[WWM3]

It seems the G90 is no quicker than the F90 and maybe slightly slower in some instances. Here is the link:

https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a6...-test-results/

[ASAP]

it is slower but to be fair a 130 mph trap is very fast... not seeing how a G80 could outrun this if the numbers are accurate

[HoldenTudiks]

So from rolling, which is an everyday scenario, the G90 is faster than the F90 M5 CS. Can't wait for C/D to get a G90 with Michelins, it could be even faster.

https://www.caranddriver.com/bmw/m5-2023
2022 F90 M5 CS
Rolling Start, 5–60 mph: 3.8 sec
Top Gear, 30–50 mph: 2.5 sec
Top Gear, 50–70 mph: 2.5 sec

G90 M5
Rolling Start, 5–60 mph: 3.5 sec
Top Gear, 30–50 mph: 2.1 sec
Top Gear, 50–70 mph: 2.3 sec

[GJBFI]

For me these results are far from bad and show progress in several aspects. The 1/4 mile 10.9 sec at 130 mph are identical to the F90 competition. The G90 is faster from 0-150 mph and it is faster on all rolling start situations. In fact, as soon as the launch control is not used the G90 is faster than F90. The skidpad results are also similar. On the other hand, when braking we see that the weight has its effect, the distances are longer than before.

[iifymbro]

G90 hankooks vs F90 pirelli and on different surfaces, nice to see that the G90 was within 0.02g on the skidpad

faster trap speed on 1/4 and faster to 130 and 150, G90 just doesn't launch that well but it clearly has more on the road power

[HoldenTudiks]

Originally Posted by GJBFI

For me these results are far from bad and show progress in several aspects. The 1/4 mile 10.9 sec at 130 mph are identical to the F90 competition. The G90 is faster from 0-150 mph and it is faster on all rolling start situations. In fact, as soon as the launch control is not used the G90 is faster than F90. The skidpad results are also similar. On the other hand, when braking we see that the weight has its effect, the distances are longer than before.

The G90 is even faster than the M5 CS rolling from 5-70mph but gets over taken sometime before the quarter mile.

[M6-Coupe]

Originally Posted by HoldenTudiks

So from rolling, which is an everyday scenario, the G90 is faster than the F90 M5 CS. Can't wait for C/D to get a G90 with Michelins, it could be even faster.

https://www.caranddriver.com/bmw/m5-2023
2022 F90 M5 CS
Rolling Start, 5–60 mph: 3.8 sec
Top Gear, 30–50 mph: 2.5 sec
Top Gear, 50–70 mph: 2.5 sec

G90 M5
Rolling Start, 5–60 mph: 3.5 sec
Top Gear, 30–50 mph: 2.1 sec
Top Gear, 50–70 mph: 2.3 sec

Rolling is everyday scenario but not top gear!
I mean at rolling people usually select correct gear

[HoldenTudiks]

Originally Posted by M6-Coupe

Rolling is everyday scenario but not top gear!
I mean at rolling people usually select correct gear

It's faster from 5-60mph than an M5 CS while being 1000 pounds heavier and more comfortable. That's enough for daily driving.

[masd79]

Originally Posted by HoldenTudiks

It's faster from 5-60mph than an M5 CS while being 1000 pounds heavier and more comfortable. That's enough for daily driving.

Frame this comment! And we haven’t even seen how this car does modded yet.

[wesleyan92]

The positive spin in all the posts, by discarding 0-60 and going with the 5-60 timing, is hilarious and predictable.

We justify this is a better car than the the predecessors. We are total suckers.

[Cannondale900]

I don't think I've ever waded in to conversations on things like this.....I'd have to check my post history. I've been close to commenting many many many times but have always refrained.

I absolutely do not understand why 0-60 times or 5-60 times or 60-100 times even matter for a road car that is already at this level of capability. I also do not understand why each new version of a vehicle, already at this level of capability, that is released has to "beat" the previous one (or another manufacturer's version).

These vehicles are used 99% of the time for your very average drive to work, dining out, taking kids to activities, running to the hardware store, etc. There is absolutely zero return on additional performance (e.g. speed, acceleration, cornering, braking) at this point. Anyone pushing any of these cars to their max capabilities on the public roads is a completely irresponsible a-hole. I and my family do not want to be on the road with you. Anyone taking these cars to the track (road, oval, or strip) is using the wrong tool.

These are high performance daily driver vehicles that give those of use who are fortunate enough to own them a bigger smile during our daily commute and running kids, family, friends, and pets around.

The disappointment should come on account of removing tech and creature comforts (massage seats, soft close doors, comfort glass, etc) that have become relatively commonplace on higher end vehicles. The fact that the rear doorsill doesn't have a finishing plate, let alone an illuminated one, is frustrating. The fact they didn't extend the front door panel lighting to the rear doors is frustrating. The fact you can't open the glass hatch separate from the entire tailgate is frustrating. There are fit and finish shortcomings here. There is no excuse for that. The fact that these aren't even pay-for options is frustrating.

Looking forward to my G99 later this year either way.

[FloridaM5]

Originally Posted by wesleyan92

The positive spin in all the posts, by discarding 0-60 and going with the 5-60 timing, is hilarious and predictable.

We justify this is a better car than the the predecessors. We are total suckers.

Unpopular opinion coming...the g90 is definitely the better car. It's also been proven to be the slower than the f90, which I get. If I had both in my garage, there would be zero times I'd grab the keys to the f90.

However, if I still had the g80 along with the g90, there are certainly times I'd grab the g80 keys.

