Comp M5 vs Non-Comp M6

[Lt1camaro]

Hey guys,

I am in the market looking to replace my 535i with either an M3, M5, or M6. Prices for these three cars that I am looking at dont differ much as the M5 and M6 will be CPO, coming at around the same price as a new M3, in the 90-100k range. I love all three cars and I will be testing them out next week to make my final decision.

The question I had was, how different is the M5 going to feel with the Competition package and M Performance Exhaust compared to a 2014 M6 without the Competition pack? Is the M5 going to be marginally better? Will the difference be worth the M5 being $10k more expensive? Or will they be more evenly matched?

Thank you.

[Phatcat]

Based on all the tests out there, there is no guarantee that a CP car will be faster than a non-CP car in a straight line. However, CP is more than just HP, BMW also improved the handling.

Between the two I would take the M5 with CP and MPE.

[SFT33]

Of course the CP car will be faster in a straight line. It has more HP.

[Phatcat]

Originally Posted by SFT33

Of course the CP car will be faster in a straight line. It has more HP.

Some magazine test results said it ain't so. Of course someone will say different day, different conditions, different driver, and what not, but that is exactly the point, variation in test results gave me a pause.

Some of those early non CP cars that a few magazines tested are really fast.

[Rearview]

Originally Posted by SFT33

Of course the CP car will be faster in a straight line. It has more HP.

Except it's not.

[elitex]

The only way to find out is a side by side race. I've owned both and CP had a better top end.

[M5Beast_NYC]

we going a bit off track here.

to answer the OPs question, Ive been through just that this past few months. I had a F10 535i xdrive and a fully modded e46 M3. After a lot of thinking and going back and forth between the three. I realized that i dont like the size of the new M3, still smaller than what I want and it doesnt fill the requirement of my family needs (larger trunk *******. With that said, the end result is, sold both F10 and E46 and bought myself a F10 M5! I love the size and interior/exterior styling of the F10 so that was my winner.

[ChrisNich117]

Originally Posted by Phatcat

Some magazine test results said it ain't so. Of course someone will say different day, different conditions, different driver, and what not, but that is exactly the point, variation in test results gave me a pause.

Some of those early non CP cars that a few magazines tested are really fast.

I've owned both. CP is faster lol.

[ChrisNich117]

Originally Posted by Rearview

Except it's not.

Yes it is. I've owned a 13 and then upgraded to a 14 with the cp after my younger brother got an LCI 14 non cp and I couldn't stand that he had the full LED lights lol. We raced and I pulled from him every time. Steering is much better, suspension is better, but the exhaust is still worthless and I just swapped my turner over to the new car from my old one. The MDM is also significantly better, probably the best part of the package. The mdm on the stock car is way too intrusive. Even when I got my Dinan tune the MDM was still able to keep it in balance.

[lemetier]

Originally Posted by Lt1camaro

Hey guys,

I am in the market looking to replace my 535i with either an M3, M5, or M6. Prices for these three cars that I am looking at dont differ much as the M5 and M6 will be CPO, coming at around the same price as a new M3, in the 90-100k range. I love all three cars and I will be testing them out next week to make my final decision.

The question I had was, how different is the M5 going to feel with the Competition package and M Performance Exhaust compared to a 2014 M6 without the Competition pack? Is the M5 going to be marginally better? Will the difference be worth the M5 being $10k more expensive? Or will they be more evenly matched?

Thank you.

Putting the controversy of whether CP vs Non-CP is truly faster...

The M6 isn't as isolated as the M5. There's a bit more ambient noise and the cockpit/seat design bring a lot of the sensory components closer to you. As far as acceleration, unless you're above 100mph or so, there isn't much discernible increase. They'll both fight for traction. Above that and especially past 120mph, there is a noticeable difference between standard and CP. Experiencing this is not something legally or safely done outside of closed courses and less restrictive public roads with no speed limits.

[Phatcat]

Originally Posted by ChrisNich117

Yes it is. I've owned a 13 and then upgraded to a 14 with the cp after my younger brother got an LCI 14 non cp and I couldn't stand that he had the full LED lights lol. We raced and I pulled from him every time. Steering is much better, suspension is better, but the exhaust is still worthless and I just swapped my turner over to the new car from my old one. The MDM is also significantly better, probably the best part of the package. The mdm on the stock car is way too intrusive. Even when I got my Dinan tune the MDM was still able to keep it in balance.

Well we also have forum member (M6beast) who has 600HP CP M6 and yet it is slower than 575HP CP and non CP when he raced them, and also dynoed less power.

And we have magazine results of 0-300km slower than non CP.

I don't doubt your experience, but at the same time we have people with opposite experiences, so I stick with what I said, there is no guarantee that a CP car is faster or even makes more power.

[SFT33]

If I have the choice I'm going factory CP over a tune any day of the week. The cars are insanely fast with or without the CP. The additional upgrades you get with the CP cant be duplicated by a tuner without significant $$$.

[Phatcat]

Originally Posted by SFT33

If I have the choice I'm going factory CP over a tune any day of the week. The cars are insanely fast with or without the CP. The additional upgrades you get with the CP cant be duplicated by a tuner without significant $$$.

I would agree with that. CP is more than just HP, a big part is the handling upgrade. While I'm iffy about the HP part, I would definitely still take CP over non-CP.

[AGS]

Originally Posted by Phatcat

I would agree with that. CP is more than just HP, a big part is the handling upgrade. While I'm iffy about the HP part, I would definitely still take CP over non-CP.

+1. Having just transitioned from a 2013 non-CP M5 to a 2016 CP M5, the difference is very noticeable. As has been said before, the CP is how the M5 should have been setup from the get go. It's always annoyed me that BMW charges extra for a performance enhancing option package on an M car that is supposed to be their pinnacle of performance!!

[ChrisNich117]

Originally Posted by Phatcat

Well we also have forum member (M6beast) who has 600HP CP M6 and yet it is slower than 575HP CP and non CP when he raced them, and also dynoed less power.

And we have magazine results of 0-300km slower than non CP.

I don't doubt your experience, but at the same time we have people with opposite experiences, so I stick with what I said, there is no guarantee that a CP car is faster or even makes more power.

It's a matter of logic and common sense. BMW will not sell a car with less power then advertised or they would be committing fraud. Additionally, none of these cars have been successfully dyno tested except for Dinan's engine dyno which clearly shows an increase in power over a stock car. I also had a BMS tune on my car which made it slower because it failed to regulate the needed air fuel mix ratio for the added boost. There are plenty of people on this forum, and I'm not referring to the individual that you mentioned, that have said they had the cp when they were in a 13 car and claimed they had it retrofitted which isn't possible. I've had 3 in my family and have several friends with other m5's m6's that are both stock and cp models and they all acknowledge that the CP is faster. Now if they were dumb enough to leave the traction fully on, then the traction control severely limits the acceleration due to the increased potential for braking traction. Bottom line is that the CP is faster, there's 0 evidence to suggest otherwise, especially since you're not talking from personal experience. And magazines? Don't make that argument, it's absurd.

[elitex]

Originally Posted by AGS

+1. Having just transitioned from a 2013 non-CP M5 to a 2016 CP M5, the difference is very noticeable. As has been said before, the CP is how the M5 should have been setup from the get go. It's always annoyed me that BMW charges extra for a performance enhancing option package on an M car that is supposed to be their pinnacle of performance!!

Agreed. I said the same thing.

I'll take it a bit farther. I believe 550i should've been setup like an M5 with less power and M5 should've been much sportier than it is now even with CP.

