RE: BMW M5 (F90): Driven
Discussion
Ares said:
The notion that you can't use 600bhp on the road is crap. Unless you are an idiot, in which case 200bhp is too much.
There is no way that you can use 600+hp on the road. The occasional squirt, or overtake perhaps, but that's it. Anything more is just dangerous. The average driver simply cannot handle that power and weight. Imagine it without the gadgets. Any more than 400hp on the road is entering into diminishing returns as to use and safety. R400TVR said:
Ares said:
The notion that you can't use 600bhp on the road is crap. Unless you are an idiot, in which case 200bhp is too much.
There is no way that you can use 600+hp on the road. The occasional squirt, or overtake perhaps, but that's it. peteA said:
You don’t use 600bhp all the time! You don’t drive flat out all the time!
But you most definately can use 600bhp some of the time and it’s bloody good fun when you do.
Indeed. I tend to find comments along those lines tend to come from folk who haven't owned a 400bhp+ car.But you most definately can use 600bhp some of the time and it’s bloody good fun when you do.
The way I see it, if that's how you want to look at it you've never really got much time at all in any performance car. First through third gear at full tilt if you fancy touching ~100mph.
E65Ross said:
But hey, choice....it must be bad 
Then you get the people saying "why can't they just make a car like xyz"...well....maybe not everyone wants that set up that you do? "it should be like an E39 M5"....maybe someone wants something a bit firmer with a bit less roll in the corners? Maybe they don't. By having more adaptable modes it means, in theory, the market that this car appeals to gets larger.
Except when none of the gazillion permutations that you spend countless hours playing with is as good as the single option on say, an E39 M5.Then you get the people saying "why can't they just make a car like xyz"...well....maybe not everyone wants that set up that you do? "it should be like an E39 M5"....maybe someone wants something a bit firmer with a bit less roll in the corners? Maybe they don't. By having more adaptable modes it means, in theory, the market that this car appeals to gets larger.
Or when the systems go wrong and you realise how much the electronic trickery that you used once costs to fix.
Plenty - ok, I haven't been in this new M5 bit you are delusional of you think that the F10 is not as good as am E39. It handles better, it's more comfortable, it brakes an awful lot better, has a much nicer interior and is much, much faster.
The E39 M5 is a great car bit I think a lot of rose tinted specs are worn regarding it. It seems people think it's an actual sports car in a big body, but it's still a circa 1800kg car with vague steering feel.
The E39 M5 is a great car bit I think a lot of rose tinted specs are worn regarding it. It seems people think it's an actual sports car in a big body, but it's still a circa 1800kg car with vague steering feel.
AreOut said:
provided same tires I don't think it will outhandle E39 especially on a tight B road
it also has fake sound and good luck with maintenance once it's out of warranty
You don't think it'll handle as well? Riiiggghhhhtt. Is that in the same way an E34 would handle as well as an E60? What about an E28?it also has fake sound and good luck with maintenance once it's out of warranty
People used to say the same RE warranty with the E39 when that was new with vanos problems etc etc but I don't see what that has to do with the discussion on how the car drives to be honest.
plenty said:
E65Ross said:
But hey, choice....it must be bad
Then you get the people saying "why can't they just make a car like xyz"...well....maybe not everyone wants that set up that you do? "it should be like an E39 M5"....maybe someone wants something a bit firmer with a bit less roll in the corners? Maybe they don't. By having more adaptable modes it means, in theory, the market that this car appeals to gets larger.
Except when none of the gazillion permutations that you spend countless hours playing with is as good as the single option on say, an E39 M5.Then you get the people saying "why can't they just make a car like xyz"...well....maybe not everyone wants that set up that you do? "it should be like an E39 M5"....maybe someone wants something a bit firmer with a bit less roll in the corners? Maybe they don't. By having more adaptable modes it means, in theory, the market that this car appeals to gets larger.
Or when the systems go wrong and you realise how much the electronic trickery that you used once costs to fix.
