F90 M5 first performance test numbers

[evojam]

Having read the start of this thread on the new M5 being a very rapid car,quicker than many old school supercars in fact I decided to dig out my old Autocar official McLaren F1 road test out of curiosity to see how it compares to the new M5 figures..as expected it's actually not that far behind but up at the top end the F1 reveals its true speed being 3.1 seconds quicker to 150mph and there after would simply dissapear off in the distance.

[ds666]

I don’t think the one car garage buyer spends £100k on a car and only has one car .... or indeed has one garage ...

Edited by ds666 on Friday 13th April 21:12

[Andy M]

ds666 said:

I don’t think the one car garage buyer spends £100k on a car and only has one car .... or indeed has one garage ...

I do.

Car prices are so totally out of whack these days (£50k hot hatches, £180k Range Rover’s etc), £100k isn’t what it used to be.

[Welshbeef]

Andy M said:

ds666 said:

I don’t think the one car garage buyer spends £100k on a car and only has one car .... or indeed has one garage ...

I do.

Car prices are so totally out of whack these days (£50k hot hatches, £180k Range Rover’s etc), £100k isn’t what it used to be.

People are time poor too so having a F40 tucked away it’s likely it might see the light of day a couple of times a year or say a 458 - kids going horse riding lessons or swimming or parties or ballet or football so to opt for a drive in your Fezza over spending time with the kids .... especially given those who do have lots of £ normally means long hours in the week so don’t see them then and then potentially choose to play in the fezzes vs time with the kids.

Vs say a car like an M5 sure it’s £100k but that’s not crazy £ especially as you’d be paying for it monthly. A chilled daily and for those occasions you leave he office late or early you can blast away. Sure it’s no Fezza with the joy that brings but it surely still brings a wicked smile any Petrol head has in their blood.

[jm doc]

Output Flange said:

Welshbeef said:

I think this is very true - people use the M5 as a daily driver ie the one car garage

Please, spend some time in an M5 (ANY M5) before your next post on this thread. Despite having the most to say, you don't appear to know anything about them.

This.

I've had two E39's doing around 80k miles in them, an E60 and E63 and done around 100k, and now in an F10 currently around 20k.

He really hasn't got a clue, it's embarassing at times

[Welshbeef]

jm doc said:

This.

I've had two E39's doing around 80k miles in them, an E60 and E63 and done around 100k, and now in an F10 currently around 20k.

He really hasn't got a clue, it's embarassing at times

I’m sorry but the cars are designed to be 2 in one a daily grinder and a super car performance when you want - they are not track cars.

What’s so hard to understand about them? I’m very confident many top jurnolists auto have ever owned an M5 yet can give a full review on it based on what it is and a drive in it.

Is your point more that it gets under your skin or that anyone who doesn’t own or ever owned such a car cannot post anything about it even if it repeats what the press have?

[Andy M]

Welshbeef said:

I’m sorry but the cars are designed to be 2 in one a daily grinder and a super car performance when you want - they are not track cars.

What’s so hard to understand about them? I’m very confident many top jurnolists auto have ever owned an M5 yet can give a full review on it based on what it is and a drive in it.

Is your point more that it gets under your skin or that anyone who doesn’t own or ever owned such a car cannot post anything about it even if it repeats what the press have?

The M5/E63/RS6 is as much a track car as a performance version Caterham etc is a road car. There's little wrong in a Caterham being used on the road is there Welshbeef?

The issue people appear to have with you isn't that you have an opinion on these cars - everybody is of course entitled to an opinion - but you're often the most frequent poster when these discussions take place; you appear frustratingly keen to rattle off opinions which are based on assumptions, not experience.

Comparing yourself in any way to a top auto journalist isn't logical IMO. Though they may not have owned an M5 etc, but they do have the experience of driving many cars in a relatively short timeframe and obviously have valid opinions about how the cars compare.

It's my recollection that you've not yet driven an M5, or am I wrong?

[Zod]

Welshbeef said:

Patrick Bateman said:

Welshbeef said:

Subjective surely.

F10 will be savage/mad man from 1,500 rpm
E60 will be a lunatic from 6,000 rpm and spine tingling at that point.

Technically subjective, sure, but I would wonder about the man who didn't find the V10 at full chat more intoxicating.

Until he has to drive the SMG round town on the daily commute ??

I did that for five years. I still loved the car. Now I drive a manual on my London commute.

