Ufficiale: BMW M2 Coupe' F87

Anche io tra M2 ed M4 probabilmente, sceglierei la "piccola", ma non nascondo che tecnicamente l'M4, specie dal punto di vista motore, ha qualcosa in più, non solo in termini numerici.

Inoltre spero che dal punto di vista dinamico la M2 non si porti dietro i difetti della 1M ma abbiano fatto tesoro delle esperienze passate. Sono anche io molto curioso della dinamica di questa vettura che, a detta di alcuni insider, rappresenta la migliore BMW M moderna prodotta. Solo che si sa, a caricare troppo le aspettative, poi, si resta delusi.

Per cui aspettiamo e vediamo /emoticons/wink@2x.png 2x" width="20" height="20">

 

Ufficiale: BMW M2 Coupe' F87

Copio e incollo.

A 24 hour endurance race had ended just the weekend before and there were plenty of scars on the concrete walls at the top of the undulating and sinewy mountain, placed there to prevent drivers from spearing down the side or into the crowds as they nudge speeds of up to 200km/h. Race drivers liken it to parts of the Nurburgring. Get it wrong and you don't get a second chance.

With this in mind, it was expected that the launch of the M2 would be at a relatively modest pace. Instructors privately talked about it as more of a "drive experience" than a "track experience". It was a time and a place to leave any "track hero" ego behind and leave room to think about the vehicles we were to drive, in my case the M2, M3 and M4 in that order.

There were four vehicles of each type in the fleet and for some the excitement of driving the M2 had to wait to the end of the day. We got to drive each for about five or six laps in rotation with perhaps a 30 minute break between them.

We were given a comprehensive briefing on what distinguished the M2 and other M vehicles, had a formal "reveal" of the car with a black satin sheet pulled off the car to a contrived show of pumping music and flashing strobe lights. First impressions are more favourable in the "flesh" than in photos. The front end is smart, the rear more polarising. The hips are relatively pronounced and I was pleased to see a "stone guard" plastic film on them to reduce or eliminate chipping of the paint.

The interior was pretty much the same as my M235i expect with some cosmetic carbon fibre bits to help create a more race-inspired ambience. They're okay but didn't float my boat. Blue stitching around the seats were similarly cosmetic. Nothing too exciting and different in the cabin, I'm afraid to say.

Sitting in the car in pit lane we received instruction to start our engines. The car was set to Sport, and we were to leave it there and not change any settings. The familiar six cylinder sound noisily erupted, but with more of a burble than the 235i. I had a plan. Drive the first lap with the car self-shifting and then start to drive it with the steering wheel paddles.

I was fortunate to drive directly behind the instructor who set the pace according to the ability of all of those behind him and this was the most advantageous place to be.

Setting out onto the track I was pleased by the apparent urgency of the M2 and the associated exhaust note which created an initial thrill, and then by the clean and rapid gear shifts. Compared with the 235i, yes, it had more go, but not by a large margin. As we headed up the back straight, it held its gear as the instructor moderated his pace and then proceeded to the redline as we picked it up again. The in-cabin sound is awesome and at similar levels to the M3 and M4, but without the raspier and more metallic note of its big brothers.

Into the first corner and the start of the 174 metre (570 foot) rise to the top up an initial one in six incline, my first disappointment was revealed. Instead of decisively and intuitively dropping down through the gears, it held a relatively high gear and used its prodigious torque to pull its way up the mountain, in much the same way that the 235i does. And so it was, all the way up the mountain. Driven this way the chassis was secure and muted, not lively, exciting or remotely challenging to control, the gearbox keeping a lid on proceedings.

Mental note, this car needs to be driven as a manual on a race track if the auto box is chosen.

Across the top of the mountain through ultra-fast sweepers the handling was secure and sure footed, and down the steep and treacherous S-bends leading onto the straight the requirements of the gearbox disappeared into the background and the emphasis turned to the brakes and agility. In a word, the brakes were awesome. If there is one thing I wish for on the 235i, it is better brakes. The M2's had immediate strength - not bite - upon application and seemed progressively reassuring in their power. They worked in harmony with the chassis and everything felt like it was working together.

