Motor Trend Video: 2014 M5 Competition vs 2014 E63 AMG S

[Luminor513]

Both cars are great offerings from one of the biggest & best German rivalries. Each car has its strengths and weaknesses. To each their own, I enjoyed this video although Lieberman's voice annoys me.

[URBAN LEGEND]

Originally Posted by Luminor513

Both cars are great offerings from one of the biggest & best German rivalries. Each car has its strengths and weaknesses. To each their own, I enjoyed this video although Lieberman's voice annoys me.

Leiberman is a clown in real life. Really though. I read it on the net. It's true!

[Pauldramos]

they seemed to both expect the AMG to do better and that is what they projected. All spin...

[RPiM5]

Originally Posted by elitex

Oh snap!

Looks like E63 needs a diet. 140lbs heavier. Lol!

That was probably a non-CP M5 too! Haha!

[-EndOfAnEra-]

I don't understand how anyone can judge the fun-to-drive factor of a car like an M5 without going for the 6-speed. An automatic AWD like in the AMG will likely be faster, technology insures that. What splits the M5 from the AMG I would hope would be that it is more fun to drive.

And yes, it is now way too heavy. E39 M5 was the perfect one.

[Poppin Fresh]

"We're now in the AMGeeezuss this thing is fast!" Best line in the video.

[btbossman]

I would never take an e63 over an m5, but kinda wish the m5 could be AWD

[N & M]

I hate to say it but AMG and BMW M have swapped mantras. The BMW was always about steering control and grip at the limit and actual real life speed and the AMG was the tail wagging comfort oriented luxury barge.

It looks like they have switched roles. Yes, the AMG cheats with AWD and yes it takes the easy and obvious route to getting the numbers but it has come along way in the handling department and that is a fact.

I love BMW, but I fear that they have become obsessed with chasing numbers and pleasing customers to the point of losing their edge and credibility.

Before any zealots come attacking, please note that I am on my 6th M car.

[MSportDC]

Originally Posted by N & M

I hate to say it but AMG and BMW M have swapped mantras. The BMW was always about steering control and grip at the limit and actual real life speed and the AMG was the tail wagging comfort oriented luxury barge.

It looks like they have switched roles. Yes, the AMG cheats with AWD and yes it takes the easy and obvious route to getting the numbers but it has come along way in the handling department and that is a fact.

I love BMW, but I fear that they have become obsessed with chasing numbers and pleasing customers to the point of losing their edge and credibility.

Before any zealots come attacking, please note that I am on my 6th M car.

Keen insight. I concur.

[Vic55]

yawwwwwwn another one of these and yes another post about another one of these:

I remember when the W210 E55 went up against the E39 M5- had them both and both had disadvantages and advantages. But the forum wars were incorrigible with grown ass men arguing (I assume grown)

Then came the venerable M113K E55 in late 2002 with a tq rating over 500 lb/ft and it was the King-and the 2006 E60 came out much later and raised the wars again. But the forum wars were similar to the W210 vs E39 dialogues. I had an E55k but not an E60- I did have an E63 M6 though so I understood the engine and its weakness and strenghths. Again both cars catered to two different buyers and both had advantages.

Then AMG went to N/A for a bit and that was ......... boring to me as I had a W212 E63 and it was rather slow but sounded great. M didnt bring anything new during that time frame.

Now we have the two going at it again- both with turbo variants and I have had 3 versions of this M157 AMG engine and two versions of the S63tu. Again advantages and disadvantages. But the same internet forum arguments.

Ive had 6 M's and 8 AMG's both great and both have me wanting the other. I fucking love cars and love that these battles keep coming- it makes each side want to one up each other and we (the end user) end up winning. I sure have. Ive never regretted one M car Ive bought and the same goes for AMG. I think AMG has upped their lack of driveability and feel to draw closer to M and M has finally added tq to their specs. In this video I like the M for looks, rolling speed power, and tranny and the AMG for sound and launch capabilities. I think the M feels better in handling vs the AMG (i have had 2 W212's) and the rear airmatic drives me nuts. Again these characteristics cater very subjectively to the owner.

Im glad we have the ability to buy both or choose between them.

[amdmaxx]

Too many BMW fanboys here. I enjoyed the review. Most publications rate e63 over m5. Awd helps

[Eddien123]

Anyone notice that if the BMW had to spin it's front wheels, that means it had to basically turn a huge dyno so thats further power loss!

