[samj2k]

I think in the US if you can get a CS, you might as well do it over an M5 comp. By the time you have built an M5 Comp with the CCB's etc... you are nearly at CS price anyway. Here in the UK there is a £40k difference over a very well optioned M5 Comp with CCB's (After 20% discount which is easy to get over here) so probably not worth it. I'm still looking at one though... if you get a new M5, might as well get the best one available. The F90 is OK for a big car on a track, took both the F90 and GT3RS to the track last week, I couldn't get anywhere near the GT3RS lap times in the F90 obviously, but it still held it's own against other cars on the day, and surprised me quite a bit, it absolutely eats tyres though... Off to the Nürburgring and Spa in October and still deciding what to take, the M5 is brilliant round the Ring and the drive up there will be a lot comfier, that's for sure!

Congrats to everyone that has got a CS, great cars!

[Spunky]

Originally Posted by shawnhayes

2:08, on Toyo Proxes RR's.

My reasoning for metal brakes as an option is the same for the Porsche guys. Since you question if I went to track with my "boat", if you knew anything about track you'd know that most track guys eventually remove the carbons because they're too expensive to replace. More than 4 events per year and you WILL be replacing them. They make the car faster, but the second time you replace them you begin to think of ways to get rid of them.

I've murdered AP racing carbon rotors to the tune of $16,000 and Chevrolet Corvette ZR1 carbon rotors to the tune of $4000.

One of the reasons I bought the M5 is that the replacement rotors range $400-$700 per corner, which is way better than most of the cars that I've owned and tracked.

Shawn

This shouldn't be debatable. A 2 ton boat, on the track, with steel rotors would give you maybe one or two hot laps, before they get heat soaked. And yes, driving on tracks is expensive and weight is the enemy.

It seems you are trying to explain yourself, which is not needed. You can be happy driving the M5 anywhere with any configuration, shouldn't matter what people think. Car is great, CAN be driven on a track, is very fast and it could also be fun if you turn off TC completely, but in the end of the day, it's still a luxury barge with crazy tech, that can hide that somewhat at the expense of involvement.

[shawnhayes]

Originally Posted by Spunky

This shouldn't be debatable. A 2 ton boat, on the track, with steel rotors would give you maybe one or two hot laps, before they get heat soaked. And yes, driving on tracks is expensive and weight is the enemy.

It seems you are trying to explain yourself, which is not needed. You can be happy driving the M5 anywhere with any configuration, shouldn't matter what people think. Car is great, CAN be driven on a track, is very fast and it could also be fun if you turn off TC completely, but in the end of the day, it's still a luxury barge with crazy tech, that can hide that somewhat at the expense of involvement.

This is, honestly, the most misinformed thing I have EVER read about track driving. You've obviously never been anywhere near one.

My M5 will do nearly an hour CONTINUOSLY of VIR, in the summer, with metal brakes, and not use up the OEM front brake pads. And then do three more hours each day, for four hours per day over two days. I might have to replace the back pads, but not the front.

Where the HECK do you come off saying this isn't debatable? Do you have ANY idea of the number of M3 guys on this board who track, and won't go within 100 feet of carbon brakes because of longevity issues?

You other guys are right. This HAS become a dumpster fire. People who don't do what they are claiming to be experts at.

Shawn

[shawnhayes]

Originally Posted by samj2k

The F90 is OK for a big car on a track, took both the F90 and GT3RS to the track last week, I couldn't get anywhere near the GT3RS lap times in the F90 obviously, but it still held it's own against other cars on the day, and surprised me quite a bit, it absolutely eats tyres though...

Try the Pilot Sport Cup 2's, or Toyo Proxes RR's. The OEM tires don't handle the abuse well. The Cup 2's and Proxes do.

Shawn

[crypto]

Wow so much gatekeeping on this forum about track cars lol. Some people seem to think the only "tracking" that is allowed for an M5 is if it's a new order via "My Garage." 😆

[samj2k]

Originally Posted by shawnhayes

Try the Pilot Sport Cup 2's, or Toyo Proxes RR's. The OEM tires don't handle the abuse well. The Cup 2's and Proxes do.

Shawn

The Cup 2 on the 3RS is a very impressive tyre, unfortunately we get a lot of rain here, and the M5 is my daily, they don't handle standing water very well. The PS4S is actually quite good on track but it gets a little greasy after a few laps.

I'd actually love to get a CS over to the Ring. I don't see an issue with people wanting to track it. Considering it only laps the Ring 2 seconds slower than a GT4, which is a quick track car, and will most likely go quicker with a proper run instead of a Sport Auto test, that seems pretty impressive to me…

[Spunky]

Originally Posted by shawnhayes

Do you have ANY idea of the number of M3 guys on this board who track, and won't go within 100 feet of carbon brakes because of longevity issues?

