2023 BMW M2 vs. Toyota GR Supra: Track Test

One is a track-ready two-door BMW coupe tuned for the track. The other is an M2. But which is the better sports car?

It's hard not to admire the fifth-generation Toyota Supra when viewed against the new BMW M2. The Supra--a Toyota-tuned, tin-top BMW Z4 underneath its handsome bodywork—is down 71 horsepower compared with the M2, but it's also 400 pounds lighter. On specs alone, the Toyota-tweaked BMW is a more pure expression of a sports car than BMW's own two-door. It's a great foil for this full-on M car.

Pricewise, the two cars aren't worlds apart either. A base GR Supra 3.0 costs $54,695, but equipment-wise, the $59,040 Premium is a closer match to a no-options M2, which starts at $63,195. (Our M2 tester had $9900 of Carbon Fiber Package and other options bringing the MSRP up to $75,345.)

There's a world where these cars are cross-shopped. This seemed like enough justification to get our hands on the pair and head up to Lime Rock Park in the northwest corner of Connecticut for a track test.

For 2023, Toyota surprised us by putting a manual in the Supra. It always seemed a little weird that this car never came with a manual, yet we never expected Toyota to add one after the fact. What was done, seemed done. Thankfully it wasn't. The manual imbues the Supra with more personality. Before, the Supra was competent, but a little cold. Now, it has a bit more joie de vivre. The gearbox is from ZF and it feels similar to what you get in modern BMWs, yet Toyota specced out a few tweaks to give it a more notchy positive feel on engagement. It's still quite light—you can shift with two fingers—yet very accurate. You'll rarely, if ever, miss a shift here.

The engine and transmission pair well together. You can use the "Gear Shift Assistant" which will rev match on both up and downshifts, though for the ultimate connection with the car, turn this off. Suddenly, the engine seems to respond more quickly, encouraging even quicker shifts. Whoever did the calibration on this system really paid attention to the details.

Toyota also made some tweaks to the adaptive dampers and the steering for 2023, though these are far more subtle. The fundamentally neutral chassis balance feels about the same, as does the way the car rolls onto the outside rear wheel in cornering. Lime Rock's first turn is Big Bend, a 180-degree double-apex right generally taken in third gear. You're in the corner for a long time, breathing on and off the throttle to adjust your line as needed. Good front-engine rear-drive chassis shine here, and so does the Supra's. Elsewhere, you notice the steering, which seems to have a bit more nuance than before, a more natural self-centering action. It's not the most talkative, though. You feel a lot more of what the car is doing through the seat.

Typically there's only one big braking zone at LRP, into Big Bend, but on this test, we were using the track's uphill chicane. This adds a hard brake on the back straight, and it exposes one of the Supra's weaknesses. I wouldn't say the car is underbraked, just that it's hard to get the braking right. You could put in the same input lap after lap and get a slightly different response every time. It's alright if you fluff the braking a bit into Big Bend, since there's a fairly wide entry. The chicane, however, cuts narrow. It's tough to meter out exactly how much brake you need to get the turn-in right. The brakes don't inspire confidence. Staff Writer Brian Silvestro and I wondered if this could be remedied with upgraded pads and fluid, or perhaps even stainless-steel brake lines.

I think it points to the fact that the Supra isn't really a track car right out of the box. Sure, it's capable of setting very fast laps around here, yet it never feels 100-percent at home. And thus, an assumption challenged. We're led to believe that weight is everything in a car, repeating "simplify and add lightness" like its gospel. I'm never going to say that weight doesn't matter, but the small details matter too. The M2 makes this obvious.

You'd never guess the M2 weighs so much more than the Supra. It feels far more agile, with an even sharper front end paired with a rear that follows faithfully. (The M2 uses the same 275/35R19 front, 285/30R20 rear Michelin Pilot Sport 4S tires as the M3 and M4. The Supra uses 255/35R19 front, 275/35R19 rear Pilot Super Sports.) Perhaps under braking you get the sense that more weight is being thrown around than in the Supra, yet the body control is much better, so there's a lot more stability. There's a bit of roll in corners, but it feels well-judged—it's enough that the driver gets a good sense of what the car is doing.

