Inside Line "trashes" M5

Originally Posted by Stealth.Pilot

Doesn't matter who Cadillac lists as the competitor. It is a smaller car with barely usable rear seating.

BMW should list the Bentley Continental Flying Spur as the M5s competitor to set up a favorable review too.

Well if you are talking about the Flying Spur Speed with the Mulliner interior, I know which car I would pick.

So I think the real question for stealth (because first hand accounts out weigh paid reviewerrs anyday) is how easy is it too fishtail just spoke with state farm m5 will run me $2423 each year which is a number I can live with.

Originally Posted by Stealth.Pilot

Doesn't matter who Cadillac lists as the competitor. It is a smaller car with barely usable rear seating.

BMW should list the Bentley Continental Flying Spur as the M5s competitor to set up a favorable review too.

So, since it's not the CTS-V that has changed but the M5 and you are saying ( with merit ) that the new M5 has outgrown the class defined by it's predecessors what other cars would you place in this new class as both fair and worthy competitors to the new M5? You mentioned the cls63, any others? I take the Bentley was a joke.

bentley flying spur? surely you jest. anyway, why would you want to compare to that barge? arent they 6,000 pds??

Originally Posted by solstice

So, since it's not the CTS-V that has changed but the M5 and you are saying ( with merit ) that the new M5 has outgrown the class defined by it's predecessors what other cars would you place in this new class as both fair and worthy competitors to the new M5? You mentioned the cls63 any others? I take the Bentley was a joke.

Car classes come about through competition. They are a mechanism for comparison based on many compromises, particularly at the higher end. Be that as it may, you'd have to include the Panamera in comparisons to the M5.

Same unfairness as comparing the CTS-V to the M5 in terms of price, you'd have to go to the Turbo to get close to the performance of the M5 or the Turbo S to get slightly ahead, but at a significant price. But then at the higher end, price isn't always a prime consideration from some.

Originally Posted by highyo

bentley flying spur? surely you jest. anyway, why would you want to compare to that barge? arent they 6,000 pds??

That's my point.

Cadillac is picking a bigger and more expensive car and the saying its smaller car handles like a smaller car.

That comparison is as ridiculous as the M5 vs Bentley comparison.

They should compare to the M3, and when the new M3 is out it will crush the CTS-v.

Originally Posted by SuperTerp

So I think the real question for stealth (because first hand accounts out weigh paid reviewerrs anyday) is how easy is it too fishtail just spoke with state farm m5 will run me $2423 each year which is a number I can live with.

Yeah my insurance went up by about $200 per year for the M5 vs 550i.

Originally Posted by Stealth.Pilot

BM323 - those are some good quotes.

It seems those who like the CTS-V like the old M5. Hammond nailed it when he said the problem with the old M5 was that you could not live with it. The new M5 is a better sports car on the track, but its also more friendly for day to day driving on the street.

Another analogy I might use is this: When the Infiniti G37 came out in 2002, it offered a more raw, more edgy, sportier alternative to the E46 330i. However back then most people who drive both preferred the 330i because it was more polished while delivering fantastic driving dynamics and performance. The balance of both is what made BMWs special. Now it seems reviewers want BMW to go and build a Porsche or a Ferrari. But that is to miss the genius of what BMW does.

BMWs M Cars have traditionally excelled in day to day real world driveability as well as on the track. The E60 M5 lost that. But it's back. And if you read the reviews of the E39 vs E60 M5s you would see that.

And to this day the E39 has been the best selling M5. However if the launch numbers from BMW are to be believed, the F10 M5 is crushing the first year sales numbers of the E60 M5 despite a weaker global economy. Here's a factoid - in the first month BMW sold 222 E60 M5s. The F10 M5 had only been out three weeks when the recall was announced and the recall had 489 sold customer cars on it.

That is a great analogy! In my honest opinion, BMW is not the best at building raw, track oriented go carts. What BMW best at is building fast, powerful sports car that is livable and usable everyday.

I don't understand why people want the F10 M5 to be more raw. It's not what the M5 is built for. The M5 is purposely built for a fast, powerful, 'executive' sedan. If they want a light, agile sports car, it wouldn't be an M5, it would be the M3.

