BMW featuring M2 at auto cross events rather than M3/M4 - why?

[64-bit]

So, here Im on another BMW autocross, and again the M2 is what they give us to drive... Why?!

I believe is a marketing strategy, first they try to make the car "special" by not having lots of them for sale, then on every demo they throw the M2s, very soon we should see an avalanche of M2s on the market and people going crazy about them.

Here is what I think:

The M2 is not better on any shape or form than then M3, it just have less weight and looks good. Probably cheaper to produce and BMW makes way more money on them.

I still prefer my M3 the way it drives, looks, interior specialness and CF parts.

Guys, BMW is paying big money to magazines to talk good about the M2, I say it is just another car that tries hard to be an M but it isn't because BMW cut lots of corners to make a cheap production sport car for the masses.

[Don Molina]

People are going crazy over the M2 because it's smaller.

The M4 is basically a baby M6 at this point.

The M2 is closer to the E46 wheelbase, and the 10cm difference from the F30/80 really makes a difference in how the car rotates.

Not that the M4 is a slouch, it's just that the M2 feels to yaw faster.


It's also cheaper and "simpler" so some people want that and the hype is built.


I don't think it's BMW campaign per se, it's just a car that the market has been asking for a long time and now they went crazy for it.

Good for them, it's a nice little car, and good value for money.
The problem with the M2 is not how close it is to the M4. It is performance wise, but the M4 is more of a "car", that's why I went for it personally.

The problem the M2 has is a 235 with a decent diff.
It's just not special enough. Some people love that, I think BMW could afford some nicer seats at least...

[Jaymax85]

[mephiska]

Originally Posted by 64-bit

it just have less weight...

Yeah not really. It's 40-70lbs lighter, depending on the source. In reality that difference is negligible.

[cotmfk]

Originally Posted by 64-bit

I believe is a marketing strategy, first they try to make the car "special" by not having lots of them for sale, then on every demo they throw the M2s, very soon we should see an avalanche of M2s on the market and people going crazy about them.

Here is what I think:

The M2 is not better on any shape or form than then M3, it just have less weight and looks good. Probably cheaper to produce and BMW makes way more money on them.

M2 is a great car. And at $51k with no options (other than OEM accessories), it's a great deal. But it's not limited edition, and there will be tons of them roaming the streets soon enough. Similar to how M3/4 were tough to get a hold of the first few months or so.

Also, M2 is not really a light car. For how much smaller it is, it's only 50 pounds lighter than an M4.

[doberzus]

"M2 is a real M, it's lighter... And ... And it's... It's. M4 is too big and heavy and is only a little faster"

The M2 weighs only 100lbs less and has about 80-100whp less, according to dynos. It also traps almost 10mph more(trap speeds don't lie). It only "out handles" the M4 around small, very tight tracks. Where the M4 cannot stretch its legs. Did I mention it out handles it by a mere 2/10ths of a second?

M2? Cool story, bruh

[MaynardZed]

Originally Posted by Don Molina

The M4 is basically a baby M6 at this point.

If by "baby" you mean significantly lighter than its parent?

An M6 weighs roughly 4300lbs. My M4 weighed 3460lbs when I weighed it on the scales. Thats over 800lbs difference!

The M2 might weigh 100lbs less than a similarly equipped M4

[DieGrüneHölle]

Originally Posted by 64-bit

Guys, BMW is paying big money to magazines to talk good about the M2

I don't follow the logic BMW is paying the media. What would BMW get out of the media saying the cheaper M2 is a better drivers car than the M3/M4? M2 is a much lower volume car, they don't need help selling it. It is hard to get as it is.

[pikkagtr]

Originally Posted by Blipit_

I don't follow the logic BMW is paying the media. What would BMW get out of the media saying the cheaper M2 is a better drivers car than the M3/M4? M2 is a much lower volume car, they don't need help selling it. It is hard to get as it is.

It drives customers to showrooms.
I can heat the sales pitch....
"We can order the M2 for you, it'll take 4-6 months for allocation and build time, OR you can get this loaded M240i now and save a few thousand ! It's almost the same thing ! "

[evobeatsti]

Originally Posted by doberzus

"M2 is a real M, it's lighter... And ... And it's... It's. M4 is too big and heavy and is only a little faster"

The M2 weighs only 100lbs less and has about 80-100whp less, according to dynos. It also traps almost 10mph more(trap speeds don't lie). It only "out handles" the M4 around small, very tight tracks. Where the M4 cannot stretch its legs. Did I mention it out handles it by a mere 2/10ths of a second?

M2? Cool story, bruh

I've driven both and prefer my m3, but the M2 did equal the m3 on willow springs which is technically the fastest track in the usa so....

[ClothSeats]

Why would BMW pay the media to hype the M2 at the expense of M3/M4? The latter is far more profitable for them.

[Don Molina]

Originally Posted by MaynardZed

If by "baby" you mean significantly lighter than its parent?

An M6 weighs roughly 4300lbs. My M4 weighed 3460lbs when I weighed it on the scales. Thats over 800lbs difference!

The M2 might weigh 100lbs less than a similarly equipped M4

Sorry, I needed to be more specific.

The F80 has a marginally bigger wheelbase than the E63 6-series.

Cars are getting huge, and fat.
Thankfully BMW did their homework and kept the weight down, but I think there needs to be a stop in the ever-increasing sizes of the cars.

