[M2Cmtl]

stopped by the dealership today to finnaly see the car in person. They had an M3 in white and an M4 in black. Both base cars with minimal visual options (no carbon pack, seats, etc.). Interestingly enough they had my exact car right next to the two, Hockenheim silver M2C. First reaction is that there is so much more aggression that the front end is ok. Just blends in. The M2 does look "plain" next to the two, but the M4 is the ugly duckling for me. The rear/hips are just way to round. The M3 looks chunky in a good way. Came away thinking its actually a good looking car, but a bit "much". So much going on. Reason I would upgrade would be to get four doors.

[solstice]

Sh*t I just hired Matt Farrah as my stylist, having 2nd thoughts now...

[PeregrineFalcon]

Originally Posted by DocJohn

This review was well done, and really does expose some of the sloppiness in the design that transcends subjectivity. I regret watching it, because it is hard to dispute or ignore the conclusions. I'll buy one anyway, but BMW loses some luster from this....

As a designer and artist myself I can't agree that this review is that well done. And the main reason for that is the purpose of the specific design language that he did not took into consideration!

Yes, the F80 M3 is one of the best BMW designs (along with the E46 M3), and the lines are more fluid and more in harmony, but the use of the more "broken" lines in the G80 M3 design have the purpose to create aggression, presence and more sporty, more unusual, more special 3D look!





By no standards this car can be called ugly like Matt Farah wants to portrait it!
It also can't be called beautiful or pretty, but in my opinion it looks just right for the purpose it was intended, and that is to have a presence, aggression, sportiness and to be just like no other car in its class, to have that specialness no other sedan has!

Here are few examples of the cars that actually can be called ugly:





Here, everything is wrong and out of its place, and unlike the G80 where the main goal is achieved using the lines that are not in perfect harmony (unlike the F80), here the lines don't create strong character, the cars are just plain and simply ugly!

[02M3ForMe]

Farah came into the review with preconceived notions and decided to roll with them. Due to weather conditions, he drove the car more conservatively than he should've for a serious review, and he left the car in Comfort suspension to boot. Facepalm. There was little opportunity for his mind to be changed.

Reviews where the car is driven hard have been almost unanimously positive. Literally, you can see in the reviewers' faces when they begin to fall in love with the car (usually when starting the "drifting" section of these videos).

Maybe those who don't like the look are eager to hear that the car sucks so they can feel good about skipping the generation because of ... grilles. Sadly, the car's actually pretty great. M came through with another winner.

[dialogical]

Originally Posted by Pantagathus

My 6MT doesn't get the striped belts. From what I've seen none of the US 6MTs have them. Kinda sucks, I do like them, but assume you can get them after market if you really want

Damn, really? That sucks - I was hoping mine would have them.

They're just a little detail I really love.

[02M3ForMe]

I don't doubt that an even more focused machine like a Civic Type R may feel more connected to the road (I've never driven one), but I'm not sure he got the most representative sampling of the drive in the wet and in Comfort.

[PeregrineFalcon]

Originally Posted by 02M3ForMe

Farah came into the review with preconceived notions and decided to roll with them. Due to weather conditions, he drove the car more conservatively than he should've for a serious review, and he left the car in Comfort suspension to boot. Facepalm. There was little opportunity for his mind to be changed.

Reviews where the car is driven hard have been almost unanimously positive. Literally, you can see in the reviewers' faces when they begin to fall in love with the car (usually when starting the "drifting" section of these videos).

Maybe those who don't like the look are eager to hear that the car sucks so they can feel good about skipping the generation because of ... grilles. Sadly, the car's actually pretty great. M came through with another winner.

That is almost exactly the same conclusion I had after watching the review, you just saved me the time writing it

[Saphirschwarz]

Originally Posted by Jcali86

I think it's the best looking M3 since the E46, but I also don't wear baggy jeans over new balance sneakers, so I guess we all have different ideas on what looks good.

[LTJohn]

Originally Posted by PeregrineFalcon

As a designer and artist myself I can't agree that this review is that well done. And the main reason for that is the purpose of the specific design language that he did not took into consideration!

Yes, the F80 M3 is one of the best BMW designs (along with the E46 M3), and the lines are more fluid and more in harmony, but the use of the more "broken" lines in the G80 M3 design have the purpose to create aggression, presence and more sporty, more unusual, more special 3D look!






By no standards this car can be called ugly like Matt Farah wants to portrait it!
It also can't be called beautiful or pretty, but in my opinion it looks just right for the purpose it was intended, and that is to have a presence, aggression, sportiness and to be just like no other car in its class, to have that specialness no other sedan has!

