e92 M3 vs M2

[parkjake50]

Hi guys,
I plan on getting engaged soon.
Once we get engaged, we plan on buying either the M2 or e92 M3.
Currently driving a 19' Miata RF Brembo/bbs/recaro. I will be either selling/trading in (possibly next year, picked this miata up on a phenomenal used deal).
For those of you guys who currently own an m3 and drove the m2 before, what would you say is better to own?
I plan on owning one for 6 years.
It seems that the leman's blue is hard to find, hence why I am out slowly searching for one now vs M2 where there are plenty of the blue color out there.

If you guys could give me some input, i'd appreciate it.
Thanks

[Redd]

There's gotta be half a dozen M2 vs E92 M3 threads in here. Try a search.

[TomHudson]

Honestly, m3 is great...but the M2 is solid, easily tuned and new..

[parkjake50]

Originally Posted by Redd

There's gotta be half a dozen M2 vs E92 M3 threads in here. Try a search.

I have. They seem all biased.
M2 has been out for quite a bit now. I wanted to see the opinion nowadays.
I've been lurking this forum for years. There is no real reason to be toxic on the forum.
Thank you.

[MaximusB]

What are you planning on doing with the car? Just daily? weekend spirited drives? track? etc?

From a practical point of view the E92 is a lightly bigger with slightly larger trunk. Although the M2 trunk is still very much usable. Since you mentioned E92 then I assume you have no use of the back seats. But if you ever do need to put people in the back the M3 is slightly bigger, although both car's back seat will be uncomfortable.

M2 is a very solid car and newer. I've sat in one during a track day and it is extremely capable and fast.

Maintenance and running cost wise, personally I don't have experience with the M2. So I am going to assume the E92 cost more being the V8 and all. Having said that, I prefer the sound of the V8 over the turbo 6 in the M2.

Not sure if I am bias but I'd feel more special with the E92 only because it is most likely the very last V8 NA engine from BMW. All manufacturers (aside from exotics) are going FI or EV.

This is the M3 forum afterall, so I am sure you'll get feedback that favors the M2 in that forum.

[kyrix1st]

I had a test drive in M2 DCT (non comp) a while ago and I thought the car was inferior in every way to E92 M3 and even to E36 M3 3.2 euro driving wise. Interior also felt really cheap.

I do think however F82 M4 is a step up vs. E92 M3 in dynamics, so I am also interested to know if M2C is a better overall package vs. E92 M3.

[Helmsman]

Great sub forum right here OP!

https://www.m3post.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=171

The Forum Police

[New2Roundel]

They very different cars. The engine is the big difference---having a miata, I would think you would appreciate a high revving car. But the low end torque on the M2 is pretty addictive. As far as turbo motors go, it's an excellent option. Also are you talking M2 or M2 comp. The engine and chassis do differ between them. But ultimately, drive them both and see where you feel more comfortable.

[dparm]

I think you do need to consider the age difference in the cars, namely when it comes to condition and maintenance. Even a 2013 M3 is 6 years old at this point so it will show signs of wear-and-tear, and it will start needing more expensive maintenance items. Budget accordingly. An M2 is still probably going to be under warranty.

[dparm]

Originally Posted by parkjake50

I have. They seem all biased.
M2 has been out for quite a bit now. I wanted to see the opinion nowadays.
I've been lurking this forum for years. There is no real reason to be toxic on the forum.
Thank you.

Yeah well it's an M3 site, of course people will be biased towards the M3, lol.

The reason these discussions never seem to have any conclusive information is because many buyers are going to pick based on subjective qualities, not metrics like gas mileage, rear seat room, etc. In all my years of shopping for and owning performance cars, I've learned that you need to take the cars on test drives and go with your gut. I wasted way too much time reading reviews, watching YouTube videos, and reading hundreds of threads on owner forums.

