Sportauto: BMW M5 vs Audi S6

[Zafiro]

i have never asked you not to buy M5, but it really doesn't make sense. i've said M5 is not as comfortable as its competitors. if you do need 'knife edge handling and fits 4 passengers', a lot of cars can do, such as Mitsi Evo, or BMW's M3. 5 series is an executive sedan, so it doesn't fit to be as sporty as M5, coz comfort is compromised.

M5 is a comfortable car more than a porsche, ferrari and not far away from AMG. Comfort in a M5 is compromised but still more comfortable than many other cheaper and normal cars.
Have you driven the RS6? I have and the new M5 is more comfortable than the RS6.
Have you driven a 550i? I tell you this, with the setting "comfort" a M5 is comfortable as a 550i.
Also have you driven a Mitsu EVO? I have and if you think those are comfortable as a M5, just forget about it. Not even close. Also you rather have 4 passenger in a M5 than in a small car like M3.

You clearly have no idea what you talking about. You are the only one complaining on the M5, gezz I wonder why. You really should give up now. Im giving up now cause you really dont want to listen to us. Whatever you say for now goes in my ear but out of the other ear. Bla bla bla...

 

[Gene]

ok, i have never said Audi is unbeatable, i just express my views that Audi is better in building performance SEDANS (sorry for some typos earlier) than BMW. i won't argue with you if you say BMW has better handling than Audi, coz that's partly correct and i've no evidence to answer back.

for RS6, that's only a beast forced to be created by Audi just to keep its fame, or people might think Audi isn't comparable to other brands. to achieve some big saloons with good handling like M5 are brilliant, but that isn't neccessary. that's just for not to 'loose face', like Mitsubishi Evo and Subaru STi always compete of max torque in new models. do you think common people can distinguish Evo VII's and Evo IX's engine just by driving them once? what they want is NUMBER. what the consumers know is 'BMW M5's 0-100 is 4.7 and S6 is 5.2, so BMW is better', so Audi needs to build RS6. that's quite silly indeed...

if you still have to argue, i can't control you. i can only sum up that, M5 might have better driving dynamics and popular, but it isn't fit to be an executive sedan as an S6 can do.

Okay, fair enough, you are after all entitled to your opinion, just as everyone else is.

But let me define what this thread is all about: Which is the better performance vehicle out of the M5 and S6 in terms of:

"... [a car] designed to excel at a combination of acceleration, top speed, braking, and maneuverability. Great emphasis is often placed on handling—the ability of the car to remain in the control of the driver under challenging condition such as when the car's tires begin to lose their grip on corners."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sports_car

Although you definition of a performance includes comfort as a significant aspect (if not more important than sportiness all together). Most people won't agree with this. I'm sorry to say, we work with the accepted definition of a performance vehicle, and therefore your definition becomes an absolute moot point.

what they want is NUMBER. what the consumers know is 'BMW M5's 0-100 is 4.7 and S6 is 5.2, so BMW is better', so Audi needs to build RS6. that's quite silly indeed...

Incorrect. I am a consumer, and I've told you I could care less about NUMBERS. My mother and father are consumers also, and to them 4.7 seconds and 5.2 seconds are effectively the same thing. No one, other than the car enthusiast, cares about numbers. Someone a long time ago on this forum said it best: "Two mature people, willing to spend $100k on a car could care less if one car is 0.1sec faster than the other. There is better things in life to worry about". I agree completely.

if you still have to argue, i can't control you. i can only sum up that, M5 might have better driving dynamics and popular, but it isn't fit to be an executive sedan as an S6 can do

- Firstly this thread is about performance sedans, NOT executive sedans.
- Secondly, if you really wish to argue this point define exactly what an executive sedan is so we can start a new thread and compare the S6 and M5 as a 'executive sedan'.
- Thirdly, you haven't even been in an S6 or an M5, what do you know what is fit and unfit to be an executive sedan. As far as I know, the M5 is more executive than 85% of the cars in the world.

