<http://schema.org/articleBody>
"  Stuttgart, Germany -- Comparing the with its coupe brother the is like arguing over who&amp;#039;s hotter: Jennifer Garner or Jessica Biel. What&amp;#039;s the point? Any self-respecting guy would be happy with either. Same goes for the M5 and M6. But off to Germany we went, to answer this simple question: If you had to choose (the M5 or M6, not Garner or Biel), which would it be?   The M5 and M6 have many similarities, but the one thing that&amp;#039;s identical is the drivetrain. And &amp;#039;s almighty, all-conquering 5.0-liter 90-degree V-10 is simply magical. This is a supremely advanced powerplant that uses individual throttle valves for each cylinder tied to an electronically controlled throttle-by-wire system; response is immediate. BMW&amp;#039;s variable double-VANOS camshaft management continuously varies the valve timing to create better high-rpm power and a very consistent torque curve.   The result is one of the most free-revving engines ever, along with an insanely potent 500 bhp at 7750 rpm and 383 lb.-ft. of torque at 6100. Fire either one of these V-10s up and they sound...like complete rubbish, at least at idle; think of the uninspiring, industrial-sounding hum modern turbodiesels make. But give the engine full wood and it sounds exactly as Peter Egan described in his of the M6 in R&amp;amp;amp;T&amp;#039;s July 2005 issue: &amp;quot;...like a Formula 1 car with mufflers.&amp;quot; It plays such a rippingly beautiful song up to its 8250-rpm redline that you find yourself running up and down through the gears just to hear it one more time.   All this power is harnessed to a 7-speed sequential M gearbox (SMG) operated either by steering-wheel paddles, a center console lever or you can just leave the system in full automatic. This third-generation SMG is far superior to any before, providing jerk-free (computer-controlled) clutch slips as you pull away from a stop. This is the only transmission available for the M5, though a true manual (that&amp;#039;s right, with three pedals!) is said to be in the works for the M6. Incredibly quick (though abrupt) full-throttle shifts in the Drivelogic&amp;#039;s sportiest setting (of 11 to choose from) mean both the M5 and M6 chirp the rear tires going into 3rd gear.   While this system (like &amp;#039;s F1 gearbox) is completely state-of-the-art, you do lose the driving pleasure associated with old-school techniques such as heel-and-toe downshifting. Personally, I&amp;#039;d also prefer the paddles to be steering-column mounted instead of wheel-mounted; as someone who shuffle-steers, it can get confusing as to where the proper paddle is.   Surprisingly, neither car feels as fast as their identical 4.1-second 0-60-mph times indicate, at least in real-world driving. Which is strange, because 4.1 is fast. Really fast. Faster than a , every and the . Equally impressive are quarter-mile times of 12.4 sec. (the few cars barely quicker include supercars such as the , and and the Ford GT), the lighter by 265 lb. M6 showing a higher trap speed of 118.1 mph versus the M5&amp;#039;s 115.8. Of note, we used BMW&amp;#039;s Formula 1-like launch control mode (which won&amp;#039;t be available in the U.S.) to achieve our best times; after you initiate the system, all that&amp;#039;s required is to keep your foot to the floor the computer manages wheelspin. But it&amp;#039;s only good for a couple of launches before the clutch heats up and the system automatically shuts down.  So why don&amp;#039;t these M cars overwhelm us with their power (&amp;#039;cause you&amp;#039;re thinking, 500 bhp is a lot of horses, right?) the way, say, a Dodge Viper does? We attribute it to the soft bottom end of the powerband combined with the lack of a real high-rpm rush. In the Ms, the rush comes on after 3000 rpm and then stays consistently thrusty all the way to redline, the finely tuned BMW engines thereby making the cars deceptively fast. The close-ratio 7-speed doesn&amp;#039;t hurt acceleration times either.  The suspensions for the M5 and M6 are similar to the aluminum-intensive systems of the standard 5 and 6 Series, but optimized for the cars&amp;#039; much higher power and correspondingly greater cornering demands. They both use BMW&amp;#039;s EDC (Electronic Damper Control), which provides for three different levels of suspension stiffness: Comfort, Normal and Sport. Swapping among the three modes, though, proved that Comfort is not that soft and Sport is not that much firmer than full soft. Why not make them more differentiated?   Dimensionally, the M5 and M6 are quite similar. In the interest of passenger space, the M5 rides on a 4.2-in.-longer wheelbase, yet the M6 is actually 0.3 in. longer than its 4-door sibling. The coupe is also 0.3 in. wider but 3.6 in. shorter in height, with a slightly narrower front track of 61.7 in. (vs. 62.2 for the M5) and a marginally wider rear track of 62.4 (vs. 61.7 for the M5). But what&amp;#039;s key here is that the M6 is lighter than the M5 3770 lb. vs. 4035 due in part to such weight-saving components as a carbon-fiber roof (the first in series production), carbon-fiber bumper supports and forged alloy wheels.   