Inside Line "trashes" M5

Originally Posted by tadtaggert

For those that are new to the forums, yes it is.

Let's not forget two years ago, we can only assume that you bought your 535 sight unseen and had been in isolation for the previous year to expect that same 535 to be some exotic sports car capable of levels of driving excellence superior to anything out of BMW to date.

Yes you had mechanical issues, and everyone will give you that at some point you decided that your decision was wrong, and moved to a different car.

But two years of trashing a platform to cover your own embarrassing decision is more than enough.

Fair enough, if you think that's more important than discussing the topic at hand knock yourself out but I'm not going anywhere. I enjoy the people and discussions here and Internet bullies don't bother me much.

Dunderhi this data you have on the rear leg room is completely bogus. I have rented the CTS several times and the rear seats have less room than the 3 series. End of story.

Originally Posted by solstice

I enjoy the people and discussions here and Internet bullies don't bother me much.

I am reminded of De Niro in Ronin when someone asked him if he'd ever killed someone, 'No, but I hurt someone's feelings once'.

If you have something to add, then do so, but the same two intertwined bull**** is very old:

1: Find a review that says this isn't a true sports car/race car or gives you this esoteric 'feeling' that older cars did/do,

or

2: Speak of some 'those of us' like there is this group of elite car ownersdrivers that are the only ones that can understand those esoteric 'feelings' and gives you some sort of machismo right to impose your definitions on anyone that disagrees.

If you don't like something, fine, then tell us why you don't, we're not concerned with 'those of us'. Expect people to disagree, not just because you're full of BS but because everyone has their own opinion.

Go drive the freaking cars, it's really not that hard to find an M5 to drive.

Originally Posted by tadtaggert

I am reminded of De Niro in Ronin when someone asked him if he'd ever killed someone, 'No, but I hurt someone's feelings once'.

If you have something to add, then do so, but the same two intertwined bull**** is very old:

1: Find a review that says this isn't a true sports car/race car or gives you this esoteric 'feeling' that older cars did/do,

or

2: Speak of some 'those of us' like there is this group of elite car ownersdrivers that are the only ones that can understand those esoteric 'feelings' and gives you some sort of machismo right to impose your definitions on anyone that disagrees.

If you don't like something, fine, then tell us why you don't, we're not concerned with 'those of us'. Expect people to disagree, not just because you're full of BS but because everyone has their own opinion.

Go drive the freaking cars, it's really not that hard to find an M5 to drive.

Good rant, I'll give you that. Got more? It's good for the blood pressure to let it all out.

Originally Posted by solstice

Good rant, I'll give you that. Got more? It's good for the blood pressure to let it all out.

Cool and calm here, just laughing at you doing the same thing, trashing cars before you've driven them.

Originally Posted by tadtaggert

Cool and calm here, just laughing at you doing the same thing, trashing cars before you've driven them.

A thread was opened to discuss insideline's thrashing, not mine and that's what we have been doing until this brief interruption. Glad to hear you're ok.

Originally Posted by Stealth.Pilot

Dunderhead this data you have on the rear leg room is completely bogus. I have rented the CTS several times and the rear seats have less room than the 3 series. End of story.

I provided actual test measurement data from two reputable sources and resort to name calling? That's pathetic!

Originally Posted by solstice

A thread was opened to discuss insideline's thrashing

So why not discuss it relative to Peter Steinlauf's bottom line? I mean package deals, outdoor advertising, is no one ready to accept the realities of today?

Originally Posted by tadtaggert

1: Find a review that says this isn't a true sports car/race car or gives you this esoteric 'feeling' that older cars did/do,

.

That's actually pretty easy to do. It's more or less the consensus.

Originally Posted by dunderhi

I provided actual test measurement data from two reputable sources and resort to name calling? That's pathetic!

Having sat in the rear of both, I agree with Stealth Pilot. I'm not sure where the measurements come from, but the CTS is a lot smaller in the back than the F10.

I am a visual person who considers usability the most important characteristic of a car. So the interior look and feel matters most to me. The exterior matters second most. As long as the vehicle receives good reviews, then I am generally fine with its performance characteristics even if there are other cars that outperform it.

I currently drive an E60 535xi. I'm looking to upgrade, so I've started to shop. The new GS 350 is receiving favorable reviews and the interior looks nice, so I test drove one. I found their mouse-like controller to be frustrating and difficult to use. There were many other usability issues, such as the push button temperature controls (as opposed to the much more usable knobs that BMW gives you), but the controller issue alone was enough to disqualify it as a car I would consider purchasing. It doesn't matter to me whether its performance is now best-in-class (with a 535) or not because its usability was a problem (and note that I found its performance to be worse than that of my current E60).

Right now there is only one other car I feel has an interior I find pleasing enough to sit in day-to-day, and that's the F10. I have a friend who owns an F10 535, so I drove his. And I've test driven the 550. BMW didn't change much in terms of usability, so of course it remains fantastic in that area. And the look of the interior is improved in almost every way over the E60.

I have complaints though. I love the cruise control lever in the E60. And along with the audio controls being on the left side of the steering wheel (in the E60), I can pretty much drive the car, manage volume, and answer the phone with my left hand, and then I can keep my right arm relaxed on the center console with my right hand by the iDrive controller. This was perfect. I don't get this with the F10 because the cruise control buttons are on the left side of the steering wheel and the audio controls moved to the right side. It is less usable for me to have to re-adjust the position of my hand on the steering wheel just to fiddle with the cruise control settings (I have active cruise control, so besides the usual setting the speed, I also fiddled with the distance). And to have to move my right hand from rest to the steering wheel to adjust volume; this was a *major* disappointment.

I have not test driven the M5. But to say that I would be purchasing a "better" car by purchasing an M5 over a 550 would be a bit ambitious. It *might* be a better car; it's very subjective and depends on yours needs and wants. With the 550, I can get xDrive (I drive snow in the winter). And my E60 has the active cruise control, which I *love*. Can't get that on the M5. Additionally, I really like the wood grain trim down by the shifter that the 550 has. But the 550 doesn't have the power or performance configurability the M5 offers. And I can't get the 4-zone climate on the 550 anymore (a mild bummer).

In life, there are always trade offs and rarely does one have the opportunity to purchase something that fits 100% of their wants and needs. Sometimes people *choose* not to fulfill all of their wants and needs. I have a "wealthy" (e.g. more than $15 million in liquid assets) friend. He drives a Honda Accord. Certainly he could purchase any car in the world. But he chooses not to.

Some people may choose the M5 over the Panamera simply because they don't want to pay so much more for the Panamera even if it did perform better. Right now I am deciding between a 550 and M5. I am leaning towards a 550. It is partly a cost issue. I can afford the M5, but I feel annoyed to pay ~$20K more (spec'd how I'd like) for a vehicle that has fewer features I want but better performance. Good thing I won't be deciding until spring ;-)

I will admit, it is really fun to read reviews and comparisons that put the car I've chosen on top of the pile. And it is a bit of a bummer when they don't. Obviously, I wish the M5 would crush the competition in the comparisons. Maybe, for some odd reason, this would stroke my ego or help me feel even more justified in buying an F10 than I already feel. But ultimately, their opinion only influences my purchasing decision to the extent they review a car favorably or unfavorably. The M5 is receiving generally favorable reviews. So even if it were finishing last in every comparison, at the end of the day, it wouldn't be a factor in my decision. If it were receiving unfavorable reviews, then yes, I would think twice about an F10 and, if that were the case, I likely wouldn't even consider upgrading from my E60, which I *love*.

-Corey

Originally Posted by dunderhi

I provided actual test measurement data from two reputable sources and resort to name calling? That's pathetic!

sorry that was iPhone auto-correct. I was typing while walking out the door to brunch, so didn't check what went on the screen.

My point still stands though!

Originally Posted by Needsdecaf

Having sat in the rear of both, I agree with Stealth Pilot. I'm not sure where the measurements come from, but the CTS is a lot smaller in the back than the F10.

Thanks. I think the difference is pretty striking.

Originally Posted by Needsdecaf

That's actually pretty easy to do.

Yes it is, with pretty much any car you choose.

Originally Posted by Needsdecaf

It's more or less the consensus.

The problems start when it is applied unevenly, or with bias.

Originally Posted by Stealth.Pilot

sorry that was iPhone auto-correct. I was typing while walking out the door to brunch, so didn't check what went on the screen.

My point still stands though!

Okay, bygones on the name calling, but I'll take measured data over someone's impression 100% of the time. I've also checked out the CTS-V in the past and I have no reason to question the independent measurements.

Here's a third source for rear leg room measurements: M5 - 36.1" , CTS-V - 36.06"
Car and Driver BMW M5 Specs
Car and Driver Cadillac-CTS-V Sedan Specs

Anyway rear leg room isn't the determining factor for which class a car fits into, so it's not the End of Story. When you have time, please read the entire R&T test data sheet and show me a car that is closer in specs to the M5 than the CTS-V. Again, I'm not a CTS-V fan, but facts are facts.

Doesn't it really come down to what you are looking for?
It has space and speed; luxury too. A pretty safe car.
It was not intended to be a Porsche turbo or a GT3RS.

It is what it is ... right Beth?

Originally Posted by dunderhi

Anyway rear leg room isn't the determining factor for which class a car fits into, so it's not the End of Story. When you have time, please read the entire R&T test data sheet and show me a car that is closer in specs to the M5 than the CTS-V. Again, I'm not a CTS-V fan, but facts are facts.

A few years ago, most of the CTS-V comparisons were to the M3 ( or here), mostly because of price, and mostly because that's why the CTS-V was built, to unseat the M3.

If you look at Cadillac's own comparisons (here) they are still comparing it to comparably priced cars that they can outperform.

I always thought the CTS-V was built to unseat the M5, not the M3. The 2014 CTS-V redsign will most likely grow in dimensions like the F10 did over the E60, but the upcoming ATS-V will be the M3 competitor. The F30 guys are already complaining about the ATS comparisons to their cars.


BTW, prior to your more recent M3 comparison, C&D compared the CTS-V to the E63 and XFR: http://www.caranddriver.com/comparis...omparison-test

Just look at the Panamera; cost-wise it competes with larger cars, size-wise it competes with cheaper cars. The Caddy is just the opposite; cost-wise it competes with smaller cars, size-wise it competes with more expensive cars.

BTW. I thought we were talking about sedans: 2013 CTS-V Sedan Comparison

Dunderhi

You have no idea how hard it is to type your screen name on an iPhone. I will call you D going forward.

The first sample here compares CTSV coupe to M3 Coupe and says they are even.

http://www.insideline.com/cadillac/c...-m3-coupe.html

Here is another one which compares CTS-V sedan to M3, ISF, and C63 AMG. Again they seem to think it is a close comparison.

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/200...cedes-c63-amg/

So it is regarded as being a close heat versus the smaller M3, but when compared to the M5 they complain the M5 is bigger and heavier. I see a logical problem in the way these mags are approaching this. Reality is they just want to create headlines by saying American muscle beats latest thing from Germany.

You are right that the next CTS will be a 5 competition. But the current one was designed to compete with both 3 and 5 and is slightly bigger than former but smaller than the latter.

D - BTW I don't know how seriously you take this but this exercise is exactly the problem with rag reviews.

Any perspective you substantiate from a third party review, I can find another to refute it.

Why don't you just go and drive one and share your own opinion?

That's what I did a year ago for a whole day in Spain, and then over the following months I drove the competition and at the end of that I knew what I wanted.

Originally Posted by dalekressin

Doesn't it really come down to what you are looking for?
It has space and speed; luxury too. A pretty safe car.
It was not intended to be a Porsche turbo or a GT3RS.

It is what it is ... right Beth?

Exactly right.

They take a smaller car, compare it with a bigger and more luxurious car, and then complain the latter isn't as light and sporty.

People who buy the M5 don't buy it because it the best track car. They buy it because if you have to pick one car that can do it all, this is as good as it gets.

Originally Posted by dunderhi

I always thought the CTS-V was built to unseat the M5, not the M3.

Nope, the M3 is/was where the money was. The decision to make it size wise in the middle gave them the option for the coupe/sedan versions, but the M3 had this.

Technologically, it was always easier to build a better M5 (E60), but the market wasn't there, at least from the perspective of American car makers.

And sorry for the coupe/sedan links, just started grabbing old comparisons.

Go back on these boards a couple of years, when anyone brought up the CTS-V it was pretty much belittled and discounted, that's what Cadillac (knew they) had to overcome. I don't think they have yet, but there's no denying that the car will perform. Fit and finish still has a long way to go, comfort as a daily driver isn't there at all. But if you're in to tuning, for the price of a well decked out 550 you can have an 800hp CTS-V, and for a bit more you can have this.

Originally Posted by Stealth.Pilot

D - BTW I don't know how seriously you take this but this exercise is exactly the problem with rag reviews.

Any perspective you substantiate from a third party review, I can find another to refute it.

Why don't you just go and drive one and share your own opinion?

That's what I did a year ago for a whole day in Spain, and then over the following months I drove the competition and at the end of that I knew what I wanted.

As I have already stated in this thread, comparos only provide background info for things to look for when test driving a car yourself, but for simple measurements such as leg room I don't see a need to take a tape measure to a dealership to confirm. I just have a low tolerance (as many know around here) for incorrect statements. When I was car shopping I did just as you did and test drove all of the cars that I was considering. The 550xi didn't win out right, but I was able to determine it's weaknesses and knew what I needed to upgrade before I even bought the car.

Anyway, when I get my car serviced I'll check to see if they have a demo M5 to drive, but since the M5 doesn't meet my minimum requirements, I doubt it make much of a difference to me. Please don't get me wrong, I'm not anti-M5. If the M guys would have built the car with an xDrive system that could handle the 600hp, I probably would have held off my last purchase decision. After all, I was driving an SL550, so life didn't really suck at the time, I was just to need three cars for two people again.

Originally Posted by tadtaggert

The problems start when it is applied unevenly, or with bias.

I will say this having never driven the M5, so I take it with a large grain of salt:

Nearly every review, domestic and foreign, have said the M5 lacks the same connected feeling as the E60 M5.

Your importance of this may vary. But I fail to see how this is applied unevenly or with bias when greater than 75% of the review mention this.

In the CTS-V sedan commercial we got over here on TV Cadillac choose to name it's competitors. Spoiler, it's not the M3