[AlpsRider]

Originally Posted by medphysdave

I still think this will stay under 80k here in the US. 77k for 6MT with no options.

Maybe 82ish with DCT and something comparable to exec pack.

Not including tax

Even at $77k, it's $18k more than the M2C. If someone is crazy about Carbon Fiber, I say go for it.

[Artemis]

Originally Posted by SeanWRT

The front page just pushed G80 SOP in March 2020. It seems the CS finds its biggest enemy from within the company

And vice versa (though the M2 CS only gets a limited production run: 2020 production only).

[pz619]

Originally Posted by AlpsRider

Even at $77k, it's $18k more than the M2C. If someone is crazy about Carbon Fiber, I say go for it.

Pretty much this. I like the car, as I should as it's basically the car I drive today with a tune and carbon fiber. But at $18k more, that's a steep price. Too steep for my value curve, but others might feel otherwise.

Hoping BMW learns from the M3/M4 CS. I'm still seeing these sit on local dealer lots. Oddly enough, I saw a M2C with an ADM but the M4 CS didn't have one.

[arciga18]

Originally Posted by pz619

Pretty much this. I like the car, as I should as it's basically the car I drive today with a tune and carbon fiber. But at $18k more, that's a steep price. Too steep for my value curve, but others might feel otherwise.

Hoping BMW learns from the M3/M4 CS. I'm still seeing these sit on local dealer lots. Oddly enough, I saw a M2C with an ADM but the M4 CS didn't have one.

Can you help me understand...what is ADM?

[JCZ5]

Originally Posted by arciga18

Can you help me understand...what is ADM?

ADM = "Additional dealer markup"

[arciga18]

Originally Posted by JCZ5

ADM = "Additional dealer markup"

Got it. Makes sense now.

The sad thing is that dealers are selling these at invoice (popular west coast dealer that plays GOLF) . Other people claim below invoice in GA dealer.

[dezzracer]

Reading comments about "all the M3CS still sitting on dealer lots. And.. "hopefully BMW NA learned their lesson"

Not true to my knowledge. All 550 or so U.S. cars have been sold according to my dealer. Many (at first) were sold at or above MSRP. Many more were sold at 5 to 8K below MSRP and towards the end a very few were reportable sold in the mid-80s to low 90s. In other words, all US cars were discounted similarly to any other car out there regardless of the brand based on supply and demand. Bottom line is BMW sold every one of them and made good profit. So what lesson did they learn :

[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by kepler

Porsche guys think they are the best. And they think their cars are the best. So no, they are not raving about BMW. In fact, they are crapping on BMW pretty regularly. This is done more out of arrogance than knowledge or driving experience. As to your Porsche friend, you can price a Porsche out of your pocket’s range with cost options very quickly, but I don’t know about double base price. I’ve never seen that and don’t believe it’s even possible. Finally, I do agree with your overall sentiment and I get very tired of members here worshiping Porsche. There are tons and tons of used Porsches on the market, many of which are at very reasonable and even modest prices. If you love the brand so much, just go buy one. It’s not hard. There is no need at all for so many comments about the GT4. It’s a completely different car and frankly, I think it’s ridiculous to cross-shop it with the M2 CS. Finally, I hate to break the news to folks, but it is not a real GT car. It has a Carrera engine, not an engine developed by Porsche’s GT division.

+1

[chris719]

Originally Posted by kepler

Porsche guys think they are the best. And they think their cars are the best. So no, they are not raving about BMW. In fact, they are crapping on BMW pretty regularly. This is done more out of arrogance than knowledge or driving experience. As to your Porsche friend, you can price a Porsche out of your pocket’s range with cost options very quickly, but I don’t know about double base price. I’ve never seen that and don’t believe it’s even possible. Finally, I do agree with your overall sentiment and I get very tired of members here worshiping Porsche. There are tons and tons of used Porsches on the market, many of which are at very reasonable and even modest prices. If you love the brand so much, just go buy one. It’s not hard. There is no need at all for so many comments about the GT4. It’s a completely different car and frankly, I think it’s ridiculous to cross-shop it with the M2 CS. Finally, I hate to break the news to folks, but it is not a real GT car. It has a Carrera engine, not an engine developed by Porsche’s GT division.