To your point -- it's highly opinionated, and ultimately, you are the one who has to enjoy the car so who cares what other people think? If you drive the M2 and love it, it doesn't matter if people cut it down for "having a boring engine and no soul blah blah blah". There are guys on here that wouldn't be caught dead in a Corvette but I love mine and that's what matters.

[Helmsman]

Originally Posted by dparm

To your point -- it's highly opinionated, and ultimately, you are the one who has to enjoy the car so who cares what other people think? If you drive the M2 and love it, it doesn't matter if people cut it down for "having a boring engine and no soul blah blah blah". There are guys on here that wouldn't be caught dead in a Corvette but I love mine and that's what matters.

Spot on. It's great fun to read reviews, they could be informative and to some extend probably influence ones decision. However once money is invested its your own butt that should feel right in the seat...

[JackieChiles]

Originally Posted by parkjake50

I have. They seem all biased.
M2 has been out for quite a bit now. I wanted to see the opinion nowadays.
I've been lurking this forum for years. There is no real reason to be toxic on the forum.
Thank you.

So I guess I would ask why you think this time it would be different?

I’ve driven both and wasn’t terribly impressed by the m2. I thought it was ok, but didn’t feel special at all and didn’t handle or feel any faster than my old e92. This was disappointing because I’m a huge 1m fan. That car felt quicker and more exciting to drive to me.

It is more reliable and probably a better choice for a worry free dd.

To me, they are different enough to test drive both and I think it will be clear which you prefer.

[daarts]

OP just want to point out the M2 and M2 comp are two totally different animals. The original M2 feels like a well thought out M-sport car and the comp feels like what the M2 should have been from the start. I don’t mean to take anything away from the non-comps. They’re still fantastic cars in their own right, it’s just that the comp moved the game on in a very big way when it comes to feeling special and engaging. It’s the closest new car I’ve driven to the feel of the e92 M3. That said, you would miss out on that NA V8 symphony which is the S65.

[yarosus]

Originally Posted by dparm

The reason these discussions never seem to have any conclusive information is because many buyers are going to pick based on subjective qualities, not metrics like gas mileage, rear seat room, etc. In all my years of shopping for and owning performance cars, I've learned that you need to take the cars on test drives and go with your gut. I wasted way too much time reading reviews, watching YouTube videos, and reading hundreds of threads on owner forums.

Exactly!
Test drive both and trust in your gut! What is more appealing to you.
Forums are good to find reliability issues and maintenance cost.

I own e92 M3. Drove couple times M2 in the city and on the track and I would change my e92 m3 if price was the same.

I bought E92 M3 based on forums (rare, v8 and blah blah blah) and logic (bigger, more usable). My gut was saying get E89 Z4 :/

Btw. I owned E85 Z4 3.0si and regret selling it for e92 m3 almost every day.
I bet you will regret going from lightweight miata to heavy e92 m3. It's also not about how heavy it is, but the wheelbase is bigger so it will feel less exciting in dd.

My E92 m3 with 19.5k miles for sale now... going to get Z4 again or m235i.

[akkando]

I own an e90 m3 ZCP dct with solid subframe bushings and stiffer diff bushings. ESS tune is the only power mod. I've only had this car for just under 2 weeks.

I also own a 2017 m2 dct with a stage 1 tune and intercooler upgrade.


The e90 is all engine noise (stock) and the m2 is mostly exhaust.

The e9X have a reputation for being torqueless but that's an exaggeration. The car gets your attention when you step on it in 1st or 2nd. In 3rd the car doesn't push you back in your seat like a turbo car, but it picks up speed soooooo fast. It builds power all the way to redline and the last 1800 rpm the car seems to rev faster and accelerate very quickly, getting you into illegal speeds very very quickly. The engine wants to be revved and you have to pay attention to not get in trouble.

