M5 Car and Driver comparison

The bottom line is that we all have choices. I actually would like to drive the Audi. What they say about the car appeals to me. On the other hand, I am not attracted to the car inside or out, and Audi doesn't have decent leases.

So for some of us it is all about compromises. Not many folks are fortunate enough to marry the hot chick who is smokin in bed, keeps the house immaculate and is a gourmet cook. I never thought I would have the means to own such an awesome car as my 550. I feel blessed beyond belief to be in the position I'm in.

For me Audi is a compromised brand. Deprived of a proper rear wheel drive platform, and built with lots of feature and quality shortcuts to enable them to undercut BMW on price. That said for guys like me VW has Porsche, and I can't wait to see the expanded line up of Porsche sedans. The Porsche Pajun Turbo may be what comes after the M5.

Originally Posted by jjsC6

Actually, what they are focused on is selling more cars. For those of you who are bitching and moaning about the demise of the "ultimate driving machine", I have to wonder why you are on the F10 forum. That is not meant to be a smart azz comment, it's a serious question.

The ones who don't like the direction BMW has taken are mostly BMW enthusiasts who have been loyal to the brand for years. Our opinions are actually more valuable and we know what we're talking about.

It's NOT "smart ass" comment since we actually care about the brand. I wonder why some ex-Lexus, ex-MB, ex-MB, ex-acura drivers are so sensitive when we discuss about 5-series direction

Originally Posted by bodonx

The ones who don't like the direction BMW has taken are mostly BMW enthusiasts who have been loyal to the brand for years. Our opinions are actually more valuable and we know what we're talking about.

It's NOT "smart ass" comment since we actually care about the brand. I wonder why some ex-Lexus, ex-MB, ex-MB, ex-acura drivers are so sensitive when we discuss about 5-series direction

I hope you don't count me in that group since every car I have ever owned since I was 21 has been a BMW except one. So when I say the F10 is a huge improvement I say that having owned an E36 325i, E36 328i, E46 330Ci, E46 M3 cabriolet,an F10 550i, and soon an F10 M5.

Originally Posted by richschneid

......
I must apologize for stating that BMW's original mission of making airplane engines began in 1923. It actually began in 1918. Oops!

Originally Posted by richschneid

Roundel insignia true origins. Not an airplane propeller. Sorry.

Originally Posted by richschneid

I'm just one horrible competitive SOB.

Ha Ha! ....one out of three is a start....

I learned from a very early age that the smart money was on the funny looking thing with the engine hanging out the back. The excellence of Porsche rests on their artful, some would say, magical ability to not only extract maximum performance from components, but to allow each component to work in concert to produce a brilliant symphony. Porsche's mission statement has served it well by offering focused direction that has infused their cars with a performance perspective. Likewise the M3.

Times change - and the question remains if Porsche under the VW umbrella will be able to derive new corporate synergies, hit their numbers, and not dilute the brand's message. The 991 is a very good start. The coming Panjun is a spear directly aimed at upper end 5/6 series BMW sedans. Is Porsche's target for the Panjun the F10 per se, or is it the mythical ideal of the f10 "BMW The Ultimate Driving Machine". The f10 is a very capable, fine car but its message has been diluted by trying to appeal to disparate demographics. We see that the basic platform has good bones as evidenced not only by the mods on this forum, but also by the reality of M.

BMW and increasingly Porsche live in big tents. M allows BMW to appeal to enthusiasts who prize responsiveness, agility, and a track oriented perspective. BMW at times seemingly defies physics by making large cars perform better than what one would expect. IMO the jury is out if multiple turbos can deliver the same thrilling sensation of being connected to the machine, and in general compensate for mass. The reality that M lives gives me hope.

This from Autocar's M6 review sums up BMW's current crop of cars

Originally Posted by Capobranco

Ha Ha! ....one out of three is a start....

I learned from a very early age that the smart money was on the funny looking thing with the engine hanging out the back. The excellence of Porsche rests on their artful, some would say, magical ability to not only extract maximum performance from components, but to allow each component to work in concert to produce a brilliant symphony. Porsche's mission statement has served it well by offering focused direction that has infused their cars with a performance perspective. Likewise the M3.

