M5 vs CTS-V

[adlep]

I am not a fan of US cars, but I have to say that the CTS is a winner, especially for the price.

 

[DivideBYZero]

Originally posted by: mariok2006

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero

Originally posted by: mariok2006

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero
I think the 'brand whore' comments are pretty childish. Who really thinks that someone shopping for cars at this performance level is going to say to themselves, 'Yeah, this car drives better, is built better, looks better, but I'm going for the one with the cooler badge.'. This sort of comment just screams of immaturity or like a class war clarion call, like 'real men buy cheap fast cars, pussies buy exotics'. #

Basically I don't buy it. I know plenty of people with fast cars and most of them buy them for the car, the soul of the car, not to flash a keyring or brag. In fact the guys with the fast cars will be the last one in a group to pipe up about them...

Define "soul".

Haha, are you serious?

Uh yes? If the car is good, it's good. Soul is just another word to justify that extra $30k.

OK, in your opinion.

 

[JDub02]

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero
I think the 'brand whore' comments are pretty childish. Who really thinks that someone shopping for cars at this performance level is going to say to themselves, 'Yeah, this car drives better, is built better, looks better, but I'm going for the one with the cooler badge.'. This sort of comment just screams of immaturity or like a class war clarion call, like 'real men buy cheap fast cars, pussies buy exotics'. #

Basically I don't buy it. I know plenty of people with fast cars and most of them buy them for the car, the soul of the car, not to flash a keyring or brag. In fact the guys with the fast cars will be the last one in a group to pipe up about them...

:roll:

When people purchase luxury items, they're not just paying for the item, they're paying for the image and lifestyle associated with that item. A BMW portrays a certain image, a Mercedes portrays a certain image, a Harley-Davidson portrays a certain image, etc.

On paper, it's impossible to justify items like that compared to equally featured but less expensive ones. BMWs are very nice cars, but to say that people buy them just on the merits is naive at best, idiotic at worst. People buy BMWs to stroke their own egos. That's not a criticism. It's just a reflection of human nature. We all like to show off and have other people envy us. Some people show it with cars, some show it with houses, some show it with clothes, etc.

For me, it's a Harley. A Harley does nothing better than the metric cruisers, other than waste money at a faster rate. But I look at Harleys much different than I look at metric bikes.

 

[Doggiedog]

Originally posted by: Koing

Originally posted by: TehMac

Originally posted by: punjabiplaya
Saw a CTS-V yesterday at a stoplight. That car looked mean. It wasn't in black though (silver). I've seen a couple of M5s and they do not have the presence the CTS-V has.

Disagree almost entirely. The CTS-V looks pretty ugly, while the M5 is a little less ugly, it still has presence. I want the next gen ones to come out already, I hear they'll be a V8 twin turbo, but some people are saying a twin turbo V10 :shocked:

It'll be rubbish to have a V8 TT in the next gen M5. You want a beasty V10. The M3 now has a V8 but yeah it's not TT.

It'll be interesting to see what it looks like!

Mate has a E39 M5, it's SAVAGE. Just puals and pulls. Very cool, but it does feel like a bit of a fatty on the roads though (duh!).

Koing

From what I've read, all of BMWs new M models will have smaller FI engines, not bigger engines with more cylinders.

 

[jtvang125]

The regular CTS looks pretty bland to me but I definitely dig the V version. Yes, I know the only difference is an added body kit but it really does make it look like a whole different car. And with that 30K you can turn it into a sleeping monster.

 

[TehMac]

Originally posted by: DVad3r
I saw a CTS-V and sat in it at the dealer, really nice car. I would get one if not for the fact that GM is having issues. And wasn't the GM high performance division cut? That means no more research and development for current V models? Not a safe buy to me atm, BMW it is for now

This is why GM is retarded for cutting off their high performance brand, it just confuses people.

Yes, the V section of CTS will remain as long as GM does.

