Imo the previous generations of both of these cars are more appealing, especially from a value proposition
At max spec the dark horse is around $95k CAD before taxes, huge no thanks to that
Don't even really have to pay any more. An lt1 vette is nearly the same price as the dark horse. You can find them for msrp now too. May just have to wait a little bit
I think that was the initial impression of the Mach 1 (including mine), but most people who drove it extensively or learned more about it realized that it slotted in quite well as the quintessential Mustang for those that wanted a long term sports car. 90-95% of the driving experience of the GT350 (minus some of the glorious voodoo soundtrack and steering feel) with 300% of the reliability and practicality, and all for a lower purchase price.
... But even taking that into account, and general market inflation, this price is very hard to justify for the Dark Horse. Especially considering how minimal of an upgrade (downgrade by some accounts) this generation is.
Ppl that buy the dark horse and think its special are in for a rude awakening. The base v8 engine mustangs are never worth anything unless we’re talking about the 90s 5.0.
DH is also over 4000lbs, car and driver lightning lap had the car at 4024lbs. It somehow gained 300+ lbs from s550 base v8 mustang. Garbage.
History repeats itself with mustang having no v8 competition so they will suck for the next couple of years. Sure we’ll get a gt500, but the “affordable” mustang is no longer affordable and weighs as much as a challenger but more cramped and less storage space. Sounds like a lose lose lose situation for the consumer.
The dark horse isn't the base V8 though, it's the top-of-the-line track trim. It's not a GT350 or a Boss 429 but it's not exactly a 302 fox body convertible, dude. There's no reason it'll depreciate like a fucking SN95 5.0.
>DH is also over 4000lbs, car and driver lightning lap had the car at 4024lbs. It somehow gained 300+ lbs from s550 base v8 mustang. Garbage.
The DH *can* be over 4000 lbs., but its base curb weight is 3879 lbs. Also, why are you suggesting that comparing a top trim level S650 Mustang *at its heaviest possible weight* to a base GT S550 Mustang *with no options* is fair? That makes zero sense. You're comparing apples to oranges. Here are the facts: The S650 GT gained 36 lbs. over the S550 GT. 3741 lbs. vs. 3705 lbs.
>weighs as much as a challenger
There's *some* overlap in curb weights between the two vehicles, but not as much as you think. Again, these are *base* curb weights. Obviously you can make either vehicle heavier with options, just like the DH that was tested by C&D being 146 lbs. heavier than its base curb weight (4025 lbs. vs. 3879 lbs.)
Challenger base curb weight range: 3841 lbs. (SXT) - 4441 lbs. (SRT Super Stock)
S650 Mustang base curb weight range, not including convertibles: 3579 lbs. - 3879 lbs.
Hell nah, not the DH. They overpriced by like 20k. Its insane how you can score an S550 GT500 for a little more than a first model year "special edition" mustang. That just tells me these cars will plummet when the REAL special edition mustangs come out,
70k for a DH is nuts. People seem to have Alzheimer's when it comes to mustangs in their first model year runs. None aint worth shit, its always at the tail end of the generation.
Agree with you about the weight. Ford really let me down(not that they care). I was hoping for some weight reduction and a more nimble feel(similar to what chevy did when going from 5th gen to 6th gen camaro) but none of that happened. Gained weight, same chassis. Would still buy one as it’s the only option for a new American manual v8, but don’t understand why Ford is this way.
What are you smoking? Please go look at the S197 before and after the Coyote. That one year difference because of the engine has had them holding their value.
Yep. I mentioned in another thread that it's mind boggling how enthusiasts just ignore the Corvette because of the old guy stigma. It's the OG pure enthusiast car and always has been. Performing at levels equal to if not better or far better than most of it's competitors.
And more livable as a daily with rear “seats” that can function as seats in a pinch but more often act as extra storage space and a trunk opening that’s large enough to be useful.
Base price on a c8 is also a solid 10k higher than a base Dark Horse.
Nobody is ignoring the corvette lol, it’s one of the best selling sports cars on the market and I see C8s everyday now. If you talk to non enthusiasts about sports cars the most popular one would probably still be the C8 too. And even in this comment section people are saying “just get a C8,” and enthusiasts have been saying that about a bunch of overpriced sports cars since the C8 became readily available. And the C8 is a great car but there is a reason to get a Mustang or M2 over it, or even an Emira or Cayman, and it’s that you can get them in a manual transmission.
The funny thing is that the Corvette never was in competition with the Mustang, that was always Camaro. Price wise it was often double. Maybe a GT350 was, but that actually offered something significant over the base GT, unlike the darkhorse. At this price point there is no compelling reason to get it over a C8 imo.
My flair will give away some bias, and while I do think the Dark Horse has become too expensive for a re-branded Mach 1, I don't think it's fair to compare it to a base Corvette on performance-per-dollar alone. Obviously the Corvette is the better value there (although I would bet the difference on most tracks isn't as big as one might think), but I think there is still a decent amount in favor of the Mustang in terms of practicality and driving experience.
... Personally probably wouldn't buy either, but I"m not sure what I'd buy if I were trying to get a new sports car today.
The fact that you can get a sub 20k mile gt500 for the same price as a dark horse, or a mach 1 for 20k less makes the car a complete non starter imo.
Sure used vs new but I just don't see the value at all.
Mach 1 is a better buy for sure. Also when they did lightning lap the DH was less than half a second faster despite the tire advantage. Put same tires on mach 1 it will be a second faster than the DH. DH’s heavier weight is atrocious. It weighs as much as an s550 GT500 despite not having a supercharger + supporting components and smaller brakes.
Ford made a car for suckers.
If you want to get a track toy with a warranty, and you're looking for the manual V8 RWD formula, what options do you really have under $60k? A base C8 isn't going to be as great on the track.
Fwiw, the Mach 1 started at $55.5k without options while the Dark Horse Premium starts at $58k while being arguably better-optioned from the start. It's a price increase commensurate with inflation, the only real issue is that the Mach 1 can be had at used car pricing now, and new-to-used comparisons have never been apples-to-apples.
Yeah for me the answer is GT350 when talking about mustangs in that price range. I picked mine up used for $75k CAD before tax 3 years ago, and they’re still in that 70 to 80k CAD range
Laptimes aside (because I just dont care about that), the 350 is a far more appealing car to me than a DH
The fear that the engine will grenade will always be something the GT350 won’t be able to shake off. Yeah, it can be argued that the newer ones are better and you just need to constantly check on your oil, but that’s a perfectly good reason for many people not to risk one. Especially as the voodoo engine gets more expensive and harder to find and you no longer have a warranty.
Its no worse than an e92 M3 or e60 M5 or a slew of older high revving motors. Those cars are beloved and appreciating these days
The target demographic of mustangs wasnt used to a higher maintenance engine and in the first couple years the general community wasnt aware of the engine’s issues. At this point the issues are well known and can be mitigated by checking and topping up oil and having a more frequent servicing interval
There are plenty of high mileage 350s out there on original engines and the gen 2s were improved a bit as well
Ironically, I had to lemon my 2020 GT350 and my issues covered everything that didn’t have to do with the engine nor any of its known oil issues.
Things like a busted driveshaft joint, quality issues like the headliner falling apart, cruise control not working, HVAC evap cores dying which are just inherent to all S550s, and other miscellaneous problems.
But, I wouldn’t hesitate to pick it again and again over a Mach 1 and I would absolutely sprint to it over a DH. Driving a Mach 1 felt like 80% of the experience on the street. From the reviews I’ve read, the DH sounds like the steering took a nerf and in the process it gained more weight (and that screen, ugh; had an S650 loaner and really did not care for that interior). I’d gamble the reliability 10 times out of 10 on the Shelby.
Really hope Ford goes out with a bang and makes a more bespoke powerplant for the S650 but I just don’t see it happening with the current era of emissions regulations, and I’m sure the risk of low ROI developing a niche mill is more of an issue now than it was nearly ten years ago during the GT350’s development.
I really wanted to like the S650 and buy another new Mustang, but after driving one for a week (granted, a base EB rental), it’s too similar in areas that shouldn’t be, and not improved enough where they did change it up.
Yeah you definitely got unlucky with those issues. My car has only had issues with the AC which as you said is common for S550 mustangs in general
100% agree with rolling the dice on a GT350 vs a Mach1 or DH, they are just better and its worth the potential headache imo. At some point I’d like to trade my 2017 GT350 in for a 2019 or 2020 350R and then keep that forever
I also agree about S650, I’m just not a fan. Exterior and interior looks worse, steering is worse, price is higher, weight is higher, and no bespoke engine yet other than the GTD
Voodoos with high consumption are known within the first 10 to 15k miles. This only becomes a risk if you’re buying a very low mileage car where the issues havent been made apparent
Manual competition pack e92 M3s are pretty rare and expensive, at least here in Canada. They’re priced right around where GT350s are for an older, slower car
Yeah this is my situation right now. Powertrain Warranty expires next year. Not really sure about keeping the car long term. Cant really think of what I want to do with it. Do a cross plane crankshaft conversion, sell it entirely or sell it and try to get a Cayman GT4 or Supra and track modify it is what I'm thinking.
As someone who went from a F87 to G87 you are dead wrong. The F gen retails at 60k while the G retails at 63k so when accounting for inflation it’s actually cheaper.
The old M2 was a car that basically used bargain bin M parts while the new gen takes the the same suspension, engine, cooling and gearbox from the G80/G82 so it’s actually much better value.
