BMW M6 vs. 911 Turbo and highly tuned RS4. SL55 AMG race is upcoming
I personally don't like BMWs, but I think the M6 is a cool car, the M5 is a bit too ugly for my tastes.
The M6 doesn't trap anywhere near 125mph, not sure where you got that number from. I have read a 1/4mile of 12.3@118 and a 0-60 of 4.4sec, in automobile magazine I think.
I personally don't like BMWs, but I think the M6 is a cool car, the M5 is a bit too ugly for my tastes.
No No agree, and I did not mean that at all.
I just looked at the time you used to get to 123 mph and compared it to what the M6 use to get to 125 mph. I totaly ignored the 1/4 time.
My "time to speed" numbers I have gotten from Sport Auto, I`ll see if I can find a link.
http://www.m5board.com/vbulletin/sho...24&postcount=1
Last edited by Erik; Oct 29, 2005 at 04:00 AM.
I just looked at the time you used to get to 123 mph and compared it to what the M6 use to get to 125 mph. I totaly ignored the 1/4 time.
My "time to speed" numbers I have gotten from Sport Auto, I`ll see if I can find a link.
give me a minute....
I spoke to the project manager for development of the M5 engine and he told me last winter that they was finnised with the Euro M5 engine and the US version was in testing..... So there are differences but probably not huge and mostly due to different rules regarding emmisions and such.
The M5 is starting to get launced in the US so as soon as the cars has covered some miles we will see.
Autocar tested it at 12.8 @ 119 mph:
Autocar's test results, reported by fastsaloons.com:
An Italian mag got 12.51 @ 191.9 km/h = 119.9 mph:
Italian mag's test results:
And lastly, Motor Magazine in Australia tested it this month. Result: 12.54 @ 192.5 km/h = 120.3 mph.
Motor Magazine's test results:
I'm anxiously awaiting test results from the US mags.
Autocar tested it at 12.8 @ 119 mph:
Autocar's test results, reported by fastsaloons.com:
An Italian mag got 12.51 @ 191.9 km/h = 119.9 mph:
Italian mag's test results:
And lastly, Motor Magazine in Australia tested it this month. Result: 12.54 @ 192.5 km/h = 120.3 mph.
Motor Magazine's test results:
I'm anxiously awaiting test results from the US mags.
i don't think there will be much below 12.5 becasue of the SMG which has limited LC capabilties. I wonder what the time without LC will be that should be the more important number. A 6sp man (if it ever becomes available)should ultimately bring a slightly lower ET but lower traps too IMO.
Last edited by reggid; Oct 29, 2005 at 06:40 AM.
Autocar tested it at 12.8 @ 119 mph:
Autocar's test results, reported by fastsaloons.com:
An Italian mag got 12.51 @ 191.9 km/h = 119.9 mph:
Italian mag's test results:
And lastly, Motor Magazine in Australia tested it this month. Result: 12.54 @ 192.5 km/h = 120.3 mph.
Motor Magazine's test results:
I'm anxiously awaiting test results from the US mags.
The Italian test is extremly slow in the short sprint. 5.68 sec 0-100 kph is way to slow, actually much slower than the previous M5... So either a typo or the traction on the test track was extremly bad.....
But do not forgett that this is from the M5 not the M6, for some reasson it looks like the M6 is considerably faster. Take a look at the posted race on our forum M5 vs M6.
EDIT: Forgett my coment of slow 0-100 kph.... I did not read proberly..... That time was for the 0-100 meter run...
Correct 0-100 kph was 4.54 sec. That sounds about right in line with most other mags.
But tell me one thing. When US mags or US driver are testing their cars at the 1/4 track, the cloc start to run as soon as you break the beam, right ?
In Euro test the clock start as soon as the car start moving, could that explain some of the differences between US times and Euro times....
1 tenths in the start ( 60 foot) equalls according you guys app 0,3 at the 1/4 mark, or have I missunderstood ?
I know I am on thinn ice.......
Last edited by Erik; Oct 29, 2005 at 12:13 PM.
The Italian test is extremly slow in the short sprint. 5.68 sec 0-100 kph is way to slow, actually much slower than the previous M5... So either a typo or the traction on the test track was extremly bad.....
But do not forgett that this is from the M5 not the M6, for some reasson it looks like the M6 is considerably faster. Take a look at the posted race on our forum M5 vs M6.
EDIT: Forgett my coment of slow 0-100 kph.... I did not read proberly..... That time was for the 0-100 meter run...
Correct 0-100 kph was 4.54 sec. That sounds about right in line with most other mags.
1 tenths in the start ( 60 foot) equalls according you guys app 0,3 at the 1/4 mark, or have I missunderstood ?
I know I am on thinn ice.......
The Best of Mercedes & AMG
No, as far as I know they use instruments, they do not go to the 1/4 track. Normaly they use either a stretch of road , airfield or a regular racetrack, like the straight on Hockenheim racetrack.
In the Euro tests I saw for the M6, the car was shod with super-sticky near-track tires, which was noted in the reviews...this would explain its faster times to an extent, but it still doesn't account for this.
In the Euro tests I saw for the M6, the car was shod with super-sticky near-track tires, which was noted in the reviews...this would explain its faster times to an extent, but it still doesn't account for this.

One thing that could explain this is the fact that this M6 had more than 30 000 km of hard driving, while the M5 was relativly fresh with a LOT less km.
So the M6 was up to max performance while the M5 still need more km to loosen up.
The tires on the M6 used in 1 test is the Pirelli Corsa, a street legal road tires prepared for those who wants to track their cars from time to time. It is no race tire, but has soft coumpond and more posetiv surface ( less pattern ??) than normal tires. Useless on cold surface and hates water.
http://video.sport1.de/pub/Video/msm...h_wmt_adsl.asf
BTW: Has this been posted before.
Not a real test, just a presentation of 2 great cars..
While I am looking for videos, here is some from one of the best MB tuners. Enjoy....
http://www.carlsson.de/de/dialog/videos.php