 

[rh71]

Originally posted by: JDub02
People buy BMWs to stroke their own egos. That's not a criticism. It's just a reflection of human nature. We all like to show off and have other people envy us. Some people show it with cars, some show it with houses, some show it with clothes, etc.

X5 is best & smexiest in class baby... that's all I gotta say. I don't want it to be a Hyundai but it didn't have to be a BMW either - though their engineering has everything to do with it.

People who buy Lexus' could have the latest gen Hyundais be just as great on paper. So yes, there is some truth to what you're saying. But aside from collecting envious thoughts, there's no better feeling than to own something that's on top. Don't care what other people think... even those who say he wasted $XXXXX. If anyone is going to call anyone else a badge-whore, that car better be much inferior.

 

[DivideBYZero]

Originally posted by: JDub02

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero
I think the 'brand whore' comments are pretty childish. Who really thinks that someone shopping for cars at this performance level is going to say to themselves, 'Yeah, this car drives better, is built better, looks better, but I'm going for the one with the cooler badge.'. This sort of comment just screams of immaturity or like a class war clarion call, like 'real men buy cheap fast cars, pussies buy exotics'. #

Basically I don't buy it. I know plenty of people with fast cars and most of them buy them for the car, the soul of the car, not to flash a keyring or brag. In fact the guys with the fast cars will be the last one in a group to pipe up about them...

:roll:

When people purchase luxury items, they're not just paying for the item, they're paying for the image and lifestyle associated with that item. A BMW portrays a certain image, a Mercedes portrays a certain image, a Harley-Davidson portrays a certain image, etc.

On paper, it's impossible to justify items like that compared to equally featured but less expensive ones. BMWs are very nice cars, but to say that people buy them just on the merits is naive at best, idiotic at worst. People buy BMWs to stroke their own egos. That's not a criticism. It's just a reflection of human nature. We all like to show off and have other people envy us. Some people show it with cars, some show it with houses, some show it with clothes, etc.

For me, it's a Harley. A Harley does nothing better than the metric cruisers, other than waste money at a faster rate. But I look at Harleys much different than I look at metric bikes.

I clearly didn't say my opinion was the only reason people buy the car they do. Your reaction in itself shows YOU have a pre-conception of people who drive those type of cars. It's your prejudice though, as unless you stop every owner and inquire as to their reasoning it's complete conjecture. People don't always buy things to show off to others. I certainly don't. I'm not buying my car for your pleasure, it's for mine.

The ultimate irony of your post is you finish it off with an emotional reason why you would buy one brand over another when they perform the same or similar basic task, which was the point of my post.

" :roll: " <-- I can find that one too.

 

[Koing]

Originally posted by: Doggiedog

Originally posted by: Koing

Originally posted by: TehMac

Originally posted by: punjabiplaya
Saw a CTS-V yesterday at a stoplight. That car looked mean. It wasn't in black though (silver). I've seen a couple of M5s and they do not have the presence the CTS-V has.

Disagree almost entirely. The CTS-V looks pretty ugly, while the M5 is a little less ugly, it still has presence. I want the next gen ones to come out already, I hear they'll be a V8 twin turbo, but some people are saying a twin turbo V10 :shocked:

It'll be rubbish to have a V8 TT in the next gen M5. You want a beasty V10. The M3 now has a V8 but yeah it's not TT.

It'll be interesting to see what it looks like!

Mate has a E39 M5, it's SAVAGE. Just puals and pulls. Very cool, but it does feel like a bit of a fatty on the roads though (duh!).

Koing

From what I've read, all of BMWs new M models will have smaller FI engines, not bigger engines with more cylinders.

We shall see

I don't think the new M5 will be FI. I read on an m5 forum how they are 'all up in arms about it' LOL. They dont' want an X5 M or an X6 M

They were bitching how the proposed X6 M engine has an asthma attack at 5'600rpm or so where the torque drops off a lot

Koing

 

[rh71]

Originally posted by: Koing

Originally posted by: Doggiedog

Originally posted by: Koing

Originally posted by: TehMac

Originally posted by: punjabiplaya
Saw a CTS-V yesterday at a stoplight. That car looked mean. It wasn't in black though (silver). I've seen a couple of M5s and they do not have the presence the CTS-V has.

Disagree almost entirely. The CTS-V looks pretty ugly, while the M5 is a little less ugly, it still has presence. I want the next gen ones to come out already, I hear they'll be a V8 twin turbo, but some people are saying a twin turbo V10 :shocked:

It'll be rubbish to have a V8 TT in the next gen M5. You want a beasty V10. The M3 now has a V8 but yeah it's not TT.

It'll be interesting to see what it looks like!

Mate has a E39 M5, it's SAVAGE. Just puals and pulls. Very cool, but it does feel like a bit of a fatty on the roads though (duh!).

Koing

From what I've read, all of BMWs new M models will have smaller FI engines, not bigger engines with more cylinders.

We shall see

I don't think the new M5 will be FI. I read on an m5 forum how they are 'all up in arms about it' LOL. They dont' want an X5 M or an X6 M

They were bitching how the proposed X6 M engine has an asthma attack at 5'600rpm or so where the torque drops off a lot

Koing

http://www.xoutpost.com/attach...updated-post-51-tc.jpg

 

[JackBurton]

Originally posted by: JDub02
:roll:

When people purchase luxury items, they're not just paying for the item, they're paying for the image and lifestyle associated with that item. A BMW portrays a certain image, a Mercedes portrays a certain image, a Harley-Davidson portrays a certain image, etc.

On paper, it's impossible to justify items like that compared to equally featured but less expensive ones. BMWs are very nice cars, but to say that people buy them just on the merits is naive at best, idiotic at worst. People buy BMWs to stroke their own egos. That's not a criticism. It's just a reflection of human nature. We all like to show off and have other people envy us. Some people show it with cars, some show it with houses, some show it with clothes, etc.

For me, it's a Harley. A Harley does nothing better than the metric cruisers, other than waste money at a faster rate. But I look at Harleys much different than I look at metric bikes.

This is just complete BS. Well, SOME people do that, I can't argue with you there. But I LOVE the BMW M3 (I actually prefer it way over the M5). Not because it is a BMW, but because it is an AMAZING car, inside and out. But on the other hand, I also LOVE the Cadillac...XLR. I don't have the extra $40 K for it though.

 

[Fenixgoon]

Originally posted by: JackBurton

Originally posted by: JDub02
:roll:

When people purchase luxury items, they're not just paying for the item, they're paying for the image and lifestyle associated with that item. A BMW portrays a certain image, a Mercedes portrays a certain image, a Harley-Davidson portrays a certain image, etc.

On paper, it's impossible to justify items like that compared to equally featured but less expensive ones. BMWs are very nice cars, but to say that people buy them just on the merits is naive at best, idiotic at worst. People buy BMWs to stroke their own egos. That's not a criticism. It's just a reflection of human nature. We all like to show off and have other people envy us. Some people show it with cars, some show it with houses, some show it with clothes, etc.

For me, it's a Harley. A Harley does nothing better than the metric cruisers, other than waste money at a faster rate. But I look at Harleys much different than I look at metric bikes.

This is just complete BS. Well, SOME people do that, I can't argue with you there. But I LOVE the BMW M3 (I actually prefer it way over the M5). Not because it is a BMW, but because it is an AMAZING car, inside and out. But on the other hand, I also LOVE the Cadillac...XLR. I don't have the extra $40 K for it though.

i wish the XLR truly warranted its price tag. it could be SO much more than it is

 

[JackBurton]

Originally posted by: Fenixgoon


i wish the XLR truly warranted its price tag. it could be SO much more than it is

Yep. And they are discontinuing it. I guess $100K was too much to ask for.

 

[overst33r]

Originally posted by: JackBurton

Originally posted by: Fenixgoon


i wish the XLR truly warranted its price tag. it could be SO much more than it is

Yep. And they are discontinuing it. I guess $100K was too much to ask for.

