In the early 2000s, there were two German super sedans – and estates in the case of the Audi – that dominated the roads. They were the E39 BMW M5 and the C5 Audi RS6. These two massive mile munchers were two of the most powerful and fast four-door cars on the market. They were also some of the most desirable cars, thanks to their ability to achieve insane speeds while offering superb levels of comfort, refinement and even fun, while also being able to carry four adults and some luggage.
But which of the two is best? It’s a somewhat difficult choice, as both cars are quite excellent. However, there were some distinct advantages on the BMW M5’s side. If you had to ask most car enthusiasts, the BMW M5 is the car of the two that they’d choose if they had to because of those advantages. So let’s take a look at why the E39 BMW M5 was better than the C5 Audi RS6.
Naturally Aspirated beats Turbocharging – The E39 BMW M5’s 4.9 liter naturally aspirated V8 is a thing of absolute joy. While significantly underpowered, at 394 hp, compared to the 450 hp monster in the Audi RS6, it was a wonderful engine to rev out and was far more refined than Audi’s. It was smooth, punchy and loved to rev. The Audi RS6’s 4.2 liter twin-turbocharged V8 was more powerful, and the RS6 was indeed a bit quicker than the M5, but it didn’t put its power down with the kind of joy that the M5’s engine did. The BMW M5’s V8 was one of the last naturally-aspirated V8s BMW ever made and it was one of the best.
Reliability – While having two turbochargers adding precious boost, having all four wheels providing grip and having a fancy hydraulically controlled Dynamic Ride Control is great, it also adds a lot of complicated bits to go wrong. Plus Audi’s not a brand known for its rugged reliability, so all of those fancy gizmos in the RS6 are going to lead to problems later on own the line. The BMW M5 is a much simpler vehicle, but it’s so much better for it. There’s very little to go wrong and this makes the M5 a much easier car to live with, especially for the long haul.
Rear-Wheel Drive > All-Wheel Drive – In terms of grip and safety, all-wheel drive will always win out, especially in bad weather. However, these two cars aren’t designed to be safe, they’re designed to be fast and fun and nothing beats rear-wheel drive for having fun. Sure, the RS6 can blitz through twisty bends without a singe tire squealing, but what’s the fun in that? It’s more fun to get the tail out a little bit and roast some rear tires. The M5, with its rear-wheel drive and limited-slip differential can do just that. Its rear-drive setup also allows it to be the sharper handling car with better steering and more nimble and sharp turn-in. This is because the front-wheels are uncorrupted and the handling balance isn’t corrupted with annoying understeer.
The M5 looks better – This isn’t to say that the RS6 wasn’t a good looking car. In fact, it was and still is a very good looking car. but the M5 seems to have aged better and is a bit more interesting. The RS6 has safe, unassuming looks which work great for the sleeper car that the RS6 is. But when it comes down to actually owning a super sedan, you want it to have a bit better looks than simply “unassuming”. The BMW M5 provides just the right amount of visual excitement while still being classy and understated in its looks.
Six-speed manual – The Car Gods smiled upon the BMW M5 during its development and allowed it to only come with a six-speed manual. The C5 Audi RS6 only came with a five-speed Tiptronic automatic. Though, this was due to the fact that Audi didn’t have a manual that could handle the massive torque of the twin-turbo V8 not that Audi didn’t want to offer one. But reasoning aside, the facts are the facts and the RS6 didn’t come with a third pedal and the BMW M5 did. Being able to hear that glorious V8, clutch in, slot the gear lever into the next gear, clutch out and get back on the gas is an experience that the RS6 simply cannot deliver and one that makes the M5 better than the Audi RS6.
[Source: Car Throttle]
Surely I agree with the M5 being better than the RS6 but some points were weird to me. For instance, Audi is not known for rugged reliability? Not defending Audi but Im sure they are in the top 5-10 of the most reliable car makers. And going around a corner without a single tyre squealing in the Audi? How? The limit is set so low, the car pushes horribly into understeer during any faster cornering unlike the balanced M5.
Audi has recently climbed up the reliability ranks, but still aren’t very reliable. Back in the C5 RS6’s day, though, Audi had a very bad reputation for being very unreliable. Ask anyone who owns an Audi before 2008.
The tire squealing thing was a bit of an exaggeration but the Quattro will allow the RS6 to cling on in hard corners without slipping by shuffling power around where needed. Audi’s are very good at this. But you’re right that the M5 handles better and will be more balance, as that was one of the points in the article.
I guess you might be right with the reliability back in the days. But nowadays, they are very reliable, at least according to customer reports. http://www.consumerreports.org/cars/how-car-brands-compare-for-reliability
The modern quattro in the S4 for example is very good at the power distribution but still will understeer before anything other happens. It will also understeer before the 335i understeers the way I feel it. Drive a bit too fast into the corner and the front will push so wide, and adding more will just enhance the understeer. Eventhough in the M5 the car will understeer a bit too, definitely not to the same extent and the car can be rotated with the throttle. While I agree the RS6 has more grip in the wet, I dont think it does in the dry. Traction is the better word for it, as it puts the power down well but lateral grip is poor in comparison.
