Autocar 7th of June 2005: BMW M5 beats the Ferrari F430
 

www.autocar.co.uk

Buy the issue and read it. This is why the M5 has a two year waiting list in the UK.

In which categories exactly?

Sounds like a lot of Jeremy Clarkson style bollocks and hyperbole.

^^agreed no scan or anything???? and i wouldnt count on just a magazine to tell me which one is better.

They are not even in the same category - so I wouldn't be making a choice between them anyway. :?

Definitely not straight line............nor conering ...............prolly not breaking too.

But M5 can beat in # passengers, driving range, comfort ...and have proper trunk.

wow thats a very intesting conclusion
i cant wait to read it

autocar always making a one sided opinion...thats why I usually don't easily belive what the Autocar said

LOL! I dont see it beating it in any category, the F430 acclerets like an F40, and it definetly corners better then the damn sedan......sounds like RC said, some JC bullshit.

You guys haven't even read it yet.

Apparently, the F430 couldn't shake the M5 when the roads got twisty, and the M5 destroyed the F430 in a straight line.

Again - in what catagories... :P

"couldn't shake the car behind" is a long way from "the car behind was out performing me".

Just because I can hustle and muslce my car through the bends up the back bumper and arse of an Enzo wouldn't mean I "beat" it - since by definition I couldn't get past... :)

Hahaha - yet more "BMW is king" tripe... ;)

Couldnt care less what they write, 'cause I frankly I couldnt give a shit when they get an M5 to "destroy" and F430 in straight line.

Not buying that magazine thats for sure :lol:

they must be giving the M5 a head start then. :?

From the figures I have seen the F430 does the 1/4 mile in about 11.8sec and the 0-130mph sprint in ~13sec. The Beemer on the otherhand takes about 12.8s and 15.6s for the same tests - so you tell me who destroys who in a straight line. :wink:

There something that everyone knows before reading the article....physics.

^ Hahahahaha. . . should be interesting to see what they wrote though.

I'm scanning the article right now, and I'll upload them in a minute... you guys decide.

I've said this before in another thread: 4 door saloon matching/beating a supercar? Now THAT is progress for you.

it is progress - but because a 4-door saloon now has similar performance to a supercar, not beating!
As my numbers posted above show the M5 is more than 2sec slower to 130mph - so it still has some work to do :wink:
I look forward to the article though - I wanna see these figures they come up with. :D

Here it is:

http://img241.echo.cx/img241/2460/ac1a3is.th.jpg
http://img241.echo.cx/img241/9788/ac25bw.th.jpg
http://img241.echo.cx/img241/9966/ac38ml.th.jpg
http://img241.echo.cx/img241/3920/ac40gg.th.jpg
http://img241.echo.cx/img241/5443/ac54px.th.jpg
http://img241.echo.cx/img241/7523/ac68wz.th.jpg
http://img241.echo.cx/img241/6499/ac73hk.th.jpg



Done.

I actually don't give a toss about the Ferrari comparison. A Ferrari will always be a Ferrari, no matter what. What I find most interesting is how close the M5 is to supercar performance... and how far up the ladder it has come.


AMG? Bah. Bespoke? New suspension? Supercharger? Please.

West Coast Customs can do what they do.

Damn i was beaten to it, just about to post the scan. In the intro, the reviewer mentions the fact this is an odd comparison, but explains why it exists.
Also highlights the difference between Ferrari's first "test" cars and their performance figures, compared to the ones coming out now.. The rumour regarding their cars being 'tuned' a little more to increase it's appeal still plays on my mind. Sure, it's hard to fathom a 4 door saloon spanking a Ferrari twice the price, however i think the article sums this sentiment up quite nicely.
I'll wait for the Ferrari assault boys to lay into me.. :P

AMG is much more than just slapping on a supercharger and suspension. They actually make reliable "tuned" cars, not ones that blow up after 10 000 km.

Well - just read the article and what a load of utter inacurate tripe.

All that happened is what is replayed EVERYDAYin the real world, the giy in the M5 got on the gas a little earlier than the guy in the similar powered F430 and was able keep his .5 sec lead over the ground which is NOTHING special.

How the hell do you think I in a 385hp Z06 can ay Hey I just pulled away from a Viper!!" - because I get on the gas first and only run to 150ish mph... so that by the time the Viper regains it's composure from my "jumping the start" the "race" is over.