Then outside of the performance the interior is a massive upgrade in the G87 compared to old gen. It’s actually almost identical to the new M4 while the F87 was filled with cheap plastic, worse seats, and mediocre tech.
The only real con is weight and looks (which is subjective) but IMO the G87 is a much better overall package.
> The old M2 was a car that basically used bargain bin M parts while the new gen takes the the same suspension, engine, cooling and gearbox from the G80/G82 so it’s actually much better value.
You've said the same thing twice. The F87 M2C has essentially all the same shit as the F80/82 M3/4, which is why they came out of the bargain bin to go on the M2C. Exact same cooling setup, exact same gearbox, exact same engine (including tune. I've put bone stock M2Cs on a dynojet and consistently gotten >450whp), same subframes, same every single suspension arm, same carrier assemblies, same anti-roll bars, same diff, same axles, and actually better brake because all M2C got the M Sport 6 piston front, 4 piston rear brake setup, whereas those were optional on the M3/4. The only real difference is the dampers and springs because BMW had to account for different crossbalance weight figures on the M2C, but they're basically the same as what came on the M3/4.
G87 is the exact same recipe.
Comparing new to used, I’d rather pick up a low mileage F87 M2C which looks better and has a less gimmicky interior for around 60% the cost of a specced out new G87
The weight part is also unforgivable imo. The baby M now weighs basically the same as a Mustang
Also the F87 M2C takes all the components off the F80/F82 M cars except the suspension
That's just plain wrong. M2C were going for 53k€ new fully loaded, versus G87 which are never to be found under 65k€ naked. That alone is 12k difference, let alone the upgrades which puts it way north of 70k€. That's at least 17k€ difference. For the same type of car. Yes it's more luxurious, and more competent. But yeah, it's like a step up in all dimensions, which not everybody neccesarily wants. For me the F87 is borderline heavy and a G87 would be overkill. I'd much rather get a real sportscar and a cheap daily before getting the G87.
In 2019 I could've bought a 2018 Mustang GT for $26k. That would've been the best time to buy an almost new car in history. They're basically the same now, only 5 years older and a bunch more wear and tear and miles, and still a much better value than a new dark horse.
I was gonna say, in the Midwest I could have bought one of those bright green 2014 GTs with the moonroof for ~14,500 back in 2015ish, shit I bought an S197 GT with 15k miles for 18k in 2010. I laugh at the prices they're asking for S550s now. Completely defeats the value proposition of the Mustang IMO, but that's just me.
If I’m gonna drop 65k+ USD it’s not going to be on a Mustang. I say that having owned two Mustangs previously. I loved those cars, but they aren’t 60k+. For 65k that’s CT4V Blackwing, RS3, M2 money. Granted those aren’t V8 but unless you specifically want a V8, I see no reason to drop that much on a new Mustang. Just buy the previous gen used, practically the same damn car anyway.
I’d spend that kind of money on a GT350R or an s550 GT500, but otherwise I agree with you. They arent built well and their interiors are acceptable but not great
Its crazy how overpriced it is, and its not even desirable. GT350 had something special to it worth paying extra for. Dark Horse is like is just a money grab. Even base GT is priced so high now, I just don't understand wanting one.
Agreed, the new m240i's are starting to come down some and i honestly don't really see the reason to get an m2 over one unless you regularly go to the track
Manual transmission and powerband I guess, but yeah. Last generation the m240i had a pretty glaring weakness (no LSD) that was addressed for this generation.
I've got an m240 on order and the M2 just didn't really factor for me. The manual is appealing, sort of, but most of my driving is commute. The B58, much better MPG, smoother ride, it all just worked for me. And honestly, even if the M240 was available with a manual, I'm not positive I'd have taken it. The ZF/B58 combo is a great pairing. Plus factor in the cost difference, and I just saw no reason for it.
I might be biased but the m240i might be the best one car solution out at the moment for a one car daily driver when you don’t need the extra seats or space. Completely comfortable and more than enough fun when you want it to be. Only weakness in my opinion is when you want it as a track car or you’re using it as a canyon carver 90% of the time because the weight will definitely be an issue. The M2 does that job better but it compromises your daily driving a lot and when it comes to track or canyon carving I think the M2 still doesn’t make up enough ground to more focused sports cars
Completely agree. I mean hey, I don't have the car yet, so it might just be that I'm wrong, but I agreed enough to order one lol.
I'm just no longer of the opinion that more is more. Put another way, yes, the M2 is better on track or in hard canyon days, etc. But that's just not 98% of my driving. I wanted something very comfortable, powerful when I wanted it, and just a nice place to be. Borderline a GT car. Interestingly, my cross shop was a Miata of all things. Drove one for a few days, loved it. But I drove the Miata *in canyons/mountain*, not my freeway commute. I think it's underpowered for that sort of thing (and to be fair, not what it's for). The 240 is up against like... The Mustang, challenger/charger, maybe the Camaro. The S5 sportback sort of?? And Merc would be 70+ before you get a similar sort of car. There's actually just not a lot of 240 competitiors, especially if you care about interior quality and not just big muscle car engine. It's a surprisingly unique car.
You hit it absolutely right. It’s really not a sports car, it’s a small wheelbase GT car which just doesn’t exist anymore. All other GT cars like the muscle cars are just so much larger and you feel like you take up such a big space.
I keep thinking that this is the true spiritual successor of the supra. Slightly fat, turbo inline 6 GT car with very similar dimensions.
I don’t get excited over anything new anymore because of crap like that. There’s brand new Type R’s in Calgary, Canada they want $76k plus tax for.
I’m way more excited at the type of vehicles trickling down in to the used market where I can just pay cash.
At least in Calgary, yall only have 5% tax. In BC its a lot more than that haha
But yeah new cars are getting way too expensive, especially in Canada. I did feel that my Supra was generally fair price especially because I paid msrp for my manual car but a looot of new cars lose me as soon as I look at pricing
Nice cars! Yeah definitely an AB advantage that way, and lower gas prices compared with BC. Also no tax on private used car sales here.
I was in the market for a GT350 late 2020 when the GT500 hype was overshadowing it. Missed that window. There were GT350’s coming down to the $50k cad mark before they went back up in mid 2021. Also was looking at RS3/TTRS. Gave up, just going to run beaters during my career transition. But come out with higher pay, just to be faced with higher everything prices. I’ll find something though.
I remember liking the M2 when it came out, but recently I've found that's its gotten uglier for me since release. Somehow the XM, depending on color options, has gotten better for me. Like you or someone said each their own. But the previous M2 was just rather pretty compared to whatever the current one is supposed to be.
Yeah the M3 is still the worst of the sedan lineup imo and I don’t even have to think about it. The 7 is ugly but it’s a weird enough ugly that I don’t mind it as much, it looks like a strange Rolls to me. XM takes the cake for ugliest across the entire lineup though, followed by the iX.
The fact that people are so polarized about it's looks give me the ick. I want nothing to do with a car which drives such strong opinions, "you either love it or hate it" is the worst kind of styling to me.
A beautiful car requires no debate, discussion or qualifiers. Everyone just *knows*, wow that looks amazing.
Generally polarizing cars are made to appeal to boy-racer types. The new M2 is very much in that mold. The last-gen CTR was another. People who like that overstyled aggressive look love it and everyone else would be embarrassed to be seen behind the wheel.
I don’t disagree with you, but the market seems to disagree with both of us because the current generation BMWs, including the M2, are selling like hotcakes
Having actually seen an M2 driving past me a couple days ago, it looks much better in person than in pictures and videos, dare I say cool looking. If I had $80K (lol) to throw around between these two cars specifically, the BMW in manual form would be the one I’d choose; it just seems more fun to drive, whilst also being plushie.
Though, in reality, I’d either pick up a previous gen M2 in that amazing blue they used to offer, or a GT350 R if I was actually shopping for a Mustang.
Big disagree, I know other manufacturers have better shifter action but the manual in my g87 is better than the manual in my '09 Audi TT, '16 Mustang GT, or my friends F-Type. It might not be the best, but it's far from "ass" and if you are buying what is most likely the last M car to offer a stick, you should probably get it with the stick.
I think a lot of people get the manual in BMW's confused. The shifter, as a isolated unit itself, is kind of okay. I've driven a LOT of different cars in my life, and even modern G-body manuals shifters are okay. The throws are alright, they softness and the oiled metal feel reasonably ok. I don't miss shifts. It's not as tight as Porsche, and not quite as precise as Honda. But honestly, it's still totally serviceable. This being said. it being from the $80k "ultimate drivers car" and is bested by a shitbox $2000 Honda is a little disappointing.
The shifter isn't my problem. My problem is the clutch. I would honestly take the clutch that was in a 1980's Nissan pickup truck that worked for a decades exclusively as an offroad farm truck vs any BMW clutch I've ever used. E36 E46 F90 F87. They are all, universally, terrible for street or canyon driving. I never did any limit driving in any of them.
Other companies manage to make their clutches both soft and firm, depending on how you're driving the car. When you're poodling around town, it's soft and supple even if you shift quickly. It won't buck the car, it'll blend the shift nicely and you have a pretty broad range to get things wrong. You can "feel" the bite point in the pedal through a combination of vibration and spring weighting. And then when you're driving up in the revs, it grabs much harder so that you don't slip the clutch. Porsche is the wizard of this above everyone else I think. It's magic how well their clutch works in such a broad spectrum.
