So if no the M5..then what? Which 4 door sedan...

[grizzy727]

So if the M5 as a commuter/weekend funcar is not practical or reaching its potenetial involves desolate roadways at 4 am--what sedan is out there thats fills the need for speed/power and precision handling. I say this as an owner of a m3 and a 911 looking for 4 doors and some grunt.

Mike

[JIO]

One of the car magazines tested it and got 0-60 in 5.0 seconds and 13.5 or so in the quarter mile. That's M3 territory. Very fast and $20K cheaper than the M5. You can also get it in either 6 speed manual or automatic.

[wolverine]

I had a 545, and it's a great car. But it is still a big, heavy sedan. If you're looking for 4 doors that you can really toss around and have a blast at low speeds, I'd take a serious look at the Subaru WRX and the Mitsubishi Evo. The Audi RS4 is another beautiful car - just saw one at an Audi event last month.

On the M5 side, I installed H&R springs and spacers and the car handles like a go-kart now. Stiffer and not quite as smooth riding, but it is a blast at lower speeds on winding roads. Almost no understeer or body roll - just awesome. I actually can't imagine having as much fun with any 4 door car.

[lee1224]

had my 2007 550 sport for about a month now, great car, one of the best for a 4 door, if not the best

[shep01]

excellent 4 door - sport, active everything, 24 way seats - category king for sure<img src="http://members.roadfly.com/chuckd/shepsig.jpg">

[greer]

why not get a 2003 M5. You can get a good used one for low 50's and it's an amazing car!

[psybj]

But as usual the M5/M6 are blasted for idrive and SMG. I LOVE SMG and will eventually learn to use idrive.

If the M5 is nearly as good as my M6, and reportedly it's just as good, why look elsewhere? The ONLY drawback is the cost of owning/operating it -- I figure it depreciates about $1/mile and I know it sucks gas at 11mpg, but that's very cheap for owning an exotic. Yes, it performs like an exotic.

:-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-)

Those are the smiles that I live with as I enjoy my car.

:-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-)




psybj
'06 ///M6 Silverstone
'02 Acura TL-S

PREVIOUS:
'02 ///M3 SMG
'01 ///M3 6sp
Acura 3.0CL
Dodge Stealth TT AWD
VW Thing
Acura Legend Cpe.
Honda Interceptor
Honda Prelude
M-B 450SL
Piper Cherokee 180
Rx 7
280Z
deTomaso Pantera
260Z
Datsun 510 2dr
Harley-Davidson
MGA Mk.II (<400 manuf)
VW bugs
Triumph TR-3A
Ford convertible
Renault Dauphine
James
Chrysler HEMI
+ Ford, Mercury, Lincoln, Chev, Buick, Caddy, Plym, Dodge, Chrysler, Toyota, Nissan, Honda, Acura, Mazda and other boring stuff for wife and family.

[savochka]

05 S4 (6MT, black ext with black and silver Alcantara int)
Retired 02 330Ci (3 very fun years)

[papadoc]

If you want a 4 door with decent room for 4 adults, true Q-ship that only the cogniscenti recognize, 450 hp with low end grunt and a smooth Tiptronic automatic, only about 1000 imported to the US, and full time 4 wheel drive for all weather safety, THIS IS THE CAR. Left the BMW stable for this (M5 and Dinan 7) after rejecting the new M5 due to SMG and its ugliness. 0-60 in 4.5, much faster than prior M5, though a bit hefty for quick track maneuvers. Sweepers on the road though, nothing better...

[FrankD]

I did check a RS6 out. Very uninspiring. Bland Audi styling, sluggish handling, and a problematic turbo set-up = thanks, but I will pass.

[wolverine]

My friend got the first one in town. The M5 blows it away. It's heavy, overpriced, unreliable, and has a slushbox. Really old technology compared to an RS4.

[Radiation-Joe]

and a worked over e46 M3. From a handling standpoint it has the characteristic Audi problem of horrible weight distribution, but the DRC (dynamic ride control) makes a huge difference at speed in the car. The car is totally planted and belies it's heft and weight distribution when pushed hard. The downside is very harsh compression damping that makes the low speed ride a little annoying.

I love the bland Audi exterior styling.

[aronis]

You can't beat an RS6 for a year round daily drive which will out perform 90% of all cars in the dry and 99.9999% with any precipitation on the road. Finding a low miliage M5 is easy since they spend more time in the Garage than on the road, but finding a low milage RS6 is not so easy. 70000 miles on mine.

[lee1224]

[AprilGoose]

hood. I would much rather see them try an emulate the look of cars like Ferrari F1. Now thats a motor that is fun to look at.

[chip]

Mercedes CLS63


http://www.onemotoring.com.sg/publish/onemotoring/en/motoring_buzz/road_tests/coupe0/mercedes_benz_cls_63_amg.html

[wolverine]

Nobody will give the E63 (E55 chassis) that much credit.

[chip]

Whatever. YOu don't know what you're talking about.
I own a CLS55 and for a 4100 lbs car it handles rather well.
The CLS63 will even be better because of new brakes,a righer reving motor, and a new 7 speed transmission.
And don't think this is coming from an antiBMW person. I owned an E46 M3 for over two years (and loved it).

[wolverine]

after one lap, when Car and Driver tested both back to back. I can refer you to the article if you'd like. I've driven the CLS 55 and the E55 a number of times, and I have over 21,000 miles on the M5.

Yes, the CLS handles 'rather well' for a 4100 lb car. But if you've driven an M5, there is no comparison in terms of 'precision handling'. The AMG's have numb steering, and an uncommunicative chassis.

Having driven most of the cars we're talking about (the E63 is not available yet), I think I know what I'm talking about. Something tells me you have never driven an M5.

[chip]

Keep telling yourself that maybe you'll believe it someday.
First off we're not talking about a CLS55. I mentioned the new CLS63.
Two, the CLS55 and M5 are about dead even performance wise. The C&D article you quoted had the M5 even on everything except a two mile circuit (which it beat the Merc by ONE second). And that can be attributed to the Mercedes weak point, the 5 speed automatic transmission. The new CLS63 will have a 7 speed paddle shifting auto which will help it considerably. It will also have more horsepower and much more torque than the M5 too.

To quote the new Automobile issue comparing the M5 to an S6 and a E63
(in which the M5 finishes third, the Audi second, and the Merc First)

"The fact that the M5 has fallen so far so fast tells you three things: That this is an extremely fast moving business. That even a well founded status quo can be eroded by clever evolution. Ans that the big-engine-in-a-mid-size-car game is more competitive than ever."


Finally I'm not here to trash the M5, its a very nice car but the so is the CLS63 (and CLS55). And the point of this thread was to offer an altenative.


BTW, I've driven the M5 and I have a CLS63 on order. So don't give me this "i know what i'm talking about and you don't" attitude.




T