I'm not against turbos, but in a car like this, it was a bad decision. Let's face it, the M5 is one of the iconic performance cars, so the turbo should be performance biased. By making it try to achieve low emissions, the whole thing just seems a bit half-arsed. It's like economy has been prioritised ahead of driver involvement and performance. And in a car like this, that is just wrong. I'd have an old V10 M5 over this any day of the week. This one doesn't even sound like a proper V8.
whilst i would prefer a normally aspirated engine, its not offering us the Manual box the Americans get that would lose BMW the sale if i were in the fortunate position to buy one.
I have been lucky enough to buy myself the ultimate christmas present; I bought an F10M, well placed my order and deposit for now at least! This means at the point of final payment I will have to have sold my Caterham R500 and my F10 530d but I tell you, having driven the F10M twice now, I do not miss having the manual gearbox from my Caterham at all, the 'box in the M5 is faster than I will ever be able to do it and now smooth too!
The engine although yes it has had to sacrifice its Naturally Aspirated heritage at the alter of emissions...still produces 552bhp and I don't look at it in the way of BMW has ruined the engine, I look at it with the view of; They have to do this to still offer us what we want, otherwise in a few years time there would be no M5, no AMGs, no Porsche or RS/S Audis to speak of..
They have to do this to still offer us what we want, otherwise in a few years time there would be no M5, no AMGs, no Porsche or RS/S Audis to speak of..
if over sized, over powered supersaloons is what the will offer, I won't miss them a bit.
The moment they chose forced induction, they should have seen it coming.
I assume you're talking about the verdict. Fade-prone brakes and uncommunicative chassis and steering are related to turbocharging, really?! You're no Einstein, that's for sure.
Turbocharging in my previous statement is not used only literally, because its traits can be found everywhere in the car. What do turbocharged cars do that makes a lot of people hate them? Well, they have slower throttle response and run out of steam early which metaphorically seem to to be the case with this car. Its dynamic repertoire is limited, there is not much joy in thrashing it, even though it offers excellent performance, low emissions and lots of grip.
In other words, effective but pointless such as turbocharging, but you wouldn't know anything about that would you now?
I think with this Review i will stick with Evo who rate it a Class Leader, Autocar stick to your everyday car Reviews and leave the SuperCars and SuperSaloons to Evo and Car Magazine
This car just doesn't grab me like the old one. I'm sure it's better in many ways like range and fuel consumption, but if i was bothered about that I wouoldn't be buying an M5 in the first place. Nice but give me the old one everytime..
Turbo charging or not, all other tests of the new M5 I've read have it as the class best. In the latest Evo, the testers found the chassis plenty "communicative", while the car whipped the back sides of the Panamera and (Autocar's perenial favourite) the XFR, quite comfortably and bested even the AMG E63.
Even Autorcar's own Greg Kable's called the new M5 a "landmark (see below) before the rest of the team decided they couldn't bring themselves to put it above the XFR (and the AMG).
28 April 2010
The moment they chose forced induction, they should have seen it coming.
5 September 2011
I'm not against turbos, but in a car like this, it was a bad decision. Let's face it, the M5 is one of the iconic performance cars, so the turbo should be performance biased. By making it try to achieve low emissions, the whole thing just seems a bit half-arsed. It's like economy has been prioritised ahead of driver involvement and performance. And in a car like this, that is just wrong. I'd have an old V10 M5 over this any day of the week. This one doesn't even sound like a proper V8.
19 December 2008
whilst i would prefer a normally aspirated engine, its not offering us the Manual box the Americans get that would lose BMW the sale if i were in the fortunate position to buy one.
21 July 2010
- See my previous thread -
I have been lucky enough to buy myself the ultimate christmas present; I bought an F10M, well placed my order and deposit for now at least! This means at the point of final payment I will have to have sold my Caterham R500 and my F10 530d but I tell you, having driven the F10M twice now, I do not miss having the manual gearbox from my Caterham at all, the 'box in the M5 is faster than I will ever be able to do it and now smooth too!
The engine although yes it has had to sacrifice its Naturally Aspirated heritage at the alter of emissions...still produces 552bhp and I don't look at it in the way of BMW has ruined the engine, I look at it with the view of; They have to do this to still offer us what we want, otherwise in a few years time there would be no M5, no AMGs, no Porsche or RS/S Audis to speak of..
28 April 2010
They have to do this to still offer us what we want, otherwise in a few years time there would be no M5, no AMGs, no Porsche or RS/S Audis to speak of..
if over sized, over powered supersaloons is what the will offer, I won't miss them a bit.
31 August 2010
The moment they chose forced induction, they should have seen it coming.
I assume you're talking about the verdict. Fade-prone brakes and uncommunicative chassis and steering are related to turbocharging, really?! You're no Einstein, that's for sure.
28 April 2010
You're no Einstein, that's for sure.
Thank you, I am flattered!
Turbocharging in my previous statement is not used only literally, because its traits can be found everywhere in the car. What do turbocharged cars do that makes a lot of people hate them? Well, they have slower throttle response and run out of steam early which metaphorically seem to to be the case with this car. Its dynamic repertoire is limited, there is not much joy in thrashing it, even though it offers excellent performance, low emissions and lots of grip.
In other words, effective but pointless such as turbocharging, but you wouldn't know anything about that would you now?
25 January 2008
I think with this Review i will stick with Evo who rate it a Class Leader, Autocar stick to your everyday car Reviews and leave the SuperCars and SuperSaloons to Evo and Car Magazine
8 April 2010
This car just doesn't grab me like the old one. I'm sure it's better in many ways like range and fuel consumption, but if i was bothered about that I wouoldn't be buying an M5 in the first place. Nice but give me the old one everytime..
6 January 2008
Turbo charging or not, all other tests of the new M5 I've read have it as the class best. In the latest Evo, the testers found the chassis plenty "communicative", while the car whipped the back sides of the Panamera and (Autocar's perenial favourite) the XFR, quite comfortably and bested even the AMG E63.
Even Autorcar's own Greg Kable's called the new M5 a "landmark (see below) before the rest of the team decided they couldn't bring themselves to put it above the XFR (and the AMG).
http://www.autocar.co.uk/CarReviews/FirstDrives/BMW-5-Series-M5/259268/