Car and Driver M4cs Test

[CanAutM3]

Originally Posted by FormulaMMM

Really some top quality work from C&D.

Evaluate drag racing capability vs. the comp because that's the point of the CS (subheadline, check). Drive in a circle, assign > roadholding to nonexistent wider tread, discuss conspicuous design details and nurburgring lap time for word count, then send the intern out for snacks and road test feedback: "uh, felt pretty intense" = "Over the road, the CS feels more intense than the already plenty tense M4 Competition."

C&D, if you're hiring, I'm humbly confident in my ability to produce similar and have been waiting for an opportunity to monetize time spent on the commode. Message me.

As a tidbit, the CS when shod with PSS, actually has narrower tread than the CP on the front tires.

Half of the article ranting about missing armrests and they forewent the real reason they have been removed: increased elbow room for track work.

[CanAutM3]

Originally Posted by doug_999

Only if you can get over 121 mph for a period of time - even then, that's time to that speed, not distance... Kind of reaching here if you ask me...

It depends in which context. For me, my M4 serves the dual duty of daily driver and track toy. For the former, I don't really care for the added performance, as it is impossible to sanely be close to the performance capabilities of these cars on the street. However, when on track, the added top end pulling power can be felt and does make a difference, and that's where it matters to me.

[FormulaMMM]

Originally Posted by CanAutM3

As a tidbit, the CS when shod with PSS, actually has narrower tread than the CP on the front tires.

haha what a dumpster fire.....

[BMWsully]

Very impressive showing from a pure numbers perspective. Best M3 ever made.

[CanAutM3]

Originally Posted by BMWsully

Very impressive showing from a pure numbers perspective. Best M3 ever made.

Except it's an M4 in this specific case

[blinkme323]

I'm not sure that I've ever read an article that completely ignored / contradicted their own numbers, lol.

For the CS haters gallery, I guess 14 seconds is nothing...

BMW claims that the CS completes a lap of the 12.9-mile Nürburgring Nordschleife in 7:38, or 14 seconds less than a standard M4.

[IB M]

Originally Posted by CanAutM3

Both have CCB. As a tidbit, CCB are worth about 18lb on the whole car.

Originally Posted by CanAutM3

The 763M are worth 29lb over the 666M, so a big chunk of the weight saving is right there. Both cars compared here have the CF driveshaft.

So that's about 12 lbs lighter at each corner unsprung on a CS with CCBs vs a ZCP with 666 wheels and standard M brakes.

[paliknight]

Originally Posted by CanAutM3

The 763M are worth 29lb over the 666M, so a big chunk of the weight saving is right there. Both cars compared here have the CF driveshaft.

Yes that's what I'm saying. So essentially they stripped the car of most convenience features to save an entire 22 pounds?

[CanAutM3]

Originally Posted by paliknight

Yes that's what I'm saying. So essentially they stripped the car of most convenience features to save an entire 22 pounds?

According to BMW, the M4cs is 66lb lighter than a Comp pack M4. Factor that they also added the CF lip and rear decklid gurney flap. It also depends how each individual car is specced. The reference CP has the cloth seats while the CS is an exec pack that includes the relatively heavy rear sunshade that most of the world doesn't get. I still wonder why BMW USA includes it, we don't get it in Canada. In terms of weight, every little bit counts. And the M4 in general is such a great track performer compared to its direct competition mainly because of its lighter weight. Add a few pounds here, another few pounds there and you quickly end up with a real porker of a car.

The M4cs isn't that much "stripped" of convenience features. I actually like the increased elbow room from the deleted/reduced armrests. The single zone HVAC is refreshingly simple and work perfectly well. The base HiFi sound system does not leave me wanting at all. And the lightweight door-cards with the reduced sound deadening actually enhance the driving experience. I'd say the only "convenience" item that I miss is the comfort access. People need to understand that the CS is not meant for everyone, hence the "limited" numbers. It's meant for those that want a dual use car (DD/track) slightly more biased towards track use

[CanAutM3]

Originally Posted by IB M

So that's about 12 lbs lighter at each corner unsprung on a CS with CCBs vs a ZCP with 666 wheels and standard M brakes.

On average yes, however front/rear distribution is likely different.

I have the standard iron rotors on my M4cs. CCB are way to expensive to operate with regular track use.

[CanAutM3]

Originally Posted by blinkme323

I'm not sure that I've ever read an article that completely ignored / contradicted their own numbers, lol.

For the CS haters gallery, I guess 14 seconds is nothing...

BMW claims that the CS completes a lap of the 12.9-mile Nürburgring Nordschleife in 7:38, or 14 seconds less than a standard M4.

BMW have revised their 'ring lap time to 7:35 for the M4cs at the car's launch during M-fest at the Nurburgring:

[OhioRiderAaron]

Originally Posted by CanAutM3

According to BMW, the M4cs is 66lb lighter than a Comp pack M4. Factor that they also added the CF lip and rear decklid gurney flap. It also depends how each individual car is specced. The reference CP has the cloth seats while the CS is an exec pack that includes the relatively heavy rear sunshade that most of the world doesn't get. I still wonder why BMW USA includes it, we don't get it in Canada. In terms of weight, every little bit counts. And the M4 in general is such a great track performer compared to its direct competition mainly because of its lighter weight. Add a few pounds here, another few pounds there and you quickly end up with a real porker of a car.

The M4cs isn't that much "stripped" of convenience features. I actually like the increased elbow room from the deleted/reduced armrests. The single zone HVAC is refreshingly simple and work perfectly well. The base HiFi sound system does not leave me wanting at all. And the lightweight door-cards with the reduced sound deadening actually enhance the driving experience. I'd say the only "convenience" item that I miss is the comfort access. People need to understand that the CS is not meant for everyone, hence the "limited" numbers. It's meant for those that want a dual use car (DD/track) slightly more biased towards track use

CAN is the biggest M fanboy on the forum! Lol

There was no good reason for them to remove such basic convenience features to save that little amount of weight. Comfort access and the arm rest? Cmon guys...it might even be a deal breaker for me if I were able to source one for a killer deal.

[CanAutM3]

Originally Posted by OhioRiderAaron

CAN is the biggest M fanboy on the forum! Lol

There was no good reason for them to remove such basic convenience features to save that little amount of weight. Comfort access and the arm rest? Cmon guys...it might even be a deal breaker for me if I were able to source one for a killer deal.

Fan, yes as BMW has built vehicles that very well suited my needs. However Fanboy, certainly not, as I have been very critical of some things BMW has done.

Honestly, I don't miss the lack of center armrest one bit and I really appreciate the increased elbow room. I actually have never used the center armrest to rest my arm in my previous cars. Last weekend, I drove a comp pack M3 at the track and I found myself cramped by the armrests on both sides. I guess one quickly gets used to the extra space.

The lack of comfort access still bothers me though...

[nickl630]

Originally Posted by OhioRiderAaron

CAN is the biggest M fanboy on the forum! Lol

There was no good reason for them to remove such basic convenience features to save that little amount of weight. Comfort access and the arm rest? Cmon guys...it might even be a deal breaker for me if I were able to source one for a killer deal.

Lack of CA is still really frustrating. Arm rest I'm getting over slightly but still miss the storage and support.

[paliknight]

Originally Posted by CanAutM3

According to BMW, the M4cs is 66lb lighter than a Comp pack M4. Factor that they also added the CF lip and rear decklid gurney flap. It also depends how each individual car is specced. The reference CP has the cloth seats while the CS is an exec pack that includes the relatively heavy rear sunshade that most of the world doesn't get. I still wonder why BMW USA includes it, we don't get it in Canada. In terms of weight, every little bit counts. And the M4 in general is such a great track performer compared to its direct competition mainly because of its lighter weight. Add a few pounds here, another few pounds there and you quickly end up with a real porker of a car.

The M4cs isn't that much "stripped" of convenience features. I actually like the increased elbow room from the deleted/reduced armrests. The single zone HVAC is refreshingly simple and work perfectly well. The base HiFi sound system does not leave me wanting at all. And the lightweight door-cards with the reduced sound deadening actually enhance the driving experience. I'd say the only "convenience" item that I miss is the comfort access. People need to understand that the CS is not meant for everyone, hence the "limited" numbers. It's meant for those that want a dual use car (DD/track) slightly more biased towards track use

I completely agree it's a very niche car. And at current pricing it's a damn steal. I don't track so I won't speak in that regard.

If it was a mere 20 or so pound difference to lose those features, I'd argue it's a negligible difference. But at 70+ perhaps it makes a difference. I got it as a daily and it's obviously more than sufficient. But I don't track it so that might be why it's difficult to gauge the effectiveness of the weight reduction.

[CanAutM3]

Originally Posted by paliknight

I completely agree it's a very niche car. And at current pricing it's a damn steal. I don't track so I won't speak in that regard.

If it was a mere 20 or so pound difference to lose those features, I'd argue it's a negligible difference. But at 70+ perhaps it makes a difference. I got it as a daily and it's obviously more than sufficient. But I don't track it so that might be why it's difficult to gauge the effectiveness of the weight reduction.

The M3cs is indeed an odd "in-between", where they kept more "lux" features that make the other CS "lux cutting" specifics seem at odds. I find the M4cs to be an overall more cohesive and coherent package in that respect.

[gripenM]

Originally Posted by OhioRiderAaron

CAN is the biggest M fanboy on the forum! Lol

There was no good reason for them to remove such basic convenience features to save that little amount of weight. Comfort access and the arm rest? Cmon guys...it might even be a deal breaker for me if I were able to source one for a killer deal.

I would actually love that armrest delete in my regular m4. If one is around 6 foot and have the seat lowered all the way, the armrest certainly is an obtrusion. I find myself driving with the armrest in the open position sometimes to have that extra room. And I wouldn't mind CA delete either. Just less stuff to fail on the car

[BMWsully]

I have yet to miss the armrest in my CS, it's a meaningless feature for me. Comfort access on the other hand... that I'd like to have back.

[stevehifi]

Guys seriously ... 66lb weight savings is not even 2% of the car's weight... let's put things
into perspective.

[IB M]

Originally Posted by CanAutM3

The M3cs is indeed an odd "in-between", where they kept more "lux" features that make the other CS "lux cutting" specifics seem at odds. I find the M4cs to be an overall more cohesive and coherent package in that respect.

It's like bmw putting PDC on the M4 GTS
:

[CanAutM3]

Originally Posted by stevehifi

Guys seriously ... 66lb weight savings is not even 2% of the car's weight... let's put things
into perspective.

It's all the small increments in all aspects that makes the CS what it is. It's the 2% lower weight, the 2% power, the 9% torque, the 2.5% increased grip from the aero, the improved suspension and electronics tuned for R-comp tires that all collectively contribute to make it a better car.

For reference, the M4cs is lighter than the M2C

[CanAutM3]

Originally Posted by IB M

It's like bmw putting PDC on the M4 GTS
:

True. I could have gotten away without PDC on my M4cs too.