And the other scenario where "I could't lose the bloke in the M5" is the same as what I and countless others experience in the woods on B roads with less than ideal psing opportunities.

I have had an M3 chase me and "stick to me arse" until the road opens up then it is bye-bye M3... or I stick to tail of one of my 550hp 427ci Z06 driving buddies through the twisties... but the moment the raod opnes a bit they off like a scalded cat.

That article was nothing more than a colourful anectodote aimed at selling themagazine - period.

Nothing to see here - please move along... :P heheh ;)

Thanks for the scans mate. This is a weird comparaison for sure but Autocar is used too :wink: And to be honest, they sometimes have odd results but I think the new M5 is a real storm and it can maybe compete with the F430 ...

I can see the flame guns coming out of their holsters... :lol:

Also, anybody notice how RC45 mentioned "tripe" twice in the same thread?

Looks like somebody's learned a new word. ;)

You mean like a turbocharged Volvo? That's not exactly a great comparison point. :D

Well - it is tripe.. :)

A lot better to say "tripe" than "bucnh of fucking hogswallop bullshit" like I was going to originally post... ;)

Lol. Well, I'll wait until everybody gets to read this (i.e. The "tripe" has hit the fan)

Right now, it's off to work.

Cheers everyone.

It's funny, because both of these cars share spots 1 and 2 on my wish list atm (check sig/avatar :wink: ), however i must admit that on paper there is actually not much in it.
RC, what areas do you think the BMW has it over the Ferrari? From 100 and beyond? Just performance wise, if you had to justify this article what would you say.
I realise the M5 is carrying more weight, but it is deceptively light (we had the E39 if that's anything to go by), and seems able to fling itself in places most cars don't consider.
This comparo really begs to see what the M6 vs F430 would be like :fadein:

I don't think the M5 has anything on the F-Car - unless the M5 gets on the gas earlier.

Which is really a "jump start" situation.

For once I agree 100% with what RC has to say on a topic! :P

I find their test numbers a bit strange - according to them there is only a 0.5sec gap in the 0-150mph sprint. According to other mags it is more like 2 seconds.... :?

Anyway I also really like both cars - but just think they serve a different purpose in life. :wink:

Dingo you totally right, they serve completely different purposes.. Page 1 covers why this became an interesting comparison though.
I'm also suggesting that this F car has inconsistent performance figures, and trying to figure out why.
As best i see it, the only consistent one is that the F430 would marginally beat the M5 at a traffic light drag race to 60. Beyond that, it's splitting hairs.

Please keep this n the QT - I do have a reputation to maintain you know.. ;)

Thanks Sir_GT for the scan......after reading it......I decided to name that article the most exaggerated comparison article ever. Ferrari nowhere in sight?? ummm...are u kidding me. The numers as dingo said, is definitely abit suspicious.

If by some miracle I had the money to choose which one to buy I'd buy the M5. I love it, 4 doors, big boot, massive performance what more do you want anyway?

Anyhting that doesn't carry Bangles signature disaster - I mean design.

After reading the article and looking at their stats sheet I was quite shocked. an F430 hitting 100mph in 9.4 secs? Autocar actually tested the base 360 Modena faster than that (8.8 I think), which is ridiculous. Another thing I considerably hate about car magazines is their lack of depth. OK an M5 may be able to outrun a F430 for a little while, but after a good 10mins of thrashing the M5's brakes simply would not be able to handle its weight, much like the brakes on an M6. This article was appaulingly shallow in almost every respect and showed - like you guys said how much they wanted to sell the magazine by talking up the BMW and hardly mentioning the F430. Me, personally? I would buy an M5 as the price range is alot easier on the eyes. But if I had the chance to afford either? C'mon thats a forgone conclusion.

yep - yet another strange number from these guys, its more like 7.9 secs for the F430 to hit 100mph. :wink:

See Dingo that is my point - why are there such inconsistent numbers regarding this car. Don't get me wrong its one of my favourites, but it is interesting that across the board, the numbers fluctuate. On one hand - 0-60 in 3.8 is Enzo territory, then you get a 4.4 test. Then a 4.1 versus the ford gt (check autocars sitee..). Drop us an email btw. :fadein:

email sent :wink:

Thanks for the scan. I agree with RC, but another thing I'm wondering is about the driving characteristics the cars have.