Both cars wear identical shoes Continental SportContact 2 tires, size 255/40ZR-19 up front and 285/35ZR-19 at the rear. No doubt about it, the M6&amp;#039;s double-5-spoke wheels look far sexier.   Although our seat-of-the-pants analysis told us the M6 is the scalpel of these two 2-ton Teutons, our track numbers say it&amp;#039;s nowhere near a dominant performance, much like the &amp;quot;Does it really matter?&amp;quot; difference between Garner and Biel. The M5 slid to a 0.87g around the skidpad while the M6 managed 0.88g. The M6 showed its more nimble nature through the slalom course, averaging 69.5 mph, though the M5 was no slacker at 68.9. With identical brakes (14.7-in. cross-drilled and vented rotors up front and 14.6-in. cross-drilled and vented rotors at the rear), identical tires and relatively similar curb weights, it only makes sense that the braking numbers were a virtual dead heat: The M5 stopped in 120 ft. from 60 mph and 207 ft. from 80, while the M6 used 1 ft. less tarmac from 60 and 2 ft. more from 80. Pedal feel is extremely firm, just as we like it.   These are easy cars to drive fast, both on the Autobahn (where those big brakes give complete confidence that, yes, you will be able to slow down in time) and on back roads. The M6 has slightly quicker, more direct steering and as a whole feels more lively and nimble than the M5. But both exhibit handling manners near perfect for road cars, with steering neither darty nor too slow, and with excellent feedback.  Despite the 500 bhp, don&amp;#039;t expect Cadillac CTS-V-like huge corner-exit oversteer. BMW&amp;#039;s variable M differential lock which increases the locking force as the speed difference between the driven wheels rises sees to that, optimizing traction; but if really provoked (with the DSC yaw and traction control system turned off), the M5 and M6 will provide smoky slideshows. While we wish the cars had a bit less understeer (no doubt dialed in to keep over-ambitious drivers from oversteering off the road), truth is you&amp;#039;ll be hard-pressed to find two more competent, confidence-inspiring cars for high-speed traveling.   Both cars are distinguished from their lesser brethren by new front air dams with brake and engine cooling ducts, side sills, flared fenders, new mirrors and new rear fascias from which a typical M quad exhaust sprouts. And, of course, M-logo side gills. The M6 is the beauty queen of the two, its sleek coupe shape and raked windshield far outweighing its ugly trunklid.   Hop into either the M5 or M6, grab onto the thick red and blue-stitched M leather-wrapped steering wheel...and you&amp;#039;re not immediately certain which car you&amp;#039;re in; both have similar twin-hood dash layouts, the central one for the iDrive/navigation system. The M6, however, has a flowing, more cohesive, driver-oriented center console versus the M5&amp;#039;s more traditional setup. Both of our cars were equipped with BMW&amp;#039;s optional ($1000) head-up display, with digital speed and current-gear indicator (the latter helpful when you have seven of them!), handy for keeping eyes on the road.   Our M5&amp;#039;s seats had the optional active width adjustment ($1900), which means the bolsters automatically move to hold you in place as you enter a corner. This might be fun for some, but to have a seat start groping you mid-corner is downright distracting. Luckily, it can be turned off.   The M6 has more laterally supportive seats, the bolsters of which are power adjustable. By a person. But the M5 has a more upright driving position, giving a greater view of the road ahead. Of course, the M5 is a lot more practical, with seating for five along with adequate head and leg room for rear-seat passengers. As a low-slung coupe, the M6 lacks rear-seat head room and the deeply sculpted bucket-like rear seats would be comfortable, except that the seatbacks are too upright.   Although the cars we tested were European specification, the M5 is now on sale in the U.S. at a base price of $81,200, which makes the M5 dare we say it a bargain in the high-priced world of well-bred road burners. The M6 won&amp;#039;t be on sale in the States until May, with an estimated price of $97,200.   So how do you choose between the M5 and M6? If you need space, the M5 is the one. For those who don&amp;#039;t, the M6 performs ever so slightly better according to the numbers. According to the seat of our pants, however, the M6 feels much better, making it the purist&amp;#039;s choice (though at a premium of $16,000). As for styling, well, it&amp;#039;s not even a question. Every German we came across gave the M6 a third look, whereas the M5 barely received a passing glance. Germans know their cars, and they love the M6. "^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string>
<http://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars/car-comparison-tests/reviews/a11593/2006-bmw-m5-m6/>