Times change - and the question remains if Porsche under the VW umbrella will be able to derive new corporate synergies, hit their numbers, and not dilute the brand's message. The 991 is a very good start. The coming Panjun is a spear directly aimed at upper end 5/6 series BMW sedans. Is Porsche's target for the Panjun the F10 per se, or is it the mythical ideal of the f10 "BMW The Ultimate Driving Machine". The f10 is a very capable, fine car but its message has been diluted by trying to appeal to disparate demographics. We see that the basic platform has good bones as evidenced not only by the mods on this forum, but also by the reality of M.

BMW and increasingly Porsche live in big tents. M allows BMW to appeal to enthusiasts who prize responsiveness, agility, and a track oriented perspective. BMW at times seemingly defies physics by making large cars perform better than what one would expect. IMO the jury is out if multiple turbos can deliver the same thrilling sensation of being connected to the machine, and in general compensate for mass. The reality that M lives gives me hope.

Porsches are much more expensive than BMWs. Porsches have been using turbos for decades. BMW just started using them a few years ago. Why are you so against turbos and simultaneously so positive on Porsche?

BTW, the Panamera is a little smaller than the F10. The Pajun will be a "junior Panamera" so I suspect it will compete with the 3 series, not the 5 series. It will however be priced the same as the "upper end 5/6 series BMW sedans". A friend of mine just told me about his new Panamera 4S, non turbo. He absolutely loves it even more than his M6 convertable. It has about the same specs as my 550i xDrive but as he pointed out to me his Porsche cost $50,000 more than my car. He paid $128,000 for his car. Of course the Porsch is a better car but it's a lot more expensive.

Originally Posted by richschneid

Porsches are much more expensive than BMWs. Porsches have been using turbos for decades. BMW just started using them a few years ago. Why are you so against turbos and simultaneously so positive on Porsche?

BTW, the Panamera is a little smaller than the F10. The Pajun will be a "junior Panamera" so I suspect it will compete with the 3 series, not the 5 series. It will however be priced the same as the "upper end 5/6 series BMW sedans". A friend of mine just told me about his new Panamera 4S, non turbo. He absolutely loves it even more than his M6 convertable. It has about the same specs as my 550i xDrive but as he pointed out to me his Porsche cost $50,000 more than my car. He paid $128,000 for his car. Of course the Porsch is a better car but it's a lot more expensive.

From a size perspective the Panamera is in the same range as an F01. The F10 is a lot smaller than a Panamera.

My understanding is that the Pajun will be a RWD car of comparable size to an A6.

Originally Posted by Stealth.Pilot

Form a size perspective the Panamera is in the same range as an F01. The F10 is a lot smaller than a Panamera.

My understanding is that the Pajun will be a RWD car of comparable size to an A6.

This is my understanding as well. The physical dimensions might be slightly different but the Panamera was created to be an exciting alternative to the 7 series and Benz S-class buyers. The little Porsche has talked about the Pajun they indicated that it will be a car in the 5 series segment.

Stealth wrote: "Lexus' biggest problem is that it is run by marketing people and accountants."
Again I agree with you. Funny enough this is what seems to be happening at BMW lately and that many here defends of some strange reason. The finance guys seems to have the company by the balls and it's now all about sales volume and less about being an enthusiast brand. I've seen this close up through my work and it can be detrimental for a company like BMW that is built upon innovation and the employee satisfaction and pride in building some of the best drivers cars in the world. When you have that athmosphere and culture you attract and nourish the best engineers and they perform to their full abilities. It also feeds a strong team spirit and clear tangible engineering goals. Once excellence is being supressed in favour of financial metrics the company changes for the worst and so does the products in the eyes of the enthusiasts. Let's hope this is a short lived period in BMWs history and that it doesn't cause chronic culture problems for this great company.

Originally Posted by Edgy36-39

Thanks, I like a good debate too. What I meant was I didn't want to get into a subjective back and forth over whose car best represents BMW-ness. Times change, and we're all biased towards our own car, otherwise we would not have bought it.

I try to be balanced when I criticize BMW. I can see the challenges -- a single brand car company competing against the likes of VW -- Porsche, Audi, VW, Bugatti. They don't have the economies of scale. And the U.S. car market is the most competitive in the world. BMW is a business and the purpose of business is to make money.

It will be interesting to watch sales volumes. BMW will probably limit the initial shipment, ensuring dealerships keep a waiting list for prospective buyers.

That said, I don't like the hypocricy I hear sometimes in their marketing. Many of their cars are not the ultimate driving machine, as this thread is discussing. Ads touting free! (meaning no) maintenance are grating, when before the company started paying for it BMW recommended far more maintenance than they do now. Calling out the 1 M Coupe as the affordable M car and one that harkened back to the roots of M -- and then sending less than 900 to NA, ensuring scarcity and prices far above MSRP. That sort of thing.

