Some pics of the M6. Same specs as the M5, just slightly lighter (1710 Kg instead og 1760 Kg). 5L V10 507HP 0-100KPh in 4.6s, 0-200KPh in 14s. Roof is Carbon fibre.

 

Looks much better than the "garden variety" 6-series. The CF roof is interesting. The wheels are especially when they're moving. Nice.

Costs too much, though (~$100k). I'd rather have an M5.

 

There goes lunch.

 

I think I might actually prefer the "garden variety" 6. I'm a fan, altogether, of the 6-series, however (in M form or not). Take a look at the rear bumper--what's with the snow plow back there?

Funny how the Bangled design works on coupes.

At the M6's price point, I'd probably get a CL500. The 6-series is more a two seater (even though there are four seats). There's absolutely no room in the back of those things.

 

looks great from in front, the rear of that car just looks confused, the trunk bluges out too much, they should shave it back and have it flow with the rest of the car, sure it ould be a lil like a porsche but it would help clean up the look of the back...

 

I like it but it needs two more doors.

 

Those rims are awesome, i love the way they look...they whole car is pretty bad ass but i love how the rims are.

 

...But then you'd only have 305HP (or whatever it is) and a slushbox.

 

CLAMG.

 

The CL500 is the one at the same price as the M6. The CL55 AMG costs ~$20k more.

 

Why don't they just plant a tree in the center console?

Too much damn wood inside

 

That's a very disappointing 0-60 for a car with 500hp. And it's not even that heavy.

 

Manufacturer estimates are usually very conservative.

 

 

M5?

 

I'd still take the CL500...make mine Granite Grey

 

 

Yeah...the M treatment looks much better on the 5er. The 6er is too soft and graceful for an M makeover.

 

Yeah, nice. But I really want a fully loaded one of these....760li

 

the m6 is bewtiful!

 

Great looking car.

Do not hold me to this, but I think the M3 CSL also has a carbon fiber roof.

 

Alright, M6....Sooo sweet...I want, I want I want....

But....Am I the only one who is now disappointed with every sports car that is slower than the new C6 Corvette? For 50k you can have 0-60 in what, 4.5s, and for the Z06 a purported 3.8s...And the car actually does go around curves! Anyhow, just my thoughts,
Steven

 

yeah the numbers mean a lot, but ive never personally driven a car that can hit sub-6 secs, so fractions of a sec dont mean much...yet. however, i sat in a 2001 porsche turbo and i'd sell my last kidney to own one. so i can understand ya.

 

Note 4.6 is 0-100k (62mph) those last 2 MPH make a bigger difference than you might imagine, also it is a manufacturers estimate and BMW is notoriously conservative with those. Expect 4.3 0-60.

Vandy

 

It indeed does and it is one of the main reasons it was not imported to the US, either the Federal M6 has a new way around the safety issues or they won't bring the CF roof over in the Federal M6.

Vandy

 

 

Now if it only had Acura Navigation rather than "iDrive-uDrive-what-the-hell-do-I-do-now-Drive"

 

They shoudl've fixed the headlights when they gave it a M-makeover. The rear end is sexy but I'm still having a hard time liking the headlights. Give it some eyelids or something...anything BMW...

but the carbon fiber roof is

 

Maybe I was being overly optimistic, but I was expecting 3.9-4s 0-60...

 

Indeed too optimistic. 3.9s would take more HP or less weight. You have to keep in mind there are very few roughly $100k or less cars that accelerate that fast, just think a 996 GT3 is slower than that and it is a wicked fast car. Low 4s in a Grand Tourer is world class.

Vandy