krispykrme

the way that M5 is going right now, the US would be lucky to get this as a 06 model. They have just pushed out european delivery out to feb/march of next year (originally was scheduled in november).

As time gets closer to the release date, the more push out it seems from BMW. There must be something seriously wrong that would force BMW to push out the car again. I am actually very worried that the 1st year car with all of its idiotic electronics would be a total disaster waiting for happen.

Bilal

Belmondo, the M5 will be faster, whether its nose is just ahead by an inch, its faster, get over it. I'm waiting to be pleasantly surprised rather than saying E55's torque and what not will crush M5. You appear more wise that way.

krispykrme, if you can't even select optimum gear to accelerate then how many downshifts do you think it will take to get into M5's powerband, @around 6-8000rpms. The car has been very aggressively geared, not exactly like a 360M, maybe slightly longer times between shifts, but shifting 7 gears manually is a hell of a task, on track or off. The E55 has only 5 right now, but in future, the E63 will be equipped with 7G Tronic, that can skip gears on kickdown and perform a 2 gear downshift in 0.2 seconds.

In my book, these cars will be very close. In the real world where you'll be driving in 7th gear at 60mph, you will need to shift 4 gears!!! to get into the action, and the E55 will be long gone by then, but still, all I'm saying is the M5 is faster right now, I seriously hope to be pleasantly surprised.

These are the gear ratios and speeds of the M5 calculated from tire size and its gearing....

http://www.car-videos.com/tools/spee...B1=Recalculate

M&M

Here's some numbers:

E55
0-100 km/h in 4.92
1/4 mile in 12.89 @ 173 km/h
1km in 23.8 @ 233 km/h

M5
0-100 in 4.58
1/4 mile in 12.61 @ 185 km/h
1km in 22.7 @ 246 km/h

M5 is mph faster over 1km, which is just over 1/2 mile.

Now for the surprise & the wonder of gearing & lower mass. Remember M5 has peak torque of 520NM @ 6100rpm. But it has plenty torque low down. Here's the rolling runs starting at 80.

At 80 in 3rd gear M5 is at 4100 rpm, in 4th its at 3100rpm & in 5th its at 2600rpm.

80-120 km/h
3rd gear M5 2.77 E55 3.83
4th gear M5 4.17 E55 5.78
5th gear M5 4.82 E55 7.35

Notice even though in 5th M5 is at 2600rpm it still is almost 3 seconds faster that 700NM E55. Why? Well M5 is at 2600rpm but E55 is at 1500rpm. Long gearing to match the E55's torque playeau vs short gearing to match M5's high rpm horsepower. Also M5 is 200kg lighter. Not wise to give up 200kg to a car that's pushing more horespower & is using gearing to get more torque to the wheels at any speed in any gear.

120-160 km/h
3rd gear M5 3.05 E55 4.40
4th gear M5 4.24 E55 6.21
5th gear M5 4.91 E55 7.50

I reckon MErc should consider some weight saving techniques. Short gearing always gets more torque to the wheels due to a gear ratio being a torque mutiplier & the fact that you are always higher up the rev-range compared to a longer-geared car.

Belmondo

Unless you can show me where I stated that "E55's torque and what not will crush M5" I dont have a clue what you are talking about here. Thanks for stating here that "the M5 will be faster, whether its nose is just ahead by an inch, its faster, get over it" is a product of your vivid imagination, unless you can show me where what you are saying is proved time and time again . Untill E55 is shown to run consistantly "slower by an inch" your BS should be put into realm of pure speculation, so get over it and know that just because you, Bilal say it, believe it, imagine it that we ALL have to agree to it here as well.

Bilal

ummm, read the above post Mr. Belmondo

DerekFSU

Looks to me to be a driver's race but until we see some real numbers, who knows. OBVIOUSLY the 15 cl's is total BS. I'm #2 on the M5 waitlist at a large dealership and pick up my E55 in Miami tomorrow so when I have both, I'll take them to the track & video it so we can all see.

Belmondo

So once again, hte "proof" of your BS is just now posted random numbers from an unnamed magazine? Is that all you have? Sweet Jesus, NOW I believe it!

M&M

I don't know if you guys are aware of it, but by definition power is the rate at which torque is applied. That is what we are interested in when considering a car's acceleration. Allow me to elaborate.

F=MA, Force - MAss X acceleration

Hence Acceleration = Force / Mass

Now Force is Torque. SO surely to get a mass moving its torque/mass. ITs not the torque that matters but the torque to weight ratio. So who cares about horsepower anyway, its only torque in the equation.

WRONG!

That's just a once off application of torque to an object. Say you place a tennis ball on a bar & apply a certain amount of torque to it. It will accelerate depending on the amount of torque applied & the weight of the tennis ball.

But as soon as leave it, it will slow down due to rolling resistance from the bar & other forms of friction.

You need to place your finger on it & KEEP applying torque. THat's horsepower. The ability to sustain torque. By definition it is the rate at which torque is applied.

M5 makes max torque at 6100rpm. And its geared to run in the 6000-8200rpm band when racing. When a forced induction car's torque (& hence horsepower) is dropping off, the M5's power is on its way up.

If you are rolling in 5th gear at 1500rpm in an E55 (50mph) you may only have say 300hp at that point. The M5 is at 2600 rpm in 5th at that same speed & he's probably got the same power. But as the M5 will rev quicker being higher up the rev-range & will be in the powerband while the E55's power is starting to drop off.

M&M

Err dude, I don't want to get involved in yout fight, but Autocar happens to be one of the top 3 biggest car magazines in the UK.

Check out this link for Sport Auto's (Germany's biggest car magazine) test of C55 vs M3. I just want to illustrate what a difference gearing can make on rolling runs.

Bear in mind that M3 has only 6 gears & C55 weight is similar to M3's.

C55 has 510nm or 375 lb/ft
M3 has 365nm or 268 lb/ft

Aslo, if you look at the test below you will see that there's not much in it in the standing starts with the M3 being marginally quicker

http://www.track-challenge.com/compa...Car1=75&Car2=2

However check out the elasticity tests at the bottom

Elasticity (4./5./6.) C55 M3
80 - 100 Km/h 3,2 s / 3,9 s / - s 2,6 s / 3,4 s / 4,8 s
80 - 120 Km/h 6,3 s / 7,9 s / - s 5,2 s / 6,6 s / 9,5 s
80 - 160 Km/h 12,8 s / 15,9 s / - s 10,9 s / 13,9 s / 18,9 s
80 - 180 Km/h 16,3 s / 20,2 s / - s 14,1 s / 17,4 s / 25 s
80 - 200 Km/h - s / - s / - s 18 s / 21,6 s / 31,2 s


M3 is quicker in EVERY SINGLE ROLLING RUN.

Check for example 80-180 in 5th gear (50-113mph)
M3 is 3 seconds faster even though at 50mph in 5th it is at 2100rpm.

Reason being the gearing is so disparate due to the different philosophies. AMG have to use long gearing to take advantage of the huge torque plateau of their engines. But in doing so they are giving an tunes NA engine the advantage.

Belmondo

I'm sure if stars will be properly aligned your story will be a good one.
Very informative, very nice to compare E55 in its 5th gear with only 5 gears to begin with with M5 in 5th out of 7 gears.
Is that the way it happens is hte requierement for a race for M5 and E55 to produce same HP at given moment everything else is non issue?
What happens if M5 is in 5th out of 7 and you come upon E55 in 4th gear or third gear?

M&M

Well to answer your question, it depends on the mode the SMG is in. Most people will cruise around in the automated mode. In which case when you stomp it, the SMG will kickdown to the loest possible gear. And it will do it a lot quicker than a torque convertor auto can kickdown.

And then the M5 will really be in the power band & not at 2000rpm. With both cars in their respective powerbands the M5 WILL pull away due to its torque not dropping off at high rpm & its short gearing.

In you are in manual mode, then you will have to click the paddles to downshift to as low a gear as possible & take it from there.

I know the gearing on the 7 speed is not comparable to the E55's 5-speed, but who's problem is that. When you on the road who cars? It like the BMW guys complaining that MErc uses superchargers to compete. Who cares? The car is out there so deal with it.

Anyway, Merc have the 7G-tronic gearbox anyway. I'm sure they would put in in the E55 replacement. Problem is it doesn't help to have short gearing on a car that doesn't rev very high. That's why the 7G-Tronic has much longer gearing that the M5 anyway. M5's final drive is 3.62. It might make it closer, but the M5 will still be quicker on the rolling runs, even if the E55 had 7 gears.

zoink

Despite all the real numbers M5 will come up with and all the arguments you guys made..... I personally would not be surprised if M5 has better numbers than E55 as it would only beat 2-3 years old AMG technology.....

This point in time is just the same as in late year 2002 or early 2003 when W211 E55 beat the crap out of E39 M5, which was 2-3 years old M technology. So... as you guys may have expected already..... soon AMG will unleash a new technology that will beat the crap out of E60 M5

And the war continues....

Belmondo

Dude there is no fight only HOT AIR.
Are you serious about Autocar ??
Because at the beginning of this thread Autocar has M5 ahead of E55 by 10-15 cars. What should I think after all "Autocar happens to be one of the top 3 biggest car magazines in the UK"


Also didn't you already posted all your numbers in C32 forum got your responce there-----------it is what it is dude nothing new. Why do you want reargue again? Not happy that they disagreed with you over there. Or do you think your numbers are the answer to hte every car race in hte world? C'mon , get over it.

M5 is not here for another year and you want me to believe you BS for 12 month without actually knoing if its true or not.

M&M

Geez dude, why would it not be true. Of course its true. Autocar has been in business for many years & even have Autocar is Greece, Portugal, etc.

BTW, Autocar tend to favour Mercs in their shoot-outs. E55 has been their choice since its release & always wins the comparative shoot-outs with RS6, M5, Jag, etc.

I hear Merc will not use supercharging. That meant the E55 replacement might fall along the same lines as the C32 replacement. In other words it might not be much quicker than the car it replaces.

Belmondo

Well we dont know, do we?? We can release more hot air in here. You can reprint your M3 numbers over and over and over again in the different thread and see if you have a better luck , convince yourself that that it is relevant.
THere is a video's posted by Henrik on Roadfly M3 board where C32 or 55 , I forgot, destroys M3 and so on and on and on. THere is no end to it.

M&M

You know what, just because I'm a nice guy I'm going to compare an M5 in the wrong gear against an E55. You do realise that any magazine comparison is always going to compare the same gear in each car. How each manufacturer chooses to gear their cars is their problem.

But it seems the gearing on the E55's 3rd is comparable to the M5's 4th in terms of gear ratio. The same with the 4th & 5th. So if I look at the table & compare to a lower gear from the E55 I get this:

80-120km/h (50-75mph) seconds
M5 3rd 2.77 E55 2nd 2.84
M5 4th 4.17 E55 3rd 3.83 (E55 faster)
M5 5th 4.82 E55 4th 5.78
M5 6th 5.92 E55 5th 7.35

In fact in the M5 is TWO gears higher (6th vs 4th) its 5.92 vs 5.78. So it holds it own even 2 gears up.

120-160km/h (75-100mph) seconds
M5 4th 4.24 E55 3rd 4.40
M5 5th 4.91 E55 3rd 6.21
M5 6th 6.05 E55 5th 7.50

Of course E55's 5th is an overdrive gear so isn't comparable to M5's 6th. That's why M5 is over a second quicker whenever E55's 5th is used.

But the point is on the road who cares? Both will drop gears and as you can see, the M5 will have even more of an advantage when that happens. The E55 can't beat it at low rev lugging contests, so when they are both at high revs the M5 will be in its element.

Zlaatan

Give it a rest Belmondo. First you say you don't believe it and want proof. When you get the proof, it's only BS. Then he gives you yet another example that torque isn't always better than right gearing etc. and now that's also BS...

I'm not saying that I trust these figures 100%. I do when I see a couple of independent magazines print those figures out. But I don't think he just made them all up either..

And the "Very informative, very nice to compare E55 in its 5th gear with only 5 gears to begin with with M5 in 5th out of 7 gears."

They are different cars! What should he compare it against? A modified M5 who had gear 6 and 7 removed?? The BMW comes out of the factory with 7 gears and the E55 with 5. That's it.

M&M

Dude, I sense some hostility here. If so I apologise. I'm just an engineer that gets kicks from equations & cold hard facts. If truth be told, I am a horsepower fan & would take a CL65 over an M5 anyway. And if someone makes a faster car than that, then that would be my choice. Don't care much for brand loyalty & the like.

Zlaatan

And BTW, these "both cars in the same gear times" are pretty useless IRL if you're not looking at the lowest possible gear. Because when you compare cars in the real world, on the road, you don't really yell over to the car your racing against - PUT IT IN FOURTH, WILL YA?!

It's more of a 30 or 40 or 50 or whatever MP/H run. And then both drivers will supposedly be in the right gear to achieve max acceleration for that speed.

Beowulf

Autocar's been around a long time, but even they know their market is not the U.S. Thanks, think I'll wait until I see a U.S. version same day/same place/same conditions production vehicle comparison.

BTW, what relevance did the E46 M3 vs C55 reference have to this discussion? Regardless of your weight/gear arguments, your http://www.track-challenge.com/comp...?Car1=75&Car2=2
link shows two cars tested YEARS apart - different venues, different conditions. Just conjecture - proves little, IMO.

M&M

Zlaatan, of course you are right. But then you are playing right into the hands of the M5. You are forfeiting your torque advantage (lost through gearing anyway) & playing to the M5's slight horsepower advantage. Actually due to the weight difference, it becomes a reasonable power to weight advantage.

But I suspect that if you both drop to the lowest possible gears, there won't be much in it. Whoever get the right gear 1st will be ahead and the other guy won't be able to gain. But I suspect the M5 will still have the slight edge:

40-80 km/h (25-50mph) 2nd gear
M5 1.87 E55 2.35

M&M

Beowulf, the relevance was to point out how a car of similar weight & 100lb/ft less torque can be quicker in rolling runs due to gearing.

I know the cars weren't tested on the same day but here's one where they were:

http://speed.supercars.net/boardpics...18820-CSLa.jpg

30-70mph M3 4.1, C55 4.5

I know the conditions can affect the results, but they weren't even close. If you factor a % change for conditions it wouldn't make much difference.

Some people that don't have an understanding for physics might say its impossible for an E55 to lose in a rolling run against an M5 with much less static torque. Well the C55 vs M3 runs prove that its possible.

Belmondo

ME: "2>1"
YOU: " yeah but 1 fat dude can weigh more than 2 skinny dudes"


THere you have your "hard numbers".

"apologise"------- are you serious?

M&M

Yeah, sometimes you get guys that get all freaky when you come onto their board to have friendly argument.

But back to the original topic, I reckon its impossible for an M5 to pull 10-15CL on an E55. Just plain dumb for journalists to talk such bull.

Zlaatan

Totally agree with the 10-15 CL. Don't think it's possible.

Belmondo: These are the only numbers that exists for the public right now. You don't have to BS them just because the Merc is a fraction slower in this particular test? Accept it for what it is, it's just bragging rights. Both cars are insainly fast. Everyone who buys these cars will enjoy the acceleration, in all gears. And I don't think a lot of people will buy one car or another based on some numbers anyway. Totally different cars for different buyers.