The GTS was hampered by two things

[norMcal]

Interesting that the GTS prices have gotten so soft. In a way it doesn't surprise me though, because BMW priced it too close to the GT3, which naturally lead to comparisons between the two, and lets face it, what were the odds of it standing a fighting chance? As a result the M4 GTS got its a$$ kicked. The 991 GT3 is just too good.

On top of that, early model year F8X M3/4's did not get the all out positive reviews this model has been accustomed to. The M3 lost the "benchmark" or "king of the hill" stigma. BMW kind screwed up, either in pricing the car, or in the way they built it. Just for the record, it is still an awesome car, but if I am spending ~$130k on a 2 seater track car, it is GT3 all the way, and I don't even care if it was slightly used, because there are plenty of them out there with barley any miles on the clock. The only appeal the M4 GTS could have had over a GT3, would have been a significant lower price AND be a bit more practicality, offering rear seats. That was always was separated the M3 from a 911. It's A LOT less money, offers practicality, yet can be flogged on the track at almost the same level.

BMW probably would have been better served to do what they did with the e46 CSL and just give it some lightweight rear seats and price it more reasonably. Yes I know they now offer a CS that might be just that, but then you always know that there is a better one and it is a bit anticlimactic then. It just seems that the CS a bit late to the game.

Not to derail this discussion, but BMW really ought to build a real purpose build sports car. Call it the M1.2 and kick butt with it. Why do they refuse to go there? Audi and Mercedes did.

[FormulaMMM]

Originally Posted by norMcal

Interesting that the GTS prices have gotten so soft. In a way it doesn't surprise me though, because BMW priced it too close to the GT3, which naturally lead to comparisons between the two, and lets face it, what were the odds of it standing a fighting chance? As a result the M4 GTS got its a$$ kicked. The 991 GT3 is just too good.

On top of that, early model year F8X M3/4's did not get the all out positive reviews this model has been accustomed to. The M3 lost the "benchmark" or "king of the hill" stigma. BMW kind screwed up, either in pricing the car, or in the way they built it. Just for the record, it is still an awesome car, but if I am spending ~$130k on a 2 seater track car, it is GT3 all the way, and I don't even care if it was slightly used, because there are plenty of them out there with barley any miles on the clock. The only appeal the M4 GTS could have had over a GT3, would have been a significant lower price AND be a bit more practicality, offering rear seats. That was always was separated the M3 from a 911. It's A LOT less money, offers practicality, yet can be flogged on the track at almost the same level.

BMW probably would have been better served to do what they did with the e46 CSL and just give it some lightweight rear seats and price it more reasonably. Yes I know they now offer a CS that might be just that, but then you always know that there is a better one and it is a bit anticlimactic then. It just seems that the CS a bit late to the game.

Not to derail this discussion, but BMW really ought to build a real purpose build sports car. Call it the M1.2 and kick butt with it. Why do they refuse to go there? Audi and Mercedes did.

You don't think that the GTS is a purpose-built sports car??

Not speaking to the desirability of the two cars, which is subjective, the track performance difference between the 991.1 GT3 and a properly setup GTS is minimal. It's far from an ass kicking.

I'm not sure if the video below has gotten much play around here. Having been on track with countless GT3's on various tracks through the years, including 2 x 991.2's in sessions with my GTS, this is most representative of the difference between the two cars on a typical road course. No coincidence, Sport Auto has it in full track setup, and the driver is hustling it as I've found required to get a lap time (note ongoing wheel activity/input).

Some outlets, for a wide variety of reasons, simply did not get the best out of the GTS.

The track performance difference between the 2 cars is not $50k. Desirability, experience, that's a different story, and I can certainly understand why some would find the GT3 worth the extra spend.

To the extent that reportedly lousy track performance has influenced depreciation, a. I'll take it. b. The narrative that the car is too slow on track and therefore took a value hit is just laughable...

[norMcal]

Originally Posted by FormulaMMM

You don't think that the GTS is a purpose-built sports car??

Not speaking to the desirability of the two cars, which is subjective, the track performance difference between the 991.1 GT3 and a properly setup GTS is minimal. It's far from an ass kicking.

I'm not sure if the video below has gotten much play around here. Having been on track with countless GT3's on various tracks through the years, including 2 x 991.2's in sessions with my GTS, this is most representative of the difference between the two cars on a typical road course. No coincidence, Sport Auto has it in full track setup, and the driver is hustling it as I've found required to get a lap time (note ongoing wheel activity/input).

Some outlets, for a wide variety of reasons, simply did not get the best out of the GTS.

The track performance difference between the 2 cars is not $50k. Desirability, experience, that's a different story, and I can certainly understand why some would find the GT3 worth the extra spend.

To the extent that reportedly lousy track performance has influenced depreciation, a. I'll take it. b. The narrative that the car is too slow on track and therefore took a value hit is just laughable...

Sounds like I need to clarify a couple of things.

• The GTS is only a purpose build sports car in the sense that BMW took a 4 series sedan and made the best out of it The M4 GTS is way more upright than a purpose build sports car and will always suffer from a taller CG. If BMW really wanted to build a GT3 type car, they would need to start from a clean slate. Taking the sedan part in to consideration, they have done a phenomenal job, but as soon as you put a roll cage in a sedan, you have to ask yourself, what's the point? If I had $130k burning a hole in my pocket and wanted a track car, I would never get a GTS over a GT3, it makes no sense. If I wanted a car that was highly capable but needed occasional back seats (a dual purpose car) then the GTS would, if it still had rear seats. That was always the justification for going with a M3 over a 911, plus the fact that they were much cheaper.

• By getting its a$$ kicked, I wasn't just referring to lap times. From what I read and heard, the GTS is just not as composed, doesn't have the same steering feel, is harder to drive at the limit.....ect than the GT3. The automotive press wasn't all that impressed with it, and I have to kind of go by what they say, since I don't have the opportunity to go drive these two cars back to back myself on track. That is what I was referring to. Like I said in my original comments, the GTS is a fine car and pretty fast on track, but there is more to it than just lap times.
  
  Again, the main issue is (was), that at the original price was to close to the GT3, which suggested it should be as good and it just isn't and at that, it makes no sense to get a GTS over a GT3, unless you are hell bent on having a BMW and not a Porsche.

Some reviews are a little conflicting to me. Randy Pobst gave the GTS a marvelous review after doing a hot lap at Laguna Seca, but both Chris Harris and Jeremy Clarkson were not at all impressed and had lots of negative to say about it. BTW, not the only two that felt that way, but arguably the most prominent. Both tested the GTS against the GT3. Maybe it is that the GTS is a pretty good car, but when going head to head against the GT3, it exposes that it it's as not as good. Or maybe the guys that like to go sideways a lot, like Clarkson and Harris, don't love the GTS, because that is where some of the weaknesses lie? Not sure, jsut a theory.

FWIW, I never considered getting one, because they were out of my league at $130k, but now that they are getting as low as $90k, I might have to reconsider. At that price range it is a direct competitor to the GT4. Probably still a challenge for the GTS as far as handling goes, but not in the power department. Pretty sure the GTS is faster on track.

[FormulaMMM]

Originally Posted by norMcal

Sounds like I need to clarify a couple of things.

• The GTS is only a purpose build sports car in the sense that BMW took a 4 series sedan and made the best out of it The M4 GTS is way more upright than a purpose build sports car and will always suffer from a taller CG. If BMW really wanted to build a GT3 type car, they would need to start from a clean slate. Taking the sedan part in to consideration, they have done a phenomenal job, but as soon as you put a roll cage in a sedan, you have to ask yourself, what's the point? If I had $130k burning a hole in my pocket and wanted a track car, I would never get a GTS over a GT3, it makes no sense. If I wanted a car that was highly capable but needed occasional back seats (a dual purpose car) then the GTS would, if it still had rear seats. That was always the justification for going with a M3 over a 911, plus the fact that they were much cheaper.

• By getting its a$$ kicked, I wasn't just referring to lap times. From what I read and heard, the GTS is just not as composed, doesn't have the same steering feel, is harder to drive at the limit.....ect than the GT3. The automotive press wasn't all that impressed with it, and I have to kind of go by what they say, since I don't have the opportunity to go drive these two cars back to back myself on track. That is what I was referring to. Like I said in my original comments, the GTS is a fine car and pretty fast on track, but there is more to it than just lap times.
  
  Again, the main issue is (was), that at the original price was to close to the GT3, which suggested it should be as good and it just isn't and at that, it makes no sense to get a GTS over a GT3, unless you are hell bent on having a BMW and not a Porsche.

Some reviews are a little conflicting to me. Randy Pobst gave the GTS a marvelous review after doing a hot lap at Laguna Seca, but both Chris Harris and Jeremy Clarkson were not at all impressed and had lots of negative to say about it. BTW, not the only two that felt that way, but arguably the most prominent. Both tested the GTS against the GT3. Maybe it is that the GTS is a pretty good car, but when going head to head against the GT3, it exposes that it it's as not as good. Or maybe the guys that like to go sideways a lot, like Clarkson and Harris, don't love the GTS, because that is where some of the weaknesses lie? Not sure, jsut a theory.

FWIW, I never considered getting one, because they were out of my league at $130k, but now that they are getting as low as $90k, I might have to reconsider. At that price range it is a direct competitor to the GT4. Probably still a challenge for the GTS as far as handling goes, but not in the power department. Pretty sure the GTS is faster on track.

