**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.
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.
Why do BMWs have such a bad reputation for reliability and cost of repair? It seems like they’re really well engineered but the reputation is that these are lease-only cars.
I wouldn't say weight makes all aspects of a car worse. Yes it hurts acceleration, braking, and handling but the increased weight is not just 90hp. Its more room inside, its more tech inside, its more chassis bracing and beefier diff, axles, and suspension. It's wider tires, longer wheel base, and bigger brakes. The new M2 is reportedly excellent across multiple laps on track. Where the old one would have smoking brakes and overheated oil the G87 carries on, all this takes more weight to make happen at these power levels. I would prefer if the new M2 were lighter, but I think just comparing old power to weight to new is missing a bunch.
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).
@@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
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.
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).
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.
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
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.
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.
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 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 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.
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)
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.
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.
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.
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!
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
Great video! I was in tune when you were talking about the m2 & m4 are the same car (essentially). Same engine, same weight 🙃 and the wheelbase is 4 inches shorter and if you want longer then pay up $15,000. It doesn’t make sense A 3800 POUND M car in general doesn’t make sense A 3800 lb M2 really doesn’t make sense Your questioning why it’s so heavy is something bmw needs to explain, it’s a M ! Carbon fiber exists, hollow metal,suspension make every ounce be meaningfully earned BMWs especially M cars should not be heavy, what happened to the engineering ideas 💡, what standards are they based on as minimum standards? A Chevy SS with a longer wheelbase and a LS3 weighs 3800 lbs , I have one and know it’s fast and the 6 speed manual is the only reason I have a 4door car (always wanted the 2003-4 m5) You need minimum of 450 hp for a car that weighs 3800 lbs to be fun But it’s not enough and you can lose still, and a super charger making it 650 hp is a better ratio for 3800 lbs The 1 second turbo lag? What the heck bmw M engineers? The E30 1989 325is weighed 2800 lbs, they knew in 1989 that weight matters
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 :)
BMW is a fantastic car company. Also, they have lost their way, making the “new”, “lightweight”, “junior” M3 weigh 3,800 pounds. Back to the drawing board. It’s supposed to be compact, lightweight, a high performance baby M. It’s only 2 Wheel Drive! This car is a formulaic failure.
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.
As a lifelong Bimmer fan, I'm really disappointed in the current gen of BMWs. I had a 230i and I loved the F22 generation, but the current series have really lost the plot. The M2 and M4 are virtually the same car, in two different flavors of ugly: plastic Lego rectangle ugly, or giant cobra fang grille ugly. It's disheartening that a brand once renowned for their lightweight, snappy coupes is now apparently competing with Tesla to see who can make the heavier car. Think about this: BMW does not offer one single vehicle in their entire lineup under 3500 lbs. The lightest M2 configuration weighs 300 lbs more than a 4-door 330i. My inner Colin Chapman is so sad.
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.
@@enjoshi-godrez8775 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.
Another way to think of the weight, the M2 weighs 9 lbs more than an E34 540i touring. Yes it's ugly but BMW has built a lot of ugly cars lately. On the positive side BMW does keep finding new and different ways to do ugly.
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 good: the M2 is practically a more affordable M4. The bad: the M2 isn’t an M2 anymore. Honestly I the the RWD M240i is the better option. Weighs a bit less, save a lot of money and has very high level of performance.
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.
Do they make cars out of pure lead these days? How can they be this heavy? I get why EV's are heavy but I remember cars over 1400kg being a rare thing, now there are no cars left @ around 1100kg. How can that be good for our health with all the extra pollution that comes along with 3 ton cars everywhere?
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.
We are living in an era that BMW now copies Hyundai. And let's stop making excuses, BMW objectively screwed the design, especially on this 2 series coupes, and I am a person who praises Chris Bangle's designs.
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!
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 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
You missed an important aspect about the price. While adjusted for inflation it might be cheaper, wages did not rise according to the inflation of the recent years. For most people under 50 cars like this are completely unobtainable. And it is heavy. PS Miata is always the answer.
The M3 usted to be smaller, lighter more nimble brother of the M5. Still don't understand why cars keep getting bigger of there is already a bigger option. Old M3 --> M5
"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 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.
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.
Too bad wages haven't gone up to match inflation. So even if it's the same price when adjusted it still costs for to the average person. I guess average people probably aren't spending 60k on a new car but maybe I'm wrong.
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.
I have a 2019 M2 Comp. and I’m looking to purchase but I don’t like the lazy design of this car. Taking a M340i for a drive next week and I’m hoping it will be nearly as fun as my M2 and if so I will buy.
The Cayman is a purpose built performance machine. Pretty much every M car is a rental car with performance parts. Basically Germany's Ford mustang. Hence the difference in price.
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.
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)
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.
