BetterMakeWay

I agree with you. That is what I meant when I first said that the M5 doesn't appear to handle well. The car seems to suffer from its weight in corners where it drifts off the racing line badly.

This appears clearly in the Bedford Autodrome due to the presence of two hairpins and fairly complicated curves. They state at the end of the article that although the M5 is a faster dragster, it just could not match the handling of the QP.

And as you said, maybe Ferrari has something to do with the QP's handling .
[/quote]
Bullls***t!

Give me that m5 now....I'l try asap to get the times from top gear....need to check alot more resources.

COME ON PPL...DON'T BELIVE IN AN INSTANT WHAT A MAG SAYS!!!!

I feel so offended what i hear that a qp is faster than the best saloon in the world. Not directly by u shebs...by the news...IT'S SIMPLY UNTRUE.
The logic defines that the m5 would smoke all day long on every track on every twist the qp.

I think i'm gonna be sick. The ferarri f 430 if i recall was fater than the m5 at top gear (1.22,9 vs 1.26,2) and u simply cannot compare the performance of the 430 with the qp. LOL It will start to keep up with the f430 and the evo fq 400.

Pls let's be serious...

Those journailst or the drivers either went on drugs when they tested the m5 or they went for smth else.... :thumbsdown:
[/quote]


Geez - chill man. You might really hurt yourself when the RS6 comes out.
[/quote]
Hmmmm...maybe...ceratinly won't hurt myself
I dunno if it would be that big of a difference. Maybe the same specs (4,7 0-100km/h). Look at what audi did with the new rs4. The old one was faster from 0-100 and as far as i tell i think it was faster (biturbo setup) on the 80-120 and so on....

And even so let's say the new rs6 would be in the M6 performance range. It is still quattro wich is a no no for the fun factor.

And this thing let's wait till the new rs6 comes out isn't that relevant u know!? Then i could say welll let's wait until the new m5 comes out and we could go on like this 4ever...

ipse dixit

Wait a minute folks. REREAD the EVO article.

They were testing an E60 Apina B5, which is not an E60 M5.

The B5 and M5 are very different mules. The B5 is essentially a 550i modded out with higher torque band/curve, and it is a slush-box. The M5, well, we all know about the M5 ...

BetterMakeWay

HAHAHAHA....yep it's true...the last (spec) page shows the 3 contenders.

Didn't even need to read it to know that the m5 is still THE m5 and no other saloon car can overtake it on a track or in general in fact.

But it is true, shame some of us didin't read the article properly and hasted on drawin' conclusions.I addmit that i didn't even threw a look at it...but if it was brought the m5 into the equation...u won't even need to.

Good catch...

EBMCS03

Really? WOW! I'm shocked!

BetterMakeWay

Riiiight... :

AC_S5

Riiiight... :
[/quote]

Maybe is in another magazine the qp beat the M5, but until I see it I will not believe it, test are test. Even if the qp is faster than the M5 I wouldn't want one in my Garage period!

ipse dixit

HAHAHAHA....yep it's true...the last (spec) page shows the 3 contenders.

Didn't even need to read it to know that the m5 is still THE m5 and no other saloon car can overtake it on a track or in general in fact.

But it is true, shame some of us didin't read the article properly and hasted on drawin' conclusions.I addmit that i didn't even threw a look at it...but if it was brought the m5 into the equation...u won't even need to.

Good catch...
[/quote]


By the way, before some smart-alek chimes in and says the EVO article "compares" a stock M5 time to the MazQP, one cannot really compare track times when the test mules are run on different days in inevitably different conditions. The QP time was literally a hair faster than the stock M5 time - but the 2 cars weren't run on the same day. Who knows when/who achieved the M5 time quoted by the EVO author.

To get a true comparo, have to run these cars on the track at the same time, on the same day, in the same conditions with the same driver. Otherwise it's like comparing the proverbial apple with that other proverbial orange.

Shebs

HAHAHAHA....yep it's true...the last (spec) page shows the 3 contenders.

Didn't even need to read it to know that the m5 is still THE m5 and no other saloon car can overtake it on a track or in general in fact.

But it is true, shame some of us didin't read the article properly and hasted on drawin' conclusions.I addmit that i didn't even threw a look at it...but if it was brought the m5 into the equation...u won't even need to.

Good catch...
[/quote]

What are you people talking about? Can't you see the track time I mentioned in the first post or what? Can't you read the article?

Just read the last few paragraphs in page 10, just below the graphs, and also the last paragraph of the article in page 11 and you will understand that they are comparing directly to the M5.

Evo does track time for every car and they put the record on the "The Knowledge" section of the magazine every month.

It is pretty simple: the M5 got 1:29.95, the QP got 1:28.35. What is so difficult to understand about that?

I can't believe that ipse dixit did not read the article to the end. What are you talking about ipse dixit?

And I can't believe that BetterMakeWay is saying it is a good catch. Where is the catch BetterMakeWay? He said something and you are saying "amen" without even trying to read the article?

Yes the test drive doesn't include the M5, but the M5's track time was obtained in the previous issue in another road test against the Gallardo. Same track, same track conditions.

Please read the article to the end (not just the title) before making wrong comments and before agreeing on those wrong comments.

Also the QP seems to have a better track time than the Boxster S, the new Carrera, so it is a very well handling car since both Porsche's have better Power to weight ratio (207 for the QP, 208 for the Boxster S, and 234 for Carrera 997). Maybe Maserati has come up with a better car than BMW. Why can't we just accept that?

Sorry for being that aggressive, but I was really offended by your comments.

wolverine

Sorry, but there is something out of whack here. Just because EVO has a great reputation doesn't mean you must accept everything they say as the absolute gospel. It looks like all the stars aligned to give the Maserati the best time it will ever see in any test relative to other cars.

Any track comparison that gives a better time for a 4,000 lb sedan with a lower power-to-weight ratio than the Porsche 997 is clearly an anomoly. Think about it, Maserati has managed to develop a car that is faster than a 997 around a track, and carries 700 extra pounds, and has a lower HP/weight ratio. It just doesn't compute.

Take any track in the world, and run the 997 against the Quattroporte with equal drivers. The 997 wins 99 times out of 100. Lighter car, better acceleration, better cornering, quicker transitioning, better braking.

The 997/Quattroporte comparison shows that the test of the Maserati on this track was NOT representative of it's performance against other cars. Could have been the driver, the temperature, the wind, or perhaps the track was the one in 100 that was absolutely perfectly tailored to the Maserati gearing. I'm not debating that the Maserati is a great handling car, but I'll bet you lunch you will never find another comparison that rates the Quattroporte as highly as this EVO test.

znod

There's a lot of test-osterone being exhibited on this thread. And, I always thought Billy Bob's, in Dallas, was the biggest fast saloon. ~0{;^)