Fair enough. My bad if you think that I misread or took you out of context.

Agreed that something like a 911 platform is at an inherent advantage. I think you might be understating the performance potential of GT cars though. At any given track day there are dudes who have sacrificed some daily drivability and convenience for track performance and built total, enjoyable monsters. Seems to me there's a point. You've got an E46, so you know the potential.

Of all of the cars I've ever driven, certainly owned, the GTS is easily the least friendly to a smash and grab style test. Especially if a track is involved, but really just period. To get the most out of it on track, you have to want to take the time to set it up properly, test, adjust, monitor tire pressures, then adjust some more. If you want to see if it's somewhat enjoyable on a road trip involving imperfect roadways, then you'd have to take 45 minutes like I did yesterday to remove wheels, get under the car and substantially soften the dampers. Clarkson isn't going to do that. Have massive respect for Harris, and I'd never try to discredit him, but much of his feedback seemed reflective of dampers out of sync with the conditions, and a wet race track. GTS would not be the car that I'd choose for that environment either... It's a fricking handful.

Sport plus throttle setting is maniacal in certain contexts. If you drive it on the street in 1st and 2nd you'd probably think it's horrible. Corner exit on track in 3rd though, and it's just right if you're measured. Kills lag. There are things like this that you learn owning the car (moments where you go, "Oh, now I see what you did there M engineers"), but you wouldn't have time to experiment with on a test.

Is that process for everyone? Definitely not. But I guess when the car details were released that would have already been abundantly clear. That's why I find so much of the "get in and drive" criticism baseless.

The 991 has just recently become a 120-130k car. That wasn't happening when new unless you had an in with the dealer. Other than when speculators went nuts on the GTS, there's always been a 30-50k difference between the two cars.

Remember that the GTS formula is one that BMW enthusiasts have used successfully for decades. KW coils (I even had KW coils w/ Eibach springs on my E90 same as the GTS!), lightened exhaust, strengthened brakes, stripped interior, etc. I just don't understand why guys would believe that the factory version of the modded version of thousands of killer M cars is a pos…

GT4 could get the best of a GTS on a handling circuit. Throw some straights into the mix, then no. GTS is ballistic 3rd through 5th.

Could someone much prefer the GT4 or GT3 experience over the GTS, and would I like to own all of the above? Of course and you betcha.

[norMcal]

Originally Posted by FormulaMMM

Fair enough. My bad if you think that I misread or took you out of context.

Agreed that something like a 911 platform is at an inherent advantage. I think you might be understating the performance potential of GT cars though. At any given track day there are dudes who have sacrificed some daily drivability and convenience for track performance and built total, enjoyable monsters. Seems to me there's a point. You've got an E46, so you know the potential.

Of all of the cars I've ever driven, certainly owned, the GTS is easily the least friendly to a smash and grab style test. Especially if a track is involved, but really just period. To get the most out of it on track, you have to want to take the time to set it up properly, test, adjust, monitor tire pressures, then adjust some more. If you want to see if it's somewhat enjoyable on a road trip involving imperfect roadways, then you'd have to take 45 minutes like I did yesterday to remove wheels, get under the car and substantially soften the dampers. Clarkson isn't going to do that. Have massive respect for Harris, and I'd never try to discredit him, but much of his feedback seemed reflective of dampers out of sync with the conditions, and a wet race track. GTS would not be the car that I'd choose for that environment either... It's a fricking handful.

Sport plus throttle setting is maniacal in certain contexts. If you drive it on the street in 1st and 2nd you'd probably think it's horrible. Corner exit on track in 3rd though, and it's just right if you're measured. Kills lag. There are things like this that you learn owning the car (moments where you go, "Oh, now I see what you did there M engineers"), but you wouldn't have time to experiment with on a test.

Is that process for everyone? Definitely not. But I guess when the car details were released that would have already been abundantly clear. That's why I find so much of the "get in and drive" criticism baseless.

The 991 has just recently become a 120-130k car. That wasn't happening when new unless you had an in with the dealer. Other than when speculators went nuts on the GTS, there's always been a 30-50k difference between the two cars.

Remember that the GTS formula is one that BMW enthusiasts have used successfully for decades. KW coils (I even had KW coils w/ Eibach springs on my E90 same as the GTS!), lightened exhaust, strengthened brakes, stripped interior, etc. I just don't understand why guys would believe that the factory version of the modded version of thousands of killer M cars is a pos…

GT4 could get the best of a GTS on a handling circuit. Throw some straights into the mix, then no. GTS is ballistic 3rd through 5th.

Could someone much prefer the GT4 or GT3 experience over the GTS, and would I like to own all of the above? Of course and you betcha.

Thanks for the insight on the handling & set up challenges. That kind of explains why the GTS didn't not work for so many, but in turn was great for Randy Pobst. It might have been set up perfectly for him, and maybe Randy also underestimated or forgot that most of us don't have his skills.

If I take your insight and combine that with what happened to the F80 over the course of the years it has been out, it is starting to become apparent that this chassis needs fine tuning. Many were critical of the early F8X M's also, but now more and more, the ZCP and the CS, are getting good reviews. It really sounds like it is hard chassis to set up, which would scare me a bit. I'm not sure I am as gifted as you are in car set up.

You are correct on the price. Back in 2016 the gap to a GT3 was probably still the same as it is now. But take a GT4 and it certainly looks different currently.

Yes, there is a lot of potential in some cars, if willing to sacrifice drive-ability. I have taken my e46 M3 to that point, but it isn't a DD, so I knew that going in. I can get a lot closer to a GT car now than before, obviously, but there is only so much you can do with it. Not sure if you are familiar with Thunderhill, but twice now a 991 GT3 passed me going in to T2 and I really did not lose a lot of ground all the weight through T6, but then on the ensuing straight sections, it's game over.
And recently at Laguna Seca I rode shotgun in a GT3 RS. Just phenomenal. We were about 5 seconds a lap quicker than what I do, and I can tell, most of it is in acceleration and deceleration, which would be the case in the GTS, but the Porsche is going to be slightly better in the turns, because of the inherent sports car DNA.

Anyway, that is why those cars are kind of in a league of their own. The more I go to the track the more I hear Porsche GT cars are ready to go out of the box and that is what makes them so good. Maybe owning a M4 GTS will make you a better driver because you have to learn how to set it up, and read what it does. For me, only being able to go about 6 times per year, I am not sure that I have the time and patience for that though. Thus in the $90-100k price range a GT4 seems like the better choice for what I would want.

[RandyC54]

Clarkson and Harris both compared the GTS to the GT3RS. By your logic, the GT3RS should not even exist, since it's barely faster than the GT3 but much more expensive. (See how this works??) Finally, at VIR I am aware of the fastest laps in a GT3 of 2:03, and the fastest laps of a GTS of 2:04. I have seen one guy do a 2:02 in the previous gen GT3 RS, and I've ripped off plenty of laps myself at 2:01 in a Turbo S. In this company, the M4 GTS is worth every penny of it's price. If you don't see why, then you shouldn't get one.

[hellrotm]

Chris Harris also said during TG Speed Week test, the M4 GTS was “the biggest disappointment” and he would “take the standard M4 and save the extra cash”.

What would he say now that the values have tanked nearly $50k in a few years? Worth it now?

[Funf6cyl]

Originally Posted by RandyC54

Clarkson and Harris both compared the GTS to the GT3RS. By your logic, the GT3RS should not even exist, since it's barely faster than the GT3 but much more expensive. (See how this works??) Finally, at VIR I am aware of the fastest laps in a GT3 of 2:03, and the fastest laps of a GTS of 2:04. I have seen one guy do a 2:02 in the previous gen GT3 RS, and I've ripped off plenty of laps myself at 2:01 in a Turbo S. In this company, the M4 GTS is worth every penny of it's price. If you don't see why, then you shouldn't get one.

A GT3 RS is far faster than a regular GT3.

For example,

VIR
GT3 RS - 2:47
GT3 2:50
M4 GTS - 2:53

Very very big gaps between any two of those cars. The same could be echoed at just about any other track.

I do not think the M4 GTS was worth anywhere near 135-140k. Under 90k abs closer to 80k I think it’s where it can make a viable case for itself. Still not as fast as a Carrera S (which is on summer rubber), or Z06, or a slew of other cars within a range up or down but much more intriguing at the current slightly used prices.

[Darth One]

The GTS just has flaws that have nothing to do with its measurable performance. Sound, steering feedback, throttle, sensation of speed too effortless, blah blah.

That's all fair, and I'm objective enough as an owner to acknowledge these things. Those "visceral"'elements are why people pay more for Porsche GT cars. But I would be 0% surprised if I was faster around a track in my GTS than my 997 GT3 or GT4.

I actually don't want to even try

[BarryB]

Originally Posted by Darth One

The GTS just has flaws that have nothing to do with its measurable performance. Sound, steering feedback, throttle, sensation of speed too effortless, blah blah.

That's all fair, and I'm objective enough as an owner to acknowledge these things. Those "visceral"'elements are why people pay more for Porsche GT cars. But I would be 0% surprised if I was faster around a track in my GTS than my 997 GT3 or GT4.

I actually don't want to even try

+ 1 just did that yesterday....
Even a 991 .1 RS be he couldn't drive so doesn't count.
I also think folks are forgetting that it is a 2016 car now.

[FormulaMMM]

Originally Posted by Funf6cyl

A GT3 RS is far faster than a regular GT3.

For example,

VIR
GT3 RS - 2:47
GT3 2:50
M4 GTS - 2:53

Very very big gaps between any two of those cars. The same could be echoed at just about any other track.

I do not think the M4 GTS was worth anywhere near 135-140k. Under 90k abs closer to 80k I think it’s where it can make a viable case for itself. Still not as fast as a Carrera S (which is on summer rubber), or Z06, or a slew of other cars within a range up or down but much more intriguing at the current slightly used prices.

My man....... A slew of cars down the price range!? Yes, there's always the Z06, also the Grand Sport. Those are value problems for the GT3, Carrera S, 458 Italia, etc. too.

The performance potential of the GTS continues to be understated and underestimated. If you want a valid comparison to the 991 GT3, check out the Sport Auto vid that I posted on the previous page. If the GTS is properly set up and properly driven, the delta between these two cars on most tracks is <1 second.

[norMcal]

Originally Posted by Darth One

The GTS just has flaws that have nothing to do with its measurable performance. Sound, steering feedback, throttle, sensation of speed too effortless, blah blah.

That's all fair, and I'm objective enough as an owner to acknowledge these things. Those "visceral"'elements are why people pay more for Porsche GT cars. But I would be 0% surprised if I was faster around a track in my GTS than my 997 GT3 or GT4.

I actually don't want to even try

Originally Posted by BarryB

+ 1 just did that yesterday....
Even a 991 .1 RS be he couldn't drive so doesn't count.
I also think folks are forgetting that it is a 2016 car now.

Driver still makes the biggest difference. When we compare lap times, then they are usually set by a pro. However, when attending your local track day, the driver skills vary greatly, and there are plenty of guys with deep pockets, who would be better served learning how to drive on track in a Miata, than proving how good they are in their exotics. Never the less, I would tend to think that most drivers will get a lot closer to their potential in GT Porsche than in the GTS, and that the difference in lap times would be greater with such a driver than the ones we see from experience ones, because the GT3 is more confidence inspiring.

Again, I'll say it for the 3rd time. The GTS is a fine car and if set up correctly, and in capable hands, it is not far off of a GT3 Porsche lap time wise. And for $90k-ish it seems like intriguing alternative. The problem for me is this. The M3
has always been sort of that benchmark car. The one that was easiest to extract your own potential from, whereas a 911 could bite you, but in capable hands was superior. Seems like with the GTS the tables have turned somewhat and on top of that it is still slower, albeit not by much.

[Darth One]

Originally Posted by norMcal

Driver still makes the biggest difference. When we compare lap times, then they are usually set by a pro. However, when attending your local track day, the driver skills vary greatly, and there are plenty of guys with deep pockets, who would be better served learning how to drive on track in a Miata, than proving how good they are in their exotics. Never the less, I would tend to think that most drivers will get a lot closer to their potential in GT Porsche than in the GTS, and that the difference in lap times would be greater with such a driver than the ones we see from experience ones, because the GT3 is more confidence inspiring.

Again, I'll say it for the 3rd time. The GTS is a fine car and if set up correctly, and in capable hands, it is not far off of a GT3 Porsche lap time wise. And for $90k-ish it seems like intriguing alternative. The problem for me is this. The M3
has always been sort of that benchmark car. The one that was easiest to extract your own potential from, whereas a 911 could bite you, but in capable hands was superior. Seems like with the GTS the tables have turned somewhat and on top of that it is still slower, albeit not by much.

I freely admit to being one of those guys who has a GTS but is at a skill level more suited to a Miata

The F8x is very comfortable for me on track. That and the DCT are mainly why i made my earlier statement that i suspect i might be faster in the GTS. But like i said I've never driven my cars on the same track on the same day

[FormulaMMM]

Originally Posted by norMcal

Again, I'll say it for the 3rd time. The GTS is a fine car and if set up correctly, and in capable hands, it is not far off of a GT3 Porsche lap time wise. And for $90k-ish it seems like intriguing alternative. The problem for me is this. The M3
has always been sort of that benchmark car. The one that was easiest to extract your own potential from, whereas a 911 could bite you, but in capable hands was superior. Seems like with the GTS the tables have turned somewhat and on top of that it is still slower, albeit not by much.

Truth. The GTS is a handful at the limit, and requires some figuring. I think Clarkson was the one who said it doesn't respond well to finesse, and it doesn't respond well to his brutish driving style either. Even when set up right (his probably wasn't), it will take some time to figure and extract the maximum.

This should factor in to how published lap times are perceived. In what circumstances were they set? After how many laps and sessions? Even pro drivers need time to get the most out of a car. In the case of the GTS, both time and calibration. When Pobst tested the ZL1 1LE at a track up in Canada, he beat the Camaro engineer's lap time by a tenth after a 1/2 day of testing.

Magazine lap times aren't gospel. 1-3 second "very very big gaps" serve as the internet basis for assigning "achiever" vs "underachiever" status to performance cars. In the real world, the difference between lap times a.m. to p.m. is commonly 1-2 seconds (or more) due to ambient, or day to day track surface condition changes. When I show up to the track on a Monday after an SCCA weekend, the track is completely different as compared to a weekend of rain. Think the magazines are testing in a vacuum?

Too much faith put in some of these mag lap times vs common sense. Really understand and consider the blend of GTS power & components, reference the significant lap time gains that M3 drivers have achieved modding with an almost identical formula, and conclude that it doesn't have ~GT3 pace. Come on.

GTS has flaws. Mine is at the shop to address two of them right now (front camber & driver's seat). But on track pace is really not one of its flaws.

[Funf6cyl]

Originally Posted by FormulaMMM

My man....... A slew of cars down the price range!? Yes, there's always the Z06, also the Grand Sport. Those are value problems for the GT3, Carrera S, 458 Italia, etc. too.

The performance potential of the GTS continues to be understated and underestimated. If you want a valid comparison to the 991 GT3, check out the Sport Auto vid that I posted on the previous page. If the GTS is properly set up and properly driven, the delta between these two cars on most tracks is <1 second.

A Carrera S was seconds faster at the Ring than the M4 GTS despite it being on a summer tire, having 80 less hp, 100 less torque and basically no aero. Had there been cup tires, it’s probably a good 6-8 seconds faster - and that was done by Sport Auto.
The GT3 has shown to be far faster on every other track than the M4 GTS (sport auto is the only close one), which was 3 years old when the M4 GTS was released. Now that 991.2 GT3 came out which is so much faster it’s not really worth even discussing as it is devastatingly quick. Furthermore, the M4 GTS was more of a GT3 RS competitor given it’s stats and it failed there as well miserably.

Look, as I said the M4 GTS is def worth 80-90k, though I do see them dropping even more. At 135-140 it is not IMO as good or as enjoyable as a GT4 let alone a GT3/RS and the times show that.

Lap Times 8

M4 GTS 911 GT3
Motortrend Figure-8 0:23.30 0:22.80
Virginia International Raceway Grand East Course (post 01/2014) 2:52.90 2:50.40
Sachsenring 1:33.17 1:32.97
Hockenheim Short 1:09.60 1:09.20
Nürburgring Nordschleife 7:27.88 7:25.00
Anglesey International GP 1:40.40 1:38.10
Circuit de Nevers Magny-Cours Club 1:20.40 1:18.95
Balocco 2:50.81 2:43.22

The .2 GT3 makes even the GT3 times above seem very slow.

[Vintage]

I was just offered a 991.2 GT3 at MSRP of $168.9 k on Monday. Brand new in Miami Blue, LWB, PDK, LEDs, Bose, Platinum leather/stitching, etc. I passed. At exactly DOUBLE what I paid for my GTS, that is a crazy number. Yes, it is faster than my GTS but not by much at a track like COTA. It is fun trying to improve my driving skills enough to run with most GT3 drivers. Obsession.

I run COTA a ton and a few other tracks on occasion. I have done that for probably 500+ laps at COTA in my GT4, Viper ACR-E, Camaro SS 1LE, and now my M4 GTS. This obsession with lap times is crazy dumb. Slowest was the GT4 but one hell of an intuitive car that fits and feels right. Quickest by far with stupid power and handling, Viper - insane track car but hell anywhere else. Camaro was fast and very cheap to run. Brake pads for all 4 corners was $440 to your door. So very satisfying. Now the beautiful to my eye and rare GTS - pretty excited.

I do not buy track cars for posted times by pros and no one should. Buy'm, love them, drive them. I don't need to justify my purchases. Nutter talk.

[FormulaMMM]

Originally Posted by Funf6cyl

A Carrera S was seconds faster at the Ring than the M4 GTS despite it being on a summer tire, having 80 less hp, 100 less torque and basically no aero. Had there been cup tires, it’s probably a good 6-8 seconds faster - and that was done by Sport Auto.
The GT3 has shown to be far faster on every other track than the M4 GTS (sport auto is the only close one), which was 3 years old when the M4 GTS was released. Now that 991.2 GT3 came out which is so much faster it’s not really worth even discussing as it is devastatingly quick. Furthermore, the M4 GTS was more of a GT3 RS competitor given it’s stats and it failed there as well miserably.

Look, as I said the M4 GTS is def worth 80-90k, though I do see them dropping even more. At 135-140 it is not IMO as good or as enjoyable as a GT4 let alone a GT3/RS and the times show that.

Lap Times 8

M4 GTS 911 GT3
Motortrend Figure-8 0:23.30 0:22.80
Virginia International Raceway Grand East Course (post 01/2014) 2:52.90 2:50.40
Sachsenring 1:33.17 1:32.97
Hockenheim Short 1:09.60 1:09.20
Nürburgring Nordschleife 7:27.88 7:25.00
Anglesey International GP 1:40.40 1:38.10
Circuit de Nevers Magny-Cours Club 1:20.40 1:18.95
Balocco 2:50.81 2:43.22

The .2 GT3 makes even the GT3 times above seem very slow.

You're shifting the conversation and throwing in new cars and lap times, but always consistent with Porsche promotion.

Porsche is definitely on top of the game right now, and ironically I'm probably as big a Porsche fan as you. But your argument to devalue the GTS on the basis of superior Porsche lap times doesn't hold water.

The .2 Carrera S is shockingly fast. North of GTS MSRP if spec'd for performance. The .2 GT3 is truly awesome. $170k+ used at the moment. The .1 GT3 is still going for near GTS MSRP four years later. The 370 bhp Carrera T can be spec'd to GTS MSRP with a handful of performance options. But the GTS MSRP was crazy, a miserable failure at $120-130k, and 911's are just right. K.

The GTS is right there with the .1 GT3 if properly set up and driven at the limit on most typical road courses, and the Nurburgring. You're dreaming if you think the .1 is "far faster."

"Good and enjoyable," relative. Like I said, I can definitely understand someone thinking that the .1 GT3 (and GT4) are worth more on an experiential basis. And the market reflects that, for now.

As Vintage said, all of these factory track cars have so much merit.

[RandyC54]

I think we have to accept that there are people that see the very cool tech and features of the GTS (H2O, CF hood, aero, half cage, OLED, Li battery, 800 produced...) and those that either don't see it as special, or don't want the car to be successful, or they want it to be cheaper in the market than it already is. I see the specialness of the car, and I love it for those reasons. This is a no-win argument, and not worth having. (PS - I track both a Porsche and the GTS. Both are fabulous for different reasons)

[SunnyD]

I chose the GTS over a 991.1 GT3 based on subjective reasons, not based on how fast of a lap time they turned. I also didn't want to deal with any potential engine issues buying a used GT3. If all I cared about was lap times for the money, I'd own a Viper ACR and call it a day.

From a financial perspective, sure, if I bought my GTS with the intention of selling it in a few years then buying a GT3 would've made more sense financially. Since I'm keeping mine for a long time, I couldn't care less what they are worth in the near term

[norMcal]

Originally Posted by Vintage

I was just offered a 991.2 GT3 at MSRP of $168.9 k on Monday. Brand new in Miami Blue, LWB, PDK, LEDs, Bose, Platinum leather/stitching, etc. I passed. At exactly DOUBLE what I paid for my GTS, that is a crazy number. Yes, it is faster than my GTS but not by much at a track like COTA. It is fun trying to improve my driving skills enough to run with most GT3 drivers. Obsession.

I run COTA a ton and a few other tracks on occasion. I have done that for probably 500+ laps at COTA in my GT4, Viper ACR-E, Camaro SS 1LE, and now my M4 GTS. This obsession with lap times is crazy dumb. Slowest was the GT4 but one hell of an intuitive car that fits and feels right. Quickest by far with stupid power and handling, Viper - insane track car but hell anywhere else. Camaro was fast and very cheap to run. Brake pads for all 4 corners was $440 to your door. So very satisfying. Now the beautiful to my eye and rare GTS - pretty excited.

I do not buy track cars for posted times by pros and no one should. Buy'm, love them, drive them. I don't need to justify my purchases. Nutter talk.

I am a little guilty of wanting certain cars for posted lap times, but in the end I never followed through on buying them for that, otherwise I'd probably would have a ZL1 1LE or Z06 in the garage (best bang for the buck). The reason I want a GT4 or a GT3 is because there is no substitute and those cars are receiving unanimously raving reviews, while the M4 GTS's are mediocre at best......and I am a 40 year die hard BMW enthusiast, so it isn't like I wouldn't want it to be the other way around.

I agree that for the current market price of a GTS, it's no comparison to a new 991.2 GT3, but comparing it to a GT4 (roughly same price and model year) or a 991.1 GT3 (~$25k more) it still isn't the clear choice.
As I stated before, the GTS doens't offer any real world advantages over the P GT cars. Rear seats would have been one, but BMW decided to make it a track car with the cage. I really think they should have gone e46 M3 CSL route, with lightweight rear seats and give it the practicality advantage. Then at least you could argue that while it isn't quite as fast or as good as a Porsche, you can still haul the family in it from time to time.

Originally Posted by FormulaMMM

Porsche is definitely on top of the game right now, and ironically I'm probably as big a Porsche fan as you. But your argument to devalue the GTS on the basis of superior Porsche lap times doesn't hold water.

