Another CSL?

[jpan08]

So do you guys think BMW will do it again and produce a better M3 later just like the CSL 1 uped the M3? Is there any news of it, and what do you think

[GregW / Oregon]

Originally Posted by jpan08

So do you guys think BMW will do it again and produce a better M3 later just like the CSL 1 uped the M3? Is there any news of it, and what do you think

You can almost bet on it, though there is no evidence as of yet. I would guess they will add 30 or 40 hp and take out a 100 lb or so and jack the price $10 - 15k. Hopefully, it will be certified for the US this time.

[esquire]

according to member steveD, who's evidently a writer for evo magazine, the CSL is a sure thing, and slated for release in summer of 08.

see here: http://www.m3post.com/forums/showpos...7&postcount=33

[jpan08]

if this is true, i'll probably wait for it, anyone else?

[southlight]

Originally Posted by jpan08

if this is true, i'll probably wait for it, anyone else?

I really would be surprised to see a CSL before the facelift for E92 has taken place (probably spring 2010). That's how it was the last time. But it's only my personal estimation, doesn't have to be true.
Oh, and I wouldn't wait, especially in the US:

Originally Posted by SCOTT26

Whilst the BMW M3 and BMW M6 will definetely get a CSL model BMW are deciding on offering a CSL model of the Z4M Coupe and the upcoming
BMW 1er Coupe.

With all this requiring serious legislation for the North American market. Currently as of now BMW do not intend to offer these models in the USA.

Best regards, south

[e36BMW///]

what is a facelift? what is an example of this?

[e36BMW///]

similar to the nose panel / grill change in the E36 during 97?

[mofomat]

Originally Posted by e36BMW///

similar to the nose panel / grill change in the E36 during 97?

The face lift for the E46 M3 was very small indeed. The main change was the rear lights, which became L.E.D. and had brake force display.

Also, the lip above the number plate became wider. And that's it. No change to the front of the car.

There is no guarantee there is even going to be a face lift to the E92 M3.

The only reason there were major changes to the E36 M3 was because it came in for quite a bit of criticism for being a bit soft, hence the E36 Evo.

[jpan08]

so what would the csl have that's different? other than lighter weight

[lucid]

Originally Posted by jpan08

so what would the csl have that's different? other than lighter weight

Wheels/tires, suspension tweaks (harsher firmer ride), minor engine mods (a few extra hp--not that there should be lots of room there for improvement), maybe a different steering wheel and shifter?

[BMW //MPOWER]

Yeah i'd expect a CSL to come out, but it'll be a late model, maybe 2010 at the earliest though. Gotta give the new M3's their two years of glory first, like what 18months of glory the 335i's got.

[lucid]

Originally Posted by JohnnyFavourite

you fogot to add 40% mark up like the last one, biggest con ever played

I didn't realize the markup was 40% on the E46. You can obviously do all that yourself with much less if you don't care about voiding your warranty.

[lucid]

Originally Posted by JohnnyFavourite

yeah, it was a huge markup .. owners are still complaining now, depreciation was enormous mind you ive driven one and raced one on the track a few times , they r sweet

I assuming you are referring to an actual E46 CSL (not sold in the US), and to the competion package relased in the US instead of the CSL, right?

[mofomat]

Originally Posted by lucid

Wheels/tires, suspension tweaks (harsher firmer ride), minor engine mods (a few extra hp--not that there should be lots of room there for improvement), maybe a different steering wheel and shifter?

There IS lots of room there for improvement. Take a look at the torque curve. BMW have quite clearly restricted the amount of power from the new V8 engine, already preparing for either/or the CSL and any future developments. The this engine is at the very beginning of it's life cycle.

Also, the V8 produces 414bhp on paper. I suspect it will produce more when dyno'd.

[lucid]

Originally Posted by mofomat

There IS lots of room there for improvement. Take a look at the torque curve. BMW have quite clearly restricted the amount of power from the new V8 engine, already preparing for either/or the CSL and any future developments. The this engine is at the very beginning of it's life cycle.

Also, the V8 produces 414bhp on paper. I suspect it will produce more when dyno'd.

Whatever you and I say, we are speculating, but let's speculate:

I will make the following arguments:

1. There is serious Hp competition out there, and BMW cannot afford to release the M3 engine with significant undeveloped potential.
2. The M3 engine is already pushing current technological boundaries of the state-of-the-art.

I'll support these arguments with the following data on the M3, F430, and RS4 engines (I am attaching a table). Note that these V8 engines are pretty close in displacement. The BMW and Ferrari engines are especially similar in cylinder dimensions. As you can see, the Ferrari engine beats the M3 engine, but not by much. Assuming BMW tweaks things around and messes with the torque curve, it might be able to gain another 1-2 kW/liter for a total of 4-8 kW, but nothing more unless there is a major breakthrough in engine technology within the next 2-3 years. And look at how close the Audi figures are. Do you really think BMW is comfortable with that, and why wouldn’t they use whatever they’ve got to open up a gap?

