I had to leave a few BMW facebook groups after the ridiculous whining comparing the G42 to the OG. Many on there think tracking is the only purpose for cars and the M2 is the best on Earth (they got really upset when I said I would get a sports car instead, like the Zupra, Z, Porsche, Louts, etc.).
I also said for $50K that the M240i has more creature comforts and wins in a straight line (how people drive most of the time), literally facts. I was then informed that the M240i is like a Camry and the OG M2 is a Ferrari F40, lel. Fake enthusiasts have no concept that people use cars differently.
I actually plan to track the 2, but realize that will only be for couple hours a year... so if it's 30% worse than the M2 on it, so be it. Like most, my driving will be majority city & highway cruising, with maybe a quarter of the time that I can push it a bit (twisty roads, on-ramps, etc.). Based on my math, the G42 would be 30% better for this ratio. You would have to spend a LOT of time on the track for the M2 to come out ahead (in my scenario, it's 6% better when you are spending only 1/3 of the time in the city or cruising):
Overall, even if you give the G42 half the styling points of the M2, in my book it comes out on top, but BARELY at 73/100 pts. Some put more value on the rarity / coolness factor though (I only put 5 points) or don't care about snow/mpg/tech, etc. though. Once again, this is my personal assessment for a year-round car in a snowy city that'll only see the track once a year, if that:
