Vs MT H2H: BMW M5 vs Porsche Panamera GTS

[EKaru]

That said, my 650i still isn't as isolated as the CL550 on the road, but it seems that the E63 AMG and the Panamera GTS are more raw than the M5 is. Weird times we're in.

M

Well to be fair to the Benz, the 650i isn't the same type/class of car as the CL550.. The CL550 is much larger, starts at $116K, and is geared more towards luxury than the 650i.

 

[K-A]

Yeah. I like how the Boxster and 911 have their identities now more than ever. It's like Porsche us bucking the trend there. I really don't know why the Pana gets panned so much. It's really such an exotic and unique Sedan that sits in the road like no other. I think it makes other Sedans look bland and square. Yeah it's got some awkward elements that need to be refined but IMO when modded it looks amazing.

 

[Merc1]

Its only the looks, otherwise it mops the floor with the competition.

M

 

[Sayyaaf]

Well the Rolls certainly doesn't suffer, it rides like butter, it wafts as they say and it actually can steer itself out of the way, a win-win for the Roller IMO.

The 5 on the other hand, not so much its been panned for its dynamics. Even using a scalled down version of the 7er platform as it does, it is still too heavy and unengaging for the enthusiasts or so they say. Oh well.

However chassis sharing is the future and its also the past, a lot of companies have been doing it for years, but the key is doing it right. VW seems to have it down in most cases.

I agree about the Panamera, but the 911 shares a lot with the Boxster, always did up until now. However both both mid and rear engined sports cars, they really have to share a lot, the expense would be extreme if they didn't, but the key is they have the same mission, sporty dynamics. The 5 and 7 don't have the same mission hence the 5 suffering because it is tied to a chassis that was built more for comfort than sport.

Oh well it is what it is.

M

Marcus if you ask me honestly, to publicly announce that your RR is based on a BMW platform is a big mistake. Look how that hurt VW & Bentley, maybe it sold well but I still find some classic customers who decided to go for alternative brands since Bentley is no longer prestigous enough for them. They shouldn't say that even its remotely related to BMW brand and they should develop its own platform under BMW supervision if they want to maintain few BMW genes like good drive/agility/handling. That is just IMO of course.

 

[K-A]

Its only the looks, otherwise it mops the floor with the competition.

M

Yeah, that's what I meant. Unless you're crazy in the head you would notice and respect the state of the art engineering put into the Pana. That chassis is said to be one of the most impressive to have a 4 door ever on it, it certainly feels solid and balanced as hell for such a big car. Best part, IT'S UNIQUE/BESPOKE!! There's something to be said about that these days. Shows care, specialness, and passion.

I'd be all over a Panamera for my next car but the sheer width and size seems like it'd get tiring after a while (to clean, detail, park, etc.) and would rather not get a car so near the facelift. Though I think Porsche's facelifts are so subtle and respectable that they don't make the earlier cars "obsolete" (cough, cough, you listening, Mercedes. ).

 

[K-A]

Marcus if you ask me honestly, to publicly announce that your RR is based on a BMW platform is a big mistake. Look how that hurt VW & Bentley, maybe it sold well but I still find some classic customers who decided to go for alternative brands since Bentley is no longer prestigous enough for them. They shouldn't say that even its remotely related to BMW brand and they should develop its own platform under BMW supervision if they want to maintain few BMW genes like good drive/agility/handling. That is just IMO of course.

Agreed as well. I mean, c'mon, we're talking a car that costs over $300K, and it shares a platform derived as low as an entry level 5-Series. Even sharing the 7's platform is ridiculous as it costs as much as like 5 7-Series'. I wish and hope that one day we can get back into a more passionate culture of car manufacturing where platform sharing is all but obsolete. SOME platform sharing is okay, I have no problem with that, but BMW has taken it too far, and it's hurting their products.

 

[Merc1]

Marcus if you ask me honestly, to publicly announce that your RR is based on a BMW platform is a big mistake. Look how that hurt VW & Bentley, maybe it sold well but I still find some classic customers who decided to go for alternative brands since Bentley is no longer prestigous enough for them. They shouldn't say that even its remotely related to BMW brand and they should develop its own platform under BMW supervision if they want to maintain few BMW genes like good drive/agility/handling. That is just IMO of course.

