Source was just a google of M5, but you're right that page says 10.9.

It was an argument against the "insanity" of a 10.5 time, you're right it costs quite a bit more.

A 10.5 is only normal to arm-chair racers spoiled by the glut of 600+hp factory cars. Even 10 years ago, those times were reserved for hyper-cars, or stripped-out hotrods which were towed to the track.

Even today it's impressive to see a street car run under 12s. On a given test and tune night, I'll see maybe one out of 50 street cars run sub-11s, and they're always obviously modified.

You claim it isn't insane, yet your example is BMW's fastest car. I'll throw out another Definitely Not Insane Car running a similar time: Ferrari 488 GTB.

>You claim it isn't insane

Whether or not it's "insane" is semantics.

The point is that once you get up into this echelon of cars, 10.5 isn't game-changing. Chrysler built a car that will stomp the Model S, and it costs 20% less. For $100k you can build many cars that will outperform a Model S; 10.5 quarter mile isn't "insane" at that price if that's what you're optimizing for.

I suppose it's exhausting seeing Tesla marketing claim "fastest car ever!" because 0-60s are fast (which, as you said is mostly due to traction and the electric drivetrain). It's embarrassing when people start comparing the Model S performance to Ferraris and Lamborghinis. They aren't even in the same league when it comes to being race ready.

> Chrysler built a car that will stomp the Model S, and it costs 20% less.

Which car is that?