Safety and regulations have been used as the scapegoats for weight increases and enthusiasts have just gone along with it. Despite the fact Mazda gave it all a middle finger with the ND. Saving weight can be done, manufacturers and enthusiasts are just apathetic.
The old M2 was based on the old RWD 1 Series. Since the new 1 series uses a FWD platform BMW had to take the M3/M4 platfom. That explains the weight difference compared to the old M2@@EngineeringExplained
The reason the new M2 is so heavy is because its based on the M4 chasis and has nothing to do with the old M2. The M2 is basically a modified 4” shorter M4. Still nice and I prefer it over the ugly M4 but old school small 1400kg M2 rear wheel drive is dead. They should call it something else like M4 Lite 😂
It weighs too much for an oil tanker. For a sports car, it's like they've tried to generate downforce by giving it a gravitational field... (Technically everything has one, but I'm just ruining the joke with nerdery at this point).
Great analysis. I bought an M2 in early '16 and have been watching the evolution of the M2/M24X models. The smaller size and lighter weight of the M2 compared to the M3/4 were primary factors in my selection process. I think there will still be buyers for both.
You really hit the nail on the head with this review. I don't think I've seen/read another analysis that gets at the disappointment with the new M2 so succinctly. Lots of kvetching about the styling and the weight (while generally acknowledging that it's at least less ugly than the M4); but you've really honed in on the fact its a great M4 - but not an M2 anymore.
I walked past the old M2 design in my neighborhood and it made me feel sad when I saw the new one. BMW had grown-up but appealing exterior design for a very long time, and to see them throw it all away in an attempt to appeal to younger buyers that can't afford them anyway is bewildering.
The previous gen m2 was based on the same platform as the second-gen 1 series (f2x series), which was rwd-based. But since BMW decided to go fwd for the current gen 1 series/2 series gran coupe and active tourer (f4x series), the new m2 (and the m240i) had to share the same platform as the g8x series M3/M4 to still be rwd-based. The M2 and M3/M4 share exactly the same drivetrain and suspension components except for body panels and wheelbase. Even the interior is almost exactly the same.
Ive never been to the track but Id imagine the heavy weight will cause bigger fluctuations in tire and brake temps when trying to control them. Also that weird feeling of the stability control masking the extra weight going in and out of corners.
Aftermarket has been in-step making way longer consumables like endless pads, since the factory pads are dust bunnys and melt. It still is setting records as per Jackie Ding's Channel with almost No mods is slaying 600 lbs lighter stuff. So it's heavy but it's still dominating.
@@pacoflyer Yea it's fast no doubt, been following Jackie's stuff too. Just saying that tires like the A052's are gonna get destroyed in a weekend of racing/tracking. That's hardly sustainable for regular fast lapping/racing...but, I guess if you're dropping $65-70k on an M2, running costs may not be that big of a concern 😆 Don't get me wrong I'd love to own one as I really like this M2, but cheaper consumables/aftermarket are what keep me on the 86 platform.
@@mr.m2137These aren't issues as stated. This car is extremely capable regardless of tire and brake temps and fluctuations aren't really a performance issue. Million variables there. The main issue with heavy fast cars on track is that kinetic energy increases exponentially with speed (KE=0.5MxV^2). Converting that to heat energy (braking) is very taxing on tires and brake pads. The concern there is very quick wear out of consumables (maybe 2 weekends on a M2) compared to something like a Miata (once a season).
@@DefinitelyNotEmma the new c63 is hybrid so that accounts for the weight. The w205 c63S is 3900 and the e63S is 4300lbs. The new M2 being as heavy as a 4 door sedan is crazy
It was really interesting for me to go from owning a 2020 BRZ with the 4.3 to a 2023 GR86 with the 4.1. I had no idea how much of an affect that shorter gearing really had. Even with the extra power I still want that 4.3 back. Love your perspective on short gearing.
People have been putting the 4.3 from the last gen in the new gen cars! Might be worth looking into if you miss the shorter gearing, apparently it's a super easy swap since the two gens are basically the same car under the skin (besides engine and some chassis stiffening changes)
Having a manual myself (F87 comp), the ratios were close to that of the DCT7. Being a car that nearly reaches 300 kph it’s inevitable that the gearing is *somewhat* tall. In 6th gear at 280 you’re incredibly close to the redline already.
I think you said it quite well here. There is no more M2 but a twin brother of an M4. I can strongly say this car might have just been a project that is merely a derivative of the M4. Re-use as much as possible without thinking about the character of the M2 or its legacy and what it means.
I had an m235i, RWD with the ZF8. It was super fast, comfortable and sounded great, but even that was just too heavy for me, and I sold it for an older Boxster. I can't even imagine how heavy the new M2 must feel with 400lb more. It's sad to see the "ultimate driving machine" become a brand that sells turbocharged muscle cars.
Well said.... it's no longer an M2. The F87 M2 that we love came out of BMW getting a lot of criticisms that BMW and the M Division forgot about being the Ultimate Driving Machine. So BMW went and answered the critics and the M2 F87 was born. The new G87 M2 seems like the engineers and test drivers had less input and the marketing and current design staff had the final say. Thus a car that you pointed out correctly, is more like an M4 slightly smaller twin brother. Sad to see this happen.
In my eyes, it's still an m2, it's smaller than a m4 ,more compact, and doesn't have that goofy front grill design. Don't care what pepole say, I will take this Over the previous gen all day
I was discussing the BMW weights with someone on another channel. It's insane that m2 and m3 pretty much weigh the same as a model 3 performance with two electric motors etc. You'd think you could get under ev sedan weights on a race inspired coupe but...
Maybe it's all the sound deadening material and hydraulic/electronic mounts and dampers they need to use to isolate the drivetrain from the cabin, something model 3 doesn't need to bother about. In this way, ICE cars are directly competing against EVs.
My suspicions in all this weight debating is that BMW just saw an advantage from both a profit and overall quickness pov. Dont spend money on making the car lighter just leave it heavy and use the new stability control to make use of the added weight for better acceleration. Nevermind the consumables.
