[JustChris]

Originally Posted by hyperzulu

Oh ok... cool. You are talking about interviews given by people who do things like downplay a future product to fool competing manufacturers with false benchmarks which they later obliterate. Got it!

To be fair I don't think he's playing it down. No way it will be 4.2 if the F8X are 4.1 0-100km/h more like 4.5-4.6? So it's not a way off assumption. X drive obviously helping loads. Sure you've see the videos of the Macan Turbo obliterating the M3 to 30 but then the M3 catches and overtakes once traction kicks in.

[W///]

Originally Posted by fuddman

As I mentioned, the X4 M40i weighs 4200 lbs and does 0-60 in 4.7 seconds.
The M2, weighing, probably, some 800 lbs less, does 0-60 in, maybe, 4.2 seconds.
To me, that comparison means the M Division put the better engine in the X4.

That is literally the equivalent of you saying 2 + 2 = 7
For the most part, we're on the same page, but this is so stupidly ridiculous I don't even know how to begin to comprehend your point. Apparently I'm not the only one.

[Adem1534]

Originally Posted by fuddman

As I mentioned, the X4 M40i weighs 4200 lbs and does 0-60 in 4.7 seconds.
The M2, weighing, probably, some 800 lbs less, does 0-60 in, maybe, 4.2 seconds.
To me, that comparison means the M Division put the better engine in the X4.

that is such a blind conclusion with such non substantial claims that I don't even know how to respond... come on man

[hyperzulu]

Originally Posted by Chris The Manx

To be fair I don't think he's playing it down. No way it will be 4.2 if the F8X are 4.1 0-100km/h more like 4.5-4.6? So it's not a way off assumption. X drive obviously helping loads. Sure you've see the videos of the Macan Turbo obliterating the M3 to 30 but then the M3 catches and overtakes once traction kicks in.

Nah, I really don't see how real world numbers will be in the 4.6s range. I mean, highlight it-
M235i RWD auto - 4.5s 0-60
M235i XDrive auto - 4.4s 0-60

Those are BMW numbers.The M2 will be faster to 60 than any variant of the M235i. But just for arguments sake, compared only to the RWD model, you're talking about a car with comparable weight, and again, more power, stiffer chassis, more traction due to the latter as well as much thicker rubber on the drive wheels, more torque with overboost and a much more aggressive and faster shifting transmission. BMW might SAY 0-60 is 4.3s, but I bet car mags will peg 0-60 time close to what the M4 does it in. The 1M bested the 0-60 time of the 135i by about 0.4 seconds. I don't see any reason to believe this car will do any less over its more base model, the M235i.

Beside, the statement is mind boggling-ly incomprehensible - that a car with xDrive and an extra 800 lbs must have a much better engine than one that beats it by half a second to 60 without AWD. Silly comments are fine, but at least back them up by telling the rest of the world that you've been in a corner all day and don't know what you're doing with your life anymore. At least then we would understand.

[Twix]

BMW claims 0-100 km/h for the X5M in 4.2s and the same sprint in the M5 sedan at 4.3s. Does that mean that the M5 has a worse engine or that it's the worse car? So what if the X4M40i beats the M2 in a sprint to 60, it will most definitely lose in the corners. It's the corners that M builds it's cars for, never the 1320ft drag strip.

If you want something stupidly fast in the quarter mile, buy an '87 notch Mustang and start throwing money at it. You want something that drives in a civil manner and holds corners well and still isn't a slouch at the strip, maybe the M2 is more your car.

[chris719]

Originally Posted by fuddman

As far as I'm concerned, what's news about the M2 engine is that it's the same engine as the one going into the X4.
Do I like that the X4 and the M2 share identical engines? Not only NO!.....well, you know the rest of it.
The X4 weighs 4200 lbs and does 0-60 in 4.7. With that stat, not only does the X4 have the same engine as M2, the X4 has the better version of the same engine .
Getting less interested.