For all it's intent, I believe the M5 is the best car of it's kind. It's a mult-purpose mult-personality car that can eats supercars for breakfast than takes your clients/family out for lunch.

(btw It's G35 that came out in 2002, G37 didn't come along till 2008)

Originally Posted by Stealth.Pilot

That's my point.

Cadillac is picking a bigger and more expensive car and the saying its smaller car handles like a smaller car.

That comparison is as ridiculous as the M5 vs Bentley comparison.

They should compare to the M3, and when the new M3 is out it will crush the CTS-v.

Exactly! Comparing the CTS-V to the M5 is nonsense really.
The People that are looking into buying the M5 will not cross shop a CTS.
They would be looking at Mercedes/Audi/Porsche etc.

The CTS was always a competitor to the 3 series and always will be.

Originally Posted by Stealth.Pilot

Yeah my insurance went up by about $200 per year for the M5 vs 550i.

I call discrimination

Still haven't answered how much will the nannies save you if you mash it at a light? better than your 550i? I must know because I must be able to do it lol

"The M5 is purposely built for a fast, powerful, 'executive' sedan."
Once upon a time this might have been a niche to fill for the M5. Today BMW already fill it more than sufficiently with not one but three other cars. The 550, 650GC and the 750. Personally I want more from an M car than just being fast, powerful and executive like it's non M siblings and would like to see it move closer to the rest of the M family.

Originally Posted by solstice

"The M5 is purposely built for a fast, powerful, 'College' sedan."
Once upon a time this might have been a niche to fill for the M5. Today BMW already fill it more than sufficiently with not one but three other cars. The 550, 650GC and the 750. Personally I want more from an M car than just being fast, powerful and executive like it's non M siblings and would like to see it move closer to the rest of the M family.

Fixed for you Sol.

Gotta get over the nostalgia!!! Even porsche is doing it!

Performance wise even if the CTS V does stack up against the M5, it's purely hideous. The inside feels so damned cheap. I gave real thought to this car since I get a great GM discount but i couldn't do it. It just felt awful inside and to be honest that was my number one priority.

Originally Posted by SuperTerp

Fixed for you Sol.

Gotta get over the nostalgia!!! Even porsche is doing it!

He, you might be right in that but just because we might soon be forced to except the demise of traditional natural sports feel in cars it does not mean we need to be quite about it.
It's like taxes, they will go up but if you are quite about it they will go up even more...

Originally Posted by Stealth.Pilot

That's my point.

Cadillac is picking a bigger and more expensive car and the saying its smaller car handles like a smaller car.

That comparison is as ridiculous as the M5 vs Bentley comparison.

They should compare to the M3, and when the new M3 is out it will crush the CTS-v.

The new ATS-V will be Cadillac's first M3 competitor and it will compete against the F30 M3, just as the current ATS' are competing against the current F30s. The new CTS-V will continue to compete against M5, just as the current version does. Below are the specs for the E90 M3, E60 M5, CTS-V, and F10 M5. It's obvious to that the M3 is in a different class, and shouldn't be compared to the M5's or the CTS. Argue, if you must, about the Caddy's rear leg room, just watch out for the lack of front leg and head room in the F10.