The m2 has fat torque and power in the low and mid range. It only revs to 7k but it feels like on shitty California gas that it runs out of steam at over 6k or even just under 6k if the stock intercooler is heat soaked. I upgraded to a Wagner Evo 2 comp and in street driving it never heat soaks and feels like it pulls to 6-6.5k consistently now. Great upgrade. Because of the low end torque and size it's more fun at slow speeds in traffic than the e9X. You don't have to rev the m2 all the way out to get the best out of the engine, but you're not rewarded when doing so. The e9X you want to go all the way, but then you're well above 90mph!

I don't have dct GTS tune (soon), but stock DCT to DCT the m2 is noticably better driven manually. I don't find myself annoyed with the speed of the e90 shifts, but every time I drive the m2 I'm like holy shit, this thing is savage. The e90 down shifts sound better, more visceral. 1st gear is more useable in the e9X though, it's long enough you can play around in it. On the m2 it's very short and only serves to get moving. Traction control seems to take over in 1st way too much in the m2. The e9X might be better with a 6 speed, feels like it wants to be more analog.

I prefer the suspension/handling of the m2. It's weakness is choppy pavement around sweepers, but other than that it just feels more planted than the e90. The e90 does communicate really well what the rear is doing, could be the after market solid subframe bushings. I suspect the best thing is a non zcp with ohlins for e9X rather than zcp. The e90 handles the choppy pavement better but doesn't seem on rails as much as the m2. The m2 feels like it rotates around me while the e90 (maybe because sedan) feels like I'm in front of where the car rotates.

The e92 has higher quality leather, but it's older, it's harder to find well taken care of seats, it's technology is older, it probably rattles more, it feels less solid (age?). So yeah it's nicer, but not really in the sense that you can just get in an m2 and everything is fresh and your phone plays nicer with the tech. Using the navigation is so much easier in the m2.

Obviously running costs for the e9X should be higher. It drinks more gas.



Really the m2 is just the easier car to drive. It's so easy to drive well, and just feels like the right size. Everything seems effortless. The e9X has more feel, more soul, but it also takes more effort. The e9X takes longer to warm up, more waiting. The hydraulic steering is nice, the m2 steering is numb, but you don't get distracted by the steering as much in the m2 when you're just cruising because it's not communicating to you the crappy pavement you're driving on. The two cars in a lot of ways are the opposite. People say the m2 isn't special, I think the m2 is more than the sum of it's parts.

Long beach blue is more pretty, interlagos blue is more handsome, but the purple in it makes it also special. Lamans blue is a very pretty standard blue. Lamans is more rare on e9X m3 than interlagos.

[M3R1]

Originally Posted by akkando

I own an e90 m3 ZCP dct with solid subframe bushings and stiffer diff bushings. ESS tune is the only power mod. I've only had this car for just under 2 weeks.

I also own a 2017 m2 dct with a stage 1 tune and intercooler upgrade.


The e90 is all engine noise (stock) and the m2 is mostly exhaust.

The e9X have a reputation for being torqueless but that's an exaggeration. The car gets your attention when you step on it in 1st or 2nd. In 3rd the car doesn't push you back in your seat like a turbo car, but it picks up speed soooooo fast. It builds power all the way to redline and the last 1800 rpm the car seems to rev faster and accelerate very quickly, getting you into illegal speeds very very quickly. The engine wants to be revved and you have to pay attention to not get in trouble.

The m2 has fat torque and power in the low and mid range. It only revs to 7k but it feels like on shitty California gas that it runs out of steam at over 6k or even just under 6k if the stock intercooler is heat soaked. I upgraded to a Wagner Evo 2 comp and in street driving it never heat soaks and feels like it pulls to 6-6.5k consistently now. Great upgrade. Because of the low end torque and size it's more fun at slow speeds in traffic than the e9X. You don't have to rev the m2 all the way out to get the best out of the engine, but you're not rewarded when doing so. The e9X you want to go all the way, but then you're well above 90mph!

