M5POST
BMW Garage BMW Meets Register Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Go Back   M5POST - BMW M5 Forum > F10 M5 Forum > M5 versus...

Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      04-22-2014, 06:28 PM   #1
RPiM5
Major General
RPiM5's Avatar
2856
Rep
7,883
Posts

Drives: Mexico Blue F10 M5(Mika)
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Sunny San Diego

iTrader: (0)

2014 Porsche 911 Turbo S: The budget Bugatti Veyron.



http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...-tested-review
__________________


Appreciate 0
      04-22-2014, 07:22 PM   #2
Bimmer6
Colonel
Bimmer6's Avatar
632
Rep
2,253
Posts

Drives: 458SPY, GT3RS on the way
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: ATL

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by RPiM5 View Post
Good read, and very capable daily driver. The launch is incredible.
Appreciate 0
      04-22-2014, 07:24 PM   #3
Vic55
Lieutenant General
Vic55's Avatar
18966
Rep
10,095
Posts

Drives: 2023 BMW M8 Competition Coupe
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: THE Orange County

iTrader: (9)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bimmer6 View Post
Good read, and very capable daily driver. The launch is incredible.
I heard Champion is running their non S with a tune that now does the 60-130 in 7.3 seconds... The tune on this car is a long time coming (for me)
__________________
2023 BMW M8 Coupe Competition Alpine White
2022 BMW M3 Competition XDrive Aventurine Red
2022 Porsche Carrera GTS Coupe Shark Blue
2020 Audi R8 V10 Performance Suzuka Gray
2012 Mercedes Benz C63 AMG Black Series Obsidian Black
Appreciate 0
      04-22-2014, 07:52 PM   #4
gmd2003
Colonel
gmd2003's Avatar
352
Rep
2,176
Posts

Drives: 2014 CP M6 and 2006 VT 525 Z4M
Join Date: May 2012
Location: South Carolina

iTrader: (2)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vic55
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bimmer6 View Post
Good read, and very capable daily driver. The launch is incredible.
I heard Champion is running their non S with a tune that now does the 60-130 in 7.3 seconds... The tune on this car is a long time coming (for me)
Yeah I finally want a tune on my M6 CP but it's not too shabby 60-130 with just DP's and intakes on the stock tune my best is 7.9 sec .
Appreciate 0
      04-22-2014, 08:08 PM   #5
s62
Enlisted Member
United_States
9
Rep
45
Posts

Drives: Yellow
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: NJ

iTrader: (0)

Car had 1790 miles when tested in California City on presumably 91 octane. It did 60-130 in 8.9 sec:

http://media.caranddriver.com/files/...11-turbo-s.pdf

I guess a near perfect run with a 2.99% down slope, few more miles on engine and drivetrain etc could yield a 7.9x or better

I like how it only weighed 3588 lbs

It is also fun magazine-racing its 100-150 time of 10 sec with the ZR1 and SRT Viper figures, also obtained in California:

http://media.caranddriver.com/files/...r1-comparo.pdf
Appreciate 0
      04-22-2014, 11:13 PM   #6
MichaelJohn
First Lieutenant
87
Rep
311
Posts

Drives: BMW i8, Kia EV6 GT
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: SF Bay Area

iTrader: (0)

The Turbo S is an incredible machine without a doubt but in rolling acceleration it doesn't test any faster than a base M5 - at least not according to Car and Driver's review of each car. In fact, 30-50 it's slower. The test linked in this thread has the S at 2.1 seconds 30-50. The November 2011 initial test of the M5 has it at 1.8 seconds. Same mag - big difference, almost unbelievable. The 50-70 times are almost identical - 2.3 for the Porsche an 2.4 for the M5. So, if my simple math is correct, according to C&D an M5 is .2 seconds quicker 30-70. Is this possible? Is C&D nuts? Can any of you 991 Turbo S drivers comment on this? Am I driving a Q Ship Porsche Turbo killer? (no drag race comparisons, we all know who wins that).