It is a real "GT" car. Porsche gave it the GT label, so it is. They decide, not you. Just like how the OG M2 is a real M car but with an N55 engine. The GT cars and M cars are more about the handling and overall feel than just the engine. I am pretty sure Andreas Preuninger considers it a real GT car, so I'll take his word over yours.

It is a bit ridiculous to compare the M2 CS to a GT4, mostly because the GT4 is just a much more focused car. One is a mid-engined sports car and the other is a 4 seat pseudo-GT car. However, if the pricing of the M2 CS is high enough, comparing it to a Cayman GTS is fair game. The end result will be that the M2 CS is a little faster in a straight line and loses everywhere else.

IMO, I don't know what the debate is all about. If you want a weekend / track car and can afford it, then the Cayman is objectively better. If you need a daily driver with rear seats, or a less expensive car, then the M2 of any variant wins.

I am probably in the small percentage of people that would cross-shop these cars because I am able to DD a car with 2 seats and not care.

[PLF69]

M2 is the ''track capable'' version of the 2 series wich is 2 door 4 seat coupe entry level bmw. Just as the M3 is the 'track capable' version of the regular 3 series etc.

Cayman.Boxster/718 is ''sports car'' built from the ground up as a sports car.


These are totally different roots and people need to realize this when cross shopping them on the internet and the specs sheets, there is a reason they drive so differently. The intended purpose at the start is not the same, They just happen to be not so far off in terms of performance.

[GimmeanM]

Originally Posted by dezzracer

Reading comments about "all the M3CS still sitting on dealer lots. And.. "hopefully BMW NA learned their lesson"

Not true to my knowledge. All 550 or so U.S. cars have been sold according to my dealer. Many (at first) were sold at or above MSRP. Many more were sold at 5 to 8K below MSRP and towards the end a very few were reportable sold in the mid-80s to low 90s. In other words, all US cars were discounted similarly to any other car out there regardless of the brand based on supply and demand. Bottom line is BMW sold every one of them and made good profit. So what lesson did they learn :

The M3CS has done better than the M4CS. That is true. I work for a large BMW store and we have 4 M4CS sitting unsold. The fact of the matter is BMWNA offered a big pile of cash to dealers to apply to unsold CS cars. That doesn't happen unless they're having a problem. Also be aware that a store can 'report' it sold to BMW in which case it's off the record and appears "sold" to everyone when in fact it may not be.

[AlpsRider]

Originally Posted by GimmeanM

The M3CS has done better than the M4CS. That is true. I work for a large BMW store and we have 4 M4CS sitting unsold. The fact of the matter is BMWNA offered a big pile of cash to dealers to apply to unsold CS cars. That doesn't happen unless they're having a problem. Also be aware that a store can 'report' it sold to BMW in which case it's off the record and appears "sold" to everyone when in fact it may not be.

Are the dealers required to pass on the "pile of cash" or can they keep it and still list the car at the higher price?

[GimmeanM]

Originally Posted by AlpsRider

Are the dealers required to pass on the "pile of cash" or can they keep it and still list the car at the higher price?

As you can imagine there are a lot of factors that determine what the final price is that a customer pays.

Finance: Rate (both buy rate and sell rate; your buy rate may be 4.0% but the dealer may not tell you that and "sell" you at 4.25%. That difference in rate is called 'reserve' and is a place that dealers make money. Term, obviously the longer the term the smaller the payment but also usually has a higher rate.

Lease: Money Factor (same as rate in finance). Residual, set by manufacturer (initially on the F80 CS's these were worse than the regular F80's, later they were set to match). Residual is also a mater of miles as set by what the customer wants for their needs. 10k has a better residual than 12k an so on.

BMW has programs called Loyalty, where if you have had a contract with BMWFS in the past x months you can get a $1,000 or $500 credit.

Next is any special money that they use discretionarily as needed. Which we saw over the last few months with the F80 CS variants.

That money is provided as 'sales assistance' because BMWNA/BMWFS see the need when cars aren't selling. However, if the vehicle isn't selling at $100k it's only by giving the customer that money in combination with the better residuals, loyalty credit, better money factor rates, etc. that they are able to get the vehicle to an acceptable payment that customers will sign up for.

Short answer, no, they are not required to pass that money on. So it is possible that a store could keep that money but that is assuming a very uneducated buyer, which most BMW customers are not.