That is a complete logical failure of a post. The 0-60 is affected by AWD, weight, tire size, suspension stiffness, and transmission/gearing. There is NO way you can identify the engine as being different based on a different quoted 0-60 time.

[PackPride85]

No BMW employee has gone on record anywhere stating any 0-60 times for the M2. What you read on a forum 3rd hand from some guy isn't anything close to being considered factual.

For those talking about the forged crank: the crank will be the last thing to explode. I'm more interested in the piston/rod strength.

[hyperzulu]

Originally Posted by fuddman

That's a rude, thoughtless, comment. You need to get in front of a mirror and have a conversation with yourself about needlessly shooting off your mouth.

You're right. Sorry.

I just looked at myself on my phone.

I still don't know how you based your conclusions, but ok.

[IS3andME]

Originally Posted by chris719

That is a complete logical failure of a post. The 0-60 is affected by AWD, weight, tire size, suspension stiffness, and transmission/gearing. There is NO way you can identify the engine as being different based on a different quoted 0-60 time.

Speaking of tire size, I believe that it was released that the X4 M40i has 275 section rears.

[JustChris]

Originally Posted by hyperzulu

Nah, I really don't see how real world numbers will be in the 4.6s range. I mean, highlight it-
M235i RWD auto - 4.5s 0-60
M235i XDrive auto - 4.4s 0-60

Those are BMW numbers.The M2 will be faster to 60 than any variant of the M235i. But just for arguments sake, compared only to the RWD model, you're talking about a car with comparable weight, and again, more power, stiffer chassis, more traction due to the latter as well as much thicker rubber on the drive wheels, more torque with overboost and a much more aggressive and faster shifting transmission. BMW might SAY 0-60 is 4.3s, but I bet car mags will peg 0-60 time close to what the M4 does it in. The 1M bested the 0-60 time of the 135i by about 0.4 seconds. I don't see any reason to believe this car will do any less over its more base model, the M235i.

Beside, the statement is mind boggling-ly incomprehensible - that a car with xDrive and an extra 800 lbs must have a much better engine than one that beats it by half a second to 60 without AWD. Silly comments are fine, but at least back them up by telling the rest of the world that you've been in a corner all day and don't know what you're doing with your life anymore. At least then we would understand.

I think we're saying almost the same thing buddy, my post is quoting 0-100km/h which is 62 mph. You're quoting 0-60 so for m2 need to take another 0.1 to 0.2 off my figures there. Also Im always quoting manufacturer figures and theRWD M235i sure ain't 4.5.

[Spook410]

Can't believe there is a thread comparing anything about the X4 M40i (The Abominable Hedgehog) to the M2. Oh well.. if soccer mom's with abysmal automotive taste buy these it will help build the tech skills of the mechanic cadre at the local dealer thereby improving their M2 skills.

It shouldn't diminish anything if the engine is very close to the X4 strangeling. But, sort of, in a way, it kinda does I guess. At least until I actually think about it and then all that really matters is how well it works and that's all that matters.

[hyperzulu]

Originally Posted by Chris The Manx

I think we're saying almost the same thing buddy, my post is quoting 0-100km/h which is 62 mph. You're quoting 0-60 so for m2 need to take another 0.1 to 0.2 off my figures there. Also Im always quoting manufacturer figures and theRWD M235i sure ain't 4.5.

4.6s for the RWD M235i to 60mph
http://www.bmwusa.com/bmw/2series/Coupe

There are people with just a stage 1 tune hitting 60 in 4 seconds... RWD auto M235i. The M2 should have just as much power and better equipped to launch, plus a faster transmission.

Whatever. It will be a little rocket, no doubt. Maybe they'll finally reveal it before we've all turned to dust.

[JustChris]

Fair play it's been a while since I checked the specs. I See they're saying 4.4s for auto X drive, really good for the money. UK spec M4 3.9 so jus 1/2 sec to play with M2.

