BMW Garage BMW Meets Register Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
BMW M2 Forum > BMW M2 Discussions > M2 CS vs M2 Competition performance test results from Hockenheim GP track (+ VIDEO)

Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      12-09-2019, 01:44 PM   #243
medphysdave
Captain
United_States
717
Rep
948
Posts

Drives: M2 CS waiting list
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Charlotte, NC

iTrader: (0)

Man, the C vs CS is getting crazy. The cars will feel different. The average Joe doing the occasional HPDE likely won't be able to sniff the limits of either. And most will never know because most of the current C owners will likely not get to drive a CS. Bench racing at it's finest 💪
Appreciate 3
cptobvious2011.50
Conissah651.50
JustChris8930.50

      12-09-2019, 03:08 PM   #244
akkando
Brigadier General
3075
Rep
4,165
Posts

Drives: 17 M2 DCT LBB,11 e90 M3 ZCP IB
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Bay Area

iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by FormulaMMM View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by akkando View Post
I mean if a comp with matching tune for $500 and same tires and wheels gets the same time around the track, I think one might have to question the value of the CS. If that's the case it costs a tune and some wheels to match it. Tires are wear items so you have to pay for that anyway.
Fair enough, question away. That's an evaluation that anyone in the market can make. But in fairness, the same can be said for almost any performance car platform, not just the M2. The lesser version can be modded to match the performance of the more expensive "plus" model.

I'd argue that especially once a tune is involved, you're likely to lose track reliability. And over time the market always prefers the factory "plus" version as compared to the modified lesser form, but to each his own. I'm no stranger to modded M cars.
Track reliability? It's the same engine. Maybe the oil pan is magnesium and slightly more oil like the m3cs but other than that why would reliability suffer. We're talking about only software difference here stock, and "tuned" it would be running the same power and essentially same difference as the CS.
Appreciate 0
      12-09-2019, 03:11 PM   #245
Artemis
Moderator
Artemis's Avatar
Belgium
10985
Rep
9,757
Posts

Drives: BMW M2C (BSM)
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Belgium

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by FormulaMMM View Post
Sure seems you’re looking to dismiss, or pick holes in their findings with a 4 lb. fuel load differential and the old, tired “but if you put parts a, b, and c on X model, it’d be just as fast” concept.
Read the second paragraph of my post again. Nothing 'old, tired' is asked here, no engine tune, no 'M2 CS only' CF parts, etc. M2 CS will win, definitely, but let's see the gap with comparable spec. That's all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Artemis View Post
Apart from the time difference because of the tires (PSS vs Cup 2): the M2 CS (1.55,8) featured M-DCT + M-CCB and went into 'limp mode' on its way to the finish due to low fuel. This M2C (1.57,6) featured manual gearbox + stock brakes. 'Low fuel' light flips on at lap time 01:08:40 (video: 01:18).

Let them pit the M2 CS against the M2 Competition in similar spec: M-DCT, same fuel load, M Driver's Package (stock on M2 CS), 2NH M Sport Brakes (stock on M2 CS), fresh Michelin Pilot Super Cup 2 tires (stock on M2 CS), 763M wheels (stock on M2 CS), same driving mode and driven immediately back-to-back by the same driver on the track.
On a general note: I cannot say that I am totally unfamiliar with what the M2 CS is about. I know a couple of things about that car. And though I've never driven it, I genuinely trust that it will be a fine piece of automotive machinery. Anyways, if you'd ever read some of my M2 CS posts, you'd know that I ain't "looking to dismiss, or pick holes". I respect BMW, but am not affiliated to them, which gives me a bit more freedom to express what I like and dislike. Feel free to disagree.
__________________
///M is art Artemis
Appreciate 0
      12-09-2019, 09:04 PM   #246
Karmic Man
Major
Karmic Man's Avatar
Australia
1109
Rep
1,181
Posts

Drives: M2C
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: World

iTrader: (0)

With comparable tyres, front camber plate on the M2C to dial out that piggy understeer I think the two would be very close. Drop the M performance dampers + springs onto the Comp and I think the Comp would clock a quicker lap time.

