[ScullyD]

Originally Posted by M4CompConv/X7

Well, the echo what I felt about the carbon buckets. I don't need to pay over $4k to be uncomfortable. What surprised me were all the negative comments.

They are talking about the no-cost fixed manual standard buckets in the CSL. Those are quite comfortable cause the side bolsters and center carbon piece are more staggered than the optional 2 piece bucket that is the $4k option in the competition.

[MadBimmeRad]

Originally Posted by IMG

😊🙏🏼
This is sitting on the 285s on the rears

As a dearly departed friend used to say: "That's a delicious Mama" (imagine it in Italian accent)

She's a stunner mate

[IMG]

Originally Posted by MadBimmeRad

As a dearly departed friend used to say: "That's a delicious Mama" (imagine it in Italian accent)

She's a stunner mate

Thank you 😊
She sure is and gets treated right 😁

[Sedan_Clan]

I find it interesting that people will say, "Well, the M4 CSL can be bested by the AWD G8X CS, etc. (despite the CSL having the racetrack edge)", but tend to ignore that the GT3 gets smoked by an AWD TT/S (while also maintaining the racetrack edge......kinda, depending on track layout). People will scream the GT3 is about the experience, but won't apply that same reasoning and rationale to the CSL's experience. Hyper-critical of BMW but not the same hyper criticism applied to Porsche.

[Chicane_]

^ this

[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by Chicane_

So the CSL struggles to put down its power. Isn’t that a good thing assuming you’re a competetent driver who wants to be entertained and feel rewarded? Cars like these should be an event and not be easy to drive. There are plenty of other cars to choose from for those seeking something more planted and safe.

This is interesting as well. They will criticize because it's a handful, but when a car is super composed, well behaved and easy/easier to drive, they complain about that too (...citing that the car isn't raw enough and doesn't require the skills of old, which I disagree with). It's a no-win situation. Porsche received a lot of flack for the widowmaker 911's of old, but people now complain that the 992 generation isn't raw enough and is too civil, easy to drive, well behaved, etc. Fucking ridiculous!

On the topic of the buckets....


....it's great to know the fixed buckets are adjustable. I wasn't aware of that. It makes these journalistic evaluations even that much more worthless if they can't even take the time to fully evaluate a car on all metrics.

[Schn3ll]

Originally Posted by Sedan_Clan

I find it interesting that people will say, "Well, the M4 CSL can be bested by the AWD G8X CS, etc. (despite the CSL having the racetrack edge)", but tend to ignore that the GT3 gets smoked by an AWD TT/S (while also maintaining the racetrack edge......kinda, depending on track layout). People will scream the GT3 is about the experience, but won't apply that same reasoning and rationale to the CSL's experience. Hyper-critical of BMW but not the same hyper criticism applied to Porsche.

That’s because the experience of a tuned 4 series is different from a bespoke engined 911 tuned by the GT division with intent to race. I’ve driven both on track and no one touched the electronic steering of the 911 (my Blackwing comes very close). Nor can BMW overcome the inherent center of gravity / weight balance issues. Transmissions on GT3 are also superior. Sound on 911 is superior. There are not many things that the 911 isn’t superior as it relates to the experience. The BMW is numb on track, and the GT3 is just not. You just need to drive both and experience yourself.

[CanAutM3]

Originally Posted by Sedan_Clan

I find it interesting that people will say, "Well, the M4 CSL can be bested by the AWD G8X CS, etc. (despite the CSL having the racetrack edge)", but tend to ignore that the GT3 gets smoked by an AWD TT/S (while also maintaining the racetrack edge......kinda, depending on track layout). People will scream the GT3 is about the experience, but won't apply that same reasoning and rationale to the CSL's experience. Hyper-critical of BMW but not the same hyper criticism applied to Porsche.

That’s not a fair comparison. The GT3 is an extensively re-engineered and revamped version of the 911, hence the very different driving experience. Also, the TT-S is a fair bit more expensive than the GT3, the less expensive variants of the 911 lineup do not “outperform” the GT3.

But I understand what you are saying, the CSL offers a special experience that is not meant for everyone, and will not please the majority, hence the limited numbers. For those that it appeals to, it remains a compelling package. I’ve had the exact same argument about my M4cs.

[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by Schn3ll

That’s because the experience of a tuned 4 series is different from a bespoke engined 911 tuned by the GT division with intent to race. I’ve driven both on track and no one touched the electronic steering of the 911 (my Blackwing comes very close). Nor can BMW overcome the inherent center of gravity / weight balance issues. Transmissions on GT3 are also superior. Sound on 911 is superior. There are not many things that the 911 isn’t superior as it relates to the experience. The BMW is numb on track, and the GT3 is just not. You just need to drive both and experience yourself.

None of that matters and none of that addresses the hypocrisy as it pertains to the criticisms I explicitly mentioned. My point still stands: both the GT3 and CSL are about the experience.....and both vehicles can be beaten by other models in the line-up.

[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by CanAutM3

That’s not a fair comparison. The GT3 is an extensively re-engineered and revamped version of the 911. Also, the TT-S is a fair bit more expensive than the GT3, the less expensive variants of the 911 lineup do not “outperform” the GT3.

But I understand what you are saying, the CSL offers a special experience that is not meant for everyone, and will not please the majority, hence the limited numbers. For those that it appeals to, it remains a compelling package. I’ve had the exact same argument about my M4cs.

I more or less agree with you, but here in the states, a GT3 tends to be the more expensive variant because of mark-ups you don't have to deal with in Canada. You were in a position where your dealership was trying to give you a GT3. Here in the states, that just doesn't happen (..as you already know).

[Asymmetrick]

Some of the arguments presented in the posts above need a reality check:

Originally Posted by Schn3ll

That’s because the experience of a tuned 4 series is different from a bespoke engined 911 tuned by the GT division with intent to race.

The CSL has a bespoke engine tuned by the M motorsports division with the intent to race. Its engine does not correspond to that of a base (430i) 4-series.

Originally Posted by CanAutM3

That’s not a fair comparison. The GT3 is an extensively re-engineered and revamped version of the 911, hence the very different driving experience.

And the CSL is not an extensively re-engineered and revamped version of the 4-series AND does not provide a very different driving experience than a base 4-series (430i) car? C’mon…

Originally Posted by CanAutM3

That’s not a fair comparison… the less expensive variants of the 911 lineup do not “outperform” the GT3.

The only way the M4Cx “outperforms” the CSL is in a straight line 0-100 km/h acceleration (because the M4Cx is AWD). In all other meaningful metrics, the CSL outperforms the M4Cx. Now, let’s see how the 911 GT3 does using the same type of comparison:

Carrera 4 GTS: 0-100 km/h acceleration in 3.3 sec (Price: $185,482 USD).
911 GT3: 0-100 km/h acceleration in 3.4 sec (Price: $213,202 USD).
(data from Porsche USA)

And if you spec the LW package on the GTS, it does the 0-100 km/h in 2.8 sec according to C&D. So, by the same metric you have used for the CSL, the 911 GT3 gets outperformed by the $30K less expensive GTS. See my point?

---

Ultimately, the argument about fairness made by many users of this thread is that so-called professional reviewers look at the same metric with the glass “half-full” when discussing the 911 GT3, and “half empty” when discussing the CSL. The 911 GT3 is great, but it's not perfect. It certainly is not the most enjoyable car to drive on regular roads, but no reviewer will fault it for this.

[hoyasaxa]

Originally Posted by MadBimmeRad

You know what, I couldn't agree with you more. I've always said, to me at least, the only opinion that matters is those of the people who put their hands in their pockets; the owners of the cars - all else is conjecture.

I'll be visiting mine toward the end of the month; the excitement and anticipation is enough to give you a heartattack.

I tend to find the opinions of owners, especially on forums, the least credible of all. They are biased and usually suffer from sunk cost fallacy. They are also people who often will have less seat time in a car at the time of purchase than video or magazine reviewers, especially for allocated cars. By the time they own the car, it’s too late to do anything about it.

[Asymmetrick]

Originally Posted by hoyasaxa

I tend to find the opinions of owners, especially on forums, the least credible of all. They are biased and usually suffer from sunk cost fallacy. They are also people who often will have less seat time in a car at the time of purchase than video or magazine reviewers, especially for allocated cars. By the time they own the car, it’s too late to do anything about it.

Funny... Thank God you took time off your busy schedule to rescue all of us who have driven the CSL extensively from our sunk cost fallacy. Not at all a case of the Dunning–Kruger effect.

[Tall Tom Cruise]

Originally Posted by IMG

Define I’m on to something plz.

Obviously I’m pushing this thing on cup 2s in high 30s low 40s temps lol but I feel the car is more planted in the rears through high speed corner exits.
Front grip is amazing.

I find myself correcting the car more out of corners on the 285s on the read compared to the 295s.

Perfect CSL spec.

[hoyasaxa]

Originally Posted by Asymmetrick

Funny... Thank God you took time off your busy schedule to rescue all of us who have driven the CSL extensively from our sunk cost fallacy. Not at all a case of the Dunning–Kruger effect.

My comment was in response to quoted language about the opinions of owners. And wasn’t directed at or involving you, regardless. Touch sensitive, are we? (Ooooh, bold!)

[Asymmetrick]

Originally Posted by hoyasaxa

My comment was in response to quoted language about the opinions of owners. And wasn’t directed at or involving you, regardless. Touch sensitive, are we?

No, just thought your comment was funny. Really.

[Humdizzle]

interesting how the 5-60mph is still only at 4.4 seconds (rwd comp is 4.5, xdrive is 4.4). the car relies heavily on building boost off the line, without that the car is relying on a relatively small motor to move alot of mass. once the turbos finally wake up the car begins to scoot.

here are some comparison times:

https://grandtournation.com/cars/her...ket-right-now/

[MadBimmeRad]

Originally Posted by hoyasaxa

I tend to find the opinions of owners, especially on forums, the least credible of all. They are biased and usually suffer from sunk cost fallacy. They are also people who often will have less seat time in a car at the time of purchase than video or magazine reviewers, especially for allocated cars. By the time they own the car, it’s too late to do anything about it.

I get your point, I do. But I also say, some folks have bias and some don't.

You can discern pretty quickly who's opinion to place any credence upon. People like Chicane_ or Sedan_Clan or Higgs Boson or ptgltw or HudsonHornett to name a few, would be credible folks whose opinion I would trust over many journalists these days

[HudsonHornett]

Originally Posted by hoyasaxa

I tend to find the opinions of owners, especially on forums, the least credible of all. They are biased and usually suffer from sunk cost fallacy. They are also people who often will have less seat time in a car at the time of purchase than video or magazine reviewers, especially for allocated cars. By the time they own the car, it’s too late to do anything about it.

I tend to disagree, I've owned some absolute dogs in my time and I'm happy to admit it online or otherwise. But I'll also defend a car I own if I think it's good and it's been slated in the press. The CSL is a weird one, it has mixed reviews but in general everybody seems to agree that it IS better than an M4 Comp, which has only had excellent reviews. Therefore the issues are price point, looks and perceived meaning of CSL name. None of these is a valid reason for me to determine that the car is indeed rubbish.

[Higgs Boson]

Originally Posted by hoyasaxa

I tend to find the opinions of owners, especially on forums, the least credible of all. They are biased and usually suffer from sunk cost fallacy. They are also people who often will have less seat time in a car at the time of purchase than video or magazine reviewers, especially for allocated cars. By the time they own the car, it’s too late to do anything about it.

So far only a few CSL owners have sold their cars (3 on BaT and 10 used ones currently on autotrader for 20k - 60k over sticker) , even when a profit could/can be made. What does that tell you?

Not only is it not too late to do anything about it, moreover, keeping and enjoying the car is worth more than the profit available by selling/flipping it, except for the small group of speculators who were always going to sell the car anyways.

I can certainly say that for me, the CSL is a keeper and I feel lucky that there were no conflicting and silly reviews to shape my perception before buying it because I might have completely missed out on an amazing car.

[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by hoyasaxa

I tend to find the opinions of owners, especially on forums, the least credible of all. They are biased and usually suffer from sunk cost fallacy. They are also people who often will have less seat time in a car at the time of purchase than video or magazine reviewers, especially for allocated cars. By the time they own the car, it’s too late to do anything about it.

The least credible??? So, the person/people who drive(s) the car every day in all of the real life ownership conditions (..and who isn't/aren't paid to render an opinion one way or the other), deals with the maintenance issues, etc. is the least credible? I would wager the guy who has dated the girl over a longer period of time has much better insight than the guy who had a wild night with her. Journalists are human, replete with their own biases, motives, etc. To suggest otherwise is just silly.

[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by HudsonHornett

I tend to disagree, I've owned some absolute dogs in my time and I'm happy to admit it online or otherwise. But I'll also defend a car I own if I think it's good and it's been slated in the press. The CSL is a weird one, it has mixed reviews but in general everybody seems to agree that it IS better than an M4 Comp, which has only had excellent reviews. Therefore the issues are price point, looks and perceived meaning of CSL name. None of these is a valid reason for me to determine that the car is indeed rubbish.

You've hit the nail on the head and identified the crux. All of this is rooted in what people perceive the CSL nameplate to mean rather than really focusing on the merits of the car.