Breaking News: 2012 BMW M5 Official Photos – 560 hp

By Horatiu Boeriu. Read Bio
June 15th, 2011 | BMW M5, Featured Posts | 89 comments

Ahead of the scheduled launch, leaked photos of the 2012 BMW M5 were released by German magazine AutoZeitung. Full details will be revealed in the upcoming days, but for now, here is the scoop.

The 2012 BMW M5 will output 560 horsepower at 6,000 rpm and 501 lb-ft of torque (680 Nm) at 1,500 rpm. The new F10 M5 will run to 62 mph (100 km/h) in 4.4 seconds. To reach 124 mph (200 km/h), the new M5 needs about 13 seconds.

Same as the old E60 M5, the M-Drivers-Package brings the top speed to 189 mph (305km/h).

The color featured in the official photos seems to be Monte Carlo blue.

Breaking News: 2012 BMW M5 Official Photos 560 hp

The M5 sits on 265/35 ZR 20 front tires and 295/30 ZR 20 rear.

In Germany, the 2012 BMW M5 is said to start at around 100,000 euros.

Stay tuned for more details!

Breaking News: 2012 BMW M5 Official Photos 560 hpBreaking News: 2012 BMW M5 Official Photos 560 hpBreaking News: 2012 BMW M5 Official Photos 560 hpBreaking News: 2012 BMW M5 Official Photos 560 hpBreaking News: 2012 BMW M5 Official Photos 560 hpBreaking News: 2012 BMW M5 Official Photos 560 hp
Tags: , , Print 89 comments

Explore related content

More in BMW M5

  • http://www.facebook.com/Whasians Daniel Vu Nguyen Hoang

    Now that looks great :D

  • http://www.facebook.com/Whasians Daniel Vu Nguyen Hoang

    Now that looks great :D

  • Pingback: Breaking News: 2012 BMW M5 Official Photos – 560 hp | BMW Blog

  • Pingback: News about Breaking News issue #1 | Conservative Homepage | Best Conservative News Sites

  • Badger

    NOW THIS LOOKS GREAT. very aggressive and well reminds me of the e39 M5. Wheels are a bit huge, but I bet it’ll look great!!

  • Badger

    NOW THIS LOOKS GREAT. very aggressive and well reminds me of the e39 M5. Wheels are a bit huge, but I bet it’ll look great!!

  • Pingback: Breaking News: 2012 BMW M5 Official Photos – 560 hp – BMW BLOG (blog) | DocBlogger

  • AMGTomr

    Ugly boat with less Hp than AMG and CTSV, what a joke. Looks like a fat M3. M has gown downhill…

    • http://www.facebook.com/Whasians Daniel Vu Nguyen Hoang

      2012 E63 has only have about 520-530hp with the new Bi-Turbo 5.5 unless you want an extra 20 or 30 hp from the AMG Performance Package.

      • Anonymous

        Exactly. The M157 engine (5.5 litre V8 twin-turbo) from 2011 E63 AMG, with AMG Performance Package, produces now 557 PS and 800 Nm, which is a lot compared to this BMW S63 (4.4 litre V8 twin-scroll). We all know that Audi’s quattro GmbH is developing the new RS 6 based on the new 4.0 litre V8 twin-turbo, but we can expect more than the 5.0 litre V10 twin-turbo, or better, more than 580 PS and 650 Nm.

        But, like ex-CEO of BMW M, Dr. Kay Segler, said: It’s not a “horsepower war”, we’re talking about chassis here. And I think this new F10 M5 will be brilliant compared to AMG’s and RS’s rivals. It won’t be a racing car like the high-rev V10 E60 M5, but it’s going to be a masterpiece. I hope so, =)

    • Anonymous

      Well, I think CTS-V is only compared on U.S. market. Besides, the LSA engine (similar to ZR-1′s famous LS9) is a real american masterpiece, I think it’s above the BMW”s EfficientDynamics philosophy, lol. We can’t compare technology TwinPower Turbo, M-DCT transmission, sDrive (RWD), and other modern stuff with a GM”s brutal sedan. It’s just too “unethical”…

    • Ujelly

      Yeah but when the AMG see’s a corner it gives up in a cloud of smoke like a frenchman. Dumbass.

    • BMW M\

      u can think and speak about just this; AMG.. u r a merco guy.. just shut up!!!..the point is not the power..AMG’s are useless..

