[msmatt]

There have been a ton threads, articles and videos about comparing the CS to other ~$100K cars out there, particularly the GT4. These comparisons, in my mind, have not been that interesting because I see them more or less as apples and oranges.

The M2 (and most BMW M cars) is a sporty car, performance car, whatever you want to call it, but is not a true sports car. I would differentiate the difference based on the car’s original design and development. M cars are derived from a standard model range, 4 doors, tourings etc. A Cayman for example was designed from the get go as sports car, something to run on the track and optimized for racing vs usefulness.

Now, don’t tear me apart, I’m not taking anything away from the M2, great car, lots of fun and super fast. And a Sporty Car can be better than a sports car, but its still not a sports car. The funny thing is a BMW M car has always dominated this space, it can function just as well as an ordinary standard car, but can shred sports cars on the track, this was the always the original appeal.

So what do you all think, is the M2 a sports car?

[mfarrzhp]

It definitely blurs the lines of sports car definition. It's not a 911, Cayman, Corvette, or Lotus. There are pros and cons to that, but it's a better daily than any of those. I can do a full Costco run in my CS with my kids in the back seat.

I think it blends the performance of a sports car with the utility of a good size 4 seater coupe better than any car available. Maybe the C63s and RS5 are in the same conversation, but you can't get a 6 speed in either of those and they are both heavier.

I've extensively driven both a McLaren and GT3 on the street, and they are almost boring unless you find some long desolate stretch of highway. The CS feels like a joy every time I get in it.

If I was going to extensively track my car, I would have gone with something a bit more raw. This is the most fun I've had on for a comfortable daily commute. It stays true to its roots of the smaller M3s of the past.

[///M2CS]

the strength of the M2 CS is summed up in a high-performance toy that shines with its consistency and versatility

[Al Bundy's Dodge]

Not a sports car.

[classj]

Originally Posted by Al Bundy's Dodge

Not a sports car.

I hate definitions but I tend to agree. My definition of a sports car is a low, small, light two seater or with tiny back seats. Noisy. Harsh. Curvy. Painfully not practical and needs to have a sense of occasion.

The CS is awesome. But I parked next to one of my sports cars and it looked as tall and body as a shoebox Chevy.

With that said, the CS is the car I want to drive every day. It has room inside it. A nice trunk. Etc

[Romo]

M2CS is a sporty car, far too refined and heavy for a pure sports car.

Its is relatively quiet, you sit fairly high, more on it than in it.

It lacks the raw character, the purity of the GT4

The difference is night and day. If I switch to the CS it feels like a Rolls Royce compared to the GT4

But what do I know

[///M2CS]

Originally Posted by Romo

M2CS is a sporty car, far too refined and heavy for a pure sports car.

Its is relatively quiet, you sit fairly high, more on it than in it.

It lacks the raw character, the purity of the GT4

The difference is night and day. If I switch to the CS it feels like a Rolls Royce compared to the GT4

But what do I know


[IMG]https://f87.bimmerpost.com/forums/at...8;d=1610819980[/IMG]

not false ! but for those looking for a real sports car, there are definitely better than the Cayman GT4

[ASAP]

Lol... if we start going by everyone's definition of what a sports car is, then we will end up in what is nonsensical banter.

By everyone's thoughts here - an M2CS is less of a sports car than say a Nissan 370z...

Then what is a GTR... a 4wd Offroad SUV w 4 seats? It weighs 3900 lbs lol.

[Peterometer]

I don't understand why every fucking thread here ends up with some jabroni posting pictures of a GT4? Do these people not know there are Porsche forums too?

[jbse39]

To me, M cars’ attraction is that they do most things reasonably well and can serve as daily and track day fun car. They are versatile, and why I love my e36 M3 so much and decided to go for the CS. If I did not already own a 997GT3, though, I am not sure I would’ve spent the money on the CS, especially given that I already have my M3. I consider M cars, especially the M3s and M2, sporty cars, sort of like multi-role fighters. Porsche GT cars are too focused and like another poster said earlier, simply not fun on the road. This is the reason mine is mostly driven on the track as it is more frustrating than fun to drive on the street. Conversely, this is why I enjoy driving my M3 on the street so much, because I can wind it out and have fun at reasonable speeds. It will be interesting what it will be like to drive the M2 CS on the street and occasional track day, once it gets here.

[VisualEcho]

Originally Posted by msmatt

So what do you all think, is the M2 a sports car?

Your answer is; it depends.

