• Dethroned? Auto Zeitung F10 M5 and E63 AMG S 4Matic comparison shows E63 facelift has faster acceleration and same weight

      When Mercedes-Benz announced the E63 AMG facelift and that it would have all wheel drive as well as a fairly large power boost it made everyone wonder if the M5's time at the top (primarily due to its underrated motor providing a horsepower advantage) would be short lived. Well, it certainly appears that time is now over as the E63 AMG S 4Matic is now clearly the superior performance car according the test data below.

      The E63 AMG S 4Matic is faster to 60 mph (hitting a stunning 3.6 seconds) and to 100 mph. The Germans unfortunately did not do a 400 meter sprint (basically a 1/4 mile) or any 60-120 km/h / 80-120 km/h testing.

      Acceleration is the main advantage it seems as the M5 is quicker around track. The laptime for the E63 facelift is slower by 4/10's. The M5 was also still able to hang onto its advantage in the slalom with a 1 km/h advantage.

      What about the E63's weight? Well, funny that the weight between the two cars is a wash. So AMG is able to offer a car with all wheel drive that weighs the same as the rear wheel drive BMW M5 while BMW sits around complaining about the weight gain all wheel drive would give the car. It seems the problem is not the weight of all wheel drive but that the M5 is grossly overweight to begin with.

      Well folks, that's it. Mercedes-Benz caught and passed the F10 M5 relatively quickly and easily at least in raw power and the new Audi RS6/RS7 may do the same. If only BMW was not so stubborn regarding updating their M cars during their lifespan they could easily regain their overall lead as the AMG really only has a power/traction straightline advantage currently. Honestly, good for AMG and congrats on raising the bar and improving their car. BMW seems content being the Ultimate Marketing Machine these days.





      This article was originally published in forum thread: Dethroned? Auto Zeitung F10 M5 and E63 AMG S 4Matic comparison shows E63 facelift has faster acceleration and outlaps the M5 started by Sticky View original post
      Comments 13 Comments
      1. 5soko's Avatar
        5soko -
        Whete it says handling is that the lap times? The m5 has a 1:42,3 and the amg a 1:42,7.. So wouldnt that mean the M5 was faster on the track?
      1. Brey335i's Avatar
        Brey335i -
        I'm not sure I agree with the reason the Mercedes takes the Motor / Gearbox category. The M5 is actually in the lead until it loses 23 points to the AMG in Consumption.

        Same story with the Driving Dynamics category. They seem to be pretty even with a slight edge to the M5 until the AMG gets a 31 point lead in Traction. The 4Matic is probably also the reason the AMG pulls away in the safety and control under braking categories.

        After reading the article it seems to me that two things are evident: BMW made a fat porker of an M5 that would have been much better at 600 lbs lighter. And for what I value in a car, the RWD M5 is the better choice.

        However, if you aren't dying to own RWD cars then the Mercedes is an attractive proposition. And the fact that a 4Matic Merc can be the same weight as its RWD competitor from BMW is just sad.
      1. M3_WC's Avatar
        M3_WC -
        Nothing I didn't expect. The F10 M5 had already lost comparos to the S6 and pre facelift E63.
      1. johnnyblaze's Avatar
        johnnyblaze -
        Counting down the days until I have a E63S...
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by 5soko Click here to enlarge
        Whete it says handling is that the lap times? The m5 has a 1:42,3 and the amg a 1:42,7.. So wouldnt that mean the M5 was faster on the track?
        Yes, you're right. That's what I get for writing this at 1 AM.
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Brey335i Click here to enlarge
        I'm not sure I agree with the reason the Mercedes takes the Motor / Gearbox category. The M5 is actually in the lead until it loses 23 points to the AMG in Consumption.

        Same story with the Driving Dynamics category. They seem to be pretty even with a slight edge to the M5 until the AMG gets a 31 point lead in Traction. The 4Matic is probably also the reason the AMG pulls away in the safety and control under braking categories.

        After reading the article it seems to me that two things are evident: BMW made a fat porker of an M5 that would have been much better at 600 lbs lighter. And for what I value in a car, the RWD M5 is the better choice.