Test Weight: 3765lbs (E90 M3) 4215lbs (E60 M5) 4475lbs (CTS-V) 4525lbs (F10 M5)
Wheelbase: 108.7" (E90 M3) 113.7" (E60 M5) 113.4" (CTS-V) 116.7" (F10 M5)
Length: 180.4" (E90 M3) 191.5" (E60 M5) 191.6" (CTS-V) 193.5" (F10 M5)
Width: 71.5" (E90 M3) 72.7" (E60 M5) 72.5" (CTS-V) 74.4" (F10 M5)
Height: 57.0" (E90 M3) 57.8" (E60 M5) 58.0" (CTS-V) 57.3" (F10 M5)
Front head room: 38.0" (E90 M3) 40.0" (E60 M5) 39.5" (CTS-V) 38.5" (F10 M5)
Rear head room: 35.5" (E90 M3) 36.5" (E60 M5) 35.0" (CTS-V) 35.8" (F10 M5)
Front Leg room: 46.0" (E90 M3) 44.0" (E60 M5) 45.8" (CTS-V) 44.3" (F10 M5)
Rear Knee room: 25.3" (E90 M3) 25.5" (E60 M5) 23.5" (CTS-V) 24.0" (F10 M5)
Trunk space: 12.0" (E90 M3) 14cuft (E60 M5) 13.6cuft (CTS-V) 14.0" cuft(F10 M5)
0-60mph: 4.6s (E90 M3) 4.1s (E60 M5) 4.2s (CTS-V) 4.1s (F10 M5) 3.6s (F10 M5 DCT)
0-1320 ft: 13.0@110.4mph (E90 M3) 12.4@115.8mph (E60 M5) 12.5@115.3mph (CTS-V) 12.3@116.7mph (F10 M5) 11.9@119.7 mph (F10 M5 DCT)
80mph-0: 195ft (E90 M3) 207ft (E60 M5) 201ft (CTS-V) 201ft (F10 M5)
Lat Accel: 0.95 (E90 M3) 0.87 (E60 M5) 0.92 (CTS-V) 0.97 (F10 M5)
Slalom: 72.9mph (E90 M3) 68.9mph (E60 M5) 70.5mph (CTS-V) 71.0mph (F10 M5)
Noise@70mph: 70dBa (E90 M3) 70dBA (E60 M5) 70dBA (CTS-V) 70dBA (F10 M5)
Top Speed: 155mph* (E90 M3) 155mph* (E60 M5) 191mph (CTS-V) 155mph* (F10 M5) *limiter
All data from Road & Track test measurements.

Again, not a fan of the CTS-V, just getting the facts out there.




Anyway, Car and Driver had some comparo fun and picked the appropriate Cadillac, the XTS, to go against the Bentley Flying Spur. Despite the $186,010 difference in price, the Bentley won: 2013 Cadillac XTS vs 2012 Bentley Continental Flying Spur Speed. The better news is that the 2013 Bentley CFSS is faster and more fuel efficient.

Unfortunately, the $63,350 difference in price between the M6 convertible and the Camaro ZL1 convertible was too big for the more expensive car to prevail: 2013 Chevrolet Camaro ZL1 convertible vs 2012 BMW M6 convertible. Before anyone gets too upset, the Camaro ZL1 Coupe has 7:41 ring time, so it has real performance credentials!

Originally Posted by dunderhi

The new ATS-V will be Cadillac's first M3 competitor and it will compete against the F30 M3, just as the current ATS' are competing against the current F30s. The new CTS-V will continue to compete against M5, just as the current version does. Below are the specs for the E90 M3, E60 M5, CTS-V, and F10 M5. It's obvious to that the M3 is in a different class, and shouldn't be compared to the M5's or the CTS. Argue, if you must, about the Caddy's rear leg room, just watch out for the lack of front leg and head room in the F10.

