2.7 RS verses 3.0CSL
Discussion
Back in late 1972 and through 1973, the well heeled buyer with £6 grand plus burning a hole in his pocket, had a great choice of some superb cars to choose from.
These included Jensens Interceptor, Alfas Montreal, Citroens SM, Jaguars V-12 E - Type ( a bargain @ just £3,500 ) Astons DBS V8, Lamborghinis Uraco and Maseratis Merak. However, fine cars they were, none were real " drivers cars".....
But 2 others were, BMWs newly launched gorgeous 3.0CSL of which just 500 right hand drive cars were built for Britain only and of course the 911RS. The RS had a January 1973 list price of approx £6,150 and the CSL was £6,399 ( rising to a stonking £7,399 by June 1973. The BAT CSL was well over £8,000.
Notable buyers of the CSL included Sean Connery, who took delivery of his Polaris Silver example in July 1973, Victor Gauntlet who we believe had 2 and apparently the great Comic Norman Wisdom.
Both the RS and the CSL had illustrious race history's, being driven by people of the calibre of Brian Muir, James Hunt, Nicki Lauda and of course Hans Stuck.
However, fast forward 42 odd years and the poor CSL is worth a tiny sum ( even a genuine BAT can be bought for 100K or less ) compared to the RS.
Gentlemen, your thoughts please ?
These included Jensens Interceptor, Alfas Montreal, Citroens SM, Jaguars V-12 E - Type ( a bargain @ just £3,500 ) Astons DBS V8, Lamborghinis Uraco and Maseratis Merak. However, fine cars they were, none were real " drivers cars".....
But 2 others were, BMWs newly launched gorgeous 3.0CSL of which just 500 right hand drive cars were built for Britain only and of course the 911RS. The RS had a January 1973 list price of approx £6,150 and the CSL was £6,399 ( rising to a stonking £7,399 by June 1973. The BAT CSL was well over £8,000.
Notable buyers of the CSL included Sean Connery, who took delivery of his Polaris Silver example in July 1973, Victor Gauntlet who we believe had 2 and apparently the great Comic Norman Wisdom.
Both the RS and the CSL had illustrious race history's, being driven by people of the calibre of Brian Muir, James Hunt, Nicki Lauda and of course Hans Stuck.
However, fast forward 42 odd years and the poor CSL is worth a tiny sum ( even a genuine BAT can be bought for 100K or less ) compared to the RS.
Gentlemen, your thoughts please ?
http://khpc.co.uk/cars/353/bmw-series-1-3-0-csl-ba...
I would buy a BAT for 100k.
But still nowhere near 73RS money. I take your point.
You can put the same argument for a E46 CSL and 6RS,
or sport evo and '64RS though.
Porsches have a spell over us all!
I would buy a BAT for 100k.
But still nowhere near 73RS money. I take your point.
You can put the same argument for a E46 CSL and 6RS,
or sport evo and '64RS though.
Porsches have a spell over us all!
It was a capable car - but not too exciting. Lovely to look at etc.... Disregarding costs I would chose an E24 any time for superior performance, comfort, etc.
All too often so called classics are a bit, well, underwhelming. Not saying the Batmobile is/was a bad car, just many other better cars of that ilk around.
Look at my garage to see the huge number of cars owned! Still have about 6 or more. My favourite? The Alfa 147 shed. Biggest laugh going for less than a grand, closely followed by the Bentley.
Have a go in any car , regardless of price and reputation and make up your own mind - not the PH follow the crowd....
Thank you and good night!
All too often so called classics are a bit, well, underwhelming. Not saying the Batmobile is/was a bad car, just many other better cars of that ilk around.
Look at my garage to see the huge number of cars owned! Still have about 6 or more. My favourite? The Alfa 147 shed. Biggest laugh going for less than a grand, closely followed by the Bentley.
Have a go in any car , regardless of price and reputation and make up your own mind - not the PH follow the crowd....
Thank you and good night!
yes. i thought so too until i bought one. Although i should qualify that it has AP brakes, KW clubsport suspension and fully caged+ fully stripped.
I don't think it is the quality of a porsche GT product but that in-line 6 engine though common is magic and chassis brilliant at the limit. Box is slower compared to PDK but still faster than I can shift with a stick. what's the delta of a CSL compared to a 6 Gt3, quite a bit i must say.
I don't think it is the quality of a porsche GT product but that in-line 6 engine though common is magic and chassis brilliant at the limit. Box is slower compared to PDK but still faster than I can shift with a stick. what's the delta of a CSL compared to a 6 Gt3, quite a bit i must say.
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Afternoon J, hope you're well ?Regarding the CSL's size, you need to "live" in them (they really are a slow burner) but once you've done so, they "shrink" around you and no longer seem big, "glasshousey" and tall. I concur that initially the steering feels light and lacking in feel/feedback, but again, live with one for a while and it all starts to gel and feel "right".
I firmly believe this was the BMW M division at it's zenith, just as the 996 GT's were in the water-cooled cars.
The chassis is so benign for a 360hp car (even with the traction aids/stability controls off).
I think comparisons with any 911 are futile, I ran my Zanzibar Mk1 back to back with my CSL (standard except AP's all round and a rear trailing arm tightening kit), they were so far apart in how they served up their delight/performance, I gave up trying to compare them ! !
The CSL's performance was always more easily accessible, but that didn't make it any less fun/intoxicating to drive, if anything it just meant you spent more time playing "tunes" with its induction system.......
