[Gunnerforlife]

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 think you can easily tell if someone is hyping up a car or they're saying the truth.

It's obvious that it's true when different people comment positively on the same things. Like for example the CSL ride. All owners have been raving about it because it is true. Some reviewers said it's trash which is weird and maybe the Cup 2 R in cold weather had an effect. The not-so-professional reviews which there are many of now with youtube do not factor in a lot of the conditions that they're subjected to in the one or two days they test the car and how it might affect it. The CSL owners have actual long-term experience with the car which is different. Anyway, most of the CSL owners' comments actually match most of the reviews. Even it's been said here that the steering especially with PS4S is a weak point. I'd be more interested to see a longterm CSL review.

[Gunnerforlife]

Originally Posted by Fugly M3

I applaud BMW for the effort on a halo M3/4 car, but they seem to keep falling short. The problem with the CSL is that there is a CS with the same tires and power, but also with AWD. It doesn't look like a Mustang either. The CS will be the true measure of how good the CSL really is. However, the problem with the CS is that there is a plain old CX. Given the same tires, how much better is the performance of the CSL/CS over the CX?

I have no doubt it's still better, but the trouble is almost nobody alive who is capable of perceiving the difference at the limit is likely to buy the CSL; either they can't afford it, or they can and they're buying a GT car. I think that's a shame because the target market of this car should be able to perceive its superior performance, not just its look at me at the coffee shop performance.

I know they have the 3.0 CSL homage thing, but imagine if BMW used the 6MT car as the base for the CSL and stripped 500 lbs out of that setup instead of 200 out of the auto. Imagine almost no sound deadening, super heavy steering, minimal tech and the loudest exhaust they could legally mate to the car...all with a 6MT. I bet they'd have sold them out much faster, and like the M2CS, they'd have legendary magazine reviews.

Faster where on the drag strip or on an actual track?

First I don't think everyone is looking for a 4 door saloon unless it's their daily. Second, I'm speaking for myself, but since when was buying a heavier AWD car more exciting, unless you're going to daily it and live somewhere cold, or maybe you can't drive that well and need the safety of the AWD.

I'm more of a purist and I'm pretty sure there are others who think a sports car is a pure RWD car.

[CanAutM3]

Originally Posted by Asymmetrick

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

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.

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…

Yes indeed, c'mon, let's keep it real. The 4-series was not the starting point for the CSL, the M4 was. In other words, the M4 is an extensively re-engineered and revamped version of the 4-series while the M4 CSL is tuned variant of the M4.

In the same way, the CSL has the same S58 engine as the M4, which is derived from the B58, not the B48 found in the 430i.

Originally Posted by Asymmetrick

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.

My comment was in a very specific context: comparing acceleration from a dig versus a higher priced model and versus a lower priced model. Period. The turbo-S annihilates the GT3 acceleration wise, but it is kinda expected since it commands a ~30% MSRP premium over a GT3 .

But I fully agree, comparing acceleration from a dig is a rather pointless exercise in the case of the CSL. The CSL is about how it accelerates from a roll and how it performs on track (where acceleration from a roll matters), and how it feels in general behind the wheel.

Originally Posted by Asymmetrick

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?

I don't, because you are selective about the data. In C&D's own testing, the GT3 still out accelerates the GTS-LW. According to Porsche Germany, the GT3 and GTS are matched at 3.4s in the 0-100km/h, but the GT3 is faster to 200km/h. While the are very close, the GT3 is not outgunned by the GTS from a dig like the CSL is by the M4xDrive. But then again, that is only in that very limited context which is not what the CSL is about.

Originally Posted by Asymmetrick

---

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.

I've made that point in many other threads, the M4 CSL does not really compete with the 911 GT3. The M4 CSL will always fade in that light. However, when comparing it to the 911 GTS-LW that your referred to, it makes much more sense.

[Asymmetrick]

Thanks for the comprehensive response to my earlier post CanAutM3. Many good points. There is quite a lot to unpack in there, so I will split my response in smaller bites below.

