Are BMW ever going to go back to building lightweight sporty cars?

File: camaro can't turn3.png (464KB, 1018x568px) Image search: [Google]

464KB, 1018x568px

both the m2 and the m4 are lighter than the camaro

faster aswell

The current M5 isn't even that heavy, and dyno's to way more power than BMW says it has. It'll be faster than you're shitbox that's for sure.

>>14821596
Yeah but it won't be as fun.

>>14821615
>600whp
>RWD
>not fun
Interesting perspective.

>>14821581
BMW has always built shit.
Why do you morons like this company?

>>14821595
>conveniently fails to mention price

Euro internet defense force pls leave

>>14821680
>2SS 46k
>m2 51k


>5k difference
>relevant at all

KEK!

File: image.jpg (93KB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 640x640px

>>14821693
>spec the BMW and it's a 15k difference
max par

>>14821759
there are only a couple of options for the BMW m2 and its the DCT, which you shouyldn't tick and an "executive" package that costs $1,250

at least try to work on your bait before posting it

>>14821809
Ok thanks for you're advice.

sure, if people buy them for that reason
>meaning; they won't, because people buy the badge now

>>14821693
>M2 base price is 51k
>SS base price is 37k
>actually a 14k difference

2/10 apply yourself

>>14822001
>base SS
sadly motortrend tested a 2SS

>>14821581
No, pudge, gadgets and softness sell now. Nobody cares about lightness, responsiveness and handling anymore, it's all about those numbers.

>>14822011
A base 1SS would be faster since it has all the same performance bits as the 2SS but is weighed down less by luxury items.

MT said the M4 would have been in excess of 90k if they tested it with the same amount of features as the 2SS. So they should have brought a higher spec'd one or compared it to a baser model for a fair comparison.

>>14822038
>A base 1SS would be faster
citation needed

>>14822021
Think how much worse it will get when this generation of teenage internet benchracers start buying cars