[PLF69]

Originally Posted by IcewaterPete

I’d make a case that any car weighing 3,600 pounds should not be called a CSL. It’s all marketing in the current form. Shaving a couple hundred pounds just doesn’t cut it. Heck, a Toyota Supra is hundreds of pounds less in weight. It can be done right if their is the desire.

So a 3300lbs supra is a better sports car than 911 GTS or a 911 Turbo because it's lighter ?

This probably not what you ment but like Higgs said please elaborate if you mind.

[Hit_Apex]

Originally Posted by IcewaterPete

I’d make a case that any car weighing 3,600 pounds should not be called a CSL. It’s all marketing in the current form. Shaving a couple hundred pounds just doesn’t cut it. Heck, a Toyota Supra is hundreds of pounds less in weight. It can be done right if their is the desire.

Doesn't make sense to choose an arbitrary number but rather a percentage reduction from the model it's based on. In this regard the G82 does fall short of the E46 which shed over 10% vs ~7% for the G82. This was achieved through much of the same carbon parts (except door cards) but primarily by eliminating the A/C (160lbs) and the radio (amps, speakers, wiring harnesses).

Could you imagine how the M4 CSL would be received without A/C or ICE? I do take issue with HUD (which is quite heavy all in) as it should have never made it's way into the build, same with rear arm rests, heavy base model front and rear door cards. Even so, extreme efforts were taken to hide the weight through stiffer chassis, suspension, and steering tuning. Ironically, most making hypothetical assertions will never drive the CSL so it's hard to take these opinions seriously.

[ScullyD]

Originally Posted by Hit_Apex

Doesn't make sense to choose an arbitrary number but rather a percentage reduction from the model it's based on. In this regard the G82 does fall short of the E46 which shed over 10% vs ~7% for the G82. This was achieved through much of the same carbon parts (except door cards) but primarily by eliminating the A/C (160lbs) and the radio (amps, speakers, wiring harnesses).

Could you imagine how the M4 CSL would be received without A/C or ICE? I do take issue with HUD (which is quite heavy all in) as it should have never made it's way into the build, same with rear arm rests, heavy base model front and rear door cards. Even so, extreme efforts were taken to hide the weight through stiffer chassis, suspension, and steering tuning. Ironically, most making hypothetical assertions will never drive the CSL so it's hard to take these opinions seriously.

Yeah I think HUD, door cards and CA could have been removed. How much weight would that have saved max? 10-15 pounds? Probably less.

[Bimmerfun82]

Sounds like they want BMW to reverse two decades of what the M brand has become... and the hypocrisy is the 'vette has also grown similarly outlandish.

And they go to the top model of some brands and leave out compelling competition like the AQ.

If they wanted a car that's amazing on track and also on the road, questionable going for the GT4RS and CSL as opposed to a GT4, GT3 touring, and/or M4 comp x. You have some esoteric options and some very pragmatic options like the RS3.

Anyway, I'm looking forward to the M2 CS in manual form (hopefully?) - I'd take it over any of these cars tbh.

[ScullyD]

Originally Posted by M3macster

Sounds like they want BMW to reverse two decades of what the M brand has become... and the hypocrisy is the 'vette has also grown similarly outlandish.

And they go to the top model of some brands and leave out compelling competition like the AQ.

If they wanted a car that's amazing on track and also on the road, questionable going for the GT4RS and CSL as opposed to a GT4, GT3 touring, and/or M4 comp x. You have some esoteric options and some very pragmatic options like the RS3.

Anyway, I'm looking forward to the M2 CS in manual form (hopefully?) - I'd take it over any of these cars tbh.

M has never really abandoned its roots. It makes hopped up versions of normal BMW road cars. They were never 1 engine type, gearbox type or anything over the history of its cars. It doesn’t re-engineer or dictate the engineering of the base model on which it’s based. In fact, the current CSL does share a decent amount of things with the M4 GT4, so it’s not even that far from the racing program. Every magazine wants bmw m to make another e30, even though safety regulation makes that virtually impossible.

Corvette on the other hand, totally abandoned its lineage, changing the layout of the car to mid engine and basically made a cut price AliFerrari. Which is fine, it’s allowed to do that and I’m sure the car is amazing. But while everyone criticizes M for abandoning its roots (when it’s never been more connected to its mission), it should look hard at Chevy for that.

But this push to say cars are good only if they are high-revving mid engined NA, is ridiculous. YouTubers keep acting like these cars are dying, but in reality there is a lot of them coming to market as ICE engines are on the way out.

Kudos to EVO as always, for granting a car like the MC20 it’s car of the year. That car did something pretty original and unique with its engineering. But all PCoty journalists weren’t so nuanced in their judgements.

