Close

    • Insideline tests the new F10 M5 6-speed manual and gets some slow acceleration figures - 1/4 mile in 12.5@115, 13.8@110.6

      We know the new M5 puts out a ton of power (527 rear wheel horsepower) and is capable of running 11's in the 1/4 mile in stock form. So what gives with Insideline acceleration testing hitting basically E92 M3 level acceleration figures running a mid 12 second 1/4 mile with traction control off and a 13.8@110.6 with traction control on?


      The manual transmission and a poor launch explain it. Seems they struggled launching the car a bit but were not far off what others have achieved. These are the slowest acceleration test figures posted thus far but only off just over 1 mile per hour in trap speed versus what Road and Track hit with the manual which was 12.3@116.7.

      Road and Track hit 11.9@119.7 with their dual clutch transmission car matching what IND-Distribution was able to achieve at the drag strip as well with their dual clutch transmission car. Why would anyone would still doubt how much faster the dual clutch transmission makes the car? If one demands the absolute fastest acceleration performance out of the F10 M5, the dual clutch is simply the better choice.



      Vehicle
      Year Make Model 2013 BMW M5 4dr Sedan (4.4L 8cyl Turbo 6M)
      Vehicle Type RWD 4dr 5-passenger sedan
      Base MSRP $91,795
      Options on test vehicle Alpine White, Executive Package ($5,500 -- includes heated steering wheel, power tailgate, comfort access keyless entry, soft-close automatic doors, power rear sunshade with rear manual side window shades, front ventilated seats, active front seats; heated rear seats, four-zone automatic climate control, head-up display, satellite radio with 1-year subscription, BMW Apps); Bang & Olufsen Sound System ($3,700 -- includes high-end sound system featuring Acoustic Lens Technology (ALT) and Dirac Dimensions technology); Silverstone II Full Merino Leather ($3,500); Driver Assistance Package ($1,900 -- includes lane departure warning system, active blind spot detection, side- and top-view cameras; speed limit info); 20-Inch M Light Alloy Wheels ($1,300 -- includes 20-by-9-inch front and 20-by-10-inch rear alloy wheels with 265/35R20 front and 295/30R20 rear tires); Manual Transmission ($0).
      As-tested MSRP $107,695
      Assembly location Dingolfing, Germany
      Drivetrain
      Configuration Longitudinal, front-engine, rear-wheel drive
      Engine type Twin-turbocharged, direct-injected V8, gasoline with auto-stop/start
      Displacement (cc/cu-in) 4,395/268
      Block/head material Aluminum/aluminum
      Valvetrain DOHC, four valves per cylinder, variable intake + exhaust-valve timing
      Compression ratio (x:1) 10.0
      Redline, indicated (rpm) 7,200
      Horsepower (hp @ rpm) 560 @ 6,000
      Torque (lb-ft @ rpm) 500 @ 1,500-5,750
      Fuel type Premium unleaded (required)
      Transmission type Six-speed manual
      Transmission ratios (x:1) I = 4.06; II = 2.40; III = 1.58; IV = 1.19; V = 1.00; VI = 0.87; R = 3.68
      Final-drive ratio (x:1) 3.15
      Differential(s) Electronically controlled multiplate clutch, limited-slip
      Chassis
      Suspension, front Independent double-wishbones, coil springs, driver-adjustable three-mode variable dampers, stabilizer bar
      Suspension, rear Independent multilink, coil springs, driver-adjustable three-mode variable dampers, stabilizer bar
      Steering type Speed-proportional power steering
      Steering ratio (x:1) 13.1
      Turning circle (ft.) 41.3
      Tire make and model Michelin Pilot Super Sport
      Tire type Asymmetrical summer, high-performance
      Tire size, front 265/35ZR20 (99Y)
      Tire size, rear 295/30ZR20 (101Y)
      Wheel size, front 20-by-9 inches
      Wheel size, rear 20-by-10 inches
      Wheel material Forged aluminum
      Brakes, front 15.7-inch two-piece ventilated and cross-drilled discs with six-piston fixed calipers
      Brakes, rear 15.6-inch two-piece ventilated and cross-drilled discs with two-piston sliding calipers
      Track Test Results
      Acceleration, 0-30 mph (sec.) 2.0
      0-45 mph (sec.) 2.9
      0-60 mph (sec.) 4.5
      0-60 with 1 foot of rollout (sec.) 4.3
      0-75 mph (sec.) 6.4
      1/4-mile (sec. @ mph) 12.5 @ 115.0
      0-30 mph, trac ON (sec.) 2.8
      0-45 mph, trac ON (sec.) 4.7
      0-60 mph, trac ON (sec.) 5.9
