OK, Improviz, this is just a discussion about the projected performance of the M5. You can go ahead & call me names if you want, or you can take apart my points below because we all know I'm a dumb troll that doesn't know anything.

Motortrend's test of the E55:
http://motortrend.com/roadtests/seda...es/index5.html

0-30 mph 1.8
0-40 mph 2.4
0-50 mph 3.2
0-60 mph 4.2
0-70 mph 5.3
0-80 mph 6.5
0-90 mph 8.1
0-100 mph 9.7
1/4 mile, sec @ mph 12.39 @ 116.21

Here Road & Track got the E55 to 100 in 9.8 seconds:
http://www.roadandtrack.com/article....&page_number=3

And here's C&D:

0-60 in 4.5
0-100 in 9.9
1/4 mile 12.5 @ 116mph

as seen here: http://www.caranddriver.com/article....&page_number=3

NOW here's Sport Auto's test of the E55 sedan:

http://www.einszweidrei.de/mercedes/e55amg2003-1.htm

Test in sport auto 01/2003
0 - 80 km/h 3,3 s
0 - 100 km/h 4,6 s
0 - 120 km/h 5,9 s
0 - 130 km/h - s
0 - 140 km/h 7,6 s
0 - 160 km/h 9,8 s
0 - 180 km/h 12,2 s
0 - 200 km/h 14,6 s

Note Improviz, this is tha FASTEST test of the E55.

And here's the FASTEST (no I'm not posting the slowest tests) CLS55:
http://www.einszweidrei.de/mercedes/cls55amg2004-2.htm

Test in auto zeitung 26/2004
Gewicht 1845 kg
0 - 80 km/h 3,4 s
0 - 100 km/h 4,7 s
0 - 120 km/h 6,0 s
0 - 130 km/h - s
0 - 140 km/h 7,7 s
0 - 160 km/h 9,8 s
0 - 180 km/h 12,0 s
0 - 200 km/h 14,6 s


Notice a similarity? Yeah the 0-100mph (0-160km/h) times. C&D got 9.9 to 100, Motortrend got 9.7 & R&T got 9.8.

Sport auto also got 9.8 for the E55 & CLS55 they tested. That's now 5 different mags tested 5 different cars & they got similar results.

I think the runs are representative of E55's running to spec BUT with no preparation, cooling of engines with ice, adjusting tyre pressures, etc. Obviously on a fast, sticky strip with preparation an owner can go faster than the mag times.

But seeing as all cars ae tested with the same procedure I think its safe to compare them as such for mag tests.

So the Sport Auto's E55 & CLS55 WERE running to spec & tested in good conditions. NOte the 0-200 km/h (0-124mph) of both the E55 & CLS55 was 14.6. And we've proven there was nothing wrong with these cars.

Now let's get onto the M5. Here's the fastest test of the M5 to 124mph.

http://www.autobild.de/test/neuwagen...70b152fd95ba96

13.5 to 200km/h. That's over a second faster than the 55's. But hey let's give Improviz somthing to play with. I'll take the 2nd fastest M5 run, not the fastest:

http://www.einszweidrei.de/bmw/m5e60v102004-3.htm

Supertest in sport auto 12/2004
Gewicht 1844 kg
0 - 80 km/h 3,5 s
0 - 100 km/h 4,5 s
0 - 120 km/h 5,9 s
0 - 130 km/h - s
0 - 140 km/h 7,4 s
0 - 160 km/h 9,2 s
0 - 180 km/h 11,6 s
0 - 200 km/h 13,8 s

Note the 0-160km/h (0-100mph) is 9.2. In the other test they did it was 9.3 so it sounds reasonable to assume that's what they run. So the M5 seems to be around 0.6 seconds quicker to 100mph & around 0.8 quicker to 124.

What that translates into on the 1/4 is hard to predict as time to distance is another concept. But seeing as the SMG can launch higher & harder, with the LSD, lower torque, lower weight & shorter gearing I assume the M5 will have better launching capablities & the time to distance will be in the M5's favour as well.

Of course AMG will counter with the normally aspirated E63, but as has been discussed that may not yield the results most expect. Let's look at the FASTEST (yes Improviz I'm a changed man) test of the SL65:

1st C&D: http://www.caranddriver.com/article....&page_number=2

0-100mph in 8.2
1/4 mile in 11.9 @ 123mph.

Sport Auto also tested the SL65:

http://www.einszweidrei.de/mercedes/sl65amg2004-1.htm

Test in ams 13/2004
Gewicht 2057 kg
0 - 80 km/h 3,0 s
0 - 100 km/h 3,9 s
0 - 120 km/h 5,1 s
0 - 130 km/h 5,9 s
0 - 140 km/h 6,6 s
0 - 160 km/h 8,2 s
0 - 180 km/h 10,1 s
0 - 200 km/h 12,6 s
400 m, stehender Start 11,9 s

How's that? SA also got 8.2 to 100mph & 11.9 1/4.

BUT we all know the E63 will not have anywhere near the power of the 65. I mean that engine is hand-built on the top floor of the factory alongside the SLR engine & the 65 engine alone costs the same as a whole E55.

 

Who cares

The W211 E55 is going into its 3rd year of production which has given all of us daily smiles on our faces. Until the new M5 is on the road and being sold no reason to compare cars.

With this crazy world we live in, I enjoy one day at a time since no one knows what the next day may bring.

I am sure the new M5 will be a AWESOME car but so is the E55

These type of posts are getting old.

 

M&M,

Whats your point? The M5 is faster? Who the F cares? It was always going to be, the 55K engine has been in production since 2002! The M5 will be released in NA in around Sept/Oct even Nov this year. Guess what? AMG's new engine will be ready by then.

Why are you comparing it to the SL65? just because its a second slower to the ton? The SL65 is HALF a SECOND off the pace of the Porsche CGT to the ton and faster from 0-186mph by nearly 4 seconds! But you don't see me comparing the two?


You can have your superiority for about a year, then we'll talk again oooooohhh, the M5 is faster in a straight line and on the Nordschleife, where do I sign for one!?!!

 

Couldn't agree more!

 

Ditto. Nip this one in the bud. Take it to bimmer.org

Tenth of a second here or there, who cares????????

 

M&M, you're full of sh*t and give BMW drivers a bad rap. I have an 04' M3 SMG and it launches like crap compared to the E. As for which is faster, all this means nothing until folks start making 1/4 mile runs with it. I'm #2 on the M5 waiting list at BMW on Long Island and will be taking it straight to the track as soon as I get it.

Until then, you sound like some nerd arguing what the air is like on Mars before we even get there. What's more important is that the 55 makes your E46 look like a little b*tch. Want some videos to prove it?

 

M&M you must be sadistic and like flame abuse.You appear to be much smarter than that but now I don't know!!!! Take it to bimmerforums like I do.Why would you come to this forum and talk so much about BMW's.I don't go over there(BF) talking about my C43.I learned that the first time I joined bimmerforums.But you go on and on and on,thread after thread after thread!!

If you(M&M) have an MB then talk about that one right here!Jeez!
Give it and yourself a break will ya!

 

Honestly, if people wanna make a comparison between 2 cars, compare the BEST times that are out there for BOTH cars. Don't compare a slow time of one car with a FAST time of another car.
As we have seen on this board, people have been pulling low 12's, flat 12's actually, and trapping from 116-118 mph. That is about 0.4 or 0.5 seconds faster than the magazines' tests.
As for the SL 65 AMG, why compare it to that car? 12.6 seconds to 200 km/h? I think NOT. Treynor here has posted a best trap speed of 126 at 11.7 seconds. That is ALSO faster than the magazine time. It is faster by almost a second, which is a huge difference at that speed.
The only way to settle this is to have both cars line up against each other in similar conditions and similiar driver's ability so launch won't be an issue. Other than that, u compare the best times obtained by both vehicles because that will be a fair comparison.
Hopefully this post made some sense. :p

Iron Sheik

 

Jeezus, what happened here? LAst time I checked this was an E55 forum. Aren't discussion about an upcoming competitor valid for a forum such as this? I thought we could discuss the straight line performance difference between these 2 great cars in a civilised way. But hey, no need to get all defensive. And where's Improviz?

Iron Sheik, thosa ARE the best times of the E55. Did you read the post or what.

Eagleeye, I see a 0.6-0.8 gap to 100mph. Probably a similar gap over the 1/4. I don't know if you ever race but a 0.6 second gap is aorund 5 carlengths.

Bilal, I expected a better debate from you. I think you know the E55 replacement will struggle to beat the E55, let alone the M5. And I know the SL65 runs after 120mph. But not many people race at those speeds. The point is up to 120 it is not significantly faster, & so don't expect a normally aspirated E63 to put up a fight.

Am I right or wrong?

 

I'll let you know when I get to try the M5 in 6-12 mos. In the mean time I'll just keep on humiliating the M5 drivers that I come across.

 

You said it, I absolutely agree.

 

Sorry M&M, but the best times reported by stock E55's are NOT mid 12's. As a matter of fact, the best times posted on this site by E55 owners have been flat 12's A few 12.0's here and there and I think someone broke in the 11's, 11.98 with Drag Radials. So you see, these are the BEST times for stock E55's, not those slow magazine times. Am I right or wrong?
I am only stating facts here.

Iron Sheik

 

Ironman, you don't read very well do you? I said those are the best times by the AUTO MAGS. We are comparing apples with apples. Same tests done by the same mags. Sprt Auto tested the E55 & M5 with a full tank of gas, passenger, stock tyres pressures & no ice on the engine on a surface that is NOT prepped with VHT.

Sure an E5 owner can go faster on a strip, but so can an M5 owner.

 

Well said! I cant believe this guy has started yet another one of these threads!

M&M, comments like "You dont read very well", which you are directing at members here just shows that you intend to start another argument. I think its pretty obvious that everyone here is over your threads.

THE M5 ISNT OUT YET AND YOUR THREADS ARE USELESS UNTIL ITS BEEN TESTED ON THE SAME DAY AT THE SAME TRACK AT THE SAME TIME AS AN E55.

 

Congrats Mickey Mouse, you did it again. You managed to get some response from MB drivers. Luckily all M3 drivers are not like you, and luckily not all South Africans as well.

 

Luckily that's been done by 3 magazines. And the gap is 0.7 seconds to 100mph. Improviz will soon post the links where the cars were tested together. That just backs up my points.

And why you guys getting so defensive. I apologise for saying the guy can't read. But apart from that I haven't said anything derogatory about MB or made an personal attacks on anyone. Go back & read my post.

AMG fanatic when you racing me?

 

M&M, whats there to debate about? The M5 IS FASTER THAN THE 55k models and very close to the 65 models... Happy? What did you honestly intend to prove by this post comparing acceleration times? Sure the M5 is faster, it had to be.

AMG is a scab that BMW M can't resist picking, and vice versa. The W210 was faster than E34? Then the E39 was faster than the W210, and then the W211 was faster than the E39 and now the E60 is faster than the W211.

The W211 facelift will get a new engine and it WILL be faster or equal to the E60, it has to be. Thats how it works.

YOUR posts and especially this one all try to prove one thing, the M5 is faster and indirectly, AMG can't produce a faster car. What in the name of.......?

The 6.3 V8 if with 600Nm and 500bhp and 7G Tronic, may not be faster than the E60 AGREED. But do you really think AMG will make an inferior car to the E60? What really were BMW M trying to prove with the E60?


.....That they could make a faster car than the 55K's, THAT'S IT. The ball may be in your court now, but things will change....

 

Bilal, that's more like it. Decent debate instead of calling me names.

I agree that its a vicious circle. However the law of dimishing returns starts to apply. That's why the SL600 & SL65 have such close 1/4 mile times & why they aren't THAT much quicker than the 55's.

Traction & power loss through the drivetrain with the beefier components required to handle the massive torque.

With AMG going NA the traction issues might be improved as will the drivetrain efficiency. However, as you are aware, 500hp will not be enough to beat the M5. AMg don't give a continental hoot about weight & as it stands the current E55 is 200kg heavier than the M5.

They need 550hp to break even & that's highly unlikely given the current plans. Maybe I'm wrong & they manage to do it.

 

For the record, I never called you any names

Yes, the gains are minimal, but to all those who have driven the 55's, the 65 cars deliver a really serious punch above their less powerful stablemates. Numbers aside. Who knows if AMG start doing body modifications like the C55 and use lighter materials? What if they make an LSD with 60% lockup as standard fit on all their cars? What if...?

My point is, you are assuming that we have reached a rut with performance levels. True to a point, but never underestimate the abilities of a firm which has the financial resources of DaimerChrysler and the mentally deranged state to make a 612hp S-Class! :p

I am glad we have both companies, but being a hugely shallow person who can't resist beautifully designed cars with the three-pointed star, I know its subjective, but the E60 M5 will never appeal to me as a good-looking everday car, and I won't want to purchase a 4 door saloon for the weekend, even though it may be superior in just about everything even to a 997C2S, as my fun car. Nor spend that much money for an engine which has minimal "kick" over the 55K or V10 sound (I still prefer V8's) I am sure the majority of E55 buyers will agree. We accept the E60 M5 is superior in just about anything, but its not a Mercedes-Benz is it?

(you're peeing in the wind)

 

I give up!

 

Closing thread. You have a PM M&M.