Test Weight: 3765lbs (E90 M3) 4215lbs (E60 M5) 4475lbs (CTS-V) 4525lbs (F10 M5)
Wheelbase: 108.7" (E90 M3) 113.7" (E60 M5) 113.4" (CTS-V) 116.7" (F10 M5)
Length: 180.4" (E90 M3) 191.5" (E60 M5) 191.6" (CTS-V) 193.5" (F10 M5)
Width: 71.5" (E90 M3) 72.7" (E60 M5) 72.5" (CTS-V) 74.4" (F10 M5)
Height: 57.0" (E90 M3) 57.8" (E60 M5) 58.0" (CTS-V) 57.3" (F10 M5)
Front head room: 38.0" (E90 M3) 40.0" (E60 M5) 39.5" (CTS-V) 38.5" (F10 M5)
Rear head room: 35.5" (E90 M3) 36.5" (E60 M5) 35.0" (CTS-V) 35.8" (F10 M5)
Front Leg room: 46.0" (E90 M3) 44.0" (E60 M5) 45.8" (CTS-V) 44.3" (F10 M5)
Rear Knee room: 25.3" (E90 M3) 25.5" (E60 M5) 23.5" (CTS-V) 24.0" (F10 M5)
Trunk space: 12.0" (E90 M3) 14cuft (E60 M5) 13.6cuft (CTS-V) 14.0" cuft(F10 M5)
0-60mph: 4.6s (E90 M3) 4.1s (E60 M5) 4.2s (CTS-V) 4.1s (F10 M5) 3.6s (F10 M5 DCT)
0-1320 ft: 13.0@110.4mph (E90 M3) 12.4@115.8mph (E60 M5) 12.5@115.3mph (CTS-V) 12.3@116.7mph (F10 M5) 11.9@119.7 mph (F10 M5 DCT)
80mph-0: 195ft (E90 M3) 207ft (E60 M5) 201ft (CTS-V) 201ft (F10 M5)
Lat Accel: 0.95 (E90 M3) 0.87 (E60 M5) 0.92 (CTS-V) 0.97 (F10 M5)
Slalom: 72.9mph (E90 M3) 68.9mph (E60 M5) 70.5mph (CTS-V) 71.0mph (F10 M5)
Noise@70mph: 70dBa (E90 M3) 70dBA (E60 M5) 70dBA (CTS-V) 70dBA (F10 M5)
Top Speed: 155mph* (E90 M3) 155mph* (E60 M5) 191mph (CTS-V) 155mph* (F10 M5) *limiter
All data from Road & Track test measurements.

Again, not a fan of the CTS-V, just getting the facts out there.




Anyway, Car and Driver had some comparo fun and picked the appropriate Cadillac, the XTS, to go against the Bentley Flying Spur. Despite the $186,010 difference in price, the Bentley won: 2013 Cadillac XTS vs 2012 Bentley Continental Flying Spur Speed. The better news is that the 2013 Bentley CFSS is faster and more fuel efficient.

Unfortunately, the $63,350 difference in price between the M6 convertible and the Camaro ZL1 convertible was too big for the more expensive car to prevail: 2013 Chevrolet Camaro ZL1 convertible vs 2012 BMW M6 convertible. Before anyone gets too upset, the Camaro ZL1 Coupe has 7:41 ring time, so it has real performance credentials!

Now I remember who to never argue specifications with, puih I''m glad I was in the right corner on this one

Originally Posted by SuperTerp

So I think the real question for stealth (because first hand accounts out weigh paid reviewerrs anyday) is how easy is it too fishtail just spoke with state farm m5 will run me $2423 each year which is a number I can live with.

That's $400 more than we pay for our two cars with $500 deductibles and a 500K CSL. Although we might get the good clean country living discount.

Originally Posted by solstice

Now I remember who to never argue specifications with, puih I''m glad I was in the right corner on this one

Someone posted a pretty good joke maybe a year or so ago about Mrs D wanting to go to bed, but I couldn't because someone had posted something wrong on the Internet. Mrs. D had a good laugh when I read it to her, but I continued along .

I never understood why people care so much what these car reviews say. Test drive the car and decide for yourself if you like it or not, you're the one who's gonna be driving it, what anyone else says about how it drives is irrelevant.

Originally Posted by riksut

I never understood why people care so much what these car reviews say. Test drive the car and decide for yourself if you like it or not, you're the one who's gonna be driving it, what anyone else says about how it drives is irrelevant.

I find reviews valuable since these guys spend quite a bit of time and miles with the cars, far more than I can do in a test drive. I try to read as many as I can since it gives me an idea of things to pay attention to. Especially if there are areas they complain about that is part of my primary criterias in a car. Sure there is a risk that you will over emphasize issue but rather that than being disappointed a few days or weeks into ownership of things a short "unprepared" test drive fail to reveal. Where these test means squat is if you own the car already an love it. Then it's totally irrelevant what someone else thinks, likewise if you test the car and disgaree with the reviewer after having checked out the complaints. My experience is that reviewers are far more forgiving than I am and that the few complaints they have more often than not have merit.

