Improviz

Busy today, so I won't respond to each and every point....

Frankly, I don't trust Gustav given his rather strenuous efforts at shutting down any pro-Benz discussion on his site, and so will withhold judgement until I see some tests. According to RS6 owners, he posted similarly suspect videos before involving an RS6 and an M3; check the history.

I don't believe it has. The 0-100 km/h times for the E55 and other Benz sc/turbo v8/v12s has been pretty consistant with what the US got; I did a compilation in another post w/M&M, but don't have time to dig it up now. Let me know if you'd like a link...

Quite. So, when we start seeing 1/4 mile tests and track results, we can get a better handle, which is what I've been saying for some time now. But you guys want to jump the gun...

The test is available on Car & Driver's website, it was a comparison so the cars were presumably tested together. But pick your comparo: cars are often much farther apart in their 0-xxx mile times than in their 1/4 mile times. Strange, but that's the way it works out!

Gustav

Frankly, I don't trust Gustav given his rather strenuous efforts at shutting down any pro-Benz discussion on his site, and so will withhold judgement until I see some tests. According to RS6 owners, he posted similarly suspect videos before involving an RS6 and an M3; check the history.

Come on give me a break. Or brake Two E55 AMG, no one is faster in any race at the end of the stretch. E55 guys says "yes, its clearly a faster car" or the E55 driver. Still you think the E55 is faster?

M5 has gearing advantage, HP advantage, aerodynamic advantage, this particluar car have made 0-200 km/h faster than a THIRD and FOURTH E55 AMG in two other tests (carmagazines) here in Sweden and still you think all this is bogus?

BMWEATR

I never did, but i still haven't been let on your baord and its been 2 weeks.
I guess you have alot of people trying to join, I'm still waiting in the moderator cue I guess or did you nix me?.

Erik

First of all, I never belived the histiry about the M5 totaly destroyed an E55, My guess is it was not an E55n or the E55 did not race, I voiced that opinion imidiatly on the M5 board.

When they later also used the incident with the M5 200 meters behind the CLS and called it a draw it clearly shows that this magasine is a joke.

Nothing I would trust anyway, and totaly different to the video Gustav will show us.

Gustav

Also: the race was well over 200 km/h, up to around 250 km/h. Magazines rarely show the differences over 200 km/h where the M5 really shines. As stated before.

M5KILLR

no, give us a break. you bmrs can slam away here and while i like boisterous discussion seeing you take advantage of it here sickens me.

3 backhanded insults, you be banned on gustavs board. so why do you all troll here anyway??? oh, BECAUSE YOU CAN!!!

Improviz

Why hello, Gustav. How nice of you to take a break from banishing people who dare to write favorable posts about Mercedes on your M5board to the intellectual Gulag to join us here and write favorable posts about BMWs, where you know you're safe from being banned.

Since English is your second language, I will forgive you for apparently failing to notice that time to distance does not equal time to speed. And that the M5's getting to 200 km/h less than one second faster than the E55 would not automatically translate to a sizeable victory like the one you're describing in a time to distance race.

I am sure that you are aware of videos showing M3's losing to C32s, and that you would doubtlessly not accept these as conclusive proof of outright C32 acceleration superiority.

I am also certain that you've seen the following: http://www.track-challenge.com/compa...ar1=48&Car2=81

The SL55, which has the same motor as the E55 but is a few hundred pounds heavier and is a convertible (less structural rigidity), managed quite well against the M5:

Car: SL55 AMG E60 M5
Nuerburgring
Round time 8.12 min 8.13 min

Acceleration
0 - 40 Km/h 1,4 s 1,5 s
0 - 60 Km/h 2,2 s 2,3 s
0 - 80 Km/h 3,1 s 3,5 s
0 - 100 Km/h 4,3 s 4,5 s
0 - 120 Km/h 5,6 s 5,9 s
0 - 140 Km/h 7,1 s 7,4 s
0 - 160 Km/h 9,4 s 9,2 s
0 - 180 Km/h 11,2 s 11,6 s
0 - 200 Km/h 13,8 s 13,8 s

Acceleration/Braking
0 - 200 - 0 Km/h 19,1 s 19,2 s

So, I think the E55 will do just fine considering its lighter weight, thank you.

Improviz

Dang, how sad...my 200-250 km/h commute to work will not be the same anymore.

Gustav

Impor: I dont care how you communte or not, I care how the test was done and that is what I comment.

I dont discuss M3 or C32 here, please keep the discussion focused on the subject which is the new M5 and E55.

Regarding time to distance it is fair to say the M5 was first in any of these cases and with a sizable car lengthe. Any other outcome is impossible, whether you are talking Swedish or I English.

We are not talking the SL55 here we are talking the E55 here. Are you going to drag up the SL55 Nardo test as well here?

We have tried the cars in real life you are just chasing numbers from magazines and with cars and locations all over the place.

Please come back when you have done the same test.

Finally, as many have stated: do you really think BMW M would allowed an "old" E55 to win to the new M5?

Also, descittion is subjective. I thought it was a big margin. Some other people thinks it was not. The thing I care for is that the M5 won and the distance and the margin seemed to be higher the higher the speeds got.

V-10 and 7-speeds is great!

W210

Under ideal testing environment, the above may be great, but with much less torque, I would bet the M5 would lose out in most street races with lots of stop and go.

I am sure BMW wished their flag ships be it 760il vs. S600 or M5 vs. E55 would be a decisive win, but that is not necessarily the case. In fact, the S600 is significantly faster than the new 760il. BMW using exclusively normally aspirated engines may produce better throttle response but it is certainly conceivable for BMW to lose out in straight line accelerations.

Belmondo

Gustav
Administrator


Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Kingdom of Sweden
Posts: 11,770


I'm talking standard E55 AMG and standard M5 E60, nothing else. I am just writing what our experiences are and nothing more.

Our experience was that the M5 was faster than the E55 AMG and one E55 AMG Estate.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hilsman
Gustav,

For years I drove BMW's so I do not have any negative feelings toward the brand....however I did have two engine replacements which I've never had from any other manufacurer and I've about sampled them all.

I find the M-5 a wonderful car and can even live with the styling and completely agree as to its ability to track and incredible acceleration.

However, all E-55 AMG's are not created equal and I know of several here in the USA that would not be put to "sleep" by a "stock" E-60 M-5. In fact I am willing to put my money where my mouth is. I will pay for your air fare and shipping expenses for your "stock" M-5 to be shipped over plus all hotel and traveling expense IF you can out distance my E-55 from 0-225 with original equipment tires...I have less than 1250 US$ invested in upgrades. If you lose and I obviously believe you will then you're out the money. I suggest you not take the bet unless your 0-200k times are less than 12 seconds.


I doubt you'll let this stay on your board but I am entirely serious about my wager and will happily put money in an escrow account of our agreement.....the gaunlet has been dropped.....Gray
__________________
Webmaster
Comments, suggestions or feedback:





Surly "standard" E60 M5 is the one you buy from dealership and not the one you borrow from BMW as a "national press car" for tests, dont you think? I think the E55's were "standard". The only "standard" E60 M5 are those few owned so far and still going through break in. When the break in period will be over that "standard" M5 should run against "standard" e55.

Gustav

This will be sold to customer so there is nothing strange about this one.

M&M

I still don't understand what the problem is. The test was done by Gustav & the owners of the other cars, including some exotics. The owners of the E55 admitted that the M5 is faster time to distance, time to speed, time to MArs & back, whatever.

Argue all you want Impro-man, you are going to look like an idiot when the M5 comes to the US& you see for yourself how quick it is. But knowing the type of person you are, you will have your excuses. You believe a car with less horsepower, more weight, etc can bend the laws of physics because it has a MErcedes badge. That is sad.

Erik

For what it is worth.

Here is what was reported on the Audi forum that also was present at the event.

Quote
.-------------
Erik was kind to let me drive the new M5 and boy it was fast.
It feels lighter than it is and thats nice. The grip in the rear is very good even it has 507hp and rear driven. The SMG in fastest mode is crazy, its big bangs every time it change, I love that bang every time. As all M cars it is so easy to powersteear. The 997 S was suprisingly fast and keept up well, and is my choice. Its slower than M5 of course but than again funnier to drive, even on a straight line!
We came in an E55 kombi wagon and E55 sedan and last the 997 Carrera S whit ceramic breakes.

The M5 dident feel fast when driving it, but boy it is fast

We in the E55s got spanked all time against the M5.

One time we was 4 persons in M5 and my freind was alone in his sedan E55 and we were even after a long time. But in the end of the air field the M5 was winning by a car leghts. Thats strong of M5.

Even my friends 510 hp techart porsche got passed by a tiny bit by M5. But my guess the are pretty even steven.

We all that was at lunda take it for what it is, i mean the car that give gas first when rolling starts is geting away first. Its not 100% accurate. But the thing is that allmost every time the M5 came out as fastest of all the cars at lunda(not faster than the crazy Ruf)

We did rolling starts from 20, 50 and 100 km/h

http://www.rs6.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=44940
-----------------
End quote

Belmondo

So where is his friend with that e55?? Is he in self-imposed seclusion with a bottle of Absolute ?