At @2:45, one solution to the tall gearing is to swap the differential for a bigger ratio. With some differentials you don't have to replace the entire differential, but you can simply replace the ring & pinion.
I just bought a manual with VERY short gearing - 3k RPM in 6th at 70mph makes me miss my old Porsche gearing, or at least a happy midpoint between the 2. On the "exciting" looks though, well, yes - I will excitedly cover the eyes of any nearby children when I see one so they don't need therapy, it's horrific. Pricing...interesting - here in the UK, a base Cayman is £47k while the M2 is £65k. A Type R is also £47k. A used F82 M4 Comp is
Jason the lag you feel is not really turbo lag. Its torque management in the ECU. Its designed to protect engine internals (connecting rods) allowing them to use thinner and lighter connecting rods in an under square engine design (taller block, longer stroke, longer rods etc). With modern turbo tech and engine management they have the ability to practically eliminate turbo lag but the OEM rods won't hold up if you feed it all the boost and timing at low rpms. Traction and 0-60 times will also suffer. So its torque management you feel, not turbo lag. Great video as always ❤
No its not "protecting" them, this motor can take 750 hp/tq. It's slowing the spool on purpose to get that "rush" feeling. I believe it's engineered to be slow on purpose. It's also tuned that way to make the M4 "Feel" faster.
@@pacoflyer True to some extent, but you not taking OEM design requirements into account. How long will this engine last at 750bhp? OEMs design engine to last for 200k to 300k miles, so I'll stick to my opinion that it's torque management to ensure longevity of the engine.
I wasn't at low RPM (4,000 as stated in video); it was most definitely turbo lag. Additionally, regardless of why it happens, there is about a second or so between WOT and full torque. If the rods couldn't handle full torque, why would they suddenly handle full torque one second later? Turbo lag is a real issue, sure you could use an electric turbo to get rid of it, but this doesn't have this. Engine management isn't going to be sufficient, there's a process that has to happen which takes time. True for basically all modern turbos (with the exception of electric, but even then there is a small delay).
@@EngineeringExplained Thanks Jason, makes sense since I wasn't sure at what rpm you went WOT. In the aftermarket tuners have been able to almost eliminate turbo lag by experimenting with ignition timing, variable valve timing and lift, and turbocharger wastegate control where they force the turbocharger wastegate shut at low rpm reducing exhaust pressure bypassing the wastegate valve and allowing the turbocharger to spool up faster. Along with a decrease in ignition timing and tuning the VVT&L systems aftermarket tuners have been able to spool large turbos up on small capacity engines in contrast with older tuning methods whereby the pressure holding turbo wastegates shut slowly builds up as charge pressure builds. Don't get me wrong, I'm sure BMW engineers know what they're doing, however I also believe BMW still targets a fine balance between reciprocal mass necessary for turbo charging vs rev happiness - the way we all know traditional BMWs were. A final thought, is the example of Honda K-series engines (K24 in particular), and how their factory fitted forged connecting rods can produce 500+ bhp sustained at high engine rpm, provided that boost pressure is ramped in slowly and reaches target at 6,000rpm, however the same connecting rods fail and destroys the engine if the same target pressure is achieved much lower in the engine rpm range, say for instance 3,500rpm. Thanks for your reply. Much appreciated 🙏🏻
Its not turbo lag, it is boost threshold!! Because the parallel twin turbo setup en low compression ratio this is more noticeable. The good about this is the high output at high rpm, it doesn’t get out of breath. Shame that you as a engineer has not invested more time in the details and technical side of the engine instead of making a video for more views.
If you look under the chassis, you'll see a majority of "M4" or "G82" labels on all the parts and even some "G80" labels as well. So, yes this is an M4 which explains the weight figure, and not "de-tuned" either just look at the dyno numbers being put out on TH-cam, they align with the M4 (not comp)
The gearing is based around emissions, the manual is even more expensive in the eu when its a much cheaper box just because the lower mpg it makes it more
I hate current BMW design but I love how this looks. Seeing it in this blue in person changed everything for me. Never drove an M2 but I’m assuming it’s feels different than previous generation cuz it’s an M4 chassis but with a different engine and body paneling basically.
Great video, really useful informed comments. I have an M2 on order. Power: the M2 has more than enough (esp the 2025 version). Looks: I prefer M2 over M4 (personally I love the look of the M2). Size: M2 is now same size as my old E46 3 series which I loved, M4 is bigger than that which I don’t need / want. So the new M2 may not be the same type of car as the previous gen but it is exactly what I want / need - petrol, RWD, all the latest tech, and insanely comfortable for long distance European cruising.
I'd really like to see what Jason thinks of the manual Supra in terms of gearing since it seems to be about about as aggressively geared as the BRZ/GR86. I'm also curious to see how he thinks the shifter compares, and with stuff like rev hang.
the carbon bucket seats are a completely different experience, if you are buying a weekend or track car get the seats, if you are getting a daily driver get the regular seats(unless you can handle the buckets daily) the buckets aren't a gimmick they are really good and make the car way more sporting than the normal seats
Jason, as good as the ZF 8 speed is, there is no way it's near as fast as a DCT. Just not possible, you'd notice driving them back to back and I'd always take a DCT. I do really like this new M2 though!
If you want to be confused about how a car is so heavy go look at the curb weight of the Nissan 350z and then look at all the allumimiminum used and lack of seats etc.
I agree, the ZF 8 speed transmission is better than the 7 speed DCT. With a transmission tune, it will shift just as fast as the DCT and it’s more reliable.
I own this car in the 6MT. And it is amazing. Although it tries to kill me when it is drizzling outside. You just don't really notice the weight on the street just daily driving it
You don’t notice until you drive something 500-1000 lbs lighter. I’m sure it’s a fun car to drive but when you approach the limits and attempt to recover you will feel the weight.
Few points here: The 2016 M2 only really pulled 330hp on the dyno. The 2023 M2 is pulling 460! So to the wheels, its really a 130hp difference. The 2023 M2 beat the 2022 M2 CS Nurburgring lap record by 5 seconds. The 2018 m240i doesn't have the added weight of an S58 engine, adaptive suspension, bigger brakes, tires, braces, and wheels. That adds up to the weight difference pretty quickly.
You need to recheck your assessment of the F87 vs F82. They weigh virtually the same. The s55 was available in both. The relationship between M2 and M4 hasn't changed. They all got heavier with the G chassis. Only real difference is they started with the S58 right off the bat instead of the B58.
100% agree. People tend to forget how heavy F87 comp was . It was over 1650kg with full tank vs G87 1725kg with full tank with carbon roof and buckets around 1710kg ... To heavy? Yes but not that big difference as everyone is saying.
But they didn't weigh the same... 175 lb difference, which is significant. Ride with and without a passenger in your car, and you'll notice the acceleration difference.
@@EngineeringExplained a m2 competition mt is 3600lbs. A m4 mt is 3625. Virtually the same. The OG is lighter, but the m2 wasn’t some featherweight version of the m4. It has always been as heavy with the same engine. The smaller size just makes up for less advanced and cheaper body materials. BMW didn’t make the G87 heavy, they just used the same engine to start.
One thought about the weight increase - the IIHS completely changed their side impact test to reflect the size of larger vehicles on the road today. Maybe it's hard to get a 2 door to pass the new test without adding some extra love handles?
@@tier1detailing Until the average consumer starts caring about weight, it’s unlikely we’ll get a breakdown of where engineers put all the fat. Heck, even the average enthusiast only ever cares about 0-60 and hp/torque figures. The amount of “power negates weight” sentiments in car channels is unbelievable.
You just perfectly summed up what's wrong with the current M2 (or more of the 2 series coupé/convertible in general). It's now based on the CLAR 3/4 series platform and caused it grew so heavy and big, losing the essential points it has since the 1M/previous M2. I know from the company's perspective it's a dilemma since the current 1 series shares the same platform as Mini and going fwd, which makes the current 2 series coupé/convertible couldn't shares the same platform as their predecessors
While I love manual transmission E39 M5 (manual) but the ZF 8 speed is not only a great transmission but it can be used manually, while not as sporty as a manual it’s acceptable.
The long gears in the manual are there for emissions and economy purposes. Also, they want to avoid additional gear shifts in "official" 0-60, 0-100, quarter mile run times so the numbers look better; turbo engines are particularly affected by manual gear shifts, it's not just the 0.5s or so of not delivering power to the wheels but boost also drops and then it needs a bit of time to rebuild.
This may be an unpopular opinion but I really like the new M2. I think the looks are polarizing and I see that as a positive. This car DOES NOT blend in with traffic. The weight is definitely interesting but I have heard many people say it still drives “better” or delivers a more dynamic experience than the M4. I haven’t had a chance to drive either myself so I can’t say anything from experience.
What would be your educated guess on where the extra weight is coming from compared to the previous gen M2 or why it weighs the same as a present gen M4? Update: you pretty much answered it: it’s the same size as the M4 :)
Speaking of interesting transmissions, I would love to see a review of a 2015 era Acura TLX V6 with the 9 speed auto (nearly 300hp). It has a very interesting shifting dynamic with the first 4 gears transitioning to a dog leg 5-6-7-8-9. The Sport + setting provides a unique experience. If you're ever in Oregon you have one to drive from me. Keep the great videos coming!
Great video! From what I understand the M2 and M4 are both based on the same platform chassis wise. Although the car is in total sliglthy smaller which means less material so should also mean less weight the M2 is a cheaper car like u said. This means that there is less budget for facy aluminium alloys and other lighteweight materials and constructions though it gains the weight loss in less material back through less lightweight components. Like u said the best way to see it is probably like the cheaper m4!
You the right person to ask because there is always some (more) power loss due to the torque converter vs DCT and MT, but I wonder how much do all 3 transmissions actually lose, or does it vary from each AT/DCT/MT?
My f80 m3cs weighs 3490lbs … crazy how heavy the m2/m4 are in comparison. As for the DCT … IMO the aggressive, herky jerky nature of it is what makes it engaging as opposed to the ZF. (CS/GTS had unique DCT tunes so that could be why)
I love the point that's it's basically a $15K cheaper M4. I actually really like the exterior design - very muscular and blocky - kinda like the car version of the Hulk lol.
BMW seemed to affected more than others. That is to say, the priority of profitability has proportionally risen to the top. Even the performance Sub brand is getting affected. Result: impressive on paper, objectively great, competent and lacking excitement.
Would like to see this comparison for the new AMG GT since the new one seems to be a comfy luxury vehicle for S class buyers rather than the Nurburgring scalpel the Gen 1 was
"Is this engine exciting? Yes!" ... "There's over a second of turbo lag unless you're already on the gas." Yeah, okay bro. The turbo lag in my Audi drove me OUT OF MY MIND. I hated it. I guess that's a KIND of exciting...
No matter what you think we all know this car is going to be exciting when the warranty runs out and you get your first repair bill. Might make your heart stop.
To take the M2 vs M4 debate further, it would be interesting to know if there are other differences for the engine as well, or is it merely a different state of tune?
"We are living in a see of boring cars today".....and this is the answer? seriously? Modern cars are just making my E30 325i increase more and more in value honestly.
It's pretty obvious to me the gearing is set up for the Ring and the Autobahn. I've driven "near ludicrous speed" in a 530d 2017ish vintage, and a late model Z4 M40i (rentals) on the A6. Total blast, but you can guess which car was more fun.
I like the new 2 Series styling, even the rear. I prefer it over the previous gen, even. Maybe just because it’s a new, fresh look. Anyway, I’d like to see a video on the 2Series, non-m2. For many of us, there’s enough power in the lower models.
To be fair, the previous generation M2 was the same weight as the M4. The weight savings of being physically smaller are offset by the cost savings items vs an m4 (cast wheels vs forged, lead battery instead of Li-on, sunroof standard instead of carbon roof). There are about 150 lbs of low hanging fruit to take off if you want. I've been very happy with my G87 with the understanding that they had to make compromises to come out with a new M car that I can actually afford.
Previous gen M2/M4 definitely weren't the same weight. For example, US media site lists a 175 lbs difference for 2018 model year. Could be greater, depending on the trims compared.
Car and Driver has: 2016/2017/2018 M2 as 80lbs lighter than the 2016/2017/2018 M4 80 lbs lighter is marginal IMO, the 2023 M2 is 16lbs lighter than the 2023 M4 which is only slightly more of a marginal distinction. The 175 lbs difference seems to be between the m4 and the m2 comp in 2019 which isn't exactly a fair comparison. @@EngineeringExplained
1733kg? That's a grand tourer. And awesome I bet. But an M-type small sedan/coupe? Craaaazy. By comparison, my NC MX5 weighs 1100kg and is mind bogglingly sharp with moderately sprung coil-over suspension added. And I just drove it from Brisbane to Sydney in two days then back in one day. Air con, cruise control, air vents for every occasion. Wore noise cancelling headphones most of the way with open top time interspersed and it was super comfortable. 7L/100km. In the 4 years I've owned mine it's appreciated in value. The BMW would have depreciated 40 percent.
**Note!** The weight for the previous generation (2016) BMW M2 was pulled from the global media site, which lists it at 1,495 kg (~3,300 lbs, as stated in the video). However, the US media site lists it at 3,450 lbs, and initial weighings from Car and Driver / Motor Trend put it at 3,415 lbs / 3,411 lbs respectively. All of this is to say, despite conflicting info across media sites, is that the likely weight difference is closer to 400 lbs than 500 lbs, as stated in the video. Regardless, a hefty weight bump for the latest generation.
I read some news that the 2024 refresh of the BAC Mono gets an improved engine that sets an incredible new record for BMEP / torque density for naturally aspirated engines with conventional cylinders (road car), beating the engines of Valkyrie, T50, former record holder 458 italia, etc. How is that possible with what appears to be based on a Ford engine? If you can get your hands on the new 2024 version next year maybe you can put it on a dyno.
It's a fat little one, that M2.
At least it doesn't have such an ugly front end of the M4.
It’s not fair to compare it to the non comp version
@@bradenmchenry995 The comp will be even heavier, most likely.
@@ARentz07this is the comp version it uses the real M engine. There is a cs version coming
Every time I watch a video on the new M2, I slowly get used to the looks until they inevitably show a picture of the last gen and it all comes crashing down
Same bro 😭
I mean, it doesn't look bad, but it's nothing compared to its predecessor…
I look at the F87 M2 and think, "too soft and rounded" 🤷♂
@@kayronmercieca8226Fair, but it is cohesive and not a Picasso where all angles are off. The car looks like it has Strabismus Syndrome, especially in the back.
I saw a couple on the road in this exact blue and I was like damnnn that actually looks good. Personal opinion, don’t hate on me.
@@LordStaindI wouldn't do that, my experience differs. I didn't see one on the road and went to my dealer. The car looked so bland, granted in white, that I asked whether they have one in the showroom while standing right next to it. I just looked past it like I do with Golfs and Toyotas. For me, it looked even more dull and boring in the flesh.
Safety and regulations have been used as the scapegoats for weight increases and enthusiasts have just gone along with it. Despite the fact Mazda gave it all a middle finger with the ND. Saving weight can be done, manufacturers and enthusiasts are just apathetic.
Ha, yes exactly! I have a video in my backlog awaiting release where I dive into this!
The old M2 was based on the old RWD 1 Series. Since the new 1 series uses a FWD platform BMW had to take the M3/M4 platfom. That explains the weight difference compared to the old M2@@EngineeringExplained
Exactly, the Cayman example shows this as well.
@@lucascla the 2016 M2 was based on the 2 series that came out in 2014.
You're feeding Jason with fanatic reasons his Miata is the best modern sportscar money can buy today, hahah
The reason the new M2 is so heavy is because its based on the M4 chasis and has nothing to do with the old M2. The M2 is basically a modified 4” shorter M4. Still nice and I prefer it over the ugly M4 but old school small 1400kg M2 rear wheel drive is dead. They should call it something else like M4 Lite 😂
They should call it an M4 minus then.
ah yes the M3.5
The M2'snt
Homeslice did not finish the video
M2x2
Everybody asks what happened to the M2 but not how is the M2
Fat. It‘s fat.
@@alpenjodel24phat*
It's the friends the M2 made along the way? Idk.
It's blue
It’s 6 feet under
Its main problem is that it weighs far too much for a sports car.
It weighs too much for an oil tanker. For a sports car, it's like they've tried to generate downforce by giving it a gravitational field...
(Technically everything has one, but I'm just ruining the joke with nerdery at this point).
Great analysis. I bought an M2 in early '16 and have been watching the evolution of the M2/M24X models. The smaller size and lighter weight of the M2 compared to the M3/4 were primary factors in my selection process. I think there will still be buyers for both.
New M2 is great news for people who want an M4 but want to spend less. Bad news for people that want an M2. Weird conundrum
You really hit the nail on the head with this review. I don't think I've seen/read another analysis that gets at the disappointment with the new M2 so succinctly. Lots of kvetching about the styling and the weight (while generally acknowledging that it's at least less ugly than the M4); but you've really honed in on the fact its a great M4 - but not an M2 anymore.
I walked past the old M2 design in my neighborhood and it made me feel sad when I saw the new one. BMW had grown-up but appealing exterior design for a very long time, and to see them throw it all away in an attempt to appeal to younger buyers that can't afford them anyway is bewildering.
Manufacturers for the most part are styling cars simply to stand out, not to look 'classicaly' good. It is baffling but it is what it is.
The new world of internet shock and awe has changed the landscape for the worse on many fronts..
New cars are selling well, I think they made good decision regarding styling.
@@currycel470that's not a good sign. Just shows taste and style are being lost in the quest to be "different "
@@Decrepit_biker exactly, it’s actually symptoms of a demoralized degraded society..