From my experience with the new turbos on the SRT, if I keep it below 3500 rpm, really 4000, I will lose to any car I see. I had trouble passing a bastard in a civic because of a 2000 rpm short-shift into third, I almost didn't pass him.

Then at only 13psi of boost I held up with an E39 M5. I think it's only the way they were driving it, assuming they didn't outright lie about the numbers. If they started the F430 below it's ideal 5000 RPM [from what they said] power point, then the BMW could well have been faster, keeping it's edge as if it had a head start like RC said. If the driver shifted at the wrong time (either one of them, seeing as both drove) then it would do the same thing.

It sounds to me like the car was misdriven.

I wonder how much BMW payed AC to publish this sort of bullshit (tripe ;) )!

Nice article, saw it in the shops but decieded not to buy it.

For the majority I trust what Autocar write, they are a great magazine and Sutcliffe is an excellent driver.

I think they must have had a poor F430 though regarding some of the stats. However they do praise the handling of the M5 against the F430 which has nothing to do with power whatsoever.

To me, it doesen't matter what the exact stats are; it does show that the M5 is an awesome machine though and if I had my way, these two would be a good start for my ultimate garage ;)

For your information there are blown up AMG engines as well.
MB is the one suffering from problems. if not engineroblems, AMG having several eletronical problems and I know several AMG owners having problems with their cars. So no, not only BMW have problems.

anyway, a M5 for daily-use and a F430 for trackmeeting and fun, great combination :D

You know, if both cars were actually comparable then I could take this seriously. But they're not...

And of course that a "BMW beats Ferrari" cover will sell more... :wink:


And I won't even speak about the numbers...


The M5 is an awesome machine. I really like it, but saying that it out-handles an F430 is comical. No matter how good it is, it's still a 1800 kilos saloon, so not a true sports car like the F430.

HAHAHAHAHA. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

You havent been around to many Mercs have you? :lol:

You should go read the Technical discussions forum on any mercedes site. You will have hours of good reads. :wink:

I forgot to mention there is a problem with 03 AMG E55s stalling.

Nuno, you are 100% correct. Again, what makes this comparison so unique and interesting, is that the fact that they are so many worlds apart.. Yet the results are suprisingly similar. I still struggle when RC gets going about how his beloved Vette's would spank a german creation, but truth is the neck and neck blasts around the mountains, track, road whatever the result is similar. I realise the BMW does not have the "soul" of the Ferrari, nor the interior quality (although that is sometimes questionable), or some of the attributes that come with its heritage, but at the end of the day a 4 door saloon with luggage will keep up with a sportscar 3 times the price.

Yeah, all you said is true. The M5 is a fantastic car that would be close to the F430/Gallardo, etc. on a straight line and deliver good fun around the bends, and still being able to transport 5 people and a good amount of luggage. That's the beauty of it.

BUT, what I don't like about this article is the sensacionalism on it. Really, you just need to look at it to tell it was made just to sell more magazines, nothing else. This thread is evidence enough; if the tittle was Ferrari beats BMW, I doubt we had 3 pages of discussion already...

Because I don't think it's necessary to quote the 'Ring times and all that shit to prove that the F430 is faster and handles better than the M5, you just need to look at the stats, and I hate when magazines pull stunts like these... If they had actually been objective and said that overall, the M5 is better (or more rational or whatever) because it had more points in total on their evaluation table, then that would be fine by me, but this...

I wonder how the hell they got an F430 to reach 60 in 4.4 sec.......They should have went for a full 4.6 if they are going to play that game lol

thanks for the scans, and after i've read it I know 1 thing that AC find M5 is better then F430. The gear, M5 have 7 gear and F430 only 6 nuf said... :wink:

Of course a M5 can be faster !!
Two skilled drivers on a track and the Ferrari is faster but in the real world its different. I think its easier to drive fast with a M5 than a F430. Afterall F430 is a proper sportcar, the M5 is not and it's meant to be driven everyday and for many hours. So I believe its easier to drive the M5 than a F430 thats why Im not surprised the M5 did so well on the roads in this test.

But in the end it depend on driver skills who is the fastest.