        However, if you aren't dying to own RWD cars then the Mercedes is an attractive proposition. And the fact that a 4Matic Merc can be the same weight as its RWD competitor from BMW is just sad.
        I think this is a fair assessment.
      1. Remonster's Avatar
        Remonster -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Brey335i Click here to enlarge
        I'm not sure I agree with the reason the Mercedes takes the Motor / Gearbox category. The M5 is actually in the lead until it loses 23 points to the AMG in Consumption.

        Same story with the Driving Dynamics category. They seem to be pretty even with a slight edge to the M5 until the AMG gets a 31 point lead in Traction. The 4Matic is probably also the reason the AMG pulls away in the safety and control under braking categories.

        After reading the article it seems to me that two things are evident: BMW made a fat porker of an M5 that would have been much better at 600 lbs lighter. And for what I value in a car, the RWD M5 is the better choice.

        However, if you aren't dying to own RWD cars then the Mercedes is an attractive proposition. And the fact that a 4Matic Merc can be the same weight as its RWD competitor from BMW is just sad.
        I think you mean BMW made a fat porker of a 5 series, M has to work with the chassis / body it's given so it's not really their fault the 5 series grew so massive this generation.
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Remonster Click here to enlarge
        I think you mean BMW made a fat porker of a 5 series, M has to work with the chassis / body it's given so it's not really their fault the 5 series grew so massive this generation.
        Yes but BMW knew an M5 would be coming. Ultimately, you are right, it isn't M's fault.
      1. 5soko's Avatar
        5soko -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
        Yes, you're right. That's what I get for writing this at 1 AM.
        Haha.. Also the amg is faster to 100KM by .6 of a second, by 160KM the amg time ahead is cut to .4 of a second, can this be a indication the m5 is gaining once speed increase?
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by 5soko Click here to enlarge
        Haha.. Also the amg is faster to 100KM by .6 of a second, by 160KM the amg time ahead is cut to .4 of a second, can this be a indication the m5 is gaining once speed increase?
        It's an indication that acceleration will slow for either past 100 mph but I would think the M5 would be stronger no the back half than early on due to its traction disadvantage. Either way, from a roll I think things would be interesting.
      1. whoosh's Avatar
        whoosh -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Brey335i Click here to enlarge
        I'm not sure I agree with the reason the Mercedes takes the Motor / Gearbox category. The M5 is actually in the lead until it loses 23 points to the AMG in Consumption.

        Same story with the Driving Dynamics category. They seem to be pretty even with a slight edge to the M5 until the AMG gets a 31 point lead in Traction. The 4Matic is probably also the reason the AMG pulls away in the safety and control under braking categories.

        After reading the article it seems to me that two things are evident: BMW made a fat porker of an M5 that would have been much better at 600 lbs lighter. And for what I value in a car, the RWD M5 is the better choice.

        However, if you aren't dying to own RWD cars then the Mercedes is an attractive proposition. And the fact that a 4Matic Merc can be the same weight as its RWD competitor from BMW is just sad.
        + Rep.

        Make a lighter platform and give customers the choice between X-drive or RWD. Forcing people to go with an "SAV" to get AWD is nonsense when Audi, MB and Porsche all have performance sedans with AWD, and Porsche (and soon Audi) also have their performance trucks. Clearly the competition has reacted to BMW, and they have taken their eye off the ball while messing with 2- and 4-door versions of everything, fugly GT models, electric supercars, and German Priusesssses.
      1. Brey335i's Avatar
        Brey335i -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Remonster Click here to enlarge
        I think you mean BMW made a fat porker of a 5 series, M has to work with the chassis / body it's given so it's not really their fault the 5 series grew so massive this generation.
        You're right. I said BMW made a fat porker of an M5. But I guess I could have said 5 series too. I never blamed the M division for the M5's weight. Although they aren't exactly my favorite people these days either Click here to enlarge
      1. heavytiresmoke's Avatar
        heavytiresmoke -
        They should have had a bigger gas guzzler M5 like they always have had. A larger displacement with two big turbos would have done a better job when comparing the other competition. Weight is another factor that changed for the newer M5 which also doesnt help.