2012 BMW M5 Sheds Most of Its Camo

This thing is gonna be so fast

While the twin-turbo V8 will no doubt be more powerful & fuel efficient, I'm sad to see the V10 go. The V10 is a masterpiece with an amazing soundtrack. Shame it had to be wrapped in a dowdy design. Of course, this new M5 may be a million times more capable than any M car before it, but I can't help but think the perfect M5 would be the E39 body with the E60 V10 engine.

"I can't help but think the perfect M5 would be the E39 body with the E60 V10 engine."

You nailed it. The E39 has yet to be surpassed.

They should have just dropped the compression and slapped the turbos onto the existing V10. That would really be a monster. Not that 590 hp V8 is anything to snear at. It's hard to see how they can keep making this car better. It's already an outstanding vehicle.

It makes no sense to have a V10 and have your rear kicked by a V8 Cadillac. While I think this is going to be faster than probably the CTS V, its not going to be faster by much.
The arrival of the CTS V sort of killed the aura for the M5 and the AMG E63 or AMG E55. There is no way they can justify their pricing based on the performance.

That said, I was at long beach this weekend and I was not impressed by BMW. Too loud and no performance compared to Ferrari and Corvettes. What’s all the noise if it does not translate into action?

These “spy shots” are always so staged.

Wow, what a shame. Make me so sad to think of BMW going to turbos on M cars. Especially as BMW builds lousy turbos.

@thedream and roadburner: I was thinking the same thing. I was a little sad reading the third paragraph of that article. But all-in-all, I expect this 4.4L V-8 to be a pretty good replacement. I can't wait to see the final result of this car though. I was a little upset when people down-talked the M5 to the CTS-V (which was considerably newer) and now we can get a more closer related test (closer related because now the M5 will be a bit newer, but nearly as new as the CTS-V was)

*I love how the exhaust pipes actually stick out the rear and are not integrated into the bumpers like most cars are. It gives it a raw racing look. Always a plus on ///M cars.*

To be frank, the CTS-V is a great performer, but the interior is very "Jersy Shore".
I really wanted to like it, but sitting in one at the LA auto show made me double check my neck and hands to make sure gold chains and big rings didn't magically appear.

As for this car, I may be the only one but, the e60 looks much better. This car isn't bad looking in any real way, it's just really boring.

Personally, I don't care what it looks like, just what makes it go.

Mechanically this is the M5 but cosmetically it's just a regular 5-series. It doesn't look near aggressive enough to be an M car.

To add to what the others were saying about the E39, someone with a lot of money should try putting a the 5.0 V10 into a E39.. it would be priceless.

bluguydotcom:

BMW doesn't build turbocharging units. The only manufacturer whose name appears on turbocharging induction units is Mitsubishi.

The dominant maker of turbos are Mitsubishi (used in the BMW N55 motor), Honeywell-Garrett (Ford Eco-Boost), IHI (Nissan GT-R), Borg-Warner (Porsche).

@mbukukanyau: You've missed a lot of points when it comes to the M5. I'm no BMW fan or specialist, I just love cars and I think it's worth knowing that when it comes to engines, it's not BMW who lost this one. It's Cadillac. While cylinder numbers are a factor, it is arguably a small factor. Engine displacement, hp, and weight are the real contributors to a car's performance. While the Caddy did have a V-8, it was indeed a BIG V-8. 6.2L to be exact. That's a lot different (and bigger) than a 5.0L V-10. Factor in the Caddy's supercharger and 50 more hp and the script changes a lot. I expected the Caddy to "wipe the floor with the Bimmer" as most people say... Admittedly, it did "beat" the BMW, but by literally tenths of seconds. 4.1s to 60 for Bimmer, 4.0 for Caddy. Identical figure-8 times and speeds, close Nurburgring times etcetera etcetera. Personally, after seeing BMW's V-10 abilities, it only made me love the engine (engine not car) even more.

You stated that the BMW will probably barely beat the Caddy this time around and I have to disagree with you on that one. Cadillac matched BMW's performance figures with this CTS-V, but failed to close the book on it. This new M5 coming out won't be a joke. And with more power and technology, it's numbers won't be either.

I tried to avoid the value talk whit this rebuttal, but I guess it is fare to say that value was something considered by GM when they imagined this car and if we can look past refinement and quality (a place where everyone says the BMW wins hands down) I guess it's fair to say that the CTS-V does win when it comes to price and performance..

I wonder if it's on the lift to have a run-flat replaced, as IL's 7-series has had so many times now. Run-flats on an ///M car? Hmmm...

Please no run-flats on an M car. That's blasphemy.

As one of the few shops who have tuned the new BMW M turbo V8 (in an X6M), I can offer some commentary. First of all, the engine is certainly no joke. Even in a 6-spd automatic, AWD vehicle like the X6, the 4.4 V8 is putting down about the same power as a Cadillac CTS-V 6AT to the hubs (I use a Dynapack), or about 480 whp. It does however put down less torque, as you would expect from the ratings.

Turbo lag is minimal, but definitely there. Surprisingly, I'm not a big fan of the sound. I hope the M5/M6 have a better exhaust than the X6M. That said, even with a turboback aftermarket exhaust the X6 sounds somewhat anodyne IMO (while the LS motor in the CTS-V sounds pretty aggressive stock, and near NASCAR-ish with aftermarket pipes). While it is hard to isolate the engine from the rest of the car in the driving experience, the broad torque curve is definitely enjoyable and there is a nice punch in the back. Even without mods, my grandmother could hit 0-60 in under 4.5 seconds, but she'd probably have a heart attack. With launch control and mods/tuning high 3's isn't hard with AWD traction.

Mod wise, we're still learning to extract the most from the X6M, but with a turboback exhaust we have managed to increase power by nearly 90 hp (568 whp). Torque is up by about 75 lbs-ft and there should be more to come as we carefully explore the limits of the turbos (and torque limiters). The X6M engine uses some very advanced (and apparently quite expensive according to the Garrett engineers) Garrett turbos. I don't know what BMW will do to get extra power on the M5/6. They could easily do it with tuning, but knowing BMW they're likely to improve the exhaust and maybe even upgrade the turbos. Either way, a modded CTS-V is in the 600 whp range without much trouble (pulley, exhaust, tune) and the M5 should be right there as well based on our current experience with the X6.

I think the biggest problem facing BMW is the same one that faces Cadillac. How do you put 600 hp to the ground effectively on street tires and 2WD? I don't see the M5 being noticeably faster to 100 than the CTS-V, or an X6 for that matter. In fact, sans some pretty sophisticated launch control/traction management, I don't see 95% of drivers of either sedan beating an X5/X6M on any given day if the stoplight drags are your thing. I also think Caddy has plenty left in the CTS-V's engine, such that they could easily find another 40-50 hp if they deem it necessary.

Yawn.......

I bet they'll ask close to $100K for it. They can keep it.

never thought I'd say this but.... BOOOOOO TURBO BOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!

I'd buy a Panamera Turbo instead

From this view, initial impression is that it appears just like a regular 5-series except for the quad-exhausts.. Great for the significant number of people who like the 'sleepers' but just doesn't look special imo at this point.

Hope they jazz it up a bit in production form.

"It always amazes me how the press "just happens" to be in the right place at the right time to get pics like these . . . you know car lifted WITH a tire off . . ."

I think these people literally camp outside of BMW garages and the ring to snap pictures. Of course having an inside informant should definitely help.

Pre-production cars are heavily-guarded because other manufacturers may attempt to copy designs from well-regarded manufacturers (Geely and even Hyundai comes to mind). Remember the leaked picture of the ZR-1 costing some delivery guy's job? I hope he'd be smart enough to at least squeeze a few grand out of those to tide him over until landing a new job.

"From this view, initial impression is that it appears just like a regular 5-series except for the 0quad-exhausts.. Great for the significant number of people who like the 'sleepers' but just doesn't look special imo at this point."

Dude, it's a box. A neatly styled box, but still a box. Always has been. Executive cog boxes (even the fast ones) are more of a treat for the driver than the passer-by. Check out the pontiac-level of chinzy body cladding on the C63, or the SL Black when they try (and fail) to be more. so if you expecting the elegant flamboyance of a gallardo supraleggra or the rolling muscular statue of david sculptures offered by Detroit, or even the reserved flagship dominance you get in a jag, well...you're gonna be dissapointed.

This slow motion strip tease with the camo has got to be the cheapest, most pathetic, marketing ploy ever.

What's funny (and sad) is that the new Ms are slowly loosing that true, high-strung boy racer feel that they once enjoyed. Think: the simplicity and fun of an E36 M3. Even the E46 M3 had a character all it's own. Then the E90 M, while still an awe inspiring ride, is not nearly as edgy in feels so much as brutish in the way it goes about it's business. I fear that the new M5 will be the same without the peaky, snarling V10 under the hood (er, bonnet!). Oh, well!!!

church: interesting commentary, thanks for sharing.

"I fear that the new M5 will be the same without the peaky, snarling V10 under the hood (er, bonnet!). Oh, well!!!"

Last year I had a student with an E60 M5 at an HPDE at Road Atlanta. It's a brilliant car and the gentleman even offered to let me drive it during an instructor run group.
I declined, but it was extremely tempting...

I was in Munich a couple days ago and I saw this very same car (I believe). It was surprisingly quiet until the driver goosed it down the street. I definitely heard turbos.

"From this view, initial impression is that it appears just like a regular 5-series except for the quad-exhausts.. Great for the significant number of people who like the 'sleepers' but just doesn't look special imo at this point.

Hope they jazz it up a bit in production form."

None of what you see is production form - the extended bodywork is comprised of unfinished blanks, the exhausts are just generic pieces and the wheels are fakes. Rest assured the car will look quite a bit different than this, it's just an engineering mule.

Rear reminds me of the facelifted 2005-2006 Q45
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/42/05-06_Infiniti_Q45_rear.jpg

Rear fascia is very similar to the 1st gen G35...

"It makes no sense to have a V10 and have your rear kicked by a V8 Cadillac."

Mbukukanyau, what you failed to realize is that if it wasn't for the BMW M5 the Cadillac CTS-V wouldn't even exist.

As someone who had owned an E39 M5 brand new, I was extremely disappointed with the E60 V10 M5, which I was planning on buying in late 2005 when the car was introduced. I have owned dozens of high end sports cars/sedans over the years and can honestly say that to this day the E39 M5 is probably my favorite of them all and why I had such high hopes that the E60 would have been even better and taken the car to the next level, however, the SMG transmission was probably one of the worst transmissions I have ever driven, the EDC damping made the car either too firm or too soft, the steering had no road feel, and the car was just too complex to be fun. I thought the car failed miserably at being a great sedan and sports cars, areas that made the previous M5 legendary. My real reason for commenting on here, though, is that I am reading everyones post about how great the E60's V10 was and I have to say that was perhaps the most disappointing part of the car for me. I found it to be light on any kind of useful torque, very gritty and not very refined and the worst part was that it sounded strained and not very sonically stirring like other V10's I have heard (Lamborghini) not to mention one of the biggest gas guzzlers I have ever driven. Apparently, I am not the only one who feels this way, my BMW salesman who has sold me all my new BMW's for over the past 12 years had told me that several of his "best" customers who had to have an E60 as soon as it was released were also underwhelmed with it and one of them actually gave the car back to him on consignment to sell and told him to find him a nice, pristine E39 M5 that he would keep rather than the E60.......to me that says alot about the car. I hope BMW goes back to what made that car great instead of trying to outdo everyone with technology that takes away from the everyday driving characteristics of what made their cars so great.

@ jameswilliard: What you're saying about the E60 M5 being too high on tech is true, but it's sad to say that almost every car is like that. It's like everyone complains about everything now. There were so many faults in cars back in the day that were less practical (by today's standards for that matter) but made the car fun. We honestly don't know what we want in a car, and companies can't do everything. I think that BMW tried to accomplish everything and that's why the M5 was so complicated and kind of robbed itself of true driving experience. There were just too many things to change. Too many settings to this wheel, and that wheel, and those suspensions yada yada yada.

And as far as the engine goes, I now see that it's a personal opinion thing. I know it wasn't the most refined engine, but it spun like crazy and I actually like the "screaming" nature of it rather that the growl that you'd get from maybe a Quattroporte.

My only hope is that this car doesn't ride too firm, feels at home on a back road in Pittsburgh, and that it's 4.4L V8 pulls hard minus turbo lag. I don't care about how it's cruise control system acts when you suddenly encounter a brontosaurus dead in the middle of the road in the snow. Or how fast it can park itself. Those are gimmicky features to me.

"it's 4.4L V8 pulls hard minus turbo lag. .."

Ain't gonna BE any turbo lag. BMW has been focused on make turbo cars for people who hate turbo cars (lag) and they've gotten pretty good at it. I predict that the cars LACK of any turbo lag will be mentioned by all it's reviewers. If not and the opposite is true, then I'll owe you a beer.