As with all new M cars, there are too many modes for the engine, steering, brakes, and chassis, so it takes a few minutes to find the right combination. Once that's all done, you won't second-guess yourself, and the red buttons on the steering wheel allow you to save and recall presets, too. What is inarguably great is BMW's 10-stage M Traction Control system, an advanced traction and stability control program that allows the driver to find a level they're comfortable with. The system looks at the car's yaw rate and uses ABS, engine controls, and the standard electronic rear differential to keep the car in line. Silvestro and I found that even in level 5, the M2 allows for a fair bit of oversteer before the computer gathers you back in line.

For fast lap times, higher numbers seemed to offer the best compromise between grip and slip. Still, the M2 has a bit of an appetite for oversteer if you're not careful. The engine delivers peak torque of 406 lb-ft at 3500 RPM, and even though power comes on progressively, the driver still has to be mindful not to spin up the rear tires on corner exit.

Given that the M2 is functionally a shortened M4, I expected the two to feel the same, but the smaller car has a personality all its own. It's one that both Silvestro and I better gelled with. He suspects the shorter wheelbase of the M2 makes all the difference. Whatever the case, the M2 is just more fun. A little lighter on its feet, a little better at communicating with the driver. BMW was clever with the engine tuning here too. The M2 uses the same engine as the M3/M4, and torque output is the same for the manual versions of those cars, yet, BMW mapped the output to be more smooth in its delivery. The result is an engine that never hits you over the head with an unexpected slug of torque at some absurdly low RPM, and one that encourages revving beyond 6000 rpm.

The extra work put into the Supra's shifter makes the BMW's seem very, well, conventional BMW. That is, it's rubbery, and a little too light. Not the most satisfying, but it won't get in your way either. Plus, the brake pedal is better calibrated, making heel-and-toe much easier, though like the Supra, the M2 has a user-selectable auto rev-match function.

Those brakes are excellent, too. Consistent, fade free, and feelsome, encouraging the driver to use their best technique. They do the thing that great brakes do on track—work so consistently and so well, you don't have to think about them. Lap after lap, they hauled the car down from 130-plus on the front straight without sweat.

Then you get into Big Bend. For as great as the Supra is here, the M2 is better. There's so much throttle adjustability, giving the driver infinite options for how they tackle the corner. The steering isn't super chatty, as is always the case with modern BMWs, but with the optional carbon bucket seats of our test car, you get a ton of great information through the seat of your pants. The whole car feels instinctive. Once you get your modes squared away, you can get in and start pushing your limits right away. It's faster than the Supra, yet more approachable.

For as much guff as BMW gets about apparently losing its way with iXs, X7s and the like, the M2 shows it can still produce a top-notch driver's car. I'm fortunate to have driven every generation of M3 on track, and there's a real connection between this M2 and the classics. At Lime Rock, it feels at home. The track is only a mile and a half long, yet it's fast and technical with not too much margin for error. There's a lot of nuance involved in getting a good lap around here, and the M2 works with the driver to achieve it.

None of this is to say the Supra is a bad car. Driven in isolation here, it's good, a few chassis and brake tweaks away from great. Perhaps a stiffer rear sway bar, or those stainless steel brake lines would get it there. With the manual, too, it's so much more enjoyable than ever before. It's just that the M2 is almost freakishly competent. The extra spend over the Supra doesn't just get you a bigger car, it gets you better hardware and software from front to back. Good luck matching BMW's fancy traction-control system through the aftermarket.

Beyond learning a lot about how these cars drive, the test reminds us that how a car stands on paper doesn't necessarily determine how it feels behind the wheel. The Supra might be a more traditional sports car, lighter, with a better manual transmission, but it's not the more rewarding machine on track. What the M Division did with the M2, with thoughtful and careful tuning, made it the better partner on a road course. Specs aren't everything. The M2 is wonderful proof.

A car enthusiast since childhood, Chris Perkins is Road & Track's engineering nerd and Porsche apologist. He joined the staff in 2016 and no one has figured out a way to fire him since. He street-parks a Porsche Boxster in Brooklyn, New York, much to the horror of everyone who sees the car, not least the author himself. He also insists he's not a convertible person, despite owning three.

Manual Vanquish S Is Aston Martin Perfected

The Porsche 911 Dakar Harnesses Rally Spirit

Twenty-Five Is a Magic Number

The Prodrive P25 Is the Greatest Impreza on Earth

Where You Test the Most Advanced Cars in the World

The 2024 Ford Mustang GT Hasn’t Changed Much

Returning the Ford Bronco Raptor to the Mint 400