[BmwFanBoy94]

Regardless of what comparison he made, it doesn’t matter as the point was quite clear imo.

Just because there’s a better version about doesn’t mean the lesser car is not attractive anymore.

All companies do it, they’re in it to make profit after all? That’s how you make money, you add value.

It’s exactly the same as Apple and their iPhones, each year there’s a new model and boy if you think the new bits they add were just thought of within a year of releasing you’ve got it all wrong. Heck, if I can make a comparison to Apple why is everyone digging at the point he compared it to a 911/911 Turbo/GT3. It’s all the god damn same tactic.

Substantial companies deliberately hold back innovation in order to make more money and expand their portfolio.

It’s simple business.

[Evinrude1975]

Berfore to buy an M3, I ran a quick cost comparison between a regular M3 Comp fully loaded and an M3 CS. I also took in account a possible depreciation along with an yearly mileage forecast. At the end I bought an M3 CS. Am I going to use it 100% of its potential?… not even close. But this is another story

[kiw1]

Originally Posted by Needsdecaf

Agreed, the better comparison would be a Carrera S to a GTS. In a way that one is better, because the price delta isn't as great, and you can actually option a Carrera S almost the same as a GTS. In the old days you could option it EXACTLY the same (997 and 991.1 years) and then they started making hardware changes you couldn't get like the turbos (991.2) and now the 992 GTS has the Turbo's suspension and brakes.

Carrera - GT3 / Turbo S is a jump too far.

I think this is a better way of looking at it. The value you get for the upgrades and the badge is subjective afterall

[Custom Install]

Originally Posted by jmg

They didn't get the G80/2 "wrong" but they do want the opportunity for another cash grab, so some things were saved for the CS. The F80 CS was a big improvement over the base F80 and F80 Competition, but there was more to "solve" in that car, and more time to solve it. I found my F80 M3 CS better on the track, personally.

The G80 CS seems like it was announced almost immediately after the G80/2 was released, at least in a relatively short time compared to the F80 CS. Same for the the M5 CS, so the cash grab seems more blatant. That doesn't mean that the improvements aren't real, however.

Personally, I'm waiting for the rumored M4 CS, as the CSL is just out of my sanity price range for that car.

E46 CSL was not viewed favorably when it came out either. SMG? No one liked that.

I agree with the points you’ve made mostly, especially the quick introduction of these ‘premium’ models.
The e46 wasn’t mechanically perfect, I put that down to the available hardware at the time. But through and through it was what I aspired to own back then, it was M at its best.
All I see at the moment are tacky logos and CF aero parts that have zero impact on performance.
I don’t watch Doug demuro much, his CSL video hit a raw nerve, he was correct in flagging up the stupidly overdone M4CSL logos, everywhere.
Today I had a discussion with my nephew about the BMW cars I’ve owned.
The M sport models I’ve had along the way and how the subtle M logo on the steering wheel, the door sill etc. made me feel I had to work towards a proper M.
Now it means nothing for the enthusiast, it’s everywhere.
Imagine a CSL/CS with functional aero, racing suspension, no stupid logos or gimmicks but the engineering behind it to justify that badge.

Imagine a Porsche RS with a 911 parts bin overload. RS logos on the roof, the front splitter, the front wing, the grill, the trunk the dash, the back seat removal, the centre console the seat mechanism….

It would be a GT3RS …… M///

[Custom Install]

G series M5 CS prototype spotted in Scotland.
Complete with double M badges on trunk, XM homage.

[jmg]

Originally Posted by Custom Install

I agree with the points you’ve made mostly, especially the quick introduction of these ‘premium’ models.
The e46 wasn’t mechanically perfect, I put that down to the available hardware at the time. But through and through it was what I aspired to own back then, it was M at its best.
All I see at the moment are tacky logos and CF aero parts that have zero impact on performance.
I don’t watch Doug demuro much, his CSL video hit a raw nerve, he was correct in flagging up the stupidly overdone M4CSL logos, everywhere.
Today I had a discussion with my nephew about the BMW cars I’ve owned.
The M sport models I’ve had along the way and how the subtle M logo on the steering wheel, the door sill etc. made me feel I had to work towards a proper M.
Now it means nothing for the enthusiast, it’s everywhere.
Imagine a CSL/CS with functional aero, racing suspension, no stupid logos or gimmicks but the engineering behind it to justify that badge.

Imagine a Porsche RS with a 911 parts bin overload. RS logos on the roof, the front splitter, the front wing, the grill, the trunk the dash, the back seat removal, the centre console the seat mechanism….

It would be a GT3RS …… M///

Haha yeah, I didn't realize how many logos until this video. The logo on the front splitter is especially head scratching. However, I get what BMW is doing. So long as the bones are legit, the components that look functional are actually functional, and the components that are purely cosmetic don't actually hurt performance, I can't blame them for trying to increase profits. I don't know if the CSL is making them money, I just know it's too much money for me.

[Custom Install]

Originally Posted by jmg

Haha yeah, I didn't realize how many logos until this video. The logo on the front splitter is especially head scratching. However, I get what BMW is doing. So long as the bones are legit, the components that look functional are actually functional, and the components that are purely cosmetic don't actually hurt performance, I can't blame them for trying to increase profits. I don't know if the CSL is making them money, I just know it's too much money for me.

Splitter logo is just adding weight lol.
I get the business profit thing, but surely you have to have a legitimate back-up answer for the customer who asks the performance gains questions ?
Like you, the CSL is too much money.
However, if it was a modern day e46 CSL I’d find that cash no matter what.

[r0wr]

Originally Posted by KevinGS

OK, but I think you guys get the overall point I was trying to make.

And as for a G8X vs. G8X CS or G8X CSL, can you option a "standard" G8X and get a CS or CSL, like you can a Carrera S to a GTS?

Once again, I think your analogy is wrong. You can’t option a option a 911 S to a GTS, they have different turbos. 911 S also has different suspension, brakes, and reduced sound deadening.

Your original comparison to the 911 to a GT3/Turbo has even more drastic differences. The point is that the CS is software differences with some parts bin specials. As you move up the 911 chain, it’s not even close to the same thing. It doesn’t mean the CS isn’t a better car than the Comp - I think it’s clear that it is. But the point is that the CS isn’t a one-off special car that is drastically different than a Comp.

[kgelfen360]

Originally Posted by r0wr

Once again, I think your analogy is wrong. You can’t option a option a 911 S to a GTS, they have different turbos. 911 S also has different suspension, brakes, and reduced sound deadening.

Your original comparison to the 911 to a GT3/Turbo has even more drastic differences. The point is that the CS is software differences with some parts bin specials. As you move up the 911 chain, it’s not even close to the same thing. It doesn’t mean the CS isn’t a better car than the Comp - I think it’s clear that it is. But the point is that the CS isn’t a one-off special car that is drastically different than a Comp.

I agree with what you saying regarding Porsche line up. It’s not same comparison.

But in the BMW M3 line up “CS” badge from factory makes special. It’s limited production and 20 years from now the CS will be valued higher regardless of the fact that it’s mostly software tune.

[r0wr]

Originally Posted by kgelfen360

I agree with what you saying regarding Porsche line up. It’s not same comparison.

But in the BMW M3 line up “CS” badge from factory makes special. It’s limited production and 20 years from now the CS will be valued higher regardless of the fact that it’s mostly software tune.

I’ll agree with you there. And for whatever it’s worth, I agree that the CS doesn’t make the regular non CS any less of a great car.

I wlll say that the extra $20k you pay for the CS invested into the stock market will be worth more than the delta between the resale value of the two cars would ever be in 20 years, assuminf they’re driven.

[BGBF18]

All that and still no rear seat center armrest. Maybe the H80 CSL-XR4TI will have one.

[BmwFanBoy94]

Originally Posted by r0wr

Once again, I think your analogy is wrong. You can’t option a option a 911 S to a GTS, they have different turbos. 911 S also has different suspension, brakes, and reduced sound deadening.

Your original comparison to the 911 to a GT3/Turbo has even more drastic differences. The point is that the CS is software differences with some parts bin specials. As you move up the 911 chain, it’s not even close to the same thing. It doesn’t mean the CS isn’t a better car than the Comp - I think it’s clear that it is. But the point is that the CS isn’t a one-off special car that is drastically different than a Comp.

You obviously haven’t done your research.

To say the CS didn’t get a major suspension overhaul would be naive. Mechanical I understand, but the CS chassis set up was completely bespoke. New camber adjustments and kinematic for both the axles. Let’s not forget the bespoke anti-roll bars new auxiliary springs. Oops, I almost forgot the new damper rates.

Let’s not forget the stiffer engine mount, increased boost pressure on the turbos, the more aggressive ZF gearbox tune and torque being available for longer over the rev range. Also did I forget to mention bespoke titanium exhaust ?

Let’s not forget the carbon bonnet.

To say the CS and comp are quite similar is VERY naive. Maybe they might look similar, (even though If you know your M’s you should see the difference) but boy do they drive different. Hopefully you’ll be lucky enough to one day drive a comp and CS back to back to feel the difference.

In my opinion your comment is a lazy comment and an argument which is recycled continuously with no backing.

[r0wr]

Originally Posted by BmwFanBoy94

You obviously haven’t done your research.

To say the CS didn’t get a major suspension overhaul would be naive. Mechanical I understand, but the CS chassis set up was completely bespoke. New camber adjustments and kinematic for both the axles. Let’s not forget the bespoke anti-roll bars new auxiliary springs. Oops, I almost forgot the new damper rates.

Let’s not forget the stiffer engine mount, increased boost pressure on the turbos, the more aggressive ZF gearbox tune and torque being available for longer over the rev range. Also did I forget to mention bespoke titanium exhaust ?

Let’s not forget the carbon bonnet.

To say the CS and comp are quite similar is VERY naive. Maybe they might look similar, (even though If you know your M’s you should see the difference) but boy do they drive different. Hopefully you’ll be lucky enough to one day drive a comp and CS back to back to feel the difference.

In my opinion your comment is a lazy comment and an argument which is recycled continuously with no backing.

I’ve driven the F8x CS back to back. It’s definitely a better car. $20-$30k better it is not. And I’ll stand by my statement that the Comp is closer to the CS than the 911 is to a GT3 or Turbo.

[Evinrude1975]

Taking about a road test, I reached out to the Throttle House team to see if they wanted to test my M3 CS. They replied, but they didn't follow up. Based on their recent BMW reviews, I thought it could be a good opportunity for realigning the expectations between TH and BMW 😉

[Kevin_The_Clean1]

Nice review overall. But... Matt did indeed seem a little less excited they hey normally is. Maybe he should've gotten a touch more rest before he hopped into a Signal Green G80 M3 CS...

[Emtoo]

Originally Posted by Evinrude1975

Taking about a road test, I reached out to the Throttle House team to see if they wanted to test my M3 CS. They replied, but they didn't follow up. Based on their recent BMW reviews, I thought it could be a good opportunity for realigning the expectations between TH and BMW 😉

That would be amazing. Can you try them again? They would give it the ultimate review

[TonM3]

You need a great personality to make up for ugly looks

[Evinrude1975]

Originally Posted by Emtoo

That would be amazing. Can you try them again? They would give it the ultimate review

I guess they have a different plan and maybe they prefer to ride the official BMW test car.

[SFVM3]

Originally Posted by jmg

E46 CSL was not viewed favorably when it came out either. SMG? No one liked that.

I had an SMG E46 M3 from 2002-2005, and read all good USA M3 forums daily. Not sure where you're getting your information but I know it is not accurate...

When the E46 CSL came out every M3 fan loved it and wanted one badly, but we couldn't get them in the US so we just drooled from here and watched test videos repeatedly. Only thing cooler was the V8 E46 M3 GTR.

At the time most SMG owners also liked their transmissions while under warranty, it had its peculiarities but it was one of the first affordable (non-Ferrari) automated manuals in the US and it shifted fast as hell, .080 seconds in max sport setting. So it shifted hard and would shock the driveline and chirp tires and I loved it. It cracked my driveshaft causing a creak (vs inability to drive) and I drove it to dealer for replacement. That was the only issue I ever had the with the SMG or any other part of the car for 3 years ownership.

SMG 2 owners said SMG 1 sucked, and years later the SMG 2 sucked... and yes the CSL should have had a manual, if only for longevity. The GTR was a manual.

[gnx]

Originally Posted by SFVM3

I had an SMG E46 M3 from 2002-2005, and read all good USA M3 forums daily. Not sure where you're getting your information but I know it is not accurate...

When the E46 CSL came out every M3 fan loved it and wanted one badly, but we couldn't get them in the US so we just drooled from here and watched test videos repeatedly. Only thing cooler was the V8 E46 M3 GTR.

At the time most SMG owners also liked their transmissions while under warranty, it had its peculiarities but it was one of the first affordable (non-Ferrari) automated manuals in the US and it shifted fast as hell, .080 seconds in max sport setting. So it shifted hard and would shock the driveline and chirp tires and I loved it. It cracked my driveshaft causing a creak (vs inability to drive) and I drove it to dealer for replacement. That was the only issue I ever had the with the SMG or any other part of the car for 3 years ownership.

SMG 2 owners said SMG 1 sucked, and years later the SMG 2 sucked... and yes the CSL should have had a manual, if only for longevity. The GTR was a manual.

I don't get the hate with the SMG either. I've done 70,000 miles in mine. Sure it's not as smooth as a dct but it is so much more than rowing your gears like you do with a manual. DCT basically mimics an autobox. SMG is very mechanical and is not supposed to be tractable as if it has a torque converter and that is it's allure. Converting to a manual net net is a loss for the car. There were a couple British magazines the past two years that have "revisited" an M3 CSL that had undergone a manual conversion. And they reveled about the newfound "completeness" of the car, with the forgettable bmw manual gearbox of that era. By messing with a classic, ruining the uniqueness of the e46 CSL.


I see a lot of posters over here probably of younger age that actually sort of abide to what recognizable, mostly English speaking, automotive journalists write or present nowadays on video. Which basically are 3-4 magazines, 15-20 individuals that know each other pretty well, regurgitate views that soon converge and create narratives. Narratives that are fed to the readership.

Those change though over time, I know what I am talking about. I have been buying like 10 titles a month since 1987, still have all the issues.

[Custom Install]

Originally Posted by Custom Install

Personally I’m sick to death hearing about ‘tweaks’ on the CS (and CSL)
So they got the G80/82 wrong first time round?
It’s a blatant cash grab, there is nothing of value added to these cars and ironically functional value items have been deleted. We’re all falling over ourselves thinking about CF hoods and things like the strut brace the base cars should have had.
Personally I hate the red accents, I mean is this the best M can do.
It’s no E46 CSL, that was truly special.
Since the launch of the 3.0 CSL I’ve seen something I can’t unsee.
It’s called marketing BS

Harry sums things up perfectly, seems like the positives in his review apply directly to the base M3/4 cars and the CS delta is questionable.
OTT red decals, fake carbon aero and deleted cup holders.
Maybe I didn’t get out of bed the wrong side before I posted in this thread.

[BmwFanBoy94]

Originally Posted by Custom Install

Harry sums things up perfectly, seems like the positives in his review apply directly to the base M3/4 cars and the CS delta is questionable.
OTT red decals, fake carbon aero and deleted cup holders.
Maybe I didn’t get out of bed the wrong side before I posted in this thread.

From what I took from that review……

Great driving machine, terrible looks, which is subjective 😀 and so is the price 😀 except a great driving machine is a fact and not subjective.

The amount of times I here people say they’d pay 5k or more for a tune from BMW with warranty…. Well here’s one with a few hardware changes also. In my opinion 20k over a comp is not bad.