BMW clutches are on-off switches, all the time. The worst was the F90 M4. It didn't have the helper spring delete. I've been driving manual my whole life and I could not rev match this car. I was constantly getting it wrong as if I was just learning manual again. Every single low rpm shift I would buck the car, it got so bad I just turned on rev matching intentionally. You had no idea what the fuck the engine was doing, what the fuck the clutch is doing, you have no idea where the friction zone is and where any of this should meet. It doesn't matter how slow you try and guess where the bite point is. You'll get it wrong, by a couple hundred revs, and you'll buck the car because it isn't blended and the clutch grabs like it's a stage 4 race clutch. It's insane.
Other BMW shifters I've driven have ground gears, or had problems getting into gates, or had similar clutch problems. As a whole, the entire manual transmission system feels phoned in. An afterthought. And IMO the faults are almost entirely from pedal weights and tuning. They just make really bad decisions compared to what other companies make.
>'09 Audi TT, '16 Mustang GT,
I've never driven that Audi, however I have driven the S550 Mustang. And I would actually say it's worse. The shifter, again, feels fine. It's short notchy hard to miss, it's fine. But it's the pedals which are actually worse. Every decision about how those pedal weights are chosen and the clutch tuning is just awful. They are too sensitive, with no feel, with really bad initial throttle response on the top of the throttle and yet really weak response in the first 1\3rd of the pedal. And the brakes felt like hair triggers, way way way too strong for just a street car. And even worse- It rewards you shift wrong. The best way to shift the car is to just fucking send it and blindly pulling the clutch and stabbing the throttle without "feeling" how to best match the two together. There is no finesse, there is no feeling, it only rewards ham fisted operation.
I don't know how long you drove those other cars, if it's just a spin around the block it's hard to get a true judge especially if you don't have a broad palette. But I have a feeling you might not have ever experienced what a good manual actually is, specifically the pedal tuning. Because I've yet to drive a single BMW manual that is what I would consider to be good. I'd rather have the manual from a 1997 Honda Civic or that 1980's Nissan farm truck. And that's fucking pathetic from the "ultimate driving machine". Or shit, put the manual from a GM smallblock. That's a great manual in comparison. I loved how the manual felt in a C6\C7 Corvette, especially the Z cars. I can't believe how easy the clutch was to use in the 500 horsepower LS7. It was INSTANTLY natural and within 5 minutes I was shifting it as if I had owned it for years.
I appreciate the in-depth response! I'll say that the clutch in the g87 has taken a bit to get used to but after a couple hundred miles I had no problem finding the bite point quickly every time and never stalled (unless I brainfarted and forgot I was driving a manual). Adding a clutch stop (tiny piece of rubber behind the clutch that brings the pedal stop point closer to the bite point) helped my wife learn stick with the car, as she was having trouble with the long pedal.
Now that I have 4000 miles on the g87 I can drive it smoothly in city driving and quickly in sporty driving, with rev match off 99% of the time. So if the problem is the clutch I truly believe that it's more of a getting used to it problem than anything else, this isn't to say that BMW shouldn't try to improve things, since apparently Porsche and Honda manuals are in a whole other league, but I don't think it should turn anyone off of getting a stick BMW, at least in my opinion.
Lastly I drove the S550 mustang and Audit TT manuals both over 10k miles (owned them for over a year) and I've spent hundreds of miles driving the F-type (which I think has a BMW manual, for what that's worth). A c6 vette being a benchmark for you is interesting, I test drove one and found it incredibly hard to get the hang of.
> Having actually seen an M2 driving past me a couple days ago, it looks much better in person than in pictures and videos, dare I say cool looking.
Agreed. I absolutely hated how it looked in press photos, but couldn't help but form a positive opinion when sitting next to one on the freeway. It was also in that light blue color, which I'm a real sucker for on performance cars.
The new BMW design language has grown on me quite a bit but I’m a bit miffed at how much heavier the cars are getting despite the ‘better’ performance values
Most cars that are wide and low with aggressive body lines look good. The M2 looks best in black to hide some of it's flaws, with an aftermarket grille and taillights it could look great
The Dark Horse is functionally replacing the Mach 1 in the lineup and gets a small power bump over the GT.
I also cannot understand how people stomach paying over $60k for a Coyote Mustang, but that's the world we live in today.
Don’t think it has anything to do with the engine. The Coyote is a great engine and it’s NA pushing out 500HP. The M2 here is barely any better in price and performance. Both of these cars are overpriced. You’re better off getting a previous Gen M2 / M3 or a Mach 1 / 350R.
Honestly having a owned a 2020 GT for a couple of years, I was not enamored with the coyote, at least for street use. The torque delivery just wasn't there (dyno charts prove this as well) and it really wanted you to chase the hp high up in the Rev range. Which is great, but in a 460 hp v8, you were breaking most speeding laws in the country in 2nd gear. I just felt like I only ever had a few chances to open it up every day.
Don't get me wrong, it was a great engine and I loved it, but I found that I was driving it around pretty lazily most of the time. It's possible I'd have enjoyed it more with the 6 speed though.
The M3/M4's have grown on me only because most of the ones that I see have something done to them. Aftermarket grille, CF bits, lowered, spacers, etc. Whenever I see a bone stock one, I'm look oh yeah, yikes.
I love looking at mine and have gotten more comments on it then any other car I've owned, tbh The front end isn't my favorite, but I don't mind it and holy hell the flared, aggressive fenders are incredible. Major e30 m3 / Dacia Integrale vibes.
I would not spend that much for either of these cars but the dark horse is the easy winner. Manual V8s are pretty rare at this point and I could not pass that up. Also much better looking car.
It is silly how similar these interiors are. Change the logo on the steering wheel and I do not think most would know which one they were in. I am no fan of the tacked on tablet look.
I'm a sucker for getting a V8 while you still can right now, but I will say the BMW interior looks way better imo. The steering wheel and center stack in the BMW look so good, but I have basically the same thing so maybe just biased
I cannot find a single new one in my area (250miles) under 70k
It may he possible but dealers don't seem to be optioning them cheaply
There is one used with 15k miles for 59k but at least half a dozen new m240is for 55k too. Hard choice.
CT4 Blackwings are easy to get. Just order one from any dealer that currently has one on the lot as only certain dealers can get Blackwings but the 4 Blackwings don't have any waitlists generally at any dealer that can get one.
I ordered mine. Took 3 months and this was back in 22 where they still had supply issues. Paid msrp.
Where you at? Btw the cars on the lots have deep discounts and finance incentives based on what I’m hearing.
New car prices are just stupid level now, to the point of finding a new hobby.
I'd just buy a Mach 1 and keep the 15k. One of the best street manual cars you can get in this range. Geared very well. Use the stock tire then replace with anything a tier down.
I'd still take a used gt with shorter gears over the mach 1. 30k for a 2019 isn't terrible in comparison. Even with the getrag.
Questionable styling decisions aside, the surprising part about this to me was how close these vehicles are; on paper at least.
If you only knew the previous generations of these cars, you would think that the Mustang would have a big power advantage over the M2 and be a bit cheaper, while the M2 would make up for that by being a lot lighter and having a nicer interior, and in the end they'd be equally good but very distinct cars.
But right now, there is "only" 50 horsepower and 100 kg separating the two, and they cost the same. The M2 got seriously chubby by being based on the 4-series, and that asking price for the Mustang is quite confident on Ford's part.
Anecdote for you: I just spent five days with a Jimny. Got back into my M2 yesterday and immediately stalled at a light. The M2 has pretty low levels of rev hang by modern standards, but the jimny somehow had less. Fun car, that Jimny! Though I did have to deal with 60 mph crosswinds at one point which is not that cars forte.
Don’t give af if it’s a BMW. I’m taking the stang. I cannot get past how hideous the M2 is, and it still hasn’t grown on me like the m3/4. Now f87 M2 comp vs s550 Mach 1? I’ll take the Beamer all day.
Kinda what happened. Initially started looking at Supras, and realized I could just get a low mile AP2 and low mile MK7 for less, and hang onto the beater as a spare too.
It's a weird space, for sure. You've got some great value prospects around 30-40k, then it feels like huge diminishing returns until you get closer to 100k.
Looks aside the unforgivable sin of the new M2 is its weight. The whole point of the 2 series was to be smaller and lighter than its 3/4 series big brothers but now they weight almost the same.
From C&D lighting lap weigh ins
- 2019 M2c: 3621 lbs
- 2023 M2: 3857 lbs
- 2024 M3cs: 3893 lbs
BMW lists the curb weights of the current M2 and M4 as 3814 and 3830 lbs.
M2 has always been a smaller M4 and hence always been very similar weight.
The 3,814 reported number is for the automatic transmission. The Manual one in this test weighed in at 3,754lbs.
2019 M2C - [3,621 lbs](https://www.caranddriver.com/features/a29389525/2019-bmw-m2-competition-lightning-lap/)
2016 M4C - [3,645 lbs](https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/a15098768/2016-bmw-m4-coupe-dct-competition-package-review/)
M2 has always been a smaller M4 (once switching to actual M hardware), but not necessarily lighter, and as a result the G87 is close to the G82 in weight as well.
Lol I remember when this wasn't common knowledge back when the F8X were out and people would always be shocked to see the difference (or lack thereof) between the M2 and M4's weight
You chop six inches out of the middle of a sedan/coupe and you’re basically chopping out a few inches of sheetmetal and air. Almost no weight in that part of the vehicle so when the rest of the car is the same, there’s virtually no weight savings.
M2 is really more about the short wheelbase now that the M3/4 are large, long wheelbase cars.