I always felt the CSL brought out the tw*t/hooligan in me as a driver, it really encouraged you to drive the wheels off it, something the Mk1 can and frequently does do, but doesn't do all the time.
Slippydiff said:
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Afternoon J, hope you're well ?Regarding the CSL's size, you need to "live" in them (they really are a slow burner) but once you've done so, they "shrink" around you and no longer seem big, "glasshousey" and tall. I concur that initially the steering feels light and lacking in feel/feedback, but again, live with one for a while and it all starts to gel and feel "right".
I firmly believe this was the BMW M division at it's zenith, just as the 996 GT's were in the water-cooled cars.
The chassis is so benign for a 360hp car (even with the traction aids/stability controls off).
I think comparisons with any 911 are futile, I ran my Zanzibar Mk1 back to back with my CSL (standard except AP's all round and a rear trailing arm tightening kit), they were so far apart in how they served up their delight/performance, I gave up trying to compare them ! !
The CSL's performance was always more easily accessible, but that didn't make it any less fun/intoxicating to drive, if anything it just meant you spent more time playing "tunes" with its induction system.......
I always felt the CSL brought out the tw*t/hooligan in me as a driver, it really encouraged you to drive the wheels off it, something the Mk1 can and frequently does do, but doesn't do all the time.
It is a heavy car. My fully caged version weighs 1400kg with a full tank of gas.
lastly, while it will never involve you the way a proper manual does, I agree that you still need to finesse the gearbox. I agree with you on the smg vs pdk point. I actually prefer the single clutch setup. way more involving.
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Well I drove two examples (one whilst I owned the GT2, one whilst I owned the Zanzibar car) I'll leave you to imagine how the second CSL felt in the shove department after the GT2....... and by the time I drove the first CSL, the suspension on my Zanzibar car had been "sorted" by JZM.Both CSL's left me feeling somewhat underwhelmed.
But as we discussed, for a car to be any good, it needs to be a bit sh*t. The 458 I drove wasn't sh*t in any way really, yep it lacked, soul, charisma, control surface weight, but for the masses wanting to look trendy/chic and go fast effortlessly, it was intrinsically a good car.
However the CSL gearbox is utterly sh*t (there, I said it) and absolutely hopeless in auto mode ( I tried it once and never again thereafter) but a bit like a 911, it provides you with a unique challenge to make it work decently.
I can totally understand why plenty wouldn't want or accept that challenge, but I actually enjoyed it (a lot) because in so many ways it took as much skill to make it change gear (decently/smoothly) as a manual 'box would. I guess the proof of that being the case is that I've driven a few E90 M3 DCTs since the CSL and found them utterly tedious, the DCT 'box is just too easy and accomplished.
As for steering weight, I think Porsche have (or had) that completely nailed. Nothing else comes close in my experience. But as Hokum said, the weight may be lacking, but all the subtle nuances needed to feel what the front end is doing when "pressing on", are there, and with time behind the wheel they become more transparent, and ultimately they make all the "noise" felt through the 911's wheel, seem a bit OTT and pointless. BUT, jump back into a 911 and all that "noise" seems welcome, needed and part of the experience. ! !
I think with the 30k miles I did in the CSL, it really did seem to "shrink", it's chassis (particularly its springing/damping) made it feel far more agile than it's dimensions would suggest. Sure, there were times when I felt it all a bit too easy and one dimensional, but all to soon the "right" piece of road presented itself and those thoughts disappeared the second the induction flap opened ......
Don't get me wrong, unlike the Mk1 996 GT3 (now on my fourth......) I've not felt the need to revisit CSL ownership. But I think that's more a case of the three years and 30k miles behind the wheel being such a fantastic experience that I feel I've ticked that box and thus don't need to go back to it any time soon. The GT3 is different, no doubting it's more focused, less useable, more compromised, but in many ways that only adds to the allure of its ownership and the driving of it.
There, now we're well and truly OT
I doubt if many people have much experience of the original CSL.
The 2.7RS was an instant icon and has been held in high esteem amongst enthusiasts and collectors pretty much since launch.
But the 3.0CSL never really had the same status or acclaim. Certainly it's an elegant, if bigger, design and a genuine 2+2, but values never really did much, and that will have discouraged expensive restorations.
Viewed against an RS, I'd assume one is an autobahn stormer and the other a track and B-road blitza.
The 2.7RS was an instant icon and has been held in high esteem amongst enthusiasts and collectors pretty much since launch.
But the 3.0CSL never really had the same status or acclaim. Certainly it's an elegant, if bigger, design and a genuine 2+2, but values never really did much, and that will have discouraged expensive restorations.
Viewed against an RS, I'd assume one is an autobahn stormer and the other a track and B-road blitza.
1st time I've heard it put down in words properly. I always struggle to describe how my CSL compares to my Porsches . 
I'd never thought to compare the two. Big 4 seater versus small 2 seater...for me the M and other fast variants of BMW models have always been modified high performance versions of base models rather than, like Porsche, out and out designed from scratch sports cars. Don't get me wrong, they are great cars, but I would never compare the two marques.
If there were 500 RHD CSL presumably there were, in total 10x more CSL than RS? That starts to explain the value difference.
If there were 500 RHD CSL presumably there were, in total 10x more CSL than RS? That starts to explain the value difference.
Gassing Station | Porsche Classics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff