SLK55_AMG

http://www.autoweek.com/cat_content...._code=02186323

this is the article, but i will take the E55 anytime, any day!

AMG BRED

if that wasn't the biggest BMW *** kissing i have ever read, i don't knwo what is.

MBE55AMG

M5 0-60MPH: 4.7 secs.

E55 0-60MPH: 4.5 secs.

You know what they say... faster is faster...

MarcusBenz

Man, if I didn't know any better I would think that BMW North America wrote that article and mailed it directly to AutoWeek!!

AMG Fan

The torque numbers are pathetic & even worse is the styling. I owned an E39 M5 before my E55 & loved it. I will always remember that car for being one of the greatest all around sedans ever produced. This new model is a disappointment in my opinion. BMW should be ashamed for having this car replace the current model.

water34

It might have the power but it doesn't have the torque!!!

Turbo2

You know what they say, "Horsepower wins buyers, Torque wins races". We know MB has the latter, hopefully the M5 wont become wildly popular, I dont want to go blind by seeing them running around all over.

Bilal

We should all stop discarding this new M5 engine because of its so called lack of torque...Sure teh V8K may put out much more, but remember AMG plans to replace this engine with an engine that develops 600nm max torque. SO how will the new engine live up to its predecessor in acceleration terms? Gearing.

0-124mph in 12.7 seconds is Lambo Murcie timing. I'm sure you all know gearing a car for 208mph is pointless when it can never even go beyond 186mph safely! The new M5 may look ugly and sound too loud but the engine is a masterpiece, Why do you all assume 500Nm is pathetic? The AMG 5.5 V8 n/a pust out 510Nm and I don't see anyone on the CLK55 forum complaining? What about the Lambo Gallardo, the engine in that is a gem, 510Nm and 500hp, the M5's engine is also relatively the same...Make no mistake, the M5 is going to be a fast car, the ONLY way to beat it would be to put in wider tyres, get 7Gtronic and gear the car for 190mph...Then we'll see who wins

W210

Perhaps I am asking too much, I really expected the concept M5 to have far better numbers.

My quick and dirty acid test on a car's straight line performance is the weight to torque ratio. While the M5 may have an engine similar to the Gallardo's, it's significantly heavier. To move a 4,000 lb.+ car, torque really helps.

Somehow, I have doubts the new M5 can beat the E55k on the highway looking at its preliminary numbers. I agree with you going to 200mph+ is pointless. In fact, going to 124mph is pretty meaningless in most countries as wel; what we appreciate most is the instantaneous acceleration. Can the M5 match the E55k in the mid range with similar weight but much less torque? Perhaps the SMGIII will do magic, we'll see.

I have lots of respect for the 5.5 AMG engine, not bad for such an old 3-valve engine from the late 90s.

And yes, I absolutely agree, the new M5 is very ugly. And with the heavy V10 up front, I'm not particularly optimistic about the steering feel. I heard BMW has no choice in the new M5 but to go back to a recirculating ball steering like in the E39 V8 days due to the lack of space. Ok just kidding..

MadC32

agreed..

the old one was one beautiful car, but the new one is just

BMW will destroy itself if it keeps designing cars like it's currently doing. They should have killed all designers after having messed up the old 7 series, which was quite nice (even more after seeing "The Transporter" hehe). Here, the 3 series is the only good selling BMW left, wonder when it's time has come.

mjc123

I owned a 545i smg for a few weeks. Had serious engine failure problems which the dealer couldn't figure out. I hate i-drive, and the seats were really uncomfortable. Gave it back.

Only good things to say about it the active steering and suspension which were pretty cool. The car handled great for a sedan, but I'd hate for either of those systems to fail on the highway.

Unfortunately the e39 M5 and e46 M3 are the last great cars it appears BMW will ever make. Too bad.

Bilal

Sure torque is important in highway acceleration, but the people who buy M5's are going to be using the manual SMG mode and not the auto function. I mean as much as I'm an AMG fan, I sure won't buy an M5 auto, I'd use SMG all the time.

This car if it actually performs the 0-124 in 12.7 second is going to be very fast. The M3 CSL is a very fast car with puny torque and only 360bhp.

