[elitex]

     Featured on BIMMERPOST.com

Enjoy!

http://www.motortrend.com/cars/bmw/m...5CA35791363137

[onfireX5]

THANKS FOR SHARING!

After Car and Driver, Road and Track, TopGear, Autopista, etc,etc have tested the M5 to be quicker to 60mph and the 1/4 mile than the AMG E 63 S 4Matic+, NOW Mototrend has to pile on ! The conspiracy is broadening! Gotta love what M is doing !

[uniqueMR]

M

[Thescout13]

May have been posted before (ran a search and did not come across a post with this article from today) but just in case.

http://www.motortrend.com/cars/bmw/m...t-test-review/

For pure driving thrills in the just-over-two-ton sedan class, I still believe I'd prefer the purer, more focused Cadillac CTS-V. But without driving the two cars back to back on the same day on the same road, it's hard to say for certain. Call it a hunch. I can say that compared to E 63 or RS 7, BMW's got 'em licked not just in terms of performance but also in terms of driving pleasure. I think what I'm most shocked about is that this F90 M5 shares a platform with all the other G30 5 Series that I've driven, and it is superior to the point that the car honestly doesn't feel related. No, it's not an E39 M5. Want a new one of those? Maybe some Chevy dealer still has a recently discontinued SS lying around. Also no, this big beast is not the deceptively great, F1-engined E60. But you know what? The wallflower-looking F90 does indeed rock. More important, unlike the last version, I say this M5 is worthy of the badge. Future performance icon? Just maybe. Although maybe I'm just getting soft. Maybe I've been seduced by the F90's crazy numbers? Last night I tried one of my wife's sweet potato fries. Nope. I still hate yams.

[DocWeatherington]

Nope its new,

An well.... I have driven the F90 and wow.. M is on point, let alone I am curious to see what the CP brings. Its crazy at how accessible the car is, ... on public roads....

[TheRealOrosie]

[walile]

Looking at the acceleration numbers between C & D and Motor Trend, the Motor Trend M5 seems to be making around 30hp less than the C & D car.

Motor Trend also acknowledges that the 91 might be the limiting factor in their article.

That 10.9@129 1/4 mile run by C & D is 911 Turbo territory. Not that 11.1@126.7 on 91 Octane is any less impressive.

[walile]

Originally Posted by Thescout13

May have been posted before (ran a search and did not come across a post with this article from today) but just in case.

http://www.motortrend.com/cars/bmw/m...t-test-review/

The CTS-V might be a hoot to drive for the car journalist that doesn't own or have to pay for the car, but do a quick search with your favorite Internet search engine on the CTS-V 8-Speed GM 8L90 Automatic Transmission before you even consider one.

The problem with 8L90 transmission is not isolated to the CTS-V, the C7 Corvette and CT6 are also having problems.

[onfireX5]

I had a 2017 Zo6 with the auto. No comparison to the M auto. Logic was terrible.

[fusionchicken]

Originally Posted by onfireX5

I had a 2017 Zo6 with the auto. No comparison to the M auto. Logic was terrible.

Yep GM definitely hasn't really figured out the automatic gearboxes yet IMO, especially when compared to the M-DCT and Porsche PDK

[onfireX5]

Originally Posted by fusionchicken

Yep GM definitely hasn't really figured out the automatic gearboxes yet IMO, especially when compared to the M-DCT and Porsche PDK

There is hope that their new 10 speed jointly designed with Ford will be a step in the right direction.

[elitex]

Originally Posted by fusionchicken

Yep GM definitely hasn't really figured out the automatic gearboxes yet IMO, especially when compared to the M-DCT and Porsche PDK

Felt the same way about Ats. Great chassis but shitty tranny.

[Thescout13]

Originally Posted by walile

The CTS-V might be a hoot to drive for the car journalist that doesn't own or have to pay for the car, but do a quick search with your favorite Internet search engine on the CTS-V 8-Speed GM 8L90 Automatic Transmission before you even consider one.

The problem with 8L90 transmission is not isolated to the CTS-V, the C7 Corvette and CT6 are also having problems.