Isn’t this basically the same platform as any other new Bmw from this 2-series up to 7-series? So it’s heavy. It’s shorter but most things are basically the same. And the pure EV versions are even more heavy because of the one size fits all strategy they have chosen. I guess it’s the only way to remain profitable in this EV craze we are faced with. Manufacturers cut down platforms and squeeze everything into the same mold. Difference now is only marketing and the number of doors the cars have. And soon cars are gone when SUV’s really take over. Glad that Bmw is still making sedans and wagons. 👍
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
It must be exhausting for the fan boys on Bimmerpost to keep seeing these "Yeah, it's a good car, but..." reviews. And to end the review with, "It's not really an M2 anymore." OUCH
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.
BMWs, certainly around the E39 era, were so nicely designed, customizing them would only spoil their looks. This iteration of the M2 is the exact opposite of that.
That turbolag is what annoys me mostly of my Giulia Veloce too. You press you foot down, and wait 1s before anything happens... Regardless it's a twin scroll turbo... :( By the way, this is ugly, the older one is MUCH more beautiful! Look at that monitor planted in the dash... It tastes like a burp after you've eaten "fagioli con le coteche"...
Turbo lag is fun, just need to use the gears in a way to make use of it. I've never driven a Veloce, but I drove a Giulia QV last week and those take a week to spool up, but it's great (although somewhat terrifying on British country roads). My current car is my 1st petrol turbo ever, had NA for years and the response was great. I don't want a turbo pretending to be NA, turbo engines without lag are just dull.
"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...
**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.
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
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.
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.
Available in manual, all I needed to hear.
At least it looks way better than the M4. The new grille even reminded me a little of early 70s Pontiac Firebirds!
Why do BMWs have such a bad reputation for reliability and cost of repair? It seems like they’re really well engineered but the reputation is that these are lease-only cars.
I wouldn't say weight makes all aspects of a car worse. Yes it hurts acceleration, braking, and handling but the increased weight is not just 90hp. Its more room inside, its more tech inside, its more chassis bracing and beefier diff, axles, and suspension. It's wider tires, longer wheel base, and bigger brakes. The new M2 is reportedly excellent across multiple laps on track. Where the old one would have smoking brakes and overheated oil the G87 carries on, all this takes more weight to make happen at these power levels. I would prefer if the new M2 were lighter, but I think just comparing old power to weight to new is missing a bunch.
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
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).
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.
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 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).
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
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.
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
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..
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?
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 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.
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
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 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 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.
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.
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 agree, weight is a pain in actual cars. Great video!
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)
Nah, pass…
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
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"
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.
Someone with a M2 comp from the previous gen take care of my future car pls
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.
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 was actually considering the M2, but your points are all valid, as usual. I really can't believe the weight comparison. Crazy.
7:03 the price may be adjusted for inflation but my income is not lol
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!
So it's a bad new M2, but a really good deal on a M4
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.
Great video!
I was in tune when you were talking about the m2 & m4 are the same car (essentially). Same engine, same weight 🙃 and the wheelbase is 4 inches shorter and if you want longer then pay up $15,000.
It doesn’t make sense
A 3800 POUND M car in general doesn’t make sense
A 3800 lb M2 really doesn’t make sense
Your questioning why it’s so heavy is something bmw needs to explain, it’s a M ! Carbon fiber exists, hollow metal,suspension make every ounce be meaningfully earned
BMWs especially M cars should not be heavy, what happened to the engineering ideas 💡, what standards are they based on as minimum standards?
A Chevy SS with a longer wheelbase and a LS3 weighs 3800 lbs , I have one and know it’s fast and the 6 speed manual is the only reason I have a 4door car (always wanted the 2003-4 m5)
You need minimum of 450 hp for a car that weighs 3800 lbs to be fun
But it’s not enough and you can lose still, and a super charger making it 650 hp is a better ratio for 3800 lbs
The 1 second turbo lag? What the heck bmw M engineers?
The E30 1989 325is weighed 2800 lbs, they knew in 1989 that weight matters
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 :)
BMW is a fantastic car company. Also, they have lost their way, making the “new”, “lightweight”, “junior” M3 weigh 3,800 pounds. Back to the drawing board. It’s supposed to be compact, lightweight, a high performance baby M. It’s only 2 Wheel Drive! This car is a formulaic failure.
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.
As a lifelong Bimmer fan, I'm really disappointed in the current gen of BMWs. I had a 230i and I loved the F22 generation, but the current series have really lost the plot. The M2 and M4 are virtually the same car, in two different flavors of ugly: plastic Lego rectangle ugly, or giant cobra fang grille ugly. It's disheartening that a brand once renowned for their lightweight, snappy coupes is now apparently competing with Tesla to see who can make the heavier car. Think about this: BMW does not offer one single vehicle in their entire lineup under 3500 lbs. The lightest M2 configuration weighs 300 lbs more than a 4-door 330i. My inner Colin Chapman is so sad.
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...
@@enjoshi-godrez8775 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.
Another way to think of the weight, the M2 weighs 9 lbs more than an E34 540i touring. Yes it's ugly but BMW has built a lot of ugly cars lately. On the positive side BMW does keep finding new and different ways to do ugly.
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 good: the M2 is practically a more affordable M4.
The bad: the M2 isn’t an M2 anymore.
Honestly I the the RWD M240i is the better option. Weighs a bit less, save a lot of money and has very high level of performance.
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.
Do they make cars out of pure lead these days? How can they be this heavy? I get why EV's are heavy but I remember cars over 1400kg being a rare thing, now there are no cars left @ around 1100kg. How can that be good for our health with all the extra pollution that comes along with 3 ton cars everywhere?
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.
We are living in an era that BMW now copies Hyundai. And let's stop making excuses, BMW objectively screwed the design, especially on this 2 series coupes, and I am a person who praises Chris Bangle's designs.
I have never been a BMW fan, but will watch your video, since you know what you are talking about. Thank you Jason.
What happened to it ??? Im guessing it's languishing in a repair shop bc the owner didn't want to pay yet ANOTHER, colossal breakdown bill 😢
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!
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 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
You missed an important aspect about the price. While adjusted for inflation it might be cheaper, wages did not rise according to the inflation of the recent years. For most people under 50 cars like this are completely unobtainable. And it is heavy. PS Miata is always the answer.
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 M3 usted to be smaller, lighter more nimble brother of the M5.
Still don't understand why cars keep getting bigger of there is already a bigger option.
Old M3 --> M5
When you compare it to the M4 vs the last gen M2, it makes a whole lot more sense. Nice video.
"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 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.
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
Too bad wages haven't gone up to match inflation. So even if it's the same price when adjusted it still costs for to the average person. I guess average people probably aren't spending 60k on a new car but maybe I'm wrong.
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.
I have a 2019 M2 Comp. and I’m looking to purchase but I don’t like the lazy design of this car. Taking a M340i for a drive next week and I’m hoping it will be nearly as fun as my M2 and if so I will buy.
I've lost all hope in people that think it looks good
The Cayman is a purpose built performance machine.
Pretty much every M car is a rental car with performance parts. Basically Germany's Ford mustang.
Hence the difference in price.
That said I would have to take the M2 for the back seats.
Except a mustang sits on a unique purposely designed performance platform.
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....
That car weighs nearly 100kg more than my Mondeo, a 4-door family car with a big hatchback, no carbon stuff, sunroof etc...
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 worst part of the new M2 is now it's a global car, not a largely German-made car, anymore. Might as well buy a Ford Mustang.
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?
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)
The whole reason why I bought my 2 series is it’s a modern bmw with classic bmw characteristics. This new one looks and feels like a pig. Just sad.
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.
Isn’t this basically the same platform as any other new Bmw from this 2-series up to 7-series? So it’s heavy. It’s shorter but most things are basically the same. And the pure EV versions are even more heavy because of the one size fits all strategy they have chosen. I guess it’s the only way to remain profitable in this EV craze we are faced with. Manufacturers cut down platforms and squeeze everything into the same mold. Difference now is only marketing and the number of doors the cars have. And soon cars are gone when SUV’s really take over. Glad that Bmw is still making sedans and wagons. 👍
Automatic is always a dealbreaker for me.
Amazing how they still can't figure out how to make the car lighter. The m2 is very close to the weight of a 99' f150.
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
Weirdly, I think the new M2 looks much better and sleeker than the old M4, DO I have to call my psychiatrist
If BMW did nothing but dedicate themselves to conserving weight on all models over the next decade, the would have the greatest line of cars on Earth.
It must be exhausting for the fan boys on Bimmerpost to keep seeing these "Yeah, it's a good car, but..." reviews. And to end the review with, "It's not really an M2 anymore." OUCH
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.
BMWs, certainly around the E39 era, were so nicely designed, customizing them would only spoil their looks. This iteration of the M2 is the exact opposite of that.
They can sell it for $15k cheaper than the M4 because it's made in Mexico and not Germany.
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
IMHO, the exterior design resembles a Scion TC. (Mostly the side profile)
Cayman all day, everyday! Can’t imagine myself inside of this not so pretty BMW elephant 😂
That turbolag is what annoys me mostly of my Giulia Veloce too. You press you foot down, and wait 1s before anything happens... Regardless it's a twin scroll turbo... :(
By the way, this is ugly, the older one is MUCH more beautiful! Look at that monitor planted in the dash... It tastes like a burp after you've eaten "fagioli con le coteche"...
Turbo lag is fun, just need to use the gears in a way to make use of it. I've never driven a Veloce, but I drove a Giulia QV last week and those take a week to spool up, but it's great (although somewhat terrifying on British country roads). My current car is my 1st petrol turbo ever, had NA for years and the response was great. I don't want a turbo pretending to be NA, turbo engines without lag are just dull.
What is that horrible speaker cover in the middle of the dash? It looks like an old Porsche 924.
The only reason I can think of is that M2 is for those who wants an M4 but wants to vomit every time they walk up to the car.
In bmw they must have lost theyr mind, this car looks awefool and its 1.8 tons...
"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...
Anyone else think that big vertical bar in the middle of the grill makes it look like an old Pontiac Grand Am?