Shock horror- New M5 is "better car" than 430M- says Autocar ==========

Haha whatever, I'll take the F430 anyday. Autocar must have hired a dumbass.

 

What I don't get, and this assumes the figures are correct, is how the BMW, with a bigger engine that produces more power and more torque, can use less fuel.

In fact as a general question.... why do all Ferraris suck when it comes to gas mileage?

Dave

 

I've actually been pretty impressed with my 360's mileage. On a largely freeway trip last week I got 19 mpg at 80 - 85. In a normal mix of mountain road sport driving/some freeway, I get 16 or so. Better than I expected. Of course, on the track I've seen as low as 5 or 6.

Gary

 

Lusso64,
Bc of the gearing I think, they are so bad, even at 60 they are going what, 3000 RPM? in contrast, a corvette does like 1500 rpm at 60, bc it has so much toque tht it really doesnt need that 6th gear...not for anythig but fuel economy.

 

Also remember that the M5 has the 'power' button to select between the 400 and 507hp modes - not sure which mode was used for the tests but it could play a role I guess.

 

Gee you mean your gas gauge actually works, you must be one of the lucky ones! And 19 mi on the freeway....must have been s o m e tailwind.

 

I thought me 550 gas tank had a leak when I first got it. I can watch the gas guage go down as I drive it. I must get around 8 mpg. I lose an 1/8 tank just going home from the gas station.
I just read today a report on the M6 where they compared it to the M5 and they seemdd to like the wheels on the M6 but liked the room of the M5.
Are they having any problems with these two cars such as computer, electrical or motor problems? I had heard a rumor a while back that they were having major problems with reliability witht eh V10 motor.
Would it be a fair comparision tpo compare the M5/M6 to a Merc S600?

 

This is really an unfortunate, nonsense comparison. Although the author of the article couches much of what he says "in suprise" that the M5 should be winning so much over the 430, ALL the objective information provided undercut the credibility of his report. I think the author of this article should be chastised!!!

For example, both cars have nearly the same HP, but the M5 is 30% heavier at 4026 lbs vs. 3190 for the 430. The calculations provided in the article even say the power/weight ratio is 333hp in the 430 vs. 277 for the M5. Torque is also higher in the 430 for weight at 237 ft/lbs vs. 210 ft/lbs for the M5. How could the M5 possibly leave the 430 behind with these base numbers inscribed on it, unless the 430 they were using was a dud, or the driver was on Prosac.

Both 'Car and Driver' and 'Road and Track' clocked the 430 as doing 0-60 in 3.5 seconds. Test drivers for one of these magazines were so suprised by the stellar performance of teh 430 (vs. an understated 4 secs by the manufacturer) that they telephoned the test drivers of the other magazine to corroborate the 3.5 times.

Finally, I'm not in the league of the 430 vs. the new M5, but I do have a 98 355 F1 Spider (15K miles) and I do have a 93 M5 (25K miles). My Spider, at around 3200 lbs has 268 ft/lbs of torque at 6000 rpms. My M5, at around 3800 lbs, and with performance upgrades has 311 tt/lbs of torque at 5000 rpms (vs. 270 ft/bs stock torque at 5000 rpms.) My M5 clips along but its a big, heavy saloon and there's just no way it can keep pace with the 355 -- a veritable go-kart.

Finally, for those of you who arn't familiar with the M5 tradtion, the current design has turned a lot of Bimmer enthusiasts OFF, especially compared with the last model (E39 M5) and the prior hand build M5s (E34 M5, my model). I saw the new M5, in arguably the most attractive color, avus blue, at the Vancouver auto show. Completely uninspiring design, hardly a head turner, lots under the hood to admire, but beyond that can't imagine wanting one. As for the 430, I'm willing to turn into a lizard for 10 years if I can own one when I shed my skin.

Cheers, Paul

 

I find it hard to believe that any rational person would even think of the two (M5 and 430) at the same time.

I have a BMW that was a worthy competitor to the 360 spider, a Z8, and it is one very competent car, similarly powered and really designed to compete in the same arena, from seating, luggage space, fabric top etc etc. I happen to love my Z8 and think that as far as convertibles go it is one of the best looking modern convertibles. Far better executed than a 360 spider from a design POV. But that era of design at BMW has been destroyed by Darth Bangle and the new 5 is an abomination, no matter what hardware is inside it - it's just plain hard to look at.

 

you dont happen to have any pictures of all your cars do you? its quite the impressive collection

 

The bottom line is that magazine editors love to shoot down extremely expensive cars, because 99.9 percent of their readers cannot afford a Ferrari and want to hear it's faults - even if they're stretched quite thin.

 

great point, the ferrari is a fun fast and exotic toy...the bmw is a car you can use for daily transportation and hauling people and things.....