Wow, 4 people in M5 , 1 friend in E55 and "car leghts" behind........
Lucky SLR was not there to be embarrased by such a performance.
I'm sure you unload 3 of you from m5 and its SLR's turn to be spanked by M5--- that what it looks like to me.

reggid

i have and i'm sure you all have seen tests where the CLS55 is even with the M5 until 70-80kph and then the M5 pulls ahead convincingly and i have assume that these were done on the same day and conditions so even if the e55 is a bit lighter it will still be behind by a margin big or small.

Whether its time to distance or time to speed the eveness to 80kph through all increments in between ie 20 40 60kph and then the m5 surge as the speed rises mean it is in front! i'll be suprsised if its more than 1-2 car lengths to the 1/4 but thats still a lead.

The only possible fault is its consistancy from 0-whatever without LC which you probably wouldn't want to utilise all the time.
If i was a e55 owner i wouldn't be scared of a stop light race with an m5 unless we ended up at 200+kph where the M5 is built to shine and by all evidence provided to date it does.

Erik

LOL why am I not supprised but such an answer. Impressive I must say.....

Gustav

Haha Belmondo grow up please...

Erik

I noticed you smily so I guess that means you are joking a bit, take a look at this link Impro.
http://www.m5board.com/vbulletin/sho...&highlight=amg

It is from a race with the SL55 vs my ALPINA Bi Turbo that took place in March 2002. The first ever race reported on the internett as far as I know. At the time the Nardo test of the SL55 was discussed a lot and a lot of people had doubts that it really was that fast.

See the responce I got from the members and Gustav, I was not banned, no namecalling, no insults just honest respect to a fast car.

And please understand how difficult it is to estimate correctly the distance in front of you so do not start to play with this numbers as to prove any point either way.

While you are at it, here is a thread that Gustav started himselves giving a lot of credit to the E55.
If you took some time you will find several threads at M5board that are about the AMG`s and non of them end like stupide pissing contests. Different opinions, offcourse but still mature dicussions without namecalling.
http://www.m5board.com/vbulletin/sho...highlight=SL55

Gustav

Gulag and Gustapo haha, you cannot blame them to be creative

Erik

So true

enzom

How many people really care about shining above 200 kph? How many people actually get to drive over 200 kph? If we are talking strictly about straight line speed, Gustav, what matters most is 0 (that's right - a standing start, like a stop light) to 200. I can't remember the last time I had enough road (and felt like risking my license) to go over 200 kph. Maybe it is a European thing. But here in the US, it is of very, very limited value.

As I have said a hundred (maybe a bit less) times, when real M5 owners get their cars here in the US, and get them out on our roads, and take them to the strip, we will all be able to determine just how fast it is. The odds of me in my E55 running into an M5 on the Turnpike at 7:00 a.m. or 11:00 p.m. to run at 200 kph and higher are virtually nil. More likely that we'll play on secondary roads.

By the way, I have owned my E55 since August, 2004. It now has 3,700 miles. If I could have purchased an M5 at that time, I would barely be done with my break-in period - 8 months after I would have bought it. That's crazy.

How many miles were on your press car?

dNA3D

Well at least we're starting to swallow the fact that the M5 is faster than the E55 above 200km/h. enzom, if you honestly don't care how fast the M5 is above 200km/h and you are convinced your E55 is faster below 200km/h, well, great!

You guys do realize this discussion is heading straight for a dead end. So what if the M5 is faster than the E55 or if the E55 is faster than the M5? All Gustav has done on MBWorld is delivered the facts.

What is up with all this press car stuff. Isn't there not a HUGE possibility that the test conducted was "true and fair", that the M5 was a completely stock, out of the showroom car and that the E55 gave it 100%? What's so difficult to believe about that? Why is it so difficult to believe a car which has less weight, more power, more gears and a manual is faster than a car which is heavier, less powerful and has fewer gears?

enzom

Of course it is possible. But an M5 with three passengers is not lighter than an E55. It is several hundred pounds heavier. The power advantage is not that great as a percentage, and the E55 enjoys a significant aerodynamic advantage (0.27 vs. 0.31 drag co.) I am very skeptical of an M5 with three passengers and 507 hp getting from 0 to 100 mph in 8.66 seconds. I don't care how many gears it has. It is one thing to be faster than another car, but being that fast with that great of a weight penalty should cause people to scratch their heads. Maybe it is true.

I am not "convinced" that my car is faster at any speed. Please don't imply things that I never said. There is a difference between guessing/predicting and believing.

The discussion is heading to a dead end. It will resume again when the M5 finally gets here and real owners take their cars to the track and run 11's stock.

Improviz

First, though:

Gustav, please. The SL55 that beat the M5 around Nurburgring was not the Nardo SL, and others have been tested in the European (and American) magazines with similar acceleration figures. Further, it is well established that the E55 is lighter, has the same engine, gearing, and horsepower (through dyno plots available on this board), but is hindered off the line by smaller tires and lighter weight, both of which hurt traction.

