Vs Car & Driver: M5 vs. CLS55 vs. STSV
- Thread starter Zafiro
- Start date
- Messages
- 7,562
Re: Car&Driver: M5 vs CLS 55 vs STS-V
Looking at this article I still say the performance numbers are about a 0.5th`s of a difference between the CLS55 and M5 which is not much to argue over.
MB should be credited for producing it`s best performance car yet.
The 63 models should be even better than the 55 in driving dynamics overall.
Looking at this article I still say the performance numbers are about a 0.5th`s of a difference between the CLS55 and M5 which is not much to argue over.
MB should be credited for producing it`s best performance car yet.
The 63 models should be even better than the 55 in driving dynamics overall.
Alx
Tire Trailblazer
- Messages
- 6,290
- Name
- Alex
Re: Car&Driver: M5 vs CLS 55 vs STS-V
GTA7.5, please dont accuse anyone of lying. If your not familiar with how articles are released and when URL's (Links) are made to such review's, please refrain from accusing fellow forum members of creating information. There is no need of such offensive comments. Once the article is released im sure it will be posted here. C&D is a very reputable American car magazine source and is not fictional.
Again, refrain from using such harsh opinions in your posts, they are offensive.
GTA7.5 said:Comment 1: This thread is without a link to the article.
Comment 2: Why no link to the article yet?
As far as we know you could have pulled these numbers out of the air.
GTA7.5, please dont accuse anyone of lying. If your not familiar with how articles are released and when URL's (Links) are made to such review's, please refrain from accusing fellow forum members of creating information. There is no need of such offensive comments. Once the article is released im sure it will be posted here. C&D is a very reputable American car magazine source and is not fictional.
Again, refrain from using such harsh opinions in your posts, they are offensive.
Zafiro
Supreme Roadmaster
- Messages
- 30,811
Re: Car&Driver: M5 vs CLS 55 vs STS-V
I dont know how many years GTA and Me has been members together but still GTA having problems believing me. Its sad.
I have no intention to lie and particulary not about an american carmag where most members here are from US. Me lieing wouldnt look good and it would also be embarassing for me.
You guys know I post reviews, carmags, videos and so on. If I had a link or a scan for this test I would post it here. Mark my words.
No, GTA you have to start trust me and once you get hold of the carmag, you will see exactly the same as I stated above.
I have two links about the review and this is one of them
http://forums.e60.net/index.php?showtopic=19252
//regards, a trustful member. Now let's stay on-topic.
I dont know how many years GTA and Me has been members together but still GTA having problems believing me. Its sad.
I have no intention to lie and particulary not about an american carmag where most members here are from US. Me lieing wouldnt look good and it would also be embarassing for me.
You guys know I post reviews, carmags, videos and so on. If I had a link or a scan for this test I would post it here. Mark my words.
No, GTA you have to start trust me and once you get hold of the carmag, you will see exactly the same as I stated above.
I have two links about the review and this is one of them
http://forums.e60.net/index.php?showtopic=19252
//regards, a trustful member. Now let's stay on-topic.
- Messages
- 7,562
Re: Car&Driver: M5 vs CLS 55 vs STS-V
I guess no one read my latest post. That should have cleared things up here with the performance numbers.
I still believe posting articles without links breeds suspicion and propaganda
because it provides no solid proof on paper.
AlxAmg said:
I guess no one read my latest post. That should have cleared things up here with the performance numbers.
I still believe posting articles without links breeds suspicion and propaganda
because it provides no solid proof on paper.
Alx
Tire Trailblazer
- Messages
- 6,290
- Name
- Alex
Re: Car&Driver: M5 vs CLS 55 vs STS-V
Your last post has absolutley nothing to do with the 2 comments i quoted. And your icons were enough to understand what you meant, also your "As far as we know you could have pulled these numbers out of the air." comment really states you feel Just_Me made it up.
Anyways im just trying to keep things civil here. We are discussing results from an upcoming review that hasn't been posted yet.... doesn't mean that it's made up, its almost like spy info.
Im not deleting anything, lets just keep this conversation at ease. Thank you.