 

I don't see why the numbers out of the F430 in Autocar are such a shock. I find it incredibly hard to believe that they F430 can turn a 3.5-3.7 0-60 time, or an 11.6-11.7 second quarter mile time. I have no doubt in my mind that those initial test cars were ringers. Unfortunately, it is becoming all too common in the auto industry for the manufacturers to orchestrate these tests very carefully by providing ringers. They are probably thinking that they can build the hype up so much that slower tests later on won't matter. The car-buying public has a habit of quoting the best test times for a car when they are comparing performance figures. The manufacturers realize this and use it to their advantage. I have no doubt that those first cars were ringers.

 

I'm intrigued by the idea that manufacturers provide 'ringers' for initial car tests. Haven't even heard the 'ringer' terminology before. Don't dispute it but here's another possibility and I use my 93M5 as an example. Car and Driver's 0-60 test on my M5 reported 5.6 seconds, which was then widely quoted, as you suggest. Every other mag. that tested the car reported between 6-6.4 seconds, no one could duplicate the 5.6 secs. One explanation I was given is that C&D testers race the engine and pop the clutch in such a horrific manner that they can ruin a clutch in 3-4 tries. If that was true and others couldn't or just wouldn't launch in that way, then that might help explain the large differences in 0-60 times. lI'm also not clear if there's a standard configuration of gas (1/4 tank, or full) and riders (driver alone, with passenger?) in such tests. A full tank and passenger could add close to 400 more lbs.

Anyway, welcome more perspectives and any firm information about the 'ringer' phenomena. Oh, and also, my 98 355 F1 factory manual says my car does 0-60 in 4.6 seconds. Every test I've seen in the mags reports about 4.8-9 secs, with only the 95 6 shift coming in at 4.6.

Cheers, Paul

 

The 430 they tested probably came with out Launch Control.

 

All of the initial test reports on the F430, whether it be Car and Driver, Road and Track, or whomever, based their results on the same three factory supplied F430 test cars, driven by Ferrari test drivers, and measured on the shorter-than-1/4-mile front straight of Fiorano, which is a slight downhill grade.

Ferrari only allowed the tests to be performed under these conditions, and would NOT allow numbers to be taken the other direction on the straight (uphill, then averaged with the downhill figures) or with the journalists driving the three very specific cars.

Every single one.

Now, three months later, we're starting to see actual results from normal customer cars which give a much better view of what the F430's potential actually is. It was laughable that any of the American rags ever said the F430 is "faster than an F40" based on such a manipulated test.

0-150MPH
18.0 - F40
21.4 - Gallardo
21.5 - F430
23.9 - 360CS

The F430 looks to be a nice step up from the 360, but it is no giant-slayer, that we can now say for certain.

 

I find this article very interesting! I have many time's driven (attacked) the roads of north wales, most likely some(all) of the roads this test was done on, as the the moor roads of Snowdonia National park, Betws-y-coed over to Anglesey are famous with Uk road testers. They are fabulous, and extremely testing of "any" car.They are light with traffic and have a bit of every thing, fast sections, slow sections, long wide open flowing sections and the surface's are just as mixed, sometimes smooth, sometimes very bumpy and harsh. The mix of corners is incredible, as i have said there a real test.

I have driven a number of friends and my own cars around those parts, everything from a Subaru P1, EVO 8 FQ 350, BMW M3(e46), M5(e39), Lotus Elise S2 190, super light Caterham 7 and many more (sorry no Ferrari's). We all found there, more then almost any other road or track, that weakness's would show up that we might not have had even considered before! The one single factor that was almost always punished badly was excess weight. Other things would also make life difficult too, suspension being to hard or soft, a badly controlled body or weak breaks etc, but a car being "over" weight was normally always the reason for it getting left behind. You can drive around a cars handling problems to an extent, but you can't drive around the laws of physics!

So i would be very surprised if new M5 was able to get away from a F430 on those roads with both drivers knowing the roads and them being at the same level of ability.

I would be very interested to see the times of both cars around the Nürburgring Nordschleife (not un-like many sections in north wales). This would give a good indication of how far the germans have been able to re-wright the laws of physics! Even though this would still be a an-unfair comparison, due to the fact that the M5 was developed there, my money would still be on the F430 giving the M5 a good spanking!!!!!!!!!!

 

shawsan,

The phenomenon of ringers is described perfectly by Never in his post above. The release and initial tests of the 430 were closely choreographed by Ferrari. This is not new for Ferrari. If you recall, when the F50 was released, owners were required to sign a waiver stating that they would never allow their cars for testing purposes, or be subject to a lawsuit. Furthermore, the only test car provided to the press had to be driven by a Ferrari driver, and only on select tracks.

The sad part is that regardless of whether the production cars turn 3.9 or 4.2 or 4.4 in 0-60, it's the 3.6 second times that will consistently be referenced by the automotive public.

And based on the 4.4 0-60 time, I wouldn't doubt if the horsepower & torque figures are overstated.

 

I wish Ferraris would have better quarter miles, my friends mustang does a 12.5, while the F430 does a 12.4. Has any one here ever taken there ferrari to a drag strip?

 

Why on earth would you? The drag strip is exactly for mustangs and NOS'd Mitsubishis and Supras. Ferraris are elegant touring and sports cars that can turn left and right.

I bet you that the same driver in an F430 would completely spank any mustang around a road circuit, regardless of their standing start acceleration numbers. The 430 will outbrake the Mustang, outhandle it and simply run away from it as soon as the mustang applies any steering input at all.

 

I wonder how much those ass holes at BMW paid for that article .
I`ve read it , and it`s crap.
First for the stupid comparison , and second for the acc figures.
I don`t think the editor it`s dumd , I only say that that`s a paid for article.
Oh well , marketing nowadays...

 

Again,

it's useless trying to say a Ferrari is a better "car", it's purely impossible.
It's way too expensive, too thirsty, impractical for what you pay.
Even for track/fast road use, you could build up something for a fraction of the cost that will simply leave any ferrari behind, Enzo included.

But then again, a Ferrari is more than that. You can't just compare figures, it says only part of it. It's also often a realised dream, or a statement to yourself, or the sheer pleasure of that look, that sound, that wonderfull work of art.
Again, a Patek philippe would loose in accuracy against any crapy 5 cents seiko watch, but you wouldn't swap, would you ?
Same for the F-car. The rest of the bunch is trying to explain you why you made a bad buy, but as long as they argue with YOU, it means they envy you, and have to compare themselves to you.

I agree these articles are some kind of commercial crap, though i don't think BM paid for it, the mag' is way too happy to publish it. Any middle.exec driving a 530d now feels he has a car 90% similar to the one that kicks' a F430 arse. But it's dumb. They will look at the M5, but they will take pictures of the F430. And in 10 years time, they'll try to get their hands on a used F430, while the M5 will finish its life in a red light district backyard.

A Ferrari has charm, the GTs have even class, and that's something no Porsche, no MB, no BM (for sure not) will ever have.
After 5 years, it's your tennis teacher that drives your SL, and the BM has this strong "F@#° you all, bastards" feeling.

 

Of course headline grabbing statistics like this sell magazines very well but i think there is a trend of which we should all be at least aware of.

Ferrari- the name used to signify the ultimate in style ( I think that finished with the demise of the 355)

Ferrari- used to epitomise performance and roadholding that was far in excess of any production car and arguably better then most sports cars.

Ferrari- used to have very strong residuals ( hold on to ones hat with 360 values and with the 430 in so many numbers- its lost the exclusivity.

Ferrari- used to be exclusive but now 360 is commonplace.

This is not a F bashing thread but really we all should open our eyes and see that regrettably Ferrari need to do better and the F430 in terms of style is not what was needed.

The days of customers buying f cars so that they can do the development work for Ferrari with problems that you never have existsed in the first place are over

If individual want to buy into the ferrari dream so be it- but I regret to say the dream is not reality.

 

That is a very good point. I remember reading somewhere that only a few test drivers (no doubt including those who achieved 0-60 in 3.5s) were told the special "code sequence" (input via a mixture of paddle flicks and manettino clicks) to enable true Launch Control.

The standard Euro car has an "LC" button, but that simply enables the driver to determine the revs he would like to dial up before "sidestepping" (virtually) the clutch. There is almost no clutch slippage doing this, just bogging down if the chosen revs are too low or rampant wheelspin if too high.

The genuine Launch Control referred to in the aforementioned article actually let the computer determine the ideal revs to engage the clutch and the correct amount of clutch slip needed to keep the engine in the right rev band without wasteful wheelspin.

Although that wouldn't account for 0.9secs difference, the author did note a consistent 0.2 sec improvement...

It is a bit farcical that Ferrari only allowed testing on Fiorano with its non-straight, non-flat surface, but ironically it will be Autocar's FULL road test figures (not yet conducted) that will be my yardstick as they are as consistent as any magazine when it comes to test conditions.

 

I owned a 2002 M5, I sold it after a year. It never did anything well. The car was put together well, cool "Hot Rod". The last time I took my 348 to a track day, some drivers came with their M5s, AMG MBs and they would not work on a small track. They were very sloppy in the turns and there was a awful smell of brake pads. I just bought a 2000 360 and drove it back to Virginia Beach from Dallas. One day was 16 hours of driving, I was amazed how comfortable the car is. I'm a former Ducati racer, amateur class. All motorcycle mags are either bashing or praising the Ducati 996. Big deal, it was the best for me. I'm living my dream, and loving it. I had ordered the new M5, thinking it maybe better than the last one. Just spent $35k more on a used 360 with no warranty from the factory, canceled the M5.