[jph28]

Originally Posted by Eau Rouge

The point, restating, many that love the E46 M3 would love to swap for a CSL. And why not? It is worthy, no?

I personally would not swap for a CSL, primarily because of the SMG transmission, secondly because the jump in price wouldn't be worth it (to me).

Originally Posted by Eau Rouge

For the current generation, there was no CSL. BMW has its oddities about turf. The performance jump from E46 to E92 was much greater than was the jump from E36 (euro spec) to E46. A CSL version of the E46 was doable thanks to the relatively small performance disparity between the E36M3 and E46M3's. A CSL version of the E92 would have been way beyond the turf the BMW had in mind for the E92.

What about the M3 GTS Sure, it wasn't named "CSL", but it featured weight reduction, track-oriented modifications, adjustable suspension, and a stroked engine (which even the CSL didn't get). I'd consider it a more aggressive step up than the CSL, which makes your arguments about why an E92 CSL didn't exist somewhat hard to accept

[cntrvrsy]

In my opinion, it all comes down to personal preference and perhaps Chris Harris (like myself) prefers the e46 M3 out of the bunch. I've tried to like to the e9x M cars but they just don't grab me the way the e46 did/ does. It doesn't mean that there's anything wrong with the car or that it lacks anywhere, I just don't like it enough to want to own one despite it's capabilities.

Originally Posted by Eau Rouge

... The only thing crazier that I've heard, yesterday in fact, was a dude conditioning his next car purchase on the type of members that comprise the particular car's Internet forum community. M3Post has killed fread hence no link.

[benzthis]

Originally Posted by Eau Rouge

It seems likely to me that very few that liked what CH said caught that contradiction.
The bottom line is this: To get E46 CSL type performance without modding, the E9x M3 is the only BMW choice.

CSL (SMG) vs E92 M3(MT) http://www.fastestlaps.com/compariso...mw_m3_e92.html

CSL vs M3 DCT ZCP http://www.fastestlaps.com/compariso...n_package.html

Even CH knows this. He did buy one and loved it; tech, V8 and all.

yeah CH loved it and then got rid of it.I guess he fell out of love.those lap times of the CSL on the top gear track were very wet.really not a fair comparison at all with the e9x times in the dry.

[EKaru]

I wish I could have an opinion in this thread, but I've only raved the M3

[Obioban]

Originally Posted by benzthis

yeah CH loved it and then got rid of it.I guess he fell out of love.those lap times of the CSL on the top gear track were very wet.really not a fair comparison at all with the e9x times in the dry.

Also totally missing the point. Nobody is saying the e9X is slow. Or slower.

[Eau Rouge]

Originally Posted by jph28

I personally would not swap for a CSL, primarily because of the SMG transmission, secondly because the jump in price wouldn't be worth it (to me).

You and I would not want SMG. Others, who knows? There's that elusive exclusivity that some crave. Bragging rights. And, of course, price as you note.

Originally Posted by jph28

What about the M3 GTS Sure, it wasn't named "CSL", but it featured weight reduction, track-oriented modifications, adjustable suspension, and a stroked engine (which even the CSL didn't get). I'd consider it a more aggressive step up than the CSL, which makes your arguments about why an E92 CSL didn't exist somewhat hard to accept

I definitely agree that the M3 GTS is more aggressive. Interestingly, with a mere 250 too be produced, all sold in advance, the number is precisely 18% of what was the totality of CSL production -- 1,400. BMW apparently built the GTS for that 15% of the CSL purchasers that passed on the amenities.

As for my earlier "turf" argument, it will be OK with BMW if the GTS runs circles around the next M3/M4, but do you really think that it wanted to have a situation where it launches generation 5 M3 only to have people look at performance data and conclude that, let's pick some numbers, two or three thousand older CSLs are superior performers? Good luck marketing that new model.

[drunk hal]

Originally Posted by Wayward///M

you must have missed the hundreds of comments by members knocking the E9X because of the marginal weight difference, power per liter, torque, too much tech, double hump vs. single hump, idiocy of EDC settings, E46 CSL vs. E9X... the list goes on. The lengths people go to knock it is mind numbing.

Yes I've seen them. Some of those comments come from owners too. Only a small percentage of the comments seem truly idiotic.

[Eau Rouge]

Originally Posted by cntrvrsy

In my opinion, it all comes down to personal preference and perhaps Chris Harris (like myself) prefers the e46 M3 out of the bunch. I've tried to like to the e9x M cars but they just don't grab me the way the e46 did/ does. It doesn't mean that there's anything wrong with the car or that it lacks anywhere, I just don't like it enough to want to own one despite it's capabilities.

That's what it ALWAYS comes down to, isn't it?

Originally Posted by benzthis

yeah CH loved it and then got rid of it.I guess he fell out of love.those lap times of the CSL on the top gear track were very wet.really not a fair comparison at all with the e9x times in the dry.

d=damp, not dry. How much fairer does that make it?

What about the Vairano lap times?

Originally Posted by EKaru

I wish I could have an opinion in this thread, but I've only raved the M3

Sandbagging opinions FTL.

Originally Posted by Obioban

Also totally missing the point. Nobody is saying the e9X is slow. Or slower.

Indeed, but that is not the same as agreeing that M Division built a worthy successor to the E46M3. To each his own. Everyone can shoot to drive whatever they wish.

[jickel180]

Are we still arguing "facts" based on personal preference?

I personally like the way my exhaust sounds better than the s65 cars I've heard. Which makes it better objectively.

[Obioban]

Originally Posted by IHatePosers

i don't get why people are so butthurt when their car is said to be lesser than another. its evolution. medicine today is better than medicine in 2000.

the same goes with cars. the e9x m3 is a better car than the e46 m3. better in terms of better performance - since thats what we base sports cars on.

harris has a gt3 rs 4.0. if he wanted a real porsche, he would have gotten a 993 GT2 or a 996 GT2 or a 964 RS or a 73 RSR or something along those lines. he too has fallen for technology > feel. since older has more charm and appeal than newer right?

http://flappypaddle-heads.blogspot.c...ermit-911.html

People take issue with it because they don't think it is lesser. For my purposes, the e46 is a hugely better machine than the e9X. So using terms like lesser, when people feel strongly the opposite... that's what causes the stir.