M5ness

sigma · 2 Dec 2010 at 20:14

I'd argue the E39 M5 is better looking too!

mjt · 2 Dec 2010 at 20:16

sigma said:
I'd argue the E39 M5 is better looking too!

It'll look epic in the flesh without the disguise.
The F10 M Sport looks fantastic

The_Abyss · 2 Dec 2010 at 22:37

Much prefer the looks of the E60. The new 5 series for me is just unfocussed and bland.

mjt · 3 Dec 2010 at 17:21

The_Abyss said:
Much prefer the looks of the E60. The new 5 series for me is just unfocussed and bland.

Lies. Look at an F10 M Sport.

Anyway, when you're inside, the F10 is about a billionty times better than the E60.

mrk · 3 Dec 2010 at 18:03

Yeah that's all fine but the moment you step away from the car and look at it as you walk off to work you think "damn, who's fugly car is that?" and then realise it's yours.

Jonny ///M · 3 Dec 2010 at 18:08

mjt said:
Lies. Look at an F10 M Sport.

Anyway, when you're inside, the F10 is about a billionty times better than the E60.

Indeed. It's pure omnomnomnom

[TW]Fox · 3 Dec 2010 at 19:12

The_Abyss said:
Much prefer the looks of the E60. The new 5 series for me is just unfocussed and bland.

The new 5 Series might not look as challenging as the previous one but it's a far more complete car. It's fantastic inside, the build quality is a level above and the interior is fantastic. I personally prefer the looks as well.

Housey · 3 Dec 2010 at 19:22

F10 is a far better car than the E60, not least inside but the whole package is excellent, top of the tree again in my book and then some.

Eliot · 3 Dec 2010 at 19:27

i think the whole OMG TURBOS!!111 arguement is a bit silly really, sure a 5litre NA engine is very cool, but im not going to turn down a 4.4 litre engine with TWO turbos, i mean lets be honest thats still MEGA really.

Joshy · 3 Dec 2010 at 19:38

Eliot said:
i think the whole OMG TURBOS!!111 arguement is a bit silly really, sure a 5litre NA engine is very cool, but im not going to turn down a 4.4 litre engine with TWO turbos, i mean lets be honest thats still MEGA really.

You're missing the point.

M cars (The proper M Cars, not that X6M junk) have always been known for their relatively high revving Naturally aspirated engines. It's something of a selling point of the cars and it has been for the past 32 years. Changing that tried and test recipe all of a sudden is going to cause a stir amongst enthusiasts espically when the only creditable reason for the change is the environment/CO2 figures.

flibbage0 · 3 Dec 2010 at 20:00

Joshy said:
You're missing the point.

M cars (The proper M Cars, not that X6M junk) have always been known for their relatively high revving Naturally aspirated engines. It's something of a selling point of the cars and it has been for the past 32 years. Changing that tried and test recipe all of a sudden is going to cause a stir amongst enthusiasts espically when the only creditable reason for the change is the environment/CO2 figures.

This worries me, I'm only learning to drive but want to own an M car with a V10 at some point in my life.

Doesn't look like there will be another M powered V10

Laugh all you want about the chances of getting an M5 (although being slim), but one day I will.

[TW]Fox · 3 Dec 2010 at 20:00

Joshy said:
You're missing the point.

I think you might be..

M cars (The proper M Cars, not that X6M junk) have always been known for their relatively high revving Naturally aspirated engines. It's something of a selling point of the cars and it has been for the past 32 years. Changing that tried and test recipe all of a sudden

Really? Is the E39 M5 not a proper M Car? It has a rev limiter set at 7000rpm and the redline begins at just 6500rpm.

[TW]Fox · 3 Dec 2010 at 20:01

flibbage0 said:
This worries me, I'm only learning to drive but want to own an M car with a V10 at some point in my life.

Doesn't look like there will be another M powered V10

Not sure why the V10 is so symbolic for you - in the context of M cars the V10 was particularly short lived.

flibbage0 · 3 Dec 2010 at 20:04

[TW]Fox;17925732 said:
Not sure why the V10 is so symbolic for you - in the context of M cars the V10 was particularly short lived.

I know you are going to think I'm mad but in my opinion all M cars should rev to 8000rpm or more.

In fact for a car to be awesome in my book it has to rev to 8000rpm.

Yes I am living in a dream world.

Joshy · 3 Dec 2010 at 20:06

[TW]Fox;17925723 said:
Really? Is the E39 M5 not a proper M Car? It has a rev limiter set at 7000rpm and the redline begins at just 6500rpm.

I knew you were going to bring up the E39, hence why I said "Relatively"

.

The point is still there. M Cars have a reputation of amongst enthusiasts of having a linear power delivery and a pin sharp throttle response. Trubocharged cars aren't renown for offering either.

[TW]Fox · 3 Dec 2010 at 20:07

Joshy said:
I knew you were going to bring up the E39, hence why I said "Relatively" .

The point is still there. M Cars have a reputation of amongst enthusiasts of having a linear power delivery and a pin sharp throttle response. Trubocharged cars aren't renown for offering either.

I think you need to go and drive a BMW Twin Turbo engine - because linear they very much are. They barely even feel turbocharged.

[TW]Fox · 3 Dec 2010 at 20:08

flibbage0 said:
I know you are going to think I'm mad but in my opinion all M cars should rev to 8000rpm or more.

In fact for a car to be awesome in my book it has to rev to 8000rpm.

You've just instantly ruled out virtually every M car ever made :confused:

flibbage0 · 3 Dec 2010 at 20:12

[TW]Fox;17925800 said:
You've just instantly ruled out virtually every M car ever made

Huh? M5 E60 revs to 8000rpm, E92 M3 revs to 8300rpm.

Kenai · 3 Dec 2010 at 20:13

flibbage0 said:
In fact for a car to be awesome in my book it has to rev to 8000rpm.

www.honda.co.uk

I suspect these people will be able to accommodate your desire for a far more reasonable price.

sigma · 3 Dec 2010 at 20:13

It looks pretty big, how close is it to the dimensions of the last (not current) 7 series model?