[Pyewacket69]

Originally Posted by Viffermike

I agree on the first point, almost to the point of it being too nominal. But I wholeheartedly disagree on the second. Beyond beltline-and-below bodywork (basically a body kit except for the fenders), shared M parts with other M models, and metal-swapping, the M2 appears to have no uniquely developed parts for it. And let's not kid ourselves -- part of the 'M' experience is that badge and what it represents, which has become far less than it used to.

I'm willing to bet that the price point in the U.S. for it is still being debated at BMW AG and BMW NA because, as it's positioned, it's going to cost sales to something else -- M235, M3, 435i, M4. It's just a matter of what it chooses, and minimizing that effect.

Personally, if I were setting sales priorities, I would be worried much about the M2 stealing sales units from M235i's, but I would be concerned about stealing sales units from higher line models, such as the M4.

After all, it isn't like I would choose between purchasing a single M2 and 2 or more M235's, but I might well choose an M2 over an M4, especially if one of my main factors in deciding was the "M" emblem on the trunk lid...

I suspect BMW would be equally as happy if a buyer chose an M2 over a M235i or the other way around, but far less so if the buyer chose, say, an ATS over the M235i..l

[mc3456]

Originally Posted by Viffermike

Allll righteee then!



Tell that to someone who is not an enthusiast and who doesn't know BMW's model range with relative intimacy. You could say the same thing about a base 228i vs. a loaded 228i M Sport with THP. Different cars? No. Different drivability? Definitely. You're biased because you appreciate the details. That's understandable. That's precisely why you and I and others here are having this discussion about the M2. I'm looking at a much bigger picture.



Best practices? No, I'd argue that some are pretty bad practices. But that's beside my point: it's design philosophy, corporate philosophy, and model distinctions within the marketplace I'm talking about. Part-sharing isn't a bad thing on its face. It's what parts are shared (and aren't) that make all the difference in maximizing the differentiations from model to model. Engine bits? They help. So does mirror design. Wheels? They don't. Neither does skimping on making the M experience more tactile inside the vehicle.

You are complaining about aestetics. Seems to me the M experience for you is less about actual performance results and more about appearances. SEMA and M-Sport packages were created for guys like you.

[mc3456]

Originally Posted by nike001

I said it because it's not that difference. I'm not sure where you got your information from, but all I've seen different M2-M235i is:
-Pistons from M3/M4 S55 engine, with top ring optimized for the use of grey-cast iron liners.
-Crankshaft main bearing shells from M3/M4 S55 engine
-Turbocharger integrated into the exhaust manifold
-Aerodynamically tuned air intake manifold

I haven't seen ANY info regarding different block & crank. But of course I'll entertain any sources you come up with

To the OP's point, that is hardly a "tuned up N55". I'd doubt those are even the only changes made to increase the durability of the engine for making higher horsepower.

This car was clearly engineered to see some significant track time, but NO it is not an M4. If people want a M4, people have to pay up for that privilege, not get an M4 for M2 money. That does not lessen the M2's worth in any way, it only makes it's own unique model, NOT just a tuned up M235i.

Seeing the M2 vs M235i side by side, and in back to back test drives will illustrate the huge distinctions.

[Viffermike]

Originally Posted by mc3456

You are complaining about aestetics. Seems to me the M experience for you is less about actual performance results and more about appearances. SEMA and M-Sport packages were created for guys like you.

Dude, you couldn't be more wrong. I just pick my spots.

But carry on, wayward son.

[mc3456]

Originally Posted by Pyewacket69

Personally, if I were setting sales priorities, I would be worried much about the M2 stealing sales units from M235i's, but I would be concerned about stealing sales units from higher line models, such as the M4.

After all, it isn't like I would choose between purchasing a single M2 and 2 or more M235's, but I might well choose an M2 over an M4, especially if one of my main factors in deciding was the "M" emblem on the trunk lid...

I suspect BMW would be equally as happy if a buyer chose an M2 over a M235i or the other way around, but far less so if the buyer chose, say, an ATS over the M235i..l

Typo!?! You "wouldn't" be worried about M2 stealing sales from M235i.

However, your observation is insightful about potential down marketing from M4 to M2, but then many of those M4 buyers were probably more M2 buyers to begin with anyway.

They might have jumped to a stripped down M4 because there was no M2 until now, but the market will correct itself, and as you've already stated protect the brand from people jumping to cars like the upcoming RS3 sedan whenever Audi gets around to bringing it to the US.

[Viffermike]

Originally Posted by mc3456

Sure the delta between the regular models and the M models is not as much as before but that is because the regular models are much better than in prior generations. In the future, the gap will likely close even further with engineering progress.

This, sir, is the essence of the definition of 'watering down'.

:: drops mic ::

[mc3456]

Originally Posted by Viffermike

Dude, you couldn't be more wrong. I just pick my spots.

But carry on, wayward son.

If you're complaining about mirrors and seats, your spots/priorities are seriously out of whack when discussing a serious M product.

The M2 is going to be a real ripper and perhaps the remedy to all the whiners who bitch about the M4 being too big, too bloated, too soft...bitch, bitch, bitch!

[AlpsRider]

Originally Posted by mc3456

You are complaining about aestetics. Seems to me the M experience for you is less about actual performance results and more about appearances. SEMA and M-Sport packages were created for guys like you.

M cars are all about performance, but they are also about style and workmanship as well. If you were only interested in raw performance then you'd save a lot of money buying a Subaru.

[mc3456]

Originally Posted by Viffermike

This, sir, is the essence of the definition of 'watering down'.

:: drops mic ::

What??? That is not watering down at all. That just illustrates that regular models like yours are not as shitty as they used to be when the earlier M models were first introduced. That is a good thing for the BMW brand, not a bad thing for M. If you think M's are less M these days, you clearly have not spent much time in each M3 generation.

The only people that complain about the next generation M3/M4 will always be the last generation owners...that is until they get the next generation themselves. It is the "natural law of M fanboy ownership".

Could my M3 have come standard with 500 plus horsepower? Of course, but the M experience is much more about being balanced then stretching for max horsepower. That is AMG's forte, and that is not a bad thing at all, just a different philosophy/experience.

[mc3456]

Originally Posted by AlpsRider

M cars are all about performance, but they are also about style and workmanship as well. If you were only interested in raw performance then you'd save a lot of money buying a Subaru.

All BMWs are about performance, style, and workmanship. It is not exclusive to M cars.

BTW...if you are interested in raw performance, Subaru probably would not be on most folks shopping lists regardless of cost, unless you are like a 20-26 year old dope who either can't afford going German, or just can't appreciate the difference, to which I'd say go for the Subie.

[hangover]

Originally Posted by Viffermike

This, sir, is the essence of the definition of 'watering down'.

:: drops mic ::

Case Closed

[hangover]

Originally Posted by AlpsRider

M cars are all about performance, but they are also about style and workmanship as well. If you were only interested in raw performance then you'd save a lot of money buying a Subaru.

Correct. BMW has lost it's way completely. The idea of M is ultimate performance WITH luxury. Not negligible performance upgrade over other M cars that aren't actually M cars even though they have M in their name (M235i) with not even VW-level interiors.

Heck, the new Mustang GT Premium has a better interior than the M2. What does that tell you? Yes, Ford is making great cars but yes, BMW is losing it too.

At least Audi understands the importance of a nice interior on a PREMIUM car. Which M cars used to be. Throwing a few new parts at the engine does not an M car make.

[Pyewacket69]

Originally Posted by mc3456

Typo!?! You "wouldn't" be worried about M2 stealing sales from M235i.

However, your observation is insightful about potential down marketing from M4 to M2, but then many of those M4 buyers were probably more M2 buyers to begin with anyway.

They might have jumped to a stripped down M4 because there was no M2 until now, but the market will correct itself, and as you've already stated protect the brand from people jumping to cars like the upcoming RS3 sedan whenever Audi gets around to bringing it to the US.

Yep, a typo... My bad!

[Pyewacket69]

Originally Posted by hangover

Correct. BMW has lost it's way completely. The idea of M is ultimate performance WITH luxury. Not negligible performance upgrade over other M cars that aren't actually M cars even though they have M in their name (M235i) with not even VW-level interiors.

Heck, the new Mustang GT Premium has a better interior than the M2. What does that tell you? Yes, Ford is making great cars but yes, BMW is losing it too.

At least Audi understands the importance of a nice interior on a PREMIUM car. Which M cars used to be. Throwing a few new parts at the engine does not an M car make.

