RE: BMW M2: Review
Discussion
Vocht said:
D200 said:
I did.
I was agreeing with you and replying to Vocht
My argument wasn't really 'Just map an M235i and it's the same thing'. I've no doubt and M2 has much slicker components than an M235i but when, in the real world, the price difference is closer to £15-£20k, are you actually going to get that much more fun out of it? I was agreeing with you and replying to Vocht
There's no doubt the M2 is the better car but I'm confident if driven back to back, and then asked if the 50% price increase was worth it a lot would find it hard to justify. Especially considering the interior differences (or lack of).
Do that with an M235i and an M4 and the gulf is much much greater.
Plus I don’t know where you are getting the 20k or extra 50% price difference
As tested M2 is 46k. Evo, ph and autocar en recently tested an M235i's and the prices were around 40k – 6k difference.
Even if the M2 was - which it isn’t! - 15k more than M235i i still think it would be worth the extra
Plus the M2 will retain its value better than the 235i
So I think the price difference is in fact negligible
I think the M2 will kill M235i sales
I don’t know how limited or hard to get an M2 was, but it’s a no brainer in my opinion over a NEW M235i
D200 said:
Sorry, I don’t mean to be argumentative [and am not singling you out] but some people’s implication was the M2 is little more than a remap and not worth the extra money. I just fundamentally disagree with that.
Plus I don’t know where you are getting the 20k or extra 50% price difference
As tested M2 is 46k. Evo, ph and autocar en recently tested an M235i's and the prices were around 40k – 6k difference.
Even if the M2 was - which it isn’t! - 15k more than M235i i still think it would be worth the extra
Plus the M2 will retain its value better than the 235i
So I think the price difference is in fact negligible
I think the M2 will kill M235i sales
I don’t know how limited or hard to get an M2 was, but it’s a no brainer in my opinion over a NEW M235i
just a discussion. And I mean the price difference imo isn't negligible as the real world cost of each is around 50%. Here's an example of a brand new auto M235i brokered by Broadspeed for £30,641. An equivalent standard auto M2 is £46,715, a huge £16,074 difference.
I know the M235i is discounted but thats what I mean by real world figures. You can't get a significant discount on an M2 as there's already a lengthy waiting list for them.
Anyway, I guess some people can justify that 50% (real world, right now) price increase for those upgrades but for me personally, I don't feel it would bring a significant enough experience difference to justify choosing an M2 over something like an M4 in that price bracket.
However, having said that, I myself would get an M235i and S2 Elise for the price of an M2.
D200 said:
All this chat over the seats is madness.
But I guess this is ph, if some people say they wouldn't buy this car solely based on the seats, well, fair enough whatever floats your boat...
They aren't that bad in my opinion, sure there are nicer seats in certain cars but they are perfectly fine
Plus its not 50k, list/base price is 44k and as tested PH price of car with options is 46k
I think 46k is reasonable price for this car. For example PH recently tested an A45 AMG it is cost 45k. And while it seats are nice I think the who feel and quality of the car - esp the interior - feels cheap for a 45k car. Never mind everything [e.g. the engine, dynamics etc etc]
An Audi RS3 is able about the same price.
Its £44k for the manual or £46k for the auto, all other options will be on top of that. There is a nice catalog of upgrades if you have the pennies to spend: http://www.bmwblog.com/2016/03/26/pricing-bmw-m2-m...But I guess this is ph, if some people say they wouldn't buy this car solely based on the seats, well, fair enough whatever floats your boat...
They aren't that bad in my opinion, sure there are nicer seats in certain cars but they are perfectly fine
Plus its not 50k, list/base price is 44k and as tested PH price of car with options is 46k
I think 46k is reasonable price for this car. For example PH recently tested an A45 AMG it is cost 45k. And while it seats are nice I think the who feel and quality of the car - esp the interior - feels cheap for a 45k car. Never mind everything [e.g. the engine, dynamics etc etc]
An Audi RS3 is able about the same price.
While you could certainly get by with a standard car most will be closer to £50k as most will have the auto and a few upgrades. The RS3 is about £40k with a long list of options, so at best will be a couple of grand cheaper.
Personally I'd go Focus RS or Golf R or something even cheaper as a daily and spend the money saved on a second hand Caterham/Locost 7, as that's exactly what I did. I don't think the cheaper hot hatches are any better than the M2, just the opposite, but I'd rather have something more focused for the track and cheaper to fix when it breaks on track.
D200 said:
All this chat over the seats is madness.
But I guess this is ph, if some people say they wouldn't buy this car solely based on the seats, well, fair enough whatever floats your boat...
They aren't that bad in my opinion, sure there are nicer seats in certain cars but they are perfectly fine
Plus its not 50k, list/base price is 44k and as tested PH price of car with options is 46k
I think 46k is reasonable price for this car. For example PH recently tested an A45 AMG it is cost 45k. And while it seats are nice I think the who feel and quality of the car - esp the interior - feels cheap for a 45k car. Never mind everything [e.g. the engine, dynamics etc etc]
An Audi RS3 is able about the same price.
But I think you are missing the point that it is about £50k once someone specs it to just a very reasonable level and the seats are crap.But I guess this is ph, if some people say they wouldn't buy this car solely based on the seats, well, fair enough whatever floats your boat...
They aren't that bad in my opinion, sure there are nicer seats in certain cars but they are perfectly fine
Plus its not 50k, list/base price is 44k and as tested PH price of car with options is 46k
I think 46k is reasonable price for this car. For example PH recently tested an A45 AMG it is cost 45k. And while it seats are nice I think the who feel and quality of the car - esp the interior - feels cheap for a 45k car. Never mind everything [e.g. the engine, dynamics etc etc]
An Audi RS3 is able about the same price.
The A45 AMG feeling cheap has nothing to do with this conversation.
For much less money there are lots of other cars where manufacturers give you a nice set of sears but in the m2 tgey are not even an option.
rb5er said:
D200 said:
All this chat over the seats is madness.
But I guess this is ph, if some people say they wouldn't buy this car solely based on the seats, well, fair enough whatever floats your boat...
They aren't that bad in my opinion, sure there are nicer seats in certain cars but they are perfectly fine
Plus its not 50k, list/base price is 44k and as tested PH price of car with options is 46k
I think 46k is reasonable price for this car. For example PH recently tested an A45 AMG it is cost 45k. And while it seats are nice I think the who feel and quality of the car - esp the interior - feels cheap for a 45k car. Never mind everything [e.g. the engine, dynamics etc etc]
An Audi RS3 is able about the same price.
But I think you are missing the point that it is about £50k once someone specs it to just a very reasonable level and the seats are crap.But I guess this is ph, if some people say they wouldn't buy this car solely based on the seats, well, fair enough whatever floats your boat...
They aren't that bad in my opinion, sure there are nicer seats in certain cars but they are perfectly fine
Plus its not 50k, list/base price is 44k and as tested PH price of car with options is 46k
I think 46k is reasonable price for this car. For example PH recently tested an A45 AMG it is cost 45k. And while it seats are nice I think the who feel and quality of the car - esp the interior - feels cheap for a 45k car. Never mind everything [e.g. the engine, dynamics etc etc]
An Audi RS3 is able about the same price.
The A45 AMG feeling cheap has nothing to do with this conversation.
For much less money there are lots of other cars where manufacturers give you a nice set of sears but in the m2 tgey are not even an option.
PH car as tested is 46k. When I spec one it comes up slightly less.
A45 is related to this, as it’s the manufacturer’s main rival’s most direct competitor.
It has nicer seats, rest of the car vastly inferior. So if seats is the only thing interest you go buy a 55k A45
I rounded it up, as that seems to be a common ph theme, as you can spec A45s to 55+k
Edited by D200 on Monday 18th April 16:45
To compare M235i and M2 you also need to take account of the stuff that is std on the latter, like pro nav and the diff.
Also, why is it that people refer to the "as tested" prices ? There is no obligation to add anything, irrespective of what others do. And I can't think of any fast depreciating gadgetry that either car needs anyway.
But still, M2 probably not that more expensive if short term (lack of) depreciation can be exploited...
Also, why is it that people refer to the "as tested" prices ? There is no obligation to add anything, irrespective of what others do. And I can't think of any fast depreciating gadgetry that either car needs anyway.