Originally Posted by dunderhi

That's $400 more than we pay for our two cars with $500 deductibles and a 500K CSL. Although we might get the good clean country living discount.

Thats because your married and famous duh! They always cut breaks to famous people who live out in the sticks. Its a conspiracy to keep me down!

Originally Posted by SuperTerp

I call discrimination

Still haven't answered how much will the nannies save you if you mash it at a light? better than your 550i? I must know because I must be able to do it lol

The M5 does have a lot grip because it has massive tires. 295 in the rears and Michelin PSS.

With the nanny on you are unlikely to kill yourself. Wth the nanny off, the potential for self destruction is significant. I drove in MDM with DSC off and had no problems with control. But I have done 2 days worth of track training in the past, and also MDM is not the same as everything off.

On the other hand, who cares. Better to live dangerously like James Hunt, than stay home with the nanny.

I frankly do not understand certain comments.....the current CTS generation was introduced at the end of 2008 and size wise is almost equal to the inch to the E60 5 Series.

The CTS-V targeted that generation M5 and it did it quite effectively....at almost M3 money....

The handling is phenomenal and the car is extremely engaging.....the magnetorheological dampers work very well.

The comparison with the F10 would not be entirely fair because the F10 is a newer car....period

You may not like the styling (I do) but at least it did introduce something radically new in that regard with the sharp angled and the pointed tail (only Acura followed that design language)

Last, I frankly do not understand the critics to the interiors.....tust me I'm the first to criticize the American car industry with its past lackluster (to be generous) products and interiors wothy of tupperware plastic quality but Cadillac did a really fine job with this car.

I do not recall that the stiched leather lined dash was even an option on the E60 M5....just to name one thing....I guess that in German car terms, the rather uninviting interiors of the E60 are called "Austere" maybe??

I remember when some people criticized the CTS pop-out navigation screen....I guess that when Audi does it is more acceptable

....and to wrap things up, with the price difference between a V and the E60 M5 you could buy a nice, comfortable and well optioned daily commuter....now maybe for a Wall Street type bailed out at taxpayer expense this may be a moot point but for a person actually working for a living it may be an additional selling point.....

Originally Posted by Stealth.Pilot

On the other hand, who cares. Better to live dangerously like James Hunt, than stay home with the nanny.

Thats what gap insurance is for

Originally Posted by duberalles

I frankly do not understand certain comments.....the current CTS generation was introduced at the end of 2008 and size wise is almost equal to the inch to the E60 5 Series.

The CTS-V targeted that generation M5 and it did it quite effectively....at almost M3 money....

The handling is phenomenal and the car is extremely engaging.....the magnetorheological dampers work very well.

The comparison with the F10 would not be entirely fair because the F10 is a newer car....period

You may not like the styling (I do) but at least it did introduce something radically new in that regard with the sharp angled and the pointed tail (only Acura followed that design language)

Sorry Bro, the trim is over done on the center in my op, the buttons seem and appear like cheap plastic (notice the climate control ones, they stand out the most to me) Steering wheel looks awesome, the driver door controls look like they belong in a chevy. Never been a fan of the speedometer choice in design, yet it remains relatively the same since like 06. The interior does not match the cars performance

Originally Posted by SuperTerp

Thats because your married and famous duh! They always cut breaks to famous people who live out in the sticks. Its a conspiracy to keep me down!

We should organize a charity event to help make the public aware of the injustices. Mrs D & I could make an appearance. Have your people get in touch with my people and they'll work something out.

Originally Posted by SuperTerp

Thats what gap insurance is for



Sorry Bro, the trim is over done on the center in my op, the buttons seem and appear like cheap plastic (notice the climate control ones, they stand out the most to me) Steering wheel looks awesome, the driver door controls look like they belong in a chevy. Never been a fan of the speedometer choice in design, yet it remains relatively the same since like 06. The interior does not match the cars performance

Against, a matter of taste.....the controls are not "gritty" at all to operate and I could say that the E60 dash was exactly the same piece of black polyurethane of the cheapest 5 Series...at least Cadillac tried to differentiate a bit more from the ordinary CTS...

To me the E60 interiors were amost the most ugly looking in that category....