[N & M]

Originally Posted by Paul-Bracq-BMW

It's on purpose that I put these comments... Some (the older demographics) will find the car over complicated. The gadget lovers will love it...

Personally, I would rather have a choice than have one setting predetermined on me. The F10 was flawed because it could not put its power down and they have addressed it and clearly kept the balance in handling between safety, comfort and entertainment.

This is always going to be a luxury saloon car first that has sportcar talent second and buyers will ultimately want that. Anybody who says otherwise doesn’t get the reason for the car.

The only let down is the engine sound that could have been better, I admit, when it is in hooligan mode but hey in a car like this I would rather have it over a ride that is harsh such as was observed in the E63.

[bm323]

I would say the F90 sounds as good as any, and the E60 is inferior sounding to the F90 ... prob E39 has the best sounding exhaust

https://youtu.be/jAELfviAR7o

http://www.bmwblog.com/2017/12/05/bm...ds-comparison/

[dcbigbaps]

Originally Posted by CarlosM4

I own a M6 Gran Coupe and instead of opting to wait for this new M5 F90, I opted for the W213 E 63 AMG S. It is pretty obvious that as far as performance goes, these two cars are pretty much identical. The difference in acceleration is minimal, and the difference in handling is probably next to zero. I still think the E 63 is probably a slight brush faster than the M5 F90 (considering it was faster in all metric acceleration from 100-200, 100-250, 100-300 comparing to the M5 30Jahre) but the difference is definitely minimal.

The M5 F90 is 20kg lighter (Pano Roof vs Pano Roof) and 30kg lighter (Carbon Roof vs non Pano Roof on the E), but other than that hardware is pretty much the same. Steering Feel, from reviews the E 63 got more praise than the M5 at the launch but it is probably very similar. The 4WD of both have been praised a lot, although it has been said the E 63 has more a RWD car feel on the road than the M5, grip is probably identical too. And although reviews are saying the M5 F90 feels slightly faster on track, it is hard to compare when you are not directly driving both cars, as conditions vary, and they were tested at different tracks. The only thing we can conclude is which will be more visceral and fun to drive. And I am sorry, but the E 63 S probably takes the cake. It has better sound, the engine is more rev-hungry, the transmission is a tad quicker (and since it has shorter ratios, you can explore the revs more often), and the suspension although a little stiffer (this is controversial though, some reviews said it is better, other said it is worse), both probably ride about the same.

The E 63 S is probably the better fun car to buy. The M5 F90 is probably the slightly quicker car on racetrack in England on a cold day (by 0,1s). Basically saying the new M5 F90 although great is a disappointment, because before AMG cars although loud and fun, did not have the poise and accuracy to match an M car. Today though AMG cars are pretty much neck a neck with M cars in terms of driving, and BMW M has not been able to play the AMG Game of being fun when you are not 10/10's.

This is my 2 cents. I feel that when comparos come in, it is going to be pretty much 50-50 both side, because it all depends on what the reviewer cares more. A car that gets the job done with no drama, or one with the drama.

The worst part is BMW M had nearly an year to perfect and finetune the car after the launch of the E 63 S, but apparently that wasn't enough.

Great summary, but interestingly enough for me, this is the reason why I am going to be getting the M5. I am definitely in the minority here, but I am using this as a sleeper super sedan/daily driver more-so than a rev happy, wake up the neighbors kind of car.

Another note is that I just like the looks, interior, and the tech better on the M5. (Very subjective of course).

The great thing is that you can get what you want in this segment for the most part. Options are great! Unfortunately for us, however, we won't be seeing any return to just naturally aspirated engines anymore...

[dcbigbaps]

Originally Posted by kyrix1st

I personally believe it would have been much better received if the car launched with DCT. Still distinctive in its segment, with that crisp shifts that no slush box could imitate.

I personally believe DCT is great for performance oriented driving, but it's not so fun for day to day driving. Perhaps that is why they left it out since this is more of a sedan?

