RE: Tell me I'm wrong: BMW M5

[Clivey]

RoverP6B said:

I'm sorry, but this whole idea that we need to pursue ever-faster lap-times and acceleration figures is just BS. The E39 M5 was already mostly traction-limited in 0-62mph times - adding 150kg and 150bhp isn't going to make that better - the only way of improving traction is more weight over the rear (upsets the balance), AWD (more weight and complexity) or much wider tyres (which means higher rolling resistance and less chassis adjustability). A DCT may make you quicker in a drag race, but I'm sure Freud would have had a field day with anyone who considered that a high priority in a big saloon. It'll add weight to the car and make it slower through corners.

Lightweight panels do not have the be expensive. Carbon is getting cheaper, GRP has always been cheap and now we're seeing bio-fibre, hemp and suchlike, coming on the market - and it doesn't get much cheaper or more eco-sustainable than that.

I couldn't agree more actually. The obsession with numbers and statistics is even sillier when you realise that "hang on a minute…when was the last time I drove this car flat-out?". On public roads, you can't even use full acceleration of my lowly 320i for more than a few seconds without getting into ban/prison territory, let alone a bloody M5. Past a certain point, the additional speed is only attainable on track…and if it's a track car you want, there are much better options than a two-ton battleship with a TV, fake exhaust noise and heated, ventilated, massaging, 18-way electronically adjustable seats that parks itself.

[Leins]

Wouldn't swap the manual box out of my old E34 for anything. Not even a faster 'Ring time

As I've said before, it's all about application and what suits the nature of a particular car IMO. Is DCT the most well-suited gearbox to the F10?

[RoverP6B]

Amirhussain said:

Is that why the F10 M5 with the DCT gearbox is TWENTY ONE seconds quicker than the E39 M5 with a MANUAL gearbox around the ring?

An additional 166bhp, 133ftlbs and a massive 2-mile-long straight are the obvious explanations. Through some of the nastier Nordschleife corners, I bet the E39 would be faster at the apex. Even so, what the hell do Nordschleife lap times matter in the real world? Not one flippin' jot. SidewaysSi and Clivey are right. Incidentally, Leins, what's the going rate for a tidy E34 M5? Would love one, especially a 3.8 Touring with the aerodynamic finned wheel-trims.

[Leins]

RoverP6B said:

Incidentally, Leins, what's the going rate for a tidy E34 M5? Would love one, especially a 3.8 Touring with the aerodynamic finned wheel-trims.

They do seem to be going up ever so slightly, and there's still a slight premium for a 3.8. Mine is a bit "miley" at 150k, but had engine and gearbox rebuilds a few years ago, plus work to the SLS components, so was worth picking up I think. Bought in Ireland, but I would think the equivalent value in the UK would be about the £8k mark now probably. About 100k-miler 3.8s seem to be over £10k now, and maybe a little more for a run-out 6-speed LE or a nice Touring

To me they still represent great value, slightly more old-school than the (probably more complete) E39 M5, and for less than half the price of an E28, although the soul would be flogged to the Devil in an instant for one of those Cheaper than the equivalent 500E, L Carlton & Alpina B10 BiTurbo too

Have you seen this one?: http://www.munichlegends.co.uk/component/option,co...

[Terminator X]

Patrick Bateman said:

Clivey said:

I agree with you but consider the advances that are being made at the moment. - Composites are becoming much more affordable for mass production and with the advent of technologies such as 3D printing, things could get exciting in the future (see the Alfa 4C for example). - If BMW wanted to (and more importantly if there was enough demand), they could produce a light weight M3/4 (CSL? ) without skimping on the features.

Oh I agree, but until they're affordable enough for a mass production model rather than a special I don't think people should expect such drastically lighter cars.

GTS was 70kg lighter than a standard M3 but cost over £100k to purchase!

TX.

[Andy M]

If you guys truly want 'driver involvement', why are you bothering with flabby saloons (yes, that includes the F10 and all previous gen M5)? Why not buy a Caterham etc?