Last edited by MichaelJohn; 04-22-2014 at 11:33 PM.. Reason: Number error
Appreciate 0
      04-22-2014, 11:50 PM   #7
MichaelJohn
First Lieutenant
87
Rep
311
Posts

Drives: BMW i8, Kia EV6 GT
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: SF Bay Area

iTrader: (0)

As a follow-up to my last post the tests I referred to indicate that the M5 and Turbo S are dead even from 100-150...10 seconds flat. The Porsche's overall time to 150 (16.5 seconds) is of course quicker due to its incredible launch...but the M5 at 18.3 is not that far behind. It would appear that once the M5 hooks it is very close to the Porsche. Again, all of this is based only on the C&D testing which is not a very big sampling. In any case, once rolling the M5 is seriously fast.
Appreciate 0
      04-23-2014, 12:15 AM   #8
Vic55
Lieutenant General
Vic55's Avatar
18966
Rep
10,095
Posts

Drives: 2023 BMW M8 Competition Coupe
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: THE Orange County

iTrader: (9)

Ive owned an F10 M5 and an F13 M6--- the M6 was faster and my Turbo S is faster than both... In a roll its a closer battle as the AWD seriously robs power and we all know the S63tu is underrated no doubt. I don't take stock in mag tests that occur in different issues and times... different conditions, drivers, etc. If the tests were done in a head to head; that would be more meaningful. The M5 is a quite a sedan and I enjoyed while it lasted (6 months). Further top gear testing is not meaningful to me as I drive the car in the proper gear especially in 30-50 and 50-70 mph pounces.
__________________
2023 BMW M8 Coupe Competition Alpine White
2022 BMW M3 Competition XDrive Aventurine Red
2022 Porsche Carrera GTS Coupe Shark Blue
2020 Audi R8 V10 Performance Suzuka Gray
2012 Mercedes Benz C63 AMG Black Series Obsidian Black
Appreciate 0
      04-23-2014, 01:06 AM   #9
MichaelJohn
First Lieutenant
87
Rep
311
Posts

Drives: BMW i8, Kia EV6 GT
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: SF Bay Area

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vic55 View Post
Ive owned an F10 M5 and an F13 M6--- the M6 was faster and my Turbo S is faster than both... In a roll its a closer battle as the AWD seriously robs power and we all know the S63tu is underrated no doubt. I don't take stock in mag tests that occur in different issues and times... different conditions, drivers, etc. If the tests were done in a head to head; that would be more meaningful. The M5 is a quite a sedan and I enjoyed while it lasted (6 months). Further top gear testing is not meaningful to me as I drive the car in the proper gear especially in 30-50 and 50-70 mph pounces.
You are right about different conditions for each test, and head to head would be more accurate. Just being anywhere close to the Porsche monster in any test is a feather in the M5's cap in my opinion.

I don't believe that those were really top gear runs in those tests, the times are too fast. I think for the twin clutch automatics they just mash it and let them kick down. A link in a previous post in this thread shows similar tests for a Viper and a ZR1 and the 30-50 and 50-70 times are in the 5-6 second range.
Appreciate 0
      04-23-2014, 09:10 AM   #10
Tom C
Captain
45
Rep
646
Posts

Drives: M8 GC Comp, Shelby GT500
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Maryland

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vic55 View Post
Ive owned an F10 M5 and an F13 M6--- the M6 was faster and my Turbo S is faster than both... In a roll its a closer battle as the AWD seriously robs power and we all know the S63tu is underrated no doubt. I don't take stock in mag tests that occur in different issues and times... different conditions, drivers, etc. If the tests were done in a head to head; that would be more meaningful. The M5 is a quite a sedan and I enjoyed while it lasted (6 months). Further top gear testing is not meaningful to me as I drive the car in the proper gear especially in 30-50 and 50-70 mph pounces.
No doubt the 991 Turbo S is a faster car than the M5 or M6. My major issue with the 991 Turbo S is that it is not a faster car than the 997 Turbo S. Yes, the 991 Turbo S is a quicker car to 60mph. Porsche has pretty much perfected its launch control and the fact that the drivetrain and in particular the clutches can withstand repeated hard launches is nothing short of amazing. However, it seems once the 991 Turbo S is rolling, it is a little weaker up top than the 997 Turbo S as evidenced by the 3mph lower trap speed in this instance and slower acceleration times for intervals above 60mph.

http://media.caranddriver.com/files/...ce-comparo.pdf

It seems that every car magazine that has tested both cars has seen the 997 Turbo S post better times above 60mph and the 991 Turbo S with better or equal times to 60mph. The 997 Turbo S is a little lighter (100lbs) but the additional stated 30hp increase should offset. Have the aerodynamics gotten worse or maybe the intercooling is not as efficient. I hate to speculate but it seems that most people are so enamored with the 0-60mph and 1/4 mile ETs that no one is curious about why the new car is not exceeding the old one.
Appreciate 0
      04-23-2014, 09:52 AM   #11
Vic55
Lieutenant General
Vic55's Avatar
18966
Rep
10,095
Posts

Drives: 2023 BMW M8 Competition Coupe
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: THE Orange County

iTrader: (9)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom C View Post
No doubt the 991 Turbo S is a faster car than the M5 or M6. My major issue with the 991 Turbo S is that it is not a faster car than the 997 Turbo S. Yes, the 991 Turbo S is a quicker car to 60mph. Porsche has pretty much perfected its launch control and the fact that the drivetrain and in particular the clutches can withstand repeated hard launches is nothing short of amazing. However, it seems once the 991 Turbo S is rolling, it is a little weaker up top than the 997 Turbo S as evidenced by the 3mph lower trap speed in this instance and slower acceleration times for intervals above 60mph.

http://media.caranddriver.com/files/...ce-comparo.pdf

It seems that every car magazine that has tested both cars has seen the 997 Turbo S post better times above 60mph and the 991 Turbo S with better or equal times to 60mph. The 997 Turbo S is a little lighter (100lbs) but the additional stated 30hp increase should offset. Have the aerodynamics gotten worse or maybe the intercooling is not as efficient. I hate to speculate but it seems that most people are so enamored with the 0-60mph and 1/4 mile ETs that no one is curious about why the new car is not exceeding the old one.
I agree with you 100% Tom... I think you even speculated via a few previous threads here with 991 TT-S test results that the fuel in Cali could be the culprit. Or its the OEM tune too? Either way Im ok with the numbers as I really enjoy the chassis progression over the previous iterations. Im first on GIAC's list this week or early next week to hopefully rectify this minor loss of power up top (they are local to me). I like trap speed for power measurements and I know that there is a non S in Florida running Fikse's (Brooks) Lambo and its trapping about 126 so maybe its the fuel? Who knows. My car feels every bit as fast if not faster to 150 (rolling) than my 997.2 Turbo with the EvomsIT tune (faster than a stock 997.2 Turbo S) but again that's "feel".

Its ironic you mention the "love" some have for the 0-60 and I find a less than desirable measure as well in real world experiences but I seem to have been using the launch control more than ever planned from dig runs where I live. The opportunities keep arising vs a variety of fools who want to challenge me. Ill tell you this--- that launch control is unfucking believable: "look ma no hands".

As always much respect for your posts over the many many years that you and I have been forum friends.
__________________
2023 BMW M8 Coupe Competition Alpine White
2022 BMW M3 Competition XDrive Aventurine Red
2022 Porsche Carrera GTS Coupe Shark Blue
2020 Audi R8 V10 Performance Suzuka Gray
2012 Mercedes Benz C63 AMG Black Series Obsidian Black
Appreciate 0
      04-23-2014, 10:40 AM   #12
Tom C
Captain
45
Rep
646
Posts

Drives: M8 GC Comp, Shelby GT500
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Maryland

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vic55 View Post
I agree with you 100% Tom... I think you even speculated via a few previous threads here with 991 TT-S test results that the fuel in Cali could be the culprit. Or its the OEM tune too? Either way Im ok with the numbers as I really enjoy the chassis progression over the previous iterations. Im first on GIAC's list this week or early next week to hopefully rectify this minor loss of power up top (they are local to me). I like trap speed for power measurements and I know that there is a non S in Florida running Fikse's (Brooks) Lambo and its trapping about 126 so maybe its the fuel? Who knows. My car feels every bit as fast if not faster to 150 (rolling) than my 997.2 Turbo with the EvomsIT tune (faster than a stock 997.2 Turbo S) but again that's "feel".