However, these would not be a factor in a rolling start race. And instrumented test results for both the M5 and the E55 (and its sister, the CLS55, from a direct head to head comparison in Auto Motor und Sport, where the CLS55 was picked as the winner show that the cars' acceleration tests are virtually identical. Reaction times vary more than the cars' 0-100 times, 0.1 apart.

It would be nice if you could stop slinging mud (for which you routinely ban people on the M5 board, non-BMW people that is) and engage in honest debate, but perhaps this is too much to expect from a compensated BMW propagandist. Banning freedom of speech on your board while using it to propagandize here is frankly pretty disgusting behavior, as are the double standards you routinely employ at the M5 board.

I cite one example in particular, where an M5 owner who claimed to have beaten a new CLS55 in an E39 M5 (and who, when challenged to meet one at a drag strip, chickened out and refused to show up) subjected me to profanity-laced outbursts without you admonishing him at all, but I was threatened with banning. In a further display of your hypocrisy, you defended his ridiculous story even though magazine numbers alone showed that it was impossible, just as you are now here trying to argue something equally ridiculous which doesn't hold up to magazine test results. Truly sad. You might also be interested to know that the poster in question came here, posted excuses for three months, but--surprise--refused to show up and race the AMG model he claimed to have beaten, despite repeated invitations. But I digress....back to the topic.

Your recent treatment of members of this board who were guilty of nothing more than an attempt at free discussion was even more disgusting, and though you rightfully apologized in one instance and reinstated one banned member, your intemperate banning of him in the first place demonstrates more than anything else that you are not interested in true, honest moderation, but in BMW advocacy and quashing free discussion. Trolls and flamers are one thing, but these people were genuinely attempting balanced discussion, and you shut them down. And despite repeated requests to provide evidence of the false claims you made against them, you have refused to produce any, instead dancing around it like a clown.

You are a first class hypocrite, and have a history of mysteriously producing unscientific "tests" wherein the BMWs manage to pull feats that no magazine in the world has replicated (i.e., an M3 outrunning an RS6), and anyone who takes these tests seriously has the critical thinking skills of a child. I deal in facts, not anecdotal race accounts provided by propagandists and hypocritical enemies of free speech.

You may laugh at the gulag reference, but it was deliberately chosen, because like you, the Soviets supressed free speech. I'm glad you find censorship to be so amusing. Perhaps if you'd had family members who had died trying to fight it, you might feel differently and treat it with a bit more reverence and respect. Instead you treat it with contempt and derision. The Internet is not made a better place by the behavior of this sort.

So, let us examine the facts thus far:

On one side, we have published instrumented test data from reputable European magazines showing that from 0-125 mph, the fastest M5 tested is 0.8 faster than an E55.

We also have data I provided from numerous tests showing that cars much farther apart than this in time-to-speed tests were identical, or virtually identical, in 1/4 mile tests.

In particular, we have the Car & Driver test which shows that when the exact same car, a Jaguar XJR, picked up two full seconds from 0-130 mph over stock, its 1/4 mile time increased by only 0.2 seconds!!

We also have the Car & Driver test results (below) for the C32, M3, and Audi S4 showing that while the M3 was faster to 60 and 130, again by wider margins than the tested M5 was faster to speed than the tested E55, the three cars' 1/4 mile times were identical.

We also have a direct head to head comparison of the CLS55 against the M5, in which the CLS55 was chosen the winner. And in this test and the E55 test, the cars were much closer than either of the examples cited above.

Nobody from the BMW camp has, or attempted, to refute these claims, because they are irrefutable, documented facts. Like the accomplished mudslingers and propagandists they are, they simply ignore inconvenient facts in favor of an anecdotal test of an M provided by BMW and tested by a compensated BMW propagandist. They also ignore the lone 1/4 mile test by a magazine of the M5, which was a 12.7--0.4 slower than the E55 tested in the US mags.

And yet Gustav's miraculous M5 managed to better the magazines' tested times, and run down an E55 with four passengers on board. Gee, who could suspect anything was amiss about this?

Gustav's tests were not instrumented, and they were not scientific. Further, his claimed times were ridiculed even by members of his own board. And his veracity on any matter related to BMW is highly questionable given his track record, so to speak. Further, as the data show, the margin of the E55's tested time to speed test results and those of the M in repeated published tests are far too close for Gustav's miracle M5 results to be taken seriously. If two cars are 0.8 apart from 0-130 with identical test drivers, one will not suddenly run down and pass the second when laden with 450+ pounds of additional weight. Something stinks here, period.

I will wait for instrumented tests. Those who wish to believe propagandists who have a record of providing suspect test data and shutting down discussion about competing brands are welcome to swallow what they're shoveling.