M5 Officially Official: The BMW M5 F10.

[H50]

The 'lag free' power delivery perhaps (as mentioned in the release)??? Or did they talk about a 'lag free' engine in the X5 M press release as well???
Or maybe the different plumbing is just that: different. Because the engine bay of X5 is much bigger, there's some differences for the 5er engine bay...

Either way, only 5 hp extra is just awkward, considering the fact that they frequently said to expect more power than in X5 M....and then they come with the exact same torque figures and a measly 5 hp extra?? I mean seriously?!?!

Also, M5 is 1,0 second slower 0-200 than Panamera Turbo S ;/ Could be the RWD 0-100 time that's causing the difference?

It might be just the front bumper issue.. The x5/x6 M front bumper have more air intakes than the one on the M5 maybe the that's why it need more or bigger plumbing and cooling...

 

[ACE]

Oh really? And what effect do you think the M5 being 435kg lighter than the X5 M has on the fuel consumption figures?

The numbers I posted didn't format very well, so maybe the conclusion that I drew from my "research" is not as clear as it could be.

My conclusion was this:
For the X6: the switch from the 50i to the ///M version resulted in an increase of 11% in CO2 and a decrease of 10% in MPG.

For the F10: the switch from the 50i to the ///M version resulted in a decrease of 5% in CO2 and an increase of 5% in MPG.

I know about the weight differences and the DCT gearbox etc. and that this would affect the numbers but I still conclude the 560PS F10M engine is more efficient than the 555PS X6M engine. I am extremely impressed with the 232g/km CO2 emissions from the F10M.

I know that some BMW fans wanted more hp (cos it looks good in some internet pissing contest?) but remember the F10M is RWD and 560PS and 680NM through the rear wheels is near the limit of what these [road] tyres can take and Kay Segler confirmed that in the interview with M5board at Garching. You are going to need near perfect conditions to be able to put 560PS and 680Nm onto the road as is. If you want more power/torque you're gonna need AWD to make use of it in 1st, 2nd, 3rd and maybe 4th gear.

 

[Centurion]

Where are the multispoke rims? Both the E60 and E39 looked their best sitting on multispoke rims.

 

[SCOTT27]

Where are the multispoke rims? Both the E60 and E39 looked their best sitting on multispoke rims.

19" Multispoke wheels are standard. These are the optional 20" wheels.

 

[Mr. Mercedes]

Great! Would be hard pressed choosing between this and an E63, though the Benz fan in me is hoping the E63 manages to hold it's own in the inevitable comparisons.

Anyone care to do up a table comparing stats between the 2? lol

 

[klier]

^^ I almost cared, but in the end I was just too lazy to post compare pics of the M5 and E63. BMWblog will do that for me tomorrow or the day after anyways....

I did however start by looking for pics of the E63, and I can safely say it will hold it's own just fine. E63 is much more in-your-face and here-am-I. Which is cool too, more like the E60 M5 approach.

19" Multispoke wheels are standard. These are the optional 20" wheels.

The 19" wheels are simply too small for an M5 imo. 20" is perfect, and definitely my favorite. And probably not in black, I like silver. Without those multispoke I see the awesome brakes better too

 

[Sunny]

Anyone care to do up a table comparing stats between the 2? lol

Can't find the specs for new E63 on the AMG site, but I guess it will mimic CLS63.
M5/CLS63/Panamera Turbo

Engine: 4.4l Bi-turbo V8 / 5.5l Bi-turbo V8 / 4.8l Bi-turbo V8
HP: 560 HP (6000-7000 rpm) / 518 HP (5250-5750 rpm) / 500 HP (6000 rpm)
Torque: 501 lbft (1500-5750 rpm) / 516 lbft (1700-5,000rpm) / 516 lbft (2250-4500 rpm)
Bore/Stroke: .99 / anyone? / 1.16
Comp ratio: 10:1 / anyone? / 10.5:1
Max Boost: 17.4 psi (not sure)/ anyone? /12.1psi
Curb Weight: 4135 lbs (4122 + 13 lbs) / 4277 lbs / 4343 lbs.

 

[klier]

^^ M5 appears to be the most high revving concept of the three.....

BTW:

F10:
HP: 560 HP (6k-7k rpm)
Torque: 501 lbft (1500-5750 rpm)

E60:
HP: 507 HP (7750 rpm)
Torque: 384 lb ft (6100 rpm)

...just not so much compared to E60 M5.

 

[LaArtist]

^ What are you talking about..
on mercedes website..you can go and look at the specs ( not amg website)

E63 weighs : Leergewicht/Zuladung (kg) [3] – (1.840/550)
CLS63: Leergewicht/Zuladung (kg) [3] – (1.870/545)
M5: 1870

So its the same as CLS.. and more than E63..
But its main competition is E63
When they make a 4 door coupe M ..then we will see if its lighter or heavier than the M5

 

[klier]

^^^ Where is the icon that rolls it's eyes when you need it???!!!!

 

[LaArtist]

^^^ Where is the icon that rolls it's eyes when you need it???!!!!

that reply was to sunny not you..

and who cares about the weights..its dead race between the CLS63..and E63 is a few KG´s lower..so few that its nothing to discuss..

The interesting part is the fact that they have been out a shit load longer..and the M5 only manages to MEET them when it comes to hp and weight..and is lower on torque..
We all know AMG will update those suckers within 2-3 years..while the M5 will probably go like this for 5-6 years..with some minor updates laaaaate in its life

Unless M changed strategy on us

 

[south]

^ What are you talking about..
on mercedes website..you can go and look at the specs ( not amg website)

That's for the 6.2l E63 not the new 5.5l E63.


Best regards,
south

 

[Bartek S.]

One word... Disappointed! Numbers are not good enough. BMW left some space for tuners. Nice car but M NO MORE THE MOST POWERFUL LETTER IN THE WORLD.

 

[Sunny]

^ What are you talking about..
on mercedes website..you can go and look at the specs ( not amg website)

E63 weighs : Leergewicht/Zuladung (kg) [3] – (1.840/550)
CLS63: Leergewicht/Zuladung (kg) [3] – (1.870/545)
M5: 1870

So its the same as CLS.. and more than E63..
But its main competition is E63
When they make a 4 door coupe M ..then we will see if its lighter or heavier than the M5

I got my figures from here: Mercedes-AMG Official Global Website. I haven't found the figures for the new E63 with V8TT anywhere.

The interesting part is the fact that they have been out a shit load longer..and the M5 only manages to MEET them when it comes to hp and weight..

One, HP is not even close unless you consider 518HP and 560HP to be close. It takes an almost $10k option to make it even close. Two, the E63 with new engine came out came out what? a month ago? And CLS 63 6 months ago? hardly "shit load longer". And if an M5 with 560HP is a disappointment, where was your disappointment when new E63 came out with pretty much same HP as the old E63 and the old M5?

 

[tikipukapuko]

DISSAPOINTING numbers but im sure it will be hell of ride and fun to drive.

 

[Centurion]

I think BMW is conservative with the performance figures. The real life performance of the car is probably better than the spec sheet.

 

[martinbo]

Remember boys and girls, in this little power and torque bunfight, one shouldn't disregard the value of revs. The more revs you make the greater the scope you have for shortening gear and final drive ratios. Which of course multiplies torque at the wheels now doesn't it?

If this is the age of turbocharged performance engines then I am satisfied that BMW has more than sufficiently differentiated its turbo V8 engine from its competitors'. What remains to be seen will come out in the comparison tests - and there'll be tons of those to come for sure.

 

[Mr Robert]

One word... Disappointed! Numbers are not good enough. BMW left some space for tuners. Nice car but M NO MORE THE MOST POWERFUL LETTER IN THE WORLD.

Come on Bartek, you drive a car that more than most live by the words of your beloved Neil Young: numbers add up to nothing. I think the feeling that the numbers were a bit low might point towards BMW keeping the main focus on delivery of feel... more power = more lag...

 

[martinbo]

No one cares for the fact that the F10M makes such impressive numbers from the smallest engine capacity here? (Talking Panamera Turbo and E63/CLS63)

 

[Sunny]

^Yup, at least till Audi introduces the 4L TT V8 like rumors indicate. Related tidbit I learned over the LeMans weekend, the V6 TDI in the Audi R18 also uses the "hot-side inside" turbo configuration like N/S63.