The .2 Carrera S is shockingly fast. North of GTS MSRP if spec'd for performance. The .2 GT3 is truly awesome. $170k+ used at the moment. The .1 GT3 is still going for near GTS MSRP four years later. The 370 bhp Carrera T can be spec'd to GTS MSRP with a handful of performance options. But the GTS MSRP was crazy, a miserable failure at $120-130k, and 911's are just right. K.

The GTS is right there with the .1 GT3 if properly set up and driven at the limit on most typical road courses, and the Nurburgring. You're dreaming if you think the .1 is "far faster."

"Good and enjoyable," relative. Like I said, I can definitely understand someone thinking that the .1 GT3 (and GT4) are worth more on an experiential basis. And the market reflects that, for now.

As Vintage said, all of these factory track cars have so much merit.

Well said. Porsche is at the top of their game, and unfortunately that dictates the prices. It sucks for buyers, that even a used Carrera S barley depreciates, but of course makes it attractive to own one.
Porsche keeps raising the prices of their new models, thus elevating the used car prices, so you are almost guaranteed to now loose a ton on depreciation owning one, and that is a major factor to me. I don't have money to burn.

I guess at some point they will price themselves out of the market, but as long as they make the best cars, there will be enough buyers that want them. BMW needs to step up their game. The M3 used to be a contender even against a base 911, and for sure the benchmark when it came to dual purposed cars (aka sports sedan), but I feel that they lost the edge a bit. They went too mainstream. Maybe they aren't involved in touring car racing enough anymore like they used to be. DTM hardly qualifies. Those are basically high tech race cars. Just imagine they would have made the GTS with a N/A engine to go against the GT3.

Originally Posted by SunnyD

I chose the GTS over a 991.1 GT3 based on subjective reasons, not based on how fast of a lap time they turned. I also didn't want to deal with any potential engine issues buying a used GT3. If all I cared about was lap times for the money, I'd own a Viper ACR and call it a day.

From a financial perspective, sure, if I bought my GTS with the intention of selling it in a few years then buying a GT3 would've made more sense financially. Since I'm keeping mine for a long time, I couldn't care less what they are worth in the near term

I wonder where prices will settle in for the GTS? Hard to imagine that they would go up again short term. I think the overall market is getting soft anyway. Seems like there are lots of GT4's for sale all over sudden and as those cars come down in price, it will subsequently drag competitors with it.
IMO right now the best value is a barley use m3/4 ZCP. They can be had for ~$60k. Or even a regular '14 or '15 F8X, which are sub $50k. Put $10-15k in it for suspension and software (tune), and you got something very close to a GTS for a lot less money.

BTW, the GT3 engine issue is a really not a big risk. Porsche will replace them for the first 10 years no charge, and that could be a good thing. Who wouldn't take new engine after 5-7 years and 30k miles. Sign me up. I'll blow the thing on purpose Or just get one that had it replaced already. On top of that, there aren't that many that go kaputt, especially considering how many GT3s rack up track miles, it is actually astounding.

[Funf6cyl]

Originally Posted by FormulaMMM

You're shifting the conversation and throwing in new cars and lap times, but always consistent with Porsche promotion.

Porsche is definitely on top of the game right now, and ironically I'm probably as big a Porsche fan as you. But your argument to devalue the GTS on the basis of superior Porsche lap times doesn't hold water.

The .2 Carrera S is shockingly fast. North of GTS MSRP if spec'd for performance. The .2 GT3 is truly awesome. $170k+ used at the moment. The .1 GT3 is still going for near GTS MSRP four years later. The 370 bhp Carrera T can be spec'd to GTS MSRP with a handful of performance options. But the GTS MSRP was crazy, a miserable failure at $120-130k, and 911's are just right. K.

The GTS is right there with the .1 GT3 if properly set up and driven at the limit on most typical road courses, and the Nurburgring. You're dreaming if you think the .1 is "far faster."

"Good and enjoyable," relative. Like I said, I can definitely understand someone thinking that the .1 GT3 (and GT4) are worth more on an experiential basis. And the market reflects that, for now.

As Vintage said, all of these factory track cars have so much merit.

My point was outside of that one data point, the GT3, which was many years old at that point, was substantially faster on all tracks, and the facelift .2 GT3 is worlds faster even. The RS mode, which I would tell you was more where the M4 GTS competed, was so far off the mark given it really didn’t even perform as good as the reg 3.
The great thing about the GT3 is you don’t need to set it up, you get in and set blisteringly fast lap times.
I do agree, they all have merit, but the GT cars are without peers.

[norMcal]

Originally Posted by Funf6cyl

The great thing about the GT3 is you don’t need to set it up, you get in and set blisteringly fast lap times.
I do agree, they all have merit, but the GT cars are without peers.

and GT3 has N/A engine with WAY better soundtrack.