The CS is very desirable and the overall driving experience would be more sporty and enjoyable to a stock M2C but for track fun or lap time purposes there is no reason to go for the CS.
Appreciate 0
      12-10-2019, 08:29 AM   #247
FormulaMMM
Colonel
FormulaMMM's Avatar
United_States
635
Rep
2,147
Posts

Drives: E90 M3
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Midwest

iTrader: (2)

Quote:
Originally Posted by akkando View Post
Track reliability? It's the same engine. Maybe the oil pan is magnesium and slightly more oil like the m3cs but other than that why would reliability suffer. We're talking about only software difference here stock, and "tuned" it would be running the same power and essentially same difference as the CS.
Aftermarket turbo tunes = the same reliability and safety as stock on track? not in my experience, not on any platform I've seen. If there really is no difference in components btwn C and CS, and the factory CS software becomes known/available, then sure.

I do think that the reliable 39 bhp boost in combination with (presumably) extra cooling capability and improved engine management is one of the advantages being overlooked here. If the CS cools 1/2 as good as the GTS, then you won't have to give a 2nd thought to engine temps. The same cannot be said for most aftermarket tuned turbo cars on track.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Artemis View Post
Read the second paragraph of my post again. Nothing 'old, tired' is asked here, no engine tune, no 'M2 CS only' CF parts, etc. M2 CS will win, definitely, but let's see the gap with comparable spec. That's all.

On a general note: I cannot say that I am totally unfamiliar with what the M2 CS is about. I know a couple of things about that car. And though I've never driven it, I genuinely trust that it will be a fine piece of automotive machinery. Anyways, if you'd ever read some of my M2 CS posts, you'd know that I ain't "looking to dismiss, or pick holes". I respect BMW, but am not affiliated to them, which gives me a bit more freedom to express what I like and dislike. Feel free to disagree.
__________________
DCT E90 M3 (stock), M4 GTS, Camaro Z/28. Past: Akrapovic Evolution, KW Clubsport, Stoptech ST-40 + Pagid RS29 | Apex EC-7 18x10 ET25 + Nitto NT01 275 35 18, Velos Designwerks Tune, Megan Racing Catback, Macht Schnell Filter
Appreciate 1
cptobvious2011.50

      12-10-2019, 08:35 AM   #248
FormulaMMM
Colonel
FormulaMMM's Avatar
United_States
635
Rep
2,147
Posts

Drives: E90 M3
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Midwest

iTrader: (2)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Karmic Man View Post
With comparable tyres, front camber plate on the M2C to dial out that piggy understeer I think the two would be very close. Drop the M performance dampers + springs onto the Comp and I think the Comp would clock a quicker lap time.
Why?
__________________
DCT E90 M3 (stock), M4 GTS, Camaro Z/28. Past: Akrapovic Evolution, KW Clubsport, Stoptech ST-40 + Pagid RS29 | Apex EC-7 18x10 ET25 + Nitto NT01 275 35 18, Velos Designwerks Tune, Megan Racing Catback, Macht Schnell Filter
Appreciate 0
      12-10-2019, 08:59 AM   #249
CSBM5
Colonel
CSBM5's Avatar
1318
Rep
2,264
Posts

Drives: 2019 M2 Comp, 2011 M3, etc
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Greenville, SC

iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by FormulaMMM View Post
Aftermarket turbo tunes = the same reliability and safety as stock on track? not in my experience, not on any platform I've seen. If there really is no difference in components btwn C and CS, and the factory CS software becomes known/available, then sure.

I do think that the reliable 39 bhp boost in combination with (presumably) extra cooling capability and improved engine management is one of the advantages being overlooked here. If the CS cools 1/2 as good as the GTS, then you won't have to give a 2nd thought to engine temps. The same cannot be said for most aftermarket tuned turbo cars on track.




The M3 CS tune is available in the aftermarket now, so it's highly likely the M2 CS tune will be cracked and available widely at some point.
__________________
Current Stable:
2019 F87 M2 Competition 6MT, LBB, slicktop, exec pkg
2011.5 E90 M3 6MT Silverstone II, slicktop, Dinan/Eibach, Apex 9.5/10.5x19 with PS4S
2007 E91 328i Silver, slushbox, Eibach fr/E93 M3 rear sway bars, 219Ms
1975 CanAm 125MX2, stock, original owner
Appreciate 1
      12-10-2019, 10:24 PM   #250
Karmic Man
Major
Karmic Man's Avatar
Australia
1109
Rep
1,181
Posts

Drives: M2C
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: World

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by FormulaMMM View Post
Why?
Because the power delta is minimal and both cars have effectively the same chassis at a similar weight.

