[TXGrey]

Originally Posted by Tallest

The litmus test of design - do people say it looks best in black? If yes, design is a failure.

This car has some outstanding design elements like the box flares but it has a pathetic front end, terrible rear bumper and tail lights. As OP says those are soft bits that can be fixed with LCI. I hope they do.

To me, this car has as much beauty to it as 2005 Mitsubishi Lancer WRC that did very poorly but looked radical.
I actually rather liked that car's looks, it was ugly but purposeful.


To me personally, the new M2 gives out the same vibes. Ugly but purposeful.


Basically it looks like a car that was designed soft for road, and then motorsport devision went bonkers on it and added some functional bits to fit bigger radiator, wheel travel, etc. It now looks like it does. It makes me want to see what the production version looks.

The M2 looks like a tarmac racing prototype in a way, and may be thats how I say it looks cool. But its not pretty, OP.

I think this post pretty much sums up what my brain seems to think… it looks “purposefully built”. Whether that is actually true, or whether it’s “good or bad” looking certainly won’t be left to my judgement. Hell, I can’t even get one up and down my driveway, so there’s that…

[awg87]

Originally Posted by Matt 335is

I respect your opinion, but I disagree with the above quote.
It is the E82 (1M) that still makes the F87 look and feel mild. The F87 is the softest one of the 3 and if I were to rank them from best to worst or most attractive to least attractive it'd go like this:

1) E82 (1M)
2) G87
3) F87

when did people start thinking the e82 1-coupe was good looking? is it just good looking through nostalgia goggles? pretty sure it wasn't long ago when the e82 was universally panned for being ugly lol

[wesleyan92]

Originally Posted by yousefnjr

Good lord deliver me from Frank Stephenson and guys whining about muh cohesive

OMG, so true and the words straight out my mouth. The level of glory Frank gets amongst us BMW fans is ridiculous. There is a reason he is no longer designing BMWs. It is easy to be stuck in the past and rest in your laurels.

[MMMGuy60]

Originally Posted by Lex Templar

The G87 looks like an absolute beast to me. Those that are getting one, love it. That's all that really matters.

Look at the pumped guards in this picture posted on another thread by @silverlining_m2

I agreed, the G87 M2 looks like what an M car should be. The F87 looks just like any Bmw in the last 20 years. It is so dated compared to the G87.

[JustChris]

These posts are always so cringey…and front page these days wow is this the summary:-.

“I hated the G87 due to my F87 perfection complex, but (shock horror) now I’ve grown up and actually seen on and ordered it…. I like it”.

Almost every time

[m2ss]

Originally Posted by m3number86

The new Ms all look decent or as good as itll get in black bc it hides all the atrocities. Even the xm passes in black

I wouldn't go as far as "atrocities" but it does hide the areas that seem to be causing such a disturbance.

Color matching the front and rear bits with the main color would go a long way to calm people down...IMHO of course.

[markcu24]

Originally Posted by horan116

This is straight copium. You guys trying to justify your addiction to commercialism. The design element of this car are objectively bad in virtually all segments.

Takes something that is inherently SUBJECTIVE (like looks) and claims it is "objectively" bad. Man, I really hate idiots like this. "My OPINION is fact." What a clown. Drives an M2 and claims we all have an addiction to commercialism. Great work, hypocrite.

[SexyRoger]

Originally Posted by ihbase

For weeks, anyone with eyesight and even the slightest appreciation for design principles has been piling on the new M2 as flat out ugly. Everyone, including Frank, and all of us who wish we had Frank's talent, were wrong. And this is why.

With the G87, BMW got the important design criteria correct; the hard points are perfect and an LCI can could easily correct the two obvious failures.

First, the hard points. I've attached a couple photos of a car I looked at yesterday. I left with this thought: The G87 is to the F87 as the F87 was to the E82 (1M) - each successor makes its predecessor look and feel mild. I sold a 135is before buying an f87. The 135is had 2 things in spades on the M2; steering feedback and sound. But the f87 is an objectively better car. Same with the g87 and the f87. There are exactly two compromises (unmentioned here), but the g87 is an objectively better car using the criteria relevant to the segment.

