[MSurge]

Haven’t seen this discussed much - the direct connection of the rear suspension without bushings is a big deal. Chris Harris called it “the elixir of motoring” when he reviewed the M4. The lack of bushings provided an unprecedented connection between his foot and the rear wheels.

This is a big deal, as is the balljoints in the front suspension. Porsche does that with the GT3 and GT2 cars, over the regular 911s.

[kfscoll]

Probably because it’s not unique or new to the M2C. The OG M2’s rear suspension is directly bolted to the subframe also (i.e. no bushings).

[chris719]

The benefit is also not without compromise it would seem, as BMW has gone away from this in the new M5 despite using it on the previous generation.

[M2_Purist]

Originally Posted by kfscoll

Probably because it’s not unique or new to the M2C. The OG M2’s rear suspension is directly bolted to the subframe also (i.e. no bushings).

Nice find! 100% confirmed?

[M3_WC]

Originally Posted by Z435is

Nice find! 100% confirmed?

Common knowledge, same M4 rear axle subframe bolted directly to body(both M2’s).

[flyaway]

I can't help asking my self enviously what "elixir" might the OP be consuming... I mean, we see people taking BMW koolaid on a regular basis but this got to be much stronger

[MSurge]

I see, thanks.
Then it looks like just the ball joint front suspension (what Porsche does on GT3/2 911s) and the 5mm lower ride height are the suspension differences.

[Tag]

Originally Posted by MSurge

I see, thanks.
Then it looks like just the ball joint front suspension (what Porsche does on GT3/2 911s) and the 5mm lower ride height are the suspension differences.

The new ball joints are in the rear. Where in the rear is still unknown, hope to learn more when reviews come out. The difference in ground clearance is not due to the car sitting lower, it's either the revised front bumper or taller muffler.

[MSurge]

Originally Posted by Tag

The new ball joints are in the rear. Where in the rear is still unknown, hope to learn more when reviews come out. The difference in ground clearance is not due to the car sitting lower, it's either the revised front bumper or taller muffler.

Everything I’ve read says the balljoints are in the front. They replace the bushings. Rear has no balljoints.

[Tag]

Originally Posted by MSurge

Everything I’ve read says the balljoints are in the front. They replace the bushings. Rear has no balljoints.

"...while at the rear the M division has used ball joints in the suspension for greater stiffness and precision."

Source: 2018 BMW M2 Competition - still want that Audi RS3?

Page 20 under chassis Magazine Article

[MSurge]

Thanks for clarifying.

[M2_Purist]

Originally Posted by Tag

"...while at the rear the M division has used ball joints in the suspension for greater stiffness and precision."

Source: 2018 BMW M2 Competition - still want that Audi RS3?

Page 20 under chassis Magazine Article

Haha so no elixir for M2C?

[M3_WC]

[MSurge]

Originally Posted by M3_WC

Oh Ya! Mark my words, when the press start reviewing this car, the wait list will grow! And with only 1-2 years of production... it has a shot at becoming collective.

[MSurge]

Ooh, Chris Harris trashed the M5C:
New M5 Comp has all of the things it doesn’t need (more power, more yob etc) and not what it does need (camber, not looking like a 520d)

[M2_Purist]

Originally Posted by MSurge

Oh Ya! Mark my words, when the press start reviewing this car, the wait list will grow! And with only 1-2 years of production... it has a shot at becoming collective.

#1. Chris seems to like fun, tossable cars
#2. Sound could be completely different and worse
#3. No more direct rear bolted frame (his “elixir” haha)

So we will see. He can easily neg the C

[//M]

Originally Posted by Z435is

#1. Chris seems to like fun, tossable cars
#2. Sound could be completely different and worse
#3. No more direct rear bolted frame (his “elixir” haha)

So we will see. He can easily neg the C

Rear subframe is still directly bolted.

[hellrotm]

Originally Posted by Z435is

#1. Chris seems to like fun, tossable cars
#2. Sound could be completely different and worse
#3. No more direct rear bolted frame (his “elixir” haha)

So we will see. He can easily neg the C

#1) M2C will be tossable(chassis stiffening, electric steering refinement from CS cars, ball joints rear)
#2) He still talks about his signal green M3, he loved it(aka the S55 driving experience)
#3) Wrong...rear subframe is still directly bolted.


You know what’s coming in a few months. Chris Harris sliding the crap out of the Competition around a track, revving out the S55. Burning through tires, all while wearing a giant grin on his face. Classic Chris Harris in a rwd BMW with a manual.

[squareznboxez]

From what i've read the only thing the M2C will have over the M4C is the ability to spec the 2NH M-sport brakes (6Pot F/4Pot R with 400mm F/380mm R steel discs) as a relatively low-cost option ($3000 AUD), where as on the M4 the only option is ceramics which add $18,000 AUD to the overall cost.

The M4C has the carbon roof, merino interior and better appointments (ie. HUD) and probably better weight distribution as the chassis and S55 were developed for each other.

[THEROK]

Originally Posted by squareznboxez

From what i've read the only thing the M2C will have over the M4C is the ability to spec the 2NH M-sport brakes (6Pot F/4Pot R with 400mm F/380mm R steel discs) as a relatively low-cost option ($3000 AUD), where as on the M4 the only option is ceramics which add $18,000 AUD to the overall cost.

The M4C has the carbon roof, merino interior and better appointments (ie. HUD) and probably better weight distribution as the chassis and S55 were developed for each other.

M4 also has a cf trunk.

[M-Pilot]

Originally Posted by squareznboxez

From what i've read the only thing the M2C will have over the M4C is the ability to spec the 2NH M-sport brakes (6Pot F/4Pot R with 400mm F/380mm R steel discs) as a relatively low-cost option ($3000 AUD), where as on the M4 the only option is ceramics which add $18,000 AUD to the overall cost.

The M4C has the carbon roof, merino interior and better appointments (ie. HUD) and probably better weight distribution as the chassis and S55 were developed for each other.

M4 has the same 52/48 weight distribution as the M2C. Also, most people are interested in an M2 mainly because of its size, driving dynamics (already proven for OG M2, still waiting for the M2C reviews), etc, and they usually don't care about what kind of leather it has or other bells and whistles. In fact, they (including myself) are looking for less of that fancy features and gadgets.

[squareznboxez]

Ah yes you're right, the other factor despite the close curb-weights is the shorter wheel base of the M2, which i think for most people will more than compensate for the weight disadvantage.

Regarding the weight dist. you also have to consider the center of gravity where i would speculate the M4 would a lower value due to the carbon roof and trunk.

Either way it is a very nicely specc'd car on it's own merit when you consider the shorter dimensions and flared body work, S55 motor and improved 6sp manual, suspension and 6/4pot brakes, m3/4 seats. It's probably better value over a base M4 to many fans.