Its ironic you mention the "love" some have for the 0-60 and I find a less than desirable measure as well in real world experiences but I seem to have been using the launch control more than ever planned from dig runs where I live. The opportunities keep arising vs a variety of fools who want to challenge me. Ill tell you this--- that launch control is unfucking believable: "look ma no hands".

As always much respect for your posts over the many many years that you and I have been forum friends.

Honestly, I never used the GT-R's launch control because I felt it was a ticking time bomb...but I have been blown away by how Porsche has made their launch control so worry free and useable. I would probably be launching a 991 Turbo S every stop light if I was fortunate to own one!

The 991 Turbo is a great car and it does so many things better than its predecessor. My speculation circles back to the OEM tune being hyper sensitive to lower octane fuel. But I probably shouldn't be bothered by the fact that no one in the automotive press is picking up on this issue...and Porsche won't look into it unless it is brought to their attention in a meaningful way (i.e. a magazine tester bringing it to the reader's attention). It isn't my issue since I don't have one, but as an enthusiast I want to see a manufacturer not short change other enthusiasts.

Thank you for the kind words, and the respect and friendship is mutual!
Appreciate 0
      04-23-2014, 01:44 PM   #13
gmd2003
Colonel
gmd2003's Avatar
352
Rep
2,176
Posts

Drives: 2014 CP M6 and 2006 VT 525 Z4M
Join Date: May 2012
Location: South Carolina

iTrader: (2)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom C
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vic55 View Post
I agree with you 100% Tom... I think you even speculated via a few previous threads here with 991 TT-S test results that the fuel in Cali could be the culprit. Or its the OEM tune too? Either way Im ok with the numbers as I really enjoy the chassis progression over the previous iterations. Im first on GIAC's list this week or early next week to hopefully rectify this minor loss of power up top (they are local to me). I like trap speed for power measurements and I know that there is a non S in Florida running Fikse's (Brooks) Lambo and its trapping about 126 so maybe its the fuel? Who knows. My car feels every bit as fast if not faster to 150 (rolling) than my 997.2 Turbo with the EvomsIT tune (faster than a stock 997.2 Turbo S) but again that's "feel".

Its ironic you mention the "love" some have for the 0-60 and I find a less than desirable measure as well in real world experiences but I seem to have been using the launch control more than ever planned from dig runs where I live. The opportunities keep arising vs a variety of fools who want to challenge me. Ill tell you this--- that launch control is unfucking believable: "look ma no hands".

As always much respect for your posts over the many many years that you and I have been forum friends.

Honestly, I never used the GT-R's launch control because I felt it was a ticking time bomb...but I have been blown away by how Porsche has made their launch control so worry free and useable. I would probably be launching a 991 Turbo S every stop light if I was fortunate to own one!

The 991 Turbo is a great car and it does so many things better than its predecessor. My speculation circles back to the OEM tune being hyper sensitive to lower octane fuel. But I probably shouldn't be bothered by the fact that no one in the automotive press is picking up on this issue...and Porsche won't look into it unless it is brought to their attention in a meaningful way (i.e. a magazine tester bringing it to the reader's attention). It isn't my issue since I don't have one, but as an enthusiast I want to see a manufacturer not short change other enthusiasts.

Thank you for the kind words, and the respect and friendship is mutual!
The latest tests of the 2014 GTR have been full of limp modes and reduced boost as well in California based tests . I wonder if its 91 octane with high levels of ethanol at play . Has Cali gone over 10% ethanol I wonder ?
George
Appreciate 0
      04-23-2014, 02:31 PM   #14
Tom C
Captain
45
Rep
646
Posts

Drives: M8 GC Comp, Shelby GT500
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Maryland

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by gmd2003 View Post
The latest tests of the 2014 GTR have been full of limp modes and reduced boost as well in California based tests . I wonder if its 91 octane with high levels of ethanol at play . Has Cali gone over 10% ethanol I wonder ?
George
Sounds very possible.
Appreciate 0
      04-23-2014, 05:36 PM   #15
thebishman
Major
United_States
495
Rep
1,104
Posts

Drives: ‘24 iX M60
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Overland Park, KS

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by gmd2003 View Post
The latest tests of the 2014 GTR have been full of limp modes and reduced boost as well in California based tests . I wonder if its 91 octane with high levels of ethanol at play . Has Cali gone over 10% ethanol I wonder ?
George
Wasn't there an ECU update that addressed the original tune pulling timing when using 91 octane?
Bish
Appreciate 0
      04-23-2014, 05:46 PM   #16
gmd2003
Colonel
gmd2003's Avatar
352
Rep
2,176
Posts

Drives: 2014 CP M6 and 2006 VT 525 Z4M
Join Date: May 2012
Location: South Carolina

iTrader: (2)

Quote:
Originally Posted by thebishman
Quote:
Originally Posted by gmd2003 View Post
The latest tests of the 2014 GTR have been full of limp modes and reduced boost as well in California based tests . I wonder if its 91 octane with high levels of ethanol at play . Has Cali gone over 10% ethanol I wonder ?
George
Wasn't there an ECU update that addressed the original tune pulling timing when using 91 octane?
Bish
I had not heard that but it certainly is possible . If so why would Porsche give the magazine a car with the older tune. ? We have yet to see trap speeds equal to the 997.2 S in any of these tests despite faster 0-60 times .
Appreciate 0
      04-23-2014, 06:11 PM   #17
s62
Enlisted Member
United_States
9
Rep
45
Posts

Drives: Yellow
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: NJ

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by thebishman View Post
Wasn't there an ECU update that addressed the original tune pulling timing when using 91 octane?
Bish
There was and, oddly, only for 2013. The red 2014 track edition that journalists keep testing keeps going into low boost mode on 91 octane.

Here is an older thread highlighting the top end of the 4 cars with the CP M6 having the fastest 100-300 km/h time:

http://www.6post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=911274

Appreciate 0
      04-24-2014, 09:38 AM   #18
ColdList
Brigadier General
ColdList's Avatar
151
Rep
3,041
Posts

Drives: McLaren 675LT / C7 Z07
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Marietta, GA

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelJohn
The Turbo S is an incredible machine without a doubt but in rolling acceleration it doesn't test any faster than a base M5 - at least not according to Car and Driver's review of each car. In fact, 30-50 it's slower. The test linked in this thread has the S at 2.1 seconds 30-50. The November 2011 initial test of the M5 has it at 1.8 seconds. Same mag - big difference, almost unbelievable. The 50-70 times are almost identical - 2.3 for the Porsche an 2.4 for the M5. So, if my simple math is correct, according to C&D an M5 is .2 seconds quicker 30-70. Is this possible? Is C&D nuts? Can any of you 991 Turbo S drivers comment on this? Am I driving a Q Ship Porsche Turbo killer? (no drag race comparisons, we all know who wins that).
I can't tell you numbers, as I never measure them. I am mostly interested in the feel of the car and how it exhilarates me. I can tell you, having owned the F10 M5, F12 M6, 991 C2S and 991 TTS, that the TTS to me seems very much faster at most speeds.

In making my decision to purchase my C2S a salesman (younger guy who races cars) took a C4S and my M6 out for a few side by side runs. We drove them to their limits. From a stop I could not keep up with the C4S up to 60 due to the amazing LC of the Porsche. Same story from slow rolls starting at about 30 mph. It just hooked and went. On the highway, different story, I would immediately jump about 1.5 lengths. He would however hang with me pretty tightly and I was not pulling away much. We prob. let off the throttle at a bit over 100 mph. Keep in mind that the C4S will suffer a tiny bit on these rolls due to the AWD where the C2S did not. This was a reason that I chose the C2S. Seemed a bit livelier.

In any case, my TTS will obliterate a C2S. Hands down not really even a race. So subjectively, I would say the M6 would have a heck of a time running with my TTS. Mine has DP on it now (it didn't when I ran it against the C4S) and it is pretty blistering fast on the highway. I'd venture to say that it is likely a bit faster than the M6 comp pkg w/o DP. It would most definitely be a case where the TTS would not blow away the M6 but it would take it. Hard to explain the difference on this car. It's just so much more smooth linear delivery of power and it never seems to stop pulling. It quite literally sounds and feels like a jet.

I talk a lot about the launch of the TTS. It's not because I care at all how what the actual 0-60 clock speed is. It is because the feeling is like nothing else. You get a quick skip of all four wheels then a violent take off as they simultaneously grip and you feel the G's in your chest. It's quite a funny thing to see the looks on the faces of passengers when they first experience it. My experience is different than Vic's in the sense that no one wants to race me-lol! I used to get challenged all the time in the F10 and the F12 but rarely so in the TTS. People sort of give you a nod and a thumbs up or "look at those brakes!"-haha and they pull away. I had an E92 M3 riding my tail the other day and we lined up with him behind me at a light urging me on. Light turned green and he was a dot in the mirror.

I also don't care if there is zero diff in a 997 or even if it does in fact tick off slower times by a tenth or two. The 991 chassis and technologies make it a perfect car. The two are easily identified as different generations in terms of the drive, the look and the feel. Straight line isn't everything either as has been discussed here ad nauseam. The AWS and longer/wider track of the 991 completely differentiate the 991.

P.S. I run 93 octane exclusively here. No experience with any of the 91 octane concerns.
__________________

2016 McLaren 675LT - Chicane Grey
2016 Corvette Z07 - Artic White
2016 BMW F86 X6M - Black Sapphire Metallic

Last edited by ColdList; 05-12-2014 at 05:01 PM..
Appreciate 0
      05-12-2014, 04:24 PM   #19
Vic55
Lieutenant General
Vic55's Avatar
18966
Rep
10,095
Posts

Drives: 2023 BMW M8 Competition Coupe
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: THE Orange County

iTrader: (9)

Some real world numbers from member JFT911 at 6speedonline.com. This was on 91 octane which seems to pull power up top. A 103 trap in the 1/8th is very fast and indicative something closer to a 130 trap so somethings up with the ECU. Either way a 10.8xx is fast

Quote:
2014 Porsche 911 Turbo S. First 1/4 mile Run

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I took my new Turbo S to the track today and wanted to get your advice on my first run at it.

Overall, the car ran very well in the various runs that I tried. Temperature was 60F (15 C) And the car ran mostly below 11 sec.

I noticed that the car 0-60 times from my Vbox were mostly slower at the track than what I normally get on the street (3.0 sec to 3.2 vs 2.6 to 2.8). The track was pretty sticky and the car did not launch as fast as it normally does.

I used launch control in Sport + mode but never removed Traction control.

Here is a sample of an average run I got:

60 ft: 1.7
MPH1: 103.17
1/8: 7.032
MPH2 :125.89
1/4: 10.877 sec

I am wondering if this is a good time or I should expect better? Should I remove TC to get better results?

I had a blast at the track. Won all of my 10 runs against modified Corvette Z06 with drag tires, Mustangs, Jeep SRT8 turbo, Mercedes CLS63 S AMG (4 Matic).

Thank you in advance for your input.

JF
__________________
2023 BMW M8 Coupe Competition Alpine White
2022 BMW M3 Competition XDrive Aventurine Red
2022 Porsche Carrera GTS Coupe Shark Blue
2020 Audi R8 V10 Performance Suzuka Gray
2012 Mercedes Benz C63 AMG Black Series Obsidian Black
Appreciate 0
Post Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:12 PM.




m5post
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
1Addicts.com, BIMMERPOST.com, E90Post.com, F30Post.com, M3Post.com, ZPost.com, 5Post.com, 6Post.com, 7Post.com, XBimmers.com logo and trademark are properties of BIMMERPOST