M2 Versus XM Is the Ugly BMW Drag Race Where Size Matters Most

Unless you have self-respect, self-esteem, and motoring gentility, case in which you have the road closed down, so no one else sees you drag racing two of the Germans' latest M badges against each other.

That's a joke; you needn't have the Sherriff Department lock down a remote Arizona road just to hide two ugly BMWs from curious onlookers. No, they do that so that carwow's major gearheading YouTube host, Mat Watson, can show us all which BMW M is better over the quarter-mile sprint: the M2 or the XM.

Let's agree on one thing: between the two contenders, neither would take home the beauty pageant trophy. They're pretty much level on this aspect – horrid, but that's not what they're here for. The couple is a modern-day piston embodiment of the biblical David and Goliath battle.

The smallest M takes on the top-tier performance BMW. The cars are worlds apart in every aspect, except the badge and the looks. The entry-level member of the Bavarian athletic branch of the family sports an M-traditional cylinder architecture – an inline six displacing 3.0 liters. A couple of air-compressing turbines give the engine enough confidence to spit out 460 PS and 550 Nm (454 hp and 406 lb-ft).

This particular M2 model featured in the video sends those figures to the rear wheels via an eight-speed automatic. But BMW has been considerate enough to offer a manual-six alternative should hardcore fans frown at the two-pedal variant.

The baby-M is a very well-fed automobile (for a performance-aiming, thrills-spawning two-door four-seater): 1,725 kilograms (3,803 lbs.), resulting in a power-to-weight ratio of 263 hp/ton (267 ps/ton). Not at all impressive, but wait (weight?) 'till you see the other one.

The XM is not a regular M car because it is not built on a standard BMW but was designed to be a pure-blooded M from the very start. Whether it is or not, we'll let history be the judge of it. Until then, here are its specs.

It's animated by a hybrid powertrain consisting of a twin-turbo 4.4-liter V8 (good for 483 hp and 479 lb-ft/490 ps and 650 Nm) and an electric motor that ups the ICE ante with 195 hp and 207 lb-ft (197 ps and 280 Nm). The total output is 653 hp and 590 lb-ft (662 ps / 800 Nm).

Impressive, isn't it? And the eight-speed automatic gearbox coupled to the all-wheel-drive system makes the XM all the more confident to instantly obliterate the petite M2. There is a drawback, though – the XM's ego is so big it brings the car's weight to the 2,710 kg mark (5,975 lbs). That's a ton over the compact challenger. 241 hp/ton (244 ps/ton) isn't that far away from the M2's rating.

This is anyone's race, looking from the pre-fight weigh-in perspective. However, the M2 packs more fight than its blue-blooded big brother and shames it every single time, both from a dig and a rolling start. By a tenth of a second (11.9 versus 12.0), but does it really matter?

Although the electric motor and the AWD give the massive Beemer the head advantage, it quickly runs out of breath and falls short of its M-exclusive origins. The only round it takes is the 100-0 mph (160 kph) braking contest, and that's a massive (pun intended) surprise. But show me one piston-worshipping ultrafundamentalist who buys an M for its braking abilities, and I'll hike to BMW's headquarters to express my condolences.

The brief conclusion would be that the posh behemoth has about as much in common with "the most powerful letter in the world" as the alphabet. Were it not for that written symbol, no one would take the XM for a German legend of automotive.