[uniqueMR]

Very nice

[rjd598]

Originally Posted by BM dnobagaV

Well, the f90 technically is a souped up f10. Very few differences overall.

Obviously, newer is better, but not as much as it could've been.

f10 COMPETITION- 7:54
f90- 7:38

[brad850csi]

I reckon it was 4wd because 3.3 is too low for a 54% forward weight car with normal road tyres.

I don’t think an F10 ever got below about 3.8s with road tyres.

[04cobra]

Originally Posted by brad850csi

I reckon it was 4wd because 3.3 is too low for a 54% forward weight car with normal road tyres.

I don’t think an F10 ever got below about 3.8s with road tyres.

3.3 could be accurate but i'm getting 3.2 in my brick 5500lb trackhawk. The trap speed is way too low, something is up.

I mean C&D already reviewed the car and got 2.8s 0-60 and a quarter mile in 10.9, which 10.9 is closer to a 130 trap than what R&T got in the current review.

Also R&T quoted this "BMW, says results in a 3.1-second 0-60 mph run and a 10.8-second 0-124 mph run. Considering we timed the standard M5 as being a lot quicker than this, we bet these figures are conservative."

Also this - https://f90.bimmerpost.com/forums/sh....php?t=1539865

[raysspl]

Impressive results

[MarcelM1]

Originally Posted by DallasLife345M

Sad to hear more complaints about the steering feel

I think that's just normal after driving cars like the GT2RS,Senna und 488 Pista

[vtknight]

Originally Posted by tcw495

Except the part where it has AWD and is almost 1 second faster in 0-60.

^THIS.

Originally Posted by Miko M

I noted above and believe the fools used 2wd to test the F90.... great job R&T as you just re tested a slightly souped up F10 LOL (I jest a little)

But they noted they used 2WD.

Yup, you can see the 1/4 mil 11.4 @123 lol[/QUOTE]

Which makes no sense to me. Why would they use 2WD?

Originally Posted by pet3r

Program it to M2 and you literally have 1 button. It's not complicated, yet everyone bemoans it. Head scratcher to me.

Its dumbfounding to see how good the M5C really is in this league!

I can answer that - everyone forgets to ensure DSC is off. They then think they are in LC and mash the gas and go thinking it's LC. Everytime you change the setting DSC is back on. And you have to wait and press until you see it. They should have been looking for the racing flags to ensure they were in it.

Originally Posted by Stav

Are you trolling or just being funny? F10 and G30 (F90) are different platforms. Or is it your visual perspective?

The older gen to newer gen salty comments are everywhere - and not just in the Bimmerpost threads. And they will likely always be.

[BM dnobagaV]

The leap from e39 M5 to e60 M5 was huge... the leap from the e60 to the f10 was still considerable. The leap from the f10 to the f90 was not up to par to what could have been.

Same engine platform.
Close to similar exterior cues.
Not a daring enough change in interior design.

It has AWD doe. All problems solved, right?
This isn't a discussion worth having with f90 fanboys that would have the gaul to proclaim it on the level of a McClaren or Ferrari.

[wujekwaldus]

even if M5 has been driven with NO LC and in 2WD mode - it is still slower than E63s WAGON (compare 60-140mph times) 7.7s for BMW and 7.4 for boring wagoon family car.

this is real proof that every M5 has different power bonus from factory and You cannot compare two cars on distance.

Same story was with mine ex F13 M6 Competition, where I had big factory bonus and in cold days i was able to do 6.6s 100-200km/h in a stock M6. Only few M6 in the world were able to achieve this result. More: f13 M6 CP LCI with euro6 fuel emissions was slower than M6 CP with euro5. (TLDR; 600hp was slower than 575hp - different power bonus)

So probably this M5 from R&T has no power bonus.

And this is shame, because You don't know what M5 are You going to order,
Merc performance from the other hand is pretty stable.

[tallshortguy]

Originally Posted by BM dnobagaV

The leap from e39 M5 to e60 M5 was huge... the leap from the e60 to the f10 was still considerable. The leap from the f10 to the f90 was not up to par to what could have been.

Same engine platform.
Close to similar exterior cues.
Not a daring enough change in interior design.

It has AWD doe. All problems solved, right?
This isn't a discussion worth having with f90 fanboys that would have the gaul to proclaim it on the level of a McClaren or Ferrari.

Actually calling a car on an entirely different chassis platform "souped up" because it shares the same engine family and your perceptions about the styling are silly to say the least.

[wesleyan92]

Originally Posted by BM dnobagaV

Well, the f90 technically is a souped up f10. Very few differences overall.

Obviously, newer is better, but not as much as it could've been.

Dude - that is the most ridiculous statement. Technically, theoretically, reality - the F90 is not a souped up F10.

[Phatcat]

Originally Posted by wujekwaldus

even if M5 has been driven with NO LC and in 2WD mode - it is still slower than E63s WAGON (compare 60-140mph times) 7.7s for BMW and 7.4 for boring wagoon family car.

this is real proof that every M5 has different power bonus from factory and You cannot compare two cars on distance.

Same story was with mine ex F13 M6 Competition, where I had big factory bonus and in cold days i was able to do 6.6s 100-200km/h in a stock M6. Only few M6 in the world were able to achieve this result. More: f13 M6 CP LCI with euro6 fuel emissions was slower than M6 CP with euro5. (TLDR; 600hp was slower than 575hp - different power bonus)

So probably this M5 from R&T has no power bonus.