The car business has changed. The days of duping a customer and making exorbitant gross profits on new and used vehicles is gone. It is a very efficient marketplace now. Anyone at any time can know what a car is worth based on the marketplace. Word to the wise; the final place that dealers have a chance to do this is on your trade. If you know what your trade is worth and negotiate on this front you take away the final place that dealers can make large profits.

[JCZ5]

So aside from the carbon fiber, alcantra, adaptive suspension, wheels etc...anyone else excited for the merino leather seats?

This was a huge gripe for me, yes, I understand the 2 series is BMW's "entry level" vehicle. But as soon as it went upmarket with M, I really wanted a better interior quality.

The Dakota leather should not be in a >US$65K car. I'm glad they have fixed this. Here's hoping the other interior trims have been updated, even if BMW goes to the M3/M4 parts bin.

(I bet someone is going to mention how they only care about the driving experience...but I care about that as well as some nice quality leather under my butt &#129303

[SeanWRT]

Originally Posted by JCZ5

So aside from the carbon fiber, alcantra, adaptive suspension, wheels etc...anyone else excited for the merino leather seats?

This was a huge gripe for me, yes, I understand the 2 series is BMW's "entry level" vehicle. But as soon as it went upmarket with M, I really wanted a better interior quality.

The Dakota leather should not be in a >US$65K car. I'm glad they have fixed this. Here's hoping the other interior trims have been updated, even if BMW goes to the M3/M4 parts bin.

(I bet someone is going to mention how they only care about the driving experience...but I care about that as well as some nice quality leather under my butt ��)

According to those seeing the car at the preview, the dash (fake leather) and door panel (bare plastic) remain the same as the comp.

I know with car like this one, many couldn't care less about the luxury touches. But really they misunderstand the car like this - the intended purpose of the CS is first a daily driver and then with maximized track-ability.

Remember the cabin is where you spend most of time, and good leather makes all the difference. This is something you really need to experience to know.

[dezzracer]

Originally Posted by pz619

Pretty much this. I like the car, as I should as it's basically the car I drive today with a tune and carbon fiber. But at $18k more, that's a steep price. Too steep for my value curve, but others might feel otherwise.

Hoping BMW learns from the M3/M4 CS. I'm still seeing these sit on local dealer lots. Oddly enough, I saw a M2C with an ADM but the M4 CS didn't have one.

I respectively disagree. Your car is not the same. Do all you BMW engineer and development experts understand that BMW employs and has to PAY "M" division engineers and drivers that test and retest settings, programs , tires, unique chassis settings , wheels, brakes, down force and aero bits , EPS adjustments, engine tunes , power curves, etc. in order to come up with a package that is worthy of the CS moniker then back it up with a warranty. While your at it, price all the top quality M performance parts that BMW has to pay people to install.

I'm sorry guys but "slapping on some carbon fiber and throwing a tune on the motor" as you claim does not make a CS. This kind of rationale reminds me of the Mustang guys that add an exhaust, cold air intake, wheels and a tune and then put a Cobra snake emblem on their car.

[chris719]

Originally Posted by kepler

You sound like a perfect candidate for one. Porsche sure does understand its buyer base. Like the saying goes, one born every minute.

I merely pointed out the objective fact. You're free to be an elitist snob. So, do you not think the M2 or 1M are real M cars?

[chris719]

Originally Posted by dezzracer

I respectively disagree. Your car is not the same. Do all you BMW engineer and development experts understand that BMW employs and has to PAY "M" division engineers and drivers that test and retest settings, programs , tires, unique chassis settings , wheels, brakes, down force and aero bits , EPS adjustments, engine tunes , power curves, etc. in order to come up with a package that is worthy of the CS moniker then back it up with a warranty. While your at it, price all the top quality M performance parts that BMW has to pay people to install.

I'm sorry guys but "slapping on some carbon fiber and throwing a tune on the motor" as you claim does not make a CS. This kind of rationale reminds me of the Mustang guys that add an exhaust, cold air intake, wheels and a tune and then put a Cobra snake emblem on their car.

While it's not zero work, it certainly isn't this much. The M performance parts are cheap in terms of actual cost. Huge margin for BMW. We are not going from a 240i to M2. Almost every single meaningful part on the car is the same. Most of this work was already done, btw, when they designed the M performance parts.

Why would BMW even bother with a short run model like this? Because their profit margins on it are high. This is a company that refuses to make a "halo" sports car. They act rationally.