For an airbrushed corvette, yeah I'd say it was.

 

[RichUK]

So the consensus in this thread is ?BMW FTW, always??

 

[Squisher]

Originally posted by: zerocool84
Am I the only one surprised LOUISSSSS hasn't posted here yet?

I scrolled through the thread first just looking for his post. Maybe, the bridge fell on him.

 

[lurk3r]

Originally posted by: Squisher

Originally posted by: zerocool84
Am I the only one surprised LOUISSSSS hasn't posted here yet?

I scrolled through the thread first just looking for his post. Maybe, the bridge fell on him.

He's harassing the girl shopping the sebring convertible. Maybe got put in the bad troll box.

 

[Arkaign]

Originally posted by: RichUK
So the consensus in this thread is ?BMW FTW, always??

No. The consensus is that some prefer one, some think both rock, and a few could care less.

 

[overst33r]

Originally posted by: Koing

Originally posted by: Doggiedog

Originally posted by: Koing

Originally posted by: TehMac

Originally posted by: punjabiplaya
Saw a CTS-V yesterday at a stoplight. That car looked mean. It wasn't in black though (silver). I've seen a couple of M5s and they do not have the presence the CTS-V has.

Disagree almost entirely. The CTS-V looks pretty ugly, while the M5 is a little less ugly, it still has presence. I want the next gen ones to come out already, I hear they'll be a V8 twin turbo, but some people are saying a twin turbo V10 :shocked:

It'll be rubbish to have a V8 TT in the next gen M5. You want a beasty V10. The M3 now has a V8 but yeah it's not TT.

It'll be interesting to see what it looks like!

Mate has a E39 M5, it's SAVAGE. Just puals and pulls. Very cool, but it does feel like a bit of a fatty on the roads though (duh!).

Koing

From what I've read, all of BMWs new M models will have smaller FI engines, not bigger engines with more cylinders.

We shall see

I don't think the new M5 will be FI. I read on an m5 forum how they are 'all up in arms about it' LOL. They dont' want an X5 M or an X6 M

They were bitching how the proposed X6 M engine has an asthma attack at 5'600rpm or so where the torque drops off a lot

Koing

Not true, both the M3 and M5 will be FI link

The M3 might even have a V6 for better weight distribution. As stated in the article, at this point it's pretty certain that the M5 will have a TTV8.

 

[bryanW1995]

Originally posted by: Marlin1975

Originally posted by: JDub02
If someone else is paying, M5 all the way. If I'm paying (hypothetically, since I wouldn't actually pay for either), then it's the CTS-V hands-down. You just can't make the argument for the M5 over the CTS-V unless you're a brand whore.

thats got to be at least 50% of BMW sales alone.


BMW

I would have said that 8 years ago, but after owning an 01 m5 for 7 years I have to say that it's a little bit more complicated than that. If you're buying a 70k car then you can probably afford the extra $30k without too much problem. BMW has a fantastic reputation for a reason. I almost bought a new 2007 z06 a few years ago and was not impressed AT ALL compared with the m5. If cadillac has really made the cts-v feel like an m5 then more power to them, but not many people who are considering these cars have owned caddy's in the past. In fact, I would say that most of their buyers are probably coming out of an e55 amg, older m5, m3, 550i sport, etc. The m5's handling (at least the older ones) is so sublime as to defy description, and I would be surprised if the new one isn't even better. I'm not talking about the 0-60 time or drag strip numbers, I just mean the way that the car feels better at 150 than it does at 60, the way you truly feel that you own the road, defies description. Also, interior features and amenities mean a LOT at that price point.

Having said all that, I'd probably buy a cts-v today over an m5 because there is such a huge PRICE disparity and that 30k actually DOES matter to me. A normal person who buys cars on a monthly payment might be more likely to just go for the bmw because you're only looking at around around a $450 payment jump ($1100 x 75 to $1550 x 75 at 5%).