The previous gen m2 was based on the same platform as the second-gen 1 series (f2x series), which was rwd-based. But since BMW decided to go fwd for the current gen 1 series/2 series gran coupe and active tourer (f4x series), the new m2 (and the m240i) had to share the same platform as the g8x series M3/M4 to still be rwd-based. The M2 and M3/M4 share exactly the same drivetrain and suspension components except for body panels and wheelbase. Even the interior is almost exactly the same.
FWD, yet another reason BMW is going to shite
I can't get over how heavy this M2 is, consumables for the track people are/will be awful 😢
Ive never been to the track but Id imagine the heavy weight will cause bigger fluctuations in tire and brake temps when trying to control them. Also that weird feeling of the stability control masking the extra weight going in and out of corners.
Aftermarket has been in-step making way longer consumables like endless pads, since the factory pads are dust bunnys and melt. It still is setting records as per Jackie Ding's Channel with almost No mods is slaying 600 lbs lighter stuff. So it's heavy but it's still dominating.
@@pacoflyer Yea it's fast no doubt, been following Jackie's stuff too. Just saying that tires like the A052's are gonna get destroyed in a weekend of racing/tracking. That's hardly sustainable for regular fast lapping/racing...but, I guess if you're dropping $65-70k on an M2, running costs may not be that big of a concern 😆 Don't get me wrong I'd love to own one as I really like this M2, but cheaper consumables/aftermarket are what keep me on the 86 platform.
@@mr.m2137These aren't issues as stated. This car is extremely capable regardless of tire and brake temps and fluctuations aren't really a performance issue. Million variables there.
The main issue with heavy fast cars on track is that kinetic energy increases exponentially with speed (KE=0.5MxV^2). Converting that to heat energy (braking) is very taxing on tires and brake pads. The concern there is very quick wear out of consumables (maybe 2 weekends on a M2) compared to something like a Miata (once a season).
When a M2 is as heavy as a W205 C63S sedan with a v8TT, maybe you’ve gone too heavy.
All cars get heavier though. The new C63 (with a 4-Cylinder) weighs as much as an E-Class.
@@DefinitelyNotEmma the new c63 is hybrid so that accounts for the weight. The w205 c63S is 3900 and the e63S is 4300lbs. The new M2 being as heavy as a 4 door sedan is crazy
Drive one and you will learn the error of your comment.
@@jamesonmiller5799 would handle better at 3500lbs.
@@7mpowerd Of course it would….but it already handles better than any other compact car as is - it just broke the Nurburgring record.
It was really interesting for me to go from owning a 2020 BRZ with the 4.3 to a 2023 GR86 with the 4.1. I had no idea how much of an affect that shorter gearing really had. Even with the extra power I still want that 4.3 back. Love your perspective on short gearing.
People have been putting the 4.3 from the last gen in the new gen cars! Might be worth looking into if you miss the shorter gearing, apparently it's a super easy swap since the two gens are basically the same car under the skin (besides engine and some chassis stiffening changes)
I agree, weight is a pain in actual cars. Great video!
The explanation I heard for the weight is that the M2 used to be based on the 1 series platform and that it now shares underpinnings with the M4.
Having a manual myself (F87 comp), the ratios were close to that of the DCT7. Being a car that nearly reaches 300 kph it’s inevitable that the gearing is *somewhat* tall. In 6th gear at 280 you’re incredibly close to the redline already.
I think you said it quite well here. There is no more M2 but a twin brother of an M4. I can strongly say this car might have just been a project that is merely a derivative of the M4. Re-use as much as possible without thinking about the character of the M2 or its legacy and what it means.
I had an m235i, RWD with the ZF8. It was super fast, comfortable and sounded great, but even that was just too heavy for me, and I sold it for an older Boxster. I can't even imagine how heavy the new M2 must feel with 400lb more. It's sad to see the "ultimate driving machine" become a brand that sells turbocharged muscle cars.
I was actually considering the M2, but your points are all valid, as usual. I really can't believe the weight comparison. Crazy.
Well said.... it's no longer an M2. The F87 M2 that we love came out of BMW getting a lot of criticisms that BMW and the M Division forgot about being the Ultimate Driving Machine. So BMW went and answered the critics and the M2 F87 was born. The new G87 M2 seems like the engineers and test drivers had less input and the marketing and current design staff had the final say. Thus a car that you pointed out correctly, is more like an M4 slightly smaller twin brother. Sad to see this happen.
In my eyes, it's still an m2, it's smaller than a m4 ,more compact, and doesn't have that goofy front grill design. Don't care what pepole say, I will take this Over the previous gen all day
I wasn’t aware anything had happened to the M2
I am now aware that things happened to the M2
You weren't aware that it got ugly af?
I have never been a BMW fan, but will watch your video, since you know what you are talking about. Thank you Jason.
I was discussing the BMW weights with someone on another channel. It's insane that m2 and m3 pretty much weigh the same as a model 3 performance with two electric motors etc. You'd think you could get under ev sedan weights on a race inspired coupe but...
Maybe it's all the sound deadening material and hydraulic/electronic mounts and dampers they need to use to isolate the drivetrain from the cabin, something model 3 doesn't need to bother about. In this way, ICE cars are directly competing against EVs.
@@mofayer Why would you need so much sound isolation in a sports coupe though?
@@Spike00773 ask BMW, they've been hell bent on isolating all drivetrain and chassis feel for the last 2 Gen of their M cars.
My suspicions in all this weight debating is that BMW just saw an advantage from both a profit and overall quickness pov. Dont spend money on making the car lighter just leave it heavy and use the new stability control to make use of the added weight for better acceleration. Nevermind the consumables.
I won't say it's ugly but I'll say that hunchback of Notre Dame shouldn't feel bad anymore.
Bro that was rough 💀
It's not that it's ugly, but my town has a curfew on BMW drivers - they're not allowed out before 10pm to avoid forcing kids into therapy.
At @2:45, one solution to the tall gearing is to swap the differential for a bigger ratio. With some differentials you don't have to replace the entire differential, but you can simply replace the ring & pinion.