I respect the fact that the M2 CS is going to be the best M2 you can get, but 98% of the work is already done. This isn't even half the work needed to create the M2C, and the price delta from an OG M2 to M2C is going to be smaller than the delta between the M2C and M2 CS! Think about that for a minute...

[Artemis]

Originally Posted by chris719

While it's not zero work, it certainly isn't this much. The M performance parts are cheap in terms of actual cost. Huge margin for BMW. We are not going from a 240i to M2. Almost every single meaningful part on the car is the same. Most of this work was already done, btw, when they designed the M performance parts.
Why would BMW even bother with a short run model like this? Because their profit margins on it are high. This is a company that refuses to make a "halo" sports car. They act rationally.
I respect the fact that the M2 CS is going to be the best M2 you can get, but 98% of the work is already done. This isn't even half the work needed to create the M2C, and the price delta from an OG M2 to M2C is going to be smaller than the delta between the M2C and M2 CS! Think about that for a minute...

Upon seeing the car, you'll notice straightaway parts that definitely do not feature in the M Performance Parts catalogue, developed specifically for this car. While BMW M could have saved the energy by sourcing those parts from the existing parts catalogue, they walked the extra mile. For example, if you stand on the CFRP M3/M4 roof or the one of the M2 M Performance Parts catalogue with that familiar CF weave look, beware not to 'sink' through it. On the newly developed M2 CS CFRP roof you can stand (sandwich-structured composite).

[devo]

Originally Posted by chris719

It is a real "GT" car. Porsche gave it the GT label, so it is. They decide, not you. Just like how the OG M2 is a real M car but with an N55 engine. The GT cars and M cars are more about the handling and overall feel than just the engine. I am pretty sure Andreas Preuninger considers it a real GT car, so I'll take his word over yours.
It is a bit ridiculous to compare the M2 CS to a GT4, mostly because the GT4 is just a much more focused car. One is a mid-engined sports car and the other is a 4 seat pseudo-GT car. However, if the pricing of the M2 CS is high enough, comparing it to a Cayman GTS is fair game. The end result will be that the M2 CS is a little faster in a straight line and loses everywhere else.
IMO, I don't know what the debate is all about. If you want a weekend / track car and can afford it, then the Cayman is objectively better. If you need a daily driver with rear seats, or a less expensive car, then the M2 of any variant wins.
I am probably in the small percentage of people that would cross-shop these cars because I am able to DD a car with 2 seats and not care.

I respectfully disagree. That's like saying a GTS is a "GT" car. It is not nor is a GT4 or Spyder; these two share the same wet sump (integrated dry) engine. They do, however, share "GT" chassis components. In addition to the other attributes GT cars possess, GT4s have an integrated dry sump (aka wet sump) engine not a race bred dry sump like the GT3, GT2s, RSs and the Speedster have. Even turbos including the S have an integrated dry sump hence one major reason the Mezger (iconic and dry sump) equipped turbos through 2010 iircc are in high demand. Other engine internals upgrades are profound as well. AP will say what he needs to sell Porsches. Great guy I'm sure but he's still very loyal as he should be.

[bogeyman]

Isn't a Porsche GT car developed by the GT division?

Originally Posted by devo

I respectfully disagree. That's like saying a GTS is a "GT" car. It is not nor is a GT4 or Spyder; these two share the same engine. They do, however, share "GT" chassis components. In addition to the other attributes GT cars possess, GT4s have an integrated dry sump (aka wet sump) engine not a race bred dry sump like the GT3, GT2s, RSs and the Speedster have. Even turbos including the S have an integrated dry sump hence one major reason the Mezger (iconic and dry sump) equipped turbos through 2010 iircc are in high demand. Other engine internals upgrades are profound as well. AP will say what he needs to sell Porsches. Great guy I'm sure but he's still very loyal as he should be.

[devo]

Originally Posted by bogeyman

Isn't a Porsche GT car developed by the GT division?

You got me in a box here...

I should clarify. Labeling a car a GTx certainly does not make it a GT car; i.e. GTS which is not developed by the GT Division. Whether a dry sump or integrated dry sump makes it a GT car is another matter of opinion. You certainly have a most valid point if a car is created by the GT division, then it is what it is. As illlustrated in my signature, I am on the list for a Spyder, however, have a hard time considering that car a GT product.