O ok, well thought they were implementing a different version of segwit, seeing i read core's version needed 95% signaling for it to go active, but segwit2x is doing it with ~ 80%?
Segwit2x is using BIP 91. BIP 91 specifies that 269 of the last 336 blocks (~80% of the last 336 blocks) must signal for BIP 91 on bit 4. Once there is enough signalling, it will be locked in for a short grace period of 336 blocks. Then it will activate. Once BIP 91 activates, all blocks must signal for segwit on bit 1. This means that segwit will then activate via its original deployment on bit 1. Segwit2x is not actually activating a different segwit, they are activating something else which will force the activation of segwit.Anyways as long as its the same as core version shouldn't have any forks, i guess until they start the hard fork to 2mb block size right?
There may be forks since 20% of the hash rate won't be support BIP 91 and thus will likely not be signalling bit 1 for segwit. With some luck and spy mining, forks could be made from miners extending a chain off of a block which does not signal bit 1. However Bitcoin Core will allow you to choose the chain to use (via the invalidateblock RPC command) and any of the forks will be valid to Core.If BIP 91 activates successfully and everyone who claims they will enforce it actually enforces it, then there shouldn't be a fork.
so even in a remote case of an hard fork, which could be imminent, we just leave our coins there on core, and we should be safe from my understanding, as logn as we don't move those coins right?
Yes. Coins at rest are not at risk.On a sidenote what versions of Bitcoin Core should a person utilize considered safest for segwit2x or does it matter as long as it ain't QT ^^.
Any recent version of Core should be fine, even ones that don't have segwit support.If I see that message in my Core wallet, is it safe to send coins somewhere now ?
Yes. There currently is no fork, so you can safely send your coins. 