It all comes down to tyres, dampers and springs. Why won't the C corner faster with camber plates + M suspension in the right setting?
Appreciate 0
      12-11-2019, 10:29 AM   #251
FormulaMMM
Colonel
FormulaMMM's Avatar
United_States
635
Rep
2,147
Posts

Drives: E90 M3
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Midwest

iTrader: (2)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Karmic Man View Post
Because the power delta is minimal and both cars have effectively the same chassis at a similar weight.

It all comes down to tyres, dampers and springs. Why won't the C corner faster with camber plates + M suspension in the right setting?
Camber potential of the CS is tbd. Not expecting miracles (because BMW), but plates might not offer a substantial single lap time advantage over the max CS stock setting. Better tire wear, of course.

A 39 bhp boost (+10%) is not inconsequential to lap times, in my experience. IMSA BoP adjustments are regularly in the 5-10 bhp range. And speculative, but guessing +39 bhp is a conservative figure.

I'm not sure why the enhanced aero of the CS is being overlooked or dismissed. The front end is almost a replica of the Racing, and the CS vented hood is added downforce and cooling. The Gurney flap doesn't look like much, but its benefits are proven on numerous platforms since the 70’s.

The carbon hood, roof, and trunk do indeed lower the center of gravity.

Based upon the data I've found, the CS front wheels are 4.9 lbs. lighter per corner than the C's. And rear wheels 4.4 lbs. lighter per corner. 245 section Cup 2 save 1 lb. vs. 245 PSS, so 5.4 lbs. overall per front corner.

(This would kick it out of the apples to apples comparison, but spec the carbon ceramics in combination with the lighter CS wheels and unsprung weight savings become really substantial vs. the C.)

Have they broke the mold with the CS? Certainly not. But doesn't seem they're delivering BS for the extra $, and that seems to be the popular take here.

Meaningful power boost, uprated dampers (including a track-focused setting), wheels & tires, brakes, legit aero, superior cooling and track durability, some nice interior bits. I’ve seen worse.

To me the better question is – throw your camber plates on the CS for a few hundred and stabilize tire wear, is the CS far off of the equally more expensive 718 GT4 around a typical circuit? Not according to Sport Auto findings. It’s closer to the GT4 than the C is to the CS. Doesn’t make it a bargain, but on lap times alone it’s not a rip off by modern German standards. And that’s before experiential gains are considered, any “CS” value advantage, etc.
__________________
DCT E90 M3 (stock), M4 GTS, Camaro Z/28. Past: Akrapovic Evolution, KW Clubsport, Stoptech ST-40 + Pagid RS29 | Apex EC-7 18x10 ET25 + Nitto NT01 275 35 18, Velos Designwerks Tune, Megan Racing Catback, Macht Schnell Filter

Last edited by FormulaMMM; 12-11-2019 at 10:36 AM..
Appreciate 4
cptobvious2011.50
Sedan_Clan4173.00
MDuckie47.50
Got f1?70.50

      12-11-2019, 09:19 PM   #252
Karmic Man
Major
Karmic Man's Avatar
Australia
1109
Rep
1,181
Posts

Drives: M2C
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: World

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by FormulaMMM View Post
Camber potential of the CS is tbd. Not expecting miracles (because BMW), but plates might not offer a substantial single lap time advantage over the max CS stock setting. Better tire wear, of course.

A 39 bhp boost (+10%) is not inconsequential to lap times, in my experience. IMSA BoP adjustments are regularly in the 5-10 bhp range. And speculative, but guessing +39 bhp is a conservative figure.

I'm not sure why the enhanced aero of the CS is being overlooked or dismissed. The front end is almost a replica of the Racing, and the CS vented hood is added downforce and cooling. The Gurney flap doesn't look like much, but its benefits are proven on numerous platforms since the 70’s.

The carbon hood, roof, and trunk do indeed lower the center of gravity.

Based upon the data I've found, the CS front wheels are 4.9 lbs. lighter per corner than the C's. And rear wheels 4.4 lbs. lighter per corner. 245 section Cup 2 save 1 lb. vs. 245 PSS, so 5.4 lbs. overall per front corner.

(This would kick it out of the apples to apples comparison, but spec the carbon ceramics in combination with the lighter CS wheels and unsprung weight savings become really substantial vs. the C.)

Have they broke the mold with the CS? Certainly not. But doesn't seem they're delivering BS for the extra $, and that seems to be the popular take here.

Meaningful power boost, uprated dampers (including a track-focused setting), wheels & tires, brakes, legit aero, superior cooling and track durability, some nice interior bits. I’ve seen worse.

To me the better question is – throw your camber plates on the CS for a few hundred and stabilize tire wear, is the CS far off of the equally more expensive 718 GT4 around a typical circuit? Not according to Sport Auto findings. It’s closer to the GT4 than the C is to the CS. Doesn’t make it a bargain, but on lap times alone it’s not a rip off by modern German standards. And that’s before experiential gains are considered, any “CS” value advantage, etc.
The areo on the CS is not groundbreaking…a bit of difference but not much. There is not enough downforce generated from the areo. May be a bit more stable at very high speed like 200km/h+ that's all.

The wheels on the CS is already option on the C

Lower of gravity from carbon roof? I will give you that but already an option on the C

Carbon hood? Probably makes a bit of difference in reducing understeer but already an option on the C

Carbon trunk? Not on the CS and already a dealer option on the C

Power delta: 40hp after drivetrain loss is not much. Look at the videos on youtube between the C and M3CP/M4CP racing on the straight. Difference is negligible. They both have the same peak torque and only after 6000rpm there is a more tangible difference between the two.

The intrinsic value of the CS lies in the no mods required to have fun + full warranty domain.

The CS is by no means a full on track car like the GTS where as with Cambers + dampers + springs mods on the C there are a lot more options to get that optimum setting to go fast so that is my premise that with the right settings it will net a faster lap time on most tracks.
Appreciate 0
      12-12-2019, 08:24 AM   #253
FormulaMMM
Colonel
FormulaMMM's Avatar
United_States
635
Rep
2,147
Posts

Drives: E90 M3
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Midwest

iTrader: (2)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Karmic Man View Post
The areo on the CS is not groundbreaking…a bit of difference but not much. There is not enough downforce generated from the areo. May be a bit more stable at very high speed like 200km/h+ that's all.

The wheels on the CS is already option on the C

Lower of gravity from carbon roof? I will give you that but already an option on the C

Carbon hood? Probably makes a bit of difference in reducing understeer but already an option on the C

Carbon trunk? Not on the CS and already a dealer option on the C

Power delta: 40hp after drivetrain loss is not much. Look at the videos on youtube between the C and M3CP/M4CP racing on the straight. Difference is negligible. They both have the same peak torque and only after 6000rpm there is a more tangible difference between the two.

The intrinsic value of the CS lies in the no mods required to have fun + full warranty domain.

The CS is by no means a full on track car like the GTS where as with Cambers + dampers + springs mods on the C there are a lot more options to get that optimum setting to go fast so that is my premise that with the right settings it will net a faster lap time on most tracks.
Pure speculation on the CS aero advantage. It's true that aero has greater effect at higher speeds, but that doesn't mean the CS aero offers no advantage at <200 kph. Gurney flap alone can influence down to 40 mph.

I assume you mean that the C can be fitted with CS equivalent M performance (or other) carbon parts, and CS wheels + tires. I don't see how that negates their advantage as stock on the CS over a stock C. (My bad on the trunk.)

Side by side racing is the wrong way to think about how a power advantage translates to lap time gain. Let's say the CS is 1-5 mph faster down straights than the C. That would mean a notable lap time advantage. Race teams would kill for a 39 bhp advantage. Read here: https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a1...est-lap-times/

As far as a collection of mods making a C faster than the CS, no doubt. You started by suggesting the C would put down the better lap with CS dampers & tires + plates, which I didn't understand.
__________________
DCT E90 M3 (stock), M4 GTS, Camaro Z/28. Past: Akrapovic Evolution, KW Clubsport, Stoptech ST-40 + Pagid RS29 | Apex EC-7 18x10 ET25 + Nitto NT01 275 35 18, Velos Designwerks Tune, Megan Racing Catback, Macht Schnell Filter
Appreciate 0
      12-12-2019, 09:06 AM   #254
CSBM5
Colonel
CSBM5's Avatar
1318
Rep
2,264
Posts

Drives: 2019 M2 Comp, 2011 M3, etc
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Greenville, SC

iTrader: (1)

It's unfortunate that the term "Gurney flap" and "Gurney" are being incorrectly applied to a simple rear spoiler design on the M2 CS. I don't understand where this is coming from but apparently BMW themselves?

