• Motortrend 2013 F10 BMW M5 test numbers are in - 11.9@120 and 4384 pound curb weight

                    
      		   
      Published on 03-14-2012 02:11 AM
      51 Comments Comments
      This is our second set of US performance numbers for the new M5. Car and Driver put up numbers last year and hit 12.0@122. MotorTrend got it into the 11's with a 11.9@120 mph run. Certainly not bad but not exactly blazing performance these days either especially considering MotorTrend hit 12.5@115 in a 6 speed manual previous generation E60 M5. That car was already a heavy 4100 pounds and this new M5 is almost 300 pounds heavier.

      If the M5 did not pick up that 300 pounds on the previous generation we would see much more impressive performance numbers. The CLS63 AMG and E63 AMG with the new twin turbo M157 motor run similar times although they have an optional performance package to up the ante and likely leave the M5 behind. The new M5 is definitely fast, but it also could have raised the bar much higher had it not gained so much weight.


      2013 BMW M5
      POWERTRAIN/CHASSIS
      DRIVETRAIN LAYOUT Front engine, RWD
      ENGINE TYPE Twin-turbo 90-deg V-8, alum block/heads
      VALVETRAIN DOHC, 4 valves/cyl
      DISPLACEMENT 268.2 cu in/4395 cc
      COMPRESSION RATIO 10.0:1
      POWER (SAE NET) 560 hp @ 6000 rpm
      TORQUE (SAE NET) 500 lb-ft @ 1500 rpm
      REDLINE 7200 rpm
      WEIGHT TO POWER 7.8 lb/hp
      TRANSMISSION 7-speed twin-clutch auto
      AXLE/FINAL-DRIVE RATIO 3.15:1/2.12:1
      SUSPENSION, FRONT; REAR Multi-link, coil springs, adj shocks, anti-roll bar; multi-link, coil springs, adj shocks, anti-roll bar
      STEERING RATIO 13.1:1
      TURNS LOCK-TO-LOCK 2.5
      BRAKES, F;R 15.7-in vented, drilled disc; 15.6-in vented, drilled disc, ABS
      WHEELS 9.0 x 20-in, 10.0 x 20-in cast aluminum
      TIRES 265/35ZR20 99Y; 295/30ZR20 101Y Michelin Pilot Super Sport
      DIMENSIONS
      WHEELBASE 116.7 in
      TRACK, F/R 64.1/62.3 in
      LENGTH x WIDTH x HEIGHT 193.5 x 74.4 x 57.3
      TURNING CIRCLE 41.3 ft
      CURB WEIGHT 4384 lb
      WEIGHT DIST., F/R 52/48 %
      SEATING CAPACITY 5
      HEADROOM, F/R 40.5/38.3 in
      LEGROOM, F/R 41.4/36.1 in
      SHOULDER ROOM, F/R 58.3/56.2 in
      CARGO VOLUME 14.0 cu ft
      TEST DATA
      ACCELERATION TO MPH
      0-30 1.5 sec
      0-40 2.2
      0-50 2.9
      0-60 3.7
      0-70 4.7
      0-80 5.8
      0-90 7.0
      0-100 8.4
      PASSING, 45-65 MPH 1.6
      QUARTER MILE 11.9 sec @ 120.3 mph
      BRAKING, 60-0 MPH 110 ft
      LATERAL ACCELERATION 0.94 g (avg)
      MT FIGURE EIGHT 24.9 sec @ 0.81 g (avg)
      TOP-GEAR REVS @ 60 MPH 1500 rpm
      CONSUMER INFO
      BASE PRICE $95,000 (est)
      PRICE AS TESTED $105,000 (est)
      STABILITY/TRACTION CONTROL Yes/Yes
      AIRBAGS Dual front, front side, f/r curtain, front knee
      BASIC WARRANTY 4 yrs/50,000 miles
      POWERTRAIN WARRANTY 4 yrs/50,000 miles
      ROADSIDE ASSISTANCE 4 yrs/Unlimited
      FUEL CAPACITY 21.1 gal
      EPA CITY/HWY ECON 15/22 mpg (est)
      ENERGY CONS., CITY/HWY 225/153 kW-hrs/100 miles (est)
      CO2 EMISSIONS 1.11 lb/mile (est)
      RECOMMENDED FUEL Unleaded premium



      This article was originally published in forum thread: Motor Trend's First Test of 2013 BMW M5 started by flipm3 View original post
      Comments 50 Comments
      1. Sorena's Avatar
        Sorena - 03-14-2012, 02:47 AM
        Don't hate. It's faster than E63 PP, so it's all good. The weight though is because of all the luxury $#@! they fitted in the car. Soft closing doors? really? i want to slam it like a burning beer! But at least it handles good, and laps the ring faster than AMG's.
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky - 03-14-2012, 02:53 AM
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sorena Click here to enlarge
        Don't hate. It's faster than E63 PP, so it's all good.
        Based on? Not hating, it could be better but it certainly isn't bad.

        I just can't like this car like the E39 or even E60 M5 for that matter.
      1. Sorena's Avatar
        Sorena - 03-14-2012, 03:17 AM
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
        Based on? Not hating, it could be better but it certainly isn't bad.

        I just can't like this car like the E39 or even E60 M5 for that matter.
        Based on the EVO video, M5 vs E63 vs XKR vs Panamera.

        The MT article is well written. The E60 problem was it's harshness. Super saloons in the first place should get you from work to home, and then after that to a race track. E60 failed at the primary goal in order to do the secondary better.

        People like the E39 M5 because it was the car at the moment. No real competitors, the N/A E55 which was the main competitor was a joke. The F10 however has to face rivals that has become close.

        The F10 M5 isn't bad FOR IT'S BUYERS. It's a very touchy point that you should consider. You don't buy this car, a family man buys it and the car is built to satisfy that guy not you.
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky - 03-14-2012, 04:05 AM
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sorena Click here to enlarge
        Based on the EVO video, M5 vs E63 vs XKR vs Panamera.
        Yes but I believe it was later clarified that was not a performance package E63.

        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sorena Click here to enlarge
        Super saloons in the first place should get you from work to home, and then after that to a race track. E60 failed at the primary goal in order to do the secondary better.
        How? This fat pig goes into limp mode at the track.

        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sorena Click here to enlarge
        People like the E39 M5 because it was the car at the moment. No real competitors
        It wasn't the car of the moment, the E39 raised the mid-size sport sedan game to heights it had never seen. The E39 defined what it was. It was the best M5 ever made IMO.

        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sorena Click here to enlarge
        You don't buy this car, a family man buys it and the car is built to satisfy that guy not you.
        So the M6 is what then? And what, the family man always has his family in the car?
      1. M3_WC's Avatar
        M3_WC - 03-14-2012, 04:35 AM
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sorena Click here to enlarge
        Based on the EVO video, M5 vs E63 vs XKR vs Panamera.
        LOL. That video was terrible.
      1. M3_WC's Avatar
        M3_WC - 03-14-2012, 04:36 AM
        Did any mags do a road/track test of the 2012 E63? I have seen road tests of the 2012 CLS63. But the E63 is a few hundred lbs lighter.


        CLS63 w/Perf. package

        0–60 mph 3.8 sec
        0–100 mph 8.3 sec
        0–1320 ft (1/4 mile) 12.0 sec @ 122.5 mph
        Top speed 186 mph
        Skidpad 0.93 g
      1. Sorena's Avatar
        Sorena - 03-14-2012, 04:46 AM
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
        Yes but I believe it was later clarified that was not a performance package E63.



        How? This fat pig goes into limp mode at the track.



        It wasn't the car of the moment, the E39 raised the mid-size sport sedan game to heights it had never seen. The E39 defined what it was. It was the best M5 ever made IMO.



        So the M6 is what then? And what, the family man always has his family in the car?
        Would you stop tearing apart posts and multi-quoting? I have to do the same and it's hard for me lol

        IDK about the later clarification, but i thought it was a E63 PP.

        The fat pig didn't go to limp mode when i was in Spain test drive. I shared the car with a former French race driver and he was beating the $#@! out of the car. It just went into limp mode once and that happened because he was trying to set the longest drifting record.

        I think @EUGENE-Taiwan shared car with a BMW test driver. He can tell if it went to limp mode or not.

        Agreed, E39 M5 was and is the best M5 ever made.

        And also i agree M6 is soft for no good reason. They should give it more punch.

        The family guy doesn't carry his family all the time, but he wants to move them from location A to B in comfort. The F10 acts like a normal 5-Series in comfort mode, but in the E60 even in Lexus mode (P-400) it wasn't a car you could live with it everyday. No torque in lower PRM's, jerky transmission, bad MPG, harsh run flat tires, sharp ride.... all hurt the E60.
      1. Sorena's Avatar
        Sorena - 03-14-2012, 04:55 AM
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by M3_WC Click here to enlarge
        LOL. That video was terrible.
        How is that?
      1. Sorena's Avatar
        Sorena - 03-14-2012, 05:00 AM
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by M3_WC Click here to enlarge
        Did any mags do a road/track test of the 2012 E63? I have seen road tests of the 2012 CLS63. But the E63 is a few hundred lbs lighter.


        CLS63 w/Perf. package

        0–60 mph 3.8 sec
        0–100 mph 8.3 sec
        0–1320 ft (1/4 mile) 12.0 sec @ 122.5 mph
        Top speed 186 mph
        Skidpad 0.93 g
        A fully optioned E63 like the tested M5, is 4300lb which 50 more than CLS63.

        EDIT: I don't know why i thought you mentioned the CLS weighs 4250.
      1. M3_WC's Avatar
        M3_WC - 03-14-2012, 05:09 AM
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sorena Click here to enlarge
        A fully optioned E63 like the tested M5, is 4300lb which 50 more than CLS63.

        EDIT: I don't know why i thought you mentioned the CLS weighs 4250.
        According to Benz, there is about 230 lbs difference in curb weight between CLS63 and E63.

        I want to see some test numbers from the new TTV8 E63, but all the mags tested the CLS63.
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky - 03-14-2012, 05:16 AM
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by M3_WC Click here to enlarge
        Did any mags do a road/track test of the 2012 E63? I have seen road tests of the 2012 CLS63. But the E63 is a few hundred lbs lighter.


        CLS63 w/Perf. package

        0–60 mph 3.8 sec
        0–100 mph 8.3 sec
        0–1320 ft (1/4 mile) 12.0 sec @ 122.5 mph
        Top speed 186 mph
        Skidpad 0.93 g
        I think the E63 with PP will be faster than the M5. It won't be a massacre but it will be faster.
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky - 03-14-2012, 05:18 AM
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sorena Click here to enlarge
        Would you stop tearing apart posts and multi-quoting? I have to do the same and it's hard for me lol
        No, it's what I'm good, nay, great at.

        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sorena Click here to enlarge
        IDK about the later clarification, but i thought it was a E63 PP.
        As did I but it was a standard car it seems.

        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sorena Click here to enlarge
        The fat pig didn't go to limp mode when i was in Spain test drive. I shared the car with a former French race driver and he was beating the $#@! out of the car. It just went into limp mode once and that happened because he was trying to set the longest drifting record.
        Who had the review that mentioned it went into limp mode? As did the CLS it was compared against. We expect it from the Benz. That is what BMW has become with M now, AMG.

        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sorena Click here to enlarge
        The family guy doesn't carry his family all the time, but he wants to move them from location A to B in comfort. The F10 acts like a normal 5-Series in comfort mode, but in the E60 even in Lexus mode (P-400) it wasn't a car you could live with it everyday. No torque in lower PRM's,
        Oh, no torque from a 5.0 liter V10 huh? Come on, get out of here. It had plenty of punch down low especially with how it was geared.

        The E60 M5 wasn't a Z06. It was a comfortable sedan as well although it had more of a razor's edge it seems than this F10 M5 does. The M5 has gotten soft, lazy, and fat. Just like BMW.
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky - 03-14-2012, 05:19 AM
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by M3_WC Click here to enlarge
        I want to see some test numbers from the new TTV8 E63, but all the mags tested the CLS63.
        Same thing I want to see. Really liking the E63.
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky - 03-14-2012, 05:20 AM
        You know what would be awesome? If Mercedes and BMW gave me an E63 and M5 to test respectively. They give these cars basically to magazine retards who don't even have any links to the real AMG or M enthusiast.
      1. alq80's Avatar
        alq80 - 03-14-2012, 05:20 AM
        I understand that they could have raised the bar MUCH higher... but now we have to think like businessmen; what on earth will they have to offer come next gen? Really, what can they provide next generation that wouldn't compel the buyer to simply buy a used f11. It's going to be kinda like the previous and new 335i sedan; same exact drivetrain with different body/interior.

        But then again, that may just be one person's way of thinking about it!
      1. alq80's Avatar
        alq80 - 03-14-2012, 06:18 AM
        Sticky, if by raising the bar you meant things that didnt just have to do with horsepower (as is now evident from the comments you made), then YES, I agree wholeheartedly. In fact, considering the technologies in these cars, they should be able to go from family man soft to track-man harsh with the flick of a switch (or button).

        Horsepower is just part of the equation and my earlier post was based on quarter-mile times. However I think the M5 should be able to turn from soft to hard if it's to really bewilder.
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky - 03-14-2012, 06:24 AM
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by alq80 Click here to enlarge
        I understand that they could have raised the bar MUCH higher... but now we have to think like businessmen; what on earth will they have to offer come next gen? Really, what can they provide next generation that wouldn't compel the buyer to simply buy a used f11. It's going to be kinda like the previous and new 335i sedan; same exact drivetrain with different body/interior.