Sure, they're not driving boats on the track

[Dark-Knight]

isnt cost the reason for using steel on a track car , steel rotors so much cheaper to replace and if you get gravel btw rotor and pad you damage rotor and thousands dollars down the toilet, real race cars use carbon as price no concern, why is everyone going ape anyway, buy a GT3 if you want to really track on Sunday drive to work Monday and put toilet paper and paper towel in trunk from Costco

[samj2k]

Originally Posted by TheBlackKnight

isnt cost the reason for using steel on a track car , steel rotors so much cheaper to replace and if you get gravel btw rotor and pad you damage rotor and thousands dollars down the toilet, real race cars use carbon as price no concern, why is everyone going ape anyway, buy a GT3 if you want to really track on Sunday drive to work Monday and put toilet paper and paper towel in trunk from Costco

Actually the majority of GT Cup cars use steel. Porsche GT Cup is steel, Lambo Cup cars are on steel brakes. Personally I think the way to go is steel for track and carbons for road, you won't get any brake dust and they'll probably last the life time of the car, but you're never getting them up to track temps on the road. Currently contemplating changing to steel on the GT3. They have more brake feel, and are better suited to lots of track driving.

[shawnhayes]

Originally Posted by samj2k

The Cup 2 on the 3RS is a very impressive tyre, unfortunately we get a lot of rain here, and the M5 is my daily, they don't handle standing water very well. The PS4S is actually quite good on track but it gets a little greasy after a few laps.

I'd actually love to get a CS over to the Ring. I don't see an issue with people wanting to track it. Considering it only laps the Ring 2 seconds slower than a GT4, which is a quick track car, and will most likely go quicker with a proper run instead of a Sport Auto test, that seems pretty impressive to me…

I concur. I have driven my M5 on the Cup 2's in the rain. Not the best. And the PS4S is very good, but it wears out QUICK. Just giving you some alternatives.

I can't wait to get my RS.

Shawn

[shawnhayes]

Originally Posted by TheBlackKnight

isnt cost the reason for using steel on a track car , steel rotors so much cheaper to replace and if you get gravel btw rotor and pad you damage rotor and thousands dollars down the toilet, real race cars use carbon as price no concern, why is

As pointed out, multiple race series use steel rotors, because of durability issues. F1, sure, carbon, but million dollar + cars.

Rally cars? Metal. LeMans cars? GTE and GTE-pro class - Metal. Carbon won't last that long on the production based cars (heavy).

The problem here is we got some M5 CS haters who are on some dumb campaign to trash the car at multiple turns. Why? Who knows. Who cares. Turned into a dumpster fire of "I know s**t about something I've obviously never done, but I get my post count up with witty little quips that makes everybody know I have a small pen**".

Shawn

[shawnhayes]

Originally Posted by samj2k

Actually the majority of GT Cup cars use steel. Porsche GT Cup is steel, Lambo Cup cars are on steel brakes. Personally I think the way to go is steel for track and carbons for road, you won't get any brake dust and they'll probably last the life time of the car, but you're never getting them up to track temps on the road. Currently contemplating changing to steel on the GT3. They have more brake feel, and are better suited to lots of track driving.

Having used both on track, and on street, I much prefer metal for track. Don't get me wrong, the braking on carbons (with the right mix of pad and rotor) is AWESOME. But if you have a heavy track habit (I used to do 12 days a year) it becomes stupid expensive. Fuel, lodging, and tires is enough. Add $16,000 for carbon brake rotor replacement, and no thanks. My preference is streetable cars that I can drive to and from track without a trailer with all my gear in the back. The M5 fits the bill.

I've watched MULTIPLE people, including myself, enjoy carbon brakes at the track - for a while. And then most of us go back to metal. Multiple reasons, some of which you list above.

Shawn

[TrevorM3]

please refer back to post 12. You're welcome.

I'm just curious, if a CS is a track car what do we call Mclarens and the GT2R's of the world, spaceships?

[Neptune7]

Why don't we take a brief recess and direct energy on whether the new Cayenne Turbo GT is a track car, and what its purpose on this planet is.

[Dark-Knight]

Cayenne Turbo GT is the Cayenne version of the CS, more hp grey paint and gold wheels-hahaha- I prefer ceramic brakes for the weight decrease and I hate the rusty rotors after washing and I hate the dust, I think if you lived in Germany the M5CS would be the ideal Autobahn cruiser with a few Ring visits too

[shawnhayes]

Originally Posted by TheBlackKnight

Cayenne Turbo GT is the Cayenne version of the CS, more hp grey paint and gold wheels-hahaha- I prefer ceramic brakes for the weight decrease and I hate the rusty rotors after washing and I hate the dust, I think if you lived in Germany the M5 would be the ideal Autobahn cruiser with a few Ring visits too

All good points.

Shawn

[Neptune7]

Originally Posted by TheBlackKnight

Cayenne Turbo GT is the Cayenne version of the CS, more hp grey paint and gold wheels-hahaha- I prefer ceramic brakes for the weight decrease and I hate the rusty rotors after washing and I hate the dust, I think if you lived in Germany the M5CS would be the ideal Autobahn cruiser with a few Ring visits too

Sure looks like Porsche is borrowing ideas from BMW here. And hey why not - it's great. Now let's see if we'll have an X6M CS!

[Dark-Knight]

I do like the Panamera, but the price and weight are much higher, I cannot deal with the E63 and the gay stalk mounted shifter, this is the rich mans Hellcat that can turn and have usable gas mileage. Cayenne is the best SUV out there and the Macan is like a suv/911, the hate for the CS is so confusing to me, it makes no sense, like when pretty girls get bullied in school,

[samj2k]

Originally Posted by Neptune7

Why don't we take a brief recess and direct energy on whether the new Cayenne Turbo GT is a track car, and what its purpose on this planet is.

The purpose of the Cayenne GT is purely a marketing exercise. Will no doubt be limited numbers, and you'll have to buy a load of basic spec Macan's and Cayenne's to be able to buy it. Porsche are clever, they don't make much profit out of the GT cars, what they make the profit out of is the 10 other cars someone purchases to get on the list for a GT car, then buying that GT car back off the buyer a couple of years later to make more profit on it.

[windtendo]

After rereading through some of the posts, it really seems like some of you are being a bit dramatic... Not sure anyone here actually "hates" the M5CS. Bringing up legitimate questions and having a discussion about the vehicle is just that -- a discussion. I brought up some questions earlier on about what this car is and I still don't understand it. That's okay though. I don't hate the car, I'm just confused by it.

[shawnhayes]

Originally Posted by windtendo

After rereading through some of the posts, it really seems like some of you are being a bit dramatic... Not sure anyone here actually "hates" the M5CS. Bringing up legitimate questions and having a discussion about the vehicle is just that -- a discussion. I brought up some questions earlier on about what this car is and I still don't understand it. That's okay though. I don't hate the car, I'm just confused by it.

It has two markets. One, those who like special limited edition BMW's. Special edition guys, whatever. Speculators that think it will gain money over time, or look good in their collection thirty years from now.

Other market - ME. The few guys who refuse to consider a RWD M3 as a car to buy to take to track (and love BMW's). The 2018 M3 and M4 (regular versions) were slower around VIR than my 2009 GT-R that cost $72,000. My M5 does the same times that I did in my old car, and the CS will probably be a little faster. There's a significant population of people who bring street legal cars to the track. There's all kinds. People who tow tire trailers behind their Miata's. There's plenty of us who drive our cars to the track, switch out to sticky tires, have fun, and then drive them home. We find all kinds of weaknesses in the cars over time (if they aren't well made, and not well suited to the task), and frequently have to change things on the cars to keep them going to track for the years. It's a funky market. The R8 has some hold on some. NSX's as well. Some M3's. Tons of FRS's, 86's, and BRZ's. Corvette's are a common group. The Mustang GT350 has been a newcomer (and man is it fast on a nice track).

So, sure, the market is small. But there's been a lot of arrogant "know it all", "this isn't debatable" shade that has made this thread a dumpster fire. Being confused about the car is one thing. But just outright dismissing one of the obvious markets for it isn't "being confused"

Shawn

[AHall]

Originally Posted by windtendo

After rereading through some of the posts, it really seems like some of you are being a bit dramatic... Not sure anyone here actually "hates" the M5CS. Bringing up legitimate questions and having a discussion about the vehicle is just that -- a discussion. I brought up some questions earlier on about what this car is and I still don't understand it. That's okay though. I don't hate the car, I'm just confused by it.

Really nothing to be confused about. Consider BMW, who is in the business of selling cars for a profit with a long-term plan, believes there is a market for this car and they can make money from it either directly or indirectly.

Consider grocery stores. Full of products some people want and some do not. Most cars are not meant to appeal to everyone. BMW understands a car such as the M5CS and even the M5 will appeal to a small number of buyers.