[kyrix1st]

Originally Posted by GioM3

I wasn't talking about GTS, if you go on to YouTube, there's plenty of lightly modified (non Supercharged) e92 M3s lapping crazy Times, in my opinion e36 M3 was good, but not as good balanced car as e34 M5 or e46 M3, I think e92 M3 is last pure, old school M car, N/A engine, MT, well balanced chassis, everyday usability as well as track day machine, it only needs aftermarket Exaust, K&N air-filter, and Performance pads. Don't need to change anything else.

You might be looking at BTG times and not a full lap like the one with Setra Motorsport (supercharged E46.) Although I think if modified to a similar level, E92 will have edge on straights, it will be slightly slower than previous gens on high lateral G corners due to weight. Youtube BTG times tell this. (E36: 7:25~ E46: 7:35~ E92: 7:19~ all BTG)

Originally Posted by dcbigbaps

I personally believe DCT is great for performance oriented driving, but it's not so fun for day to day driving. Perhaps that is why they left it out since this is more of a sedan?

Yeah, but it's hardly different from E63 AMG in that sense. What fun is it if M does not have that edgy character over the competition?

[dcbigbaps]

Yeah, but it's hardly different from E63 AMG in that sense. What fun is it if M does not have that edgy character over the competition?[/QUOTE]

Let's just hope that they achieved some of that fun in other ways! I can't wait until full on reviews come out.

[bm323]

"The 2018 Mercedes-AMG E63 S is similarly priced, quick, and powerful, but is heavier and isn't as tuned-for-the-track as the Bimmer. Other competitors, like the*Audi RS 7,*Cadillac CTS-V, and*Porsche Panamera*are worthy of comparison, but none, for various reasons, align perfectly with the latest M5."

https://www.autoblog.com/2017/12/05/...-drive-review/

[dcbigbaps]

Interesting talk about the transmission from the Jalopnik review:

But I was even more nervous when I found out that the only transmission available in the new M5 is a new eight-speed M Steptronic transmission, which is a regular-old automatic. There is no double clutch transmission option, and BMW has done DCTs so well before.

As it was explained to me by the M engineers: this was a performance decision, as the automatic is actually faster than the old dual-clutch transmission so many of us have loved. They told me that the torque converter is already fully locked as soon as the car starts moving, so shifts are close to instantaneous.

I’m not sure how much of that was marketing speak, but I will say that both on track and around town, I never once was left waiting when I needed to drop several gears in a hurry. And transmission’s shift mapping can be changed on the fly. Mode 1 is for daily, around town driving. Mode 2 shortens up the shift times a bit. Mode 3 is fully dialed for the track with extremely short shift times.

[xlover]

Car and driver was pretty positive on the transmission and chassis....

[BwoodBMW]

Originally Posted by cgg126

So, am I the only one who thinks the E63 S is like 5 years ahead of this car in almost every way???

ummm... 5 years ahead? yeah you may be the only one. You can argue that certain aspects of the e63 are superior but no doubt this is a competitive segment. Performance wise the only data we have is one reviewer whose test data put the M car faster to 60 and to the quarter mile. Given different conditions, different days, who knows accuracy of equipment but clearly they'll be in the same ballpark from a performance standpoint. Having sat in both I think the M5 interior is nicer (I despise the flat two screen dash of the AMG). Will the AMG come out on top in some tests? I'm sure it will but these cars are neck and neck.

[BG23]

Originally Posted by BwoodBMW

ummm... 5 years ahead? yeah you may be the only one. You can argue that certain aspects of the e63 are superior but no doubt this is a competitive segment. Performance wise the only data we have is one reviewer whose test data put the M car faster to 60 and to the quarter mile. Given different conditions, different days, who knows accuracy of equipment but clearly they'll be in the same ballpark from a performance standpoint. Having sat in both I think the M5 interior is nicer (I despise the flat two screen dash of the AMG). Will the AMG come out on top in some tests? I'm sure it will but these cars are neck and neck.

I spent quite a bit of time comparing these 2 including 2 days driving the E63s. In summary I thought it was a great car and I would be happy owning one. I would note that I do quite a few miles and the E63's ride was almost a deal breaker.

On paper the E63s is the one that falls short though. From a tech standpoint the BMW does everything the Merc does but more - some of the cool camera things you can do both inside the cabin and from your phone are amazing. I also really like the remote parking!

I've seen some people swoon over the E63's dash - this design language looks like someone has just stuck 2 pads on the dash. Unfortunately the M5 suffers a little it here as well. I also found the idrive system superior in my F10 - let alone the F90.

I was also shocked to find that you can't even order items like soft close doors on the E63.

Weight is the enemy of these cars and getting it down from here is expensive - producing more power with theses engines is comparatively cheap and easy. BMW choose to spend money on weight - and I expect dynamically there will be quite a big reward for doing so.

Ultimately the head said M5, the heart loved the E63S sound... but ultimately I decided to get the M5

[Nivarox]

Car And Driver Review of F90 M5

https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews...ws&date=120617

[marcvtec]

Originally Posted by dcbigbaps

Great summary, but interestingly enough for me, this is the reason why I am going to be getting the M5. I am definitely in the minority here, but I am using this as a sleeper super sedan/daily driver more-so than a rev happy, wake up the neighbors kind of car.

Another note is that I just like the looks, interior, and the tech better on the M5. (Very subjective of course).

The great thing is that you can get what you want in this segment for the most part. Options are great! Unfortunately for us, however, we won't be seeing any return to just naturally aspirated engines anymore...

100% agree. That is why I am buying one.

Love the exterior looks simple kinda blends in with other 5 series but just look a bit more aggressive. I do not need the attention of people staring at me or my car.

Secondly the interior of the M5 is way nicer (to me) then the merc.
Clean lines, simple, effective.white interior with piano black trim to match the centre console will look solid.
Merc. is like a disco ball of disaster, circle vents, carbon ashtray dash etc. and screens oh boy.
soft close doors on M5, very nice touch.
super load exhaust on 63, no thanks. I have a c63 and slk 55, and every time I give it gas everyone looks at you. drive though a neighbourhood everyone hates you and thinks you speeding, even if your not. Cops hear you coming all the time.
No thanks

And most importantly, a nice tune from MHD, or Cobb, JB, whoever, + some bolt ons. And this car will be easy 700 WHP+AWD+4doors=winner

[kyrix1st]

Originally Posted by bm323

I would say the F90 sounds as good as any, and the E60 is inferior sounding to the F90....

I would not go as far as to say you need hearing aids because it is a personal preference afterall, but there is something in high compression NA engines that have the screamer character that no forced induction engine can ever imitate.

I hear straight piped RB engines and 1jz,2jzs here all the time but none sound as fierce as straight piped inline 6 M engine such as S50B30 euro, S50B32 or S54. They simply are much more refined at low rpm while having that every ounce of juice squeezed thunderous noise resembling the DTM golden eras.

[bm323]

Originally Posted by kyrix1st

I would not go as far as to say you need hearing aids because it is a personal preference afterall, but there is something in high compression NA engines that have the screamer character that no forced induction engine can ever imitate.

I hear straight piped RB engines and 1jz,2jzs here all the time but none sound as fierce as straight piped inline 6 M engine such as S50B30 euro, S50B32 or S54. They simply are much more refined at low rpm while having that every ounce of juice squeezed thunderous noise resembling the DTM golden eras.

You obviously turned a blind ear why remove the links?

[kyrix1st]

Originally Posted by bm323

You obviously turned a blind ear why remove the links?

Why post a link with e60 revving to 4000 rpm instead of 8300?
Link below isn’t redlining either, but gives a better picture.

Slight exhaust tune gives this.

Bring s63 clips that sound better than this:

[CarlosM4]

E60 sounds worse than the F90.


The E60 is the best Engine Sounding Sedan of all Time. I absolutely love the E60 M5. That is the best M5 ever made. The E39 is pretty epic, but the E60 is pure sex on the form of a Sedan

[phil_]

Originally Posted by CarlosM4

E60 sounds worse than the F90.


The E60 is the best Engine Sounding Sedan of all Time. I absolutely love the E60 M5. That is the best M5 ever made. The E39 is pretty epic, but the E60 is pure sex on the form of a Sedan

Saying something so blasphemous should result in a ban.

[bm323]

Originally Posted by kyrix1st

Why post a link with e60 revving to 4000 rpm instead of 8300?

Thank you for admitting the F90 sounds better than the E60 up to 4000 rpm ;cool:

In fact, it's the 2nd worst sounding

[CarlosM4]

Originally Posted by phil_

Saying something so blasphemous should result in a ban.

This is coming from an owner of a M6 F06 GC and ex owner of a F10 M5. In my family we had both the E39 and E60. I got to drive the E60 when I was younger. The E60 is the most exciting car in the form of a Sedan. The SMG on DriveLogic 6, TC Off, and that V10 scream up to 8k rpm is something I will always take with me. Every time I see a video of an E60 M5, I remember why I am a petrolhead. The fact is although I think it is wonderful, the car has horrible reliability, and running costs are greater than the GDP of many African nations, that is why I haven't bought one. If one day, an aftermarket solution is done to the issues the car has, I wouldn't hesitate to buy one the following day.

So no, the E39 M5 is not better than the E60. It can be a better allrounder, considering it has more torque lower down, and is definitely more tamed and comfortable, and it has a lovely manual tranny, but it is not a better M5.

[kyrix1st]

Originally Posted by bm323

Thank you for admitting the F90 sounds better than the E60 up to 4000 rpm ;cool:

In fact, it's the 2nd worst sounding

I think there is a reading comprehension issue going on here.

I simply pointed out how E60 isn’t revved to its full potential. How it translates to “F90 is better sounding under 4,000 rpm” is a mystery.

Like I said, it is all personal preference so I am not commenting on your taste, but general consensus undeniably is nothing turbocharged beats the sound of naturally aspirated V10.

[phil_]

Originally Posted by CarlosM4

This is coming from an owner of a M6 F06 GC and ex owner of a F10 M5. In my family we had both the E39 and E60. I got to drive the E60 when I was younger. The E60 is the most exciting car in the form of a Sedan. The SMG on DriveLogic 6, TC Off, and that V10 scream up to 8k rpm is something I will always take with me. Every time I see a video of an E60 M5, I remember why I am a petrolhead. The fact is although I think it is wonderful, the car has horrible reliability, and running costs are greater than the GDP of many African nations, that is why I haven't bought one. If one day, an aftermarket solution is done to the issues the car has, I wouldn't hesitate to buy one the following day.

So no, the E39 M5 is not better than the E60. It can be a better allrounder, considering it has more torque lower down, and is definitely more tamed and comfortable, and it has a lovely manual tranny, but it is not a better M5.

I owned the E60 M5 for 4 years, 3 years out of warranty. You never knew when a $2k to $5k bill was looming. And I went through quite a few of those. Lost count. I was at the gas station so often I had my credit card suspended once for fraud because I put in gas twice in 2 hours.

That being said it remains my favorite car of all time. I had a Dinan exhaust and the sound it made was glorious. I would take 10km detours just to hear the exhaust in a tunnel. I had a neighbor tell me the favorite part of his day was hearing my car go by.

The SMG was awful in stop and go traffic (Which I never experience thankfully) but in everything else it was sublime. The S6 shifts could knock your fillings out.

I look at used E60 M5's weekly and wonder if I should just go back.