Coming around to the straight presented an opportunity to experience its speed and acceleration

in a down hill run with a rise at its fastest point which, with enough speed, is enough to put your heart - and stomach - in your throat. The M2 didn't hang around as it chased the lead M4 to its controlled speed limit. The aeros on the car keep it secure up to the approximate 180km/h we were limited to, but I think my M235i with the factory aero kit fitted feels a little more planted at that and higher speeds, but I wouldn't argue the point. Snapping the car into a right bend at that speed was drama free and late braking into the slow and tight left-hander which followed was similarly drama-free. But then, when I went to accelerate out of the corner and though the next which immediately followed to the right, it once again failed to match the right gear for the speed, punting through in a drowsy gear or two too high, relying too much on its torque and not enough on its power.

Happily the car took the race line well and was absolutely secure as it picked up speed under firm acceleration through the bend as we hurtled toward to the final 90 degree corner leading onto the straight. And this is where my next issue arouse.

Frustrated by the gearbox's slothfulness in downshifting (in Sport, remember) I tapped the paddle to drop into second from third under brakes and before turning in. Hello, is there anyone home? I'm still approaching the turn and I want second gear . . . when are you going to change? So, this is another observation of that car, on that day - the gearbox upshifts manually nicely and very smoothly compared with its bigger brothers, but down shifts seem to be something the car decides is appropriate (or not) sometime after you ask for it. For me, this is a serious black mark and frustration, but probably one that can be easily resolved by BMW if that is what it really wants to achieve.

I don't want to go on endlessly. I'll make some of my other observations in summary form:

The car felt much more responsive driven manually with the driver picking the right gear for the conditions rather than relying on the car to determine the best gear, but you have to be patient for it to arrive.

The car, at the modest speeds driven, felt very secure and cornered flatly and without the slightest hint of oversteer or understeer. How it would be when pushed to its dynamic limits, smoothly or clumsily, is impossible to determine on a day like this.

Swapping from the M2 to the M3 and M4, it was clear that the bigger brothers had sharper steering, felt more poised and planted, more dynamically responsive and felt much more "race car". The contrast was stark, but this does not mean the M2 is lacking. The M2 has beautiful poise and balance. The M3/4 feel comparatively raw and less forgiving.

The M2's power is satisfying, not savage. The big brothers once again shone in this department with a great top end surge and more metallic sound down the straight the than baby M.

How the baby M will go under very hard braking from higher speeds than those achieved on the day will be interesting to learn. I found the M3/4 a bit unsettled and floaty under brakes from 200km/h, but I reference that against my Porsche GT3; perhaps an unfair comparison.

At no time did I feel the traction control or ABS intervene on the M2, pointing to terrific grip and cornering poise when driven swiftly and in challenging cornering conditions. The downhill corners at Mount Panorama are in places very steep, very sharp and at times blind, and every one of them was taken absolutely securely with a nicely fluid turn-in. Understeer and oversteer were not even on the radar.

The M2 is a fun track car. I think it will bring out the best in most early to intermediate drivers by delivering smooth, predictable and fluid performance in a very balanced package, and for more advanced drivers I think it has the potential to bring out the larrikan and just satisfy with consistent and predictable performance. It won't be hard or scary to drive fast. Very likely you'll wave to the 235is as you pass them under brakes or exiting the corners.

Whether it is a good road car remains to be seen. The M2 lacks adjustable road and sport damper control settings which the 235i enjoys and which helps to make the 235i a great sporty - but comfortably compliant - road car. It also doesn't have all of the sound-deadening material ripped out, so road noise can be expected to intrude into the M2's cabin. And will it rise above the high performance levels of the rival A45AMG and RS3?

None of these questions could be answered on this beautiful and exciting day at Mount Panorama. This is something we are going to have to wait to read about when the driving pro's report their findings under various test conditions. Once again, I thank BMW for the privilege. It was an awesome experience.