But still, M2 probably not that more expensive if short term (lack of) depreciation can be exploited...
Vocht said:
D200 said:
Sorry, I don’t mean to be argumentative [and am not singling you out] but some people’s implication was the M2 is little more than a remap and not worth the extra money. I just fundamentally disagree with that.
Plus I don’t know where you are getting the 20k or extra 50% price difference
As tested M2 is 46k. Evo, ph and autocar en recently tested an M235i's and the prices were around 40k – 6k difference.
Even if the M2 was - which it isn’t! - 15k more than M235i i still think it would be worth the extra
Plus the M2 will retain its value better than the 235i
So I think the price difference is in fact negligible
I think the M2 will kill M235i sales
I don’t know how limited or hard to get an M2 was, but it’s a no brainer in my opinion over a NEW M235i
just a discussion. And I mean the price difference imo isn't negligible as the real world cost of each is around 50%. Here's an example of a brand new auto M235i brokered by Broadspeed for £30,641. An equivalent standard auto M2 is £46,715, a huge £16,074 difference.
I know the M235i is discounted but thats what I mean by real world figures. You can't get a significant discount on an M2 as there's already a lengthy waiting list for them.
Anyway, I guess some people can justify that 50% (real world, right now) price increase for those upgrades but for me personally, I don't feel it would bring a significant enough experience difference to justify choosing an M2 over something like an M4 in that price bracket.
However, having said that, I myself would get an M235i and S2 Elise for the price of an M2.
You could also buy plenty of used ferrari's, porsches, amg mercs, M3s, M4s, M5, for 50k or load of Superbikes
I'm talking about walking into a BMW garage
M2 is well worth the difference in price to a 235i
And its better than its competition - which is the A45, Audi RS3 or top end TT
Regarding the prices you could get a M235i for [you could get used one or demo ones for less], this is my opinion is besides the point. It just make it a bargain - e.g. for the price of a Golf GTI or 308 GTi you could get a M235i
D200 said:
Personally I think it’s crazy to discount the car due to your opinion that the seats are rubbish, there is nothing wrong with them in my opinion. There are nicer seats available in different cars yes but, to me anyway, it’s not the be all and end all. They are not that bad
PH car as tested is 46k. When I spec one it comes up slightly less.
A45 is related to this, as it’s the manufacturer’s main rival’s most direct competitor.
It has nicer seats, rest of the car vastly inferior. So if seats is the only thing interest you go buy a 55k A45
I rounded it up, as that seems to be a common ph theme, as you can spec A45s to 55+k
Not sure about your obsession with the a45. I am only talking about this car in confinement. But on your point I can't see a rwd coupe being a rival for an awd 5door hatchback in any area except price and performance. They are very different layouts with very different practicalities.PH car as tested is 46k. When I spec one it comes up slightly less.
A45 is related to this, as it’s the manufacturer’s main rival’s most direct competitor.
It has nicer seats, rest of the car vastly inferior. So if seats is the only thing interest you go buy a 55k A45
I rounded it up, as that seems to be a common ph theme, as you can spec A45s to 55+k
Edited by D200 on Monday 18th April 16:45
Also I never said I would not buy the car because of the crap seats. I merely pointed out that there are cars worth 1/3 of what this costs and yet they will put in some nice seats which lifts an interior massively. In the M2 a decent set of seats are not even a cost option which seems very odd.
rb5er said:
Not sure about your obsession with the a45. I am only talking about this car in confinement. But on your point I can't see a rwd coupe being a rival for an awd 5door hatchback in any area except price and performance. They are very different layouts with very different practicalities.
Also I never said I would not buy the car because of the crap seats. I merely pointed out that there are cars worth 1/3 of what this costs and yet they will put in some nice seats which lifts an interior massively. In the M2 a decent set of seats are not even a cost option which seems very odd.
You are the one who appears to be obsessed with the M2's seats. I am simply stating that to me - and I suspect the many others - it’s not that big a deal.Also I never said I would not buy the car because of the crap seats. I merely pointed out that there are cars worth 1/3 of what this costs and yet they will put in some nice seats which lifts an interior massively. In the M2 a decent set of seats are not even a cost option which seems very odd.
Who cares about this cars engine, handling, trick diff, butch looks etc. – if it’s got so so seats?
I mention the A45 for the reasons I stated. It’s a direct competitor to this car, fact. Lots of people want to buy an ‘AMG’ Merc, ‘R’S Audi and ‘M’ BMW. I know someone who is trading their A45 for an M2. They are both very similar price, very performance, both can seat 4 and have reasonable boot etc and are from BMW and Mercedes - rival car makers. Sure the AMG is more practical for most the M2 is more than suffice.
I know you didn’t but others in this forum have said they wouldn’t buy the M2 it due to its seats.
Although you keep going on about how complete;y unbelievably and inexplicably s
t they areI have not been in or driven an M2, but have a M235i. I thought its interior was very nice, high quality, even the seats were nice! Compared to the A45 lol or a Mustang – I felt the interior have a general feeling of much higher quality.
You can stick a nice setoff seats in any car – e.g. you would take 911 GTS RS seats and stick them in an old Hyundai but it won’t make it a great interior or great car [in my opinion, you are entitled so have your own]
D200 said:
You are the one who appears to be obsessed with the M2's seats.
Although you keep going on about how complete;y unbelievably and inexplicably st they are
Errm not quite sure why you think the above, it was only a mild criticism. If you had not continued to quote me for a reply on every post my only post in this thread would have been my first one when I (essentially) said "great car, shame about the crap seats". Hardly obsessed.Although you keep going on about how complete;y unbelievably and inexplicably s
t they areNow I see you are an owner of said crap seats I understand your excited defence of them.
Edited by rb5er on Monday 18th April 21:56
Aesthetics aside I can not see why anyone would buy this over an M4?? They both perform so closely that there will be little to no difference on the road. Regardless of the article I do not buy it that the M2 is more nimble than the M4 on normal B road blasts. Throw in a race driver perhaps but for the average driver there will be no difference.
They needed to do more on the engine front and it should have no rear seats. Not that the seats are of any use if the driver is over 5'4.
I think they have missed a trick with this car, such a shame.
They needed to do more on the engine front and it should have no rear seats. Not that the seats are of any use if the driver is over 5'4.
I think they have missed a trick with this car, such a shame.
vz-r_dave said:
Aesthetics aside I can not see why anyone would buy this over an M4?? They both perform so closely that there will be little to no difference on the road. Regardless of the article I do not buy it that the M2 is more nimble than the M4 on normal B road blasts. Throw in a race driver perhaps but for the average driver there will be no difference.
They needed to do more on the engine front and it should have no rear seats. Not that the seats are of any use if the driver is over 5'4.
I think they have missed a trick with this car, such a shame.
I'd definitely pick this over an M4They needed to do more on the engine front and it should have no rear seats. Not that the seats are of any use if the driver is over 5'4.
I think they have missed a trick with this car, such a shame.
s m said:
vz-r_dave said:
Aesthetics aside I can not see why anyone would buy this over an M4?? They both perform so closely that there will be little to no difference on the road. Regardless of the article I do not buy it that the M2 is more nimble than the M4 on normal B road blasts. Throw in a race driver perhaps but for the average driver there will be no difference.
They needed to do more on the engine front and it should have no rear seats. Not that the seats are of any use if the driver is over 5'4.
I think they have missed a trick with this car, such a shame.
I'd definitely pick this over an M4They needed to do more on the engine front and it should have no rear seats. Not that the seats are of any use if the driver is over 5'4.
I think they have missed a trick with this car, such a shame.
vz-r_dave said:
s m said:
vz-r_dave said:
Aesthetics aside I can not see why anyone would buy this over an M4?? They both perform so closely that there will be little to no difference on the road. Regardless of the article I do not buy it that the M2 is more nimble than the M4 on normal B road blasts. Throw in a race driver perhaps but for the average driver there will be no difference.
They needed to do more on the engine front and it should have no rear seats. Not that the seats are of any use if the driver is over 5'4.
I think they have missed a trick with this car, such a shame.
I'd definitely pick this over an M4They needed to do more on the engine front and it should have no rear seats. Not that the seats are of any use if the driver is over 5'4.
I think they have missed a trick with this car, such a shame.
I prefer the looks to the M4..... but I liked the 1 coupes as well and many people liken them to Noddys car
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff