Some M5 competition from Australia with some help from the US. - The Unofficial BMW M5 Messageboard (m5board.com)

Apples · 1st January 2002, 11:32

Just thought l would put up this post with some pics of what competition the M5 might have from Down Under.
It called the HSV GTS made by Holden,sister to GM for all you US people
This car is about as good as you could get in respect to bang for bucks as it 45-50% of the price of an M5 in Australia (GTS= AUS$100,000......M5= AUS$225,000)
It's a USA, Australia combo, the engine is the 5.7liter used in the top Corvett in the US and it's pumping out 400hp 300kw and around 375 lbft 510nm. The look/style was created in Australia.
The red GTS 300 photos are of Mark Skaifes car, he's our Touring car champ in Aus for the past few years. I was lucky enough to get a ride(passenger) in his race ready touring car a few years back. 600hp and only a 3,000lb and you can work the rest out.........Holly s*!#* they go stop and turn so fast there is no time to think about or even see the next corner.
I must say in the flesh the GTS has a very strong powerful look and pulls off the whole package with ease.
It's not an M5 in some areas but puts up a good fight.........bang for bucks again can't be ignored.
HVS maybe also making a ute (sort of pick up) called the Maloo with a stroked version of the same 5.7liter engine to 6.2 liters and 475hp.....cost would be around AUS$150,000. They took plenty of orders from the Sydney motor show. And l would do and pay anything to have one in my garage in the US
There just about to release the coupe version in the same body as the GTS soon...... it will sell very very quick and comes with the generation III 3.8liter with/without supercharger, as well as the 5.7liter in versions in 300hp...360hp.....400hp(GTS) powerplants.
I think they are looking at sending some for the UK market in the near future........l think their looking at a distributor as l type this post.
I had a real good look at one the coupes other day, and l was very impressed, it has great lines. The speedo/taco cluster is made in the same color of the car..........I know what your thinking, but l must say it's well done and not tacky. They will be only selling around 8-10,000 total in the coupe in the next 3 years.....and thats it.....should be a snack.
Have a look at their site.....(good site with plenty of sound) and have a snoop around.
www.hsv.com.au
Have a great and happy new year.
APPLES
Looks likes Bobefett will attach them for me.....thats mate.

bobafett · 1st January 2002, 11:34

Apples,

There have been a number of threads abotu this car. Personally I find the styling to be a bit OTT, and the interior to be a bit on the cheap side (but it's all from pictures, mind you), but yes, the performance is mind-blowing for the price, and definetly poses as serious competition to the M5 (I have an issue of CAR somewhere that compared it to the M5 and the E55, they threw the E55 out right away, but actually ranked the Holden above the M5 in many respects).

--Dan

PS: about your pictures, email them to me and I'll put them online so you can see them. They can't be hosted off of your desktop. my email address is bobafett@earth.he.net

pontman · 1st January 2002, 16:48

as u say it is good bang for bucks, but a similiar top went through here a few months ago with a magazine article comparin the m5 and the gts.

performance is a little similiar, but ride and interior quality has absolutely nothin on the BMW (aparently)

hey apples, u an australian or something? u know more than u should for a non-australian

skaifies car would have been a nice ride too, lucky u :P

Adam · 1st January 2002, 19:40

Heres the car and driver comparison...

The BMW M5 looked like it had just fudged its pants. The cooling fan was gulping air, the hunky Michelin Pilot Sport tires were frayed at the edges, and the handsome aluminum wheels were runny with brake soot.
Over the sun-dappled mountains of Santa Barbara County, an ink-black mystery sedan had nipped incessantly at the M5's back bumper for three hours. The interloper's gaping meshed air ducts were never more than one turn away from inhaling the M5, even though to slip away the BMW had summoned every last tittle of grip, torque, and brake in its voluminous reserve.

We were aghast. The 394-hp BMW M5 is the king, the picture next to the word "car" in our dream dictionary since its introduction in 1999, when it began draining our reservoir of superlatives. We've hurled fine machinery at it, including the Mercedes-Benz E55 AMG and the Jaguar XJR ("Battle of the Best," March 2000), and watched the M5 grind them into the soil. It's an O'Neill drama, it's Whistler's mama, it's Camembert.

But as sure as Captain Cook's first words were "What rocks?" when he sailed into Botany Bay, there is a car from the Southern Hemisphere that has all the requisite fixings to be a challenger. It has four doors, a 402-hp V-8, a six-speed manual cog box, rear drive, and independently sprung wheels at all the corners. And the lucky Australians can be jitterbugging on its drilled stainless-steel pedals for about $24,000 less than what an M5 costs here.
Even more stupefying is the fact that the HSV GTS R 300 — is your inhaler standing by? — initially comes out of a General Motors factory only a couple of chromosomes off a Cadillac Catera. Yes, the Caddy they can't give away.

Since when, you're probably asking yourself, did GM get into the M5-heckling business? That would be 1988, when it authorized its Melbourne-based subsidiary, GM-Holden's Automotive, to form a partnership with Tom Walkinshaw Racing called Holden Special Vehicles (HSV). The mission was — and still is — for it to become Holden's equivalent of AMG. The company creates hot-rod derivatives of the locally assembled Commodore family sedan in a suburban Melbourne workshop. Thanks largely to Aston Martin DB7 designer Ian Callum, who penned the current generation of hot Holdens before joining Jaguar, HSVs have become more handsome through the years since the first VL SS Group A SV of 1988, which Aussies bluntly dubbed the "plastic pig."
Today's HSV catalog features six cars, from the XU6, which is powered by a supercharged 241-hp Buick 3800 V-6, to the Grange, an extended-wheelbase luxury cruiser motivated by 342 horses from the Corvette's LS1 V-8. All are based on the current Commodore VX sedan and use the same basic dirty underside as both the Catera and the Opel Omega: the General's global rear-drive GM2800 platform.

The GTS R 300 is the top scrapper of the bunch. The 300 moniker is the number of peak kilowatts piped to the Tremec T-56 gearbox by the Callaway-modified Chevy LS1 V-8 — or 402 horsepower, for those who don't do metrics. Callaway's plant in Old Lyme, Connecticut, pokes the LS1's cylinder heads with a CNC mill to encourage higher port air velocity and fits larger valves and sturdier valve gear, a lumpier camshaft, and a machined-billet throttle body with three more millimeters of throat. The tubular exhaust manifold comes from HSV along with the engine-control software. In case you've forgotten the output, it's scrawled in three places on the outside of the GTS R and once on the instrument cluster.

The volcanic styling mirrors that of the cars running in Australia's V-8 touring-car series and specifically the Bathurst 1000, a fair attempt to create a motorsport equivalent to bungee jumping. HSV sharpens the Commodore's handling by fitting rear toe-control links and firmer bushings in the semi-trailing arms. Springs, shocks, and anti-roll-bar links are all upgraded. Kinetic energy conversion is accomplished with four-piston calipers mounted on huge cross-drilled pizza pans: 13.5 inches in the front and 12.4 inches in the rear.
The only problem with pitting the GTS R against the BMW was finding one stateside and learning to power-shift southpaw. We headed for the hills when AMCI, a testing firm in Vista, California, graciously solved the first problem (see sidebar), while our resident crown colony refugee, Barry Winfield, claimed to still possess the software for starboard controls.

Second Place
HSV GTS R 300
Were it not for some easily fixed deficiencies in quality and refinement, the HSV would likely have edged out the M5 in this test and sparked an ugly brawl in Backfires.

Here's why: Apex to apex, the Holden proved to be more fun in an alpine fracas. The steering felt more communicative than the M5's, the driver more connected to the front wheels. The body stayed planted, and the rear semi-trailing arms remained unflappable, even during lift-throttle horseplay certain to provoke oversteer. Throttle-on oversteer was more accessible and controllable.
The Verdict

Highs: Friskier in the hills than the M5, the best seats in any GM product anywhere.

Lows: The fact that we can't buy one, a balky shifter, some cheap bits.

The Verdict: We'd rather have this "Cadillac" than the one GM entered at Le Mans.

In short, the Holden felt livelier and more willing for a hard thrash than the M5. It was a turnaround performance over the previous day's, when the GTS R posted slower numbers in lapping and the lane-change maneuver. At maximum grip, the steering had an unsettling two-stage delivery, offering a heart-stopping moment of nothing before the turn-in. In tight corners the inboard rear Bridgestone S0-2 unloaded enough to spin, making quick exits a challenge. All GTS Rs are supposed to have a Hydratrak limited-slip device in the differential, but ours felt as if it were either missing or on strike.

The cast-aluminum small-block also proved a little outclassed at the track, betrayed in part by the HSV's taller gearing in first and second and a heavy, reluctant shifter just this side of awful. The redhead delivered little excitement for the first half of the journey to the 6100-rpm fuel cutoff (a rankling 500 rpm shy of the posted redline!) and couldn't power out of "park 'em" hairpins like the BMW could. It was no surprise that the acceleration times were thus off the M5's, by 0.6 second to 60 mph and 0.5 to the quarter-mile, even though the 3820-pound HSV is 200 pounds lighter. A ranking GM engineer said the mothership offered HSV the Corvette Z06's fabulous 405-hp LS6 engine but couldn't deliver it in time for the GTS R 300's launch, which is why HSV turned to Callaway. A prudent decision then, perhaps, but one that should be reconsidered now that the stronger-feeling LS6 is in stores.

With the volume turned down a notch for public roads, the HSV came into its zone of harmony. The pieces began working together to attack and conquer corners, and the car felt smaller than the M5 and easier to place with confidence. Unlike many slammed tuner jobs, the ride was firm but absorptive. All but the most serious shocks faded to tremors at the seat and steering wheel and never upset the car.
"It's quieter and more sophisticated as a grand tourer than the hot-rod graphics would suggest," Winfield summed up.

We winced at the interior's acres of hard plastic, some of it an odd shade of metallic blue, but bore in mind the HSV's reduced price. Persistent wind noise was the inevitable consequence of indifferently applied door seals. The Xanadu interior colors weren't to everyone's taste, but the elaborately contoured buckets were unquestionably the best chairs ever experienced in a GM product. Lateral movement was negligible, and extended visits left both the spine and pelvis feeling pampered. The back seat offered the comfort of a leather couch and made the M5's seem almost like a phone booth for pygmies.
The GTS R is no M5, but it's closer in constitution than anything we've driven and anything we ever expected to drive from General Motors.

First Place
BMW M5
The M5 was looking threatened until we started tallying the scores for the individual categories. Let's start with the engine.

It's a cold-cock wallop for the BMW. The S62 V-8 compensates for its lack of cubes with gizmology, notably the variable valve timing. It helps the M5 deliver deep slugs of power at all points on the rev range with no disabling ruts, as in the HSV. The extra 900 rpm of usable revs didn't hurt, either, and there's still some living to do if you've never experienced 7000 rpm ululating from the M5's quadraphonic tailpipes.
The transmission category also had to go to the BMW's buttery ZF box, especially since the HSV's unwilling Tremec was pale competition. However, like some BMWs these days, the M5 requires concentration to operate smoothly because of the reluctance of the engine to spool down between shifts, possibly a result of the electronic throttle trying to control emissions.

The Verdict

Highs: Only Enzo's heirs build a sweeter V-8, fluid controls, a blue-chip choice no one will question.

Lows: Feels spongier over the mountains, a price fit for a prince.

The Verdict: It's better, but only just.

Although both cars offered progressive, effective brakes, the BMW's vented discs never showed the creeping fade the HSV's drilled rotors acquired after repeated hard hits. Handling scores came down to a wash. Even though all parties agreed the HSV was honey in the mountains, its misconduct at the track left a slightly vinegary aftertaste. Conversely, the big M5 was hobbled on the road by an inherent softness in the chassis. Drivers noticed the extra body motion and experienced a vague feeling of insulation from the wheels, which caused them to back off in the corners. Its suspension "puts a layer of syrup between you and the road," spake the logbook. The M5's front tires also had trouble getting bite on the slippery skidpad. Mild front-end plow put the BMW's 0.83 skidpad performance down by 0.02 g from that of the GTS R.