 

[rdp6]

75 months of $1100 or more per month? That sounds like child support.

I love both of these cars, but can't fathom ever being able to afford either in terms of budget priorities. And with that, I'll take the M5, because each are essentially fantasy for me.

p.s. I checked out both the M3 (M5 was absent) and the S5 at the Cleveland Auto Show. M3 was nice inside (actually a letdown considering the sticker price), but nowhere near as nice as the S5 which was pretty freaking sweet/hella cool/wicked good.

 

[Kadarin]

Originally posted by: AdamK47

Originally posted by: Kadarin
Even if you come up with technical reasons as to why the CTS-V is a better car (if it is), you simply can't change the fact that it is hideous.

Uh oh! It seems like the new BMW driver here is placing his opinions as facts now. Say it isn't so!

I've had the M3 for one month shy of a year now.

And yes, like other people's religious faith, my opinion on this matter is so strong that to me it's fact.

 

[alkemyst]

Originally posted by: Bignate603
I honestly think the BMW is over engineered. Yes, the engine is impressive in the way its designed but its complex. The CTS-V shows that a simpler and cheaper engine can put out more power and torque. The simpler the design to get you to what you want is always the best from an engineering standpoint. They're cheaper to make, easier to maintain, and tend to be less likely to break.

over engineering in the end usually turns out much cheaper to maintain....

Ultimately though the CTS-V and M5 buyers are polar markets. At nearly 50% more in purchase price the added costs in mileage/etc aren't going to be issues with the right M5 buyer.

I don't like the current M5 that much...it's a bit to civilized looking. The latest 6 series got close but no cigar to it's 80's heritage. I was really close back in 1992 or so to lose a kidney to buy a M635CSi my friends dad was selling. I made the smarter choice and picked up a 1988 Mustang GT with T-tops and about every FMS part on it...it was owned by the head of Lincoln-Mercury's parts department down here. He finally found the boat he wanted and needed $7500 in cash that day. I drove by the car road side in the morning, bought it that night...I was outbid on paper, but so was that guy's boat seller who needed even more money that day. CASH IS KING!

I really liked that Mustang though, it was Dove Grey (almost white) on a red interior. I met my first wife in that ride and many close contenders. Had to always make sure I cleaned the windshield prior to any new dates Another chick's footprints FTMFL. Having your mom get upset seeing them even more so.

 

[alkemyst]

also if you have maintenance done by BMW prepare a rape. Learn to do it yourself if you are frugal. Like the Porsche things are over-engineered. You have to remove covers and covers covering the cover. All this protects things, but also makes labor VERY time consuming. I believe the 944 Turbo's clutch job is a 10 hour book rate. That's 2.5x most RWD cars. Add that to Porsche's double than customary labor rate, and insane price of parts at the dealership and you are fucked.

Learn to turn a wrench, pick a nice weekend, order from Pelican or the like and have fun playing with tools. Although complex, they are designed to come apart nice.

People bash Saturns, but the two I have owned (my 96 SC2 and my wife's 00 SL2) are very easy to maintain (my SC2 was a bit easier for many jobs). My 98 240SX is also very tuned to maintenance in mind. Very easy car to work on. Any car I have bought since my first two (1966 and 1988 Mustang GT's) I have focused on ease of access. I know I am going to be doing this sooner or later. A PITA of a car to work on gets neglected.

 

[Bignate603]

Originally posted by: alkemyst

Originally posted by: Bignate603
I honestly think the BMW is over engineered. Yes, the engine is impressive in the way its designed but its complex. The CTS-V shows that a simpler and cheaper engine can put out more power and torque. The simpler the design to get you to what you want is always the best from an engineering standpoint. They're cheaper to make, easier to maintain, and tend to be less likely to break.

over engineering in the end usually turns out much cheaper to maintain....

Not really, over building a component so its significantly stronger than it needs to be usually makes it cheaper. Over engineering something where you put 5 parts in where you only needed 1 would do makes it significantly more likely something will go wrong.