I just bought a manual with VERY short gearing - 3k RPM in 6th at 70mph makes me miss my old Porsche gearing, or at least a happy midpoint between the 2.
On the "exciting" looks though, well, yes - I will excitedly cover the eyes of any nearby children when I see one so they don't need therapy, it's horrific.
Pricing...interesting - here in the UK, a base Cayman is £47k while the M2 is £65k. A Type R is also £47k. A used F82 M4 Comp is
Honestly id be happy with an m240i, maybe with those carbon seats and a bit of a tickle tuning wise
Sportscars owners in 2035 be like "look at my agile 13.600lbs f*cking racetruck"
Jason the lag you feel is not really turbo lag. Its torque management in the ECU. Its designed to protect engine internals (connecting rods) allowing them to use thinner and lighter connecting rods in an under square engine design (taller block, longer stroke, longer rods etc). With modern turbo tech and engine management they have the ability to practically eliminate turbo lag but the OEM rods won't hold up if you feed it all the boost and timing at low rpms. Traction and 0-60 times will also suffer. So its torque management you feel, not turbo lag. Great video as always ❤
No its not "protecting" them, this motor can take 750 hp/tq. It's slowing the spool on purpose to get that "rush" feeling. I believe it's engineered to be slow on purpose. It's also tuned that way to make the M4 "Feel" faster.
@@pacoflyer True to some extent, but you not taking OEM design requirements into account. How long will this engine last at 750bhp? OEMs design engine to last for 200k to 300k miles, so I'll stick to my opinion that it's torque management to ensure longevity of the engine.
I wasn't at low RPM (4,000 as stated in video); it was most definitely turbo lag. Additionally, regardless of why it happens, there is about a second or so between WOT and full torque. If the rods couldn't handle full torque, why would they suddenly handle full torque one second later? Turbo lag is a real issue, sure you could use an electric turbo to get rid of it, but this doesn't have this. Engine management isn't going to be sufficient, there's a process that has to happen which takes time. True for basically all modern turbos (with the exception of electric, but even then there is a small delay).
@@EngineeringExplained Thanks Jason, makes sense since I wasn't sure at what rpm you went WOT. In the aftermarket tuners have been able to almost eliminate turbo lag by experimenting with ignition timing, variable valve timing and lift, and turbocharger wastegate control where they force the turbocharger wastegate shut at low rpm reducing exhaust pressure bypassing the wastegate valve and allowing the turbocharger to spool up faster. Along with a decrease in ignition timing and tuning the VVT&L systems aftermarket tuners have been able to spool large turbos up on small capacity engines in contrast with older tuning methods whereby the pressure holding turbo wastegates shut slowly builds up as charge pressure builds. Don't get me wrong, I'm sure BMW engineers know what they're doing, however I also believe BMW still targets a fine balance between reciprocal mass necessary for turbo charging vs rev happiness - the way we all know traditional BMWs were. A final thought, is the example of Honda K-series engines (K24 in particular), and how their factory fitted forged connecting rods can produce 500+ bhp sustained at high engine rpm, provided that boost pressure is ramped in slowly and reaches target at 6,000rpm, however the same connecting rods fail and destroys the engine if the same target pressure is achieved much lower in the engine rpm range, say for instance 3,500rpm. Thanks for your reply. Much appreciated 🙏🏻
Its not turbo lag, it is boost threshold!!
Because the parallel twin turbo setup en low compression ratio this is more noticeable.
The good about this is the high output at high rpm, it doesn’t get out of breath.
Shame that you as a engineer has not invested more time in the details and technical side of the engine instead of making a video for more views.
The last M2 looked so good, and now we got this...
Looks fine in person, always thought the previous M2 was too aggressive for the size
@@Rookiereecesir, you should have gone to specsavers.
The funny thing is that the M240i looks better
Virtually all of BMW's last gen cars looked better than their current updates. I think we've hit peak BWM design and it goes downhill from there.
@@richardnavratil9661 I think you have the inability to move on
If you look under the chassis, you'll see a majority of "M4" or "G82" labels on all the parts and even some "G80" labels as well. So, yes this is an M4 which explains the weight figure, and not "de-tuned" either just look at the dyno numbers being put out on TH-cam, they align with the M4 (not comp)
Of course it’s detuned. Just take a look at the acceleration numbers (for example Carwow) and it’ll become clear. Easy to manipulate a dyno.
4.4 inch wheelbase difference is actually alot compared to the g82. New M2 should be 200 lbs lighter from this alone imo, but BMW found a way.
The gearing is based around emissions, the manual is even more expensive in the eu when its a much cheaper box just because the lower mpg it makes it more
Little diff change, and you get what you want.
Excellent review! I wish more car reviews were straight to the point like you. More please!
When you compare it to the M4 vs the last gen M2, it makes a whole lot more sense. Nice video.
I hate current BMW design but I love how this looks. Seeing it in this blue in person changed everything for me. Never drove an M2 but I’m assuming it’s feels different than previous generation cuz it’s an M4 chassis but with a different engine and body paneling basically.
The wizards at ZF have absolutely knocked it out of the park with their 8-speed auto. It’s amazing
I wish I could say the same about my zf8...
@@TallnerdyguySame boat haha, mine blew up in a F chassis BMW
It's also technically not an auto, it's electronic
@@Tallnerdyguy does it change gears automatically?
@@Tallnerdyguybrother it has a torque converter and is most definitely an automatic
Great video, really useful informed comments. I have an M2 on order. Power: the M2 has more than enough (esp the 2025 version). Looks: I prefer M2 over M4 (personally I love the look of the M2). Size: M2 is now same size as my old E46 3 series which I loved, M4 is bigger than that which I don’t need / want. So the new M2 may not be the same type of car as the previous gen but it is exactly what I want / need - petrol, RWD, all the latest tech, and insanely comfortable for long distance European cruising.
I'd really like to see what Jason thinks of the manual Supra in terms of gearing since it seems to be about about as aggressively geared as the BRZ/GR86. I'm also curious to see how he thinks the shifter compares, and with stuff like rev hang.