        But then again, that may just be one person's way of thinking about it!
        Couldn't we look at the car as they had to go to a turbo motor just to lug this big fat tub of lard around? BMW's are becoming the heaviest cars in their class. What happened to efficient dynamics? It's all bull$#@!.
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky - 03-14-2012, 06:26 AM
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by alq80 Click here to enlarge
        Sticky, if by raising the bar you meant things that didnt just have to do with horsepower (as is now evident from the comments you made), then YES, I agree wholeheartedly. In fact, considering the technologies in these cars, they should be able to go from family man soft to track-man harsh with the flick of a switch (or button).

        Horsepower is just part of the equation and my earlier post was based on quarter-mile times. However I think the M5 should be able to turn from soft to hard if it's to really bewilder.
        They didn't make the M5 better. The M5 is more isolated, soft, and heavier than it has ever been. It's gotten stale and dare I say boring.

        They didn't even need to add horsepower. They just needed to make it leaner and meaner. They failed IMO.
      1. Sorena's Avatar
        Sorena - 03-14-2012, 06:46 AM
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
        No, it's what I'm good, nay, great at.
        Dick.

        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
        As did I but it was a standard car it seems.
        I double checked, it was a E63 with 550hp. That's a E63 with PP specs.

        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
        Who had the review that mentioned it went into limp mode? As did the CLS it was compared against. We expect it from the Benz. That is what BMW has become with M now, AMG.
        No clue what are you referring to.

        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
        Oh, no torque from a 5.0 liter V10 huh? Come on, get out of here. It had plenty of punch down low especially with how it was geared.
        How many miles you have put down with the S85? I went from south to north, west to east of my country with it. Loved it so much, best engine ever in M mode. But not in P400 mode when you are trying to achieve two digit number MPG.

        Test one of these new M5's to realize what i'm saying. Torque everywhere, it pulls like the Shinkansen train. The S63 is the engine i pick anyday in normal driving and even in tracks, just wished it had a character, sound and response close to the S85's.

        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
        The E60 M5 wasn't a Z06. It was a comfortable sedan as well although it had more of a razor's edge it seems than this F10 M5 does. The M5 has gotten soft, lazy, and fat. Just like BMW.
        Seriously man, you missed the whole point of super sedans. It must be a comfort sedan at first, then a super car.

        The F10 M5 isn't lazy and soft, test drive one to see what i'm saying. In comfort mode it's like a very normal 5-Series, but in sport plus mode it's more agile and i can say it's even harsher than E60 M5.

        All this talking without testing is pointless IMHO.
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky - 03-14-2012, 07:27 AM
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sorena Click here to enlarge
        I double checked, it was a E63 with 550hp. That's a E63 with PP specs.
        Show me.

        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sorena Click here to enlarge
        Dick.
        One of the best features of the forum I would say.

        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sorena Click here to enlarge
        No clue what are you referring to.
        I posted a CLS63 and F10M5 comparison not too long ago where both cars were said to go into limp mode on the first lap.

        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sorena Click here to enlarge
        How many miles you have put down with the S85? I went from south to north, west to east of my country with it. Loved it so much, best engine ever in M mode. But not in P400 mode when you are trying to achieve two digit number MPG.
        So it's a great motor when it isn't being hampered by software? No kidding. But you just said it has no torque. Inconsistency? Of course a low horsepower mode won't feel good, uh, it's because it is being artificially limited.

        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sorena Click here to enlarge
        Test one of these new M5's to realize what i'm saying. Torque everywhere, it pulls like the Shinkansen train. The S63 is the engine i pick anyday in normal driving and even in tracks, just wished it had a character, sound and response close to the S85's.
        And? Since when is an M car about torque down low? What, now the best cars are ones with positive displacement superchargers because their torque delivery is even better and more rapid than the M5's? If so, we would all have CTS-V's.

        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sorena Click here to enlarge
        Seriously man, you missed the whole point of super sedans. It must be a comfort sedan at first, then a super car.
        Since when? Because BMW is now making this idiotic claim? The E39 M5 did everything well and didn't need a billion buttons changing every setting to do so. It was just an awesome super sedan, it wasn't pretending to be multiple things. And it never needed to fake its engine noise...

        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sorena Click here to enlarge
        The F10 M5 isn't lazy and soft, test drive one to see what i'm saying. In comfort mode it's like a very normal 5-Series, but in sport plus mode it's more agile and i can say it's even harsher than E60 M5.

        All this talking without testing is pointless IMHO.
        It's gotten fat and lazy. BMW says the new turbo motors don't respond like the old ones. I don't care how much you like the torque, it is not as sharp as a car as the E60 M5 and it makes nowhere near the statement the E39 M5 did.
      Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast