darren_dallas

Actually, the price for the base Z06 is $70k, then if you add options and include the dealer "market equalizer" which ranges from $10k to $15k (this is a premium due to the demand for the car) the car ends up being around $90k. I went to the Chevy dealership in Frisco, TX last week and that is what I was officially quoted.

04E55 AMG

A former AMG owner and buddy ordered one about 8 months ago and he is getting it for just under $70K next month. We should be able to get some track runs side by side.

C43AMG

What most people are mssing in this BMW vs. MB horsepower/torque war is that BMW's stance on it is that they aren't going to build a car with "x" amount of horsepower and "x" amount of torque to say that they can build it.BMW is more concerned with building performance automobiles that sell.That is why BMW has some of the highest profit dollars and increased sales figures of all the manufacturers.If you build it and can't sell it what good is it?

MBAMGPWR

If you want to hear hotness, you should stand next to & sit in my E55 with the Brabus Exhaust. Everytime I start the beast up, I just can't help but smile.

BlownV8

HP = torque * RPM/5252. You can't have hp without tq. In reality, hp doesn't really matter...it's all about tq and rpm's. A low torque high hp engine will have to make use of gearing for quick acceleration. However, you will constantly be shifting gears trying to stay in your power band. A car with high torque doesn't need to use gearing as effectively to accelerate quickly. You want the best of both worlds for a heavy street car: high hp and high tq.

krispykrme

I am so sick and tired seeing same people making same comment.

The fact is that we all have seen stock M5 beat stock E55.

Plus who really cares about straight line performance. I could buy a civic and modify the crap out of it and it will eat tons of car in straight line. But what is the fun in that?

Anyway, My M5 is now at port. So in about 4 to 6 weeks, i should have my M5 in my garage soon. I will post pict of both E55 and M5 side by side.

I think i made a big mistake in ordering silverstone interior with silver grey interior. Should have gone black. oh well.

reggid

which gives hp.

reggid

this is old news.. .

Some people have no idea about what gives a car performance. The m6 has trapped 121mph and the m5 119mph so they are quick plain and simple.

When has manufacturers ratings been the be all and end all

reggid

a car accelerates directly according to its torque curve not its power curve!

torque to rear wheels (what moves the car) is = rwhp/wheel speed = engine torque x gearing

big low end torque comes into it becasue it means more hp at low engine speeds and hence a higher rwhp/speed when the engine is at low rpms, but obviously low end torque is irrelevant at higher engine speeds which is why a car with seemingly less tq but slightly more hp can be faster if the engine is operating at its best range.

if all else is equal just compare the engine hp vs the road speed to see which is faster at any given speed

krispykrme

You are so wrong in your information.

Let's take a look into history.

W210 was introduced as 1996 model, while the E39 was introduced as 1997 model.

The E39 M5 debuts in 1998 and BMWNA believe there was no market in US and did not bring it over to the state side until 2000.

The W210 E55 debuted in 1999. A full year behind M5, and did not outperfom E39 M5 through out its life cycle.

W211 was introduced again a full year ahead of next generation 5 series. However, MB decided instead of taking the time to develop a new powertrain for the new AMG, it simply used the old engine and transmission (only change was additionl of S/C and beefed up transmission). I also believe that MB did not take enough time to develop a better AMG E-class, simply to rush more AMG to the market. In the process it diluted the image of AMG.

So, it took MB full 5 years to finally surpass E39 M5. And the only thing that it did well is the power (which was result of adding a S/C to an old engine). The W211 E55 still could not match the agility of M5.

M5 has always been introduced about 2 years after introduction of regular 5 series. BMW simply took the time to deliver a full package, while DCX simply gave you a S/C to move the car faster in straight line.

Not to say that E55 is a bad car. It simply not as complete of a package as the M.

Judging from your signature, your interest is in pure drag. But people who buy M is not looking at outgunning in straight line. You can buy a civic and throw 20K in it and it will kill pretty much anything outthere. I just never understand the point of judging a good car is solely based on 0-60 number. I think it is absurd.

absent

Then be jealous of mine,September 15 production ,Saphire Black with perforated Black interior.

jangy

I can't wait until the M5s are running around so I can shut a few of you up. Real life. Light to light. BMW's core competency and entire history is based on holding a constantly high rev rate. That started when they made airplane motors and continues today. Their cars do not accelerate. They do love to spin. You can sit at 6K rpm for an entire day and the motors don't mind. But, that is not why I bought a V8 sedan.

RezF

LOL! Your wife's got all the nice toys :p

RezF

BMW-->"manufacturer's estimate" --In other words, alot faster in the real world with real people driving it

zumbalak

Why do people care that much about 0-60 times?
Those who enjoy driving a car throught the curves, the turns, the apexes will not be bothered too much with 0-60 times or 1/4ml times too much I would think.

Straight line driving with an automatic does not require much of a skill, majority of people can drive a monster HP car from a roll and get the same results, they all can outrun many cars without a difference. But for those people the results would be so much different on a track.

absent

She deserves and she's grateful (most of the time)

absent

Been there ,done that...
Had one of the first '03 E55s with full Renntech,car was impractical because of traction issues,got S600,done full Renntech,Kleemann LSD and still the car was undriveable even in the dry.
These cars just could not transfer all their power to the ground without activating the electronic baby sitters.
I'm too old to have a baby sitter ,so I'm getting the M5.

jangy

So, the E55 had too much *** so you modified it and it was worse. Then, you tried a different car, one with even more grunt and you were still not happy. You just don't find power to be practical or driveable, even after you modified the 600 too, so now you are buying a BMW. OK, I finally get it.

Next time try new tires instead of Renntech performance mods until you learn to need more. You are a classic example of overload. You spend all the money (if you really did) on adding to the one part of your cars that you have not yet learned how to use.

As another poster noted, any idiot can drive an automatic like an E55. For you to find the E55 and or SL600 as impractical or undriveable is ludicrous. Both cars are teddy bears if you choose to drive them in that way.

I guess it makes perfect sense to assume that a mid sized sedan will be much more civil with less torque. Not to mention how fun it is to constantly change gears fighting to be at or above 5000 rpm to show any life. I forgot the good old days when I had the first generation M3. Screaming four cylinder.

vixapphire

Hello all,
very interesting discussion here re. hp v. torque. The S type R jag i just got rid of had 395 lb/ft torque from 1950 rpm straight up to just shy of the redline, or so they said. That thing felt like it would tear my limbs off from a standing start, with all the power *right there* under your foot. no revs, just ripping. even though the e55's torque apparently doesn't kick into high kick mode til above 2500, it still feels like it's giving me what the jag had at the same time in the pedal travel. maybe that's what an extra 120 lb/ft will do, i don't know.

I have a serious question for you guys, since i've seen the term around here and can't for the life of me figure it out. At the risk of sounding like a dummy, what does "WOT" stand for? i recall a new-waver named "Captain Sensible" had a single named "Wot" back around '83, but I'm pretty sure that ain't what you all are referring to...

thanks!

v

reggid

Wide Open Throttle (WOT)

krispykrme

I need go hijack your car and swap out your interior with my silverstone interior.

The only thing that i can make you jealous is that my car has been produced and passed quality inspection and it at port to be shipped.

krispykrme

Last time i check, this is also history of MB until they went the S/C route on the 5.5L and turbo.

Look at early AMG should tell you as such. Why do you think MB is going back to Normal Aspirated V8.

Also, do not compare aircraft engine with automobile engine. This is as absurd as comparing motorcycle engine to a automobile engine.

M requires a better driver than someone that only knows to step on the gas and stay there.

krispykrme

bingo. Babysitter in MB just cuts in way too soon and overkill in many case. The chassis can do a lot more. But ESP babysitter is just way tooooooooo agressive.

krispykrme

Even with better tires, you can't prevent ESP to cut in when tire loses grip. With Rennetech upgrade, his car is still putting way too much torque than the wheel can handle. Hence with agressive ESP setting in W211, all the power is useless.

In addition, if you drive your car agressively in turn, ESP would cut power when you want to slide out of turn. What good does all the massive torque do when ESP takes it away from you?

NOTHING! You simply never be able to take advantage of it.

M5 has more than enough torque. If you know how to drive, 7 gear is more than enough for you to keep M5 in its powerband.

Yes, SL600 and E55 can be drive like a teddy bear. But then again, why did you pay for all those horses when you want to drive it like a teddy bear????
A lexus is cheaper and more reliable teddy bear.

Moreover if torque is the king, then hybrid wins, because of massive and instaneous torque available from the electric engine.

A car with all the output is useless if the chassis, tires/wheels, electronics were designed to prevent you from fully exploit it. This is the case with the E55. And to some extent the IS350.

a_ok2me

The e60 M5 is proof that hp beats the e55 torque.

As to history, I'd have to disagree - to expand on krispykrme's argument. The e39 M5 reigned during it's time; it won every speed, braking, handling tests and even luxury vs the competitors (according to the magazines). Up to 2002, the M5 NA v8 was far ahead of it's competitor (my opinion).

210 E55
349hp on a 5.4L NA (65hp/L)
0-60: 5.4 sec.
1/4: 13.9 sec.
braking: 70 mph in 161 feet
handling: no comparison

e39 M5
394hp on a 4.9L NA (80hp/L)
0-60: 4.7
1/4: 13.2 sec.
braking: 70 mph in 156 feet
handling: no comparison

As to the recent past, MB reacted by supercharging the 211. To compare a supercharger to an e39 NA is fine and fair, but it would be better to compare it to a supercharged e39 with 600 - 1000 hp. Everyone would love to see that.

However, I would argue with your point that BMW is way behind MB in building engines. I could argue that MB couldn't build an NA engine to compete against the M5 s62 engine, so they slapped on a supercharger - similar to krispykrme's argument. In any case, the stock 211 blew away the stock e39 M5, but with a supercharger. That could be commented as a true statement.

As to now, the e60 M5 clearly outperforms the 211 e55, from the videos and magazines. But, I agree, not by much.

As to the future, the e63 should be tough. Versus the e60 M5, who knows. Why speculate/hypothesize over nonsense guesses and formulas? Again, it's not an apples-apples comparison because you have a 5L v10 vs 6.2L v8. But again, which ever is better performing is all that matters.

In any case, (1) I wouldn't dare race a 211 e55 and (2) I can't stand the e60 M5 interior dash and would love to be a potential e63 owner. But, a MB saleswhimp at Autobahn MB in Northern Cal blew me off for a test drive of the 211 e55. So, just because of that scavenging "low-life", I might not.