[mofomat]

Originally Posted by lucid

why wouldn’t they use whatever they’ve got to open up a gap?

1) Because they want to allow room for the CSL.

2) They don't want to get too close to the M5/M6.

3) Because they have gone on record as saying they don't want to get into a "power" race with MB and Audi. Why would they need to have an engine with any more power than the RS4, when dynamically the M3 will be better, and also it is lighter? Quite simply, 414bhp is enough power.

4) Because in reality the official output figures are most likely an underestimation of the actual power produced. This is the case with the M5/M6, 335i.

5) Because this engine is at the start of it's life cycle, and therefore there will be plenty of room for further development in the future.

[lucid]

Originally Posted by mofomat

1) Because they want to allow room for the CSL.

2) They don't want to get too close to the M5/M6.

3) Because they have gone on record as saying they don't want to get into a "power" race with MB and Audi. Why would they need to have an engine with any more power than the RS4, when dynamically the M3 will be better, and also it is lighter? Quite simply, 414bhp is enough power.

4) Because in reality the official output figures are most likely an underestimation of the actual power produced. This is the case with the M5/M6, 335i.

5) Because this engine is at the start of it's life cycle, and therefore there will be plenty of room for further development in the future.

Well, you didn't respond to my point about the M3 engine already been pretty close what engineers can do with available technology. That's why I posted the Ferrari numbers. As you can see, there is not much of a gap there. I really don't think a mass produced BMW engine will outperform a limited production Ferrari engine anytime soon. There is only so much power one get out from a given displacement with available technology.

To respond to your points in the order you posted them:

1) How many CSLs will BMW sell? A few thousand. So, you are saying they will handicap the entire M3 product line so that they can sell a few thousands of another product?

2) M5/M6 are targetted at entirely different markets, so there is no overlap/issue there.

3) It doesn't matter what they might have said to downplay the threat from MB and Audi. Come on, deep inside they would love to open up a serious gap somehow and advertise that. Even if that is what they really think, what the market thinks and wants is more important. Like it or not hp numbers are important in marketing campaigns, especially when one is paying $60k for the product. Yeah, my '04 325ci handles better than a production supercharged dodge neon (or whatever those things are), but the neon will still blow me at a light, and having paid $35k, I don't like that. That's the sentiment.

4) I don't understand your point here. If the actual numbers are higher than the published numbers, that would make it even more difficult for the BMW engineers to up the power for the CSL (this relates back to my comment about the Ferrari numbers).

5) This again doesn't make sense to me; I am saying there are theoretical limits and all that (see Ferrari comment again). Also, the engine is not at the start of its life cycle at all. To the best of my knowledge, the M5 has been using the V10 version. However, as I've said in my previous post, yes, if there is a technological breakthrough in engine design within the next 2-3 years, we might see differences, but that would take more time. They could possibly have something in the pipeline right now, but we would have heard about it if it were something significant.

Regards,

[jpan08]

no i think he's right. BMW usually doesn't put out there best numbers for some reason, just like what they did with the 335i 0-60 numbers

[lucid]

Originally Posted by jpan08

no i think he's right. BMW usually doesn't put out there best numbers for some reason, just like what they did with the 335i 0-60 numbers

Fine, but what does that have to do with BMW engineers getting more hp out of the M3 engine for the CSL?

[mofomat]

Ok, I will try to respond to your post, but I don't know where to start because it is full of so many glaring errors, and lack of understanding.

Originally Posted by lucid

Well, you didn't respond to my point about the M3 engine already been pretty close what engineers can do with available technology.

Who said they are close to what they can do with the available technology?

Originally Posted by lucid

That's why I posted the Ferrari numbers. As you can see, there is not much of a gap there. I really don't think a mass produced BMW engine will outperform a limited production Ferrari engine anytime soon. There is only so much power one get out from a given displacement with available technology.

Porsche will be disappointed you've ignored them. The GT3 (997) has more than 115 bhp/litre. If BMW could achieve the same output from the 4.0 litre engine, then the CSL will have 460bhp. Even if they achieved 110bhp/litre then the CSL would have 440bhp. 414bhp doesn't seem so much now does it? Much more is possible, but BMW have to think about the 'slot' the M3 is filling. In between the M5/M6, and the forthcoming M1/M2 (whatever it will be called). The CSL would nicely fit above the standard M3 with about 440bhp.

It's the same as Porsche with the Cayman. Of course it's underpowered, but the engineers were not allowed to give it too much for fear of treading on the toes of the 911.

Originally Posted by lucid

To respond to your points in the order you posted them:

1) How many CSLs will BMW sell? A few thousand. So, you are saying they will handicap the entire M3 product line so that they can sell a few thousands of another product?

BMW are gunning for Porsche and the GT3. They intend to sell many more E92 CSL's compared to the E46 CSL. The E46 CSL was a much more experimental car than the E92 CSL will be. They were still learning to use plastic re-enforced carbon, and other weight saving techniques. These have filtered down into the standard M3 and M6, because BMW learnt to produce cars with this technology on a cost effective and mass produced scale. OK, they will still sell a lot less E92 CSL's compared to the standard M3, but that's where the halo effect of the CSL comes in.

BMW will debut a concept version of the M6 CSL at Frankfurt in September, with the production version in Geneva March 2008. As you can see, the CSL "brand" will be much more prominent in the future, and will be viewed as a new step up from the standard 'M' cars.

Originally Posted by lucid

2) M5/M6 are targetted at entirely different markets, so there is no overlap/issue there.

The M3 might be a different car to the M5/M6, but BMW still do not want to overlap on the power with the M5/M6. See again Porsche with the Cayman and the 911. The Cayman is a different market to the 911, but Porsche will still never encroach on the 911's territory.

Originally Posted by lucid

3) It doesn't matter what they might have said to downplay the threat from MB and Audi. Come on, deep inside they would love to open up a serious gap somehow and advertise that. Even if that is what they really think, what the market thinks and wants is more important. Like it or not hp numbers are important in marketing campaigns, especially when one is paying $60k for the product. Yeah, my '04 325ci handles better than a production supercharged dodge neon (or whatever those things are), but the neon will still blow me at a light, and having paid $35k, I don't like that. That's the sentiment.

This is nonsense. BMW have made it quite clear, many, many times, that they are not interested in solely going for power. BMW never base their marketing on the power of their cars. They promote driving dynamics, 50/50 weight distribution, rear wheel drive. It's in these three areas where Audi generally fall behind.

And I only think it's boy racers in parking lots that care about power and getting away from lights. BMW is certainly not targeting this market!

Originally Posted by lucid

4) I don't understand your point here. If the actual numbers are higher than the published numbers, that would make it even more difficult for the BMW engineers to up the power for the CSL (this relates back to my comment about the Ferrari numbers).

No it wouldn't. It would make it easier! The standard E92 M3 has an 'official' output of 414bhp, but lets say in reality it has 425bhp. That means to attain an official output of 440bhp for the CSL, the M engineers would only need to actually find an extra 15bhp, yet on paper it would look like they've found an extra 26bhp.

Originally Posted by lucid

5) This again doesn't make sense to me; I am saying there are theoretical limits and all that (see Ferrari comment again). Also, the engine is not at the start of its life cycle at all. To the best of my knowledge, the M5 has been using the V10 version. However, as I've said in my previous post, yes, if there is a technological breakthrough in engine design within the next 2-3 years, we might see differences, but that would take more time. They could possibly have something in the pipeline right now, but we would have heard about it if it were something significant.

Do you honestly believe the M3 V8 is just the V10 with two less cylinders?

So some of the best engineers in the world have spent several years developing the V8, when all they had to do was to take the M5 engine and cut off two cylinders? Don't believe everything you read in the press.

The S65 V8 is a totally brand new engine and is at the start of what could be a ten year life cycle if the E36/E46 is anything to go by.


The E92 M3 is filling a niche. It's no coincidence that the power to weight ratio is exactly 250bhp/tonne.

The car weighs 1,655kg, therefore the power it was only ever going to have 'officially' is 414bhp.

Look at how it fits into the M brand products:

M6 (507/1785kg) 284bhp/tonne
M5 (507/1830kg) 277bhp/tonne
M3 (414/1655kg) 250bhp/tonne
Z4 M (343/1495kg) 229bhp/tonne

Possible future M1/M2

(350/1520kg est.) 230bhp/tonne.

[lucid]

Originally Posted by mofomat

Ok, I will try to respond to your post, but I don't know where to start because it is full of so many glaring errors, and lack of understanding.



Who said they are close to what they can do with the available technology?



Porsche will be disappointed you've ignored them. The GT3 (997) has more than 115 bhp/litre. If BMW could achieve the same output from the 4.0 litre engine, then the CSL will have 460bhp. Even if they achieved 110bhp/litre then the CSL would have 440bhp. 414bhp doesn't seem so much now does it? Much more is possible, but BMW have to think about the 'slot' the M3 is filling. In between the M5/M6, and the forthcoming M1/M2 (whatever it will be called). The CSL would nicely fit above the standard M3 with about 440bhp.

It's the same as Porsche with the Cayman. Of course it's underpowered, but the engineers were not allowed to give it too much for fear of treading on the toes of the 911.



BMW are gunning for Porsche and the GT3. They intend to sell many more E92 CSL's compared to the E46 CSL. The E46 CSL was a much more experimental car than the E92 CSL will be. They were still learning to use plastic re-enforced carbon, and other weight saving techniques. These have filtered down into the standard M3 and M6, because BMW learnt to produce cars with this technology on a cost effective and mass produced scale. OK, they will still sell a lot less E92 CSL's compared to the standard M3, but that's where the halo effect of the CSL comes in.

BMW will debut a concept version of the M6 CSL at Frankfurt in September, with the production version in Geneva March 2008. As you can see, the CSL "brand" will be much more prominent in the future, and will be viewed as a new step up from the standard 'M' cars.



The M3 might be a different car to the M5/M6, but BMW still do not want to overlap on the power with the M5/M6. See again Porsche with the Cayman and the 911. The Cayman is a different market to the 911, but Porsche will still never encroach on the 911's territory.



This is nonsense. BMW have made it quite clear, many, many times, that they are not interested in solely going for power. BMW never base their marketing on the power of their cars. They promote driving dynamics, 50/50 weight distribution, rear wheel drive. It's in these three areas where Audi generally fall behind.

And I only think it's boy racers in parking lots that care about power and getting away from lights. BMW is certainly not targeting this market!



No it wouldn't. It would make it easier! The standard E92 M3 has an 'official' output of 414bhp, but lets say in reality it has 425bhp. That means to attain an official output of 440bhp for the CSL, the M engineers would only need to actually find an extra 15bhp, yet on paper it would look like they've found an extra 26bhp.



Do you honestly believe the M3 V8 is just the V10 with two less cylinders?

So some of the best engineers in the world have spent several years developing the V8, when all they had to do was to take the M5 engine and cut off two cylinders? Don't believe everything you read in the press.

The S65 V8 is a totally brand new engine and is at the start of what could be a ten year life cycle if the E36/E46 is anything to go by.


The E92 M3 is filling a niche. It's no coincidence that the power to weight ratio is exactly 250bhp/tonne.

The car weighs 1,655kg, therefore the power it was only ever going to have 'officially' is 414bhp.

Look at how it fits into the M brand products:

M6 (507/1785kg) 284bhp/tonne
M5 (507/1830kg) 277bhp/tonne
M3 (414/1655kg) 250bhp/tonne
Z4 M (343/1495kg) 229bhp/tonne

Possible future M1/M2

(350/1520kg est.) 230bhp/tonne.

As if you know what you are talking about...Anyway:

1. I omitted the GT3 because of the drastically different engine geometry. That doesn't allow for a relevant comparison. We are talking about extracting more power from a specific configuration.
2. In case you still don't get it, I am using the Ferrari engine as the benchmark for the state of the art.
3. Who cares about what the hp increase would look like on paper? We are talking about actual increases that can be experienced by an owner since we are comparing a regular M3 with a possible M3 CSL. I don't care if BMW will make things look better for the CSL because they did some clever hp accounting.
4. What's up with "boy racers"? So you don't care at all about your car's straight line acceleration? And, BMW doesn't either? Give me a break…What planet do you live on?
5. What do you know about what I have or have not read in the press? Are you denying that the V8 is a derivative of the V10? Who said anything about simply chopping off 2 cylinders? It is never that simple.

Man you really need to relax, try to understand what other people are saying, engage in some kind of productive discussion, and project less.

That's it from me--the last time I respond to any of your posts. Not worth it.

[mofomat]

Originally Posted by lucid

As if you know what you are talking about...Anyway:

1. I omitted the GT3 because of the drastically different engine geometry. That doesn't allow for a relevant comparison. We are talking about extracting more power from a specific configuration.
2. In case you still don't get it, I am using the Ferrari engine as the benchmark for the state of the art.
3. Who cares about what the hp increase would look like on paper? We are talking about actual increases that can be experienced by an owner since we are comparing a regular M3 with a possible M3 CSL. I don't care if BMW will make things look better for the CSL because they did some clever hp accounting.
4. What's up with "boy racers"? So you don't care at all about your car's straight line acceleration? And, BMW doesn't either? Give me a break…What planet do you live on?
5. What do you know about what I have or have not read in the press? Are you denying that the V8 is a derivative of the V10? Who said anything about simply chopping off 2 cylinders? It is never that simple.

Man you really need to relax, try to understand what other people are saying, engage in some kind of productive discussion, and project less.

That's it from me--the last time I respond to any of your posts. Not worth it.

My previous post says it all. Other people are free to believe what they want to believe, but I think my arguments stand up to scrutiny.

I think responding any further would be otiose.