[Erebor]

Originally Posted by brokeboi

What new group? The ones worried about the environment? I highly doubt it. The car is also sold with the same high pricetag as earlier M5s, so the lunch lady at junior high can't afford it. If this was a car that costs less than 50k brand new, then I would agree with you

Yeah, difficult to imagine, but if i know one thing, than that there are always ppl with enough money around.
Here in Switzerland, a M5 is just a quick commuter Limo. I'm certain that, within a year, there will be many new M5 driving around here.

[Remigijus]

Originally Posted by Sedan_Clan

Your reading comprehension needs work. You just bolstered my point.

Oh, thanks for clarifying! It seems we both agree that using common parts across models can be a smart way to streamline production.

There is a trade-off between cost savings and smooth design. In this case, the decision to share doors again with the base model creates a sharper transition on the M5 that some enthusiasts, myself included, find a bit jarring.

Domagoj Dukec's comments about evaluating investment per product just shows how BMW weighs factors like cost alongside customer perception. For the M5, the investment in a new door wasn't deemed necessary based on customer feedback from the G80 with the shared doors seeming positive overall. And having that sharp kink.

Design is subjective, and the reasons can be very different, as this time saving production costs is the key factor for this decision. In the end, both parties are winning.

[Remigijus]

Originally Posted by junx

Why did bmw decide to get rid of fender vents and badges? Those were iconic and an easy way to identify it from non-M cars. Looks naked without it imho

Just yesterday Head of design answered that they wanted to get rid of elements that had no function, just for styling purposes.

Also, they're focusing on a cleaner design language. And he charging port flap is there this time. In that way, they transferred the M logo to the Hofmeister kink.

[NotSoJDMGC4]

Disgustingly overweight.

The whole point of the M line of cars is to be performance oriented.

All they need to do is remove material that brings up its safety score. People who buy M cars don't give a fack about Euro NCAP, IIHS or NHTSA scores. Performance over safety.

This is ridiculous.

[mirob]

Originally Posted by bavarianboar

One who doesn’t like to take a boat to the race track.

I think a substantial portion of the M-car owners track their cars or care about BOTH 0-100mph times and cornering/handling. That ain’t coming from this new boat of an M5.

I can speak for myself, I have been financial planning to ordering an M5 competition some day, I have had 2 5ers, and driven M3 and M5 multiple times. This generation is crossed from my list and I will pony up to a Panamera or an RS6. I don’t need to test drive the G90.

Your question is rhetorical but I think you know what I meant, what’s a real M car or the target buyers. Cheers!

I just hope that the irony of your statements isn't lost on you.

[Iben]

I`m actually considering changing my Porsche Taycan Turbo S for a new M5 (G90).

95% of my normal daily drives is bellow 40 km, so I can use the M5 on electrical power and play around with the last 5%.

[bavarianboar]

Originally Posted by mirob

I just hope that the irony of your statements isn't lost on you.

Lol good one. Actually it isn’t, there is none. RS6 is significantly lighter than the G90. So is the V8 hybrid Panamera, only slightly though. They are just smaller boats (with arguably better design)?

The crowd would like one GT3 RS each please as a third car for track, if money grows in the backyard.

[mirob]

Originally Posted by bavarianboar

Lol good one. Actually it isn’t, there is none. RS6 is significantly lighter than the G90, just a smaller boat?

Right. The M3 is significantly lighter than both. Matter of fact - both, the RS6 and the Panny, are closer to the G90 than the G80 in weight.

Not really following your logic here.

[bavarianboar]

Originally Posted by mirob

Right. The M3 is significantly lighter than both. Matter of fact - both, the RS6 and the Panny, are closer to the G90 than the G80 in weight.

Not really following your logic here.

Well, I’ll try since we are really pressing on it.

I have budget, space and means to maintain one car. M3 is too small for daily, I’d like a great handling larger 4 door that I can occasionally track with a new set of tires. I’ll look beyond the G90.

M5 competition was my dream car for 12 years or so, but this weight addition piled on top of the radical design choices BMw made with the new 5er leave a lot to be desired. I have had F10 and G30 (current), had 2 3er (E90, F30) before that, so believe me I m not talking out of my behind regarding my use case and preference. I’d think some are in similar situation where they don’t have a dedicated track car.

Is that a good logical explanation with a modicum of my personal take?

Apologies in advance, though it sounds as if you are saying there is no market for an M5, all who want a fast good handling BMW should get an M3. M5 isn’t a new introduction though, the mammoth weight addition is, when other automotive makers are doing quite a bit better

[mirob]

Originally Posted by bavarianboar

Well, I’ll try since we are really pressing on it.

I have budget, space and means to maintain one car. M3 is too small for daily, I’d like a great handling larger 4 door that I can occasionally track with a new set of tires. I’ll look beyond the G90.

M5 competition was my dream car for 12 years or so, but this weight addition piled on top of the radical design choices BMw made with the new 5er leave a lot to be desired. I have had F10 and G30 (current), had 2 3er (E90, F30) before that, so believe me I m not talking out of my behind regarding my use case and preference. I’d think some are in similar situation where they don’t have a dedicated track car.

Is that a good logical explanation with a modicum of my personal take?

Apologies in advance, though it sounds as if you are saying there is no market for an M5, all who want a fast good handling BMW should get an M3. M5 isn’t a new introduction though, the mammoth weight addition is, when other automotive makers are doing quite a bit better

I understand. I missed the part where you said that the M3 is too small for you. It makes sense now for sure.

I do agree that the G90 may not be optimal for you given your use case.

[bavarianboar]

Originally Posted by mirob

I understand. I missed the part where you said that the M3 is too small for you. It makes sense now for sure.

I do agree that the G90 may not be optimal for you given your use case.

Yeah thanks for catching my drift

My use case was not really the focus initially of my post, since you asked, I felt compelled to give ‘an’ example!

I was primarily trying to say the G90 weight addition is not fitting for M5 evolution, hybrid tech or not. People lately love to justify any direction BMW takes and maybe there aren’t many purist M enthusiasts left in this word that BmW or for that matter this forum cares about. What’s the point of M5 now, I don’t get it tbh.

Well respected BMW Blog owner clearly says he feels the weight of the car on his test drive, M5 has lost somewhat of its DNA, compares to F90 and M4. And of course they can’t bash the car because it hurts the brand and their relationship with BMW as a journalist.

Sale numbers will probably tell. This isn’t always the case with mass selling cars like with the beaver grilles or polarizing exterior design of the new 5er (which is incoherent), because the spread of what customers care about is pretty wide.

Anyhow, not here to argue, I have made my point beyond my personal preference or use case.

Interesting discussion

[mirob]

Originally Posted by bavarianboar

Yeah thanks for catching my drift

My use case was not really the focus initially of my post, since you asked, I felt compelled to give ‘an’ example!

I was primarily trying to say the G90 weight addition is not fitting for M5 evolution, hybrid tech or not. People lately love to justify any direction BMW takes and maybe there aren’t many purist M enthusiasts left in this word that BmW or for that matter this forum cares about. What’s the point of M5 now, I don’t get it tbh.

Well respected BMW Blog owner clearly says he feels the weight of the car on his test drive, M5 has lost somewhat of its DNA, compares to F90 and M4. And of course they can’t bash the car because it hurts the brand and their relationship with BMW as a journalist.

Sale numbers will probably tell. This isn’t always the case with mass selling cars like with the beaver grilles or polarizing exterior design of the new 5er (which is incoherent), because the spread of what customers care about is pretty wide.

Anyhow, not here to argue, I have made my point beyond my personal preference or use case.

Interesting discussion

I think that BMW, as a manufacturer, is stuck between a rock and a hard place (regulations) and they're trying to make the best out of a shit situation. I'm not happy about the drastic weight gain but I'm sure they aren't either. This probably goes for all the manufacturers. I can't imagine MB was happy about stuffing the 4-pot into the C63. It's a sign of the times.

I'm glad we can have a civilized conversation but "beaver grilles" are fighting words.

[Sedan_Clan]

I think it’s really interesting how short people’s memories are. BMW enthusiasts have been complaining about weight ever since the E46 and E39, and honestly…..long before that. Even still, with every [heavier] iteration, the cars have been solid performers.

[Savoy2001]

Originally Posted by Sedan_Clan

I think it’s really interesting how short people’s memories are. BMW enthusiasts have been complaining about weight ever since the E46 and E39, and honestly…..long before that. Even still, with every [heavier] iteration, the cars have been solid performers.

When in the history of weight gain in each generation has there been a 1000 lb gain from one Gen to the next? What you’re saying has no bearing to this generation and what they did this time.

[Savoy2001]

Originally Posted by mirob

I think that BMW, as a manufacturer, is stuck between a rock and a hard place (regulations) and they're trying to make the best out of a shit situation. I'm not happy about the drastic weight gain but I'm sure they aren't either. This probably goes for all the manufacturers. I can't imagine MB was happy about stuffing the 4-pot into the C63. It's a sign of the times.

I'm glad we can have a civilized conversation but "beaver grilles" are fighting words.