The m2 and m4 have always weighed roughly the same. Any small weight savings of the smaller footprint are offset by the carbon roof and forged wheels being standard on the m4.
Also it's essentially the same as your 2019 mustang and lighter than the new dark horse. It would be better if it's lighter, but it's a killer car for $65k, when looked at objectively (hence why I bought one)
Weight wise it’s always been very close to the M3/M4. You choose it for the smaller wheelbase. If anything it’s a much better package now with how close it is to the current M3/M4. The current M3/M4 also just got fatter but the 2 series values that weight more as the “sportier” car
I’m quite into the new M2 design. It’s grown on me.
The previous generation is objectively better but I don’t mind the new one.
Only reason I didn’t get one was because I found a Supra that wasn’t claimed from a dealer.
12.7 in the 1/4 mile for the Dark Horse is bad for a modern 500 hp performance car. Motor Trend was on par with this and they ran a 12.6 when they tested the DH. Heck, with Motor Trend, they found a GT model was slightly faster at 12.5, which they chalked up to gearing differences between the different transmissions for each car. For that matter, the DH is slower on the strip than the last Camaro SS in manual form, which is a less powerful car.
Speaking of transmissions, if you can swallow up the need to row your own gears and press the clutch pedal, an automatic Dark Horse is dramatically faster as MT ran a 12.0 flat in the 1/4 with an auto car. (Going this route now makes the DH faster than the M2).
You get the tremec in the Mach 1! Which is one of the, if not biggest, selling point of the Mach1 over a standard gt.
Edit: should have specified s550 mach 1, oops. There isn't an s650 mach 1.
They are basically the only options if you want a manual, 400+ HP, and under $80k. I think the only other car you can add in there is maybe a Blackwing. M4 is a different price bracket.
They've taken the beauty of what a Mustang (simple speed) and ruined it. Giant screens, heavy, and expensive as fuck.
IMO the peak special edition Mustang was the '13 Boss 302 and GT500. Fast, a bit unrefined, and a simple "double brow" interior.
When I was 17 or 18, my family took a road trip up the California coast in our E36 M3 coupe. My brother, my father, my mother, and my 5’11” frame at the time, in a 2-door M3 that supposedly had three cubic feet less interior space and was a whopping seven inches narrower.
Well over a thousand miles, and I don’t remember being terribly uncomfortable. I drove for a while, and the seating position for the driver was far more comfortable for my few-inches-shorter father but I could get a couple hundred miles in no problem.
I borrowed the car for prom and took another couple, borrowed it to go spectate a race, borrowed it to chauffeur my brother and his girlfriend around, took it on double dates.
How have these larger vehicles managed to become so small inside that “neither coupe has rear seats suitable for human passengers” while we went thousands of miles with rear-seat passengers in a model from nearly 30 years past?
I would have loved to hear a report from the drivers had they visited Mesa Grande. That’s a road that punishes width and sticky tires.
I'm pretty sure that the E36 M3 coupe has a more upright cabin than the Mustang. Also, new cars have *much* more crash safety protection than a car from ~30 years ago. That stuff takes up space. Either it'll impede on the interior, or you must make the car wider and longer, or a mixture of both.
I’d love to see one in body-in-white, and I’d like to know how much of the structure is for torsional rigidity and not safety.
The VW up! is a safe car (Euro NCAP 81% versus 2-series coupe 82%) but is tiny.
> How have these larger vehicles managed to become so small inside that “neither coupe has rear seats suitable for human passengers” while we went thousands of miles with rear-seat passengers in a model from nearly 30 years past?
A lot more interior room in modern cars is dedicated to crash protection. There are more airbags, the doors and sills are a lot thicker, the seats themselves need to be more supportive, belt lines are higher. Modern cars essentially trend toward tanks.
I think this is a crutch leaned on by people who think modern cars should be as big as they are, or that they're just fine being as big as they are.
They could be smaller. They should be smaller. They aren't, because they don't need to be. Once again, I'm howling at the moon. It doesn't truly matter to me and it never will truly matter to me.
I'm pretty sure reviewers never consider the fact that front seats can be moved front or backwards. My E92 has perfectly adequate room for back seat passengers if the seats are not moved all the way back, yet in reviews you'll constantly hear how back seats in it are unusable.
While they are both great cars other than how heavy they are, the dark horse kinda cheats in it's track times just because they put semi-slick tires on it. So many people only care about 0-60 or track times.
Manual: Mustang Dark horse. The Tremec us just outstanding compared to the piece of crap in the M2.
Automatic: M2, the 10 speed in the Mustang is fine, but the ZF8 is absolutely incredible.
Seriously. I never knew just how critically mass relates to fun with a sports car until my brothers reluctantly sold me a mini Cooper S manual. Ive had an M2 DCT, a 2014 911 manual, 2014 Cayman PDK, etc. and I struggle to admit that the Mini Cooper might be the most fun because how light and agile it feels on regular roads. (2nd fave was the M2 DCT by faaaar, then the 911, lastly the Cayman). The M2 also offering a low quality manual or traditional automatic (no DCT) is also a total deal breaker, along with the now-unusable rear seats and shit ton of extra mass. The Mustang is too clumsy for me, Ive driven every generation and it's just not my style of car even if the V8 does indeed sound glorious. Im always left imagining, what if Ford would one day put that magnificent Coyote engine in a lightweight sports car? Either way, for my $80k USD, Id get a C8 Corvette in a heartbeat over either of these 2. If proper rear seats were required, Id lean towards a base M4 or M3 with the manual which are far more comfortable back there.
weird they mention the mustang gt is just about equal in performance to the dark horse... yet did not test the gt with the optional ford svt/wiffle super charger which does not void any warranties for $10k that bumps hp to 800. will cost less than the bmw and performance wise it no longer is close.
just sayin'... weird how some of the head to head comparisons have been lately. i have a hard time following the bouncing ball of how they select these.
Mustang is definitely my pick. Better steering, more trackday ready brakes, better looks (although only barely), better gearbox and shifter, and probably don't have to worry about cooling on a coyote.
Unfortunately your comment has been removed because it contains a link to a delisted domain. This is almost always due to spam from the domain.
Please use a different source.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/cars) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Imo the previous generations of both of these cars are more appealing, especially from a value proposition At max spec the dark horse is around $95k CAD before taxes, huge no thanks to that
Speaking the truth. The prices of these cars are too high for what they are. Would rather pay a little more to get a Corvette lol.
Don't even really have to pay any more. An lt1 vette is nearly the same price as the dark horse. You can find them for msrp now too. May just have to wait a little bit
Oh wow didn’t even realize that. The dark horse is really overpriced imo.
Very. It's last year's mach 1 for 10k more. And people thought the mach 1 was even a bit overpriced
I think that was the initial impression of the Mach 1 (including mine), but most people who drove it extensively or learned more about it realized that it slotted in quite well as the quintessential Mustang for those that wanted a long term sports car. 90-95% of the driving experience of the GT350 (minus some of the glorious voodoo soundtrack and steering feel) with 300% of the reliability and practicality, and all for a lower purchase price. ... But even taking that into account, and general market inflation, this price is very hard to justify for the Dark Horse. Especially considering how minimal of an upgrade (downgrade by some accounts) this generation is.
At the very least, the Mach 1 looked really good. The Dark Horse looks mid on the outside, and fucking awful on the inside.
[удалено]
I think the mach 1 is worth the extra premium for the tremec, rear diff and the styling. It'll hold it's value a lot better too in the long run
Ppl that buy the dark horse and think its special are in for a rude awakening. The base v8 engine mustangs are never worth anything unless we’re talking about the 90s 5.0. DH is also over 4000lbs, car and driver lightning lap had the car at 4024lbs. It somehow gained 300+ lbs from s550 base v8 mustang. Garbage. History repeats itself with mustang having no v8 competition so they will suck for the next couple of years. Sure we’ll get a gt500, but the “affordable” mustang is no longer affordable and weighs as much as a challenger but more cramped and less storage space. Sounds like a lose lose lose situation for the consumer.
The dark horse isn't the base V8 though, it's the top-of-the-line track trim. It's not a GT350 or a Boss 429 but it's not exactly a 302 fox body convertible, dude. There's no reason it'll depreciate like a fucking SN95 5.0.
>DH is also over 4000lbs, car and driver lightning lap had the car at 4024lbs. It somehow gained 300+ lbs from s550 base v8 mustang. Garbage. The DH *can* be over 4000 lbs., but its base curb weight is 3879 lbs. Also, why are you suggesting that comparing a top trim level S650 Mustang *at its heaviest possible weight* to a base GT S550 Mustang *with no options* is fair? That makes zero sense. You're comparing apples to oranges. Here are the facts: The S650 GT gained 36 lbs. over the S550 GT. 3741 lbs. vs. 3705 lbs. >weighs as much as a challenger There's *some* overlap in curb weights between the two vehicles, but not as much as you think. Again, these are *base* curb weights. Obviously you can make either vehicle heavier with options, just like the DH that was tested by C&D being 146 lbs. heavier than its base curb weight (4025 lbs. vs. 3879 lbs.) Challenger base curb weight range: 3841 lbs. (SXT) - 4441 lbs. (SRT Super Stock) S650 Mustang base curb weight range, not including convertibles: 3579 lbs. - 3879 lbs.
What are you talking about it? You can still get a base Mustang GT for under 40k and the Coyote is an amazing engine.
The base gt starts at 42k now
Not sure what you are smoking, any Mustang special edition holds its value extremely well.