[BMWRL]

I'd still take the M5 over the Merc. Any day baby...

[M54ccibo]

Interesting. I'd love to track the E63 just to see what it is capable of doing. Canyon roads are OK, but to get a real sense of what the car is capable of, i.e., 8/10 or higher it needs to be on a track, back to back.

Until then: M differential + track = WIN. I'll stand by that

[ORIGIN M.]

Bring the M5 xDrive and then we'll see who's complaining...

[turbo8765]

Originally Posted by Tom C

You are failing to grasp what I am saying about AWD. Yes if the same car has AWD and the same engine, transmission, etc, it should put down less power at the wheels. In this instance we are talking about the net result of the E63 S putting down 540+awhp. So this is post parasitic loss. If we were talking about crank hp, it would be a different story.

The AWD DOES help improve trap speeds as well as ETs. The more efficient you are during the quarter mile run, especially early on, the more effective distance you are allowing yourself to build speed. A good example is the Nissan GT-R running with and without launch control. The LC runs (in every test I have seen) always had a higher trap speed than the without LC runs. The LC allows the car to be more effificient off the line and allows more of the "track" to put down the power and hence the higher trap speed. The reason you see lower trap speeds for AWD cars when compared to the same exact model is because of the additional weight of the AWD system and the parasitic loss. If the AWD car weighs the same and has the same exact wheel hp and transmission, the AWD will trap higher.

Having had a GT-R and taken it to a drag strip and collecting vbox data for it, I saw the advantages of having both AWD and the DCT.

Your comment about "finicky dynos" shows your ignorance about dynoing the M5. It is widely known that the M5 has some issues on the dyno with the ECU pulling timing because of improper air speed, front wheels not moving at the same speed as rears and various other "finicky" things that prevent "good" #'s. that isn't to say that dyno operators can't get a good dyno #, but they have to be aware of these idosyncracies and address them.

I'm very familiar with dyno'ing BMWs and the associated issues. I'm not new to this game by any stretch. I remember when the e46 M3 was labelled as un-dynoable. I'm sure you remember as well. Bear in mind the issues related to dyno'ing BMWs are related to getting a successful run. The cars limit revs and/or power when there is a significant delta between front and rear wheel speeds. Once you've overcome that hurdle and completed a successful run, they're the same as any other high output car.

Do they cut timing due to higher temps given reduced airflow relative to a moving vehicle? Of course they do, as you know all cars do so. As you know there is a general trend whereby cars with increasing power, compression, timing, and/or boost are more susceptible to this effect. Obviously this is also a function of cooling capacity as well. The E and M in this test face exactly the same challenge with respect to reduced airflow.

Your point is that putting the power down more effectively at beginning of a run = faster ET AND higher trap. And that all else being equal the AWD car puts the power down more effectively therefore traps higher... all else being equal.

You've clearly spent a lot of time at the dragstrip right? You clearly have a vast and varied exposure to all things related to drag racing. Then I'm sure you've seen a powerful RWD car switch from streets to slicks and ET improves but trap speeds fall. Given the amount of exposure you've had and your knowledge base I'm sure you're familiar with this phenomenon... so how do you explain it?

BTW.... a little quick to throw "ignorant" out eh.

[1BMW335]

Originally Posted by RPiM5

Oh snap!

Looks like E63 needs a diet. 140lbs heavier. Lol!

That was probably a non-CP M5 too! Haha!

lol, love how fan boys try so hard to find a win to make themselves feel better. I'm sure these Russian street racers are credible sources of auto journalism. Love how you even threw in the non-CP M5 comment too.

The AMG is 140lbs heavier because of AWD. In the motortrend test, the car's weren't equal. The M5 had carbon ceramic brakes compared to the standard ones on the E63, yet they both stopped at 106 ft. Standard brakes on a car that is 140lbs heavier are better than BMW's 9k optional carbon's? The E63 also didn't have the $1700 5 spoke light forged wheel option. The carbon ceramic brakes saves over 22 pounds and the lighter wheels would reduce rotational mass. 3.6s is AMG's estimated 0-60 speed, but european reviews (non-english with subtitles) had it clocked at 3.2 seconds.

All objective testing will differ due to track condition, weather, wind, temp, etc. That is why test numbers differ from one to another. Accept the fact that both are great cars and the average person will be impressed that you can afford to drive either one. I don't understand the bashing of a well engineered AMG when they clearly stepped up to the plate. We wouldn't have seen the competition package had AMG not released the S version. It is BMW's response so that it wouldn't fall behind its competition.

I'll dig up Chris Harris' review of the E63. He's a journalist that even BMW drivers think knows how to drive.

[yousefnjr]

Lol the amount of butthurt in here is incredible. It's like a Lexus forum.

[Jay-K]

disagree with that guy.

[pkimM3r]

M5 has better top end. By the quarter mile its trap speed is edging out the benz (factor in awd launch and how it catches up and passes it by then). I want to see a half mile race.

Ill wait on the chris harris review though. No drifts. No fun!!

[Tom C]

Originally Posted by turbo8765

I'm very familiar with dyno'ing BMWs and the associated issues. I'm not new to this game by any stretch. I remember when the e46 M3 was labelled as un-dynoable. I'm sure you remember as well. Bear in mind the issues related to dyno'ing BMWs are related to getting a successful run. The cars limit revs and/or power when there is a significant delta between front and rear wheel speeds. Once you've overcome that hurdle and completed a successful run, they're the same as any other high output car.

Do they cut timing due to higher temps given reduced airflow relative to a moving vehicle? Of course they do, as you know all cars do so. As you know there is a general trend whereby cars with increasing power, compression, timing, and/or boost are more susceptible to this effect. Obviously this is also a function of cooling capacity as well. The E and M in this test face exactly the same challenge with respect to reduced airflow.

Your point is that putting the power down more effectively at beginning of a run = faster ET AND higher trap. And that all else being equal the AWD car puts the power down more effectively therefore traps higher... all else being equal.

You've clearly spent a lot of time at the dragstrip right? You clearly have a vast and varied exposure to all things related to drag racing. Then I'm sure you've seen a powerful RWD car switch from streets to slicks and ET improves but trap speeds fall. Given the amount of exposure you've had and your knowledge base I'm sure you're familiar with this phenomenon... so how do you explain it?

BTW.... a little quick to throw "ignorant" out eh.

It can be explained by a couple of things. Most people run drag radials that are using a wheel/tire combo that are not stock...usually lowering the overall tire height. This changes the effective gear ratio and might actually improve acceleration down low but could cause an extra shift during a quarter mile run. The extra shift..especially during the final 66' feet of the run (where the trap speed timing lights are) can negatively impact trap speed. Also, stickier and wider rubber are great for getting off the line...but as speeds build...especially with cars that are travelling 120+mph through the traps... the additional rolling resistance becomes a liability. This is especially true of drag radials that are aired down to 15 to 20 psi. Like I said...great for getting out of the hole...but they become a liabilty further down the quarter mile run when traction is no longer an issue and aerodynamic and frictional drag become the enemy.

Sorry if you didn't like the "ignorant" comment.... I only responded in-kind to the inference that my lack of knowledge led me to believe something was wrong with the dyno run..

[ybbiz34]

I love BMWs but for those of you that haven't been keeping up in recent years, the folks in the AMG division have really been stepping their game up drastically since late 2011.

I just commented on this in another thread actually.

I've driven the E90 M3, the E92, and the E93.

I now own a '13 C63. It is one of the most neutral cars I've ever driven. Yes, it's a bit on the heavy side but man is it a joy to drive. Steering feel is incredible. So predictable and easy to control once you decide to step the rear out.

I just shake my head whenever I see someone flippantly say, "Oh the M3 just handles so much better . . ." or "The C63 is faster, until you add a corner." Just absolute nonsense. On the road, the 2012+ C63s are 100% as capable as the E9X M3s. On tight, technical tracks, the C63's weight becomes a bit of a penalty and the M3, being the lighter, more surgical instrument, gains a slight advantage. Even then, the C63 delivers 90% of what the M3 can. This extraordinary handling advantage for the M3 is fairytale stuff.

It appears that AMG has done more than merely narrow the gap in the E63 vs. M5 battle; it appears that AMG is starting to win it. This isn't the first review where the E63 has been praised; nor will it be the last.

And I saw some posts asking about what Chris Harris thinks about the new E63. In short, he loves it, I'll find his review of it and embed it shortly.

All that said, the M5 is still a fantastic car and I surely wouldn't turn down the opportunity to drive/own one.