The only competition this front end heavy fwd brand ever competed in was rallying. BMW won the Mille Miglia in 1940 & many more titles since. If you like pimped out VWs, buy an Audi. Or send VAG a cheque directly, they’re going to need it for the lawyers.
Diesel? Ach, nein!
Reliability, while I’ve never had a BMW with reliability issues, I remembered reading this.
https://www.bmwblog.com/2015/10/22/bmw-moves-up-to-no-11-reliability-ranking-by-consumer-reports/
And Audi sits quite a bit higher then BMW, according to Consumer Reports.
Consumer Reports? Tesla broke all records in their testing. How long did it take before they removed their own recommendation? Even less relevant when considering 15 yr. old German high performance sedans.
Yeah Consumer Reports isn’t reliable themselves, I remembered reading this article recently, and wanted to pair it with a period link but I wasn’t able to find anything.
And yet you cite them as a source.
Ok, I love bmw but let’s be serious, Bmw was NEVER a reliable car, Audi was far more strong and reliable. Let’s remember de 00’s when the E66 launched… it was a mess, one of the worst reliable cars in the history of german auto. The M5 e39 was a disaster in terms of realiability, the engine only lasts about 130.000 miles and then it need swaping, same for the gearbox and today… well today Bmw doesen’t know to build a reliable engine with an ok timing chain… they all fall so in terms of realiability Audi is on another scale.
According to JD Power, you’re right. BMW is in the top 10, Audi is below average. So yes, two different scales. For models of the vintage in this article, maintenance history is more important than any quality survey.
huge LOL at you guys and your reliability ranks. In reality tho the whole VW grop is known for failing timing chains due exceptional stretching across their engines range, with Audi being no exception. Believe me, I’m actually from Europe and know quite a bit on this subject, although I never checked JD Power rankings thing. I am awared BMWs are not kings of the hill either, but I bet you any money – they are NOT WORSE than similar Audis reliability wise.
Btw. how would Chris support his claim about the e65 being the worst of them all? I mean everyone had the electronics failing at that time, not only BMW, but engine wise it is hard to see the point for me.
Anyone who would buy a 15 yr. old German high performance sedan looking for reliability is asking for a world of trouble.
yes, but that is because old things are just falling apart and need maintanance which is NOT going to be cheap at the first place, rather than shabby build quality.
Owner forums are mainly if not only frequently by Brand Fans, so there is a huge bias. You could hear (well read) that Land Rover is the most reliable brand right now, the GT-R is the best supercar ever, and that the new Type R is a pile of shit (obviously not on a Honda One) on owner forums.
Yes, it is not 100%, but what is? Forums are not all the same, there are plenty and they might be of different nature. For that reason, Mother Nature gave you your head to sit on your neck, you then should be able to sort the informations you are receiving and use them to your preferences. Guess what it means if you can’t find any on reliability of a car you are looking for? Certainly not that the car is trouble free.
So? Chris here is “complaining” about the e39 M5 demanding a new engine + tranny every 130k miles (yeah, right, think he is confusing The Beast for the e60 M5), but even if so – try to find any reliability issue threads on the M5 powertrains and you will find them being dissasembled to the last screw with detailed info years ago. Now, go on and do the same for the S8 D3 / S6 C6 and all you will find is just…. nothing, really. Hell, you won’t even find the production code of that engine, they seem to call it “dat engine from dat car”. This fact on its own is putting me off the idea of owning the S8 in the near future, since I’m not buying a second hand saloon with used-to-start-at-100k pricetag without a strong community of people behind – I don’t want to find out problems somebody else already had on my own. Yes, Ima helluva lazy Billy:). That being said, God, I’m glad my most favorite manufacturer in the world has a community that works…. and I don’t care for the others that don’t either.
huge LOL at you and your reliability ranks. In reality tho the whole VW grop is known for failing timing chains due exceptional stretching across their engines range, with Audi being no exception. Believe me, I’m actually from Europe and know quite a bit on this subject, although I never checked JD Power rankings thing. I am awared BMWs are not kings of the hill either, but I bet you any money – they are NOT WORSE than similar Audis reliability wise.
Btw. how would you support the claim about the e65 being the worst of them all? Yeah, right, check the A8 D3 reliability threads first, please. I mean everyone had various electronic modules failing at that time – not only BMW – but engine wise it is hard to see the point for me.
Physics: anvil or slingshot? Isn’t the Audi’s V8 ahead of the axle? Thus the necessity of awd.
I’ve had both. Audi RS6 by far.