  • E39owns

    560HP?? Is this a joke??? This huge M3 doesnt even come close to my E39 M5.

    • Chris82

      Your E39 is now 2 generations old. 

    • Anonymous

      We can appeal to G-Power’s S63 development. They achieved (until now) 725 PS and 900 Nm on the Typhoon S (X6 M based). But as I said above… it’s not a “horsepower war”. BMW M can’t behave like Mercedes in-house tuner AMG used to do in the past, and what Brabus still does, increase power and torque, but no improvements in handling at all. It isn’t a drag car… or is it?

    • Ujelly

      u jelly u can’t afford a new car?

    • wazon8

      E39owns: Blah, blah, blah… You can pretend that M5 E39 is better performer, but numbers say something quite opposite. Period.

    • wazon8

      E39owns: Blah, blah, blah… You can pretend that M5 E39 is better performer, but numbers say something quite opposite. Period.

      • GeraldE39M5

        wazon8 your a mouthbreather. My E39 can run to 60 in 4.6 seconds only .2 slower than this behemoth and boat F10.

    • Alex

      unless you’re E39 is supercharged I doubt you’ll be able to keep up with it. If i recall correctly the 0-100km time for the E39 M5 is 5.3, so almost 1 second slower than the new one.

    • e39m5

      All you E39 haters, the ESS V550 S/C kit is rated for 570 on 93 octane tune.  Add the light weight (compared to F10) chassis, the turbo lagged 560 HP is no match, not to mention Dinan S3 S/C comes in at 621 HP.  Yeah, 10 yr old ubber sedan still kicking the F10 M5′s butt.  You prob guessed it, I own an E39 M5.

      • Ujelly

        GUESS WHAT HAPPENS IF I ALSO ADD A S/C KIT TO MY F10 M5….idiot.

        U JUST MAD U 2 POOR TO BUY A NEW CAR.

      • Ujelly

        GUESS WHAT HAPPENS IF I ALSO ADD A S/C KIT TO MY F10 M5….idiot.

        U JUST MAD U 2 POOR TO BUY A NEW CAR.

  • Pingback: Breaking News - 2012 BMW M5 Official Photos - BMW-SG - The BMW Singapore Community

  • M5Freak

    I don’t see it being that much better than the E60 M5.  I’ll skip this generation and wait next.

    • Anonymous

      When we scrutinize BMW M5 cars… we are capable of seeing a 100 PS difference: E34 (315 PS), E39 (400 PS) and E60 (507 PS). But I think 600 PS in a saloon is a lot. Look at Mercedes S65 AMG. It’s a car created to be fast, just fast. We have to wait until the first review of the new F10 to judge performance. But autonomy, smoothier gearbox and a huge amount of torque, which were the most M5′s owners concern in the development of the new generation, was “heard” by BMW AG.

    • Anonymous

      When we scrutinize BMW M5 cars… we are capable of seeing a 100 PS difference: E34 (315 PS), E39 (400 PS) and E60 (507 PS). But I think 600 PS in a saloon is a lot. Look at Mercedes S65 AMG. It’s a car created to be fast, just fast. We have to wait until the first review of the new F10 to judge performance. But autonomy, smoothier gearbox and a huge amount of torque, which were the most M5′s owners concern in the development of the new generation, was “heard” by BMW AG.

      • Alex

        For us the power jump from the e34 to e39 wasn’t as dramatic (we got the 340 hp version of the E34).

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/La-Ma/1681833435 La Ma

      well, it is so much better, its actually a 2gen skip.  no, not in HP but in driving dynamics. Just drive one and you will be shocked !!!
      its a lion in sheep’s clothes.  No, not a wolf, that was the E60. This is a Lion, the king of the animals.

      as I said schedule a test drive and be prepared. won’t be cheap but if you got the dough, bring a checkbook.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/La-Ma/1681833435 La Ma

      ITS 2GEN STEP !!!  It is so much better !  Forget the bungle car, this car is  a HUGE step in forward. No, not in HP but in driving dynamics.  It is a real dual personality car.  Track or Street is a button choice.
      Cruise and monster – all in one massive package.  Few cars can beat this family sedan on track (handling, speed) and street (comfort, luxury, space). Real performance and high level of luxury both present in a car.
      Overall the best “sleeper” car ever.
      test drive one and bring a checkbook to the test drives.  You will love this car.

      ps.. don’t delete this post again… its a public forum, why censure the posts ? Is Ceaușescu working for bmwblog now ?
      its a 3rd time my post got deleted. ridiculous. I was banned for weeks and I never used profanity just formed an opinion different then the governor body here. geez…

  • drossel

    it’s actually 552 HP (560 PS).

    looks like there are some AMG and Cadillac trolls on here.  don’t be so quick to dismiss the F10 M5 based on numbers on a spec sheet. not that their engines are lacking (the multiple international engine of the year awards can attest to this), but M cars have always excelled at providing a complete package – power with supremely balanced handling.  if you’re scoffing at the F10 M5 based purely on the 552 HP, you’re either a troll, and/or you have no idea what M cars are capable of.  in how many review articles has an AMG or caddy beat an M car? 

    of note: BMW rates their turbo sixes very conservatively.  inside line recently dyno-tested the 1 series M at 331 HP / 362 lb-ft…at the wheels!  BMW rates the 1 M at 335 HP / 332 lb-ft at the crank.  even if the F10 M5 isn’t underrated, it’s still a turbo engine.  as such, you can make HUGE power gains with just a few aftermarket parts.  

    • 8888

      Ford Mustang GT beat the BMW M Cheeze …. BMWtroubleu is a company who is like U2 ….. had some great years but have been on the decline for the past 20 yrs…. these cars are ugly……..and tat interior is not sporty at all compared to a Audi RS6. no comparison. M fan boys the days are numbered.

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uOwSPccbzl4

      • wazon8

        It seems that guys from motor trend cannot drive M3 properly. Check this comparision: http://fastestlaps.com/comparisons/bmw_m3_e92-vs-ford_mustang_gt_50.html

      • wazon8

        It seems that guys from motor trend cannot drive M3 properly. Check this comparision: http://fastestlaps.com/comparisons/bmw_m3_e92-vs-ford_mustang_gt_50.html

      • drossel

        you’re full of it.

        first, did you even watch the video?  the M3 beat the mustang on the track.  even though it was very close, the M3 still won.  Pobst said it “won” because it got so close to the M3, but MotorTrend still declared the M3 the winner.  let’s see if i can put it in terms you little boys can understand: ”Ask any racer, any real racer. It doesn’t matter if you win by an inch or a mile; winning’s winning.” ~Dominic Torettoon the decline for the past 20 years?  so you’re saying M division has been on the decline since 1991?  ok, let’s see which models have been available since then: E34 M5, E36 M3, E36/7 Z3 M, E36/8 M Coupe, E39 M5, E46 M3, E60 M5, E63/64 M6, E84 Z4 M, E85 M Coupe, E90/92/93 M3, E82 1 Series M, E70 X5 M, E71 X6 M.  so you’re saying all these cars are crap?  you sir, are full of shit.  

        aesthetics are purely subjective.  if the interior/exterior design doesn’t appeal to you, i can’t argue with that.  however, i can say the 5 series / M5 is made for adults, not prepubescent boys.  if you’re looking for A-pillar mounted blue gauges, please look elsewhere.  and speaking of the Audi RS6, you are flat wrong. aside from the flat-bottom steering wheel, the design and switch gear looks plain and outdated compared to the F10 M5 (or anything else in its class, for that matter).  that’s not surprising since the current RS6 comes with the C6 A6 interior design, which has been out for 7 years.  

        can you trolls at least make a semi-plausible argument?  

      • drossel

        you’re full of it.

        first, did you even watch the video?  the M3 beat the mustang on the track.  even though it was very close, the M3 still won.  Pobst said it “won” because it got so close to the M3, but MotorTrend still declared the M3 the winner.  let’s see if i can put it in terms you little boys can understand: ”Ask any racer, any real racer. It doesn’t matter if you win by an inch or a mile; winning’s winning.” ~Dominic Torettoon the decline for the past 20 years?  so you’re saying M division has been on the decline since 1991?  ok, let’s see which models have been available since then: E34 M5, E36 M3, E36/7 Z3 M, E36/8 M Coupe, E39 M5, E46 M3, E60 M5, E63/64 M6, E84 Z4 M, E85 M Coupe, E90/92/93 M3, E82 1 Series M, E70 X5 M, E71 X6 M.  so you’re saying all these cars are crap?  you sir, are full of shit.  

        aesthetics are purely subjective.  if the interior/exterior design doesn’t appeal to you, i can’t argue with that.  however, i can say the 5 series / M5 is made for adults, not prepubescent boys.  if you’re looking for A-pillar mounted blue gauges, please look elsewhere.  and speaking of the Audi RS6, you are flat wrong. aside from the flat-bottom steering wheel, the design and switch gear looks plain and outdated compared to the F10 M5 (or anything else in its class, for that matter).  that’s not surprising since the current RS6 comes with the C6 A6 interior design, which has been out for 7 years.  

        can you trolls at least make a semi-plausible argument?  

      • drossel

        you’re full of it.

        first, did you even watch the video?  the M3 beat the mustang on the track.  even though it was very close, the M3 still won.  Pobst said it “won” because it got so close to the M3, but MotorTrend still declared the M3 the winner.  let’s see if i can put it in terms you little boys can understand: ”Ask any racer, any real racer. It doesn’t matter if you win by an inch or a mile; winning’s winning.” ~Dominic Torettoon the decline for the past 20 years?  so you’re saying M division has been on the decline since 1991?  ok, let’s see which models have been available since then: E34 M5, E36 M3, E36/7 Z3 M, E36/8 M Coupe, E39 M5, E46 M3, E60 M5, E63/64 M6, E84 Z4 M, E85 M Coupe, E90/92/93 M3, E82 1 Series M, E70 X5 M, E71 X6 M.  so you’re saying all these cars are crap?  you sir, are full of shit.  

        aesthetics are purely subjective.  if the interior/exterior design doesn’t appeal to you, i can’t argue with that.  however, i can say the 5 series / M5 is made for adults, not prepubescent boys.  if you’re looking for A-pillar mounted blue gauges, please look elsewhere.  and speaking of the Audi RS6, you are flat wrong. aside from the flat-bottom steering wheel, the design and switch gear looks plain and outdated compared to the F10 M5 (or anything else in its class, for that matter).  that’s not surprising since the current RS6 comes with the C6 A6 interior design, which has been out for 7 years.  

        can you trolls at least make a semi-plausible argument?  

        • wazon8

          @drossel: By definition, trolling excludes giving semi-plausible arguments, so she/he can’t do it.

          • drossel

            wazon8, you are correct.  my mistake. =)

        • 8888

          M3 0-60 4.4 mustang 4.4
          braking M3 110 ft  mustang 108 ft
          Quater mile M3 12.8 @ 110.9 mph Mustang 12.7 @ 111.6 mph
          M3 lateral G .95G  Figure- 8 track 25.1 @ .74 G
          Mustang  Lateral G .96G figure-8 24.9 @ .76G
          Track is a difference of .01 seconds

          So it is obvious that you are a BMW fangirl with your argument because the only thing you mentioned was the track time but forgot to address the 5 other performance categories. Get the fuck out of here ….. i wrote what i wrote to get a reaction out of you and i knew precisely how you would respond. Not surprised you troll. the numbers don’t lie and based on what i see from the numbers above the Mustang GT is the new benchmark if it beat the supposed benchmark the M3. :)

          • http://www.facebook.com/Whasians Daniel Vu Nguyen Hoang

            Just correcting you here but wouldn’t the New Boss 302 be the new Benchmark.

            Mustang Boss 302
            0-60 MPH 4.0 seconds
            Quarter Mile 12.3 Seconds
            Lateral Acceleration .98g
            Braking 108 ft

            Leguna Seca Times
            BMW M3 1:44.96
            Boss 302 1:40.21

            The only advantage that the M3 has is half a foot more rear leg room, more refined, and more comfortable but the new Mustangs is the better car in terms of performance and value.

            (Proof that Americans can make good cars.)

          • 8888

            Yes you are right but i didnt want to embarass the M3 lover because he would come out with even more excuses. I was comparing a simple mustang GT to the M3 and the video as proof.

            Notice  how my friend Drossel has no response to what both of our posts reveal…. Yo drossel learn your facts and speak with purpose before opening ur mouth and insulting people. Typical M3 lover. face it  my friend BMtroubleu is and has been on a decline… same design… ugly ass interiors….and losers for drivers… everyone  has one because everybody else has one… all following no lead….

            NEVER FOLLOW……….. Audi :)

          • http://www.facebook.com/Whasians Daniel Vu Nguyen Hoang

            Recent tests of the M3 from Motor Trend

            2011 BMW M3 (7 speed DCT)

            0-60 MPH 4.2 seconds

            Quarter Mile 12.6 Seconds

            Lateral Acceleration 1.0g (most likely from the Competition Package)

            Braking 108 ft

          • drossel

            8888, you amuse me.  =)

    • drossel

      my mistake.  it is 560HP.  i guess the other publications had the unofficial specs wrong.

  • Pingback: Alles zum neuen M5 F10 : Seite 20 : Dann sag aber bitte den Kollegen, sie sollen das beim X mit gl...

  • Pingback: Zukünftige Leckerbissen der M GmbH : Seite 13 : Guten morgen thomas :) na dann herzlich willkommen in öster...

  • Pingback: Breaking News: 2012 BMW M5 Official Photos – 560 hp | labmw.com

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1842858183 Ahmad Haziq

    I don’t see the point of having a lot of HP in the M5. In the end, the most important thing is to have a proper balance between power and handling and that’s where BMW is strong at. What’s the point of having an E63 AMG with a whole lot of power, sliding around yet can’t steer neatly as an M5?

  • Pingback: Video News Blog » Breaking: Breaking: First official 2012 BMW M5 shots hit the web – Autoblog (blog)

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Hubert-Jadczak/100000325894622 Hubert Jadczak

    560hp? :/ 20hp less than they said before… shame… it’s slower than actual RS6 :( and has the same run to 62 mph as E63 AMG (4.4s) which has less hp… Well… at least it looks fast… xD

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1842858183 Ahmad Haziq

      On straight, yes it might lost. But when on a full course, I can gurantee the BMW being more superior. Have you seen the M3 competing against the RS5 by Top Gear and the M3 is by far more superior despite the amount of HP the RS5 have? Don’t get trapped on those numbers…

  • Viper

    Im surprised by the power 560……the car lost hp war for sure , torque war also.
    identical power to x5 x6 m….why?
    why not dostance the m5 from those?
    only a good sorry great chassis will put this car on the mark against e amg and rs ,
    the looks?
    great color , but look at the bumper , same bumper always and always.
    no imagination and inovation. ZERO points for that bmw.
    well see how this goes.

    • drossel

      i agree with you about the “M look.”  the 3 and 5 series M’s have been recycling the same design philosophy since the E46 and E39.  to be fair, AMG have been doing the same thing also.  i guess it has something to do with brand recognition and lineage, but i wish they’d come up with something more different for each generation.

    • Manny Antunes

      Let’s analyze HP figures shall we? 1M was “rated” at 330HP yet on a chassis dyno it managed 331 at the wheels…equaling 401 at the crank.

      New F10 M5 rated at 560HP…. care to guess what the reality will be?

      It’s not the first time BMW has understated their HP claims. and for the record MOST OEMs are doing this now. Shall we discuss Porsche, Nissan GTR, AMG hp figures?

      • Viper

        you think so…then how many does s65 amg have 700?

        • Manny Antunes

          In some cases I’ve seen Dyno results for the S65 close to that figure. On the low side, I’ve seen E39 M5 crank out 355Wheel HP which is clearly more than 394 stated. My previous E39 M5 dynod at 383 Wheel HP. With simple bolt on  modification my M5 saw 412 Wheel HP on the dyno. 

        • http://www.facebook.com/Whasians Daniel Vu Nguyen Hoang

          The S65 is rated at 568 RWHP meaning it is about 650-670hp on crank so it is underrated.

          You’re better off with the S63 than the S65. The S63 posts 4.0 seconds 0-60 plus an enhanced suspension. The S65 cannot handle all that torque and horsepower making it half a second slower dispite the power advantage.

  • Witt

    Oh my, even more boring that I feared. The soul of BMW , oh where art thou?

  • Manny Antunes

    WOW, amazed at some of the comments on here. Really…

    M is about making “Chassis” dynamics. Engine outputs are secondary.

    Shall i bring up the fact that the E92 M3 beat the Caddillac CTS-V and Audi RS5 in a head to head in multiple publications? No? Didn’t think so….

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1842858183 Ahmad Haziq

      It’s just that most people here don’t understand what is BMW. I don’t care on the comments about the looks because as I said in other post that it’s someone’s taste and not being expected to be liked by everybody. What I’m dissapointed is when someone is commenting on the HP figures, because simply what’s the point of having a 4-door saloon with over 600+HP? Also from my knowledge, BMW have never made a car with a crazy HP figures and only concentrate on building a car with a perfect balance.

    • Guest

      Dude, the car weighs well over 4000 lbs. What’s dynamic about that? Also, I don’t see how the m3 winning some comparison tests makes the m5 any more dynamic. All I see is that you’re a stupid fanboy who hasn’t got better things to do than annoy everybody who posts critical comments about bmw no matter how justified they are.

      • Manny Antunes

        Yep, you’re comppletely right and I apologize. You’re also correct that I’m stupid! I thank you for eloquently stating your position and rebutle. It’s always refreshing to be mentally stimulated and challenged in such scholarly manners!

        PS! This is a BMW Site!!! If you don’t want the “ra-ra” banboy cheers, go over to Audi, i hear they’re fond of trolls!

        With love, Me.

        • Guest

          Well this just shows that one cannot reason with you. All you do is insult and reapeat your stupid fanboy crap. Why don’t you just explain to me how the m3 winning comparison tests makes the m5 more dynamic and why you consider a car that wheigs more than 4000 lbs to be dynamic?
          And by the way there is a difference being an enthusiast and being an annoying fanboy who just can’t shut their mouth about how everything except bmw sucks.

          With love, daddy.

          • Manny Antunes

            OK daddy, now you got me engaged. It’s about time too. I was getting bored…
            “Chassis Dynamics” was referring to how BMW’s M division is focused on tuning the chassis first around the standard design and then around what goals the M department has for said given chassis. In the case of the F10, BMW M knew they were dropping in the S63 and to what HP rating they would like to achieve. Then they tune the brakes, suspension, chassis dynamics to meet their strict safety, performance, and comfort standards. An M road car is first and foremost a High performance version of it’s road going sybling. After that it’s just a BMW. Only as good as the engineers can make the standard chassis. So in a way, every M car is as good as the engineers make the standard road going version.

            Next: My comment about the M3 beating the Audi and Caddy in a head to head to demonstrate that the HP wars don’t always bring home the medal. In the case of the M3, it was the least powerful car in the bunch yet, got handed the win because of it’s “Chassis Dynamics” and handling overall. It’s  aperfectly struck balance between performance and handling, not always dropping the biggest engine into any ‘ol piece of shit.

            As for the M5 and it’s “weight problem” , yes, the F10 is a big, comfortable GT sedan with sports car capabilities. That’s why it’s called an M “5″ not an M “3″ It’s the larger brother to the athletic 3 series. It outpeforms most sedans in it’s class including most proper sports cars. At the same time civil enough to take out to dinner, a long weekend drive, or straight cross country.

            PS: Class is open from 9 to 5 during weekdays, but I offer tutoring after hours for a price. I’ll send you my bill…

            Love, Professor Manny  

          • Manny Antunes

            OK daddy, now you got me engaged. It’s about time too. I was getting bored…
            “Chassis Dynamics” was referring to how BMW’s M division is focused on tuning the chassis first around the standard design and then around what goals the M department has for said given chassis. In the case of the F10, BMW M knew they were dropping in the S63 and to what HP rating they would like to achieve. Then they tune the brakes, suspension, chassis dynamics to meet their strict safety, performance, and comfort standards. An M road car is first and foremost a High performance version of it’s road going sybling. After that it’s just a BMW. Only as good as the engineers can make the standard chassis. So in a way, every M car is as good as the engineers make the standard road going version.

            Next: My comment about the M3 beating the Audi and Caddy in a head to head to demonstrate that the HP wars don’t always bring home the medal. In the case of the M3, it was the least powerful car in the bunch yet, got handed the win because of it’s “Chassis Dynamics” and handling overall. It’s  aperfectly struck balance between performance and handling, not always dropping the biggest engine into any ‘ol piece of shit.

            As for the M5 and it’s “weight problem” , yes, the F10 is a big, comfortable GT sedan with sports car capabilities. That’s why it’s called an M “5″ not an M “3″ It’s the larger brother to the athletic 3 series. It outpeforms most sedans in it’s class including most proper sports cars. At the same time civil enough to take out to dinner, a long weekend drive, or straight cross country.

            PS: Class is open from 9 to 5 during weekdays, but I offer tutoring after hours for a price. I’ll send you my bill…

            Love, Professor Manny  

  • Babken

    560hp and 501lb-ft isn’t anything special in today’s high-performance sedans segment.

    • Viper

      Agree.nothing special , 650 would turn heads. and top speed of 360kmh , that would set the mark , this is so 2001

    • http://www.facebook.com/Whasians Daniel Vu Nguyen Hoang

      BMW M cars are built more for tackling corners than drag strips. Take this car to Leguna Seca or the Nuburgring it will post good numbers.

  • Lexus LVR

    For the price it better be quicker to 60 than a Lexus GS450h.

    • Manny Antunes

      Here you go again with your nonsense!

      • Lexus LVR

        The GS450h was quicker to 60 mph than the E39 and E60 M5.

        • Manny Antunes

          Put down the smokey smokey!

          E39, sure, I’ll give you that. They were after all a nearly a decade apart. But an E60 M5 will walk on the 450H on a bad day with my grandmother driving! 

        • http://www.facebook.com/Whasians Daniel Vu Nguyen Hoang

          The GS was tested at 5.2 seconds. The E39 M5 posted 4.8 (MFR). Depending on which magazine you read, the E60 will get between 4.1-4.6 seconds. A better comparison to the GS450h is the 550i, Mercedes E550, or the Last generation Audi S6.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Stu-Izdaman/637252985 Stu Izdaman

    Awesome!! I was expecting the 0-100 time to be 4 seconds flat or sub-4, given the fact that the E60 M5 was a full 0.7 seconds faster than the E39 M5 but hey, it isn’t a trend I guess. This M5 is beautiful, it is the spiritual successor to the E39 which makes it extra special

    • GeraldE39M5

      Your an idiot. This is no spiritual successor to the E39, its too big and ugly and complicated.
      The E39 owns this car plain and simple.

      • Manny Antunes

        I respectfully disagree. I’ve owned every 5 series since 1998 including an E39 M5, heavily modded E39 M5, and E60. The F10 is more a successor to the E39 than the E60. 

        Don’t get me wrong, i loved my wife’s 5 M Sport but it was no E39. This F10 feels like my E39 in the way it handles. Yes, it’s a larger car, but it just “feels” better than the E60 for some reason. 

        If it was today, and i had to make a decision on buying another E39 M5 or a E60 M5, i’d pick an E39 every day of the week. Until i drive the F10 M5 that is. 

  • Lexus LVR is a Faggot

    Why we even comparing to a Lexus?  Lexus LVR is ignorant and what Lexus craps he’ll say its better than anything that God designed.

  • Pingback: Photo Comparison: 2012 BMW M5 vs. E60 M5

  • Pingback: Photo Comparison: 2012 BMW M5 vs. E60 M5 | labmw.com

  • Pingback: Official Photos: 2012 BMW M5 | BMW of Freehold Blog

  • Viper

    isnt 305kmh a bit slow for 560hp?

  • Pingback: 2012 BMW M5 Offical Photos - TechTurkey Forum

  • GeraldE39M5

    Looks like a giant M3 or smaller 7 series. What is happening with M making these boats with the same HP as their BMW M SUV’s. What a joke. E39 M5>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>F10M5

  • Ringboy

    Big
    Ugly
    Looks like big M3

    AMG >>>M
    CTS-V>>>>M

    Just the truth

  • Pingback: Breaking News: 2012 BMW M5 Official Photos – 560 hp – BMW Reviews

  • Pingback: Breaking News: 2012 BMW M5 Official Photos – 560 hp | Hold Your Future

  • Dcpm2121

    I own a 2006 M5 Silver/Grau with all options. I have an ESS Supercharger system, full headers/exhaust without cats, under-drive pulleys, H&R Springs, 2010 CIC Conversion (awesome mod Patryk) and euro launch control. It was tuned conservatively with E85 fuel, the best! 105 octane for less than regular unleaded. Makes 712rwhp & 687rwtq at 10psi and no pinging. I can easily go up to 16-22 psi of boost without changing fuel. I highly recommend this setup. No problems what so ever,high performance 105 octane fuel that supports USA farmers and burns much cleaner than unleaded fuel. The only way to go; 251mph top speed at 8,600 in 7th gear!

Editor's Pick

Featured Stories

125 125 125 125 125 125