Cool. I'm not pro CTS-V at all.

[vtknight]

Originally Posted by walile

Looking at the acceleration numbers between C & D and Motor Trend, the Motor Trend M5 seems to be making around 30hp less than the C & D car.

Motor Trend also acknowledges that the 91 might be the limiting factor in their article.

That 10.9@129 1/4 mile run by C & D is 911 Turbo territory. Not that 11.1@126.7 on 91 Octane is any less impressive.

11.1 at almost 127 MPH on 91 octane is actually quite astounding. The F90 has siginificant boost - and these new cars/ECU's pull timing at the slightest hint of - well anything.

The MT article has now completed the trumvirate of North American car mags and they all have the same message:

The F90 M5 is the car to buy.

[vtknight]

And for those like me who love the numbers...this is very welcome news. DO not only look at ET - look at the trap speeds. DO not just look at the straight line numbers - look at the handling, skidpad and braking numbers.

This car is nuts and I am very pleased to have ordered one. Pleased and now very excited lol...

"please note: Out here in the Golden State, we’re (stupidly, pointlessly, frustratingly) running our tests on 91-octane “premium,” not 93, so in many other places, the M5 will be even quicker. As for the direct competition, the AMG E 63 S (more than 300 pounds heavier at 4,581) comes closest, doing 11.3 at 124.2 mph. The Audi RS 7 takes 11.5 seconds at 120.4 mph, and the RWD-only Caddy CTS-V brings up the rear, doing the quarter in 11.9 at 122.0 mph. Your takeaway: This new M5 is an accelerative monster.

She handles great, too. In our figure-eight testing the M5 put down a 23.3-second lap. That’s extraordinary. That’s 1.1 seconds off of a Lamborghini Huracán Performante with triple-sticky tires and 0.9 second behind the alien-technology-infused McLaren 720S. As for the direct competition, the E 63 S does a 23.6, the RS 7 lays down a 24.6, and the CTS-V is good for a 24.2. For just a little more perspective, the lightweight track-day-special BMW M4 GTS also does a 23.3-second lap, as do the Shelby GT350R and the Corvette Grand Sport. Crazy plus amazing equals cramazing. The Mercedes-AMG GT S, our former Best Driver’s Car, needs 23.4 seconds. Oh, and let’s not forget braking. The M5 needs just 97 feet to stop from 60 mph, whereas the E 63 S requires 116 feet, the Audi RS 7 needs 105 feet, and the Cadillac uses 99 feet. What a beast."

[BG23]

Originally Posted by vtknight

And for those like me who love the numbers...this is very welcome news. DO not only look at ET - look at the trap speeds. DO not just look at the straight line numbers - look at the handling, skidpad and braking numbers.

This car is nuts and I am very pleased to have ordered one. Pleased and now very excited lol...

"please note: Out here in the Golden State, we’re (stupidly, pointlessly, frustratingly) running our tests on 91-octane “premium,” not 93, so in many other places, the M5 will be even quicker. As for the direct competition, the AMG E 63 S (more than 300 pounds heavier at 4,581) comes closest, doing 11.3 at 124.2 mph. The Audi RS 7 takes 11.5 seconds at 120.4 mph, and the RWD-only Caddy CTS-V brings up the rear, doing the quarter in 11.9 at 122.0 mph. Your takeaway: This new M5 is an accelerative monster.

She handles great, too. In our figure-eight testing the M5 put down a 23.3-second lap. That’s extraordinary. That’s 1.1 seconds off of a Lamborghini Huracán Performante with triple-sticky tires and 0.9 second behind the alien-technology-infused McLaren 720S. As for the direct competition, the E 63 S does a 23.6, the RS 7 lays down a 24.6, and the CTS-V is good for a 24.2. For just a little more perspective, the lightweight track-day-special BMW M4 GTS also does a 23.3-second lap, as do the Shelby GT350R and the Corvette Grand Sport. Crazy plus amazing equals cramazing. The Mercedes-AMG GT S, our former Best Driver’s Car, needs 23.4 seconds. Oh, and let’s not forget braking. The M5 needs just 97 feet to stop from 60 mph, whereas the E 63 S requires 116 feet, the Audi RS 7 needs 105 feet, and the Cadillac uses 99 feet. What a beast."