GTA7.5 said:
Your last post has absolutley nothing to do with the 2 comments i quoted. And your icons were enough to understand what you meant, also your "As far as we know you could have pulled these numbers out of the air." comment really states you feel Just_Me made it up.
Anyways im just trying to keep things civil here. We are discussing results from an upcoming review that hasn't been posted yet.... doesn't mean that it's made up, its almost like spy info.
Im not deleting anything, lets just keep this conversation at ease. Thank you.
- Messages
- 7,562
Re: Car&Driver: M5 vs CLS 55 vs STS-V
Fair enough, I shouldn`t have posted that. I was actually in a hurry and should have cleared things up with my lastest comment about the performance numbers. I had to run out!, thats no excuse though.
I shouldn`t haved called Just_me a, some members here are really strong in their beliefs with there favorite brands, this is why a suspect info.
without links, I never post numbers without links or proof, thats just me though.
AlxAmg said:
Fair enough, I shouldn`t have posted that. I was actually in a hurry and should have cleared things up with my lastest comment about the performance numbers. I had to run out!, thats no excuse though.
I shouldn`t haved called Just_me a
, some members here are really strong in their beliefs with there favorite brands, this is why a suspect info.without links, I never post numbers without links or proof, thats just me though.
... j/k
Zafiro
Supreme Roadmaster
- Messages
- 30,811
Re: Car&Driver: M5 vs CLS 55 vs STS-V
I found this summary:
Third Place
Mercedes-Benz CLS55 AMG
Highs: Drop-dead good looks, torque-monster V-8, sumptuous interior.
Lows: Restrictive rear sightlines, reluctant transient response, limited rear-seat room, think-twice price.
The Verdict: A dazzling blend of beauty and beast.
CLS out of the starting blocks in a serious hurry: 0 to 60 mph in 4.2 seconds, 0 to 100 in 9.8, the quarter-mile in 12.6 at 114 mph. That’s Corvette turf, and pretty brisk for a two-ton car.
For all its thrust and high-speed stability, the Benz isn’t really happy doing hot laps on a technical circuit like Grattan. There were logbook demerits for relatively lethargic responses in quick transitions, for steering that added effort as speed increased without any corresponding increase in feel, for a manumatic transmission function that took its sweet time making downshifts, and for a brake-assist program that made smooth braking tricky to achieve.
Grip—0.93 on the skidpad—was abundant, inspiring confidence in high-speed corners
With an as-tested price of $92,975, the CLS had the heaviest window sticker in an expensive trio, which hurt the value quotient.
Second Place
Cadillac STS-V
Highs: Respectable power, handsome interior, high comfort quotient, attractive pricing.
Lows: Not a track star, spongy brake feel, relaxed-fit seats.
The Verdict: An uptown Caddy that thrives on high-speed cruising.
STS-V’s 4.6-second 0-to-60-mph run was slowest in this group, but how many luxo sedans are capable of 60 mph in less than five seconds? Similarly, stopping to a standstill from 70 mph in 170 feet was third-best here, but still exemplary for this weight class.
Where the Caddy fared worst was in Grattan’s twists and turns. Although the steering was quick and nicely weighted, excessive up-and-down motion in the suspension inhibited transient responses, and observers noted substantial brake dive compared with the German cars.
TS-V’s price nets you a no-apologies supersedan with big money left over—almost 16 large versus the CLS55. That’s a huge advantage—especially since the STS-V has this group’s most comprehensive allocation of features and amenities.
First Place
BMW M5
Highs: Supercar V-10, amazing brakes, as-you-like-it performance adjustability, SMG
automated manual.
Lows: SMG automated manual, iDrive still given to demonic possession.
The Verdict: When max performance with four doors is the objective, this one has the right stuff.
M5 blasts to 60 mph in 4.2 seconds, a dead heat with the CLS55, and then eases ahead of the Benz in the quarter-mile at 12.5 seconds and 118 mph. At the con clusion of our Grattan lapping, where the M5 turned in the fastest time of the day at 1:31.25, our man Webster called this “the mother of all powertrains.”
M5 is happy on a racetrack. Select the combination of suspension, power, and transmission settings you need for max lap times—this Bimmer is almost as adjustable as a modern race car—and hit it. In sport mode, the most aggressive of three suspension settings, the M5 is distinctly more athletic than its rivals. We were surprised at the modest level of grip delivered by the Continental SportContact 2 tires—just 0.89 g—but it didn’t seem to hamper stopping performance, a phenomenal 158 feet from 70 mph, nor did it keep the M5 from smoking the two other cars in the lane change.
The ride quality is a trifle stiff, even in the mildest settings, although this is something that can also be said of the Benz. But the biggest culprit is the SMG. In the most aggressive automated manual mode, it hammers home shifts like John Henry racing the steam drill—whop-whop-whop! But in full automatic, it’s all but impossible to avoid huge gasps between upshifts, particularly in the lower gears. One logbook scribbler summed up the test crew’s unanimous response: “I tried to leave it in auto mode, but I just couldn’t stand it.”
But in the end, the BMW’s poise and athleticism, plus the yowl of that high-revving V-10, are irresistible. There are new contenders entering the supersedan arena regularly these days, and we’ll undoubtedly be staging another tournament, Episode 40, when the Audi RS 6 comes along. But right now, the M5 rules once again.
Propelled by a DaimlerChrysler 6.1-liter Hemi V-8—425 horsepower, 420 pound-feet of torque—the 4274-pound Charger rumbled to 60 mph in 4.8 seconds, covered the quarter-mile in 13.2 seconds (a tie with the Cadillac) at 109 mph, pulled 0.90 g on the skidpad, and stopped from 70 mph in 168 feet.
The basic test numbers were impressive, but the Charger’s agility on the Grattan road circuit was truly revelatory. Even though we experienced brake-fade problems during the full-tilt process, we were able to herd the bad-boy Dodge around the track in 1:32.65, just 0.1 second behind the CLS55 Benz and almost a full second quicker than the Cadillac STS-V.
That’s a tribute to excellent work by DC’s Street and Racing Technology skunkworks guys, as well as a testimonial to a superb job by the chassis engineers.
M5, STS-V, CLS55AMG
0-60 mph 4.2 4.6 4.2
0-100 mph 9.4 11.4 9.8
0-150 mph 20.7 36.3 24.9
1/4-mile @ mph 12.5 @ 118 13.2 @ 107 12.6 @ 114
rolling 5-60 mph 4.6 5.0 4.5
I found this summary:
Third Place
Mercedes-Benz CLS55 AMG
Highs: Drop-dead good looks, torque-monster V-8, sumptuous interior.
Lows: Restrictive rear sightlines, reluctant transient response, limited rear-seat room, think-twice price.
The Verdict: A dazzling blend of beauty and beast.
CLS out of the starting blocks in a serious hurry: 0 to 60 mph in 4.2 seconds, 0 to 100 in 9.8, the quarter-mile in 12.6 at 114 mph. That’s Corvette turf, and pretty brisk for a two-ton car.
For all its thrust and high-speed stability, the Benz isn’t really happy doing hot laps on a technical circuit like Grattan. There were logbook demerits for relatively lethargic responses in quick transitions, for steering that added effort as speed increased without any corresponding increase in feel, for a manumatic transmission function that took its sweet time making downshifts, and for a brake-assist program that made smooth braking tricky to achieve.
Grip—0.93 on the skidpad—was abundant, inspiring confidence in high-speed corners
With an as-tested price of $92,975, the CLS had the heaviest window sticker in an expensive trio, which hurt the value quotient.
Second Place
Cadillac STS-V
Highs: Respectable power, handsome interior, high comfort quotient, attractive pricing.
Lows: Not a track star, spongy brake feel, relaxed-fit seats.
The Verdict: An uptown Caddy that thrives on high-speed cruising.
STS-V’s 4.6-second 0-to-60-mph run was slowest in this group, but how many luxo sedans are capable of 60 mph in less than five seconds? Similarly, stopping to a standstill from 70 mph in 170 feet was third-best here, but still exemplary for this weight class.
Where the Caddy fared worst was in Grattan’s twists and turns. Although the steering was quick and nicely weighted, excessive up-and-down motion in the suspension inhibited transient responses, and observers noted substantial brake dive compared with the German cars.