Years ago I did quite a bit of research on the origin of what people call a "Sport Car" by today's standards, and I have very old books detailing it well. I say "by today's standards" because the term itself is very old. But many enthusiasts, myself among them, consider the first modern Sport Cars to be British in origin, and follow the model below.

- Sports Car
- GT (Grand Touring Car)
- Muscle Car
- Super Car
- Hyper Car
- Race Car

For the moment, forget about Super Cars, Hyper Cars, and Race Cars, and see that the top 3 older names are distinct for a reason; the Sports Car is on one end of the spectrum, the Muscle Car on the other, and the GT Car right in the middle where it tries to give you the best of both worlds.


The definitions of the top 3 look like this:

- Sports Car - 2-seat, open top, manual, F/R or M/R, lightweight, radio, and with the major purpose being handling and fun

- GT Car - A balance between a Sports Car and a Muscle Car, a "have your cake and eat it too" sort of car

- Muscle Car - 4-seat, hard top, automatic, F/R, weight nor handling nor radio a concern, with the major purpose being ¼-mile prowess


These aren't absolute definitions, but they are the best I can find, and they make sense to me, so I use them.

So, in answer to your question; the M2 is a GT Car (to me).

[ptgltw]

With a couple mods, it can become quite the Sports car.

However this is BMW's secret sauce.

BMW makes a car that walks the fine line between daily drivable and sports car. That's what makes this car special.

You want to take it toward more sports car? Do a few mods. Suspension, Exhaust, Maybe seats and a roll bar and you've tilted the scale to sports car.

The M2 CS toes this line better than any other BMW in quite some time. Add in a 6 speed manual and magic happens for some.

How else does it beat arguably the best 3rd best Mclaren ever built? And the Almighty Lambo

[Moflow]

Originally Posted by ASAP

Lol... if we start going by everyone's definition of what a sports car is, then we will end up in what is nonsensical banter.

By everyone's thoughts here - an M2CS is less of a sports car than say a Nissan 370z...

Then what is a GTR... a 4wd Offroad SUV w 4 seats? It weighs 3900 lbs lol.

I had a 350z before my M2 comp, and they overlapped by a couple of months so I had lots of opportunities to drive them back to back. The 350z was way worse and way slower, but it did feel more like a classic sports car, thanks in large part to the seating position and feel of being lower to the ground. That said, the Z is based on the generic FM platform. I’ve driven a Z and a Miata back to back and the Miata is WAY more of a sports car than the Z.

It’s a continuum, you can draw your lines wherever. And also, where a particular car is on that continuum doesn’t really say anything about how good of a car or even performance car something is.

[buckybadger]

It's a sporty car.
Sports car are more hardcore.

[medphysdave]

I go with sporty car that gets the accolades it does because of how it blurs the line between sporty car and sports car. It puts down numbers that it shouldn't in it's category, but you have to pay a high price for it's position.

Performance costs money. We pay a high price to have a do all car. It's a masterpiece in my opinion.

[ScullyD]

Originally Posted by msmatt

There have been a ton threads, articles and videos about comparing the CS to other ~$100K cars out there, particularly the GT4. These comparisons, in my mind, have not been that interesting because I see them more or less as apples and oranges.

The M2 (and most BMW M cars) is a sporty car, performance car, whatever you want to call it, but is not a true sports car. I would differentiate the difference based on the car’s original design and development. M cars are derived from a standard model range, 4 doors, tourings etc. A Cayman for example was designed from the get go as sports car, something to run on the track and optimized for racing vs usefulness.

Now, don’t tear me apart, I’m not taking anything away from the M2, great car, lots of fun and super fast. And a Sporty Car can be better than a sports car, but its still not a sports car. The funny thing is a BMW M car has always dominated this space, it can function just as well as an ordinary standard car, but can shred sports cars on the track, this was the always the original appeal.

So what do you all think, is the M2 a sports car?

Its definitely a sporty car and not a sports car, based on the way you outlined the definition above, because its not a dedicated sports car chassis. But reviewers consistently rated the M2 CS on par with cars that were dedicated supercar chassis as far as fun factor.

So then this starts a bigger question. Unless i'm driving on a track, why do i want a dedicated sports car chassis based car? Personally, if its an open top car (Miata, S2000, Boxster, Elise), it makes complete sense to me cause you are getting that turn-in, harder ride coupled with the wind in your hair and its a visceral experience. Makes any beautiful day drive an occasion, and then the car can be used a few times a year on colder days with the top up.