I've written a number of posts on whether BMW is still a company that caters to the old school enthusiast who buys rather than leases, and is interested in long term ownership. Very good question I think.

Does anyone think that the exotic turbo in the F10 M5 will be as trouble free 12 years from now as my S62 is? Will modern BMWs even be in service post warranty, with ever escalating repair costs?

Segue...

According to Bimmer magazine Dec. 2007 #71, the BMW symbol was originally designed to connote the Bavarian national flag. Only around 1929, when the company wanted to call attention to its airplane engines, did BMW start to connect the symbol with a propeller.

Interesting comments, and most of them I fully understand. I do not understand what leasing/buying has to do with it. Regrading trouble free - BMW's reputation for many years has been that they are very unreliable in relation to most other cars - especially Japanese. I personally am not making that accusation, I'm simply stating what the reputation is. I read that all the time on other forums.

Originally Posted by w5lx

That's a fair question. I'm on the forum because I've been driving BMW's for the past 12 years (4 different models) and have loved all of them. All wonderful cars that gave me a sense of being connected to the road and virtually trouble-free. To say I am disappointed with the direction BMW has been going over the past few years would be an understatement. I have recently driven most of the 2012 models and have been sadly disappointed in my driving experiences. Mainly because of the common complaints repeatedly discussed on this forum....runflats, steering feel, hesitation, battery/charging systems, 4- cylinder engines, start-stop technology, repeated and often unsuccessful attempts to fix these problems with software updates has taken a toll on my BMW loyalty. I keep reading and participating in the forum hoping that BMW will take notice of some of the common problems and complaints expressed here and return to building "The Ultimate Driving Machine". In the interim, I have bought a 2013 GS350 and am once again enjoying the driving experience that I enjoyed with my former BMW's. I still own my 2008 E-60 and love it. I just can't find a new model that compares with it in features, quality, throttle-response, and driveability.

All good comments and I certainly can understand why you feel that way. I am very familiar with the new GS. There were just too many negatives about the car for me to consider it. But I cannot argue with your points.

Originally Posted by bodonx

The ones who don't like the direction BMW has taken are mostly BMW enthusiasts who have been loyal to the brand for years. Our opinions are actually more valuable and we know what we're talking about.

It's NOT "smart ass" comment since we actually care about the brand. I wonder why some ex-Lexus, ex-MB, ex-MB, ex-acura drivers are so sensitive when we discuss about 5-series direction

A bit cocky implying that if we have not owned BMWs in the past that we don't know what we are talking about. I have been a huge car nut since '65 - that's when I started buying the car magazines . While I have never owned a BMW until now, I have read every road test on them that has been printed in C&D, MT and R&T magazine in the past 47 years. I have many friends who have owned multiple BMWs and I have driven most of them.

Just to be clear, if you go read my post again where I used the term "smart azz", it was directed at my own question, not any statement that anyone has made. I'm not sure either why YOU are so sensitive about people coming from other brands and stating our opinions about the 5 series as if we have not earned the right. But if that's how you think

Originally Posted by richschneid

.... Porsches have been using turbos for decades. BMW just started using them a few years ago....

Rich, per my post just above this one, I know I'm the new guy here and I guess I'm not supposed to know enough about BMW's to have an opinion yet , but I have to bust your balls a bit. You are very knowledgeable and I'm guessing you actually do know this, but BMW offered a turbo "745" starting in the late '70's (I think early to mid '80s in the U.S.).

Originally Posted by jjsC6

Rich, per my post just above this one, I know I'm the new guy here and I guess I'm not supposed to know enough about BMW's to have an opinion yet , but I have to bust your balls a bit. You are very knowledgeable and I'm guessing you actually do know this, but BMW offered a turbo "745" starting in the late '70's (I think early to mid '80s in the U.S.).

I guess I should have said "using them routinely". I stand corrected but for many years BMW was commited to naturally aspirated engines. I have only driven V8 BMWs since 1992 and none were ever offered with turbocharging. Porsche has routinely used turbocharging in its most powerful engines for decades. Thanks for "busting my balls" because I actually didn't know about the 1970s turbocharged 745. But I believe that was a 6 cylinder not an 8. Is that correct?

Originally Posted by Stealth.Pilot

From a size perspective the Panamera is in the same range as an F01. The F10 is a lot smaller than a Panamera.

