Is the 6-Speed manual in the new BMW M5 a REAL improvement?

I'd rather take it as an SMG. Yes manual transmission is more 'fun' in theory, but the M5 was designed to be a precision tool for going very quick and offering a greater degree of practicality (at a more affordable price) than something like an F430. It was supposed to have SMG, not full-on stick shifting - the customer cropped up with a "we are always right" attitude, and guess what they weren't - BMW should have stuck to thier guns on this.

I guess an analogy for other people might be Audi Quattro... RWD is more fun than 4WD (in the same way a manual box is more fun than a semi-auto)... so should Audi offer the RS4 in RWD too - just to make it more fun - even though it wouldn't be as fast.....??

I would also take the SMG. Sure the stick is more fun, but the SMG makes it a daily driver (city) that's also fast(er).

Did BMW design the manual transmission at the last moment, or did they anticipate the need and designed it with the SMG?

it was a bit of an afterthought. The M5 was never originally expected to be offered with a MT

If you are looking for a daily driver I would suggest the 530i, not an M5.
If I am going to pay 90K for a vehicle I should have the option of an manual.

It's MORE of a daily driver is what I meant to say

they took it from the previous gen m5

I wouldn't take either of them.

The SMG may be more practical, but basically, it sucks to drive.

The manual may be more fun- and it's great to drive, but it sucks as a daily driver.

So basically, I think the new M5 is a dud. I hate saying that, though. I love the bodykit, and the engine is a masterpiece.

But I'm going to have to go with the E63 AMG, as a practical automatic that is also blindingly quick and luxurious, until the new RS6 comes out.

if you have to drive automatic then the m5 doesn't want YOU

What? "...BMW took away the ability to fully disable the stability control system." So much for "Ultimate Driving Machine". :)

I can't believe BMW would put out any car that would not let you fully disable the stability control/traction control system. An M car should always be able to switch off the black box. I am not sure that Automobile has its facts straight.

^
I have the new Car and Driver; the M5 lost to the S6 and E63 due mainly to this fault on BMW's part. But, because it is a computer, I am sure that someone can figure a way to disable the DSC without the help of BMW engineers.

-BMW

Before bringing the M5 MT to market, BMW should have spent some time refining the manual gearbox, rather than taking it directly from the previous gen. They did it too hastily and I think it cost them a little bit.

I agree with what Matt said above, the M5 (and its illustrious V10) is a precision vehicle. It demands the best in terms of tranmission as well as powerplant. The 6MT just doesn't cut it. Same with the F430...the 6sp just doesn't cut it with these kinds of engines. The new "manumatic" transmissions have gotten better at shifting than a human ever could, so its no surprise that C&D got slower 0-60, 0-100, and 1/4mi times.

In terms of my preference, I love all of them, but I drove the E55 and loved it, so I would probably take the E63 over the competition...but the M5 would be close behind.

The S6, unfortunately, does not compete (nor was it meant to) so it should not have been considered in the comparo in the latest C&D. Although, despite being underpowered, it did manage to beat out the M5, so I guess hats off to Audi.

Because F1 engines don't use automatics.

Well yes. Of course it is.
The desire for a manual isn’t a rational one. That’s why rational arguments such as "you never have to take your hands off the wheel, better gas mileage, even faster, etc." don’t hold any water. Any one who’s driven and enjoyed a manual for any length of time has developed an extra "limb" of sorts that operates autonomously... kind of like having an automatic hardwired to your brain. Ever seen (or been :-) ) a "manual driver" in an automatic car? They’re pressing invisible pedals, trying to move shifter that won’t move, they forget to put it in Park... it’s a sad sight. It’s clear there’s a missing "limb."

A traditional manual is more involving and (therefore) more fun to drive than any automated system will ever be; so it doesn’t matter that SMG is logically better. Manual should always be an option on a car priding itself on being a driving machine.

^ one of the most enthusiast driven not to mention well written posts ive seen here... ever! hat tip to you.

hey, have u guys ever heard about the e39 m5 that did under 13 in stock form? gosh! the e39 m5 truly was a milestone!

Bottom line is the M5 is all about performance, and the 6-spd manual is a step back.

I’m very surprised that BMW would go for the quick band-aid fix and just bolt on the transmission from the previous M5.

I wouldn't buy the E63 mainly because if I'm buying a fast expensive car like that, I would want perfect safety. Remember the poor marks the E-Class got? (It's also an older, dated, design, but it sure is fast).

not to mention I find the benz AMG's to just be torque rockets, with little agility and handling, only brute straight line force.

I just don't get people who would order the SMG. If the point of this car isn't to have fun, what is it? Sure, you can go .3 seconds or whatever faster with the SMG, but I actually like driving, and without a real manual gearbox, frankly, your not driving. SMG is marketed as the best, but the reality is that it, and the flappy paddle gearboxes like those found in Ferrari's and others, are designed to sell automatics to people who have never learned to heel toe. Those with the SMG are missing out.

As for daily driving, I drive a manual in Toronto, which has some of the continents heaviest traffic, without any difficulty.

but isn't it annoying at sometimes when you just want to get somewhere?

The SMG isn't just 0.3 seconds faster...

--------------------------------------
From C&D:

M5 SMG
0-60 in 4.2 sec
0-100 in 9.4 sec
0-150 in 20.7 sec
1/4mile 12.5@118

M5 Manual
0-60 in 4.7 sec
0-100 in 10.3 sec
0-150 in 23.4 sec
1/4mile 13.0@114

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

The worst part is the top gear 50 to 70 mph in 7.4 seconds vs. 3.2 sec Es3 and 3.7 S6 .

By contrast the MB B klasse 200 Turbo (with 193 hp) needs just 7.3 seconds from 50 to 70 in top gear.


Webguy said that these engines M5 and F430 don't like manuals, true because they are F1 inspired engines and F1 engines don't use manuals.

And BTW sequentials and/or dual-clutches aren't automatics like some think.

I'm glad somebody bought up heel & toeing. One of the things I do like about auto's is the ease with which you can left foot brake, which I do all the time if I'm driving my old 6, whereas with the 320 I have manual, but hardly ever heel & toe, cos I'm simply not good enough to, and I severly dount more than 1% of the driving population could heel and toe at all.

Left Foot braking is easy, takes about a week to get right, heel and toeing depends FAR more on the design and layout of the pedals as to whether its possible or not. The easiest car I've had for heel and toeing was one of the crappiest cars I've ever owned (a Rover!)

darkoneforcei hate to burst your bubble, but that 50-70 can't compare. the automatics will downshift, the manual won't. so they can't really compare.

no audi ever beat a BMW. the only reason this happened in the car mag you talk about was becasue of their hatred for idrive. Ive said this before.. anyone with half a brain (this does not include audi owners)can figure this out in 30 mins.. except these morons. I have smg M5. It is quite simply one of the greatest cars ever made and one that audi with all their fwd trickery cannot come close to.

Audi does not yet make a car that has the handling adjustability of a Beemer. With their current front heavy AWD layout it is a physical impossibilty. The RS4 is about 1/2 way there but that is as close as Audi has ever gotten. With the up coming shortened drivetrain allowing them to push the engine further back will definately help. It will be interesting to see how the handling changes on the new A4 that's coming out next year. The other point is that Audi's philosophy about how a car handles is simply been different then BMW's. Audi has chosen to value the safety of AWD without adjustable handling as in say a WRX or and EVO deliberately. I don't think you will see the same kind of oversteering fun from a BMW ever in an Audi.

how many people here have actually DRIVEN a SMG M5 to make an informed decision? I love manual transmission cars as well, but SMG gives you total control of the engine and is quite thrilling to drive. With that being said, if you have driven both than that is your preference, but don't come to conclusions if the closest you have ever gotten to an M5 is the auto show.

How does an SMG give you a total control of the drive train if you don't have control over the clutch? What about the sequential part? I believe the Ultimate Driving Machine should give the driver total control when required, and that includes fully disabling the computer DSC nanny. If you can't handle a stick-shift with all that power, maybe you shouldn't drive that car. I think the stick-shift is a must-have option.

I agree with MDalle 100%. The SMG may not be as fun, but its surely better overall. Not to mention its faster. U people probably havent driven the M5...
You also described the E AMG exactly what it is!! A saloon with a big engine and its comfortable.

SMG all the way! lol

MDalle great post.

Hope one day people will realise that sequentials and automatics aren't the same thing.

BMW now offers the manual transmission in response to the SMG being problematic, and because their SMG provides a ride that has been called "rubbish" by reviewers.

BMW does a lot of things right. They also do some things wrong. Some of them VERY wrong. "Launch Control" was a feature that was VERY wrong, as it tended to trash the drive train if used exactly as directed.

My friend used to have a 6spd manual 330i, and now drives a SMG M3.

He wishes he got a manual. End of story.

On paper and initially the SMG is great, but the only people that actually prefer the SMG in the long run are people that have never owned a manual transmission car.

It seems to me that this highlights a couple of issues that may be disturbing trends.

1. According to car and driver the biggest reason the performance on the manual takes a hit is because the crash control systems (DSC) can’t be completely turned off like they can on the SMG version. Thus not allowing real driving like you would think this car was made for especially in a manual version of the car. But apparently this is a liability issue. What that has to do with a car that has 500 BHP is baffling.

2. BMW had to throw in the old version of the manual tranny. That seems an impossibility given the power boost over the previous generation, but I haven’t heard if this was modified in any way. Sounds like a lot of time, development and cost goes into the new systems, while the manual gets the scraps left over.

Both of these points hint at disturbing trends, shame on you BMW. How can you be the ultimate driving machine with such a compromise?