Yet the M5's unsprungs proved more composed and able to lay down the power on Willow's torturous 1.1-mile long ribbon, allowing it to lap about a quarter of a second faster. The micrometer-accurate steering drove the BMW through the lane-change gates with another 0.9 mph of velocity. And the extra degree of chassis compliance earned the BMW ride-quality honors.
The M5's stiff seats may agree with many Teutonic posteriors, especially those accustomed to perching on stacked drywall, but for overall utility and coddling ability the GTS R's were unbeatable. But the M5 roared back in the ergonomics and features categories with a logical control layout and no-dead-buttons dash that included a navigation system and rear parking-distance monitor. Compared with the HSV, with its fairly penny-pinched cockpit and fluttering door seals, the finely tailored BMW also got the nod in fit and finish.

In styling, the two cars diverge completely. The M5 is reserved, an executive streamliner with mostly subtle modifications that speak its message in its fast-shrinking taillights. Alternatively, the HSV trademarks are flaunted in red and silver script on almost every available plastic-enhanced panel. Both are handsome to our collective eyes, however.
It is the value and fun-to-drive slots where the Aussie records its most direct hits against the German. Even with all its sublime qualities, the $74,733 M5 is an expensive opiate when weighed against the HSV's greenback-equivalent price of $50,362 (including $3580 in Australian luxury tax), which buys you perhaps 90 percent of the resulting high. Throw in intangibles such as brand bragging rights and future resale values, and the BMW starts to look better, but the HSV is still the budget champ. And the tightly wound chassis combined with the rear-end-roasting bluster of the big-bore V-8 made it the head hoot to drive. Still, the M5 took more columns than it lost and thus deserves the title. As long as GM continues this madness of keeping its best sedans sequestered in Australia, the M5 may never have to give it up.

Enjoy!
Adam

JEM · 1st January 2002, 21:05

Some folks ought to look at the 'similar cars to the M5' section, periodically...the HSVs get dicussed over there, which is probably where this thread gets moved eventually.

The Holdens and HSVs are what GM should be selling in the US- even the Commodore SS makes every US-made GM product look silly, both on a pure-performance basis and in terms of content-for-money. They're not built like BMWs, but they don't cost like them either, and for a lot of folks this would be a perfectly decent tradeoff.

Bart Carter · 2nd January 2002, 04:01

But you see, why we by an M5 instead of a Holden is we want luxury and quality.

JEM · 2nd January 2002, 04:42

Quote:

Originally posted by Bart Carter
But you see, why we by an M5 instead of a Holden is we want luxury and quality.

Agreed, there's lots of folks for whom a Holden's, uh, Detroit-like plastic would put them off. On the other hand, there's a lot of folks for whom a car of M5 performance at $25K less would justify some sacrifices in material quality.

Furthermore, stepping down from the HSVs to the Holdens, at the Commodore SS level you have sedan a little larger than an E39, powered by the wonderful LS1 V8 in basically what was Camaro spec in the US, sells in Australia for around $30K USD. Ford offers product of similar capability (generally a little down on HP to its GM counterpart.)

So why do GM and Ford give us in the US the junk they give us?

Bart Carter · 2nd January 2002, 05:57

JEM, I really wish I knew.

I have often wondered why a company, say Ford, wouldn't put a 400HP engine in a 6-speed Lincoln.

And we all know they could do it if they wanted.

JEM · 2nd January 2002, 06:51

I'm sure Ford is concerned about competing with Jaguar. There's been some comment that there will be a 350-or-so-HP Lincoln LS once Jaguar is safely up to 400HP.

In GM's case I think the reason has to this point been interdivisional tug-of-war about who owns what market segment.