My understanding is that the Pajun will be a RWD car of comparable size to an A6.

No, actually, here are the numbers. I think the most telling in terms of competition is the interior volume of the passenger compartment.

Panamera has 98 cu. ft.
F10 has 100.5 cu. ft.
750i has 106 cu. ft.

Wheelbases are respectively: 114.9", 116.9", 120.9"
Weight of V8 RWD versions: 4101lbs, 4375 lbs, 4564 lbs

True the Panamera is wider and 2.5" longer than the F10, but overall it is a smaller lighter vehicle and has less passenger room than an F10. The 750i is a lot bigger and heavier than the Panamera even though the Panamera is somewhat wider. The Panamera competes with the 7 series in terms of price but with the F10 in terms of size.

The Pajun is a "Panamera Junior" and will be smaller than the Panamera and therefore a lot smaller than the F10. Most likely it will be very close in size to the F30 3 series. But I suspect it will compete with the F10 in terms of price. Porsches are just more expensive than BMWs for the same size sedans with similar horsepower.

Originally Posted by richschneid

No, actually, here are the numbers. I think the most telling in terms of competition is the interior volume of the passenger compartment.

Panamera has 98 cu. ft.
F10 has 100.5 cu. ft.
750i has 106 cu. ft.

Wheelbases are respectively: 114.9", 116.9", 120.9"
Weight of V8 RWD versions: 4101lbs, 4375 lbs, 4564 lbs

True the Panamera is wider and 2.5" longer than the F10, but overall it is a smaller lighter vehicle and has less passenger room than an F10. The 750i is a lot bigger and heavier than the Panamera even though the Panamera is somewhat wider.

The Pajun is a "Panamera Junior" and will be smaller than the Panamera and therefore a lot smaller than the F10. Most likely it will be very close in size to the F30 3 series.

That's quite interesting. When I last sat in the back of a Panamera it has much more leg room than the back of my F10, which suggests the shape is maximizes cabin space very well.

Originally Posted by Stealth.Pilot

That's quite interesting. When I last sat in the back of a Panamera it has much more leg room than the back of my F10, which suggests the shape is maximizes cabin space very well.

What's even more interesting is that the rear leg room of the F10 is more than in the Panamera as well. Here are the numbers:

Rear leg room of the Panamera = 33.3"
Rear leg room of the F10 = 36.1"

The rear leg room, as well as total interior volume, is constrained by the overall wheelbase. As above, the WB of the F10 is 116.9" while the Panamera is only 114.9". The shorter wheelbase makes the Panamera more maneuverable in terms of sportiness but the longer WB of the F10 improves the quality of the ride. That is one reason why the Porsche is more sporty and the F10 is more luxurious. That's why BMW offers IAS to shorten the effective WB and improve the low speed handling of the RWD F10. This ameliorates to some degree the loss of sportiness compared to the E60 which had a much shorter wheelbase and therefore also smaller interior volume.

Of course, what you experienced sitting in the back of the Panamera compared to your F10 is related to where the front seats were positioned fore and aft at the time.

Originally Posted by Stealth.Pilot

That's quite interesting. When I last sat in the back of a Panamera it has much more leg room than the back of my F10, which suggests the shape is maximizes cabin space very well.

Yes, the Panamera has unbelievable leg and headroom in the back. A consequence of the 6'4" Porsche CEO saying he had to be comfortable in the back of the Panamera.

It's not quite fair to list the Panamera S weight of 4100 lbs. vs the M5 weight of 4387 lbs. since the Panamera Turbo S weighs in at almost 4400 lbs. I think the real competitor for the M5 in terms of performance and price is the Panamera GTS. The price is a bit more ($110K vs $97K), but you're getting AWD. It's not in the same league in straight-line speed (430HP vs 560HP), but it's handling is in a different league as well, resulting in about the same or better track lap times. The curb weight is 4232 lbs.

The M5 is close to the GTS in price, but close to the Turbo S in performance.

This is from an Autobild recent test. Notice M5 is much faster than competition.

The Porsches were not part of the same test, so the Porsche times quoted cannot be compared because deferent day and track temp. However the other cars were in the same comparo.

Originally Posted by FTB

Germancar Forum has a very interesting article on the F10 M5 and its competitors and while this forum used to have members that used to document more and provide with more real facts I see a lot of BS being posted. I don't mind that the F10 is being targeted about the weight, I mind that people don't know what it weighs compared to the opponents, which every amateur journalist, including Autocar among others, are calling lighter than the F10 M5.