[Phatcat]

Originally Posted by ChrisNich117

It's a matter of logic and common sense. BMW will not sell a car with less power then advertised or they would be committing fraud. Additionally, none of these cars have been successfully dyno tested except for Dinan's engine dyno which clearly shows an increase in power over a stock car. I also had a BMS tune on my car which made it slower because it failed to regulate the needed air fuel mix ratio for the added boost. There are plenty of people on this forum, and I'm not referring to the individual that you mentioned, that have said they had the cp when they were in a 13 car and claimed they had it retrofitted which isn't possible. I've had 3 in my family and have several friends with other m5's m6's that are both stock and cp models and they all acknowledge that the CP is faster. Now if they were dumb enough to leave the traction fully on, then the traction control severely limits the acceleration due to the increased potential for braking traction. Bottom line is that the CP is faster, there's 0 evidence to suggest otherwise, especially since you're not talking from personal experience. And magazines? Don't make that argument, it's absurd.

Zero evidence? So you are saying M6Beast's experience doesn't count for anything while yours does? And reputable magazines like AutoBild don't count either? SA also had a M5 CP quicker than M5 Jahre, so what's wrong with these magazines?

M6Beast on another thread said he raced and dyno tested vs non CP on the same day, same dyno. However accurate the dyno was, at least he was able to compare directly.

I don't know him and I don't know you, but you two have contrary experiences, on top of which magazines also showed inconsistent results, thus why I maintain that it's not for certain that CP car is faster, especially the 600HP versions, for some reason they seemed to be the slowest.

Too bad my M5 and M6 are on different continent or I would have loved to pit them against each other.

[SFT33]

For all those times I might run into a non CP ///M5 at a stop light I chose to get the CP. Did I mention I have CCBs and my charcoal filters removed?

[ChrisNich117]

Originally Posted by Phatcat

Zero evidence? So you are saying M6Beast's experience doesn't count for anything while yours does? And reputable magazines like AutoBild don't count either? SA also had a M5 CP quicker than M5 Jahre, so what's wrong with these magazines?

M6Beast on another thread said he raced and dyno tested vs non CP on the same day, same dyno. However accurate the dyno was, at least he was able to compare directly.

I don't know him and I don't know you, but you two have contrary experiences, on top of which magazines also showed inconsistent results, thus why I maintain that it's not for certain that CP car is faster, especially the 600HP versions, for some reason they seemed to be the slowest.

Too bad my M5 and M6 are on different continent or I would have loved to pit them against each other.

Lets just talk logic for a minute. When magazines test cars there are several variables that from a mathematical stand point are impossible to replicate on a consistent basis and these tests are always done multiple times with different drivers and averaged within that specific limited time frame. One magazine may test a vehicle at a location where the altitude will effect air density offering less oxygen for the engine to utilize thus reducing power. If altitude isn't the issue then time of year and temperature can have a similar effect whereby cold weather offers more oxygen but tires have less grip while hot weather is better for traction but there is less oxygen available. There are other weather variables but you can use deductive reasoning on your own to figure that out. Some of the newer M cars are using Pirelli tires instead of the PSS tires, which we all know and love that have superior traction, since the elusive compound has been utilized in developing their new all season version which is why the PSS's are on back order. From a standstill those tires will have better grip.

The suspension settings and traction settings make a huge difference on the launch. Fuel is another variable that can't be ignored. Perhaps a car came from California with a full tank of 91 octane is trucked over to Florida and gets tested against a car from Florida with 93 octane. Do you see how many variables need to be accounted for? Those that work for the magazines don't know the cars inside and out like an owner does. They have limited time to experiment with everything and you can see major discrepancies between several major magazines on identical cars that claim to have similar testing procedures.

Maybe one car has 1/4 of a tank of fuel and ccb's while the other has a full tank and steel brakes. A full tanks of fuel weighs 140lbs give or take, ccb's lose another 45lbs, let's just say for arguments sake you've got a fat 6'3 whale in the driver seat with a full tank without ccb's and camera equipment in the trunk. Then we can compare the human variable. Was the same person driving both times? Did they drive the vehicle in the same conditions? Did the car have the same tires and same fuel? Was the tire pressure identical or was there a 6psi discrepancy giving one better grip lol.

Bottom line is that the CP car makes more power, there is absolutely no solid evidence other than subjective tests that have been carried out by a myriad of individuals that are not physically or mentally capable of pulling the paddle or stepping on the peddle at the exact time simply because the circumstances were not and could not have been the exact same because we aren't robots.

Now, if there were someone like me who took both cars out, made sure that the fuel was equal and the other driver was an owner (my brother) and well versed in the proper settings and tests were conducted from the same speed with identical settings, both manual and automatic mode and the outcome was the same each and every time, a valid conclusion could be drawn as to the faster vehicle.

One person's differing experience and a magazine that you're automatically trusting on blind faith when compared to the majority of opposite outcomes is what we would call outliers. It's a poor argument and one that defies logic and reason. I too have cars in Europe and here in the US, and the fuel quality in Europe is much better, but sometimes the ecu's are calibrated for specific octanes.

1 person and 1 magazine or 10 magazines since I don't trust any of them vs the rest of the cp owning community doesn't make for an intelligent argument. You think Bmw would be dumb enough to defraud customers when VW has to pay their first (but not last) 18+ billion dollar settlement for their scandal? Come on dude, don't be silly.

[SFT33]

Exactly

[elitex]

Originally Posted by ChrisNich117

Lets just talk logic for a minute. When magazines test cars there are several variables that from a mathematical stand point are impossible to replicate on a consistent basis and these tests are always done multiple times with different drivers and averaged within that specific limited time frame. One magazine may test a vehicle at a location where the altitude will effect air density offering less oxygen for the engine to utilize thus reducing power. If altitude isn't the issue then time of year and temperature can have a similar effect whereby cold weather offers more oxygen but tires have less grip while hot weather is better for traction but there is less oxygen available. There are other weather variables but you can use deductive reasoning on your own to figure that out. Some of the newer M cars are using Pirelli tires instead of the PSS tires, which we all know and love that have superior traction, since the elusive compound has been utilized in developing their new all season version which is why the PSS's are on back order. From a standstill those tires will have better grip.

The suspension settings and traction settings make a huge difference on the launch. Fuel is another variable that can't be ignored. Perhaps a car came from California with a full tank of 91 octane is trucked over to Florida and gets tested against a car from Florida with 93 octane. Do you see how many variables need to be accounted for? Those that work for the magazines don't know the cars inside and out like an owner does. They have limited time to experiment with everything and you can see major discrepancies between several major magazines on identical cars that claim to have similar testing procedures.

Maybe one car has 1/4 of a tank of fuel and ccb's while the other has a full tank and steel brakes. A full tanks of fuel weighs 140lbs give or take, ccb's lose another 45lbs, let's just say for arguments sake you've got a fat 6'3 whale in the driver seat with a full tank without ccb's and camera equipment in the trunk. Then we can compare the human variable. Was the same person driving both times? Did they drive the vehicle in the same conditions? Did the car have the same tires and same fuel? Was the tire pressure identical or was there a 6psi discrepancy giving one better grip lol.

Bottom line is that the CP car makes more power, there is absolutely no solid evidence other than subjective tests that have been carried out by a myriad of individuals that are not physically or mentally capable of pulling the paddle or stepping on the peddle at the exact time simply because the circumstances were not and could not have been the exact same because we aren't robots.

Now, if there were someone like me who took both cars out, made sure that the fuel was equal and the other driver was an owner (my brother) and well versed in the proper settings and tests were conducted from the same speed with identical settings, both manual and automatic mode and the outcome was the same each and every time, a valid conclusion could be drawn as to the faster vehicle.

One person's differing experience and a magazine that you're automatically trusting on blind faith when compared to the majority of opposite outcomes is what we would call outliers. It's a poor argument and one that defies logic and reason. I too have cars in Europe and here in the US, and the fuel quality in Europe is much better, but sometimes the ecu's are calibrated for specific octanes.

1 person and 1 magazine or 10 magazines since I don't trust any of them vs the rest of the cp owning community doesn't make for an intelligent argument. You think Bmw would be dumb enough to defraud customers when VW has to pay their first (but not last) 18+ billion dollar settlement for their scandal? Come on dude, don't be silly.

Yep, what he said.....

[Rearview]

Zzz Zzz Zzz ...

Holy long posts. I capitulate based upon length.