I don't have dct GTS tune (soon), but stock DCT to DCT the m2 is noticably better driven manually. I don't find myself annoyed with the speed of the e90 shifts, but every time I drive the m2 I'm like holy shit, this thing is savage. The e90 down shifts sound better, more visceral. 1st gear is more useable in the e9X though, it's long enough you can play around in it. On the m2 it's very short and only serves to get moving. Traction control seems to take over in 1st way too much in the m2. The e9X might be better with a 6 speed, feels like it wants to be more analog.

I prefer the suspension/handling of the m2. It's weakness is choppy pavement around sweepers, but other than that it just feels more planted than the e90. The e90 does communicate really well what the rear is doing, could be the after market solid subframe bushings. I suspect the best thing is a non zcp with ohlins for e9X rather than zcp. The e90 handles the choppy pavement better but doesn't seem on rails as much as the m2. The m2 feels like it rotates around me while the e90 (maybe because sedan) feels like I'm in front of where the car rotates.

The e92 has higher quality leather, but it's older, it's harder to find well taken care of seats, it's technology is older, it probably rattles more, it feels less solid (age?). So yeah it's nicer, but not really in the sense that you can just get in an m2 and everything is fresh and your phone plays nicer with the tech. Using the navigation is so much easier in the m2.

Obviously running costs for the e9X should be higher. It drinks more gas.



Really the m2 is just the easier car to drive. It's so easy to drive well, and just feels like the right size. Everything seems effortless. The e9X has more feel, more soul, but it also takes more effort. The e9X takes longer to warm up, more waiting. The hydraulic steering is nice, the m2 steering is numb, but you don't get distracted by the steering as much in the m2 when you're just cruising because it's not communicating to you the crappy pavement you're driving on. The two cars in a lot of ways are the opposite. People say the m2 isn't special, I think the m2 is more than the sum of it's parts.

Long beach blue is more pretty, interlagos blue is more handsome, but the purple in it makes it also special. Lamans blue is a very pretty standard blue. Lamans is more rare on e9X m3 than interlagos.

Well said... OP, you got what you asked for. I'm not sure there is much more to add, this post is very informative and objective. As others have said go with your gut, both are great cars.

[akkando]

Originally Posted by M3R1

Well said... OP, you got what you asked for. I'm not sure there is much more to add, this post is very informative and objective. As others have said go with your gut, both are great cars.

Yeah and I would add it should be easy to test drive both and a buyer should, or better yet rent from Turo for a day.

Sorry for the rambling post.

[///Mowgli]

Originally Posted by akkando

I own an e90 m3 ZCP dct with solid subframe bushings and stiffer diff bushings. ESS tune is the only power mod. I've only had this car for just under 2 weeks.

I also own a 2017 m2 dct with a stage 1 tune and intercooler upgrade.


The e90 is all engine noise (stock) and the m2 is mostly exhaust.

The e9X have a reputation for being torqueless but that's an exaggeration. The car gets your attention when you step on it in 1st or 2nd. In 3rd the car doesn't push you back in your seat like a turbo car, but it picks up speed soooooo fast. It builds power all the way to redline and the last 1800 rpm the car seems to rev faster and accelerate very quickly, getting you into illegal speeds very very quickly. The engine wants to be revved and you have to pay attention to not get in trouble.

The m2 has fat torque and power in the low and mid range. It only revs to 7k but it feels like on shitty California gas that it runs out of steam at over 6k or even just under 6k if the stock intercooler is heat soaked. I upgraded to a Wagner Evo 2 comp and in street driving it never heat soaks and feels like it pulls to 6-6.5k consistently now. Great upgrade. Because of the low end torque and size it's more fun at slow speeds in traffic than the e9X. You don't have to rev the m2 all the way out to get the best out of the engine, but you're not rewarded when doing so. The e9X you want to go all the way, but then you're well above 90mph!

I don't have dct GTS tune (soon), but stock DCT to DCT the m2 is noticably better driven manually. I don't find myself annoyed with the speed of the e90 shifts, but every time I drive the m2 I'm like holy shit, this thing is savage. The e90 down shifts sound better, more visceral. 1st gear is more useable in the e9X though, it's long enough you can play around in it. On the m2 it's very short and only serves to get moving. Traction control seems to take over in 1st way too much in the m2. The e9X might be better with a 6 speed, feels like it wants to be more analog.