I want the CSL to be real Been my screen saver since the Vision GT

[Lucky13]

Another way to look at it is the X4 3.5 is 0-60 in 5.2 so the new engine knocks off .5 down to 4.7. The M2 engine we know has over boost so more torque and possibly more hp so .5 faster than 4.5 could put it around 4.0. I doubt BMW will claim that just to protect the M4.

[fuddman]

Originally Posted by Lucky13

The M2 engine... [0-60]... around 4.0. I doubt BMW will claim that just to protect the M4.

My guess is 4.1 to 4.2, DCT. (claimed)
I agree, they protect the the M4 and, they're up front about saying they do it. An example IMO: unlike the M2 engine, they don't spread the S55 around among other cars. I could be wrong about that, but; I haven't seen it in other cars.

[W///]

Originally Posted by fuddman

My guess is 4.1 to 4.2, DCT. (claimed)
I agree, they protect the the M4 and, they're up front about saying they do it. An example IMO: unlike the M2 engine, they don't spread the S55 around among other cars. I could be wrong about that, but; I haven't seen it in other cars.

It'll be going in the next X3M at the very minimum. Not sure if there's supposed to be an X4M or not, can't remember

[M3 Adjuster]

Originally Posted by fuddman

My guess is 4.1 to 4.2, DCT. (claimed)
I agree, they protect the the M4 and, they're up front about saying they do it. An example IMO: unlike the M2 engine, they don't spread the S55 around among other cars. I could be wrong about that, but; I haven't seen it in other cars.

I think you will find you are wrong about that... The S63 right now is in the M5, M6, X5M, and X6M...correct?

Originally Posted by W///

It'll be going in the next X3M at the very minimum. Not sure if there's supposed to be an X4M or not, can't remember

Agree... X3M .. and if one is made then an X4M probably as well.

As it is... just adapting some of the parts .. and potentially the (closed deck) block from the S55 motor to use in the N55B means more production of those parts, reducing cost, and spreading out R and D.

It simply doesn't make good business sense to develop something for only a single vehicle... or.. even if one did... to not continue to further that development by applying either parts or R and D to other models.

I'm really hoping that BMW designs a 4 cylinder twin turbo (S20, S48?) based off the S55 architecture...

[M3 Adjuster]

Originally Posted by hyperzulu

4.6s for the RWD M235i to 60mph
http://www.bmwusa.com/bmw/2series/Coupe

There are people with just a stage 1 tune hitting 60 in 4 seconds... RWD auto M235i.
The M2 should have just as much power and better equipped to launch, plus a faster transmission.

Whatever. It will be a little rocket, no doubt. Maybe they'll finally reveal it before we've all turned to dust.

indeed... perhaps a little more rubber to put that power on the road..

[dmboone25]

Originally Posted by Twix

BMW claims 0-100 km/h for the X5M in 4.2s and the same sprint in the M5 sedan at 4.3s. Does that mean that the M5 has a worse engine or that it's the worse car? So what if the X4M40i beats the M2 in a sprint to 60, it will most definitely lose in the corners. It's the corners that M builds it's cars for, never the 1320ft drag strip.

If you want something stupidly fast in the quarter mile, buy an '87 notch Mustang and start throwing money at it. You want something that drives in a civil manner and holds corners well and still isn't a slouch at the strip, maybe the M2 is more your car.

Correct. The main problem with the 235 is where the M2 will be significantly better - better brakes, wider track, much better suspension and a better transmission (DCT) - all those things = better handling.

Like I said in one of the other threads, if 0-60 is your thing, then the American manufacturers have several options down at your local dealership, and even at a lower price point. This car *should* be about purifying the driving experience - or as much as can be achieved in the reality of today's regulatory landscape. I think it will hit that mark and be very good. Can't wait to see it.

[fuddman]

Originally Posted by M3 Adjuster

It simply doesn't make good business sense to develop something for only a single vehicle...