For those in ownership positions at BMW, I'd bet they'd completely disagree.

Record sales and high profits are hardly examples of a company that has lost its way.

[hangover]

Originally Posted by Pyewacket69

For those in ownership positions at BMW, I'd bet they'd completely disagree.

Record sales and high profits are hardly examples of a company that has lost its way.

Oh gawd please... appealing to the masses now is a good thing?

What auto company isn't making record profits?

EPIC FAIL

[Pyewacket69]

Originally Posted by hangover

Oh gawd please... appealing to the masses now is a good thing?

What auto company isn't making record profits?

EPIC FAIL

Don't look now... Your immaturity is showing...

[Bohemoth]

Quite dissapointed with this tbh, my head was set on getting 1 of these but its missing too much. The seats, wing mirrors, bonnet and the rear end are just shocking omissions. Even making the seats optional extras would be a start. I'd buy this and feel like I dont actually have an M car!

[Viffermike]

Originally Posted by Pyewacket69

For those in ownership positions at BMW, I'd bet they'd completely disagree.

Record sales and high profits are hardly examples of a company that has lost its way.

For the short term. For the long term, I'd argue that the relative quality of BMWs (both compared to other marques and compared to past BMWs), as well as the flattening, broadening, and softening of its U.S. product range, will cost it dearly if it continues. Its European business may not suffer as much since BMWs are seen as slightly more pedestrian vehicles there. But in the U.S., higher-end brand reputation and mystique is a larger part of what makes the marque successful. Such traits can fall apart over time (albeit rarely quickly, with some exceptions) if bruises to the brand are not addressed.

[mc3456]

Originally Posted by Viffermike

For the short term. For the long term, I'd argue that the relative quality of BMWs (both compared to other marques and compared to past BMWs), as well as the flattening, broadening, and softening of its U.S. product range, will cost it dearly if it continues. Its European business may not suffer as much since BMWs are seen as slightly more pedestrian vehicles there. But in the U.S., higher-end brand reputation and mystique is a larger part of what makes the marque successful. Such traits can fall apart over time (albeit rarely quickly, with some exceptions) if bruises to the brand are not addressed.

So basically, because the M2 does not have Recaro seats that light up and winged mirrors, the brand is in decline and the new M2 sucks???

Clearly, you are not an M, AMG, RS/S level person who is buying/understands these special cars for all the right reasons. Good riddance!

[BMW335iOn18s]

The M2 doesn't even have subframe bushings. You want to convince me it won't be hardcore? LOL! It will probably make the e46 look like a Cadillac.

E36/E46/E92s had partially different seats or the same seats as their non M counterparts....and all you guys are crying about lack of M seats? Am I the only one who remembers luxury package E36s and E46 M convertibles?

The N55B30T0 has a different block. It's barely a regular N55.

Am I the only one who remembers when M cars were about the driving experience and NOT M logos on seats (that don't even have thigh extensions) and other little trinkets?

I guess the E46 M3 sucked because the nav unit was shared with the 325i too.....

Today's M cars are far more aggressive than any e30 or e36. The E46 set the "modern M" standards and the current cars take chassis engineering and workmanship to a whole new level. What's awesome is that the high end non-Ms are WAY more capable than they used to be. And that works out for those of us who can't afford or don't want to pay for full M models just yet.

If you can't appreciate the many minor differences between M cars and non-Ms. Then you can save your money and drive a 2/3/435i or a 550i. That's why BMW gives us options!

[mc3456]

Originally Posted by Bohemoth

Quite dissapointed with this tbh, my head was set on getting 1 of these but its missing too much. The seats, wing mirrors, bonnet and the rear end are just shocking omissions. Even making the seats optional extras would be a start. I'd buy this and feel like I dont actually have an M car!

I don't get guys like you. You are already bending over to defeat before even:

A) seeing one in person.
B) seeing the official final US pricing/options.
C) most importantly, driving one in person.

Sounds reasonable...

[Bohemoth]

The 1m coupe was one of the best looking cars BMW ever made so people naturally expect this to be on a par. The seats are already available in the M3 & M4, so why not just use them?

Criticism of people who feel it's half hearted is a bit harsh considering it's clearly a marketing decision, otherwise you'd put the seats and mirrors on the damn thing. It's not a bad car its just limited.