Final note: Porsche Carrera Cup winner and multiple Mt Panorama champion Steve Richards was filmed doing a hot lap in the M2. Keep an eye out for it. It will surface at some time and will show what the M2 really is capable of achieving (on standard road tyres!). >>

Inviato dal mio iPhone utilizzando Tapatalk

 

Perciò sarebbe più selvaggia e orientata alla pista l'M3/M4 ? mi sembrava che le opinioni precedenti fossero il contrario. Mah, aspettiamo qualche prova di qualcuno dei nostri..

 

Il passo della F32 è più lungo di 5cm, mentre le carreggiate aumentano davanti di 4cm e dietro di 7,7cm: era peraltro notorio quanto fossero limitate le carreggiate delle E9X, tanto che nel LCI le aumentarono leggermente.

Insomma, continuo a ritenere del tutto trascurabile l'incremento delle dimensioni della F32 rispetto alla E92 /emoticons/wink@2x.png 2x" width="20" height="20">

 

Infatti, non si puo' definire la F32 una macchina enorme... /emoticons/wink@2x.png 2x" width="20" height="20"> Secondo me gli oltre 60 cv in piu' compensano ampiamente la differenza di peso, anzi forse vanno anche oltre...Con la GTS poi non c' è storia! /emoticons/wink@2x.png 2x" width="20" height="20">

 

passo e carreggiata della M2 sono conosciuti, invece?

 

salute savage,

il peso della M 2 in configurazione normale è di 1495 kg stando ai dati ufficiali; non molto diverso da quello della M 4 ( che però di serie ha i cerchi da 18 , almeno mi sembra);

con il cambio a doppia frizione dovrebbe restare intorno ai 1.540 kg

 

Secondo me in ordine di marcia alla fine sarà una 50ina di kg + leggera della ///M4...

 

http://www.auto-data.net/it/?f=showCar&car_id=19878

http://www.auto-data.net/it/?f=showCar&car_id=9868

http://www.auto-data.net/it/?f=showCar&car_id=9872

http://www.auto-data.net/it/?f=showCar&car_id=9880

Passo, carreggiate crescono

- - - - - aggiornamento post - - - - -

http://www.auto-data.net/it/?f=showCar&car_id=19879

peso qui 1497kg

è simile di dimensioni e passo a GT-R

 

Le auto crescono in prestazioni e dimensioni.

Noi acquirenti siamo sempre più esigenti e in molti chiedono sempre più spazio!

ecco, noi grandi uomini prendiamo auto per portarci dentro le nostre grandi donne!

Eccone una che da l'esempio



ci servono auto grandi se volgiamo riempirle di donne no?

 

In definitiva prima delle verifiche sul campo abbiamo

La M4 1497 Kg con i cerchi da 18" (potrebbero pesare uguale o poco più dei 19")

La M2 1495 Kg

Il DKG pesa 25 Kg per tutte e 2

Per le prestazioni sul misto va anche tenuto conto che

La carreggiata anteriore è identica la posteriore 2 mm in + la M4

Mentre il passo della M4 è ben 120 mm più lungo...... questo è significativo

Ritengo che sul dritto i 61 cv in + della M4 si faranno sentire

E sul misto vedremo ( dipende quale misto)

 

Si:

- carreggiata anteriore 1579mm

- carreggiata posteriore 1601mm

- passo 2693mm

Bmw M4 invece:

- carreggiata anteriore 1579mm (uguale)

- carreggiata posteriore 1603mm (pressoché uguale)

- passo 2812mm (+12cm, come indicato da Fighter)

 

Starei comunque più fedele al dichiarato. Non mi farei false speranze nel peso

 

grazie a entrambi. purtroppo ho potuto reppare solo fighter /emoticons/sad@2x.png 2x" width="20" height="20">

in effetti, 12 cm in meno di passo sono tanti. penso a una strada di montagna, un percorso tortuoso...

 

per esempio la 1M ha un passo di 2660 mm

 

Passo piu corto = piu difficile avere 50/50.

Inviato dal mio GT-I9515 utilizzando Tapatalk

 

http://www.zeperfs.com/duel4936-5974.htm

qui indicano una bella differenza di peso!