And this is shame, because You don't know what M5 are You going to order,
Merc performance from the other hand is pretty stable.

I don't know about power bonus but I do believe it is possible M6 600HP CP is slower than M6 575HP CP.

Based on Auto Bild's rest, the 600HP version was almost 5 seconds slower to 300km/h. Yes they were tested at different days but the difference is too hard to overlook, usually they should be within 1-2 seconds.

[utsteve98]

I believe the use of 2WD is a conspiracy to make this car not appear as quick as it really is. After all we can't have 4200+ lbs car beating a 3000 lbs Vette with more HP. There are purist at RT that don't wanna see AWD in any sports car.

[norbtx]

Road and Track tested the F90 (regular mind) themselves and got 2.8 sec and 10.9 at 127mph earlier. Was their tester the DG M5C that has been making the press circuit rounds? Maybe its been beaten like a dog.

[guarnibl]

face palm

[tcw495]

Originally Posted by wesleyan92

Dude - that is the most ridiculous statement. Technically, theoretically, reality - the F90 is not a souped up F10.

That guy owns a 2010 528...he's just holding onto the (false) notion that an oldie=a goodie.

[josec70]

Originally Posted by BM dnobagaV

The leap from e39 M5 to e60 M5 was huge... the leap from the e60 to the f10 was still considerable. The leap from the f10 to the f90 was not up to par to what could have been.

Same engine platform.
Close to similar exterior cues.
Not a daring enough change in interior design.

It has AWD doe. All problems solved, right?
This isn't a discussion worth having with f90 fanboys that would have the gaul to proclaim it on the level of a McClaren or Ferrari.

Really?

[Phatcat]

Originally Posted by josec70

Really?

Well I suppose the stuff he said is true depends on your point of view.

Same engine platform: true
Similar exterior cues: also true in my eyes, but F10 looks great and sold very well, I can see why BMW doesn't want to do a drastic change. E60 looks nothing like the E39, and F10 doesn't look like E60 either. But F10 and F90 are similar in size and shape.
Interior: F90 definitely better but maybe OP is looking for a radical change.

To me the F90 addresses some of the biggest issues the F10 has:

Traction: fixed with AWD
DCT jerkiness in city driving: fixed with ZF box
Braking: Sport Auto said this is the biggest improvement (in the performance department) over the F10 in their eyes compared to the F10.

[CarlosM4]

I read the entire review, and I was quite disappointed. I was expecting lap times for the E63 S only to find out they crashed it before doing the lap times. The M5 CP review is pretty abysmal. Not much detail, too much ravelling about how it is retardedly fast, and not enough comments about its driving dynamics. Awful review.

[F32Fleet]

Originally Posted by Phatcat

I think some really wanted a different engine than just another upgraded S63. But realistically we will never see another dedicated M5 engine like the V10 again.

Yep.

Turbo charging allows:

1: Gaming of Emissions/Effeciency tests by operating off boost.

2: Enough torque to satisfy customer demand for driving around town, which is what these cars will be doing for most of their life.

[F32Fleet]

Originally Posted by BM dnobagaV

The leap from e39 M5 to e60 M5 was huge... the leap from the e60 to the f10 was still considerable. The leap from the f10 to the f90 was not up to par to what could have been.

Same engine platform.
Close to similar exterior cues.
Not a daring enough change in interior design.

It has AWD doe. All problems solved, right?
This isn't a discussion worth having with f90 fanboys that would have the gaul to proclaim it on the level of a McClaren or Ferrari.

Ya, the e60 was clearly better than the e39 for the 20 minutes between refueling stops.

In all seriousness, the numbers looked good on the e60 but the experience wasn't with the constant complaints about poor torque at low rpms, essentially SMG-only, lubrication issues.

[josec70]

Originally Posted by Phatcat

Well I suppose the stuff he said is true depends on your point of view.

Same engine platform: true
Similar exterior cues: also true in my eyes, but F10 looks great and sold very well, I can see why BMW doesn't want to do a drastic change. E60 looks nothing like the E39, and F10 doesn't look like E60 either. But F10 and F90 are similar in size and shape.
Interior: F90 definitely better but maybe OP is looking for a radical change.

To me the F90 addresses some of the biggest issues the F10 has:

Traction: fixed with AWD
DCT jerkiness in city driving: fixed with ZF box
Braking: Sport Auto said this is the biggest improvement (in the performance department) over the F10 in their eyes compared to the F10.

Phatcat, hope you're well brother.

The "really" comment was directed at the insinuation that any F90 owners have proclaimed it to be on the level of a McClaren or Ferrari .... not exactly an apples to apples comparison but incredible what the F90 can do given it's a a 4 door sedan.

It may appear on the surface that the F90 M5 was a lazy effort from BMW but this car's so much better in every aspect than the F10 M5 that's it's not even close (steering feel remains poor) ..... to the individual who's not owned / driven both extensively the improvements in the F90 M5 may not be as readily apparent especially if you focus on technical reviews. Having owned two F10 M5's over a 6 period I can say w/o any hesitation that the F90 M5 is a huge improvement in almost every single aspect and I'm enjoying every minute behind the wheel.

I've also owned an E39 and E60 M5's and the F90 is hands-down the best I've owned.

BMW could have gotten a little more creative with the exterior but like you mentioned the F10 M5 exterior, in my eyes, was just about perfect.