Originally Posted by ATS
So M cars are not supposed to be high performance cars then??? Besides, for the ridiculous amount of money BMW charges for the M6 it better perform like one, otherwise what's the point of going for the M6 instead of the 650?
I'm not expecting it to be a supercar, but it should be dramatically faster than an E92 M3. It isn't. But the obvious fact that it weighs almost as much as a Panamera puts it on a class of it own: the overweight, overpriced, poseur GT class. Aka: the new BMW.
Eh? I never said they shouldn't be performance cars but everybody has their own definition or interpretation of what a performance car should be or what it should beat. It's ///M division so we should expect a better performing car from the previous gens and the cars it competes against. Does the M5 and M6 do this? Yep..
In this thread, people are expecting the mighty M6 to beat an RS5, a Corvette and a Camaro - none of which are even in the same class of car as the M6.
It's a performance car, yes, but it out-performs or performs as good as cars in its class - AMG, S series Audi's etc.
The M3 (E92) outperformed everything Audi could throw at it until they came out with (finally) the RS5 in 2013. Mercedes (AMG) added a performance pack adding more hp to their C63 which got spanked on tracks time and time again before then - and in some cases- still does. So, apples to apples? Yep!
These times are for reference only and comparing the M6 to some of these cars would be like (if we were in a MERC forum), they compared the CL63 AMG to the M3, Camaro and Corvette on track times. It just doesn't make any sense