I prefer the suspension/handling of the m2. It's weakness is choppy pavement around sweepers, but other than that it just feels more planted than the e90. The e90 does communicate really well what the rear is doing, could be the after market solid subframe bushings. I suspect the best thing is a non zcp with ohlins for e9X rather than zcp. The e90 handles the choppy pavement better but doesn't seem on rails as much as the m2. The m2 feels like it rotates around me while the e90 (maybe because sedan) feels like I'm in front of where the car rotates.

The e92 has higher quality leather, but it's older, it's harder to find well taken care of seats, it's technology is older, it probably rattles more, it feels less solid (age?). So yeah it's nicer, but not really in the sense that you can just get in an m2 and everything is fresh and your phone plays nicer with the tech. Using the navigation is so much easier in the m2.

Obviously running costs for the e9X should be higher. It drinks more gas.



Really the m2 is just the easier car to drive. It's so easy to drive well, and just feels like the right size. Everything seems effortless. The e9X has more feel, more soul, but it also takes more effort. The e9X takes longer to warm up, more waiting. The hydraulic steering is nice, the m2 steering is numb, but you don't get distracted by the steering as much in the m2 when you're just cruising because it's not communicating to you the crappy pavement you're driving on. The two cars in a lot of ways are the opposite. People say the m2 isn't special, I think the m2 is more than the sum of it's parts.

Long beach blue is more pretty, interlagos blue is more handsome, but the purple in it makes it also special. Lamans blue is a very pretty standard blue. Lamans is more rare on e9X m3 than interlagos.

I own an E90 M3 and I've driven the M2 and M2C a few times and you're right on point on both. Thought I'd add my track impressions here as I got to drive them back-to-back in Sepang.

I actually drove the M5, M4 too I have to say the M2C blew them away on all counts - more planted, less body roll, more direct steering and better rotation.

The M2C I drove was a DCT and the 7000+ RPM was fantastic. The car felt small, tight and compact and was happy to kick its tail out if you provoked it. I would have preferred a manual but I'll take what I can get.

Upon getting into my E90 M3 (also DCT with a bunch of mods I won't go into detail on), it felt a slight bit looser and larger. Probably the longer wheel base. There was a bit more body roll than the M2C but not a whole lot more to it and nothing to ruin the experience. Grip levels were the same but the E90's steering and chassis were way more communicative. And when you get it up to the sweet spot in the rev range, it's intoxicating!

To me, on track both cars were superb. I couldn't choose between the two at all and if I'm in the position to decide which one to take on track again, I'd have a hard time choosing.

[Redd]

Drive both on the same weekend. See which one you miss more one week later.

[MightyM3]

The m2 and m2c are completely different animals. For 65k you get a lot of car in the M2C. I personally own a 12 E92 M3 and love it, however it does show signs of an older car. I just tipped over 70k miles and the squeaks/confidence in the car is starting to go downhill. I LOVE the sound and downshifts, but the burbles and refinement of the M2c are starting to lean me in the other direction. I may end up keeping both if my irresponsible side kicks in lol. Difficult decision, but buying a used 5+ year old car is always a gamble. Best of luck!

[Redd]

This may be just me, but I came from a couple of very nice turbo cars before my M3. Both were well modded and daily driven and tracked. In both cases, I got bored of them after 3 yrs and at year 4/5 I was looking to replace them. The M3 is the only car I have not grown bored of after 5 yrs of ownership.

In my history of car ownership, aside from the M3, the only other car I miss is my Alfa 156 V6. Both were renowned for their engine sound. So...

[Yvette]

Both great cars. I owned both. I sold the e92m mainly because I didnt drive as I thought I would be. Every time I drive the e92, I could notice its ages comparing to the m2. M2 was solid, nimble and was more fun to me.