[Tony B2]

janesmith1950 said:

cerb4.5lee said:

I do agree with this but with hindsight now the V10 was quite a strange engine to put into an executive express. They're not the characteristics of a cruiser to have to rev the nuts off the engine to get it to perform. Surely a torquey engine like the F10/F90 suits that type of car much better.

The E39 M5 is my favourite M5 of the lot, but even that went against the grain of a comfortable cruiser by having a manual gearbox.

BMW used to be quite individual when you look back now. Now they're just the exact same as their rival manufacturers.

They can't win with you! You hated the high revving V8/V10 and now they're wrong for sorting it out?

Nailed it.....!

[Welshbeef]

Andy M said:

BMW should by now be more than familiar with the N63/S63 engine which they've been using extensively for over a decade - and which has been fitted to the F10 M5 since 2011 - yet it has clearly been usurped by Mercedes' smaller (4.4 litre vs Mercedes 4 litre) more powerful and newer engine.

The S63 is an excellent engine, but you'd have thought - given that BMW have had over a year to benchmark it against the Mercedes E63s etc - that BMW would have used the extra capacity and their greater experience of their engine to ensure the new M5 was at least as powerful as that of the main competition.

Additionally, they chose a more dated gearbox as well - the 8 speed ZF versus the Mercedes' 9 speed ZF box. Why?

Quite a few reviews of the new M5 say that it is softer than expected (the reviewers choice of word, not mine), and on the evidence of the CarWow video it's clearly slower than the competition too (in acceleration at least).

The Mercedes is the heavier car, was running with double the amount of fuel than the M5, had a driver who reacted slower (giving a significantly worse start), yet still finished a car length ahead. That's quite surprising IMO, and I don't think it can be explained by the mileage on each car; the M5 should be sufficiently well run in by 2,000 miles.

Let's hope the Competition Package unlocks something which is currently hidden within the standard M5.

But this post above could be made by anyone into Cars - you do not have to be an owner of said vehicle to make this statement. Or am I missing something.

Just not sure why you had a dig given you have done the same see above.

[Andy M]

Welshbeef said:

But this post above could be made by anyone into Cars - you do not have to be an owner of said vehicle to make this statement. Or am I missing something.

Just not sure why you had a dig given you have done the same see above.

Which part of my post do you disagree with, or believe is not based in fact?

And, it's my recollection that you've never driven an M5. Is this correct?

[Welshbeef]

Andy M said:

Welshbeef said:

But this post above could be made by anyone into Cars - you do not have to be an owner of said vehicle to make this statement. Or am I missing something.

Just not sure why you had a dig given you have done the same see above.

Which part of my post do you disagree with, or believe is not based in fact?

And, it's my recollection that you've never driven an M5. Is this correct?

My point to you - what part did you disagree with as I simply posted what auto jurnolists have written (or video with Steve Sutcliffe and Chris Harris) as surely they have a very good insight to the vehicles.

Do you have a forced induction M5?

[Andy M]

Welshbeef said:

Do you have a forced induction M5?

I do, which my 7 year old son has driven for a couple of hundred yards on private property.

Does this mean that my 7 year old has more experience and firsthand knowledge of driving an M5 than you do Welshbeef?

[Nearlyretired]

Just about to buy a 2016 M2.Feels good,but steering feels a bit dead
My" fun" car is a Lotus Exige S1.with a supercharged Honda vtec.
No abs,no power steering,no servo brakes,no traction control (just pure)
400bhp per ton.
It's very quick, all about changing gear,braking, steering.... balancing!
It's all I want from a car,and it's cheap to run.Everyone wants different things from cars,but I'm not interested in supersaloons driven by computers,that can't be used on the road (Will drive M2 with DSC off!)
I find that the novelty of a fast new car soon wears off,but driving my Lotus after 5 years is still a thrill.
Happy driving everyone!

[Wills2]

Nearlyretired said:

Just about to buy a 2016 M2.Feels good,but steering feels a bit dead
My" fun" car is a Lotus Exige S1.with a supercharged Honda vtec.
No abs,no power steering,no servo brakes,no traction control (just pure)
400bhp per ton.
It's very quick, all about changing gear,braking, steering.... balancing!
It's all I want from a car,and it's cheap to run.Everyone wants different things from cars,but I'm not interested in supersaloons driven by computers,that can't be used on the road (Will drive M2 with DSC off!)
I find that the novelty of a fast new car soon wears off,but driving my Lotus after 5 years is still a thrill.
Happy driving everyone!

An M2 or Exige has zero relevance to this thread, but thanks for posting....