Link to the story.

"1st place: BMW M5 F10

• Tyres: Michelin Pilot Super Sport
• Weight: 1930 kg
• 0-100 km/h: 3,9 s
• 0-200 km/h: 11,8 s
• Quarter mile: 11,98 s
• Flexibility (80-120 km/h) in 5th gear: 3,9 s
• Braking (100-0 km/h), warm: 34,7 m

2nd place: Cadillac CTS-V Automatic

• Tyres: Michelin Pilot Sport PS2
• Weight: 1980 kg
• 0-100 km/h: 4,3 s
• 0-200 km/h: 14,1 s
• Quarter mile: 12,49 s
• Flexibility (80-120 km/h) in 5th gear: 6,1 s
• Braking (100-0 km/h), warm: 34,4 m

3rd place: Mercedes-Benz E63 AMG Performance Package

• Tyres: Continental SportContact 5P
• Weight: 1929 kg
• 0-100 km/h: 4,1 s
• 0-200 km/h: 12,6 s
• Quarter mile: 12,07 s
• Flexibility (80-120 km/h) in 5th gear: 4,6 s
• Braking (100-0 km/h), warm: 34,6 m

4th place: Jaguar XFR

• Tyres: Dunlop SP Sportmaxx J
• Weight: 1970 kg
• 0-100 km/h: 4,5 s
• 0-200 km/h: 14,4 s
• Quarter mile: 12,54 s
• Flexibility (80-120 km/h) in 5th gear: 6,0 s
• Braking (100-0 km/h), warm: 35,6 m

Sachsenring-tracktimes:
1:37,82 min - Porsche Panamera Turbo S
1:38,16 min - Porsche Panamera Turbo
1:38,66 min - BMW M5 F10
1:40,86 min - Cadillac CTS-V Automatic
1:41,00 min - Mercedes-Benz E63 AMG PP (best is 1:40,6 min)
1:43,75 min - Jaguar XFR


Verdict:
- The M5 is the clear winner here, fastest on the straightline, fastest on the track. Without Launch Control 0-100 kph is in 3,9 s!
- The Cadillac made a little sensation beating the E63 AMG PP: great performance, big fun for relatively low costs.
- The 3rd place is for the Merc: it's the only one that can get close to the M5 on the straightline. Best 0-100 kph run: from 1800 rpm.
- Last place for the relaxed Jaguar."

So let's stop with the guessing and amateur/childish behavior by trusting every one with a right to write and start going for some facts. Other magazines post similar weights with the rule that it's always a bit heavier than the E63, but in no way more than a few (2-3) tens of KG. Also, look at the other cars as well. Except the E63, which here was 1KG lighter, all others are far heavier than both.

Here are the results of Sport Auto's comparison test among the M5 F10, Panamera Turbo S, and E63 AMG Performance Package. The M5 doesn't come out on top in the raw number categories, but still gets the nod from Sport Auto for its handling and overall dynamic package.

I love that these German magazines also do a dyno test.


1st place: BMW M5 - 620 hp on the dyno (claimed: 560)

Tires: Michelin Pilot Supersport
Weight: 1963 kg (4,327 lb)
0-100 km/h (62 mph): 4.3 s
0-200 km/h (124 mph): 13.0 s
Flexibility (80-120 km/h) (50-75 mph) in 5th/6th gear: 4.5 s/5.6 s
Flexibility (80-180 km/h) (50-75 mph) in 5th/6th gear: 12.2 s/15.3 s
18 m slalom: 66.3 km/h
Braking (100-0 km/h) (62-0 mph), warm: 37.5 m
Braking (200-0 km/h) (124-0 mph), warm: 150.0 m
Laptime (Kleiner Kurs Hockenheim): 1:13.6 min


2nd place: Porsche Panamera Turbo S - 555 hp on the dyno (claimed: 550)

Tires: Michelin Pilot Supersport N0
Weight: 2024 kg (4,462 lb)
0-100 km/h (62 mph): 3.7 s
0-200 km/h (124 mph): 12.4 s
Flexibility (80-120 km/h) (50-75 mph) in 5th/6th gear: 4.6 s/7.0 s
Flexibility (80-180 km/h) (50-75 mph) in 5th/6th gear: 11.9 s/16.8 s
18 m slalom: 65.0 km/h
Braking (100-0 km/h) (62-0 mph), warm: 34.9 m
Braking (200-0 km/h) (124-0 mph), warm: 144.2 m
Laptime (Kleiner Kurs Hockenheim): 1:12.1 min



