The New BMW M5
#126
Registered User
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Houston
Posts: 567
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[QUOTE=RX-Hachi]Whether you think they are worthy or not, the natural competitors to the M5 are the E55 AMG and the RS6. Someone who can afford cars in that league would not be shopping for the CTS-V.
/QUOTE]
Bull. I chose a Caddy CTS-V and I could buy a Duesenberg if I wanted too. I also am partial to Miatas.
/QUOTE]
Bull. I chose a Caddy CTS-V and I could buy a Duesenberg if I wanted too. I also am partial to Miatas.
#127
Int'l Man of Mystery
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 3,651
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
^^ is part of my issue about pricing themselves out of the market. The M5 is not something like a Maybach. It's not a super luxo sedan for the really rich. It was a reasonably priced high performance sedan for those who want a little more than the tamer 5 Series sedans offer. Like said above... for someone who'd buy a Porsche, but wants or needs room for the wife and kids. $100k just seems to be pricing them out of this market. The Porsche lover could get his Porsche AND get a well-performing sedan for that much money.
#128
Blue By You
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 8,717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[QUOTE=babylou]
You're right, Hachi was wrong. Just because someone can afford a better car doesn't mean they will purchase said better car... My brother in law traded in his 993 Turbo S for a freaking STS (yawn), traded that in for a S500 (yawn), and is now waiting for his 760 to be delivered. Proof that money can't buy good taste, nor will it allow a tightwad to live a little (he's worth about 40 million).
Not saying you don't have good taste Babylou, the CTS-V was not a bad choice over the previous M5.
Originally Posted by RX-Hachi
Bull. I chose a Caddy CTS-V and I could buy a Duesenberg if I wanted too. I also am partial to Miatas.
Not saying you don't have good taste Babylou, the CTS-V was not a bad choice over the previous M5.
#129
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Honolulu, Hawaii
Posts: 1,266
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[QUOTE=babylou]
Let me correct my statement. There's a diffrence in being to able to afford a car vs. actually wanting to buy one.
If you actually did seriously pick the CTS-V over the M5 after test driving both, good for you, nothing wrong with that. But for most people who intend to spend $80K-$100K on a super sedan, the Caddy usually isn't on the short list.
My point was about the natural competitors to the M5, not about whether one can afford one or not.
(And Ike is always wrong about everything.)
Originally Posted by RX-Hachi
Whether you think they are worthy or not, the natural competitors to the M5 are the E55 AMG and the RS6. Someone who can afford cars in that league would not be shopping for the CTS-V.
/QUOTE]
Bull. I chose a Caddy CTS-V and I could buy a Duesenberg if I wanted too. I also am partial to Miatas.
/QUOTE]
Bull. I chose a Caddy CTS-V and I could buy a Duesenberg if I wanted too. I also am partial to Miatas.
If you actually did seriously pick the CTS-V over the M5 after test driving both, good for you, nothing wrong with that. But for most people who intend to spend $80K-$100K on a super sedan, the Caddy usually isn't on the short list.
My point was about the natural competitors to the M5, not about whether one can afford one or not.
(And Ike is always wrong about everything.)
Last edited by RX-Hachi; 10-31-2005 at 08:42 PM.
#130
It seems to me that people are picking "natural comepetitors" based solely on price and straight line performance. I have driven the previous M5, RS6, and a bunch of AMG crap. The M5, to me, is a different type of super sedan. It seems to strive for balance, while the others do not. The AMG's don't even make an attempt to pretend they do.
I would call all the cars mentioned, other than the Maseratti, alternatives, not competitors.
I have said it many times while talking about similarly priced cars. If you only have 100k to go car shopping, you would be a fool to buy one car to try to do everything. Will the M5 and similar alternatives see buyers like that, sure, there are a bunch of foolish people running around. The people this car is marketed towards have enough money for more than 1 car, and certainly more than 1 $100k car.
I would call all the cars mentioned, other than the Maseratti, alternatives, not competitors.
Originally Posted by Japan8
Wait a min. You have $100k to go car shopping. How many of us are going to buy the new M5? Be honest. You can buy 1 can or you can buy 10 cars. You can also buy mods or whatever. $100k to do whatever you like. You want a Bangled M5 with SMG for $96k + tax?
#131
Int'l Man of Mystery
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 3,651
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
... but the previous M5's didn't seem to be marketed towards those kinds of people. All BMW's seemed to have taken quite a step up in price, especially the M5. Has BMW priced themselves out of what was a significant portion of the M5's market? At $60-70k... I'd consider one. At $100k... not even if I could afford to buy 3 and a Ferrari.
#132
the reason for the mark up in prices is because of all the new technology. iDrive, part aluminum chasis, aluminum suspension components, fiber optics, more control modules, active stability control, active steering, EDC, HUD, Harmon Kardon with Logic 7, blue tooth technology, BMW assist, comfort access, magnesium blocks, SMG, run flat tires, condition based services, active cruise control, etc. etc. when it comes to technology, BMW is always a step ahead of most manufacturers. therefore, they have every reason to increase the price on their models.
BMW is only going to get bigger. the new V8 powered M3, a supposed V8 powered Z4 (M4), turbocharging, diesel, hydrogen, etc.
it's not just BMW that's jacking up prices...look at all the other manufacturers. times are changing.
the E39 M5 wasn't all that much different from the regular E39 5 series. the E39 540i 6 spd. was/is one hell of a ride. the M5 has some cosmetic changes, but it just looked like a 540i on steriods. the same goes with the current E60 M5/550i/545i. performance wise, the M cars always rocked...that's obvious. the E46 M3 and the E36 Z coupe/roadster were the only M cars that looked totally different from their regular looking models. they had the crucial fender flares and wide staggered rims.
i think you guys are missing the point that the $95k price tag on the new M5 isn't just performance numbers. it includes the material the car is made of, the maintenance and new car warranty that comes with it, the luxury accessores (blue tooth ready, suede headlining, auto side wing support, HUD, etc.). at the price the M5 comes with, you're not just getting a car...you're getting full support from BMW.
some people can afford cars like the M5, great for them. but how many of them really care about how fast it can go around a turn, how many of them actually know how the little power button boosts another 100 hp? they don't...they buy it b/c of the BMW name and the reputation they will get for driving a 500HP luxury sedan. it's funny, i bumped into an old highschool friend looking to buy an E46 M3 cabrio. she's a year younger than me (21) and doesn't know a damn thing about the M3. all she knows is that it is the highest model 3 series you can get and it's fast. what a waste of a beautiful machine....
like japan 8 said...if i had $100k to spend, i would definately buy several decent cars and enjoy every single one of them. actually...i'd just get a R33 Skyline GT-R
BMW is only going to get bigger. the new V8 powered M3, a supposed V8 powered Z4 (M4), turbocharging, diesel, hydrogen, etc.
it's not just BMW that's jacking up prices...look at all the other manufacturers. times are changing.
the E39 M5 wasn't all that much different from the regular E39 5 series. the E39 540i 6 spd. was/is one hell of a ride. the M5 has some cosmetic changes, but it just looked like a 540i on steriods. the same goes with the current E60 M5/550i/545i. performance wise, the M cars always rocked...that's obvious. the E46 M3 and the E36 Z coupe/roadster were the only M cars that looked totally different from their regular looking models. they had the crucial fender flares and wide staggered rims.
i think you guys are missing the point that the $95k price tag on the new M5 isn't just performance numbers. it includes the material the car is made of, the maintenance and new car warranty that comes with it, the luxury accessores (blue tooth ready, suede headlining, auto side wing support, HUD, etc.). at the price the M5 comes with, you're not just getting a car...you're getting full support from BMW.
some people can afford cars like the M5, great for them. but how many of them really care about how fast it can go around a turn, how many of them actually know how the little power button boosts another 100 hp? they don't...they buy it b/c of the BMW name and the reputation they will get for driving a 500HP luxury sedan. it's funny, i bumped into an old highschool friend looking to buy an E46 M3 cabrio. she's a year younger than me (21) and doesn't know a damn thing about the M3. all she knows is that it is the highest model 3 series you can get and it's fast. what a waste of a beautiful machine....
like japan 8 said...if i had $100k to spend, i would definately buy several decent cars and enjoy every single one of them. actually...i'd just get a R33 Skyline GT-R
![Lol](https://www.rx8club.com/images/smilies/lol.gif)
#133
Registered User
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Houston
Posts: 567
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Im_DANomite
the reason for the mark up in prices is because of all the new technology. iDrive, part aluminum chasis, aluminum suspension components, fiber optics, more control modules, active stability control, active steering, EDC, HUD, Harmon Kardon with Logic 7, blue tooth technology, BMW assist, comfort access, magnesium blocks, SMG, run flat tires, condition based services, active cruise control, etc. etc. when it comes to technology, BMW is always a step ahead of most manufacturers. therefore, they have every reason to increase the price on their models.
#134
Int'l Man of Mystery
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 3,651
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by babylou
Except for the weight reduction technologies I consider the rest of those things as making an automobile a step behind the others. To me the perfect devices are the simple, reliable, low cost, perfectly operating ones; In engineering parlance we call that an "elegant design". This is why I am looking for another nice '99-'00 Miata or maybe even a '93.
Personally... I like the way it used to be with the M5. I like it being a 540 on steroids. The e46 M3... well it is a beautiful car, but I did wonder if BMW wasn't going a bit overboard though. But at least it's price is still affordable. This $96k stuff is seriously BS. For a freaking hot rod 5 Series BMW... not in this life.
#135
Originally Posted by Japan8
The V10? Sweet... yes. Was all the techno gadgets on it necessary? Nope. The Viper V10 drops serious power without it. .
A street V10 revving to 8000 rpm and having a full warranty is a dream come true. I also think SMG III, if it's any better than II, will be a great system, but that's just me.
#136
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 1,959
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Viper V10 isn't making any attempts to win any awards--it is American horsepower in one of its rawest forms. The last M5 was the perfect BMW in my eyes--I'm not for all this techno stuff either--at the end of the day I can't get past the M5s hideous looks to even boggle my mind with its window sticker.
#137
Int'l Man of Mystery
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 3,651
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The BMW V10 is just a big Honda VTEC engine. Looks at it's powerband... not much on the low-end. Cars like Alpina (sp?) with their tuned 5 Series V8 drop the similar hp numbers and actually performance numbers too. but they make more power on the low-end due to it being s/c.
The SMG III... I said before and I will again... BMW can shove it. I don't do SMG. Double H and clutch thank you. Don't need SMG in a M5... you ain't gonna track it. It ain't a Ferrari... you ain't gonna race it. The clutches are light, so stop whining. Especially in this overweight M5, SMG is just another techno gadget.... one that I particularly don't care for.
The BMW V10 is a techno marvel. But like I said... probably overkill and we'll see how reliable all that proves to be.
The Viper... it's the old American adage... ain't no replacement for displacement. Although I do agree... even GM does better with the LS engines.
Speaking of which... the LS V8's are the perfect example of what I am (apparantly) not explaining well about the BMW V10. The LS is compact, powerful, fuel efficient, simple and reliable. Not to mention it costs less. Who cares if it is "low tech." It does the job and does the job well. Again... techno gadgets for the sake of techno gadgets.
The SMG III... I said before and I will again... BMW can shove it. I don't do SMG. Double H and clutch thank you. Don't need SMG in a M5... you ain't gonna track it. It ain't a Ferrari... you ain't gonna race it. The clutches are light, so stop whining. Especially in this overweight M5, SMG is just another techno gadget.... one that I particularly don't care for.
The BMW V10 is a techno marvel. But like I said... probably overkill and we'll see how reliable all that proves to be.
The Viper... it's the old American adage... ain't no replacement for displacement. Although I do agree... even GM does better with the LS engines.
Speaking of which... the LS V8's are the perfect example of what I am (apparantly) not explaining well about the BMW V10. The LS is compact, powerful, fuel efficient, simple and reliable. Not to mention it costs less. Who cares if it is "low tech." It does the job and does the job well. Again... techno gadgets for the sake of techno gadgets.
#138
Originally Posted by Japan8
The BMW V10 is just a big Honda VTEC engine. Looks at it's powerband... not much on the low-end. Cars like Alpina (sp?) with their tuned 5 Series V8 drop the similar hp numbers and actually performance numbers too. but they make more power on the low-end due to it being s/c.
The SMG III... I said before and I will again... BMW can shove it. I don't do SMG. Double H and clutch thank you. Don't need SMG in a M5... you ain't gonna track it. It ain't a Ferrari... you ain't gonna race it. The clutches are light, so stop whining. Especially in this overweight M5, SMG is just another techno gadget.... one that I particularly don't care for.
The BMW V10 is a techno marvel. But like I said... probably overkill and we'll see how reliable all that proves to be.
The Viper... it's the old American adage... ain't no replacement for displacement. Although I do agree... even GM does better with the LS engines.
Speaking of which... the LS V8's are the perfect example of what I am (apparantly) not explaining well about the BMW V10. The LS is compact, powerful, fuel efficient, simple and reliable. Not to mention it costs less. Who cares if it is "low tech." It does the job and does the job well. Again... techno gadgets for the sake of techno gadgets.
The SMG III... I said before and I will again... BMW can shove it. I don't do SMG. Double H and clutch thank you. Don't need SMG in a M5... you ain't gonna track it. It ain't a Ferrari... you ain't gonna race it. The clutches are light, so stop whining. Especially in this overweight M5, SMG is just another techno gadget.... one that I particularly don't care for.
The BMW V10 is a techno marvel. But like I said... probably overkill and we'll see how reliable all that proves to be.
The Viper... it's the old American adage... ain't no replacement for displacement. Although I do agree... even GM does better with the LS engines.
Speaking of which... the LS V8's are the perfect example of what I am (apparantly) not explaining well about the BMW V10. The LS is compact, powerful, fuel efficient, simple and reliable. Not to mention it costs less. Who cares if it is "low tech." It does the job and does the job well. Again... techno gadgets for the sake of techno gadgets.
Even Farley agrees.
![101384 L](https://www.rx8club.com/images/smilies/101384_l.gif)
#139
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Honolulu, Hawaii
Posts: 1,266
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Japan8
... but the previous M5's didn't seem to be marketed towards those kinds of people. All BMW's seemed to have taken quite a step up in price, especially the M5. Has BMW priced themselves out of what was a significant portion of the M5's market? At $60-70k... I'd consider one. At $100k... not even if I could afford to buy 3 and a Ferrari.
#140
Registered User
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Houston
Posts: 567
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Japan8
Speaking of which... the LS V8's are the perfect example of what I am (apparantly) not explaining well about the BMW V10. The LS is compact, powerful, fuel efficient, simple and reliable. Not to mention it costs less. Who cares if it is "low tech." It does the job and does the job well. Again... techno gadgets for the sake of techno gadgets.
#141
it's hardly technocrap. It's an impressive feat of engineering. If everything was engineered elegantly, there would be little progress. Invention, innovation and progress require "technocrap". If it's not your cup of tea, which it appears it isn't, thats fine. But don't call it crap.
#142
Bummed, but bring on OU!
The only reason the BMW V10 won engine of the year is because BMW made it. The LS7 is a much more spectacular feat of engineering. I mean come on there's more innovation in that "old tech" pushrod than the V10 easy. BMW just used established ohc tech and made a V10 out of it. The LS7 pushes the pushrod limit higher than it's ever been. But it was made in America, by GM so therefore can't touch the German engine...<---------sarcasm, btw
#144
Originally Posted by therm8
The only reason the BMW V10 won engine of the year is because BMW made it. The LS7 is a much more spectacular feat of engineering. I mean come on there's more innovation in that "old tech" pushrod than the V10 easy. BMW just used established ohc tech and made a V10 out of it. The LS7 pushes the pushrod limit higher than it's ever been. But it was made in America, by GM so therefore can't touch the German engine...<---------sarcasm, btw
Anyhow, I have been trying to find the weights of both the LS7 and the M5 engine, since babylou mentioned the LS7 is lighter. I can't find that info anywhere. Anyone have a resource? As well, anyone know of an engine website that details the specifices of variouls engines. More in depth than just power and displacement?
#145
Originally Posted by RX-Hachi
Since Danomite seems slow in posting the pics,
https://www.rx8club.com/showpost.php...8&postcount=84
![Stick Out Tongue](https://www.rx8club.com/images/smilies/tongue.gif)
#146
Bummed, but bring on OU!
http://forums.corvetteforum.com/show...8&forum_id=101
best I can do...
about halfway down the page...
450lbs with some accessories.
on a side note, I saw a post on one of the forums about GR motorsports (i think) making headers that gained 30hp/30something tq, untuned. Apparently the Z06 has 2.5in exhaust...
best I can do...
about halfway down the page...
450lbs with some accessories.
on a side note, I saw a post on one of the forums about GR motorsports (i think) making headers that gained 30hp/30something tq, untuned. Apparently the Z06 has 2.5in exhaust...
![Crazy](https://www.rx8club.com/images/smilies/crazy.gif)
Last edited by therm8; 11-01-2005 at 03:16 PM.
#147
Originally Posted by Japan8
The BMW V10 is just a big Honda VTEC engine. Looks at it's powerband... not much on the low-end.
The SMG III... I said before and I will again... BMW can shove it. I don't do SMG. Double H and clutch thank you. Don't need SMG in a M5... you ain't gonna track it.
The clutches are light, so stop whining.
The SMG tranny in the m5 was designed from the ground up as an SMG tranny. Since they didn't have to worry about shift pattern they put the lowest gears in the strongest parts of the transmission. If they tried to make a traditional manual out of it the shift pattern would be too ridiculous for people to use.
From a performance standpoint (which is what M cars are supposed to be about), SMG is simply just a better transmission. It shifts faster and is more consistent.
That said, I'd also rather have a third pedal.
#148
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 1,959
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't have a problem with SMG units (except in the Z4)--in fact I'd probably prefer one in this application as it is a better tranny than a standard manual--a standard stick is more fun though.
#149
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Honolulu, Hawaii
Posts: 1,266
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by BlueEyes
#150
i totally see both sides of this discussion. but i'll tell you one thing...i work on BMW's for a living, but i will NEVER buy one....EVER.
the E39 M5 ran similar track times to the E46 M3 (forget where i heard this from...you guys can clarify for me). our beloved RX8 ran similar track times to the E46 M3. yea...we definately have the best car out on the market right now
woot!
the E39 M5 ran similar track times to the E46 M3 (forget where i heard this from...you guys can clarify for me). our beloved RX8 ran similar track times to the E46 M3. yea...we definately have the best car out on the market right now
![Lol](https://www.rx8club.com/images/smilies/lol.gif)