Couldn't agree more - I think BMW have built something very special. I ordered mine last year on a bit of a whim (and hope) when I had my F10 in for a service. I thought it would be pretty similar (albeit a little better) to the F10 but with more traction. However I have been shocked with how much more nimble it feels. Audi this is how you build a 4wd car!

I am running mine in as per the book, so I haven't even tried WOT yet...900km to go and I can't wait!

[RPiM5]

I've read Lieberman's expose a few times all the way through now. I am also waiting to see the next MotorTrend Head 2 Head between the F90 and the AMG E63S. I think they will find that the F90 M5 is the better between the two.

I am in agreement with most of what Lieberman wrote, even his comment about the F10 M5. I do agree that a "stock" F10 M5 is kind of mundane in certain aspects and that a "stock" F90 M5 improves upon the F10 significantly in certain areas. I've driven the F90 M5 now and the E63S. But I would like to highlight some of Lieberman's points which are in line with my own opinions.

Leiberman calls out G30 as having "derivative looks and behind-the-times interiors," and I couldn't agree more. Although some of the interior design materials and looks are different/improved over the F10, it's just not compelling. This carries over to the F90, and I think a lot of new G30/F90 owners are being dazzled by things like the multi-color interior lighting capability and the digital dash, but fail to see or don't care about the lack of a drastic change in overall interior styling from the F10 or from other BMW's (i.e. floating iDrive screen from F30/G11, etc...). It's the big details that probably led to Lieberman to making the comment on "behind the times interiors."

Cooincidentally, I've also driven the new Honda Accord, and I gotta say I was surprised. It does drive pretty well. Lots of feedback too.

Lieberman's words; "the engine is still muted" and the "steering is still dead," again things that shouldn't be present in an ///M car. Let alone an all new generation M5, when the F10 M5 was lambasted for having the same flaws.

The one area that I definitely agree with Lieberman on is the chassis engineering/feel. The chassis engineering is definitely a step above the F10 M5, however, why would we ever not expect ///M to deliver a chassis that is significantly better than the last generation? Or in other words, which M5 had worse chassis engineering than the last? None is the answer, so this is like praising ///M for doing a good job for something they are expected to do in the first place, because that's their job. I do however give kudos to ///M for lightening the weight of the car despite adding AWD to the chassis. This is definitely something no other manufacturer has done before.

Lieberman's comment about the X6M is what I've been saying for the last year as well. That the F90 M5 is just going to be a 1,000lbs lighter X6M by them adding AWD. But they took it too far and if you look closely the front end of the F90 M5 looks too identical to the X5M/X6M in my eye. Just look at the way the air intake on the front bumper are designed. It's too similar looking.

The F90 M5 was a bit of a muted driving experience for me compared to the E63S. Fast? Yes. But the thing that I hated the most about the F90 M5 was the same exact engine characteristics in both terms of sound and performance. At least the E63S was fun to drive because it's aggressive sounding exhaust note and far more grunt delivered by its 627lbs/ft of torque, despite it's atrocious weight disadvantage compared to the F90 M5.

As I have said before, if you take away the ///M xDrive AWD system on the F90 M5, what would you have? You would have a car with the same engine and less weight than the previous generation M5, with a bit better driving dynamics due to the new chassis engineering, which makes the F90 M5 feel like even a better RWD car than the F10 M5, but really nothing else to differentiate it performance wise or driver wise from the F10 M5.

The one thing that would have changed my opinion on the F90 M5 entirely is if ///M at least tried to give the S63tu4 some stark contrast compared to the S63tu. One way they could have done this is by giving the S63tu4 a redline of 8,000rpm. If the F90 M5 had a redline of 8,000rpm I would have one in my garage right now, no joke. That new torque converter would have no problem handling the extra rpm either.

In my view the F90 M5 is the fastest M5 / Sports Sedan in existence today, but it's also the worst M5 ever made, for many small reasons that an M5 enthusiast like me cares about.

I really hope that the next M5 is a re-birth of the BMW M5, and will feature some actual Motorsport feeling for the driver rather than just trying to make it as fast as possible. Then again there is no solid definition as to what an ///M car really is and ///M Division produces what they think an ///M car should be, therefore my points are all moot anyway.

As another counterpoint to the F90 M5, the picture below is the 2018 Audi A7. Can you imagine that if the regular A7 looks like this, how awesome the RS7 is going to look?! At least Audi is taking chances with their designs these days. I feel like BMW is playing it too safe, even with their ///M designs. Chris Harris even made the comment that we was disappointed in the F90's rear end design. But hey, beauty is in the eye of the beholder right, so I make no judgement on anybody who loves the way the F90 M5 looks.

The next generation Audi RS7, which will no doubt be heavier than the F90 M5, but in terms of everything else, I think is going to be a winner, but probably still a bit slower than the F90 M5. It'll have killer looks, and the rumors are that the new RS7 is going to come with 700 crank hp.

But based on the picture below, I'd rather have the next RS7.

[TheRealOrosie]

Originally Posted by RPiM5

I've read Lieberman's expose a few times all the way through now. I am also waiting to see the next MotorTrend Head 2 Head between the F90 and the AMG E63S. I think they will find that the F90 M5 is the better between the two.

I am in agreement with most of what Lieberman wrote, even his comment about the F10 M5. I do agree that a "stock" F10 M5 is kind of mundane in certain aspects and that a "stock" F90 M5 improves upon the F10 significantly in certain areas. I've driven the F90 M5 now and the E63S. But I would like to highlight some of Lieberman's points which are in line with my own opinions.

Leiberman calls out G30 as having "derivative looks and behind-the-times interiors," and I couldn't agree more. Although some of the interior design materials and looks are different/improved over the F10, it's just not compelling. This carries over to the F90, and I think a lot of new G30/F90 owners are being dazzled by things like the multi-color interior lighting capability and the digital dash, but fail to see or don't care about the lack of a drastic change in overall interior styling from the F10 or from other BMW's (i.e. floating iDrive screen from F30/G11, etc...). It's the big details that probably led to Lieberman to making the comment on "behind the times interiors."

Cooincidentally, I've also driven the new Honda Accord, and I gotta say I was surprised. It does drive pretty well. Lots of feedback too.

Lieberman's words; "the engine is still muted" and the "steering is still dead," again things that shouldn't be present in an ///M car. Let alone an all new generation M5, when the F10 M5 was lambasted for having the same flaws.

The one area that I definitely agree with Lieberman on is the chassis engineering/feel. The chassis engineering is definitely a step above the F10 M5, however, why would we ever not expect ///M to deliver a chassis that is significantly better than the last generation? Or in other words, which M5 had worse chassis engineering than the last? None is the answer, so this is like praising ///M for doing a good job for something they are expected to do in the first place, because that's their job. I do however give kudos to ///M for lightening the weight of the car despite adding AWD to the chassis. This is definitely something no other manufacturer has done before.

Lieberman's comment about the X6M is what I've been saying for the last year as well. That the F90 M5 is just going to be a 1,000lbs lighter X6M by them adding AWD. But they took it too far and if you look closely the front end of the F90 M5 looks too identical to the X5M/X6M in my eye. Just look at the way the air intake on the front bumper are designed. It's too similar looking.

The F90 M5 was a bit of a muted driving experience for me compared to the E63S. Fast? Yes. But the thing that I hated the most about the F90 M5 was the same exact engine characteristics in both terms of sound and performance. At least the E63S was fun to drive because it's aggressive sounding exhaust note and far more grunt delivered by its 627lbs/ft of torque, despite it's atrocious weight disadvantage compared to the F90 M5.

As I have said before, if you take away the ///M xDrive AWD system on the F90 M5, what would you have? You would have a car with the same engine and less weight than the previous generation M5, with a bit better driving dynamics due to the new chassis engineering, which makes the F90 M5 feel like even a better RWD car than the F10 M5, but really nothing else to differentiate it performance wise or driver wise from the F10 M5.