In order for a "Gurney flap" to exist, you first need an airfoil, a wing, with clear flow on the top and bottom. Next you need an airfoil shape to said wing, and in the case of a car, the Gurney flap is pointed up at the rear edge of the airfoil. It increases pressure on the high pressure side of the wing while at the same time helping the boundary layer to stay attached on the low pressure side at greater angles of attack.

No such wing exists on the M2 CS. It's just a larger rear spoiler with a reduced profile in the center. It has no relation to a true airfoil with clear airflow on both sides where a real Gurney flap could be useful (increase coefficient of lift (i.e. inverted on a car wing) without changing the airfoil camber.

/rant off
__________________
Current Stable:
2019 F87 M2 Competition 6MT, LBB, slicktop, exec pkg
2011.5 E90 M3 6MT Silverstone II, slicktop, Dinan/Eibach, Apex 9.5/10.5x19 with PS4S
2007 E91 328i Silver, slushbox, Eibach fr/E93 M3 rear sway bars, 219Ms
1975 CanAm 125MX2, stock, original owner
Appreciate 1
JasH552.00

      12-12-2019, 09:22 AM   #255
FormulaMMM
Colonel
FormulaMMM's Avatar
United_States
635
Rep
2,147
Posts

Drives: E90 M3
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Midwest

iTrader: (2)

Quote:
Originally Posted by CSBM5 View Post
It's unfortunate that the term "Gurney flap" and "Gurney" are being incorrectly applied to a simple rear spoiler design on the M2 CS. I don't understand where this is coming from but apparently BMW themselves?

In order for a "Gurney flap" to exist, you first need an airfoil, a wing, with clear flow on the top and bottom. Next you need an airfoil shape to said wing, and in the case of a car, the Gurney flap is pointed up at the rear edge of the airfoil. It increases pressure on the high pressure side of the wing while at the same time helping the boundary layer to stay attached on the low pressure side at greater angles of attack.

No such wing exists on the M2 CS. It's just a larger rear spoiler with a reduced profile in the center. It has no relation to a true airfoil with clear airflow on both sides where a real Gurney flap could be useful (increase coefficient of lift (i.e. inverted on a car wing) without changing the airfoil camber.

/rant off
haha... rant away. BMW taking liberties in Dan's name? Perhaps.

My point being, doesn't have to look like much for aerodynamic benefit. An actual gurney flap sure doesn't. It's a stretch to conclude the CS offers no aero advantages over the C. BMW is suggesting otherwise and the CS looks the part, especially at the front end.

Since we're talking old school, might enjoy this read https://autouniversum.wordpress.com/...mic-appendage/
__________________
DCT E90 M3 (stock), M4 GTS, Camaro Z/28. Past: Akrapovic Evolution, KW Clubsport, Stoptech ST-40 + Pagid RS29 | Apex EC-7 18x10 ET25 + Nitto NT01 275 35 18, Velos Designwerks Tune, Megan Racing Catback, Macht Schnell Filter
Appreciate 0
      12-12-2019, 09:44 AM   #256
dcmac
Lieutenant
dcmac's Avatar
362
Rep
404
Posts

Drives: '18 LCI M2
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Denver, CO

iTrader: (0)

What pathetic track times for what is an over-hyped, over-priced, riced up M2C. Blatant BMW money grab.
Appreciate 0
      12-12-2019, 09:35 PM   #257
Karmic Man
Major
Karmic Man's Avatar
Australia
1109
Rep
1,181
Posts

Drives: M2C
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: World

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by FormulaMMM View Post
Pure speculation on the CS aero advantage. It's true that aero has greater effect at higher speeds, but that doesn't mean the CS aero offers no advantage at <200 kph. Gurney flap alone can influence down to 40 mph.

I assume you mean that the C can be fitted with CS equivalent M performance (or other) carbon parts, and CS wheels + tires. I don't see how that negates their advantage as stock on the CS over a stock C. (My bad on the trunk.)

Side by side racing is the wrong way to think about how a power advantage translates to lap time gain. Let's say the CS is 1-5 mph faster down straights than the C. That would mean a notable lap time advantage. Race teams would kill for a 39 bhp advantage. Read here: https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a1...est-lap-times/

As far as a collection of mods making a C faster than the CS, no doubt. You started by suggesting the C would put down the better lap with CS dampers & tires + plates, which I didn't understand.
I stated that the 'C would put down a better lap with M performance dampers + springs + plates on comparable tyres' is because those are the variables that matters more than a 40hp pump on the flywheel.

Aero on the CS is mild. It's not even using the rear wing of the CS racing! Aero requires large surface area to be effective and those carbon bits on the CS don't have enough surface areas to make a tangible difference (may be a slight difference at top speed) since the largest surface area which is the body of the car remains the same. I don't see how the CS carbon hood is anymore aerodynamics than the smooth hood on the C. The shape of the CS carbon roof might make a slight difference but very slight.

The carbon roof and hood giving the CS a lower of centre of gravity means nothing when I can drop the ride height of the C with coilovers. Thin air weights less than carbon.

Since both have similar ride height (C:1410mm, CS:1414mm), with the M performance suspension I can drop the front by 20mm and the rear by 10mm to give the C a lower centre of gravity and reducing understeer at the same time. That's a conservative adjustment. With aftermarket coilovers like KW, the front can be dropped by at least 30mm or 40mm.

You can't do that to the CS because of the adaptive suspension. You will have to take out the adaptive suspension and replace with coilovers and code out the adaptive settings.

With ride height and alignment sorted out with camber plates, we can play with the rebound and compression on the dampers, a square or staggered setup and get the best out of the C without even touching the engine!

With all those variables sorted my conviction is that it will be faster than a stock CS on most track while using comparable tyres.

Last edited by Karmic Man; 12-12-2019 at 09:53 PM..
Appreciate 0
      12-12-2019, 10:55 PM   #258
medphysdave
Captain
United_States
717
Rep
948
Posts

Drives: M2 CS waiting list
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Charlotte, NC

iTrader: (0)

The stock vs modified argument gets old, and is ridiculous. There are a lot of cars cheaper than the M2C that you can modify to be faster than the CS for a lot less than either. My modified Mazda Miata would run with 911 turbos on the track where I would do driving events. I didn't create many P-car to Mazda Miata converts. Despite the $120k difference cost between our cars. The CS is faster than any other M2 version. It should be as the pinnacle of the current platform. If it costs too much, then go modify your M2 until content.

*This isn't posted at any one person directly. Blanket statement towards the topic.
Appreciate 6
cptobvious2011.50
MDuckie47.50
Conissah651.50
JasH552.00
leemik334.50

      01-03-2020, 04:57 PM   #259
sdhotwn
Mmmm... Bavarian
sdhotwn's Avatar
United_States
67
Rep
288
Posts

Drives: F30 335i, F25 X3, E36 M3
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Wisconsin, USA

iTrader: (0)

I spent 5 years planning and aiming to buy a 2016 GT4. After I drove a friends I found it wasn't "for me". I drove an M2 and LOVED it, and felt the M2 CS was the perfect blend of what I was looking for - something a little special, and something I didn't have to screw around with. I have my E36 M if I want to tinker, and I have my F30 for comfort. The CS will be fun for track, and great for charity events etc. When it comes to resale it'll do better than a modded M2 of any vintage. So why not. My F30 is all MPerformanced up, and that does nut-all for it's value and desirability for anyone but me. I'm absolutely 100% BMW's perfect target with the CS.

When I was shopping I had heavily looked at the GT350, and ZL1 Camaro as options with backseats, and frankly much more performance for less. But the size and cheap interiors did nothing for me. Used AMG GT-S's are in the price range as well. Plenty of used 911's and Cayman's in the space too. So it's all about what you want to spend or want. Cars are largely emotion based purchases, and trying to argue it's factual can be a bit farcical.
__________________
2014 EBII MSport 335i -Delivered 7/12/14
1998 Hellrot M3/4/5
2011 X3
M2 CS (Allocation Deposit)

Last edited by sdhotwn; 01-03-2020 at 05:03 PM..
Appreciate 0
      01-04-2020, 05:14 PM   #260
JustChris
General
JustChris's Avatar
United Kingdom
8931
Rep
18,172
Posts

Drives: BMW
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Uk

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by medphysdave View Post
Man, the C vs CS is getting crazy. The cars will feel different. The average Joe doing the occasional HPDE likely won't be able to sniff the limits of either. And most will never know because most of the current C owners will likely not get to drive a CS. Bench racing at it's finest 💪
Never a truer word spoken.

I guess the CS gets Hockenheim Gold and the C gets Hockenheim Silver
__________________
BMW X3 M40d Performance Auto
Sophisto Grey Metallic with Oyster Leather
Comfort Package + M Sport Plus Package + Technology Package
Appreciate 0
      01-05-2020, 05:40 PM   #261
JasH
Lieutenant Colonel
JasH's Avatar
United Kingdom
552
Rep
1,595
Posts

Drives: McLaren & Ferrari & i8 & i3
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Kent, UK

iTrader: (0)

The "value" of the CS is primarily in its limited numbers.

Whether the numbers are quite low enough for that to work will be demonstrated by the market.

I agree that comparing a modded car to any factory car is a pointless exercise. My old modded Lotus Exige S1 could run rings around *any* modded M2, but so what? A track Radical could run rings around my Lotus after all.
Appreciate 1
cptobvious2011.50

      01-07-2020, 11:11 AM   #262
Megator
Second Lieutenant
Megator's Avatar
110
Rep
294
Posts

Drives: M2 Competition
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: NL

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by FormulaMMM View Post
haha... rant away. BMW taking liberties in Dan's name? Perhaps.

My point being, doesn't have to look like much for aerodynamic benefit. An actual gurney flap sure doesn't. It's a stretch to conclude the CS offers no aero advantages over the C. BMW is suggesting otherwise and the CS looks the part, especially at the front end.

Since we're talking old school, might enjoy this read https://autouniversum.wordpress.com/...mic-appendage/

I think your right and that the CS aero must do something. The CS has a front lip that is 90% similar to the MP one except the front holes are closed (the M2C racing is the same). I imagine this was done in order to further reduce the air going under the car and therefore lift.
__________________
AX 1.1 --> AX GTI --> NA Roadster 1.8 --> E39 528i --> Xsara VTS --> Volvo 940 LPT --> Focus RS MK3 --> M2C + NA Miata 1.8
Appreciate 0
      01-07-2020, 01:46 PM   #263
FormulaMMM
Colonel
FormulaMMM's Avatar
United_States
635
Rep
2,147
Posts

Drives: E90 M3
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Midwest

iTrader: (2)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Megator View Post
I think your right and that the CS aero must do something. The CS has a front lip that is 90% similar to the MP one except the front holes are closed (the M2C racing is the same). I imagine this was done in order to further reduce the air going under the car and therefore lift.
I'm no Adrian Newey, not qualified to speculate on exactly what's going on, but if BMW says enhanced aero I have no reason to doubt them. Don't know why the CS design would attract strong skepticism from similarly unqualified, uninformed enthusiasts.

The new CFRP hood weighs half of the weight of a similar steel hood while incorporating functional air vents, finished in High-Gloss Black, which help increase front end downforce and aid in engine cooling.

Also made form CFRP are the front splitter, the rear spoiler, rear diffuser and M twin-stalk exterior mirrors. The front and rear spoilers along with the diffuser work together to optimize air flow underneath the car and to further increase downforce.


Other performance cars have undisputed downforce, don't look like a Pikes Peak Unlimited contender or Gridlife special. Here's a pretty good example. And for the .2 RS here's what Porsche had to say about upping front end downforce: The front spoiler lip is now even wider than the lip of the predecessor model, and downforce has been increased as a result. (.2 is 2nd picture. Not exactly in your face downforce.)



__________________
DCT E90 M3 (stock), M4 GTS, Camaro Z/28. Past: Akrapovic Evolution, KW Clubsport, Stoptech ST-40 + Pagid RS29 | Apex EC-7 18x10 ET25 + Nitto NT01 275 35 18, Velos Designwerks Tune, Megan Racing Catback, Macht Schnell Filter
Appreciate 0
      01-07-2020, 02:27 PM   #264
sdhotwn
Mmmm... Bavarian
sdhotwn's Avatar
United_States
67
Rep
288
Posts

Drives: F30 335i, F25 X3, E36 M3
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Wisconsin, USA

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by JasH View Post
The "value" of the CS is primarily in its limited numbers.

Whether the numbers are quite low enough for that to work will be demonstrated by the market.
Yep, all tea leaves at this point. Will be for quite sometime. You are on the nose of the issue though.
Appreciate 1
JasH552.00

Post Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:51 PM.




m2
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
1Addicts.com, BIMMERPOST.com, E90Post.com, F30Post.com, M3Post.com, ZPost.com, 5Post.com, 6Post.com, 7Post.com, XBimmers.com logo and trademark are properties of BIMMERPOST