TS-V’s price nets you a no-apologies supersedan with big money left over—almost 16 large versus the CLS55. That’s a huge advantage—especially since the STS-V has this group’s most comprehensive allocation of features and amenities.
First Place
BMW M5
Highs: Supercar V-10, amazing brakes, as-you-like-it performance adjustability, SMG
automated manual.
Lows: SMG automated manual, iDrive still given to demonic possession.
The Verdict: When max performance with four doors is the objective, this one has the right stuff.
M5 blasts to 60 mph in 4.2 seconds, a dead heat with the CLS55, and then eases ahead of the Benz in the quarter-mile at 12.5 seconds and 118 mph. At the con clusion of our Grattan lapping, where the M5 turned in the fastest time of the day at 1:31.25, our man Webster called this “the mother of all powertrains.”
M5 is happy on a racetrack. Select the combination of suspension, power, and transmission settings you need for max lap times—this Bimmer is almost as adjustable as a modern race car—and hit it. In sport mode, the most aggressive of three suspension settings, the M5 is distinctly more athletic than its rivals. We were surprised at the modest level of grip delivered by the Continental SportContact 2 tires—just 0.89 g—but it didn’t seem to hamper stopping performance, a phenomenal 158 feet from 70 mph, nor did it keep the M5 from smoking the two other cars in the lane change.
The ride quality is a trifle stiff, even in the mildest settings, although this is something that can also be said of the Benz. But the biggest culprit is the SMG. In the most aggressive automated manual mode, it hammers home shifts like John Henry racing the steam drill—whop-whop-whop! But in full automatic, it’s all but impossible to avoid huge gasps between upshifts, particularly in the lower gears. One logbook scribbler summed up the test crew’s unanimous response: “I tried to leave it in auto mode, but I just couldn’t stand it.”
But in the end, the BMW’s poise and athleticism, plus the yowl of that high-revving V-10, are irresistible. There are new contenders entering the supersedan arena regularly these days, and we’ll undoubtedly be staging another tournament, Episode 40, when the Audi RS 6 comes along. But right now, the M5 rules once again.
Propelled by a DaimlerChrysler 6.1-liter Hemi V-8—425 horsepower, 420 pound-feet of torque—the 4274-pound Charger rumbled to 60 mph in 4.8 seconds, covered the quarter-mile in 13.2 seconds (a tie with the Cadillac) at 109 mph, pulled 0.90 g on the skidpad, and stopped from 70 mph in 168 feet.
The basic test numbers were impressive, but the Charger’s agility on the Grattan road circuit was truly revelatory. Even though we experienced brake-fade problems during the full-tilt process, we were able to herd the bad-boy Dodge around the track in 1:32.65, just 0.1 second behind the CLS55 Benz and almost a full second quicker than the Cadillac STS-V.
That’s a tribute to excellent work by DC’s Street and Racing Technology skunkworks guys, as well as a testimonial to a superb job by the chassis engineers.
M5, STS-V, CLS55AMG
0-60 mph 4.2 4.6 4.2
0-100 mph 9.4 11.4 9.8
0-150 mph 20.7 36.3 24.9
1/4-mile @ mph 12.5 @ 118 13.2 @ 107 12.6 @ 114
rolling 5-60 mph 4.6 5.0 4.5
- Messages
- 40,688
- Name
- Marcus
Re: Car&Driver: M5 vs CLS 55 vs STS-V
I got mine a few days ago. The basically knocked the CLS55 behind the Caddy because the CLS had a worse back seat, poor rear sight lines and a higher price. Pretty much what previous posts have stated, you aren't missing much really. The only thing the CLS should have been knocked for which they noted was "reluctant transient repsonses" around the track - that I can see costing point, but the other stuff is bs imo. Motor Trend got it right.
M
I got mine a few days ago. The basically knocked the CLS55 behind the Caddy because the CLS had a worse back seat, poor rear sight lines and a higher price. Pretty much what previous posts have stated, you aren't missing much really. The only thing the CLS should have been knocked for which they noted was "reluctant transient repsonses" around the track - that I can see costing point, but the other stuff is bs imo. Motor Trend got it right.
M