      0-60, trac ON with 1 foot of rollout (sec.) 5.6
      0-75 mph, trac ON (sec.) 8.1
      1/4-mile, trac ON (sec. @ mph) 13.8 @ 110.6
      Braking, 30-0 mph (ft.) 28
      60-0 mph (ft.) 111
      Slalom, 6 x 100 ft. (mph) 68.9
      Slalom, 6 x 100 ft. (mph) ESC ON 67.6
      Skid pad, 200-ft. diameter (lateral g) 0.93
      Skid pad, 200-ft. diameter (lateral g) ESC ON 0.92
      Sound level @ idle (dB) 49.0
      @ Full throttle (dB) 82.1
      @ 70 mph cruise (dB) 63.0
      Engine speed @ 70 mph (rpm) 2,300
      Test Driver Ratings & Comments
      Acceleration comments A little tricky to launch. Either gets lots of wheelspin right off the line, or no wheelspin initially followed by lots of spin shortly thereafter, requiring a bit of backpedaling through 1st gear. Nice power, if an odd V8 engine note. Shifter has kinda long and rather notchy throws but well-defined gates.
      Braking comments Very firm pedal, short travel. Car barely dips the nose at all and stops are incredibly stable. Still, how embarassing that the VW Up! stops shorter. First stop was shortest at 111 feet. Fourth stop (out of seven) was longest at 117 feet. Erratic distances.
      Handling comments Skid pad: Even with the suspension set to its stiffest at Sport Plus, the M5 rolls over mightily on the outside front tire. Dialing back throttle lessens the understeer, but certainly doesn't eliminate it. Overall, grip is pretty good though, definitely better than the old car. Slalom: The M5 is too soft, even in the Sport Plus suspension setting. Surprisingly, the hydraulic steering felt best in Comfort mode -- Sport and Sport Plus feel heavy for the sake of being heavy, but don't give any increased feel or quickness. The chassis gives decent feedback and the M5 is very forgiving at the limit, but the overall sensation is one of massive weight transfer. This is definitely not a car that drives small, and no one will call it nimble.
      Testing Conditions
      Test date 9/5/2012
      Elevation (ft.) 1,121
      Temperature (F) 86.4
      Relative humidity (%) 16.5
      Barometric pressure (in. Hg) 28.72
      Wind (mph, direction) 0.44, Head/crosswind
      Odometer (mi.) 2,830
      Fuel used for test 91-octane gasoline
      As-tested tire pressures, f/r (psi) 35/35
      Fuel Consumption
      EPA fuel economy (mpg) 15 city/22 highway/17 combined
      Edmunds observed (mpg) 13.3 worst/19.1 best/15.1 average (1,133 miles)
      Fuel tank capacity (U.S. gal.) 21.1
      Driving range (mi.) 464.2
      Audio and Advanced Technology
      Stereo description Bang & Olufsen AM/FM/CD/DVD/MP3/Satellite radio 1,100-watt sound system with 12 speakers
      iPod/digital media compatibility Standard iPod via USB port and Aux-in jack
      Satellite radio Optional SiriusXM
      Hard-drive music storage capacity (Gb) Standard 20.5GB music storage capacity
      Rear seat video and entertainment Optional
      Bluetooth phone connectivity Standard
      Navigation system Standard with real-time traffic information
      Telematics (OnStar, etc.) Standard
      Smart entry/Start Optional ignition, doors, trunk/hatch
      Parking aids Standard parking sonar front and rear, back-up camera; optional side and top-view cameras
      Blind-spot detection Optional
      Lane-departure monitoring Optional departure warning
      Collision warning/avoidance Not available
      Night Vision Optional
      Dimensions & Capacities
      Curb weight, mfr. claim (lbs.) 4,343
      Curb weight, as tested (lbs.) 4,389
      Weight distribution, as tested, f/r (%) 52/48
      Length (in.) 193.5
      Width (in.) 74.4
      Height (in.) 57.3
      Wheelbase (in.) 116.7
      Track, front (in.) 64.1
      Track, rear (in.) 62.3
      Legroom, front (in.) 41.4
      Legroom, rear (in.) 36.1
      Headroom, front (in.) 40.5
      Headroom, rear (in.) 38.3
      Shoulder room, front (in.) 58.3
      Shoulder room, rear (in.) 56.2
      Seating capacity 5
      Step-in height, measured (in.) 15
      Trunk volume (cu-ft) 14.0
      Cargo loading height, measured (in.) 26.5
      GVWR (lbs.) 5,313
      Payload, mfr. max claim (lbs.) 970
      Ground clearance (in.) 4.6
      Warranty
      Bumper-to-bumper 4 years/50,000 miles
      Powertrain 4 years/50,000 miles
      Corrosion 12 years/Unlimited miles
      Roadside assistance 4 years/Unlimited miles
      Free scheduled maintenance 4 years/50,000 miles