Or we just get bigger and bigger 3ers, 5ers, etc, and then BMW has to create more series to satisfy people that want smaller cars. And given how we're at a 1/2 series that is as big as the E46, they're either stopping somewhere here, or in 2025 they'll have to introduce somthing like the -1 series

[Matt_B]

Originally Posted by evobeatsti

I've driven both and prefer my m3, but the M2 did equal the m3 on willow springs which is technically the fastest track in the usa so....

So I think you're getting slightly confused here. That happened at Streets of Willow which is a slower more technical course. Big Willow is the much faster main track often simply called Willow Springs. Two separate courses at the same facility. I suspect the M3/4 would have been quite a bit faster at the faster Big Willow track.

Here's a map. Note Big Willow at the bottom with the tighter, shorter Streets of Willow in the top right.

[shu5892001]

lol why do you guys care what bmw does with the m2. Just enjoy your own M.

[csbear]

Originally Posted by 64-bit

The M2 is not better on any shape or form than then M3, it just have less weight and looks good. Probably cheaper to produce and BMW makes way more money on them.
.

From what I've seen/heard, BMW makes a larger profit from selling M3/M4s. Generally, the higher the model, the more profit a company makes.... See Cayman/Boxster vs. 911.

I'm curious to see how many people who own F80/F82s on this forum have actually driven E46, E36 M3s.

The amount of M2 bashing on these forums makes me believe that many have not driven older M cars.

I'm not saying M2 = E46 M3 exactly, but it seems a bunch of members have just gotten into the M brand. Could be a function of age ?

From the media, the Focus RS has received more praise than the M2. The M2 has received more praise than the M4.

Does that make the Focus RS much "better" than an M4?
No. Everyone uses their cars for different reasons and have different ideas of what is "better."

[Ian1973]

Originally Posted by csbear

I'm curious to see how many people who own F80/F82s on this forum have actually driven E46, E36 M3s.

I have owned an E46. It felt different for sure over the F80, but it most certainly was not more capable in the handling department. Maybe it was a touch more accessible as you weren't going as quickly, but by no means was the E46 even close to as capable. The steering was better of course, but I think you can feel what the rear of the F80 is doing far better.

Not sure why but I just don't have a huge problem with the electric steering. Maybe I'm just not advanced enough to discern that level of detail, but it doesn't bother me like it does reviewers.

[bd307]

[csbear]

Originally Posted by Ian1973

I have owned an E46. It felt different for sure over the F80, but it most certainly was not more capable in the handling department. Maybe it was a touch more accessible as you weren't going as quickly, but by no means was the E46 even close to as capable. The steering was better of course, but I think you can feel what the rear of the F80 is doing far better.

Not sure why but I just don't have a huge problem with the electric steering. Maybe I'm just not advanced enough to discern that level of detail, but it doesn't bother me like it does reviewers.

Thanks for the post...

I was basically insinuating that it seems some members believe that a car has to have full leather interior, 400+ HP, carbon everything, etc, etc to be deemed an "M car." (OK, maybe in this day-and-age, 400+ hp is a barometer of performance... I can see that.) However, past M cars did not have any of this stuff and were considered some of the best driver cars ever. They were M cars through and through...

So yes, today's cars are vastly superior performance wise, but the M2 is based on a somewhat old school mentality that (even though price bracket kind of dictates that) you don't need "M parts" or a fancy interior or carbon fiber up the ass to be an excellent drivers car.

I am 42 years old, and have driven a fair amount the E36, E46, E92, F80/82 M cars. (I have personally owned a 2000 M Roadster. And no, I have not driven the great 1M). I am not a BMW expert by any means or a pro driver, but all of these cars I have listed are excellent for their time periods. I love the way the M4 looks and think it is one of the best looking coupes ever...

However, the M2, although I have not driven it, but can safely say due to overwhelming praise by owners and the media.... belongs in the aforementioned group.

[michael3435]

Has anyone here actually driven both on an autox course? I take my m3 to autox and the throttle is so touchy and erratic in 2nd gear coming on and off throttle in a tight course it's very difficult to control in sport plus and sport modes. I get the best times when I put it in efficient. Does the m2 have this issue??

[chillindrdude]

apples v oranges i know. but i'd like to see the driving dynamics of a fully track prepped/stripped M2.

seems like it would be quite the car.

and id like to see that head to head with a similarly prepped GT4.

[64-bit]

Guys im not saying that the M2 is a bad car, in fact it is a nice car and if my budget only allowed me $55K that would be the car to get.

My point is, the M2 is not car that I would compare to the M3 which in my believe is way ahead and on a different class combining power and luxury at the same time plus high end parts.

What BMW is doing really hard is to advertise their M2 as the "the fun" M car is because they make more $$$ on than the M3/M4

[chillindrdude]

Originally Posted by 64-bit

Guys im not saying that the M2 is a bad car, in fact it is a nice car and if my budget only allowed me $55K that would be the car to get.

My point is, the M2 is not car that I would compare to the M3 which in my believe is way ahead and on a different class combining power and luxury at the same time plus high end parts.

What BMW is doing really hard is to advertise their M2 as the "the fun" M car is because they make more $$$ on than the M3/M4

of course, there were minimal R&D as everything is basically off the shelf.

exactly why GT4 is money maker for porsche also.