Anyone else think that big vertical bar in the middle of the grill makes it look like an old Pontiac Grand Am?
It'd be cool to learn more about how they can achieve the same/better braking and lateral g's at a much heavier weight
the carbon bucket seats are a completely different experience, if you are buying a weekend or track car get the seats, if you are getting a daily driver get the regular seats(unless you can handle the buckets daily) the buckets aren't a gimmick they are really good and make the car way more sporting than the normal seats
Jason, as good as the ZF 8 speed is, there is no way it's near as fast as a DCT. Just not possible, you'd notice driving them back to back and I'd always take a DCT. I do really like this new M2 though!
If you want to be confused about how a car is so heavy go look at the curb weight of the Nissan 350z and then look at all the allumimiminum used and lack of seats etc.
Problem is, that it‘s not really an M2 anymore but rather a shortened M3/M4.
Yep, discussed in video, it's a strange positioning to me.
Uhhh isn't that what the last one was
Jason, this makes the M2 more twitchy and unpredictable and that's.....a good thing??😅 @@EngineeringExplained
Weight, that is the reason I just bought an 2021 M2 Comp (wish I could the CS) and not the new M2. "It's not an M2 any more", you nailed it!
I agree, the ZF 8 speed transmission is better than the 7 speed DCT. With a transmission tune, it will shift just as fast as the DCT and it’s more reliable.
Changing the rear end gearing will help with the tall transmission gearing in the manual
I own this car in the 6MT. And it is amazing. Although it tries to kill me when it is drizzling outside. You just don't really notice the weight on the street just daily driving it
You don’t notice until you drive something 500-1000 lbs lighter. I’m sure it’s a fun car to drive but when you approach the limits and attempt to recover you will feel the weight.
Few points here:
The 2016 M2 only really pulled 330hp on the dyno. The 2023 M2 is pulling 460! So to the wheels, its really a 130hp difference. The 2023 M2 beat the 2022 M2 CS Nurburgring lap record by 5 seconds.
The 2018 m240i doesn't have the added weight of an S58 engine, adaptive suspension, bigger brakes, tires, braces, and wheels. That adds up to the weight difference pretty quickly.
You need to recheck your assessment of the F87 vs F82. They weigh virtually the same. The s55 was available in both. The relationship between M2 and M4 hasn't changed. They all got heavier with the G chassis. Only real difference is they started with the S58 right off the bat instead of the B58.
100% agree. People tend to forget how heavy F87 comp was . It was over 1650kg with full tank vs G87 1725kg with full tank with carbon roof and buckets around 1710kg ... To heavy? Yes but not that big difference as everyone is saying.
But they didn't weigh the same... 175 lb difference, which is significant. Ride with and without a passenger in your car, and you'll notice the acceleration difference.
@@EngineeringExplained a m2 competition mt is 3600lbs. A m4 mt is 3625. Virtually the same. The OG is lighter, but the m2 wasn’t some featherweight version of the m4. It has always been as heavy with the same engine. The smaller size just makes up for less advanced and cheaper body materials. BMW didn’t make the G87 heavy, they just used the same engine to start.
I have EU catalog for 2020 M2 Competition. It states 1650kg with 75kg driver, fuel tank filled in 90% and with automatic transmission.
One thought about the weight increase - the IIHS completely changed their side impact test to reflect the size of larger vehicles on the road today. Maybe it's hard to get a 2 door to pass the new test without adding some extra love handles?
Good point, but 500-600 lb. love handles? At some point, it’s an M4 with the M2 trim package and not an M2 anymore.
@@chriskelvin248 completely understand. wish they'd just be more transparent
@@tier1detailing Until the average consumer starts caring about weight, it’s unlikely we’ll get a breakdown of where engineers put all the fat. Heck, even the average enthusiast only ever cares about 0-60 and hp/torque figures. The amount of “power negates weight” sentiments in car channels is unbelievable.
@@chriskelvin248I'm sure there are some differences ,it's not the same I'm all aspects
You just perfectly summed up what's wrong with the current M2 (or more of the 2 series coupé/convertible in general). It's now based on the CLAR 3/4 series platform and caused it grew so heavy and big, losing the essential points it has since the 1M/previous M2.
I know from the company's perspective it's a dilemma since the current 1 series shares the same platform as Mini and going fwd, which makes the current 2 series coupé/convertible couldn't shares the same platform as their predecessors
They axed the 1 series, and did the same to the 2 series in the process, it seems
While I love manual transmission E39 M5 (manual) but the ZF 8 speed is not only a great transmission but it can be used manually, while not as sporty as a manual it’s acceptable.
The long gears in the manual are there for emissions and economy purposes. Also, they want to avoid additional gear shifts in "official" 0-60, 0-100, quarter mile run times so the numbers look better; turbo engines are particularly affected by manual gear shifts, it's not just the 0.5s or so of not delivering power to the wheels but boost also drops and then it needs a bit of time to rebuild.
You don't want to drive too close behind one of these, due to the parts falling right off. It could be hazardous to your tires....
This may be an unpopular opinion but I really like the new M2. I think the looks are polarizing and I see that as a positive. This car DOES NOT blend in with traffic. The weight is definitely interesting but I have heard many people say it still drives “better” or delivers a more dynamic experience than the M4. I haven’t had a chance to drive either myself so I can’t say anything from experience.
What would be your educated guess on where the extra weight is coming from compared to the previous gen M2 or why it weighs the same as a present gen M4?
Update: you pretty much answered it: it’s the same size as the M4 :)
Speaking of interesting transmissions, I would love to see a review of a 2015 era Acura TLX V6 with the 9 speed auto (nearly 300hp). It has a very interesting shifting dynamic with the first 4 gears transitioning to a dog leg 5-6-7-8-9. The Sport + setting provides a unique experience. If you're ever in Oregon you have one to drive from me. Keep the great videos coming!