3nd place: Mercedes-Benz E63 AMG PP - 610 hp on the dyno (claimed: 557)

Tires: Continental Sport Contact 5P
Weight: 1941 kg (4,279 lb)
0-100 km/h (62 mph): 4.4 s
0-200 km/h (124 mph): 13.2 s
Flexibility (80-120 km/h) (50-75 mph) in 5th/6th gear: 4.5 s/6.4 s
Flexibility (80-180 km/h) (50-75 mph) in 5th/6th gear: 12.0 s/16.2 s
18 m slalom: 64.9 km/h
Braking (100-0 km/h) (62-0 mph), warm: 37.5 m
Braking (200-0 km/h) (124-0 mph), warm: 151.8 m
Laptime (Kleiner Kurs Hockenheim): 1:14.6 min


Credit to dede@germancarforums

Originally Posted by wolverine

Yes, the Panamera has unbelievable leg and headroom in the back. A consequence of the 6'4" Porsche CEO saying he had to be comfortable in the back of the Panamera.

It's not quite fair to list the Panamera S weight of 4100 lbs. vs the M5 weight of 4387 lbs. since the Panamera Turbo S weighs in at almost 4400 lbs. I think the real competitor for the M5 in terms of performance and price is the Panamera GTS. The price is a bit more ($110K vs $97K), but you're getting AWD. It's not in the same league in straight-line speed (430HP vs 560HP), but it's handling is in a different league as well, resulting in about the same or better track lap times. The curb weight is 4232 lbs.

I was comparing the Panamera S to the 550i RWD. Both are the RWD versions of the V8 cars respectively. The Panamera S AWD weighs 4101. I should have said the Panamera S RWD weighs 3968. The 550i RWD weighs 4375. The difference between the Panamera Turbo S and the F10 M5 is that the Panamera turbo S is AWD and the F10 M5 is RWD. The correct comparison would be the Panamera Turbo S to the F10 M5 xDrive. Unfortunately for me the F10 M5 xDrive does not exist.

But the point is the same in that is size and weight the Panamera is a competitor of the F10 5 series not the F01 7 series.

And to reiterate, the F10 has MORE legroom than the Panamera in the back, 36.1" vs 33.3".. The headroom is almost identical 38.2" in the Panamera, 38.0" in the F10.

Looking at those German 0-60 times and the greater hp in the M5 isn't it a shame that BMW doesn't make an M5 xDrive. The reason the Panamera Turbo S is faster is because it has AWD.

AWD drive is a crutch for limited skill drivers. M5 doesn't need it, and if they did implement it it would need to be much better than the second rate system BMW has in the 550xi. You would need an advanced torque vectoring system like in the GTR, ideally paired with 4 wheel steering. However, I think the M5 would be less fun if they went down this pAth.

Originally Posted by richschneid

I guess I should have said "using them routinely". I stand corrected but for many years BMW was commited to naturally aspirated engines. I have only driven V8 BMWs since 1992 and none were ever offered with turbocharging. Porsche has routinely used turbocharging in its most powerful engines for decades. Thanks for "busting my balls" because I actually didn't know about the 1970s turbocharged 745. But I believe that was a 6 cylinder not an 8. Is that correct?

Correct. And I hope you took my comment as good natured. You and I actually see things pretty much the same for the most part, and I consider you very knowledgeable.

Originally Posted by Stealth.Pilot

AWD drive is a crutch for limited skill drivers. M5 doesn't need it, and if they did implement it it would need to be much better than the second rate system BMW has in the 550xi. You would need an advanced torque vectoring system like in the GTR, ideally paired with 4 wheel steering. However, I think the M5 would be less fun if they went down this pAth.

While I understand your point about AWD, I don't agree with it. Ten years ago yes. But with 500+ hp becoming very common, I don't consider AWD a crutch. Putting the power to the ground with this kind of hp is limited by traction no matter how good the driver is. The M5 has 140 more hp than the Audi, yet it takes until right at the end of the 1/4 mile to catch the Audi due to the lack of AWD. The same would be true accelerating out of a corner on a road course.

If you don't care about instrumented times then I can't argue with you. I used to take my Z06 out on back roads and had a blast in it. Frying the back tires, especially in cool weather, is a ton of fun, but an AWD vehicle would have left me for dead in first and second gear. I might have been having as much fun, but it would have still left me for dead.