18 years old and my stock SLS has not broken any
I still say that the SLS is the TOP system,,, not a throw away.
Re: 18 years old and my stock SLS has not broken a
I don't know how SLS felt new, but having both broken front shocks and bad accumulators and then switching to the euro setup has made an incredible difference. I've basically been driving a caddy with an m engine for the past 3 years...
that is the biggest unknown to all of us now..
how was the SLS when it was new....?? I have new accumulators, hoses, and almost new.. shocks.. (bought from a smashed car that just had them replaced. I did all that work just before the car went to bed for winter.. I also installed factory front shocks..
now i need to wait for spring.... but Id like to drive another car that has good but not racing suspension...
shocks brakes and tires are always soooooooooooo good when they are replaced. compared to the worn out ones, it is always way better.. it is a salesperson's dream. human memories are short.. who really knows how these cars were when new?
Re: that is the biggest unknown to all of us now..
I have owned a e28 m5 since new and I must tell you the SLS suspension is horrible compared to the Fahey modified springs and shocks. I wish I would have dumped that crap years ago. That's the way I see it.
can you add something technical...
what was wrong with the sls when it was new?
Id like to know in terms of ideal for a fast businessman's express sedan. I am certain that the SLS is not suited for track or racing but this is a large upright sedan.
The trendsetting novilty of the M5 was to be a practical and very fast family car. There are lots and lots out there now. For sure not very many of them are out on the race track. also very few have SLS suspensions. I wonder if it was surpassed by technology or axed due to cost?
I would like to know if a car with the Fahey suspension would work well with 5 adults and a full trunk.. because I like that my car sits straight and handles well even when loaded.
Re: can you add something technical...
If you find that you're that embarrassed with an m5 riding a little low in the rear (I've read it's really not that big of a difference) that you're willing to pay to keep the SLS going, that's fine. But for me, who wanted better performance, more reliability, and lower price instead, I went with a regular setup.
hmm there ya go with better performance again..
hahaha.. I know you can make it better for the track.. for a single purpose. but what is better about it for an M5? I mean how do you define the needs of M5 suspension? harder is not necessarily the answer.. I am totaly a driver guy.. I appreciate as much road feel as possible.. but the M5 is there to impress the passengers as well.
well for me anyway this is my "big" car, the only one suitable for 4 people.
I still get excited when I think about that Lancia Thema 8.32
Re: hmm there ya go with better performance again.
Better performance typically refers to the track... that's what I meant. What other performance measure would you be referring to? Ride quality? Are you saying that SLS rides better than a regular setup? I've never heard that before. The only performance advantage that was claimed for SLS was that the rear end keeps ideal camber, but at speeds where that would come into play, I'd rather have the euro setup for the control.
I mean driving at 120 km/h on a highway.
or 100 on a twisty 2 lane road... with the car loaded.. I also think that people here that did not like the cost of the system are much more inclined to diss the system...
I can assure you that the US spec car had the best available options. they tuned the sls to PERFORM BEST!!!
now the engine was sorta detuned due to emissions, but every other aspect of making the M5 best was used. The Euros got the regular suspension because they have the sense to slow down when fully loaded.. they had to put a BETTER system on the US cars cuz the americans tend to throw logic out the window when driving.
Now times have changed.. BME has to block brake coolind ducts on new BMWs, because the americans complain that the cooling duct makes the brakes wetter in the rain, drivers dont have the sense to be careful braking in the rain.
either way... I think that the sls system is well designed and is a performance option. It is good when working properly. I support those who want to keep it working.
Re: I mean driving at 120 km/h on a highway.
You used performance again, so you're saying that it's a safer system because the slight camber changes can cause the car to lose control? There's enough understeer built in that I don't see where you'd be in danger of losing the back end, and when you're on the brakes, SLS doesn't affect anything as far as I can tell.
You keep using BMW as proof that SLS was better, except I can't seem to find any info about the e39 or e60 having the feature. If it was the better system, why was it dropped from the e39?
I'm fine with people keeping the system, it doesn't suit my needs or wallet. If SLS was the same price as the Euro, I'm sure it would still be the setup of choice in this country, but it's not.
I think there is more to it than angle
when a normal suspension is compressed the spring rate increases a lot. with the sls the spring is kept at the same level.
Back in the 80's BMW added technology as needed to be the best. The company has changed a lot since then. the cars are WAYYYYYYY cheaper now than they ever were.
the M5 was 50,000 dollars in 1988 that was SERIOUS money. there were no 1.9% leases and no financing plans .. they guys that bought these things new were RICH!!
BMW was arrogant, and adament to be the best technically. I think the SLS was dropped because it was too expensive.
Volvo used the system in the 90's on the 960's and it was deemed the superiour suspension.
anyway i dont feel like I am getting anywhere.. I like the SLS because it suits the way I precieve the M5, performance is partly subjective measurable but ride is a feeling not so easy to measure.
I am convinced that BMW did not add the SLS to the american cars because it was crappy.
Re: I think there is more to it than angle
There is only one reason SLS was used. It was to keep the rear tires from overheating when the car was loaded up with passengers and luggage and driven for prolonged high speed runs on the autobahn.
The reason the rear tires would overheat was due to excessive rear negative camber. The inside treads would overheat, especially with the relatively poor quality rubber they were using then.
BMW thought this was an important safety issue, otherwise why mess with the complexity and expense of SLS ?
I've driven SLS cars in good condition, both M5, M6 and 745i. I think they ride great, but they do have a problem with feeling a bit stiff when very unloaded. You can tune them softer, but then they tend to ride kind of low in the back. However with a full tank of gas or a box of tools in the boot, this is not an issue. SLS offers the added advantage of not getting that overloaded look when you have passengers and whatnot. The ride quality is far better with stock springs and Bilstein HD's which is what I had in my 535is. I have never driven an M5 with stock rear springs and adj. ride hight Bilstein sports, though. I have Dinan springs in mine.
As for why the Euro cars didn't get SLS and the US cars did, I can only assume that COST was the factor as the 745i had the SLS system at the same time the Euro M5's were being sold (85-87). Scottie Sharpe
Provider of Mass Air Flow Conversion Kits for BMWs
88 Dinan-badged M5, M88 motor with BMWTurboPerformance.com mass air flow conversion, Laptop Dynamic Tuning, 02 Sensor feedback, Dinan Stage 4 suspention, Dinan 17x9.5 3pc wheels, 255/40 Conti Sport X 4, e34 rear brakes, B&B Stainless steel Exhaust, F&R LaDue stainless steel strut bars.
68 2002 Ireland coil overs, e12 brakes, Mikuni 40s, Stahl, Hoosiers
67 1600 Stock - "Cutie"
Do you BMWwikiwiki.com ??
Re: I think there is more to it than angle
I didn't say it was crappy. I tried to say that with the more performance oriented m5 of today, they would not have included SLS unless it was equal to/better than their other suspension setup. (Notice the deletion of valvtronic and their active steering from the m5).
Taking inflation into account, the m5, at 45k, would be 73k in 2005. The new m5 costs 80...
Obviously it was a nice system, it wouldn't be on the 6 and 7 series if it wasn't. You seem to try so hard to defend it though. I think people know that when it was new it must have been nice, or else it wouldn't have ended up on our cars.