New M5

I would imagine that feels pretty uncomfortable. Looking it up, an F40 takes nearly a second longer, and an XJ220 took 7.9 according to evo...

4wd and pretty much zero shift times.

and a metric fuck ton of power.

4wd or not - anything that can do 60 to 100mph in 4.2 seconds is silly quick.

I think 0 to 150 mph was recorded as 17.8 seconds - which is equally mental.

I think most of those things are for willy-waving, ego flattering and pub boastery!

I think anything on Corsa or Cup tyres will be going sideways at some point just not at the owners request but more by the surprise of cold tyres and too much power.

Haven't all the big boy cars been about pub boaster since someone strapped a supercharger onto the front of a 4.5L Bentley back in the day?

You've not got enough Arabs living near you, clearly.....

Seriously though, you're right: it's pointless and 0-60 or 30-70, the sort of thing you can get away with on a frequent basis, Golf Rs and their ilk are just as quick. It's above 160-200kph that these things are king, on the autobahn basically. The Gorilla is just like any other car on the road when driving normally; it's great surprising people around and through roundabouts that such a yacht can be so nimble but small cars with decent set-up are more fun, just like the R1 eats most things on the road but it's still more satisfying and enjoyable slinging a 250 2-stroke about.

It's still an utter hoot joining the A3 in the Gorilla, though.....

How long before legislation gets in the way of these ridiculous power hikes? I know, car nut and all that but there have been many incidents of people being unable to handle the cars and this sort of thing is just pointless willy waving. Take a look at this link, it shows where the rest of us are being taken by a few morons. abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=4198416&page=1

Perhaps there will be changes in the future but frankly I cannot see sense and intelligence anywhere in all this.

Fair point and at any speed a car or bike or whatever can kill when used incorrectly but, what is the point of huge power increases for use on the public roads?

I would happily have 600HP in anything 4WD, Porsche like with the weight over the driven rear wheels or a lightweight like an Atom or Caterham with similar power to weight stats. For the road though I don't think anything over 400hp is going to make any difference in rate of progression. In fact lack of intelligence or respect for authority will get you there even faster with anything over 100HP!

What I am trying to say is that for every enthusiast who has the ability to use the power responsibly, there are who knows how many that would not be safe on a pedal tricycle that get to drive these cars. We really need to have some kind of Psychometric tests but that will not happen so the responsibility ends up elsewhere. Sorry I did not get what I was meaning across.

When I started on bikes I had a 250 but people were not being responsible on the 250cc bike and the law went on to restrict learners to a 125cc 12.5 bhp or 11kw now.

There is also the march of technology to consider. The RD250 that was the main cause for the Learner rule change was so much more powerful and efficient than the 250s of the 50s and 60s that it was two or three classes of bike above them but safety features and handling were not as advanced as engine development - so boys got killed on them. The 600bhp M5 is holistically more capable than a 600bhp F1 car of days past to the extent that even the most ding-dong bell-end would have to be doing something seriously insane to have an event in it, that insanity being in the hands of the driver not the car.

The US 2nd amendment was written, as discussed elsewhere, at a time where semi-automatic weapons capable of ripping an ox in two were not even considered in the maddest dreams of the fathers of the constitution. Same goes for the serenity of a 600bhp saloon car: in William Woollard's era it would have been a death trap; today its just a car. 

I've just read the review in this week's Autocar. It is clearly an epic machine - powerful and then some; handling prowess for a 4 door saloon (so practical too); mile munching when required and yet exhilarating when needed and so on and so on. And they've gone back to a "proper" auto box and done away with the TCT. That's got to be a good thing.

But some other things stuck out in the review -  

Price - £89,645. Price as tested with a couple of packs and some added M gubbins plus ceramic brakes £101,900. Yes, that's where the E class big engined AMG's are as well price wise, so the competition is matched. But with a 540i saloon X Drive M sport being £53,000 and an M3 being £63,000 that's an epic gulf in price between the M5 and the "next model down". I juts can't see that is sustainable, which brings me to the next point - 

Value after 3 years and 36k miles £35,650.....  but then epid depreciation seems to be true of all these uber-saloons. 

Autocar noticed some things that meant it was not a 5 star car -

"Slightly irksome steering weight" as it was too heavy unless you spent ages getting it right in the systems set up. 
Inconsistent brake pedal feel - sometimes grabby and over assisted, but that might be the carbon ceramics optional brakes. 
An occasionally restless ride (it rode a bit hard and didn't do do waft as well as a Merc E class)

But here's one that made me think WTAF - this is an M5 after all - and this was that is has synthesised engine noise in the cabin. Yes, it's got fake engine noise inside the car. Has the world ended or something and I've not noticed? 

It reminds me of the original RS3, in that the price is steep for the class of car, but good VFM for the performance.

The five star thing is universal now - the best car (or cars) in a class get five stars in many cases, despite flaws being reported. A five star car should be pretty much perfect, at least for intended purpose.

No great lust for it on my part. The engine is the heart and soul of a performance car, and should make you feel good even if you are just pootling about. The new breed delivers performance and efficiency at a level beyond that which it could without taking this approach, but it feels like we've lost a lot, too.

and yet in some you tube half mile races (the Carwow one), the E63 S was ahead from 0 to 150 mph plus