I agree, but we've been told over and over that it just isn't financially feasible anymore. Notice how at Rolls and Bentley only the Phantom and the Mulsanne have their own dedicated platforms, and their prices reflect it.

I don't think they should announce it, and they actually haven't "announced" in that sense. I was talking about finding proof via a blabbering executive, they often let things go and sometimes even get in trouble about it. Like the former head of MBUSA blurted out that the E Coupe/Convertible are still based on the C-Class chassis, we knew it anyway, but still you get my point, but no they shouldn't come out and say such a thing.

M

 

[Merc1]

Agreed as well. I mean, c'mon, we're talking a car that costs over $300K, and it shares a platform derived as low as an entry level 5-Series. Even sharing the 7's platform is ridiculous as it costs as much as like 5 7-Series'. I wish and hope that one day we can get back into a more passionate culture of car manufacturing where platform sharing is all but obsolete. SOME platform sharing is okay, I have no problem with that, but BMW has taken it too far, and it's hurting their products.

The only problem with this K/A is that you wouldn't know it unless someone told you that. Most can't tell that the Ghost is related to the 7-Series and I think you're kinda going overboard with saying that it just shares its chassis with a 5-Series, its true, but it isn't that black and white. There is a whole lot of changes to get a car/chassis the size of a 5er up to the size of a Ghost and the Rolls has never been knocked for not being a truly premium luxury car. I think platform/chassis sharing can be a wonderful thing, but it has to be done right. 7er and Ghost don't really suffer in their relationship, only the 5 does.

There is no way platform sharing is going away, it has only just begun really...in the sense that it is being done now. Various governments wants cars to be strong as a vault while being miserly at the gas pump, and that means it has be lightweight and strong as hell. Hard to do that for every single car BMW (or anyone else) without sharing something.

The VW empire has a new chassis that will be scaled up and down from a wide range of cars like the Golf to the Audi A6, and it focuses on lightweight construction.

BMW's real problem that their newest cars are just to heavy and they didn't take enough weight out of the 5er when trying to adapt it to their large car platform. If they had taken the weight out, which in turn would have enhanced the dynamics no one would care what platform it shares. They simply didn't tweak the platform enough.

I know how you love to take something and run with it lol, but platform sharing isn't the devil, it really isn't. Some of the most brilliant cars on the road share platforms like the Audi R8 and the Lamborghini Gallardo and the even the E and CLS. They're brilliant examples of a different body on the same bones.

Here's a thought: VW has decreed that the Porsche will develop all of the RWD cars for the VW empire next time around. That Panamera chassis will be all of the place next generation, so I think we're just going to have to judge each car on their own merit, instead of just instantly writing them off because they share platforms with something else.

M

 

[K-A]

F*ckin' VW! Gonna ruin Porsche, I tell you.

If they're gonna platform share, then in the future they will have to do it in a very un-lazy way, i.e really tweak the platforms to give different cars completely different identities worthy of being called "their own" and not bog down certain especially key cars because they have to build it on whatever platform is readily available to them (from an entirely different car). The 5-Series drives great for a Luxury Car, probably would get tons of praise if it was a Mercedes platform (boaty, floaty, big and wafty, yet actually slightly more tied down and nimble due to that BMW DNA still drowned within it, shouting to try and get out), but of course doesn't have the "dynamics" expected of a BMW.

Actually, regarding the E-Class, I think being based on the W204 chassis is what's thrown off the overall driving experience of it. The W204 has a rock solid, great, and seemingly bomb-proof chassis, but I've complained a lot about the E's "multi character", where it is floaty and smooth on smooth roads, but harsh and jarring over rough roads. There's a great imbalance and Jekyll/Hyde trait within the W212's chassis (with Sport suspension, at least). It feels like the suspension was dialed down to fit the W204, but when they tweaked and worked it into the W212, it had some holes. The car drive great, but you can tell there's some odd "mismanagement" in the suspension in certain areas. For example, I feel like the W204 actually absorbs harshness better than the W212, yet the W212 is far smoother and "floatier" on smooth surfaces. This goes to show some holes in the implementation of the W204-meant chassis into the W212. Same situation but different circumstances via the F01 into the F10.