I ordered a new M5 fully knowing that it had received less positive reviews from a number of the motoring press. It was interesting to note that those who I believe to have relatively limited driving skill didn't get on with the car, but those willing to grab it by the neck appeared to love it.

Speaking personally, having owned two VX220s and a stripped down 911, the M5 has all the driver involvement I need whilst being able to carry my young family around in safety. Having driven the car even for a relatively short period of time, my experience of the car does make me wonder how many of those with strong opinions against the current M5 have even set foot in one?

[E65Ross]

Those moaning about no manual in the M5, how many would buy a new one if it had manual? Thought so....

If M car owners want manual gearboxes why is it once DCT was available on the M3 did it COMPLETELY outsell the manual version? These are the people BMW are catering for. Not those moaning it should have a manual who MIGHT buy one 10 years down the line.

[SidewaysSi]

E65Ross said:

Those moaning about no manual in the M5, how many would buy a new one if it had manual? Thought so....

If M car owners want manual gearboxes why is it once DCT was available on the M3 did it COMPLETELY outsell the manual version? These are the people BMW are catering for. Not those moaning it should have a manual who MIGHT buy one 10 years down the line.

Indeed, the modern M driver is probably someone who wants something quick, comfortable, full of toys and easy to drive. They are no more likely to be a car and driving enthusiast than someone with a 520d.

[Andy M]

SidewaysSi said:

Indeed, the modern M driver is probably someone who wants something quick, comfortable, full of toys and easy to drive. They are no more likely to be a car and driving enthusiast than someone with a 520d.

You're in danger of sounding like somebody who doesn't think anybody is a driving enthusiast, unless they are...you!

I'm told that BMW UK have been having record quarters. You guys complaining about their products is akin to sitting in an extremely popular restaurant, with queues for tables, and complaining about what's on the menu and the prices the restaurant charges. The answer: don't eat there.

It's blindingly obvious that BMW as a brand is not for you, nor do I think they have ever been.

[zeppelin101]

Andy M said:

You're in danger of sounding like somebody who doesn't think anybody is a driving enthusiast, unless they are...you!

I'm told that BMW UK have been having record quarters. You guys complaining about their products is akin to sitting in an extremely popular restaurant, with queues for tables, and complaining about what's on the menu and the prices the restaurant charges. The answer: don't eat there.

It's blindingly obvious that BMW as a brand is not for you, nor do I think they have ever been.

I think the issue lies in that they have marketed themselves as making "the ultimate driving machines" and yet (seemingly) to a lot of car junkies - they aren't. Or maybe the consumer view of the ultimate driving machine has changed?

For instance, the reviews of the 435i were telling. I don't think that many reviewers have extolled it's dynamic virtues but nonetheless it's a "good car". Arguably not a BMW that lives up to their marketing hype. Do they even make one? I've not driven a new BMW product since I had a go in an E92 330i which was fine, but disconnected in terms of chassis and steering feel. Otherwise a great car if you want something that looks good and goes well.

[Andy M]

http://youtu.be/2phhbM9yonI

How many believed this? Not many I would hope...

[E65Ross]

zeppelin101 said:

Andy M said:

You're in danger of sounding like somebody who doesn't think anybody is a driving enthusiast, unless they are...you!

I'm told that BMW UK have been having record quarters. You guys complaining about their products is akin to sitting in an extremely popular restaurant, with queues for tables, and complaining about what's on the menu and the prices the restaurant charges. The answer: don't eat there.

It's blindingly obvious that BMW as a brand is not for you, nor do I think they have ever been.

I think the issue lies in that they have marketed themselves as making "the ultimate driving machines" and yet (seemingly) to a lot of car junkies - they aren't. Or maybe the consumer view of the ultimate driving machine has changed?

For instance, the reviews of the 435i were telling. I don't think that many reviewers have extolled it's dynamic virtues but nonetheless it's a "good car". Arguably not a BMW that lives up to their marketing hype. Do they even make one? I've not driven a new BMW product since I had a go in an E92 330i which was fine, but disconnected in terms of chassis and steering feel. Otherwise a great car if you want something that looks good and goes well.

Funny, the EVO review of the 435i was glowing, and said its dynamics blew the Audi rival out of the water. I think a lot of people think a 3/4/5 series is meant to be a big comfy saloon whilst also being a caterham. They aren't. First and foremost they're luxury cars which happen to (generally...not always) be rather good to drive compared to a lot of the competition.

[RobM77]

zeppelin101 said:

I think the issue lies in that they have marketed themselves as making "the ultimate driving machines" and yet (seemingly) to a lot of car junkies - they aren't. Or maybe the consumer view of the ultimate driving machine has changed?

For instance, the reviews of the 435i were telling. I don't think that many reviewers have extolled it's dynamic virtues but nonetheless it's a "good car". Arguably not a BMW that lives up to their marketing hype. Do they even make one? I've not driven a new BMW product since I had a go in an E92 330i which was fine, but disconnected in terms of chassis and steering feel. Otherwise a great car if you want something that looks good and goes well.

What about handling though? That's why I've chosen BMWs as daily drivers. Nothing these days other than a Lotus has good steering feel etc, but the handling balance on a 3 series is lovely. As for looking good and going fast, they're at the very bottom of my priorities in a car. Everyone's after something different. In a daily driver I'm after balance, control feel, response and linearity, handling, low CofG, ride, quiet at speed and good roof bars with a low roofline to make them accessible. BMW score above any other manufacture in all of those areas, except throttle response in their petrol models and control feel, but as I said, it's not as if other makes of saloon give vastly better feel; certainly not enough to outweigh the other advantages.

[Devil2575]

Clivey said:

I couldn't agree more actually. The obsession with numbers and statistics is even sillier when you realise that "hang on a minute…when was the last time I drove this car flat-out?". On public roads, you can't even use full acceleration of my lowly 320i for more than a few seconds without getting into ban/prison territory, let alone a bloody M5. Past a certain point, the additional speed is only attainable on track…and if it's a track car you want, there are much better options than a two-ton battleship with a TV, fake exhaust noise and heated, ventilated, massaging, 18-way electronically adjustable seats that parks itself.

Let's be honest. In every incarnation of the M5 the power has been pretty much irrellevant on the public roads. It's the same for most performance cars. My E36 328 would get to licence losing speeds quick enough, I can only imagine how quickly an E39 M5 would get there.

In which case with a lot of high performance cars it's got more to do with numbers and what it could do than what you are actually going to do.

The toys are there because in reality these are luxury cars to be sold to people who want the bragging rights the power gives them (including the "Ring time") but want to comfort etc.

You only have to look at what spec your M3 should have to make it desirable come resale time to realise that the majority of people who buy these cars don't want a lightweight racer. They want a luxury car that has numbers that impress their mates and gives them that pinned in the seat feeling when they hit the loud pedal.

[Clivey]

E65Ross said:

Those moaning about no manual in the M5, how many would buy a new one if it had manual? Thought so….

The curent car doesn't seem to suit a manual 'box according to the reviews (I would be more than happy to test both versions ) but I don't know whether that says more about the manual gearbox or the direction the car is taking.

E65Ross said:

If M car owners want manual gearboxes why is it once DCT was available on the M3 did it COMPLETELY outsell the manual version? These are the people BMW are catering for. Not those moaning it should have a manual who MIGHT buy one 10 years down the line.

I would buy a manual M3 or M4 - to me it's disappointing that the PH car will be DCT. Actually, I recently had to remind myself to keep my eyes on the prize (TVR Tuscan S) and avoid committing to a newer BMW. - A 330Ci would be a good enough daily to back-up the TVR.

Devil2575 said:

Let's be honest. In every incarnation of the M5 the power has been pretty much irrellevant on the public roads. It's the same for most performance cars. My E36 328 would get to licence losing speeds quick enough, I can only imagine how quickly an E39 M5 would get there.

In which case with a lot of high performance cars it's got more to do with numbers and what it could do than what you are actually going to do.

The toys are there because in reality these are luxury cars to be sold to people who want the bragging rights the power gives them (including the "Ring time") but want to comfort etc.

You only have to look at what spec your M3 should have to make it desirable come resale time to realise that the majority of people who buy these cars don't want a lightweight racer. They want a luxury car that has numbers that impress their mates and gives them that pinned in the seat feeling when they hit the loud pedal.

So what's the logical conclusion? Remove the driver entirely because the computer can do it better? That worries me.

Edited by Clivey on Monday 27th January 13:55

[Devil2575]

Clivey said:

So what's the logical conclusion? Remove the driver entirely because the computer can do it better? That worries me.

Edited by Clivey on Monday 27th January 13:55

I think the logic is that cars like this sell based on bragging rights and headline figures rather than whether or not the power is actually usable. Whether it has 400 or 4000 bhp is largely irrellevant given that even the lower figure means the car will have far more performance than anyone would be sensible using on the public road, other than in exceptional circumstances.

FWIW I see no point in a car that requires electronics to keep it on the road or stop it lunching it's tyres, but the people who buy them obviously don't agree. You only have to look at BMW/Audi/Merc power figures to see that it's an arms race with each manufacturer trying to outdo the other. A work colleague has an Audi RS6 with a V10 Twin Turbo and 580 bhp. He admitted to me that on 99% of his drives he never gets a chance to use full throttle. I simply don't see the point of it as a car to drive everyday, but he gets lots of positive comments and in the work car park "top trumps" he is winning, which is I suspect half the reason to buy it.

[E65Ross]

Devil2575 said:

Clivey said:

So what's the logical conclusion? Remove the driver entirely because the computer can do it better? That worries me.

Edited by Clivey on Monday 27th January 13:55

I think the logic is that cars like this sell based on bragging rights and headline figures rather than whether or not the power is actually usable. Whether it has 400 or 4000 bhp is largely irrellevant given that even the lower figure means the car will have far more performance than anyone would be sensible using on the public road, other than in exceptional circumstances.

FWIW I see no point in a car that requires electronics to keep it on the road or stop it lunching it's tyres, but the people who buy them obviously don't agree. You only have to look at BMW/Audi/Merc power figures to see that it's an arms race with each manufacturer trying to outdo the other. A work colleague has an Audi RS6 with a V10 Twin Turbo and 580 bhp. He admitted to me that on 99% of his drives he never gets a chance to use full throttle. I simply don't see the point of it as a car to drive everyday, but he gets lots of positive comments and in the work car park "top trumps" he is winning, which is I suspect half the reason to buy it.

Not sure about him but my old man bought his M6 for the daily.... He doesn't care as such you can't use it all the time, it's that 1% that makes it worth it.

I get your point. I understand WHY you think they're pointless. But if you can't understand why people don't think they're pointless, I pity you.

[Devil2575]

E65Ross said:

Not sure about him but my old man bought his M6 for the daily.... He doesn't care as such you can't use it all the time, it's that 1% that makes it worth it.

I get your point. I understand WHY you think they're pointless. But if you can't understand why people don't think they're pointless, I pity you.

Please don't

The question is how often when he plants his right foot is he getting all the power and how often are the cars electronics reigning it in to keep it on the road?

I know why people don't think they are pointless. Pub/work car park bragging rights are important to a lot of people. Thinking you are and having people think you are winning is important to a lot of people. Having a car that gives you that pinned back in the seat rush when you hit the accellerator is important to some people (even I get that bit ). But the reality is that the cars performance and limits are simply far too high to use on the public road unless you have a death wish or like prison food. So the only place to use the cars performance is on a track and do people really go to track days with these cars?

[E65Ross]

Devil2575 said:

So the only place to use the cars performance is on a track and do people really go to track days with these cars?

You've not driven one have you.

[Zod]

E65Ross said:

Devil2575 said:

So the only place to use the cars performance is on a track and do people really go to track days with these cars?

You've not driven one have you.

This attitude (Devil's) comes up depressingly frequently on PH threads about performance cars. Nobody who's spent much time in cars of this performance level would ever post this kind of thing.