[Tyga11]

Wow C&D has really gone downhill. That's the review? It's like 500 words. I remember getting C&D delivered to my house when I was a kid in the late 90's / early 00's and how good their reviews were. They've really hit the skids.

And what's up with the lame comment section?

"I'd rather buy a Corvette and save $80K"

Cringe

[Asymmetrick]

Originally Posted by CanAutM3

I don't, because you are selective about the data.

Your comment was about my statement that the 0-100 times for the GTS and GT3 are:

Carrera 4 GTS: 3.3 sec
911 GT3: 3.4 sec

I don't think I am being selective with the data. These are the numbers that Porsche published. I confirmed on the US, Canada, UK, and German websites and they all report the same thing. Proof below.

Originally Posted by CanAutM3

According to Porsche Germany, the GT3 and GTS are matched at 3.4s in the 0-100km/h,

This is not what is reported on the Porsche website in Germany. As argued above, the GTS is reported at 3.3s. See below.

Originally Posted by CanAutM3

In C&D's own testing, the GT3 still out accelerates the GTS-LW.

Different days, different conditions (different drivers?). Hard to compare these numbers.

[CanAutM3]

Originally Posted by Asymmetrick

Your comment was about my statement that the 0-100 times for the GTS and GT3 are:

Carrera 4 GTS: 3.3 sec
911 GT3: 3.4 sec

I don't think I am being selective with the data. These are the numbers that Porsche published. I confirmed on the US, Canada, UK, and German websites and they all report the same thing. Proof below.




This is not what is reported on the Porsche website in Germany. As argued above, the GTS is reported at 3.3s. See below.




Different days, different conditions (different drivers?). Hard to compare these numbers.

My bad, I was comparing to the Carrera GTS, not C4-GTS. But nonetheless, we are splitting hairs when talking about 0.1 of a second, it could go either way as demonstrated by real world testing. Porsche tend to have a very specific pecking order when it comes to their quoted 0-100km/h number that does not always correlate to real world testing, marketing gimmicks at play here. On the other hand, the M4xDrive trumps the M4 CSL by a massive 0.5 sec to 60mph, that will always go one way.

But anyhow, again, acceleration from a dig is not the point of the CSL .

[Asymmetrick]

Originally Posted by CanAutM3

I've made that point in many other threads, the M4 CSL does not really compete with the 911 GT3. The M4 CSL will always fade in that light. However, when comparing it to the 911 GTS-LW that your referred to, it makes much more sense.

We are in full agreement. My point is not that we should compare the M4 CSL and 911 GT3.

My original point was that automotive reviewers seem to have a "glass half empty" perspective when commenting on some aspects of the M4 CSL and then "give a pass" on the exact same issue when it comes to Porsche 911 variants, including (but not only) the GT3.

[ScullyD]

Originally Posted by Gunnerforlife

Anyway, most of the CSL owners' comments actually match most of the reviews.

Yeah this is a great point actually, i don't see the owners of the car on here overhyping the car. People have been pretty objective about how the car has various weak points.

Try to find anyone on Rennlist (or here for that matter) being similarly objective about positives and negatives of GT Pcars.

[Higgs Boson]

Originally Posted by CanAutM3

My bad, I was comparing to the Carrera GTS, not C4-GTS. But nonetheless, we are splitting hairs when talking about 0.1 of a second, it could go either way as demonstrated by real world testing. Porsche tend to have a very specific pecking order when it comes to their quoted 0-100km/h number that does not always correlate to real world testing, marketing gimmicks at play here. On the other hand, the M4xDrive trumps the M4 CSL by a massive 0.5 sec to 60mph, that will always go one way.

But anyhow, again, acceleration from a dig is not the point of the CSL .

Don't really have a dog in this fight but let's remember the M4 is a front engine platform so AWD is going to have a WAY bigger effect than the rear engine 911 AWD will.

[CanAutM3]

Originally Posted by Asymmetrick

We are in full agreement. My point is not that we should compare the M4 CSL and 911 GT3.

My original point was that automotive reviewers seem to have a "glass half empty" perspective when commenting on some aspects of the M4 CSL and then "give a pass" on the exact same issue when it comes to Porsche 911 variants, including (but not only) the GT3.

Yes and no. C&D had pretty harsh comments on how stiffly the turbo-S with PASM-Sport rode.

LOWS: Firm enough to buck you out of the seat

Our test car arrived with the optional PASM sport suspension that drops the car 0.4-inch on higher-rate springs and recalibrated adaptive dampers. On certain bumps, the chassis shot us out of the saddle like a PBR bull. Yeehaw, then ouch. And it happened in the Normal drive mode, not in the more unyielding Sport or Sport Plus settings.

[MadBimmeRad]

Originally Posted by Gunnerforlife

I think you can easily tell if someone is hyping up a car or they're saying the truth.

It's obvious that it's true when different people comment positively on the same things. Like for example the CSL ride. All owners have been raving about it because it is true. Some reviewers said it's trash which is weird and maybe the Cup 2 R in cold weather had an effect. The not-so-professional reviews which there are many of now with youtube do not factor in a lot of the conditions that they're subjected to in the one or two days they test the car and how it might affect it. The CSL owners have actual long-term experience with the car which is different. Anyway, most of the CSL owners' comments actually match most of the reviews. Even it's been said here that the steering especially with PS4S is a weak point. I'd be more interested to see a longterm CSL review.

Originally Posted by ScullyD

Yeah this is a great point actually, i don't see the owners of the car on here overhyping the car. People have been pretty objective about how the car has various weak points.

Try to find anyone on Rennlist (or here for that matter) being similarly objective about positives and negatives of GT Pcars.

That's what I was trying to convey. When someone pays that much for a car, their opinion should have a greater value than someone who drives it for a total of 6 hours.

[HudsonHornett]

Originally Posted by MadBimmeRad

That's what I was trying to convey. When someone pays that much for a car, their opinion should have a greater value than someone who drives it for a total of 6 hours.

Totally agree with this - plus as I've said before there is an element of journalism that is about entertainment, especially since Clarkson relaunched Top Gear in the early 2000's. Finding pure, objective reviews on cars is now very difficult indeed, you have to read a ton of reviews and then work out what is the truth (if you can't drive the car yourself).

The letters CSL, because they have been so sparingly used by BMW bring an expectation amongst people who love cars (like us), that this car is absolutely sensational and I get it but I'm afraid that loads of journos made their minds up about this car before it even turned a wheel - in their heads 1625kg was too heavy and that was that. Dumb really, especially as they gave ECOTY win to a carbon-tubbed super car that weighed more than the CSL. Makes me wonder if Maserati had some additional marketing budget to spend with them this year.

[Asymmetrick]

Originally Posted by CanAutM3

Yes and no. C&D had pretty harsh comments on how stiffly the turbo-S with PASM-Sport rode.

Yes, they did mention the harsh ride. But they also finished their review on a positive note overlooking the issue (stating: "Yet, out in the canyons, the Turbo S doesn't feel abusively harsh")

The crux of the matter is: the "glass half empty/full" analogy doesn't necessarily mean reviewers do not mention perceived flaws, only that –when they do– they chose to project them in a positive light for the P-cars. Here are a couple of examples using the issue you raised with the harsh suspension of the 911 TS:

The car I drove had the optional sport suspension that lowers the car 0.4 inch on shorter springs. It’s all tuned to be considerably stiffer than the suspension in the mere mortal 911s, and that gives the Turbo S more road feel. -Motor Authority

Comfort abounds, even over the rougher sections of Los Angeles freeway and surface streets, and though there are limits to the PASM dynamic suspension's ability to absorb abuse, you'll cry uncle long before it does -Motortrend

Notice how the issue raised by C&D is presented in the reviews above as "loveable quirks" or turned into positive attributes. The very harsh ride did not even make it to the final take away paragraph of these reviews. The CSL doesn't get that same treatment in a similar situation. As argued by HudsonHornett above, if feels like reviewers made their minds up about this car before trying it.

[ScullyD]

Originally Posted by HudsonHornett

Dumb really, especially as they gave ECOTY win to a carbon-tubbed super car that weighed more than the CSL. Makes me wonder if Maserati had some additional marketing budget to spend with them this year.

In fairness to EVO, I know some people with an MC20 who absolutely adore it. And they were fairly critical of the GT4 RS as well for being a track specific car.

I do not have a problem with the CSL finishing where it did to those cars on those roads, in the shadow of the two CS wins from the prior 2 years. Saying the car didn’t nail its brief, when everyone is pining for wingless GT3s constantly, is misguided. But EVO did fairly criticize the 992 touring the prior year.

If BMW had made a winged CSL with cage, set a blazing Nurburgring time but then offered everyone a chance to buy it with a ducktail and a manual, that’s the car they would have sold a boatload of. But remember in 2018, there was a very early prototype of the the CSL using a F82 body. It’s possible bmw figured out early that the additional downforce weight and cage weight would have hurt the car’s times. SportAuto did say, after talking to the engineering team, they were confident M got as much out of this car as possible and to leave it at that.

I do think in the way that the F82 GTS was very sensitive to manual suspension settings (people’s opinions of the car changed drastically), this G82 CSL is very compound and tire temp sensitive. Now that the dampers are electronically adjustable, that’s the big variable that changes peoples opinions of the car.

[HudsonHornett]

Originally Posted by ScullyD

In fairness to EVO, I know some people with an MC20 who absolutely adore it. And they were fairly critical of the GT4 RS as well for being a track specific car.

I do not have a problem with the CSL finishing where it did to those cars on those roads, in the shadow of the two CS wins from the prior 2 years. Saying the car didn’t nail its brief, when everyone is pining for wingless GT3s constantly, is misguided. But EVO did fairly criticize the 992 touring the prior year.

If BMW had made a winged CSL with cage, set a blazing Nurburgring time but then offered everyone a chance to buy it with a ducktail and a manual, that’s the car they would have sold a boatload of. But remember in 2018, there was a very early prototype of the the CSL using a F82 body. It’s possible bmw figured out early that the additional downforce weight and cage weight would have hurt the car’s times. SportAuto did say, after talking to the engineering team, they were confident M got as much out of this car as possible and to leave it at that.

I do think in the way that the F82 GTS was very sensitive to manual suspension settings (people’s opinions of the car changed drastically), this G82 CSL is very compound and tire temp sensitive. Now that the dampers are electronically adjustable, that’s the big variable that changes peoples opinions of the car.

I'm not saying that the MC20 is not a great car - I'm saying that it's bizarre that it won ECOTY, given their own views on the cars tested. It was obvious to me that the GR86 should have won and in fact the scoring gave the win the Maserati because some people just naturally scored higher than others. In previous ECOTY, it's simply been a list going from favourite to least favourite, which is a fairer system. Using that system the GR86 did win.

Completely agree on the road conditions / dampers / tyres / temp though. Really looking forward to getting mine now and seeing what it can do. Gonna have to book a track day and see if can actually scalp any P-cars.

[ScullyD]

Originally Posted by HudsonHornett

I'm not saying that the MC20 is not a great car - I'm saying that it's bizarre that it won ECOTY, given their own views on the cars tested. It was obvious to me that the GR86 should have won and in fact the scoring gave the win the Maserati because some people just naturally scored higher than others in previous ECOTY, it's simply been a list going from favourite to least favourite, which is a fairer system. Using that system the GR86 did win.

Completely agree on the road conditions / dampers / tyres / temp though. Really looking forward to getting mine now and seeing what it can do. Gonna have to book a track day and see if can actually scalp any P-cars.

I think as owners, and IMG touched on this with his rear tire size change from stock, there are small tweaks that need to be made to make the car better. Whether that’s compound, eventuri intake, possibly some front suspension changes to dial in more steering feel, or decode the exhaust overrun on the ASD.

Should you need to make these tweaks on a $145k BMW? Of course not. But they are minor things and BMW will absolutely never make a car like this again. I hope they make some EV M4 CSL in like 2032 or something, but we will be lucky if they even make an EV M3 at all.

Porsche will keep cranking out 911 GT3s with the same engine for 10 more years until 2035 as people keep going “tHiS tYpE oF cAr wOn’T eXiSt eVeR aGaIn”.

[HudsonHornett]

Originally Posted by ScullyD

I think as owners, and IMG touched on this with his rear tire size change from stock, there are small tweaks that need to be made to make the car better. Whether that’s compound, eventuri intake, possibly some front suspension changes to dial in more steering feel, or decode the exhaust overrun on the ASD.

Should you need to make these tweaks on a $145k BMW? Of course not. But they are minor things and BMW will absolutely never make a car like this again. I hope they make some EV M4 CSL in like 2032 or something, but we will be lucky if they even make an EV M3 at all.

Agree - I think the EV M3 will be made personally but I've no interest in that to be honest - it would have to be other-worldly good for me to even want to take a look at it. Think I'd always pick petrol over an EV.

[ScullyD]

Originally Posted by HudsonHornett

Agree - I think the EV M3 will be made personally but I've no interest in that to be honest - it would have to be other-worldly good for me to even want to take a look at it. Think I'd always pick petrol over an EV.

I hope they do it and I expect it to be good if they do (I love the steering and power delivery on my iX, it’s fantastic).

But I don’t expect another CSL, or CS, after the G8x M2 (and that’s no guarentee as there are no test mules yet, when there was a G8x CSL test mule in 2018, 5 years before the car was released). BMW is moving to this “red label” branding for the high performance variant of the XM and new M5.

If they make another CS/CSL in the EV models, I’ll be pleasantly surprised. But I expect the G8x CSL and CS cars, as well as the F90 M5 CS, to be forever classics (maybe the F87 M2 CS but all depends on how the G8x M2 is received and if there are special models).

I think the only reason these CS and CSL cars have been made is cause the board agreed to approve them as the final hurrah for ICE models. They don’t make BMW any significant money and an ECoty win doesn’t help them move an i4 to families.

[IMG]

Originally Posted by ScullyD

I think as owners, and IMG touched on this with his rear tire size change from stock, there are small tweaks that need to be made to make the car better. Whether that’s compound, eventuri intake, possibly some front suspension changes to dial in more steering feel, or decode the exhaust overrun on the ASD.

Should you need to make these tweaks on a $145k BMW? Of course not. But they are minor things and BMW will absolutely never make a car like this again. I hope they make some EV M4 CSL in like 2032 or something, but we will be lucky if they even make an EV M3 at all.

Porsche will keep cranking out 911 GT3s with the same engine for 10 more years until 2035 as people keep going “tHiS tYpE oF cAr wOn’T eXiSt eVeR aGaIn”.

I honestly feel this car is great out the box.
And yes, just a few tweaks and it’s amazing.
The rear tires for me were more than enough.
But we all obviously have different driving styles.
The steering to me is brilliant out the box.
I also drive it in comfort steering and suspensions. I like to feel what the car is doing, communicate with the car.

I wish it was 15mm lower in the rear though haha

[HudsonHornett]

Originally Posted by ScullyD

I hope they do it and I expect it to be good if they do (I love the steering and power delivery on my iX, it’s fantastic).

But I don’t expect another CSL, or CS, after the G8x M2 (and that’s no guarentee as there are no test mules yet, when there was a G8x CSL test mule in 2018, 5 years before the car was released). BMW is moving to this “red label” branding for the high performance variant of the XM and new M5.

If they make another CS/CSL in the EV models, I’ll be pleasantly surprised. But I expect the G8x CSL and CS cars, as well as the F90 M5 CS, to be forever classics (maybe the F87 M2 CS but all depends on how the G8x M2 is received and if there are special models).

I think the only reason these CS and CSL cars have been made is cause the board agreed to approve them as the final hurrah for ICE models. They don’t make BMW any significant money and an ECoty win doesn’t help them move an i4 to families.

Definitely agree, buddy.

[wavyyyy]

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.

If I could’ve, this would’ve been my CSL spec too. Congratulations on the beautiful car man and enjoy it in good health.