[HoldenTudiks]

Originally Posted by wesleyan92

The positive spin in all the posts, by discarding 0-60 and going with the 5-60 timing, is hilarious and predictable.

We justify this is a better car than the the predecessors. We are total suckers.

The target market for the M5 is a fast executive family car. With that in mind, this is better than the predecessor. EU regulations forced BMW to adapt. Audi and merc caved and brought in a v6 i4 hybrid. BMW kept the V8, but getting 1000 pounds heavier. The great thing is, you don't feel the 1000 pounds when cornering. It has better performance than the CS in daily scenarios, and being a very comfortable daily driver while being able to save on fuel. Without the EU regulations, no doubt BMW brings out a lighter and faster M5, but the world has changed. You either adapt or you become the c63 hybrid. So for the M5's target customer(high performance family sedan that can buy groceries and drive kids), this is the best we can get for the price point. If you wanted a track car, you could get a 911 for the price of a CS. 5-60 is the daily sweet spot. No one is first at the red light and launching all day, and in most cases, we aren't going above 80mph on the high way. Once people understand this, they will start to appreciate this beautiful monster that BMW has released.

[pmsteinm]

It isn't the M5 we want. It's the M5 we need. Blame regulations (and it doesn't matter if they make sense they still have to be followed). At least they kept the engine. And the cheaper interior is unfortunate but they had to offset the higher powertrain costs to keep the same price point.

[CarlosM4]

The G90 has a crazy top end. Results are pretty much on par with what I felt and posted previously here

[DocWeatherington]

Originally Posted by GJBFI

For me these results are far from bad and show progress in several aspects. The 1/4 mile 10.9 sec at 130 mph are identical to the F90 competition. The G90 is faster from 0-150 mph and it is faster on all rolling start situations. In fact, as soon as the launch control is not used the G90 is faster than F90. The skidpad results are also similar. On the other hand, when braking we see that the weight has its effect, the distances are longer than before.

On braking we need the Michelins for testing as i think things would improve. We have no idea of the condition of the tires at that stage of testing

If you look below you will see the XM which weighs over 6054lbs out brakes the m5 which is should not happen as the M5 is 800lbs less, more aggressively tuned with better brakes.

[DocWeatherington]

Originally Posted by wesleyan92

The positive spin in all the posts, by discarding 0-60 and going with the 5-60 timing, is hilarious and predictable.

We justify this is a better car than the the predecessors. We are total suckers.

I think the zero to 60 will improve if you look at the launch control rpm for what it is...it's pretty low.

Think about Porsche and how high they they dump.

I think something sandbagging is going on with bmw pending the launch of the new RS6 and E63.

[DocWeatherington]

I think the launch is by design on the base m5

[masd79]

Originally Posted by Cannondale900

I don't think I've ever waded in to conversations on things like this.....I'd have to check my post history. I've been close to commenting many many many times but have always refrained.

I absolutely do not understand why 0-60 times or 5-60 times or 60-100 times even matter for a road car that is already at this level of capability. I also do not understand why each new version of a vehicle, already at this level of capability, that is released has to "beat" the previous one (or another manufacturer's version).

These vehicles are used 99% of the time for your very average drive to work, dining out, taking kids to activities, running to the hardware store, etc. There is absolutely zero return on additional performance (e.g. speed, acceleration, cornering, braking) at this point. Anyone pushing any of these cars to their max capabilities on the public roads is a completely irresponsible a-hole. I and my family do not want to be on the road with you. Anyone taking these cars to the track (road, oval, or strip) is using the wrong tool.

These are high performance daily driver vehicles that give those of use who are fortunate enough to own them a bigger smile during our daily commute and running kids, family, friends, and pets around.

The disappointment should come on account of removing tech and creature comforts (massage seats, soft close doors, comfort glass, etc) that have become relatively commonplace on higher end vehicles. The fact that the rear doorsill doesn't have a finishing plate, let alone an illuminated one, is frustrating. The fact they didn't extend the [...]

Originally Posted by DocWeatherington

On braking we need the Michelins for testing as i think things would improve. We have no idea of the condition of the tires at that stage of testing

If you look below you will see the XM which weighs over 6054lbs out brakes the m5 which is should not happen as the M5 is 800lbs less, more aggressively tuned with better brakes.

My road experience on road braking is different, I think it brakes amazingly fast and it’s felt everytime you come to a normal or a aggressive stop. Engaging abs to measure how good it is just as flawed as 0-60 measures of cars these days as there are so many variables. 🤷‍♂️

[thaalrasha]

Maintaining similar performance levels despite the huge added handicap is still a win in my book. It has other daily usability and efficiency sides to make up for some of that if used as a daily vs pure sports car. M cars were always sports car you could daily and i think it's still the case with that one.

[DocWeatherington]

Originally Posted by masd79

My road experience on road braking is different, I think it brakes amazingly fast and it’s felt everytime you come to a normal or a aggressive stop. Engaging abs to measure how good it is just as flawed as 0-60 measures of cars these days as there are so many variables. 🤷‍♂️

Braking has alot to do with tires and the availability of grip with the service...

The Hankooks aren't the best tire and I think the Michelins are the preferred tire.

I think we need for tests with different tire and carbon vs steel to figure out how much the weight effects braking numbers vs feel. The XM stops similar to a m2 with way more weight.

[GJBFI]

Interesting that C&D achieved these results by setting the stability control system to "MDM" when all the other tests I had seen before used "DSC off". Maybe it reduces the wheelhop. To be validated.