There. I said it.

The tile lines on floor in the photos below provide reference for how aggressively the fenders flair out from the body. Note the rocker width; it's massive! Also note how the rocker now sweeps up to protect the leading edge of the rear fender. This means that after minor contact or tons of rock chips, you are buying a rocker and not body filler. Thanks BMW.

Next, when you sit in the driver's seat of the g87, observe the outside character lines of the hood. These have the effect of diminishing the visual width of the car- just as the perfect hood lines of the e90 performed the same function. It is a design criteria feature lost with the f-gen cars and I'm glad it is back with the g87.

Last, note the proportion of the rear quarter to the rest of the car. Unlike my f87, the rear quarter proportions appear less awkward. And while I'm picking on my f87, let's be honest about its own glaring design failure- the fake fender vents. The G87 has done away with them. Point g87.

In sum, the hard points from the front fenders, hood / cowl height, rockers, roof and rear quarter are each extraordinary. I recommend that when viewing the new M2 in person for the first time, inspecting those aspects closely. A healthy appreciation for BMW's design success with the hard points is helpful when confronting the failures- the front and rear bumper covers.

And man, those two soft points are ugly. The upside is this; those are not hard points - which means that unlike cowl height or roofline, they can easily be remedied at the LCI stage or with whatever versions BMW will subsequently issue like trading cards.

The interior? Well, hate to say it, but the seats and materials feel like a step up from my f87. The sound system is superior. And while the massive screens are not my favorite, they are well laid out (boost gauge!), intuitive, and other people make like them just fine- that, screen presence, is much more subjective whereas the hard points on the g87 are objectively beautiful. I dislike screens. You may love them.

The net net is this: I was wrong. The g87 feels like an excellent successor to the f87. The hard points are a stunning design achievement. Let's hope the factory corrects those absurd bumper covers in subsequent versions of the M2.

Whether g87 succeeds in becoming the last best ICE BMW, or whether the F87 will retain that crown, requires the hindsight of history.

That said, did I trade my f87? Hell no. I appreciate the rowdy nature of the f87 and I have regretted selling cars in the past. I'm just saying that I was wrong about the G87- from a design perspective, and when viewed in person, its hard points are design perfection.

Maybe ask me about trading again sometime after the LCI.

I am struggling to have this M2 or a Gt4 as my track car. GT4 many of them are built w 18 way seats and manual. This makes it not the best thing for a track car. This one may prove to be very unreliable on the track as last 3 M cars had major brake issues.

[m2ss]

Originally Posted by Matt 335is

I respect your opinion, but I disagree with the above quote.
It is the E82 (1M) that still makes the F87 look and feel mild. The F87 is the softest one of the 3 and if I were to rank them from best to worst or most attractive to least attractive it'd go like this:

1) E82 (1M)
2) G87
3) F87

Funny how subjective looks can be to individuals.

I rank M cars in terms of aggressiveness and having owned a 1M and currently own an M2C I would rank them as follows now that I have seen the G87 in person:

1-G87
2-F87
3-E82

[m2ss]

Originally Posted by Tallest

The M2 looks like a tarmac racing prototype in a way, and may be thats how I say it looks cool. But its not pretty, OP.

BMW is not the only one moving to sharper lines.

This was my 22 R8 and the new sharp look vs previous generations also caused a stir, to many it was ugly, personally I loved it...

[LCDRJohn]

Originally Posted by Kstoff125

Design is going to be subjective, I personally don’t care for it, but would never try and pursuade someone from buying the car if they like the looks.

What I can’t understand is how the car weighs 3,800lbs…it looks small(ish) in pictures. I would expect this to be closer to <3,400.

It’s no wonder the power is grossly underrated, if it was only 460hp it wouldn’t move like it does.

Let me just throw my 2-cents in.

It is true that the E92 is a dimensional analog to this car, and that car weighed about 3590LBS (190lbs lighter than this M2), which at the time was also deemed "heavy". So we have some point of reference.

But much has transpired since then, and the same E92 would weigh several hundred pounds more today. The reason is the almost unbelievable chassis strength they are designing into certain cars today. These cars have strong "bones". Consider too, that the E92 was not turbocharged, which can easily add 100lbs to a design. But back to the chassis; this BMW frame is capable of low offset hits into barriers at 45mph with no deformation of the passenger space. And recent advances in side protection, which is something that really packs on weight, have been demonstrated in the latest crash tests. So, they build tank-like protection, which brings tank-like weight.
Earlier this year I was in a serious accident with a bus, and I was driving a rental Golf. The bus was speeding and nearly t-boned us at 70mph. The golf, which I always considered "heavy" at 3300 lbs, had almost no intrusion into the passenger space. We all had concussions and some soft tissue injuries, but I was able to open my door and fall out without assistance. That's why they weigh a ton! I for one, welcome the weight, but only if it means survivability. I drive a miata on most days and I enjoy the lightness, but not when I almost get smashed 1-2 times each week by distracted drivers.

[ellipsis212]

Originally Posted by TXGrey

“Japanese styling…”. I was JUST thinking about this earlier today/yesterday reading a a 80/90s JDM article… and I remember stopping and thinking “hmm… the new M2 is reminiscent of these 80s and 90s JDM cars… I wonder if I’m the only one that thinks that?”

It’s just the “unfinished body kit” look that makes it seem related as half the Japanese cars from that era ended up sporting one.

Someone please Photoshop the bumpers in primer grey so we can test this.

[1stM]

Peugeot e-legend is also going retro in square design with softer lines.

[TXGrey]

Originally Posted by ellipsis212

It’s just the “unfinished body kit” look that makes it seem related as half the Japanese cars from that era ended up sporting one.

Someone please Photoshop the bumpers in primer grey so we can test this.

[F32Fleet]

Having a G42 one of the biggest annoyances is the deep side skirt. We constantly find ourselves hitting the side skirt with the soles of our shoes when exiting.

[Mavus]

Originally Posted by M2CS

When it comes to certain types of vehicles, buyers do care about where it was made. I doubt many Porsche enthusiast would be excited to purchase a non-German made Porsche. Also good luck selling a Ferrari or Lamborghini that wasn't made in Italy. A non UK made McLaren wouldn't sell either.

Cayenne is built in Bratislava and in Malaysia

[Chet for short]

Originally Posted by F32Fleet

Having a G42 one of the biggest annoyances is the deep side skirt. We constantly find ourselves hitting the side skirt with the soles of our shoes when exiting.

Will definitely need PPF film on the side skirts (should we call them running boards?).

[ROBM2C]

Lol

[StickyPickle]

Originally Posted by m2ss

BMW is not the only one moving to sharper lines.

This was my 22 R8 and the new sharp look vs previous generations also caused a stir, to many it was ugly, personally I loved it...

Which is funny because I loved that Audi sharpened the lines of the R8 (just wish they didn’t ditch the manual after the first gen).

[StickyPickle]

All the people who are ragging on the G87’s looks (and have never seen one in person) should watch SketchMonkey’s video on it. It really shows the aggressive profile of the car in a way almost no other video I’ve watched do as well. Focus on the silhouette, lines and profile of the car. This video does a good job of how it looks irl imo but you still need to see one irl to truly judge it.

https://youtu.be/2U9BnJB4Q80

[m2ss]

Originally Posted by StickyPickle

Which is funny because I loved that Audi sharpened the lines of the R8 (just wish they didn’t ditch the manual after the first gen).

Same arguments as here, new design looked botched/after thought while old design looked too soft/feminine.

I actually give car performance much more weight, the 991.2 TT was not a very good looking car IMHO but could squash anything I've owned on the road or track...lol

[NotSharocks]

I said it for the G80/2/3 cars and I will say it again.

If you HAVE TO BUY THE CAR IN BLACK, it's not a good looking car.

It's not a horrible looking car by comparison to the G80/2/3 but it's definitely not good looking comparative to the 1M and the M2.

I can understand design architecture changing, that's normal. These leaps however are so far from where the predecessors were, that it's almost unrecognizable.

Also, they got rid of the Hoffmeister Kink.

That cannot go unpunished. Straight to the Gulag, all of you.