See this vid....
right click save target as
0-270km/hr in M3 CSL.

http://www.e46drivers.de/msm/video/m3be.mpg


Now imagine about 200kgs more but 500NM and 500hp going to the same gearing

The car will be quick, but the sound and looks are so so.

stephens

Bilal
The perfromance numbers you have quoted are also being thrown around the M5 board. Re read the press releases. The estimated 12.7sec is a 0-120mph time, not the traditional European 0-200kmh (0-124mph). This is the same as a standard E55. The new M5 is estimated at 3900lbs 500hp 500Nm, Gallardo 3500lbs 500hp 510Nm, Ferrari 575 3700lbs 515hp 560Nm.
I would appreciate someone explaining to me how the M5 is going to be significantly quicker than a Gallardo or a 575? A standard E55 has been tested many times and is quicker than both of these cars. The M5 will be a fantastic car, no doubt, but in the newly createdperformance climate, straight line acceleration is going to be at the back of the pack. No Murci munching happening after all.

Bilal

"Murcie munching"

Well, I got "slightly" scared after some Bimmer fans started saying 0-200km/hr in 12.7.

I was just giving respect to the performance claims because they do seem out of the ordinary for a 4 door saloon!

As for the Gallardo, did u know in this weeks autocar they got 0-100mph in 9 flat? Same for CL65 and Murcie! Which V8K car can touch that???

norb

stephens

Bilal
All the US tests of the E55K have them running low 9's to 100mph.
I think the Gallardo tested may have been a freak, because they are not that quick. All the tests I have seen have the Gallardo doing mid to late 12's in the standing quarter at 114-116mph about the same as the std E55.

jkrutch

First off...I love my E55 for what is it...but most of you on here are clueless!!!! I think it's funny how my 911 Turbo dusts my E55 to 60....with much less torque. At some point the E55 may catch up...it has a better Cd and more HP, but up to 100 the E55 is far behind.

The E55 is quick...but the M5 will be equally quick and probably a lot more fun to drive. Torque doesn't win races...engineering does. Torque with little skinny tires doesn't work. My E55 has no 1st gear traction to speak of. Maybe the M5's lesser torque figure/285 rears will let it actually scream without the traction control constantly intervening. I think it will be a blast to rev up to 8,500 and shift the SMG. IMO those of you who think the M5 will not perform at least as well as the AMG are in denial. I bought the E55 because I needed a sedan for my family and performance for me. It is a great car, but I will almost definitely buy the new M5 when it is available. The looks have grown on me and the interior remains to be seen.

stephens

Duh, torque?????!!!!
I would have thought that nearly 500kg of weight and 4WD had more to do with this than anything else.

mjc123

A stock e55 will never catch a stock 996TT. After 100mph a stock e55 will barely be able to see a 996TT with $500 of mods.

Vic55

Apples and Oranges, thats what the E55 and the 996 TT are. Two different cars with two different purposes. I dont see how they can be compared.

mjc123

true! looks to be a popular combo these days

W210

The horsepower to weight, torque to weight ratios for the new M5 are not particularly impressive. Good traction and an efficient gearbox will help to a certain degree, but it's largely physics. It all boils down to the power to weight.

In denial? I don't know, I still have my deposit on the M5 and I'm first on my dealer's list, but the car is still not growing on me. I suppose I have another half a year to decide. Just too many shortcomings: the obnoxious looks, the poor ergonomics, the cheap interior, the unusable phone system and the useless iDrive.

By now, I should have been sick of the E55 and should be looking forward to a fresh new super sedan; however after seeing the specs of the new concept M5, and having extensivly test driven the 545i, I'm having serious doubts whether I can bite the bullet and downgrade from the E55 to the M5.

AMG Fan

I'll challenge any STOCK 996 TT from a roll and I assure you I will destroy them unless the driver has great rowing skills. Most Turbo drivers do not.

jkrutch

Owning both cars, I can assure you that from a roll the 911TT will waste the E55 (and it should). The only advanatge for the E55 is the HP and better Cd....it might put up a better fight at higher speeds.

jkrutch

My point here is that everyone is fixated only on torque. Torque is great, but superior engineering will more than compensate for the lack of torque in the new M5.
The weight difference between the E55 and the 996TT is more like 300kg and the AWD does help. The 996TT has a lightning quick 1st gear. It also accelerates without wheelspin...none of the power is wasted. That is my point about engineering. MB didn't match the tires to the power etc. They threw a massive SC-V8 into a car with skinny tires and let their electronics do the rest. There is room for improvement in their execution and I expect BMW will hit the target better then MB did. As for the subjective things like looks...I will wait until the final production of the M5 is shown along with a look at the interior. I will render an opinion then.