Now why people buy a 718 GT4 instead of a 718 Spyder as a road-only car for nice days is something I just do not understand, for example. If you are taking your car to the track on a regular basis, then the GT4 is a no-brainer.

But if you are getting a GT4 to do one track day a year and then road drive on nice days only, but then you look at a car like the M2 CS as overpriced, I think you are a total poser. M2 CS is probably as exciting as a GT4 on regular roads, rides beautifully, gets sideways a bit on backroads, and can swallow a bunch of groceries. Makes much more sense for someone who wants to use a car everyday and on normal roads only then a dedicated sports car. Its just not for someone who wants to go to their friends "i drive a Porsche GT4!" Personally, I just like to go for a fun long drive blaring some tunes, shifting for myself on back roads, and not have anyone look at me like i have anything special. A BSM M2 CS works just fine for me.

[ptgltw]

If an M2CS does a 2nd gear burnout for 2 minutes and no one saw it (video included) how do they know it smoked the tires?

These are questions that have no answers. Ah takes me back to Philosophy 101

[killerdeck]

Originally Posted by ScullyD

Its definitely a sporty car and not a sports car, based on the way you outlined the definition above, because its not a dedicated sports car chassis. But reviewers consistently rated the M2 CS on par with cars that were dedicated supercar chassis as far as fun factor.

So then this starts a bigger question. Unless i'm driving on a track, why do i want a dedicated sports car chassis based car? Personally, if its an open top car (Miata, S2000, Boxster, Elise), it makes complete sense to me cause you are getting that turn-in, harder ride coupled with the wind in your hair and its a visceral experience. Makes any beautiful day drive an occasion, and then the car can be used a few times a year on colder days with the top up.

Now why people buy a 718 GT4 instead of a 718 Spyder as a road-only car for nice days is something I just do not understand, for example. If you are taking your car to the track on a regular basis, then the GT4 is a no-brainer.

But if you are getting a GT4 to do one track day a year and then road drive on nice days only, but then you look at a car like the M2 CS as overpriced, I think you are a total poser. M2 CS is probably as exciting as a GT4 on regular roads, rides beautifully, gets sideways a bit on backroads, and can swallow a bunch of groceries. Makes much more sense for someone who wants to use a car everyday and on normal roads only then a dedicated sports car. Its just not for someone who wants to go to their friends "i drive a Porsche GT4!" Personally, I just like to go for a fun long drive blaring some tunes, shifting for myself on back roads, and not have anyone look at me like i have anything special. A BSM M2 CS works just fine for me.

This is almost my exact sentiment. Not only can the CS do all the above but it can fit a child seat (or two!), enough stuff to go for a family weekend outing for me, and provides other versatility that a true sports car just can not. BONUS: Wife would not approve a daily that was a sports car, but endorsed the CS wholeheartedly.

[Jimjamz]

If owners put it on a track and race it, it is by very definition a motorsports car.

[(K)]

Years ago when I was working at a machine shop, one of the older machinists made a comment during break about my (then new) Accord V6 coupe with a 6 speed. "Must be nice to have a sports car!" My response was that it wasn't a sports car, not even close. HIS response was "Yeah. That's a sports car, look at it." I guess back when cars were a little more honest, the Honda would have passed as a sports car.

Piggybacking off of VisualEcho's post, my point is that the definition of a sports car has evolved over the years as new models start to fill niche markets and the lines blur. I'm a bit old school myself but in a world of hyper cars, SUVs, and "cross-overs" I would consider the M2 family as a proper sportY car and the CS as the upper end of sporty.

Lastly. An Accord is NOT a sports car.

[classj]

I responded earlier but maybe this makes more sense of it.

I own a 991.2 T and a 944 among a few other things plus daily driver BMW’s (E90 and M40i X3) and whatnot. I had a 981 Cayman for 5 or 6 years.

The CS is new and awesome and somehow I made sense of buying it since it is much more practical than a dedicated sports car.

But I would never, could never, consider it a replacement for one of the Porsche’s. It is actually more similar to my 06 Mustang GT in size and concept than any of the Porsche’s I have owned or driven.

[ptgltw]

Originally Posted by classj

But I would never, could never, consider it a replacement for one of the Porsche’s.

I agree. I’m a believer in their old advertising slogan.

There is no substitute.

Especially the 911, it’s the best all around sports car ever made.

And I haven’t even mentioned the GT cars yet.

I have a 944 race car but for the street there is nothing like a 911. For Porsche it’s 911 ( the best ) or nothing for me. I’ll pass on a gt4