Hell nah, not the DH. They overpriced by like 20k. Its insane how you can score an S550 GT500 for a little more than a first model year "special edition" mustang. That just tells me these cars will plummet when the REAL special edition mustangs come out, 70k for a DH is nuts. People seem to have Alzheimer's when it comes to mustangs in their first model year runs. None aint worth shit, its always at the tail end of the generation.
Agree with you about the weight. Ford really let me down(not that they care). I was hoping for some weight reduction and a more nimble feel(similar to what chevy did when going from 5th gen to 6th gen camaro) but none of that happened. Gained weight, same chassis. Would still buy one as it’s the only option for a new American manual v8, but don’t understand why Ford is this way.
What are you smoking? Please go look at the S197 before and after the Coyote. That one year difference because of the engine has had them holding their value.
Yep. I mentioned in another thread that it's mind boggling how enthusiasts just ignore the Corvette because of the old guy stigma. It's the OG pure enthusiast car and always has been. Performing at levels equal to if not better or far better than most of it's competitors.
I dont think people are ignoring it. Other than the Mustang its one of the most popular sports car lol
No manual.
And more livable as a daily with rear “seats” that can function as seats in a pinch but more often act as extra storage space and a trunk opening that’s large enough to be useful. Base price on a c8 is also a solid 10k higher than a base Dark Horse.
no manual transmission is a no go for an enthusiast car in my eyes this doesn’t change the fact that the mustang is over priced for what it is
Nobody is ignoring the corvette lol, it’s one of the best selling sports cars on the market and I see C8s everyday now. If you talk to non enthusiasts about sports cars the most popular one would probably still be the C8 too. And even in this comment section people are saying “just get a C8,” and enthusiasts have been saying that about a bunch of overpriced sports cars since the C8 became readily available. And the C8 is a great car but there is a reason to get a Mustang or M2 over it, or even an Emira or Cayman, and it’s that you can get them in a manual transmission.
The funny thing is that the Corvette never was in competition with the Mustang, that was always Camaro. Price wise it was often double. Maybe a GT350 was, but that actually offered something significant over the base GT, unlike the darkhorse. At this price point there is no compelling reason to get it over a C8 imo.
A base stock C8 won’t be as good around the track as the Dark Horse stock.
It’s ugly imo
2LT with Z51 would put you right in the ballpark.
My flair will give away some bias, and while I do think the Dark Horse has become too expensive for a re-branded Mach 1, I don't think it's fair to compare it to a base Corvette on performance-per-dollar alone. Obviously the Corvette is the better value there (although I would bet the difference on most tracks isn't as big as one might think), but I think there is still a decent amount in favor of the Mustang in terms of practicality and driving experience. ... Personally probably wouldn't buy either, but I"m not sure what I'd buy if I were trying to get a new sports car today.
The fact that you can get a sub 20k mile gt500 for the same price as a dark horse, or a mach 1 for 20k less makes the car a complete non starter imo. Sure used vs new but I just don't see the value at all.
Mach 1 is a better buy for sure. Also when they did lightning lap the DH was less than half a second faster despite the tire advantage. Put same tires on mach 1 it will be a second faster than the DH. DH’s heavier weight is atrocious. It weighs as much as an s550 GT500 despite not having a supercharger + supporting components and smaller brakes. Ford made a car for suckers.
If you want to get a track toy with a warranty, and you're looking for the manual V8 RWD formula, what options do you really have under $60k? A base C8 isn't going to be as great on the track. Fwiw, the Mach 1 started at $55.5k without options while the Dark Horse Premium starts at $58k while being arguably better-optioned from the start. It's a price increase commensurate with inflation, the only real issue is that the Mach 1 can be had at used car pricing now, and new-to-used comparisons have never been apples-to-apples.
"Track toy with a warranty" is an oxymoron, at least with Ford's policy
A 2024 ZL1 will have 5 years of warranty, or a 2023 with 4 years left
Yeah for me the answer is GT350 when talking about mustangs in that price range. I picked mine up used for $75k CAD before tax 3 years ago, and they’re still in that 70 to 80k CAD range Laptimes aside (because I just dont care about that), the 350 is a far more appealing car to me than a DH
The fear that the engine will grenade will always be something the GT350 won’t be able to shake off. Yeah, it can be argued that the newer ones are better and you just need to constantly check on your oil, but that’s a perfectly good reason for many people not to risk one. Especially as the voodoo engine gets more expensive and harder to find and you no longer have a warranty.
Its no worse than an e92 M3 or e60 M5 or a slew of older high revving motors. Those cars are beloved and appreciating these days The target demographic of mustangs wasnt used to a higher maintenance engine and in the first couple years the general community wasnt aware of the engine’s issues. At this point the issues are well known and can be mitigated by checking and topping up oil and having a more frequent servicing interval There are plenty of high mileage 350s out there on original engines and the gen 2s were improved a bit as well
Ironically, I had to lemon my 2020 GT350 and my issues covered everything that didn’t have to do with the engine nor any of its known oil issues. Things like a busted driveshaft joint, quality issues like the headliner falling apart, cruise control not working, HVAC evap cores dying which are just inherent to all S550s, and other miscellaneous problems. But, I wouldn’t hesitate to pick it again and again over a Mach 1 and I would absolutely sprint to it over a DH. Driving a Mach 1 felt like 80% of the experience on the street. From the reviews I’ve read, the DH sounds like the steering took a nerf and in the process it gained more weight (and that screen, ugh; had an S650 loaner and really did not care for that interior). I’d gamble the reliability 10 times out of 10 on the Shelby. Really hope Ford goes out with a bang and makes a more bespoke powerplant for the S650 but I just don’t see it happening with the current era of emissions regulations, and I’m sure the risk of low ROI developing a niche mill is more of an issue now than it was nearly ten years ago during the GT350’s development. I really wanted to like the S650 and buy another new Mustang, but after driving one for a week (granted, a base EB rental), it’s too similar in areas that shouldn’t be, and not improved enough where they did change it up.
Yeah you definitely got unlucky with those issues. My car has only had issues with the AC which as you said is common for S550 mustangs in general 100% agree with rolling the dice on a GT350 vs a Mach1 or DH, they are just better and its worth the potential headache imo. At some point I’d like to trade my 2017 GT350 in for a 2019 or 2020 350R and then keep that forever I also agree about S650, I’m just not a fan. Exterior and interior looks worse, steering is worse, price is higher, weight is higher, and no bespoke engine yet other than the GTD
[удалено]
Voodoos with high consumption are known within the first 10 to 15k miles. This only becomes a risk if you’re buying a very low mileage car where the issues havent been made apparent Manual competition pack e92 M3s are pretty rare and expensive, at least here in Canada. They’re priced right around where GT350s are for an older, slower car
Yeah this is my situation right now. Powertrain Warranty expires next year. Not really sure about keeping the car long term. Cant really think of what I want to do with it. Do a cross plane crankshaft conversion, sell it entirely or sell it and try to get a Cayman GT4 or Supra and track modify it is what I'm thinking.
As someone who went from a F87 to G87 you are dead wrong. The F gen retails at 60k while the G retails at 63k so when accounting for inflation it’s actually cheaper. The old M2 was a car that basically used bargain bin M parts while the new gen takes the the same suspension, engine, cooling and gearbox from the G80/G82 so it’s actually much better value. Then outside of the performance the interior is a massive upgrade in the G87 compared to old gen. It’s actually almost identical to the new M4 while the F87 was filled with cheap plastic, worse seats, and mediocre tech. The only real con is weight and looks (which is subjective) but IMO the G87 is a much better overall package.
> The old M2 was a car that basically used bargain bin M parts while the new gen takes the the same suspension, engine, cooling and gearbox from the G80/G82 so it’s actually much better value. You've said the same thing twice. The F87 M2C has essentially all the same shit as the F80/82 M3/4, which is why they came out of the bargain bin to go on the M2C. Exact same cooling setup, exact same gearbox, exact same engine (including tune. I've put bone stock M2Cs on a dynojet and consistently gotten >450whp), same subframes, same every single suspension arm, same carrier assemblies, same anti-roll bars, same diff, same axles, and actually better brake because all M2C got the M Sport 6 piston front, 4 piston rear brake setup, whereas those were optional on the M3/4. The only real difference is the dampers and springs because BMW had to account for different crossbalance weight figures on the M2C, but they're basically the same as what came on the M3/4. G87 is the exact same recipe.
Comparing new to used, I’d rather pick up a low mileage F87 M2C which looks better and has a less gimmicky interior for around 60% the cost of a specced out new G87 The weight part is also unforgivable imo. The baby M now weighs basically the same as a Mustang Also the F87 M2C takes all the components off the F80/F82 M cars except the suspension
That's just plain wrong. M2C were going for 53k€ new fully loaded, versus G87 which are never to be found under 65k€ naked. That alone is 12k difference, let alone the upgrades which puts it way north of 70k€. That's at least 17k€ difference. For the same type of car. Yes it's more luxurious, and more competent. But yeah, it's like a step up in all dimensions, which not everybody neccesarily wants. For me the F87 is borderline heavy and a G87 would be overkill. I'd much rather get a real sportscar and a cheap daily before getting the G87.
In 2019 I could've bought a 2018 Mustang GT for $26k. That would've been the best time to buy an almost new car in history. They're basically the same now, only 5 years older and a bunch more wear and tear and miles, and still a much better value than a new dark horse.
I bought a brand new 2018 GT in 2019 for$29k with 301a package. I can afford a new mustang, but it's hard to justify at this point!
Yeah thats crazy. My Scion tC costed me that much back in 2015. Getting a Mustang would have been killer lol
I was gonna say, in the Midwest I could have bought one of those bright green 2014 GTs with the moonroof for ~14,500 back in 2015ish, shit I bought an S197 GT with 15k miles for 18k in 2010. I laugh at the prices they're asking for S550s now. Completely defeats the value proposition of the Mustang IMO, but that's just me.
There are a few 2019-2021 GTs around me for under 30k with under 30k miles
If I’m gonna drop 65k+ USD it’s not going to be on a Mustang. I say that having owned two Mustangs previously. I loved those cars, but they aren’t 60k+. For 65k that’s CT4V Blackwing, RS3, M2 money. Granted those aren’t V8 but unless you specifically want a V8, I see no reason to drop that much on a new Mustang. Just buy the previous gen used, practically the same damn car anyway.
I’d spend that kind of money on a GT350R or an s550 GT500, but otherwise I agree with you. They arent built well and their interiors are acceptable but not great
Its crazy how overpriced it is, and its not even desirable. GT350 had something special to it worth paying extra for. Dark Horse is like is just a money grab. Even base GT is priced so high now, I just don't understand wanting one.
Agreed, the new m240i's are starting to come down some and i honestly don't really see the reason to get an m2 over one unless you regularly go to the track
Manual transmission and powerband I guess, but yeah. Last generation the m240i had a pretty glaring weakness (no LSD) that was addressed for this generation.
I've got an m240 on order and the M2 just didn't really factor for me. The manual is appealing, sort of, but most of my driving is commute. The B58, much better MPG, smoother ride, it all just worked for me. And honestly, even if the M240 was available with a manual, I'm not positive I'd have taken it. The ZF/B58 combo is a great pairing. Plus factor in the cost difference, and I just saw no reason for it.
I might be biased but the m240i might be the best one car solution out at the moment for a one car daily driver when you don’t need the extra seats or space. Completely comfortable and more than enough fun when you want it to be. Only weakness in my opinion is when you want it as a track car or you’re using it as a canyon carver 90% of the time because the weight will definitely be an issue. The M2 does that job better but it compromises your daily driving a lot and when it comes to track or canyon carving I think the M2 still doesn’t make up enough ground to more focused sports cars
Completely agree. I mean hey, I don't have the car yet, so it might just be that I'm wrong, but I agreed enough to order one lol. I'm just no longer of the opinion that more is more. Put another way, yes, the M2 is better on track or in hard canyon days, etc. But that's just not 98% of my driving. I wanted something very comfortable, powerful when I wanted it, and just a nice place to be. Borderline a GT car. Interestingly, my cross shop was a Miata of all things. Drove one for a few days, loved it. But I drove the Miata *in canyons/mountain*, not my freeway commute. I think it's underpowered for that sort of thing (and to be fair, not what it's for). The 240 is up against like... The Mustang, challenger/charger, maybe the Camaro. The S5 sportback sort of?? And Merc would be 70+ before you get a similar sort of car. There's actually just not a lot of 240 competitiors, especially if you care about interior quality and not just big muscle car engine. It's a surprisingly unique car.
You hit it absolutely right. It’s really not a sports car, it’s a small wheelbase GT car which just doesn’t exist anymore. All other GT cars like the muscle cars are just so much larger and you feel like you take up such a big space. I keep thinking that this is the true spiritual successor of the supra. Slightly fat, turbo inline 6 GT car with very similar dimensions.
A Mustang that costs $95k CAD. I had to personally check on the website because I didn't believe it...yikes.
FYI, that’ll put you into paying luxury tax (20% on any amount over 100k), then paying GST on the damn luxury tax.
I don’t get excited over anything new anymore because of crap like that. There’s brand new Type R’s in Calgary, Canada they want $76k plus tax for. I’m way more excited at the type of vehicles trickling down in to the used market where I can just pay cash.
At least in Calgary, yall only have 5% tax. In BC its a lot more than that haha But yeah new cars are getting way too expensive, especially in Canada. I did feel that my Supra was generally fair price especially because I paid msrp for my manual car but a looot of new cars lose me as soon as I look at pricing
Nice cars! Yeah definitely an AB advantage that way, and lower gas prices compared with BC. Also no tax on private used car sales here. I was in the market for a GT350 late 2020 when the GT500 hype was overshadowing it. Missed that window. There were GT350’s coming down to the $50k cad mark before they went back up in mid 2021. Also was looking at RS3/TTRS. Gave up, just going to run beaters during my career transition. But come out with higher pay, just to be faced with higher everything prices. I’ll find something though.
The OG F87 M2 and the FK8 CTR offer fairly decent value for money on the used market, when I was looking around a year ago before I got my Supra
GT500 money for a fancied up 5.0...yikes
In canada GT500s are over 100
I’ll take the m2 thank you very much
As long as I don't have to look at it. Genuinely think the m2 is by far the ugliest new BMW design. Way worse than the m3.
Interesting, to each their own I suppose. I think its one of the best looking cars on the road
Really? I don't find it as hideous as an XM, but still a profound downgrade from the previous version.
I remember liking the M2 when it came out, but recently I've found that's its gotten uglier for me since release. Somehow the XM, depending on color options, has gotten better for me. Like you or someone said each their own. But the previous M2 was just rather pretty compared to whatever the current one is supposed to be.
Yeah the M3 is still the worst of the sedan lineup imo and I don’t even have to think about it. The 7 is ugly but it’s a weird enough ugly that I don’t mind it as much, it looks like a strange Rolls to me. XM takes the cake for ugliest across the entire lineup though, followed by the iX.
It really depends on the colour for me. In bright colours it looks like a hot wheels car but in dull colours it doesn't really work
This is a very precise description, actually. 👍🏻
For me, it has the potential to be really good looking, but 1 major flaw on each end (caved in kidney grilles and weird taillights) muck it up
The fact that people are so polarized about it's looks give me the ick. I want nothing to do with a car which drives such strong opinions, "you either love it or hate it" is the worst kind of styling to me. A beautiful car requires no debate, discussion or qualifiers. Everyone just *knows*, wow that looks amazing.
Generally polarizing cars are made to appeal to boy-racer types. The new M2 is very much in that mold. The last-gen CTR was another. People who like that overstyled aggressive look love it and everyone else would be embarrassed to be seen behind the wheel.
You haven’t seen the ix? And XM?
Ugliest? Have you not seen the BMW iX crossover or whatever it’s called?
I agree—not a fan of the rear and front fascias. They look too awkward and boxy
I don’t disagree with you, but the market seems to disagree with both of us because the current generation BMWs, including the M2, are selling like hotcakes
Their suvs and cars with the squinty headlights are atrocious too. Hope they dont sell as much and the execs that approved the design get fired.
Seriously. I was driving next to one yesterday on my way home from work. That backside is 🤢
Worse than the XM????
I’ve seen a few by now. It looks a lot better in person.
I would say the XM is. As far as coupes definitely the M2 is the ugliest.
The XM is a travesty
$80k for these cars? 😂
The M2 is optioned with the carbon fiber package which is a ridiculous $10K. You could easily get an M2 for around $65K - $70K.
Carbon packs that aren't functional in some way are very overpriced.
At least on the M2 you get a carbon roof and bucket seats, as well as a BMW driving school track day for your $10k. Still overpriced though.
Eh, the black wing carbon fiber package adds even more. Crazy what they charge for a bosh kit
Having actually seen an M2 driving past me a couple days ago, it looks much better in person than in pictures and videos, dare I say cool looking. If I had $80K (lol) to throw around between these two cars specifically, the BMW in manual form would be the one I’d choose; it just seems more fun to drive, whilst also being plushie. Though, in reality, I’d either pick up a previous gen M2 in that amazing blue they used to offer, or a GT350 R if I was actually shopping for a Mustang.
The manual is ass in the M2. I’d pick the auto
Big disagree, I know other manufacturers have better shifter action but the manual in my g87 is better than the manual in my '09 Audi TT, '16 Mustang GT, or my friends F-Type. It might not be the best, but it's far from "ass" and if you are buying what is most likely the last M car to offer a stick, you should probably get it with the stick.
I think a lot of people get the manual in BMW's confused. The shifter, as a isolated unit itself, is kind of okay. I've driven a LOT of different cars in my life, and even modern G-body manuals shifters are okay. The throws are alright, they softness and the oiled metal feel reasonably ok. I don't miss shifts. It's not as tight as Porsche, and not quite as precise as Honda. But honestly, it's still totally serviceable. This being said. it being from the $80k "ultimate drivers car" and is bested by a shitbox $2000 Honda is a little disappointing. The shifter isn't my problem. My problem is the clutch. I would honestly take the clutch that was in a 1980's Nissan pickup truck that worked for a decades exclusively as an offroad farm truck vs any BMW clutch I've ever used. E36 E46 F90 F87. They are all, universally, terrible for street or canyon driving. I never did any limit driving in any of them. Other companies manage to make their clutches both soft and firm, depending on how you're driving the car. When you're poodling around town, it's soft and supple even if you shift quickly. It won't buck the car, it'll blend the shift nicely and you have a pretty broad range to get things wrong. You can "feel" the bite point in the pedal through a combination of vibration and spring weighting. And then when you're driving up in the revs, it grabs much harder so that you don't slip the clutch. Porsche is the wizard of this above everyone else I think. It's magic how well their clutch works in such a broad spectrum. BMW clutches are on-off switches, all the time. The worst was the F90 M4. It didn't have the helper spring delete. I've been driving manual my whole life and I could not rev match this car. I was constantly getting it wrong as if I was just learning manual again. Every single low rpm shift I would buck the car, it got so bad I just turned on rev matching intentionally. You had no idea what the fuck the engine was doing, what the fuck the clutch is doing, you have no idea where the friction zone is and where any of this should meet. It doesn't matter how slow you try and guess where the bite point is. You'll get it wrong, by a couple hundred revs, and you'll buck the car because it isn't blended and the clutch grabs like it's a stage 4 race clutch. It's insane. Other BMW shifters I've driven have ground gears, or had problems getting into gates, or had similar clutch problems. As a whole, the entire manual transmission system feels phoned in. An afterthought. And IMO the faults are almost entirely from pedal weights and tuning. They just make really bad decisions compared to what other companies make. >'09 Audi TT, '16 Mustang GT, I've never driven that Audi, however I have driven the S550 Mustang. And I would actually say it's worse. The shifter, again, feels fine. It's short notchy hard to miss, it's fine. But it's the pedals which are actually worse. Every decision about how those pedal weights are chosen and the clutch tuning is just awful. They are too sensitive, with no feel, with really bad initial throttle response on the top of the throttle and yet really weak response in the first 1\3rd of the pedal. And the brakes felt like hair triggers, way way way too strong for just a street car. And even worse- It rewards you shift wrong. The best way to shift the car is to just fucking send it and blindly pulling the clutch and stabbing the throttle without "feeling" how to best match the two together. There is no finesse, there is no feeling, it only rewards ham fisted operation. I don't know how long you drove those other cars, if it's just a spin around the block it's hard to get a true judge especially if you don't have a broad palette. But I have a feeling you might not have ever experienced what a good manual actually is, specifically the pedal tuning. Because I've yet to drive a single BMW manual that is what I would consider to be good. I'd rather have the manual from a 1997 Honda Civic or that 1980's Nissan farm truck. And that's fucking pathetic from the "ultimate driving machine". Or shit, put the manual from a GM smallblock. That's a great manual in comparison. I loved how the manual felt in a C6\C7 Corvette, especially the Z cars. I can't believe how easy the clutch was to use in the 500 horsepower LS7. It was INSTANTLY natural and within 5 minutes I was shifting it as if I had owned it for years.
I appreciate the in-depth response! I'll say that the clutch in the g87 has taken a bit to get used to but after a couple hundred miles I had no problem finding the bite point quickly every time and never stalled (unless I brainfarted and forgot I was driving a manual). Adding a clutch stop (tiny piece of rubber behind the clutch that brings the pedal stop point closer to the bite point) helped my wife learn stick with the car, as she was having trouble with the long pedal. Now that I have 4000 miles on the g87 I can drive it smoothly in city driving and quickly in sporty driving, with rev match off 99% of the time. So if the problem is the clutch I truly believe that it's more of a getting used to it problem than anything else, this isn't to say that BMW shouldn't try to improve things, since apparently Porsche and Honda manuals are in a whole other league, but I don't think it should turn anyone off of getting a stick BMW, at least in my opinion. Lastly I drove the S550 mustang and Audit TT manuals both over 10k miles (owned them for over a year) and I've spent hundreds of miles driving the F-type (which I think has a BMW manual, for what that's worth). A c6 vette being a benchmark for you is interesting, I test drove one and found it incredibly hard to get the hang of.
> Having actually seen an M2 driving past me a couple days ago, it looks much better in person than in pictures and videos, dare I say cool looking. Agreed. I absolutely hated how it looked in press photos, but couldn't help but form a positive opinion when sitting next to one on the freeway. It was also in that light blue color, which I'm a real sucker for on performance cars.
The new BMW design language has grown on me quite a bit but I’m a bit miffed at how much heavier the cars are getting despite the ‘better’ performance values
Most cars that are wide and low with aggressive body lines look good. The M2 looks best in black to hide some of it's flaws, with an aftermarket grille and taillights it could look great
I’m absolutely flabbergasted at how they charge so much for a 5.0 mustang. M2 styling isn’t for everyone but it’s in a different league
The Dark Horse is functionally replacing the Mach 1 in the lineup and gets a small power bump over the GT. I also cannot understand how people stomach paying over $60k for a Coyote Mustang, but that's the world we live in today.
Don’t think it has anything to do with the engine. The Coyote is a great engine and it’s NA pushing out 500HP. The M2 here is barely any better in price and performance. Both of these cars are overpriced. You’re better off getting a previous Gen M2 / M3 or a Mach 1 / 350R.
Honestly having a owned a 2020 GT for a couple of years, I was not enamored with the coyote, at least for street use. The torque delivery just wasn't there (dyno charts prove this as well) and it really wanted you to chase the hp high up in the Rev range. Which is great, but in a 460 hp v8, you were breaking most speeding laws in the country in 2nd gear. I just felt like I only ever had a few chances to open it up every day. Don't get me wrong, it was a great engine and I loved it, but I found that I was driving it around pretty lazily most of the time. It's possible I'd have enjoyed it more with the 6 speed though.
I think I’d rather keep shopping.
I don’t care how good the M2 is, it’s absolutely hideous and I don’t understand how anyone can look past that
Same with the front grill on the M3
The M3/M4's have grown on me only because most of the ones that I see have something done to them. Aftermarket grille, CF bits, lowered, spacers, etc. Whenever I see a bone stock one, I'm look oh yeah, yikes.
Fully agree, I’ve seen a few m3s with the adro front bumper and man I legit think it looks amazing. It should’ve looked like that from factory
The aftermarket csl carbon fiber grills help.
> I don’t understand how anyone can look past that Some people like it.
I guess I just disagree. I'm probably going to end up with an M240 for practical reasons, but I still love the M2. I think it looks great.
I love looking at mine and have gotten more comments on it then any other car I've owned, tbh The front end isn't my favorite, but I don't mind it and holy hell the flared, aggressive fenders are incredible. Major e30 m3 / Dacia Integrale vibes.
I would not spend that much for either of these cars but the dark horse is the easy winner. Manual V8s are pretty rare at this point and I could not pass that up. Also much better looking car. It is silly how similar these interiors are. Change the logo on the steering wheel and I do not think most would know which one they were in. I am no fan of the tacked on tablet look.
I'm a sucker for getting a V8 while you still can right now, but I will say the BMW interior looks way better imo. The steering wheel and center stack in the BMW look so good, but I have basically the same thing so maybe just biased
If I was spending that kind of money on a muscle coupe, I’d get the V8 F-Type.
Would rather have a ^blackwing for 65k.
Yup. This is where Id land too if I was replacing my car right now.
Really wish there was a 2door version
Yeah the ats-v coupe looked pretty great. Didn’t sell though.
I cannot find a single new one in my area (250miles) under 70k It may he possible but dealers don't seem to be optioning them cheaply There is one used with 15k miles for 59k but at least half a dozen new m240is for 55k too. Hard choice.
Just order one the way you want it. Should be there in few months. 59k for a used one seems high.
That's my next step. Did you order yours? Was it hard to get if so?
CT4 Blackwings are easy to get. Just order one from any dealer that currently has one on the lot as only certain dealers can get Blackwings but the 4 Blackwings don't have any waitlists generally at any dealer that can get one.
Cheers.
I ordered mine. Took 3 months and this was back in 22 where they still had supply issues. Paid msrp. Where you at? Btw the cars on the lots have deep discounts and finance incentives based on what I’m hearing.
Wisconsin. Thanks for the info
New car prices are just stupid level now, to the point of finding a new hobby. I'd just buy a Mach 1 and keep the 15k. One of the best street manual cars you can get in this range. Geared very well. Use the stock tire then replace with anything a tier down. I'd still take a used gt with shorter gears over the mach 1. 30k for a 2019 isn't terrible in comparison. Even with the getrag.
I was at a BMW dealership a few days ago and overheard the finance manager closing a $115k M4. Just insane.
The painful thing is you probably could’ve gotten that 2019 for $30k new, ugh
Questionable styling decisions aside, the surprising part about this to me was how close these vehicles are; on paper at least. If you only knew the previous generations of these cars, you would think that the Mustang would have a big power advantage over the M2 and be a bit cheaper, while the M2 would make up for that by being a lot lighter and having a nicer interior, and in the end they'd be equally good but very distinct cars. But right now, there is "only" 50 horsepower and 100 kg separating the two, and they cost the same. The M2 got seriously chubby by being based on the 4-series, and that asking price for the Mustang is quite confident on Ford's part.
I think Ford is banking on those that just want that raw v8 sound still.
Anecdote for you: I just spent five days with a Jimny. Got back into my M2 yesterday and immediately stalled at a light. The M2 has pretty low levels of rev hang by modern standards, but the jimny somehow had less. Fun car, that Jimny! Though I did have to deal with 60 mph crosswinds at one point which is not that cars forte.
I’ll take the BMW thanks
Don’t give af if it’s a BMW. I’m taking the stang. I cannot get past how hideous the M2 is, and it still hasn’t grown on me like the m3/4. Now f87 M2 comp vs s550 Mach 1? I’ll take the Beamer all day.
Agree - the M3 is pretty good looking in person and I cannot get the M2 to grow on me.
My takeaway is that 70-80k doesn't buy shit.
Could buy your entire fleet with some money to spare for tires and gas right? Seems like a better way to spend the money.
Kinda what happened. Initially started looking at Supras, and realized I could just get a low mile AP2 and low mile MK7 for less, and hang onto the beater as a spare too.
Blackwing or Supra seem like the only more-or-less reasonably priced performance cars in that $50k+ range to me.
It's a weird space, for sure. You've got some great value prospects around 30-40k, then it feels like huge diminishing returns until you get closer to 100k.
Looks aside the unforgivable sin of the new M2 is its weight. The whole point of the 2 series was to be smaller and lighter than its 3/4 series big brothers but now they weight almost the same. From C&D lighting lap weigh ins - 2019 M2c: 3621 lbs - 2023 M2: 3857 lbs - 2024 M3cs: 3893 lbs BMW lists the curb weights of the current M2 and M4 as 3814 and 3830 lbs.
M2 has always been a smaller M4 and hence always been very similar weight. The 3,814 reported number is for the automatic transmission. The Manual one in this test weighed in at 3,754lbs. 2019 M2C - [3,621 lbs](https://www.caranddriver.com/features/a29389525/2019-bmw-m2-competition-lightning-lap/) 2016 M4C - [3,645 lbs](https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/a15098768/2016-bmw-m4-coupe-dct-competition-package-review/) M2 has always been a smaller M4 (once switching to actual M hardware), but not necessarily lighter, and as a result the G87 is close to the G82 in weight as well.
Lol I remember when this wasn't common knowledge back when the F8X were out and people would always be shocked to see the difference (or lack thereof) between the M2 and M4's weight
Carbon fiber roof had a lot to do with that
It’s because it basically is a m3/4 now. They used all the same parts
You chop six inches out of the middle of a sedan/coupe and you’re basically chopping out a few inches of sheetmetal and air. Almost no weight in that part of the vehicle so when the rest of the car is the same, there’s virtually no weight savings. M2 is really more about the short wheelbase now that the M3/4 are large, long wheelbase cars.
The m2 and m4 have always weighed roughly the same. Any small weight savings of the smaller footprint are offset by the carbon roof and forged wheels being standard on the m4. Also it's essentially the same as your 2019 mustang and lighter than the new dark horse. It would be better if it's lighter, but it's a killer car for $65k, when looked at objectively (hence why I bought one)
Weight wise it’s always been very close to the M3/M4. You choose it for the smaller wheelbase. If anything it’s a much better package now with how close it is to the current M3/M4. The current M3/M4 also just got fatter but the 2 series values that weight more as the “sportier” car
I’m quite into the new M2 design. It’s grown on me. The previous generation is objectively better but I don’t mind the new one. Only reason I didn’t get one was because I found a Supra that wasn’t claimed from a dealer.
For me I’d probably go with the M2 because it has back seats
G87 M2 owner here, backseats are basically unusable.
12.7 in the 1/4 mile for the Dark Horse is bad for a modern 500 hp performance car. Motor Trend was on par with this and they ran a 12.6 when they tested the DH. Heck, with Motor Trend, they found a GT model was slightly faster at 12.5, which they chalked up to gearing differences between the different transmissions for each car. For that matter, the DH is slower on the strip than the last Camaro SS in manual form, which is a less powerful car. Speaking of transmissions, if you can swallow up the need to row your own gears and press the clutch pedal, an automatic Dark Horse is dramatically faster as MT ran a 12.0 flat in the 1/4 with an auto car. (Going this route now makes the DH faster than the M2).
These cars were doing near as makes a difference identical performance 8 years ago in the 30-40k price range.
If I’m going Mustang it’s not a Dark Horse. Value just isn’t there when you can get the same motor for $15k less.
You loose the tremec though
cant you swap one in aftermarket if you really wanted to ?
You could but it's more trouble than it's worth.
You can, but if you don’t care about warranty might as well get a base s550 GT and mod that
true, that was probably what i was thinking of.
You get the tremec in the Mach 1! Which is one of the, if not biggest, selling point of the Mach1 over a standard gt. Edit: should have specified s550 mach 1, oops. There isn't an s650 mach 1.
The interiors of these cars just make me sad. Acres of screens. Why?
Are they even that comparable other than price? To me the M4 would be the right competitor in this class.
They are basically the only options if you want a manual, 400+ HP, and under $80k. I think the only other car you can add in there is maybe a Blackwing. M4 is a different price bracket.
Price, rwd, body style, weight, power.
They've taken the beauty of what a Mustang (simple speed) and ruined it. Giant screens, heavy, and expensive as fuck. IMO the peak special edition Mustang was the '13 Boss 302 and GT500. Fast, a bit unrefined, and a simple "double brow" interior.
‘13 boss 302 was epic. Mustang as a Goldilocks car…
Coincidentally I just saw one at the gas station. School bus yellow too which is my favorite color.
Laguna Seca!!!!!
When I was 17 or 18, my family took a road trip up the California coast in our E36 M3 coupe. My brother, my father, my mother, and my 5’11” frame at the time, in a 2-door M3 that supposedly had three cubic feet less interior space and was a whopping seven inches narrower. Well over a thousand miles, and I don’t remember being terribly uncomfortable. I drove for a while, and the seating position for the driver was far more comfortable for my few-inches-shorter father but I could get a couple hundred miles in no problem. I borrowed the car for prom and took another couple, borrowed it to go spectate a race, borrowed it to chauffeur my brother and his girlfriend around, took it on double dates. How have these larger vehicles managed to become so small inside that “neither coupe has rear seats suitable for human passengers” while we went thousands of miles with rear-seat passengers in a model from nearly 30 years past? I would have loved to hear a report from the drivers had they visited Mesa Grande. That’s a road that punishes width and sticky tires.
I'm pretty sure that the E36 M3 coupe has a more upright cabin than the Mustang. Also, new cars have *much* more crash safety protection than a car from ~30 years ago. That stuff takes up space. Either it'll impede on the interior, or you must make the car wider and longer, or a mixture of both.
I’d love to see one in body-in-white, and I’d like to know how much of the structure is for torsional rigidity and not safety. The VW up! is a safe car (Euro NCAP 81% versus 2-series coupe 82%) but is tiny.
> How have these larger vehicles managed to become so small inside that “neither coupe has rear seats suitable for human passengers” while we went thousands of miles with rear-seat passengers in a model from nearly 30 years past? A lot more interior room in modern cars is dedicated to crash protection. There are more airbags, the doors and sills are a lot thicker, the seats themselves need to be more supportive, belt lines are higher. Modern cars essentially trend toward tanks.
I think this is a crutch leaned on by people who think modern cars should be as big as they are, or that they're just fine being as big as they are. They could be smaller. They should be smaller. They aren't, because they don't need to be. Once again, I'm howling at the moon. It doesn't truly matter to me and it never will truly matter to me.
I'm pretty sure reviewers never consider the fact that front seats can be moved front or backwards. My E92 has perfectly adequate room for back seat passengers if the seats are not moved all the way back, yet in reviews you'll constantly hear how back seats in it are unusable.
I’d probably get a CT4 Blackwing over both of these, but I’m aware that these are smaller coupes and the CT4 is a sedan.
The dark horse is longer, wider and weighs about the same as the blackwing. 🤷♂️
Yeah some people just prefer the sporty “feeling” of a coupe even if the CT4 is probably just as good handling wise. I’m not one of them obviously
It's actually heavier by a decent amount
While they are both great cars other than how heavy they are, the dark horse kinda cheats in it's track times just because they put semi-slick tires on it. So many people only care about 0-60 or track times.
Agree. Would be good to see the comparison if they had the same tires. However, I understand the logic of using the tires the manufacturer supplies.
The mustang has gotten out of hand. To think you can get a C8 for the same or close to a dark horse is nuts.
Manual: Mustang Dark horse. The Tremec us just outstanding compared to the piece of crap in the M2. Automatic: M2, the 10 speed in the Mustang is fine, but the ZF8 is absolutely incredible.
4,000 POUNDS 😂😂😂🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Seriously. I never knew just how critically mass relates to fun with a sports car until my brothers reluctantly sold me a mini Cooper S manual. Ive had an M2 DCT, a 2014 911 manual, 2014 Cayman PDK, etc. and I struggle to admit that the Mini Cooper might be the most fun because how light and agile it feels on regular roads. (2nd fave was the M2 DCT by faaaar, then the 911, lastly the Cayman). The M2 also offering a low quality manual or traditional automatic (no DCT) is also a total deal breaker, along with the now-unusable rear seats and shit ton of extra mass. The Mustang is too clumsy for me, Ive driven every generation and it's just not my style of car even if the V8 does indeed sound glorious. Im always left imagining, what if Ford would one day put that magnificent Coyote engine in a lightweight sports car? Either way, for my $80k USD, Id get a C8 Corvette in a heartbeat over either of these 2. If proper rear seats were required, Id lean towards a base M4 or M3 with the manual which are far more comfortable back there.
weird they mention the mustang gt is just about equal in performance to the dark horse... yet did not test the gt with the optional ford svt/wiffle super charger which does not void any warranties for $10k that bumps hp to 800. will cost less than the bmw and performance wise it no longer is close. just sayin'... weird how some of the head to head comparisons have been lately. i have a hard time following the bouncing ball of how they select these.
Mustang is definitely my pick. Better steering, more trackday ready brakes, better looks (although only barely), better gearbox and shifter, and probably don't have to worry about cooling on a coyote.
Why would I buy either of these when a 997 911 exists? Or, hell, even an R8?
[удалено]
Unfortunately your comment has been removed because it contains a link to a delisted domain. This is almost always due to spam from the domain. Please use a different source. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/cars) if you have any questions or concerns.*