Krikkit said:
plenty said:
E65Ross said:
But hey, choice....it must be bad
Then you get the people saying "why can't they just make a car like xyz"...well....maybe not everyone wants that set up that you do? "it should be like an E39 M5"....maybe someone wants something a bit firmer with a bit less roll in the corners? Maybe they don't. By having more adaptable modes it means, in theory, the market that this car appeals to gets larger.
Except when none of the gazillion permutations that you spend countless hours playing with is as good as the single option on say, an E39 M5.Then you get the people saying "why can't they just make a car like xyz"...well....maybe not everyone wants that set up that you do? "it should be like an E39 M5"....maybe someone wants something a bit firmer with a bit less roll in the corners? Maybe they don't. By having more adaptable modes it means, in theory, the market that this car appeals to gets larger.
Or when the systems go wrong and you realise how much the electronic trickery that you used once costs to fix.
popeyewhite said:
Oh and yes, the BMW chap was quoted as saying M Division itself considered the M535 to be the first true M5. Hardly surprising as it was developed by BMW Motorsport. Truth is that fact is pretty well known to virtually every true BMW enthusiast.
In your video?? He didn't. You are perhaps getting confused by the fact he called it the 'Em-Five-Thirty-Five'?He did say that the first M5 followed 5 years later.
TomG75 said:
Ares said:
Said it before...I'll say it again. Latest 'proper' autos are so good and so quick they start to render DCT/SMG/Dual Clutch as redundant, especially sub-supercars.
I agree that the new autos are very impressive and might get there but I definitely prefer DCT as things stand right now. (Comparing the Golf R / Audi S3 DCT to the M235i auto)I would love to experience the new M5 for myself to see what they have achieved. Admittedly I can only dream of owning one but if I had £90K burning a hole in my pocket I would be gutted that its not available with DCT, unless a test drive proved me wrong.
R400TVR said:
Ares said:
The notion that you can't use 600bhp on the road is crap. Unless you are an idiot, in which case 200bhp is too much.
There is no way that you can use 600+hp on the road. The occasional squirt, or overtake perhaps, but that's it. Anything more is just dangerous. The average driver simply cannot handle that power and weight. Imagine it without the gadgets. Any more than 400hp on the road is entering into diminishing returns as to use and safety. And gadgets are needed by most people in a 200bhp RWD car to stop it pointing the wrong way on a wet roundabout.
Ares said:
In your video?? He didn't. You are perhaps getting confused by the fact he called it the 'Em-Five-Thirty-Five'?
He did say that the first M5 followed 5 years later.
FOURTH time now He did say that the first M5 followed 5 years later.
popeyewhite said:
It's all on the M Division website.
You carry on, thread ban for both of us soon.....A friendly reminder that good handling is as much about feel as opposed to outright grip and performance-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FzOPR7STqrQ&t=
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FzOPR7STqrQ&t=
Personally, I've always looked at the E12 530 MLE as genesis for M-cars. It may have been designed for the South African market, but it was a genuine homologation product, and the only 5-series I can think of that went through a lightening process, with the likes of aluminium panels, thinner glass, and drilled pedal & boot hinges. This was in 1976
As for the original E28 M5 itself, Richter said that, due to spare line capacity in 1986, there was a desire to fit the M88 into another model than just the E24 M635. However, when they tried with the E30, the results weren't satisfactory to them, so they instead turned attention to placing the engine into an E28
He didn't seem to stipulate whether the plan was for this E30 was to be standard or "M3" bodied though, although I know the latter is something that Hartge produced a little while later
As for the original E28 M5 itself, Richter said that, due to spare line capacity in 1986, there was a desire to fit the M88 into another model than just the E24 M635. However, when they tried with the E30, the results weren't satisfactory to them, so they instead turned attention to placing the engine into an E28
He didn't seem to stipulate whether the plan was for this E30 was to be standard or "M3" bodied though, although I know the latter is something that Hartge produced a little while later
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff