SCANS [scans] AutoBild Sportscars - M5 F10 vs. CTS-V Automatic, XFR & E63 AMG PP

1st place: BMW M5 F10

• Tyres: Michelin Pilot Super Sport
• Weight: 1930 kg
• 0-100 km/h: 3,9 s
• 0-200 km/h: 11,8 s
• Quarter mile: 11,98 s
• Flexibility (80-120 km/h) in 5th gear: 3,9 s
• Braking (100-0 km/h), warm: 34,7 m

2nd place: Cadillac CTS-V Automatic

• Tyres: Michelin Pilot Sport PS2
• Weight: 1980 kg
• 0-100 km/h: 4,3 s
• 0-200 km/h: 14,1 s
• Quarter mile: 12,49 s
• Flexibility (80-120 km/h) in 5th gear: 6,1 s
• Braking (100-0 km/h), warm: 34,4 m

3rd place: Mercedes-Benz E63 AMG Performance Package

• Tyres: Continental SportContact 5P
• Weight: 1929 kg
• 0-100 km/h: 4,1 s
• 0-200 km/h: 12,6 s
• Quarter mile: 12,07 s
• Flexibility (80-120 km/h) in 5th gear: 4,6 s
• Braking (100-0 km/h), warm: 34,6 m

4th place: Jaguar XFR

• Tyres: Dunlop SP Sportmaxx J
• Weight: 1970 kg
• 0-100 km/h: 4,5 s
• 0-200 km/h: 14,4 s
• Quarter mile: 12,54 s
• Flexibility (80-120 km/h) in 5th gear: 6,0 s
• Braking (100-0 km/h), warm: 35,6 m

Sachsenring-tracktimes:
1:37,82 min - Porsche Panamera Turbo S
1:38,16 min - Porsche Panamera Turbo
1:38,66 min - BMW M5 F10
1:40,86 min - Cadillac CTS-V Automatic
1:41,00 min - Mercedes-Benz E63 AMG PP (best is 1:40,6 min)
1:43,75 min - Jaguar XFR


Verdict:
- The M5 is the clear winner here, fastest on the straightline, fastest on the track. Without Launch Control 0-100 kph is in 3,9 s!
- The Cadillac made a little sensation beating the E63 AMG PP: great performance, big fun for relatively low costs.
- The 3rd place is for the Merc: it's the only one that can get close to the M5 on the straightline. Best 0-100 kph run: from 1800 rpm.
- Last place for the relaxed Jaguar.



Porsche Panamera Turbo vs. Panamera Turbo S comparison: http://www.germancarforum.com/panam...rsche-panamera-turbo-vs-panamera-turbo-s.html

I believe Autozuning did a very similar test.
Again very impressed by the Cadillac, almost 25k less than M5 and E63 and similar performance.
Can't really understand what happen to the 100kg advantage of the E63.

It never existed... Sport Auto measured both M5 and E63 at 1940 kgs.
Even the CLS63 PP weights 1874 kgs with full tank of fuel.

http://www.germancarforum.com/inter...ung-m5-vs-e63-amg-pp-vs-panamera-turbo-s.html
This is where I saw the 100kg advantage in dry weight.

Those are factory claims, check the tested weight: 1924 (E63) and 1937 kg (M5).

That's why I mentioned "dry weight". I guess in the real world, they both weight about the same.

I pick the Merc because I think it looks the best. All the other stuff is nonsense to me, as they're all extremely more than fast and well performing for me.

Great showing by the Cadillac. It's an acquired taste, but I like the styling (except for the frosty/chrome rear tail light treatment for the Euro market; makes it look tacky like the old Lexus IS and current GT-86 rears). I'd rather have the wagon though, but in either format it's hard to overlook the poor economy and lack of individualization.

Big placement/win for the Cadillac. I want the M5 naturally. The Jaguar looks the best. Historically I'd have the Benz, but I just don't like the looks enough.


M

Couldn't agree more. When you consider all of these cars are quicker to 200km/h than an E92 M3 you realise that they are all plenty quick enough and whilst track performance is interesting to read about it has little to no bearing in the real world. For me at least the important stuff are comfort, looks and performance in that order so personal I would pick the Jag followed by the Merc and then the Beemer, the Caddy wouldn't even get a look in simply because it's the least appealing to look at.

Correct me if I'm wrong but the Panny Turbo S in AutoBild did the 0-200 km/h in 12.5 sec. And the F10 M5 did it in 11.8 sec?? We have a clear winner here of the fastest in a straightline sports saloon.

Absolutely agreed. I was just talking about it with someone today. In the City where I reside, it is IMPOSSIBLE to utilize any excessive HP, as it is constantly congested, constant stoplights, and pothole city. It's really all about bench racing or "bragging rights". These cars are all such brilliant excessively performance vehicles in the real world, it's funny when people look "down on" one because it isn't faster than the other. I don't think I've ever called for the full potential of my 268 HP, and to be honest, whenever I do give it a "spirited" acceleration, it's more than fun for me. With 500+HP? I'd feel like a Lion in solitary confinement.

The Porsche is only quicker from 0-100 because of its AWD, Launch Control and short first 3 gears.
The M5 pulls better in 4-7th gear.

Anyone wanna guess which car I voted for? Hehehehehe!

The Competitors in one chart



:t-cheers:

I want the best allround sportsaloon car and its obviously the M5.

CTS-V has great brakes. It is the heaviest of the three and front disc brakes are 380 mm (smaller than M5 and E63).
But it beats all of them in 100-0 warm and 200-0 warm.

M5's in gear acceleration is in a different league compared to the other cars in this comparison and that is despite having the smallest engine - talks volumes about the engine's flexibility.

80-120 Km/h 5/6

M5 3.9, 5.2
CTS V 6.1, 9.1
XJR 6, 8.4
E63 4.6, 6.4

To put it into perspective -

LP 700-4 Aventador - Flexibility 80-120 km/h in 5th/6th gear: 4,0 s/5,5 s http://www.germancarforum.com/aventador/40324-ams-lamborghini-aventador-lp700-4-test.html

I agree that the M5 is the best all round sport saloon but it ain't the most thrilling for sure
M3 vs. C63 is another thing as the more precise M3 somehow manages to be even more fun than the monstrous C63... but that's the M3 and it's perfection
M5 is great for the buyers in this class as I guess they were expecting something softer and better for everyday usage and a more luxurious and comfortable ride than before... but it's not my cup of tea anymore and my last new M5 will probably be my E60

Next Friday in AutoBild



M5 vs. E63 AMG (no Performance Package)