 

[klier]

Heavier and less of a focused driver's car than before, yeah I'd say it is. Same for 3-Series and Cadillacs outhandling them, yeah BMW is trending in the wrong direction from an enthusiasts point of view, IMO.

M

The 1M was a huge hit, the X5 M is great for what it is, and the next gen M3 will be better than ever, and lighter than E92.
There is no trend. The M5 migh be heavy, but it is a fantastic car that wipes the floor with all cars that cost as much in it's class. The GTS is no competition, as it is way too weak (and fitted with AWD)

Also, I'd like to add that the 5 series is one of the few BMW cars that got significantly heavier with the last refresh.
I'm sure BMW is doing everything it can to not let this happen again, and I am fairly certain the next gen 5er will be significantly lighter than the current version.....
And a Caddy outhandling a 3er? Yeah, in some obscure biased U.S mag perhaps. I don't care about those tests, Cadillac doesn't exist in Europe (for obvious reasons, being crappy cars is a big part of that)

The 5 on the other hand, not so much its been panned for its dynamics. Even using a scalled down version of the 7er platform as it does, it is still too heavy and unengaging for the enthusiasts or so they say. Oh well.

I don't deny any of this. But I would like to add that the 5er facelift is supposed to adress all these problems, excluding weight...

Oh well it is what it is.

M

You got that right!

BMW's real problem that their newest cars are just to heavy ....

....or so you want to believe. BMW's newest, the F30, is lighter than E90.
F20 didn't gain over E87. F25 is lighter than E83. F15 will be much lighter than E70. And F01 is not heavier than E66 (those are the same length).
Don't mix up the 5er/6er with the rest of the line up

 

[Deckhook]

There is no trend. The M5 migh be heavy, but it is a fantastic car that wipes the floor with all cars that cost as much in it's class.

The M5 is a fantastic car, better in fact than the car it replaced but the rivalling brands haven't sat idle either so I think wiping the floor with the competition is a bit of an exaggeration and only a comment that you would believe to be true.

 

[mini_cooper4]

Agreed as well. I mean, c'mon, we're talking a car that costs over $300K, and it shares a platform derived as low as an entry level 5-Series. Even sharing the 7's platform is ridiculous as it costs as much as like 5 7-Series'. I wish and hope that one day we can get back into a more passionate culture of car manufacturing where platform sharing is all but obsolete. SOME platform sharing is okay, I have no problem with that, but BMW has taken it too far, and it's hurting their products.

That's why I think the 520d is the best car money can buy(tho the M135i has something to say about that)
With the F10 you really get an entry level RR at a damn low price... that's why it doesn't feel THAT sporty as is the case with any other RR... it's mostly about luxury and comfort(My Individual F10 feels so damn special and perfect)

 

[K-A]

With the F10 you really get an entry level RR at a damn low price...

Well when you put it that way....

To be honest it does give the car extra "cool points" and want factor to know that an RR is basically riding on the same core chassis (modified extensively I'm sure, of course), however it gives the RR down-points. I'd still happily drive an RR if given to me though.

 

[mini_cooper4]

^ Exactly!

 

[Merc1]

Actually, regarding the E-Class, I think being based on the W204 chassis is what's thrown off the overall driving experience of it. The W204 has a rock solid, great, and seemingly bomb-proof chassis, but I've complained a lot about the E's "multi character", where it is floaty and smooth on smooth roads, but harsh and jarring over rough roads. There's a great imbalance and Jekyll/Hyde trait within the W212's chassis (with Sport suspension, at least). It feels like the suspension was dialed down to fit the W204, but when they tweaked and worked it into the W212, it had some holes. The car drive great, but you can tell there's some odd "mismanagement" in the suspension in certain areas. For example, I feel like the W204 actually absorbs harshness better than the W212, yet the W212 is far smoother and "floatier" on smooth surfaces. This goes to show some holes in the implementation of the W204-meant chassis into the W212. Same situation but different circumstances via the F01 into the F10.

Only the E Coupe and Convertible are based on the C, not the E-Class sedan. Whatever you're experiencing with the W212 isn't related to the C-Class. You're getting it confused K/A. The E Sedan is not based on the C.