 

[Gene]

The whole argument that has occurred here is due to you fanboyish nature.
This is what you have said through the course of the thread (sorted chronologically):

1) The magazine is wrong, the S6 is better than the M5 because it has Quattro. Nothing can beat Quattro.
2) The M5 might be faster, but if the S6 had a manual transmission, it would destroy the M5 on the track.
3) The M5 might be faster, but if the S6 had DSG transmission, it would destroy the M5 on the track.
4) Don't worry about the S6, when the RS6 comes out it will destroy the M5.
5) If you want a sports car, go get a lotus elise, but your grandma (?!)would complain.
6) The M5 might faster and better handling, but a performance car should be really comfortable. The S6 is comfortable and therefore a better executive sedan, that is why it is a better car than the M5.
7) The M5 and RS6 are useless cars anyway. They are pointless. That is why the S6 is better.

Follow through this entire thread, and read your comments. These are comments of a person who can't bear to accept that the Audi might not be as good as another car.

 

[PanterroR]

@ Gene's posts in this thread.

 

[LaArtist]

If he said all those things gene..then LOL
cause only 1 of these statements are remotely true..
the following:
4) Don't worry about the S6, when the RS6 comes out it will destroy the M5.

 

[Imhotep Evil]

If he said all those things gene..then LOL
cause only 1 of these statements are remotely true..
the following:
4) Don't worry about the S6, when the RS6 comes out it will destroy the M5.

What if the M5 get a FL, and BMW decides to tweak those restrictors a little bit ?!
Remeber the S85 is no 507 HP engine.

 

[LaArtist]

its against the history but a possibility..in that case i belive BMW will be back on top ..

 

[Zafiro]

RS6 will need at least 530-540hp to beat the M5 and E63. RS6 is not a light car and its get even heavier thanks to the Quattro system..

Im sure the next RS6 will beat both M5 and RS6 but unlike some of you guys, I dont think the RS6 will beat M5 and E63 by several seconds to 200km/h. Not even by a second becuase then we talk times comparable to F430, 997TT and Z06. Not going to happen.

 

[Lemantech]

RS6 will need at least 530-540hp to beat the M5 and E63. RS6 is not a light car and its get even heavier thanks to the Quattro system..

Im sure the next RS6 will beat both M5 and RS6 but unlike some of you guys, I dont think the RS6 will beat M5 and E63 by several seconds to 200km/h. Not even by a second becuase then we talk times comparable to F430, 997TT and Z06. Not going to happen.

i dont know about that Just_Me........for the R8 they are working on a light-weight Quattro system..maybe the RS6 will get that....and indeed it might be lighter than the old RS 6...and you never know it might be about equal or even less than the weight of the M5.

But i do agreee that the Rs6 will not destroy all of the other executive/ performance sedans...I think the performance will be very close.

 

[Zafiro]

i dont know about that Just_Me........for the R8 they are working on a light-weight Quattro system..maybe the RS6 will get that....and indeed it might be lighter than the old RS 6...and you never know it might be about equal or even less than the weight of the M5.

But i do agreee that the Rs6 will not destroy all of the other executive/ performance sedans...I think the performance will be very close.

I dont know what Audi are doing for the next generation RS6 but if its anything close to the old RS6 it will need much more power than M5.

 

[warot]

I dont know what Audi are doing for the next generation RS6 but if its anything close to the old RS6 it will need much more power than M5.

Audi's got this all measured. They aren't going to build a car that is slower than the M5, because that would be a failure wouldn't it?

 

[Zafiro]

Audi's got this all measured. They aren't going to build a car that is slower than the M5, because that would be a failure wouldn't it?

I didnt say it would be slower, in fact I said it would be faster. But the differences wont be like night and day like some seem to think. Thats what I meant. Do you understand?

 

[Lemantech]

I didnt say it would be slower, in fact I said it would be faster. But the differences wont be like night and day like some seem to think. Thats what I meant. Do you understand?

I do find it rather funny that some people actually say its going to kill the M5

 

[Zafiro]

I do find it rather funny that some people actually say its going to kill the M5

yea, cars cant die

 

[yaubrandon]

The whole argument that has occurred here is due to you fanboyish nature.
This is what you have said through the course of the thread (sorted chronologically):

1) The magazine is wrong, the S6 is better than the M5 because it has Quattro. Nothing can beat Quattro.
2) The M5 might be faster, but if the S6 had a manual transmission, it would destroy the M5 on the track.
3) The M5 might be faster, but if the S6 had DSG transmission, it would destroy the M5 on the track.
4) Don't worry about the S6, when the RS6 comes out it will destroy the M5.
5) If you want a sports car, go get a lotus elise, but your grandma (?!)would complain.
6) The M5 might faster and better handling, but a performance car should be really comfortable. The S6 is comfortable and therefore a better executive sedan, that is why it is a better car than the M5.
7) The M5 and RS6 are useless cars anyway. They are pointless. That is why the S6 is better.

Follow through this entire thread, and read your comments. These are comments of a person who can't bear to accept that the Audi might not be as good as another car.

you annoyed me, Gene. don't try to 'sum up' my points before understanding, and conclude that i'm wrong. 'The M5 might be faster and better handling, but a performance car should be really comfortable' might be something you wrote from anger? should be 'performance sedan', not pure 'performance car'. a sedan is a sedan, even you add up performance to it, the sedan should still keep comfort at an acceptable level, otherwise it's a pointless sedan. however, i've never said M5 is a pointless 'performance car', but it's a sedan, so it's pointless, of course, as well as RS6.

 

[yaubrandon]

If he said all those things gene..then LOL
cause only 1 of these statements are remotely true..
the following:
4) Don't worry about the S6, when the RS6 comes out it will destroy the M5.

don't be misleaded by him! he twisted my points.

 

[PanterroR]

Isn't it enough already?

 

[Zafiro]

I said it long ago, the thread is leading nowhere. People should know when enough is enough.

 

[yaubrandon]

Okay, fair enough, you are after all entitled to your opinion, just as everyone else is.

But let me define what this thread is all about: Which is the better performance vehicle out of the M5 and S6 in terms of:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sports_car

Although you definition of a performance includes comfort as a significant aspect (if not more important than sportiness all together). Most people won't agree with this. I'm sorry to say, we work with the accepted definition of a performance vehicle, and therefore your definition becomes an absolute moot point.


Incorrect. I am a consumer, and I've told you I could care less about NUMBERS. My mother and father are consumers also, and to them 4.7 seconds and 5.2 seconds are effectively the same thing. No one, other than the car enthusiast, cares about numbers. Someone a long time ago on this forum said it best: "Two mature people, willing to spend $100k on a car could care less if one car is 0.1sec faster than the other. There is better things in life to worry about". I agree completely.


- Firstly this thread is about performance sedans, NOT executive sedans.
- Secondly, if you really wish to argue this point define exactly what an executive sedan is so we can start a new thread and compare the S6 and M5 as a 'executive sedan'.
- Thirdly, you haven't even been in an S6 or an M5, what do you know what is fit and unfit to be an executive sedan. As far as I know, the M5 is more executive than 85% of the cars in the world.

you know, a number of people always compare the specs, that's why many manufacturers nowadays have given up the OHV/2V per cyl engines, coz the consumers always think those engines are crap and low tech. in fact, those engines are perfect for urban use.

performance sedans can be executive sedans. even if executive sedans are equipped with performance, they're still luxury car, or they aren't fit for 'executive sedan'. you seem still don't understand my points, no wonder i see you 'conclude' my points in a bold, but wrong way. YOU MISLEAD THE READERS AND MAKE THEM FEEL I"M AN IDIOT!!!

 

[yaubrandon]

I dont know what Audi are doing for the next generation RS6 but if its anything close to the old RS6 it will need much more power than M5.

in fact, it may be 150-200kg heavier than the old RS6, just as the S6 (old: 1790kg,new: about 1980kg (man)). but the interior should be bigger than 5 series (at least in measurements)