Here are few examples of the cars that actually can be called ugly:





Here, everything is wrong and out of its place, and unlike the G80 where the main goal is achieved using the lines that are not in perfect harmony (unlike the F80), here the lines don't create strong character, the cars are just plain and simply ugly!

My subtle disagreement with you is in regards to areas he pointed out that suggest lazy, or incomplete implementation. For example, the jumble of panels anterior to the rear wheel is hard to excuse. No panel fits the other, and has no continuity. We know this is due to cost, but still....The harder you look at it, the more it looks like a car accident repair.

The second point that he makes that is hard to excuse is the lens placed in the grill that removes 3 vanes, asymmetrically, and obviously. The grill is a key, standout feature, and it looks like they took a hole-saw to it. The way the grill folds in to the lower spoiler edge is also rather lazy. This feature could have been sunk into an air inlet. Or, if they did not continue the grill into the lower edge of the spoiler, could have had a second smaller grill with the lens in it, ala' 911.

Lastly, I agree that the design language of the frontal view is jumbled. Sharp creases mixed with amorphous curves that end and begin randomly. It is appealing, yet ugly. Which in totum, is the way I summarize the car's styling.

[AlexFL]

Funny how the deniers get all lively and excited because they found one (1, uno, eins) really critical review of the G80/G82 while ignoring the previous 20.

[CanAutM3]

Originally Posted by EXE46

Bogus review he mentions 3850LBS which we all know doesn't relate to the base model which is less and happens to be the one reviewed here. I see countless reviewers provide false data online just like your typical car salesman and mislead the uninformed.

3,830lb is the official US curb weight for the 6MT base M4, he’s not that far off...

[gemini.m3]

Matt and Chris are old school and I don’t think their channels rely on Bmw reviews for profit like some of the reviewers that are not going to trash the new m3/m4 and not get another Bmw press car they can use for drawing eyes to their channel. The two reviewers I feel are excluded from that club have been fairly opposed to the g80

[EXE46]

We get the looks arguments which is subjective. I wouldn't call F80/82 great in styling, that title IMHO belongs to the E46/E30 M3's. However, none of that matters as much to me as the performance. I am really astounded as to how many people are worried about how they'll look driving the cars.

Boggles the mind why someone buying a performance car would consider that high priority. May as well get an exotic if one really cares about how strangers in traffic will view the car and somehow judge their otherwise connoisseur tastes in cars. Car's mind you, not art....I wonder if this level of thought is placed on attire...doubtful...

[Germanauto]

He didn't even talk about the styling until the end (which I personally don't find to be a deal-breaker). I think he made a good point that the M2 is a superior product. Looks aside, the M2 at least has kept its size/weight in check and offers a more visceral driving experience with better steering. If you need 4 doors then obviously the M3 is the way to go.

Sad to hear that the M4 is larger than the friggin M6 was. Insane.

[6speed_M2]

I think it's the perfect blend of daily driver/track car for both comfort and performance.

[MachinesWithSouls]

Originally Posted by frankiebones

Why is it that my friend who owns one has been mobbed every time he goes out with the car by people who love it? He gets thumbs up, he gets horn honks and then thumbs up, he gets compliments at gas stations, etc. and these are New Yorkers who don't say anything nice to anyone.

Confirmation bias. That's why.

I only got a production number because i know people. The car is sold out for six months or marked up beyond belief.

The car I shot on a Monday was gone on a Tuesday. Awful lot of people like them considering the hate.

[gemini.m3]

Matt and Chris Harris are old school so it doesn’t surprise me neither liked the car. It just so happens they also don’t specifically rely on BMW press cars to drive views and ultimately revenue to their channels, so I think they’re going to be a little bit more honest and not gloss over the negative like a Joe Achilles.

At this point I don’t see the reason to attack or defend the car or it’s design. Let the people who want it and like it enjoy it. For those of us that didn’t, we made our decision and spoke with our wallet (BMW got my money anyway in a form of an m2 cs lol)

I don’t understand those saying looks isn’t a reason to influence your purchasing decision.. WHAT? So I’m going to marry a 3 in looks because she’s a good cook? I’m going to want the 10, kinda the same idea. You see the car everyday I couldn’t purchase a car purely on performance, I don’t understand that logic

And that’s the beauty of free will.

[Cortexiphan]

Originally Posted by heavyD^2

Problem with a guy like Matt is unlike the car magazines that test everything from Corollas to Ferraris, he spends no time testing vehicles like the regular 3 series so he doesn't really have perspective of how the segment has grown in size. He thinks it's big based on his recollection of old M models and not the actual 3 series car it's based on. As said above the competition is equally as big and heavier in most cases. It seem like a lot of people unfairly keep using Porsche as the benchmark for these cars and not BMW's real competition from Audi, MB, Alpha, etc.

I think this is also an American point of view. When the first M3 came to US market, all other cars were like boats here. M3 was associated with being a small lightweight sports coupe. Whereas in Europe, E30 was categorized as a ‘large family car’, as it is now. There were ‘mini’ cars (Like Renault 5), small family cars (Like VW Golf) under E30 in terms of size, and the situation is still the same, but all cars in all categories grew in size.

[bri1042]

I don't think it was an unfair review at most points. He's right, I've seen some funny looks from BMW drivers. And had some of them look very happy to see it. I don't think they trashed the looks, they just repeated the line that so many others have already said. Most of the rest of the review is pretty fair. The shifter isn't as good as a good Honda shifter (but it's better than a few Honda shifters I've experienced...just not on the S2K, Type-R, Type-S level).

And some day BMW really will dial in the electric steering but for those of us who spend every day with it, we're either used to it or we've figured out that on every model ONE of the steering modes will cause you to not know what the tires are doing. In my own electric-rack BMW's, ONLY the two M cars had any steering feel and both have at least one steering mode than numbs the wheel...so I won't argue this point with anyone.

Matt hated the M2 Comp he drove, too...so I'm two of two in M Cars that he didn't really like (he loved the CS but his review of the Orange M2C was quite negative). Pretty amused by that.

I like both of these guys, but they very much want their E46 back, just like Jason Camissa does (well, Jason wants his E30 back), and just like Chris Harris does. That's what the M2 variants are for. I don't think it's great that we have to know these reviewers personal tastes and biases to get the most out of their reviews, but that's life. I'm sure that was basically true during the print days, too.

All in all, that was MORE positive than I expected it to be.

[911r]

Originally Posted by dialogical

The thing that kills me about these reviews is the complete lack of perspective. It's like they're comparing it to some mythical sports sedan that doesn't exist, instead of basing their comparisons on your other options in the segment.

The car is "super heavy"...unless you compare it to its main competitors, where it's actually one of the lightest.

The car is "way too big"...unless you compare it to its main competitors, where it's right in line with them.

The car has the "wrong transmission"...unless you compare it to its main sporty competitor, the Giuliano QV, which uses the exact same transmission.

On the topics of transmission - the fact that this is the ONLY sports sedan in its class with a manual doesn't even get mentioned. If you want your car with a stick, it's literally the only thing in its class.

Also, and it's unrelated, but he gets a bunch of facts wrong. He says that the car they are driving is a "stripper model", proving the car is way too expensive, but it has literally every option. He also thinks that the ventilated seats are $1k for some reason.

I think the car has issues, I'm not some crazed fanboy, but that review had some real lack of context and perspective in it.

I think Doug DeMuro did a great job of getting this exact point across. Like you said, what is he comparing the car to? DeMuro at least recognized this is pretty much the only high performance luxury car still widely available with a manual.

[Jproos]

I found it unwatchable and stopped less than 1/2 way through.

I don't find him to have much credibility and I couldn't care less if he hates the looks and doesn't like that cars are getting bigger over time. So is he.

[CalCarNut]

Originally Posted by dialogical

The thing that kills me about these reviews is the complete lack of perspective. It's like they're comparing it to some mythical sports sedan that doesn't exist, instead of basing their comparisons on your other options in the segment.

The car is "super heavy"...unless you compare it to its main competitors, where it's actually one of the lightest.

The car is "way too big"...unless you compare it to its main competitors, where it's right in line with them.

The car has the "wrong transmission"...unless you compare it to its main sporty competitor, the Giuliano QV, which uses the exact same transmission.

On the topics of transmission - the fact that this is the ONLY sports sedan in its class with a manual doesn't even get mentioned. If you want your car with a stick, it's literally the only thing in its class.

Also, and it's unrelated, but he gets a bunch of facts wrong. He says that the car they are driving is a "stripper model", proving the car is way too expensive, but it has literally every option. He also thinks that the ventilated seats are $1k for some reason.

I think the car has issues, I'm not some crazed fanboy, but that review had some real lack of context and perspective in it.

Cadillac CT4-V comes with a standard 6M, so it's not the only thing in it's class...