M

 

[Merc1]

The 1M was a huge hit, the X5 M is great for what it is, and the next gen M3 will be better than ever, and lighter than E92.
There is no trend. The M5 migh be heavy, but it is a fantastic car that wipes the floor with all cars that cost as much in it's class. The GTS is no competition, as it is way too weak (and fitted with AWD)

Also, I'd like to add that the 5 series is one of the few BMW cars that got significantly heavier with the last refresh.
I'm sure BMW is doing everything it can to not let this happen again, and I am fairly certain the next gen 5er will be significantly lighter than the current version.....
And a Caddy outhandling a 3er? Yeah, in some obscure biased U.S mag perhaps. I don't care about those tests, Cadillac doesn't exist in Europe (for obvious reasons, being crappy cars is a big part of that)

The fact that you have to bring up the X5 M shows how much BMW has changed. Here is a truck with AWD, a turbo engine and automatic only as a M vehicle. That says it all right there. The M5 doesn't wipe the floor with anything anymore, haven't you seen the reviews where they constantly grip about it not being the driver's tool it once was?

Yeah the 5er got heavier, yeah lets hope the next one doesn't.

That obscure biased magazine? Klier you're so clueless it isn't even funny. You do realize that this is Car and Driver I'm talking about? This magazine LIVED for BMW and particularly th 3-Series, which they still say is the better car overall, but the ATS was better handling. If you're now going to say that C&D is biased in favor of Cadillac you simply don't know what you're talking about. The 3-Series has been a C&D 10 Best winner for over 20 years, they worship the 3er. Cadillac doesn't exist in Europe, ok that doesn't change the results of the test.

If you can't see that BMW has gotten much softer and less focused then that is exclusively your problem.


M

 

[Merc1]

Agreed as well. I mean, c'mon, we're talking a car that costs over $300K, and it shares a platform derived as low as an entry level 5-Series. Even sharing the 7's platform is ridiculous as it costs as much as like 5 7-Series'. I wish and hope that one day we can get back into a more passionate culture of car manufacturing where platform sharing is all but obsolete. SOME platform sharing is okay, I have no problem with that, but BMW has taken it too far, and it's hurting their products.

I mean honestly what about the Rolls says 5-Series? What is not right about the Rolls other than some thing you and others have in their mind about the car sharing with a 5-Series? Really, I'd like to know. Please point out the deficiencies on the Rolls and tell us why it is seemingly crippled by sharing a platform with a 5-Series. My point is that you (nor anyone else here) can point to anything about the Ghost that isn't right because it shares a platform and again, they didn't just take a 5-Series and add a Ghost body. They 2 cars aren't interchangable. The Ghost is most related to the 760Li, V12 and all has been changed even from that car.


M

 

[klier]

That obscure biased magazine? Klier you're so clueless it isn't even funny.
M

You're so serious it isn't even funny.

But feel free to just continue calling one (arguably) 'bad' driving M5 a trend. I don't even see the point in arguing. You'll end up with saying "...but I have a BMW too so I am not biased unlike you" anyways

 

[Merc1]

You're so serious it isn't even funny.

You just continue calling one (arguably) 'bad' driving M5 a trend.

See that is your problem Klier, no one said the M5 drove bad. You constantly post ridiculous things and then when called on it, you change it around. I'm done. Utterly ridiculous waste of time responding to you.

My point still stands, if you think C&D is some obscure, biased (against BMW) magazine you clearly have no clue about what you're talking about.


M

 

[K-A]

Only the E Coupe and Convertible are based on the C, not the E-Class sedan. Whatever you're experiencing with the W212 isn't related to the C-Class. You're getting it confused K/A. The E Sedan is not based on the C.


M

The W212 actually is apparently the first M-B of a different size to engage in "platform sharing" with another model. I remember reading reports where M-B said they wanted to test it out and afterward gave it the greenlight for future models. The E Coupe IS actually on the C-Chassis, completely identical, but the W212's is "based" on the W204's. The W212 is on a modified chassis that first was introduced on the W204, but not an identical chassis (obviously, as they're different sizes).

As for the Ghost. What I'd like to know is if there are any IMPROVEMENTS to the chassis than the F01. I.e is it stiffer? Stronger? Better material build? More balanced? Etc. The F01 has a great chassis, but for $300+K I'd want "my" Ghost to have either a completely bespoke platform (I mean, much less than $300K should be enough to buy that privilege), or at the very least an extensively improved F01 chassis (which it very well may be?).