The one thing that would have changed my opinion on the F90 M5 entirely is if ///M at least tried to give the S63tu4 some stark contrast compared to the S63tu. One way they could have done this is by giving the S63tu4 a redline of 8,000rpm. If the F90 M5 had a redline of 8,000rpm I would have one in my garage right now, no joke. That new torque converter would have no problem handling the extra rpm either.

In my view the F90 M5 is the fastest M5 / Sports Sedan in existence today, but it's also the worst M5 ever made, for many small reasons that an M5 enthusiast like me cares about.

I really hope that the next M5 is a re-birth of the BMW M5, and will feature some actual Motorsport feeling for the driver rather than just trying to make it as fast as possible. Then again there is no solid definition as to what an ///M car really is and ///M Division produces what they think an ///M car should be, therefore my points are all moot anyway.

As another counterpoint to the F90 M5, the picture below is the 2018 Audi A7. Can you imagine that if the regular A7 looks like this, how awesome the RS7 is going to look?! At least Audi is taking chances with their designs these days. I feel like BMW is playing it too safe, even with their ///M designs. Chris Harris even made the comment that we was disappointed in the F90's rear end design. But hey, beauty is in the eye of the beholder right, so I make no judgement on anybody who loves the way the F90 M5 looks.

The next generation Audi RS7, which will no doubt be heavier than the F90 M5, but in terms of everything else, I think is going to be a winner, but probably still a bit slower than the F90 M5. It'll have killer looks, and the rumors are that the new RS7 is going to come with 700 crank hp.

But based on the picture below, I'd rather have the next RS7.

That grill is heinous, imo.

And to everything else you said, yep...heard you the first time. And second. And third......

[elitex]

Originally Posted by Hill Country F90

That grill is heinous, imo.

And to everything else you said, yep...heard you the first time. And second. And third......

And fourth and fifth and sixth......

[BwoodBMW]

Originally Posted by RPiM5

I've read ..... next RS7.

Had to cut down the novel. 2 points:

1- I didn't own an F10 but having sat in the F90 I think its genuinely one of my favorite interiors in the business right now. I completely love it and I'm not just falling in love with multi-color lights. I can't stand the E63 interior with the big cheesy flat screen that is a shared part across basically every new mercedes. Like I said, purchasing decision will be based on personal preferences not performance and I'm happy to admit that people may disagree with me on the above.

2 - pretty sure that Audi pic is a photoshop. This is the official pic of the A7 and the back end looks dopey to me. I'm a big Audi fan so I hope it looks better in the flesh but pics are very unflattering of the rear on this car.

[RPiM5]

Originally Posted by BwoodBMW

Had to pair down the novel. 2 points:

1- I didn't own an F10 but having sat in the F90 I think its genuinely one of my favorite interiors in the business right now. I completely love it and I'm not just falling in love with multi-color lights. I can't stand the E63 interior with the big cheesy flat screen that is a shared part across basically every new mercedes. Like I said, purchasing decision will be based on personal preferences not performance and I'm happy to admit that people may disagree with me on the above.

2 - pretty sure that Audi pic is a photoshop. This is the official pic of the A7 and the back end looks dopey to me. I'm a big Audi fan so I hope it looks better in the flesh but pics are very unflattering of the rear on this car.

I agree, I've never been in love with the A7/RS7 rear end either. I wish they would just make it a little shorter. But the interior of the new A7 I am in love with and I feel is light years ahead of BMW. I've owned the F10 so long now that I really think that BMW should have taken more bold steps to make the interior different than what the G30/F90 is today. I'm not saying that I love the E63S interior either, but I do think that it is at least different enough to be exciting or polarizing at the least. Then again, I'm one of those people who love the E60 and it's interior/exterior designs, where most people hated it.

Now that the MotorTrend review is out and I've personally driven both the F90 and the E63S, I should have ended the novel with the final point of: F90 M5, Fast? Yes. Special? No. The end.

I won't make any new threads on the subject nor make any new points but only respond to threads that people have made that have a direct counterpoint to my posts for a civilized debate. Thanks for playing.

[tcw495]

^ Lol to the comments above...I couldn't get through that whole post.