BimmerGuyFL

well I only posted this information for those that wanted to know offical magazine numbers is all I wanted to do. So it means exactly what it says.

norham

What I meant was IMO if your going to buy any of these cars these figures don't mean anything you always buy what you like irrelevant of performance figures how many times are we going to be faced with these three cars on the same piece of tarmac at the same time, designed to sell magazines I'm afraid. and it has succeeded

BetterMakeWay

What I meant was IMO if your going to buy any of these cars these figures don't mean anything you always buy what you like irrelevant of performance figures how many times are we going to be faced with these three cars on the same piece of tarmac at the same time, designed to sell magazines I'm afraid. and it has succeeded
[/quote]
Not necesarely all 3 of them. If i had an M5 i would for sure get the chance to meet a cls55 or e55 and go head to head. If not i would make that chance.
Of course it's not going to be the MAIN reason when it comes to buying decision. ALOT of other factors come in the equation. But of course at this level of performance most of the people are interested in the specs/performance. Hell you don't buy an m5 for such a luxury/refined cruiser or as the best town car. Specs from different magazines help to make put a general ideea about the capabilities of those cars. Do remember that not all of us get to test drive an amg or m5 or whatever. I mean really properly test drive it. Specs like gs or braking distance/time, acceleration capabilities create a general image about the car's potential, either if it is a straight line smasher or a super handling car....I hope i made myself clear.

swajames

Not necesarely all 3 of them. If i had an M5 i would for sure get the chance to meet a cls55 or e55 and go head to head. If not i would make that chance.
Of course it's not going to be the MAIN reason when it comes to buying decision. ALOT of other factors come in the equation. But of course at this level of performance most of the people are interested in the specs/performance. Hell you don't buy an m5 for such a luxury/refined cruiser or as the best town car. Specs from different magazines help to make put a general ideea about the capabilities of those cars. Do remember that not all of us get to test drive an amg or m5 or whatever. I mean really properly test drive it. Specs like gs or braking distance/time, acceleration capabilities create a general image about the car's potential, either if it is a straight line smasher or a super handling car....I hope i made myself clear. [/quote]

I agree, I think the decision on what to get is of course a personal thing and based on the criteria that are important to you, but when you've dropped 90K+ on your car it is doesn't hurt to have some external "support" for your decision in the press coverage and magazine reviews etc .

Simple1

For all those who want to read the 7 page article here it is
M5_vs._STS_V_vs._CLS55.pdf

znod

Who has seen this magazine? Oh, I see now; it is online. Personally, I appreciate you posting the stats. I like stats. I think they are informative, at least in a relative sense, if consistent across mag tests.

znod

I finally got my mag and read the article. I think the M5 won in a run-a-way, but still the other cars are very nice depending on what one is interested in. No mention of the LC--whether used, limited, or whatever. I noted that the CLS55 was faster in the rolling acceleration tests. The car would likely make a few M5 owners feel a little bad in some more or less low-speed street contests. Both cars were criticized for their ride. The M5 came out way ahead on "feel." Interestingly, the CLS55 won the skidpad contest. The testers hated the SMG in auto mode noting that they simply could not stand to drive the car in this mode because, paraphrasing, its shifts wrenched their necks or had way too much lag--depending on how set. They thought thumbs-up to the manual that will be introduced soon--as do I. Also, interesting, the testers rated the CLS55 engine the highest--as would I (although not necessarily the most interesting or technologically advanced perhaps). In this regard, the CLS55 is in the ballpark with the M5 in acceleration despite 30 less HP and several hundred more pounds. Of course, the CLS55 also has significantly more maximum torque.

Jeffs

Interesting discussion going on here.
Well....most testers hate the SMG not because its lousy but because they are not used to it. When I first drove my friend's SMG on his E46 M3 I did not like it for the same reasons. I tried the auto mode too and its not as bad as written. Maybe its an exaggeration?? However, after a few tries where I perfected my timing to lift the foot off the throttle slightly when upshifting, I began to love the SMG. It tkaes time to practice driving smoothly but other than that it is a great transmission. I hope SMG owners out there share the same feelings as me.

When I first saw the title, I immediately concluded that I would get the M5 immediately. However, I might get the CLS instead. Althought the M5 is an awesome car, lack of a supercharger means that you cannot modify it easily. I would get the CLS 55 and get a chip from Renntech or Brabus and I am sure it can beat the M5. Only downside is the handling which can never compare to the M car but hey, CLS handles much better than E class and I have driven both cars so I know...

Just my 2 cents here...

Peter530i

Cadillac near BMW ?????
uhmmm that is totaly paid for advertisement otherwise in a real performance test there is no way for the Caddy to be a competitor to a BMW

maybe this was a test based on old granma's driving the car to a grocery store

znod

I forgot to mention that the reviewers mention not liking the iDrive, but admitting that apparently BMW drivers eventually get used to it in varying degrees. And, I agree with your thoughts on the CLS. I might prefer one to the M5, but am not completely sure. I might like the manual M5 just fine. And, mileage on the M5 is an issue.