M4 GTS Tested by Jeremy Clarkson on The Grand Tour

[335ddd]

Originally Posted by cntzl

There are a lot of people willing to pay $20K-$30K over MSRP actually. I have seen one with a $200K markup in Bay Area. The dealer was asking close to $350K. Ridiculous...

with 200k markup why not MB GT R? unless GTS will outperform MB GT R somehow.

[M-Pilot]

Originally Posted by 335ddd

with 200k markup why not MB GT R? unless GTS will outperform MB GT R somehow.

Well if it was up to me, I wouldn't even pay MSRP for GTS I watched AMG GT R's Nurburgring lap and I agree, that thing is something else.

[dmboone25]

Originally Posted by 335ddd

with 200k markup why not MB GT R? unless GTS will outperform MB GT R somehow.

Originally Posted by cntzl

Well if it was up to me, I wouldn't even pay MSRP for GTS I watched AMG GT R's Nurburgring lap and I agree, that thing is something else.

I think the only people willing to pay that kind of markup are folks who are diehard (and I do mean diehard) BMW zealots and/or hoping for insane appreciation of the GTS' value in the future.

Because the car isn't good enough to justify those prices, on merit alone anyway.

[Robcut1]

Originally Posted by cntzl

Well if it was up to me, I wouldn't even pay MSRP for GTS I watched AMG GT R's Nurburgring lap and I agree, that thing is something else.

What you are saying is that the GTS has to be faster around a track than a $200,000 car or it isn't even worth its $135,000 MSRP. Additionally, using that philosophy, any collectable car that doesn't perform as well as one of the current best performing cars, shouldn't be valued as a collectable. It just irritates the crap out of me that people are placing a value on this car strictly how it compares in outright performance. Especially due to the fact that most of the comparison cars are nearly twice the price and it definitely sucks and is ridiculous that any asshole person that calls themselve an automotive journalist would review the car without taking an opportunity to spend a few days making suspension and aero adjustments which are absolutely necessary in this vehicle to extract the best performance.
What a crapfest it is!!
Incidentally cntzl, don't worry about paying "even msrp", cause you can't have one.

[M-Pilot]

Originally Posted by Robcut1

Your an idiot. What you are saying is that the GTS has to be faster around a track than a $200,000 car or it isn't even worth its $135,000 MSRP. Additionally, using that philosophy, any collectable car that doesn't perform as well as one of the current best performing cars, shouldn't be valued as a collectable. It just irritates the crap out of me that people are placing a value on this car strictly how it compares in outright performance. Especially due to the fact that most of the comparison cars are nearly twice the price and it definitely sucks and is ridiculous that any asshole person that calls themselve an automotive journalist would review the car without taking an opportunity to spend a few days making suspension and aero adjustments which are absolutely necessary in this vehicle to extract the best performance.
What a crapfest it is!!

I have never compared the GTS to any other car and more importantly I don't have to compare it to a GT3 RS or AMG to justify if it's worth it's money or not. I don't give a shit how collectable it is. I don't care how rare it is. Just because BMW made only 700 GTS doesn't mean it's worth $130K+.

If I wanted to compare it to other cars, I would compare it to GT350R at the half price, or Camaro ZL1 at the half price, or even Camaro 1LE at 1/3th of the price. All these cars perform either very close to GTS or even better at a much lower price. Guess who's the idiot now?

I wouldn't buy a GTS not because it's not as good as GT3 RS or AMG GT R but because it simply is not worth paying $60K+ over a regular M4 to me, period. As I said, I couldn't care less how exclusive/rare/limited it is.

[Robcut1]

Originally Posted by cntzl

I have never compared the GTS to any other car and more importantly I don't have to compare it to a GT3 RS or AMG to justify if it's worth it's money or not. I don't give a shit how collectable it is. I don't care how rare it is. Just because BMW made only 700 GTS doesn't mean it's worth $130K+.

If I wanted to compare it to other cars, I would compare it to GT350R at the half price, or Camaro ZL1 at the half price, or even Camaro 1LE at 1/3th of the price. All these cars perform either very close to GTS or even better at a much lower price. Guess who's the idiot now?

I wouldn't buy a GTS not because it's not as good as GT3 RS or AMG GT R but because it simply is not worth paying $60K+ over a regular M4 to me, period. As I said, I couldn't care less how exclusive/rare/limited it is.

Fair Enough. Thank you for clarifying your position and opinion regarding how you personally value the car although now you are simply saying that a Ferrari should be valued the same as a Z06 since they perform similarly. It is not generally acceptable to value a car simply based on performance without considering the brand and many other factors that I am not about to discuss at length since it has been done so in many other threads. As far as comparing the GTS to an M4 standard car, in my opinion there is no comparison, but then again, I have a GTS so I actually can compare the 2 cars. How about you??

[cbertels]

Originally Posted by BarryB

here we go again.

This! :

[desertfox73]

This should help the resale value of these cars!

And BTW, on that GTS markup sticker, the thing that pisses me off the most is charging $69 for Nitrogen. Nothing aggravates people more than nickel and diming...can BMW seriously not give away the nitrogen fill for free on a $160k+ car? WTF!

[SakhirM4]

Originally Posted by jaehshim

the overall consensus about this F8X M3/M4, in addition to GTS has been "meh..."

against a higher competition 911 GT3, GTS is "meh"
against a lower competition like the american counterparts, GTS is "meh"

BMW had to find ways to make the car better under new circumstances called new emission, and totally failed it + lost its M taste

the new M5 is coming out, a bear sized, now with x drive...

This gen was a total failure, jus waiting to see how they come back with the new M3/M4 line.

There are thousands of F8X buyers that will disagree with that statement.

[VCP]

100%

Originally Posted by SakhirM4

There are thousands of F8X buyers that will disagree with that statement.

[Gatte]

Originally Posted by Robcut1

Your an idiot. What you are saying is that the GTS has to be faster around a track than a $200,000 car or it isn't even worth its $135,000 MSRP. Additionally, using that philosophy, any collectable car that doesn't perform as well as one of the current best performing cars, shouldn't be valued as a collectable. It just irritates the crap out of me that people are placing a value on this car strictly how it compares in outright performance. Especially due to the fact that most of the comparison cars are nearly twice the price and it definitely sucks and is ridiculous that any asshole person that calls themselve an automotive journalist would review the car without taking an opportunity to spend a few days making suspension and aero adjustments which are absolutely necessary in this vehicle to extract the best performance.
What a crapfest it is!!
Incidentally cntzl, don't worry about paying "even msrp", cause you can't have one.

If BMW made a car that was utter shit and made just 10 of them, some people would still buy them thinking that it was a collectible and that performance did not matter because the car is limited edition and a collectible of which there are just 10.

Now, if BMW were to number them 1 of 10, 2 of 10 and so on..... Some people would just freak out and these people would want it more than ever. These people would probably not mind paying twice the price of the car for it. I am not saying you're one of these people but there exist these types of people.

We all agree that the M4 GTS is not a car that is utter shit and I for one like how it looks (except the wing). However, when BMW makes a car that it advertises as being a track monster and tacks on a huge MSRP on it, it would be expected to perform significantly better than some other cars that are significantly cheaper. Most people are not comparing lamborghinis and ferraris with the BMW because that would not be a fair comparison. They're comparing much cheaper cars that seem to do everything that BMW advertised the M4 GTS as being able to do, but at a fraction of the price.

P.S: Cars usually become collectibles because of what they are and how they perform and not because of how many are made or how they're advertised.

[SD ///M4]

Originally Posted by psuibmw

My dealer where I service my cars has an available M4 GTS with crazy markup

I'd totally buy that car for that price except that the cost of the nitrogen tire fill is outrageous ($69)! Now they're just price gouging! At that price point they should just throw in the nitrogen.

Edit: Never mind. desertfox73 beat me to it 10 minutes earlier!

[Gatte]

Originally Posted by SakhirM4

There are thousands of F8X buyers that will disagree with that statement.

Agreed. The F8X is a very nice car because it does what it is supposed to do better than any other car.

The M4 GTS does not seem to do it.

[M3 Number 86]

Originally Posted by mvigod

Sounds like I made the right decision to buy a GT3 RS and not try to get the M4 GTS!!!

Didn't need this to realize that lol

[ilikebmxbikes]

Originally Posted by Robcut1

Fair Enough. Thank you for clarifying your position and opinion regarding how you personally value the car although now you are simply saying that a Ferrari should be valued the same as a Z06 since they perform similarly. It is not generally acceptable to value a car simply based on performance without considering the brand and many other factors that I am not about to discuss at length since it has been done so in many other threads. As far as comparing the GTS to an M4 standard car, in my opinion there is no comparison, but then again, I have a GTS so I actually can compare the 2 cars. How about you??

First off congratulations on the gts. Seriously awesome car. I'm a nerd for things oem and limited and the gts really appeals to me in that category. It's a really cool car.

But looking at the car outside of my personal interests, I understand why it doesn't appeal to a lot of people and why it repeatedly doesn't live up to its expectations in these tests where people do not care about the collector value or all the or the awesome details which set this car apart from a standard m4.

The car isn't made for them. And if considering price per performance and taking all the amazing competition into that discussion - the m4 gts is way off.

[Mlyfe]

All of this matters to who? 700 or 803 happy people out there.

[Law]

Originally Posted by Killramos

This is the same Clarkson who thinks the competition pack makes the M3 worse. What did we expect?

That was in reference to the E9X M3, where the ZCP added zero measurable performance benefit to the civic M3.

He didn't call the ZCP the "worst", only that driving-wise, the Comp. Pack [on the E9X M3] makes "absolutely no difference" at all.

And while he was critical of the test car's Frozen paint and auto-start-stop Efficient Dynamics feature (post 09/10 production), none of those are ZCP add-ons.

The moral of that review though, is that the ZCP doesn't make the [E9X] M3 experience any better.
As summarized at the end of the video:
"If you want a small fast saloon car, buy a standard M3."

[M-Pilot]

Originally Posted by Robcut1

Fair Enough. Thank you for clarifying your position and opinion regarding how you personally value the car although now you are simply saying that a Ferrari should be valued the same as a Z06 since they perform similarly. It is not generally acceptable to value a car simply based on performance without considering the brand and many other factors that I am not about to discuss at length since it has been done so in many other threads. As far as comparing the GTS to an M4 standard car, in my opinion there is no comparison, but then again, I have a GTS so I actually can compare the 2 cars. How about you??

You are totally right, there is no question when it comes to M4 vs M4 GTS. I'm sure GTS is much better car than M4. I don't have any problem admitting it. Again, I just would not pay an additional $60K+ for what it offers on top of M4.

[Gatte]

Originally Posted by Law

That was in reference to the E9X M3, where the ZCP added zero measurable performance benefit to the civic M3.

He didn't call the ZCP the "worst", only that driving-wise, the Comp. Pack [on the E9X M3] makes "absolutely no difference" at all.

And while he was critical of the test car's Frozen paint and auto-start-stop Efficient Dynamics feature (post 09/10 production), none of those are ZCP add-ons.

The moral of that review though, is that the ZCP doesn't make the [E9X] M3 experience any better.
As summarized at the end of the video:
"If you want a small fast saloon car, buy a standard M3."

+1

This is called being objective. A lot of these quarrels could be prevented if people were more objective.

[G35POPPEDMYCHERRY]

lmao yall take shit to personally. its just a car lmao.

[PNWM3]

Originally Posted by cntzl

You are totally right, there is no question when it comes to M4 vs M4 GTS. I'm sure GTS is much better car than M4. I don't have any problem admitting it. Again, I just would not pay an additional $60K+ for what it offers on top of M4.

You're comparing it to a stripper M4. One with DCT, ZCP, LEDs, HUD and CCBs is more like $89k so it's really only $45k more than a regular M4 comparably equipped as much as it could be.

But, you should look at the previous GTS and CSL and how they've held their value or gone up. If you buy a $89k M4 and sell it in 3 years you're out probably $31k (assume 35%) in depreciation. If the GTS holds at MSRP, which one was the better deal?

Even if it does depreciate at the same rate as a regular M4 and say in 3 years drops $47k (again 35%) in depreciation. You then had a GTS for 3 years that "cost" you only $445/mo over that $89k M4.

I guess we'll all see in a few years who was right...

[CanAutM3]

Originally Posted by termigni

I've never seen/heard BMW corporate make such a statement that it is competing against 911 with BMW products. What's your source?

It is us that raised the expectations of the 3 series(because these cars are so good) to be able to run with 911s because M3s have actually been better (in some parts) than the 911s over the years. In turn, you have to give credit to BMW being able to turn a small family car into such a competent sports car to go up against the pure sports cars such 911's for half the price. I'm not saying M3 is better than a 911 but it is good enough to be able to be mentioned in the same sentence. Hence why we love BMWs.

On the other hand, Mercedes said they will come out with a 911 competing product and made the AMG GT-S by using 911's as benchmark in its development. And they were successful with it by winning sports car of the year in Motortrend article. IMO BMW does not have balls to make such a commitment. If they had the balls, or wanted to compete with 911, they would've came out with the M8 instead of an i8.

BMW GTS is not a GT3/GT3RS competitor. BMW GTS is only a hardcore M4 that's continuing its heritage of the special M3s (E36 Lightweight, E46CSL, E92 GTS...).

From the product planning bulletin, it said to compete against the 911 GT3 (not the RS though):