Great video! From what I understand the M2 and M4 are both based on the same platform chassis wise. Although the car is in total sliglthy smaller which means less material so should also mean less weight the M2 is a cheaper car like u said. This means that there is less budget for facy aluminium alloys and other lighteweight materials and constructions though it gains the weight loss in less material back through less lightweight components. Like u said the best way to see it is probably like the cheaper m4!
You the right person to ask because there is always some (more) power loss due to the torque converter vs DCT and MT, but I wonder how much do all 3 transmissions actually lose, or does it vary from each AT/DCT/MT?
My f80 m3cs weighs 3490lbs … crazy how heavy the m2/m4 are in comparison.
As for the DCT … IMO the aggressive, herky jerky nature of it is what makes it engaging as opposed to the ZF. (CS/GTS had unique DCT tunes so that could be why)
I love the point that's it's basically a $15K cheaper M4. I actually really like the exterior design - very muscular and blocky - kinda like the car version of the Hulk lol.
BMW seemed to affected more than others. That is to say, the priority of profitability has proportionally risen to the top. Even the performance Sub brand is getting affected. Result: impressive on paper, objectively great, competent and lacking excitement.
Blud… he literally showed in the video how m cars are cheaper
@@blocksource4192no he didn't...
@@En_Joshi-Godrez he literally said that… and even if he didnt, just search up an e46 m3 price adjusted for inflation and then compare it to g80 m3.
And you just finished on the points which helped me decide on an M340xi.
I've lost all hope in people that think it looks good
Inline sixes are just heavenly! Good for BMW. Cheers from the Pacific West coast of Canada.
Would like to see this comparison for the new AMG GT since the new one seems to be a comfy luxury vehicle for S class buyers rather than the Nurburgring scalpel the Gen 1 was
What new one? The SL is not the GT
There is a brand new AMG GT (2024 model year) @@papa_pt
"Is this engine exciting? Yes!" ... "There's over a second of turbo lag unless you're already on the gas." Yeah, okay bro. The turbo lag in my Audi drove me OUT OF MY MIND. I hated it. I guess that's a KIND of exciting...
They made it super ugly. Thats what they did.
For real! The moment I see anyone driving one of these I will question their sanity.
As an owner of the Hyundai I30 N 2020 Manual, I can say it is a fantastic car!
Automatic is always a dealbreaker for me.
You can thank noise regulations for the gearing. Hopefully someone offers a different ratio final drive to bring out the beast
No matter what you think we all know this car is going to be exciting when the warranty runs out and you get your first repair bill. Might make your heart stop.
Sadly they're discontinuing the Z4 while M2 being heavy. Option for light weight car is extremely low from BMW until you go down Mini Cooper.
Nah, pass…
To take the M2 vs M4 debate further, it would be interesting to know if there are other differences for the engine as well, or is it merely a different state of tune?
It looks horrible. The look of a car is the first thing you see, and this is ugly, just ugly. Where the old designers
Do you prefer the 80s E30 M3?
That gauge cluster is HORRENDOUS! So hard to interpret what is going on.
Brilliant as always, it's great having you out there. 👍
Great comparison video to the prev gen M2 and new M4! Tx
Incredible reviews, man! Having watched your newest review of the type S, which would you recommend as a daily driver?
I can relate to the M2 generations.. I too was once lighter and more agile.. as I aged I got bigger and heavier
"We are living in a see of boring cars today".....and this is the answer? seriously? Modern cars are just making my E30 325i increase more and more in value honestly.
I really enjoyed the side-by-side paint comparison
IMHO, the exterior design resembles a Scion TC. (Mostly the side profile)
It's pretty obvious to me the gearing is set up for the Ring and the Autobahn. I've driven "near ludicrous speed" in a 530d 2017ish vintage, and a late model Z4 M40i (rentals) on the A6. Total blast, but you can guess which car was more fun.
Thank you Jason for calling it for what it is!
This is just a SWB M4 running on a stupidly heavy i4 chassis.
Wonderful insight, as opposed to the other M2 reviews
I like the new 2 Series styling, even the rear. I prefer it over the previous gen, even. Maybe just because it’s a new, fresh look.
Anyway, I’d like to see a video on the 2Series, non-m2. For many of us, there’s enough power in the lower models.
Hey Jason, another insightful and well thought out analysis. But I was almost lost with no ‘white board’! Beautiful car, love the blue.
This was an exceptional review. Keep them coming!
Excellent review! Look forward to more of your videos.
To be fair, the previous generation M2 was the same weight as the M4. The weight savings of being physically smaller are offset by the cost savings items vs an m4 (cast wheels vs forged, lead battery instead of Li-on, sunroof standard instead of carbon roof). There are about 150 lbs of low hanging fruit to take off if you want. I've been very happy with my G87 with the understanding that they had to make compromises to come out with a new M car that I can actually afford.
Previous gen M2/M4 definitely weren't the same weight. For example, US media site lists a 175 lbs difference for 2018 model year. Could be greater, depending on the trims compared.
Car and Driver has:
2016/2017/2018 M2 as 80lbs lighter than the 2016/2017/2018 M4
80 lbs lighter is marginal IMO, the 2023 M2 is 16lbs lighter than the 2023 M4 which is only slightly more of a marginal distinction.
The 175 lbs difference seems to be between the m4 and the m2 comp in 2019 which isn't exactly a fair comparison.
@@EngineeringExplained
Available in manual, all I needed to hear.
Great video! Loved the format and insights
@6:36 Side by Side color comparison just has a tag, but no visual
Glad someone else noticed!! 🤣
Did you do a video in the past about the Mustang where the gearing was tailored more to fuel economy numbers and hence the acceleration was worse?
1733kg? That's a grand tourer. And awesome I bet. But an M-type small sedan/coupe? Craaaazy.
By comparison, my NC MX5 weighs 1100kg and is mind bogglingly sharp with moderately sprung coil-over suspension added. And I just drove it from Brisbane to Sydney in two days then back in one day. Air con, cruise control, air vents for every occasion. Wore noise cancelling headphones most of the way with open top time interspersed and it was super comfortable. 7L/100km.
In the 4 years I've owned mine it's appreciated in value. The BMW would have depreciated 40 percent.