12-09-2019, 12:44 PM | #243 |
Brigadier General
4560
Rep 4,672
Posts |
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
|
12-09-2019, 02:08 PM | #244 | ||
Major General
5865
Rep 6,637
Posts |
Quote:
|
||
Appreciate
0
|
12-09-2019, 02:11 PM | #245 | ||
Moderator
29419
Rep 13,107
Posts |
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
///M is art ↔ Artemis
|
||
Appreciate
0
|
12-09-2019, 08:04 PM | #246 |
Lieutenant Colonel
1996
Rep 1,759
Posts |
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, 07:29 AM | #247 | ||
Brigadier General
3663
Rep 3,422
Posts |
Quote:
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:
__________________
M4 GTS, GT3, C63 S | E90 M3s, E39 M5
|
||
Appreciate
1
cptobvious2531.50 |
12-10-2019, 07:35 AM | #248 |
Brigadier General
3663
Rep 3,422
Posts |
Why?
__________________
M4 GTS, GT3, C63 S | E90 M3s, E39 M5
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-10-2019, 07:59 AM | #249 | |
Brigadier General
2723
Rep 3,337
Posts |
Quote:
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:
2024 G20 M340i Melbourne Red/Cognac 2019 F87 M2 Competition 6MT, LBB, slicktop, exec pkg 2007 E91 328i Silver, slushbox, Eibach fr/E93 M3 rear sway bars, ARC-8 |
|
Appreciate
1
FormulaMMM3662.50 |
12-10-2019, 09:24 PM | #250 |
Lieutenant Colonel
1996
Rep 1,759
Posts |
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-11-2019, 09:29 AM | #251 | |
Brigadier General
3663
Rep 3,422
Posts |
Quote:
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.
__________________
M4 GTS, GT3, C63 S | E90 M3s, E39 M5
Last edited by FormulaMMM; 12-11-2019 at 09:36 AM.. |
|
Appreciate
4
|
12-11-2019, 08:19 PM | #252 | |
Lieutenant Colonel
1996
Rep 1,759
Posts |
Quote:
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, 07:24 AM | #253 | |
Brigadier General
3663
Rep 3,422
Posts |
Quote:
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.
__________________
M4 GTS, GT3, C63 S | E90 M3s, E39 M5
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-12-2019, 08:06 AM | #254 |
Brigadier General
2723
Rep 3,337
Posts |
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:
2024 G20 M340i Melbourne Red/Cognac 2019 F87 M2 Competition 6MT, LBB, slicktop, exec pkg 2007 E91 328i Silver, slushbox, Eibach fr/E93 M3 rear sway bars, ARC-8 |
Appreciate
1
JasH621.00 |
12-12-2019, 08:22 AM | #255 | |
Brigadier General
3663
Rep 3,422
Posts |
Quote:
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/
__________________
M4 GTS, GT3, C63 S | E90 M3s, E39 M5
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-12-2019, 08:35 PM | #257 | |
Lieutenant Colonel
1996
Rep 1,759
Posts |
Quote:
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 08:53 PM.. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-12-2019, 09:55 PM | #258 |
Brigadier General
4560
Rep 4,672
Posts |
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
|
01-03-2020, 03:57 PM | #259 |
Mmmm... Bavarian
2129
Rep 1,690
Posts |
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.
__________________
M2 CS
2023 CB X5 45e 2018 i3 94 2014 Cayman S Last edited by sdhotwn; 01-03-2020 at 04:03 PM.. |
Appreciate
0
|
01-04-2020, 04:14 PM | #260 | |
General
17489
Rep 25,115
Posts |
Quote:
I guess the CS gets Hockenheim Gold and the C gets Hockenheim Silver
__________________
My car made front page of Bimmerpost
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
01-05-2020, 04:40 PM | #261 |
Lieutenant Colonel
621
Rep 1,646
Posts |
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
cptobvious2531.50 |
01-07-2020, 10:11 AM | #262 | |
Captain
518
Rep 744
Posts |
Quote:
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, 12:46 PM | #263 | |
Brigadier General
3663
Rep 3,422
Posts |
Quote:
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.)
__________________
M4 GTS, GT3, C63 S | E90 M3s, E39 M5
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
Post Reply |
Bookmarks |
|
|