[Bimmerfun82]

I didn’t mean that M abandoned its roots, rather they have evolved. In the article they want M to remove the A/C and m badges, for example, but that’s not realistic. And I agree, the vette has changed radically. The engineers admit it - they needed more traction over the drivetrain. Then they produced the e ray which solves the problem through adding FWD and it’s the same weight as the m3 comp X, so not sure why they didn’t just add AWD in the first place. Reality is (and I had a corvette as my first car, never again since) the brand has always been a poor man’s race car with loads of compromises. Fast and lightweight and stiff but otherwise cheap and unsophisticated.

[IcewaterPete]

Originally Posted by ScullyD

So you just made my point for me. It’s being judge against the badge and not if it’s a good car or not.

What would you compare a CSL to then? An SUV?

[IcewaterPete]

Originally Posted by PLF69

So a 3300lbs supra is a better sports car than 911 GTS or a 911 Turbo because it's lighter ?

This probably not what you ment but like Higgs said please elaborate if you mind.

You are correct, I’m not saying a Supra is better. Just pointing out that it is possible to make a much lighter car even in this era of additional safety requirements.

[PLF69]

Originally Posted by IcewaterPete

You are correct, I’m not saying a Supra is better. Just pointing out that it is possible to make a much lighter car even in this era of additional safety requirements.

Starting from scratch or a lightweight sports car platform is probably much easier that starting with a 3900lbs sedan/coupe

BMWs have gotten so good I think ppl often forget what they essentially are, souped up "luxury" commuters.

[FISH22]

The weight discussion is tiring. I get cars are heavier, but it is what it is. From a driving dynamic, I don’t think you can truly say that because cars a bit heavier nowadays, they are not as fun to drive.

Case in point, I was an S2000 fanatic years ago. Owned four of them over the course of 10 years. Incredible machine and extremely light. Although much heavier vehicles, I’d take my old E90 M3 and current G80 over an S2000 any day of the week. Much more capable vehicle. I know some may not agree with this, but I think there’s much more to a vehicle even if the weight on paper seems high. Dare I mention the GTR?

Anyways, the CSL, don’t care what some reviewers say. The whole thing turns into a bandwagon and it’s something for some auto enthusiasts to relate in, feel validation. I’ll preach the same thing about our large front grills. Some people missing the whole experience because of one little detail or metric that the masses love to beat to death.

If I had the funds, I’d easily move into a CSL. My G80C is absolutely incredible, and it continues to get better after nearly two years. Can only imagine how good a CSL is.

[IcewaterPete]

Originally Posted by Higgs Boson

So what would you have done to cut more weight? Be specific.

I love the word twisting. Ya’ll must work in Washington. No where did I suggest I knew how to make it lighter. That’s for the engineers.

We are where we are with the weight. I simply said it is odd to be calling a car of this weight a lite car when plenty of other current generation sports cars are considerably less weight.

[Bimmerfun82]

Threw this chart together to argue power-to-weight ratio matters in this discussion. Notwithstanding Lambo understates their weight, and that the torque curves matter, the three NA at the bottom are more fun at the limit but bring the gas money! The M3 CSL v M4 CSL is interesting.

Personally, my e93 was more fun to drive than either my e46 or f80 comp ... but I still would take my G80cx over all of them.

[Asymmetrick]

Originally Posted by IcewaterPete

I love the word twisting. Ya’ll must work in Washington. No where did I suggest I knew how to make it lighter. That’s for the engineers.

We are where we are with the weight. I simply said it is odd to be calling a car of this weight a lite car when plenty of other current generation sports cars are considerably less weight.

Don't forget that many car manufacturers don't report accurately the real/full weight of their cars. That usually is not the case with BMW. Case in point: Latest eCOTY weight test with the MC20 (1655 kg vs 1475 kg claimed weight – a 180 kg difference; see below). And that car won car of the year! What disappoints me most is that so called "reviewers" let this fly w/o any consequence. It really contrasts with the obsessive fixation the same reviewers have with the weight of the CSL (which is 60 kg lighter than the MC20 in the eCOTY weight test).

Likewise, you don't hear reviewers criticize the AR GTAm or 911 Turbo S w/ "lightweight" package when both of these cars weight about the same or more than the CSL. (the "A" in GTA is for alleggerita, Italian for "lightened") Where's the outrage? I sure wish there were more journalistic integrity in this case.

At least BMW is honest (or at least conservative) when it reports the weight of its cars!

[HeelToeShift]

Originally Posted by MadBimmeRad

I have a patent in the US for an invention of mine. Few years after the first patent, I applied for another.

After three years of searching the entire world for other prior art, USPTO cited my first patent against my second.

Similarly, the problem with M4CSL is not weight, length, or even the performance; the problem with the M4CSL is how good the M4 Competition is

Or even the manual, which is very, very good. Funny that the CSL 3.0 which is really the penultimate version of the G8x is a manual.
Overall, I would say the G8x delivers what the F8x imo never could - and I wholeheartedly did not like the overall package. The G8x while still not perfect is just a charming car.

[Higgs Boson]

Originally Posted by IcewaterPete

I love the word twisting. Ya’ll must work in Washington. No where did I suggest I knew how to make it lighter. That’s for the engineers.

We are where we are with the weight. I simply said it is odd to be calling a car of this weight a lite car when plenty of other current generation sports cars are considerably less weight.

I didn't twist any words. I just know it's easy to complain without providing a solution. That's what we call bitching.

As I suspected, there is no solution within your thoughts, only the basic observation, "Me no likey heavy." yeah buddy, we all know lighter is better. BMW never said the car was light, that's your word twisting. It is lighter than the car it is based on, just like it's predecessor. To me, the M3CSL was heavy too because it was way heavier than my race car. But today, that car is considered light. A Miata is 2200 lbs, everything is heavier....I mean where do you draw the line? Lighter than where it started, but not compared to the industry Past, Present, and Future. That's not how you measure something.

My next question for you is, were you about to buy an M4CSL until you learned the curb weight and then decided not to?

As far as where I am, you can look left and read my Location. The most non-Washington place in the country, lol.

[Higgs Boson]

Originally Posted by DM5PAV

The fact that they don’t really differentiate themselves enough from an m4cx

How do you know?

Originally Posted by DM5PAV

the article even says as much.

Oh....


Well, maybe you should ask anyone on this forum that owns one if the CSL doesn't differentiate itself. Let me tell you, it is night and day.

[Forzanerazzurri]

Originally Posted by IcewaterPete

I’d make a case that any car weighing 3,600 pounds should not be called a CSL. It’s all marketing in the current form. Shaving a couple hundred pounds just doesn’t cut it. Heck, a Toyota Supra is hundreds of pounds less in weight. It can be done right if their is the desire.

Isn't a Supra like 20 inches shorter?

[Higgs Boson]

Originally Posted by DM5PAV

Night and day huh?
Ok.

I guess I’m not enough of a fan, because I don’t believe that for a second. Where’s my bottle of hopium…

I had a 22 M4Cx and a CSL now, my opinion is real. Yours isn't even yours.

Drink up.

[PLF69]

Originally Posted by DM5PAV

I think the complaint is valid though. BMW sells these to people who want that badge cred. If they really wanted to make a true track weapon they might as well go all the way and throw a cage in there, lose all the electronics, manual seats only, carbon everywhere, only cloth, no soundproofing, dct or manual only, etc, etc…

I mean, these cars sell for $150,000 minimum. The fact that they don’t really differentiate themselves enough from an m4cx speaks ‘cash grab’ to me when they are real world selling for nearly double the price of a good m4cx.

Again, TO ME… personally this car makes no sense from any standpoint except bragging rights (which is fine, I love money too!)

It’s not considerably faster or all that different than the regular m4cx. We can split hairs, but the article even says as much.

Totally fine to like this car, want it, etc. I just think the criticism is valid from the pov of people who are reading the marketing materials and saying… how is this a true track weapon compared to a regular m4, worth double the price?

You mister really need a ride in a broken in M4 CSL.

[ScullyD]

Originally Posted by DM5PAV

I think the complaint is valid though. BMW sells these to people who want that badge cred. If they really wanted to make a true track weapon they might as well go all the way and throw a cage in there, lose all the electronics, manual seats only, carbon everywhere, only cloth, no soundproofing, dct or manual only, etc, etc.

Yeah I think the complaint is valid, that it could have been full track spec or less features. But I said in another thread, if they added a wing and a cage, it actually might have been as heavy as an M4C (in which case they absolutely couldn’t have used the CSL badge). It also might not have been as fast around the ring as it was (the extra downforce weight might not have made the larger bodied M4 more nimble). There actually was an early CSL test mule with a wing and it was scrapped fairly early in the testing process. People forget that an F80 M4 GTS weighs 3,610 lbs.

Now you can argue that they should have given a manual and less power like in 3.0 CSL (or developed a new manual to handle more power). You can also argue they shouldn’t have made the car at all.

But it is entirely possible that they did the absolute best they could do to extract this level of performance from the G8x without risking powertrain reliability. Sport Auto’s review of it said, in speaking to the engineering team, it became clear that was the case (that this was the absolute best performance they could extract around a track from a G82).

[Higgs Boson]

Originally Posted by DM5PAV

You’re still behind an m4cx from a dig though. I guess he’s in another universe compared to you when he’s accelerating.

Oh no, I'm behind from a dig, whatever will I do???

Read me some more magazine stories.

[MadBimmeRad]

DM5PAV & Higgs Boson

This is a sobering reminder that performance matters more than mass