I like how adjustable cars have become with just a few button pushes or toggle selects. Easier than climbing under the car to adjust rebound and swapping jets. It's a shame that there is a combination that seems obvious to make available and the software engineers don't make that combination available. It shouldn't be that hard and it shouldn't be a mystery to a company like BMW as to what that is and why an enthusiast would want it.
Yes, the M3 costs more. However the things that are missing on the M2 are all cheap, if no cost at all to add.
I haven't had a car with traction control as a track rat for many years now.
However I never let my novice students turn it off. Firstly they need it! They can do dumb stuff that can ruin their weekend and (most often) their DD. If the traction control is intervening a lot, that tells me quite a bit about how they're driving which I can then start to correct for them.
Once they really start to know what to do and when, I'll let them turn it off...
docwyte wrote: Yes, the M3 costs more. However the things that are missing on the M2 are all cheap, if no cost at all to add.
How do you make that particular calculation? The on/off feature of the rev matching I can see adding some sort of feature to just turn that off, but the other things they are complaining about the car lacking in the review are dynamically adjustable steering input, throttle remapping, suspension adjustment and a host of other performance oriented features that probably require specific hardware to address in addition to custom software for the car.
Also, I do agree with Motor Trend that it should have a temp gauge, both for coolant and oil.
They're complaining about the lack of a few buttons to be able to tune and store settings for things that are already adjustable on the car. So to be able to independently set suspension, steering, throttle settings and the "M" button that'll store an individual setup that you like.
The other M cars have those, there's the spot on the M2's steering wheel for the buttons, they're just not there.
Adding the temp gauges would add a little cost but not an appreciable amount.
docwyte wrote: They're complaining about the lack of a few buttons to be able to tune and store settings for things that are already adjustable on the car. So to be able to independently set suspension, steering, throttle settings and the "M" button that'll store an individual setup that you like. The other M cars have those, there's the spot on the M2's steering wheel for the buttons, they're just not there. Adding the temp gauges would add a little cost but not an appreciable amount.
I guess I'm a little confused about their complaints though, because there is no adaptive suspension option for the M2 car and I'm guessing the $1000 it costs to get it on the M3/4 is backed by some other hardware/software additions to the car that probably add to the cost as well. Maybe the throttle and steering have some sort of adjustability, but they don't even really remark on what effect the drive modes that it does have end up having on the car, so I'm left confused as to whether those aspects of the car are actually adjustable at all to some degree.
It just seems like whenever reviews like this come around they complain about getting an enthusiast car without all the extra options that likely are cut to make it a $52k no option car.
Also, they try to say that just because it doesn't have those additions it shouldn't be an M car? It has the M3 rear diff, M3 suspension, widened body to account for M3 sized wheels, special engine with more durable pistons and extra power and their benchmark about whether it should be an M car is that it doesn't have some buttons to adjust things that they already kind of admitted in the rest of the review don't really need to be adjusted.
Well, it doesn't really have a special engine. It's not a "S" code engine that the M cars have, although it uses the same pistons.
I think their point is don't call it an M car if it doesn't have all the things that traditionally have come on M cars, like gauges and the ability to set up the settings you want.
I think the suspension is adjustable between comfort, sport, sport + etc but the throttle settings, steering settings all get lumped together. You can't set the throttle in sport, steering in sport + and suspension in normal, then save that as your default the way you can in the other M cars.
I don't know, I haven't driven the car. Yeah it seems a little ticky tacky to complain about. I know I'd like to see the gauges and the fact that the drivers seat isn't centered to the steering wheel would drive me nuts...
The other forum complaints as this car was being released were that it doesn't have M mirrors, doesn't have M seats, doesn't have carbon roof...
I think the real issue is that to make this a full zoot M car, it would cost as much as the big brothers, so why bother. It is an M car lite, and it is either a pretty good deal or the M235i is a terrible deal. I think I need to see one in person to render judgment myself, but I really like small cars, so it may end up appealing. I know that the Camaro and Mustang are better buys for the money, but I just don't like the size of those cars, so that's a moot point for me, and certainly some other buyers in the market.
I agree about the gauges, temp for coolant and oil should be readily visible.
I am wondering about the offset seat thing, though they kind of mention it, but don't really say it affected their impressions of the car at all.
See, again, I'm not clear at all that the suspension is adjustable or that any of the other stuff is either. Regular 2/3/4 BMWs don't have adjustable suspensions unless you select the option (if available) and as far as I can tell they don't even fit an adjustable suspension to the M2.
I guess I just found the review had several strange complaints that popped up that contrasted quite directly with their stated desire to have a car that enthusiasts would enjoy.
It sounds like a good, fun car. It has universally positive reviews, it's as fast, if not faster than the M3/4.
What's funny is that although its much smaller than the M3/4 it doesn't really weigh any less.
From everything I've read, it's the M car to buy if you want a fun, engaging car, much more so than any of it's bigger siblings.
Hopefully I get a chance to drive one in the future...
z31maniac wrote:hotchocolate wrote:Because letting the computer fix your mistakes isn't teaching you how to feel limits. There were two guys this past weekend, one in an NC Miata and one in a new Cayman S. They were hustling the cars, but openly admitted to "throwing the cars in and letting the computer sort it out." Street driving is one thing, if you're at the track trying to learn the limits, you aren't finding them with the nannies.z31maniac wrote:Planning to attend my first track day. Is this really true? I suppose it could be to prevent brake fade/failure. Please elucidate.Mr_Clutch42 wrote: auto-x/track days.You will be suitably chastised by instructors for leaving on driving aids while on track.
Thank you. I was concerned that it would be required to be off. My first few laps I want a safety net--just in case. I am planning on not pushing it too much.
hotchocolate wrote:z31maniac wrote:Thank you. I was concerned that it would be required to be off. My first few laps I want a safety net--just in case. I am planning on not pushing it too much.hotchocolate wrote:Because letting the computer fix your mistakes isn't teaching you how to feel limits. There were two guys this past weekend, one in an NC Miata and one in a new Cayman S. They were hustling the cars, but openly admitted to "throwing the cars in and letting the computer sort it out." Street driving is one thing, if you're at the track trying to learn the limits, you aren't finding them with the nannies.z31maniac wrote:Planning to attend my first track day. Is this really true? I suppose it could be to prevent brake fade/failure. Please elucidate.Mr_Clutch42 wrote: auto-x/track days.You will be suitably chastised by instructors for leaving on driving aids while on track.
Just start with it off. I've never driven a vehicle on track with ABS/Traction control, etc.
My first vehicle on track was a Sport Bike. You'll start out conservative and slowly build good habits and speed from there.
This weekend was my first time to:
I was slow as crap Saturday morning (PS no one cares about this either, everyone is out to have fun and learn). By Sunday afternoon (after it dried out) I was putting in very clean, respectable laps. No idea on times, just compared to other cars that were blowing my doors off the day before were now giving me point-by's in a Miata with a weak engine.
Harvey wrote: I assume you're referring to me?
I was referring to at least 3 people, so it's not like i'm singling anyone out.
'm not against stability control or abs or any safety tech of that sort, but I don't think it really has a place on a track or at an autocross.
Over the years i have seen a LOT of videos of autocross crashes (that damaged cars) that literally would not have been possible if traction/stability control had not been disabled. Traction/stability control only 'hurts' you when you get up to a certain point of being able to drive a car, and a lot of people aren't at that point. I think there is a lot of learning that can be done before you run up against the limitations of the safety nannies and i feel that the open disdain for safety nannies on internet forums is part of the reason why total n00bs showing up to events turn them off right away when many of them should probably be leaving them on, at least for a while. So i don't feel that safety nannies have 'no place at a track event'. They are great for all the people who would rather learn what stability control intervention feels like, than learn what sliding into a pole or curb feels like. I'm sure you agree with this on some level and are probably just thinking more of the people who are already in the hobby than the people who are getting in and will get out real quick if they wad up their car in the first event.
Vigo wrote:Harvey wrote: I assume you're referring to me?I was referring to at least 3 people, so it's not like i'm singling anyone out.'m not against stability control or abs or any safety tech of that sort, but I don't think it really has a place on a track or at an autocross.Over the years i have seen a LOT of videos of autocross crashes (that damaged cars) that literally would not have been possible if traction/stability control had not been disabled. Traction/stability control only 'hurts' you when you get up to a certain point of being able to drive a car, and a lot of people aren't at that point. I think there is a lot of learning that can be done before you run up against the limitations of the safety nannies and i feel that the open disdain for safety nannies on internet forums is part of the reason why total n00bs showing up to events turn them off right away when many of them should probably be leaving them on, at least for a while. So i don't feel that safety nannies have 'no place at a track event'. They are great for all the people who would rather learn what stability control intervention feels like, than learn what sliding into a pole or curb feels like. I'm sure you agree with this on some level and are probably just thinking more of the people who are already in the hobby than the people who are getting in and will get out real quick if they wad up their car in the first event.
My view on this was really as an enthusiast that knows how to drive at the limit, which is how the Motor Trend article is really positioning the consumer of this car. They push this angle that the real enthusiast won't have the auto and the real enthusiast doesn't want the rev matching, but then they complain that the real enthusiast wants to have selective application of various things to save them.
Well, as someone that knows how to drive fast I would not want any of those things on when I'm driving on track or at an autocross, but I would want all of it on when I'm driving on the street, because I'm not a jerk (or I try not to be) and I don't drive like I'm on track or at an autocross when I'm on the street. There isn't really a time on the street where you disengage nannies or engage performance modes that you're not driving in an unsafe and/or illegal fashion. It's not like I haven't been that guy in the past and who knows, I might be that guy in the future, but let's admit that's what is going on.
That said, the article is really all over the place and doesn't do a good job of making it clear what is appropriate for someone that knows how to drive vs someone that doesn't. They also don't really go into what sort of driving modes are available in the car if any.
BMW keeps putting M suffixes and prefixes on more and more cars, because it earns them better profit margins. I don't hate on them for doing that, for the same reason many Porsche guys don't hate on them for the SUVs and sedans. It keeps them in business, so people who want more BMWs and Porsches will have the option to get a new one if they want one. Same deal with the cars getting bigger every redesign, it's what most car buyers want, and ultimately they have to sell cars. Electric steering, 4-cyclinder turbos, no dipsticks? Victims of fleet fuel economy standards. Heavier? Crash test ratings.
I kinda sorta think BMW always has one car in the lineup that's truly a track-it-like-you-bought-it car, and they're really only trying to have the one (okay, two if you differentiate the 3 series between two or four doors). To me, everything else just seems like a BMW daily driver with some options on it.
Z4 owners might add their car to the track-it-like-you-bought-it category. I won't arm-wrestle them for that.
The one series M is a very fast car on the track, but I don't count those, because there aren't enough of them. It's an anomaly, not a model in the lineup.
I think Porsche and Corvette are better at the track-it-like-you-bought-it thing than BMW. But damn, having a modern M3 out in the driveway for daily driving is an indulgence not to be underestimated.
P.S. Traction control at HPDE - Your instructor may tell you to leave it on. Or you may just want to leave it on. I wouldn't worry about having it on. You will be so busy learning line basics that you won't be corrupted with a little assistance from the TC. First, just figure out whether you like this enough to pour time and money into getting decent at it.
You'll need to log in to post.