They didn’t have to give it a40 mile ev range. Save that crap for non M cars. Nothing about buying an M suggests we need any 40 mile range or more. Do it like gm did it with the eray. That’s well done and what they should have done is they were so stuck on the idea of adding ev junk to this car. No need to destroy the very essence of what made these cars special.

My x5mc weighs this much and is an suv. Let me guess my 5400 lbs high performance suv in the next few years will now weight 6400lbs? Everyone Is ok with that too? Come on. Stop the nonsense. Where does this end? They going to start giving free tires and brake pads with the 4 year maintenance? Cause these heavy pigs will burn though brakes and tires even worse. Oh I guess using up tires and brakes is ok for the environment? Lol what a joke.

[mirob]

Originally Posted by Savoy2001

They didn’t have to give it a40 mile ev range. Save that crap for non M cars. Nothing about buying an M suggests we need any 40 mile range or more. Do it like gm did it with the eray. That’s well done and what they should have done is they were so stuck on the idea of adding ev junk to this car. No need to destroy the very essence of what made these cars special.

My x5mc weighs this much and is an suv. Let me guess my 5400 lbs high performance suv in the next few years will now weight 6400lbs? Everyone Is ok with that too? Come on. Stop the nonsense. Where does this end? They going to start giving free tires and brake pads with the 4 year maintenance? Cause these heavy pigs will burn though brakes and tires even worse. Oh I guess using up tires and brakes is ok for the environment? Lol what a joke.

I understand your frustration. I don't like the idea of the weight gain either but I'm not an M5 customer so I'm not that upset about it. I'll be plenty mad in 2028 when the M3 is due for an upgrade.

[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by Savoy2001

When in the history of weight gain in each generation has there been a 1000 lb gain from one Gen to the next? What you’re saying has no bearing to this generation and what they did this time.

This is a hybrid with a heavy battery system, and a first for the ///M5, so there isn’t precedent for this particular type of evolution. The hybrid S63 weighs more than the G90 (…and it gained a similar amount of weight once it became a hybrid), so weight for this level of hybrid luxury sled is in line with other similar offerings. It remains to be seen how dynamic the G90 actually is when it comes to road going prowess. A little intellectual integrity will take you a long way.

[M5 London]

Originally Posted by Savoy2001

Thing is this is more than just a styling issue. Oh look at that huge grill. Or the buck teeth. Etc etc. This is a radical departure from what any m5 has ever been. The have radically changed the car all around and generally speaking not for the better is the consensus. Go read Reddit also you’ll see. Since when does a car like this come out with less performance than its predecessor ever? In every metric? Answer is never. Plus understand something. These cars aren’t camrys. This is a total extra. An extravagance if you will. And as for me I’d I don’t love it and it doesn’t tickle my fancy I won’t spend that kind of money on it. Period the end. I suspect alot of people feel as I do. I’m sure it will still sell ok. But the real M fans won’t be diving head first into this imo. This won’t be as bad as the xm but I don’t think it will sell like f90 did imo.

Less performance than it's predecessor in every metric?

Please share your data, or stop chatting tripe.

[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by M5 London

Less performance than it's predecessor in every metric?

Please share your data, or stop chatting tripe.

It’s a bunch of nonsense.

[JMD]

Originally Posted by BimmerBahn

Because most people pull into their garage nose first…. The charge port is only AC, up to 7.2KW (9.6KW in November)…. However, you can charge off 120V, too…. It’s a 18kWh pack, too.. don’t need a big EVSE or DCFC for that.

Sir, respectfully! I'm aware of that. I mean,...why would BMW release a PHEV that can't be charged at home on regular 115V/120V?

For the record,...I currently have a '21 45e,...and I'm a bit caught up on PHEV charging at home, etc.

[tsbrown]

Originally Posted by Remigijus

The real reason is the saving costs by using base model doors. And they of course tell us that this is intended to. I don't like this part, just looks out of place, no smooth transition.

Look how beautiful sculpted RS6 and RS7 are. And the body panels they are sharing are only the front doors and trunk.

This dates back several generations of M3. My E90 M3 used standard 3er doors but a different rear quarter panel with wider hips. The transition was less pronounced than the G8x or G90 but it was there. Aren’t we noticing it on the G90 because it’s the first generation of M5 with wider rear quarter panels?

[Remigijus]

Originally Posted by tsbrown

This dates back several generations of M3. My E90 M3 used standard 3er doors but a different rear quarter panel with wider hips. The transition was less pronounced than the G8x or G90 but it was there. Aren’t we noticing it on the G90 because it’s the first generation of M5 with wider rear quarter panels?

Yes, firsf M5 with wider panels. And with G80 anyone started to notice also, with much wider arches than previous models.