The BMW 2002 Hommage is an M2-based Retro Thriller

Patrick Hoffstetter
by Patrick Hoffstetter
the bmw 2002 hommage is an m2 based retro thriller

Just in time for the Concorso d’Eleganza at Villa d’este, BMW revealed a stunning concept today that is just magnificent. Unlike last year’s concept, the automaker chose to blend retro and contemporary styling cues to give every kidney grille fan a real treat.

Last year, BMW shared with the world a 3.0L CSL Hommage that contained some cool ideas, but felt disjointed, and to my eyes was even a tad ugly. Many people felt that BMW had lost its way, but this year BMW hit back, knocking it out of the park with a concept known simply as the 2002 Hommage.

Based on the M2, the concept arrives just in time for the 50th anniversary of the 2002 — the car that put BMW on the map. Borrowing some cues from the 2002 Turbo of old while keeping some of the M2’s design language, the striking concept shows what we all want from the automaker: sporting, dashing design.

From the 2002’s squared front, to the “turbo” badging on the front fascia, this car is a greatest hits compilation of the original 2002 and the Turbo. Quad tailpipes, carbon fiber, and LED lighting inject modernity into the quasi-retro design. M mirrors remain, along with a wide stance.

There’s no word on the concept’s power figures, but since it is based on the M2, you can take an educated guess. Still, horsepower and torque isn’t important when dealing with a concept. Take a moment to look at this car and appreciate it. If anything, this proves that Bimmer can still make a stunning vehicle.

We can only hope that BMW adopts more of this design language in the future.

[Images: BMW Group]

Join the conversation
2 of 45 comments
  • Alan The Prado shouldn't have the Landcruiser name attached. It isn't a Landcruiser as much as a Tacoma or 4 Runner or a FJ Cruiser. Toyota have used the Landcruiser name as a marketing exercise for years. In Australia the RAV4 even had Landcruiser attached years ago! The Toyota Landcruiser is the Landcruiser, not a tarted up Tacoma wagon.Here a GX Prado cost about $61k before on roads, this is about $41k USD. This is a 2.8 diesel 4x4 with all the off road tricky stuff, plus AC, power windows, etc. I'm wondering if Toyota will perform the Nissan Armada treatment on it and debase the Prado. The Patrol here is actually as capable and possibly more capable than the Landcruiser off road (according to some reviews). The Armada was 'muricanised and the off road ability was reduced a lot. Who ever heard of a 2 wheel drive Patrol.Does the US need the Prado? Why not. Another option to choose from built by Toyota that is overpriced and uses old tech.My sister had a Prado Grande, I didn't think much of it. It was narrow inside and not that comfortable. Her Grand Cherokee was more comfortable and now her Toureg is even more comfortable, but you can still feel the road in the seat of your pants and ears.
  • Jeffrey No tis vehicle doen't need to come to America. The market if flooded in this segment what we need are fun affordable vehicles.
  • Nrd515 I don't really see the point of annual inspections, especially when the car is under 3 years (warranty) old. Inspections should be safety related, ONLY, none of the nonsensical CA ARB rules that end up being something like, "Your air intake doesn't have an ARB sticker on it, so you have to remove it and buy one just like it that does have the ARB sticker on it!". If the car or whatever isn't puking smoke out of it, and it doesn't make your eyes water, like an old Chevy Bel-Air I was behind on Wed did, it's fine. I was stuck in traffic behind that old car, and wow, the gasoline smell was super potent. It was in nice shape, but man, it was choking me. I was amused by the 80 something old guy driving it, he even had a hat with a feather in it, THE sign of someone you don't want to be driving anywhere near you.
  • Lou_BC "15mpg EPA" The 2023 ZR2 Colorado is supposed to be 16 mpg
  • ToolGuy "The more aerodynamic, organic shape of the Mark VIII meant ride height was slightly lower than before at 53.6 inches, over 54.2” for the Mark VII."• I am not sure that ride height means what you think it means.Elaboration: There is some possible disagreement about what "ride height" refers to. Some say ground clearance, some say H point (without calling it that), some say something else. But none of those people would use a number of over 4 feet for a stock Mark anything.Then you go on to use it correctly ("A notable advancement in the Mark VIII’s suspension was programming to lower the ride height slightly at high speeds, which assisted fuel economy via improved aerodynamics.") so what do I know. Plus, I ended a sentence with a preposition. 🙂