No offense, really, but, from a business standpoint, this generalization of yours is, fundamentally, way off. It ignores the effect of exclusivity i.e., convincing the customer he has the "only one." A perception particularly important in the luxury car business. To BMW, Porsche, Ferrari, etc., etc., preserving perceived exclusivity in their cars is crucial for one simple reason - it sells expensive and, thus, very profitable cars . The BMW Individual Program is testament to that idea. While it may at other levels, cutting costs, as you suggest, in the luxury car market, IMO, does not sell cars.
As I said, the M3/M4 cars are regarded by their owners and customers as a means to claim exclusivity. BMW knows that's what their customers want and they are providing it. One way they're doing it is to make sure no else gets the S55, an engine developed exclusively for that car. At least until something new comes along to replace it.
It's pretty obvious this line of reasoning does not apply to the M2.

[M3 Adjuster]

Originally Posted by fuddman

No offense, really, but, from a business standpoint, this generalization of yours is, fundamentally, way off. It ignores the effect of exclusivity i.e., convincing the customer he has the "only one." A perception particularly important in the luxury car business. To BMW, Porsche, Ferrari, etc., etc., preserving perceived exclusivity in their cars is crucial for one simple reason - it sells expensive and, thus, very profitable cars . The BMW Individual Program is testament to that idea. While it may at other levels, cutting costs, as you suggest, in the luxury car market, IMO, does not sell cars.
As I said, the M3/M4 cars are regarded by their owners and customers as a means to claim exclusivity. BMW knows that's what their customers want and they are providing it. One way they're doing it is to make sure no else gets the S55, an engine developed exclusively for that car. At least until something new comes along to replace it.
It's pretty obvious this line of reasoning does not apply to the M2.

Thanks but I certainty understand what your are saying - I am simply saying that the current trend in manufacturing - leaning out of systems and processes is eliminating this. And I believe you are focusing on MARKETING, not profit dollars.

The car is still a sum of parts. And making all of those parts exclusive to a single vehicle is simply NOT better in business sense.

This IS the reason that the 1M and M2 now share suspension components, wheels, differential, rear subframe, etc with the M3 and M4.

If you aren't realizing this trend is already occurring ...... what was a " parts bin " approach in making the 1M... by taking components from the E9x M3 and using them to develop the 1M became a DESIGN approach ( it appears) in the M2 which has been designed around the M3/M4 underpinnings.

As far as the BMW individual program... This is a program that BMW wants to grow... particularly in the US market.. but in all markets... And it's a chance to get away from what....? limited color palettes and vehicle colors that are bland.. or " launch colors " that are splashed everywhere (for example.. SAVs and M cars in LBB and Valencia Orange on everything from the 1M to the Mini Cooper to the X1).

When it comes to customers, the feeling of exclusivity is indeed important however When it comes to manufacturing, VOLUME is King. So, your point is excellent.. BMW would LOVE to make you feel exclusive... by letting you use the INDIVIDUAL PROGRAM to customize their most MASS PRODUCED M model.. the M3 and M4.. And oddly... they don't allow the individual program on some of their non mass produced vehicles.. Hmmmmm...




When BMW starts dropping the S55 into additional vehicles (like an X3M..) perhaps the point will be abundantly clear.

[rcoccultwar]

I have a hard time believing M235i's can consistently iron out a 4.3 based on Car and Driver's claim. How hard is it to press the gas all the way for a handful of steamboats?

For all we know, BMW may have sent this publication a modified one. Apparently, it may not be the first time. For all we know, they clocked 4.3999 seconds but decided to round it off to 4.3. For all we know, at the testing grounds they got 4.501 but rounded off to 4.6.

Some days my current car vibrates first thing I turn it on and honestly some days it smells like it is burning unusually rich. Maybe some days, cars run better than other days. I'm no expert

This M2 won't come out till well into 2016, so it will be easy for slight performance bumps for the 2016 m3/m4 to avoid a potential estranged relationship between models. A consistent, 4.1, would be a pleasant surprise.