      This article was originally published in forum thread: Insideline tests the new F10 M5 6-speed manual and gets some slow acceleration figures - 1/4 mile in 12.5@115, 13.8@110.6 started by Sticky View original post
      Comments 13 Comments
      1. leo985i's Avatar
        leo985i -
        Seems the DCT has a huge advantage over this. It really is insane how much faster the DCT is.
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by leo985i Click here to enlarge
        Seems the DCT has a huge advantage over this. It really is insane how much faster the DCT is.
        No kidding.
      1. Blaizon's Avatar
        Blaizon -
        Too early to tell imo...
      1. benzy89's Avatar
        benzy89 -
        If you're gonna turn the car into a heavy hitter, it seems like the only advantage the MT has is that it's a lot easier to beef up the clutch for a high HP setup. Once the DCT has an upgrade out that consistently runs with OEM, all bets are off.
      1. Q4P's Avatar
        Q4P -
        i am w sticky on this one... 911 carrera s is the exact same way
      1. leo985i's Avatar
        leo985i -
        It almost feels like the customer is buying a totally different car. I hope that whoever buys a Manual M5 understands that their m5 will be a lot slow than one that's not l. $#@! an e60 m5 will keep up with the new manual M5, that's how sad this $#@! seems.

        As much as I love manuals the difference is too big this time around, and I would feel like I got screwed by buying a manual M5. Not so much between the smaller cars.
      1. TZ04XJR's Avatar
        TZ04XJR -
        Times have just made a full transition.. I remember making fun of by best friend for buying a new LS1 Z28 with an auto transmission.. I didn't think I'd ever change my mentality. In recent years I've accepted the facts and embraced the technology we now have available as consumers.

        With that said, I test drove a Sakhir Orange DCT M6 yesterday Click here to enlarge
        All I can say is, son of a bit*h what a beast!! I didn't want to stop driving the thing. I was fortunate to have a younger salesman ride along and he let my beat it up to my full satisfaction. I'm now convinced that I would take the F1x M6 over the M5. It's funny how things change, I preferred the M5's looks in the E6x platform. It's the complete opposite now. I'll wait for them to work out all the bugs before I grab one.. You can be damn sure it'll be a DCT.

        -TZ
      1. Q4P's Avatar
        Q4P -
        lets remember that there are still idiots that hate on the gtr for the same reason, a car that goes 10's w a grandma behind the seat
      1. Remonster's Avatar
        Remonster -
        I used to be one of the manual transmission's biggest diehards but last Tuesday I picked up a 2013 335is with DCT and I haven't regretted it yet. I wish the DCT in my car was programmed as aggressively as the M-DCT (shifts in DS + Sport mode don't kick you in the back like they do in the M3) but it's such a great transmission.
      1. cstavaru's Avatar
        cstavaru -
        If it holds the power, the DCT is worth considering. And it is definitely a better option if you plan to remain stock, provided it has good launch control (unlike the 335is, M3, etc.). But seeing how the DCT and automatic gearboxes slip under high torque in N54 cars, I think I would still choose the manual gearbox for heavy tuning and abusive driving. I'm not sure how would the DCT hold with slicks at the drag strip.
      1. inlineS54B32's Avatar
        inlineS54B32 -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by cstavaru Click here to enlarge
        If it holds the power, the DCT is worth considering. And it is definitely a better option if you plan to remain stock, provided it has good launch control (unlike the 335is, M3, etc.). But seeing how the DCT and automatic gearboxes slip under high torque in N54 cars, I think I would still choose the manual gearbox for heavy tuning and abusive driving. I'm not sure how would the DCT hold with slicks at the drag strip.
        What's wrong with the M3's launch control? Just curious.
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by cstavaru Click here to enlarge
        If it holds the power, the DCT is worth considering. And it is definitely a better option if you plan to remain stock, provided it has good launch control (unlike the 335is, M3, etc.). But seeing how the DCT and automatic gearboxes slip under high torque in N54 cars, I think I would still choose the manual gearbox for heavy tuning and abusive driving. I'm not sure how would the DCT hold with slicks at the drag strip.
        This is a different DCT gearbox than the M3/335 have.
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by inlineS54B32 Click here to enlarge
        What's wrong with the M3's launch control? Just curious.
        People just don't know how to use it. They expect to be able to have a perfect launch anywhere, it doesn't work like that.

        I will say the Porsche and GT-R launch control programs are much better and more consistent. The M3's works well though if you know how to utilize it.