+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 16 of 16
03-14-2006 02:31 PM #1
M5 vs. 550i acceleration from 2,000 to 5,000 rpms?
A question for the engineering types on the board:
Taking into account weight, torque, gearing etc... Which car generates more acceleration g force from 2,000 to 5,000 rpms, a 550i automatic, or an E60 M5?
This question is in no way intended to flame. Its pure curiosity following a few test drives.
03-14-2006 03:54 PM #2
All the torque in M5 is from 6-8K RPM
Look at the graph (it is e39 M5 vs e60, but 550 is pretty close to e39)
Here is your answer. At 2500 RPM e60 has nothing. It feels that too. Unless you keep that car at 6-8K RPM there is not much torque. it only starts to exceed the e39 torque at 5500RPM. For the street it translates into high RPM driving and always keeping the car in the lower gear. very different from e39. (or 550 for that matter)
All I can advise is drive the car a lot (a lot of dealers have 5-6 on their lots right now.. see autoreader.com. So call around an find a car to drive) before you buy. It is a very fast car but requires a lot of shifting and a lot of road to get there.
03-15-2006 05:14 PM #3
How about a 4.0 V-8 twin turbo M5?
I drove an M5 week before last and it was very very hard to gauge its "power" on a relatively short test drive. It sounds great and has tremendous top end, but the power didn't feel that usable as a daily driver. I already literally double the speed limits when I drive (highway too). With the M5 I think I would end up tripling them just to feel the rush of prime acceleration from 6-8k rpms. I'm not sure I have the necessary restraint to drive an M5. I love the grunt of a V8 at 3000 rpms and the way the rear tires struggle for grip as the car lauches forward. Its true, I wish my 4.4 had a bit more top end, but the M5 seems to deliver its top end at the expense of ANY bottom end. Its like a Ferrari from the 80s! The high revving concept seems to work better in a lighter chassis like the M3 where its relative lack of torque is more acceptable. Hey, BMW is re-emracing turbo technology. By a show of hands, who would rather see a lighter, twin turbo 4.0 v-8 with roughly 500 horsepower and well over 400 lb./ft. of torque below 5000 rpms? Mate it to a DSG style transmission and then the M5 can regain its crown as the undeniable king of all sport sedans from any prespective. Just a thought...
03-15-2006 09:25 PM #4
would be a different car then
AMG basically serves that market - the daily driver with immense low-end grunt, auto box only, etc. M5, rightly or not, has more of a track-oriented powertrain. it does not do all that well in normal driving and doesn't really make sense as a commuter. the fact that the torque is high in the rev range and the linearity of normally-aspirated power delivery is what makes it so easy to balance on the throttle when tearing up a racetrack. that is where it's truly impressive but of course very few customers would ever use it that way. on the other hand, the car has way too many gadgets and is too heavy to really be a focused track tool. so perhaps it's a bit confused and confusing which maybe explains the slow sales? it's certainly a fun machine when you get it in its element and use it right. unfortunately, for most people that would be never.
so maybe you're right and bmw would do well to rethink its drivetrain strategy and what exactly it's trying to achieve here. the car of course would lose all appeal to the likes of myself but would probably appeal a whole lot more to the customers bmw is actually trying to reach.
03-16-2006 11:16 AM #5
dp - my feelings exactly - right on...
The best post I've read here so far.....
Here are my thoughts on the track aspect of e60M5:
I'm having a hard time letting my e46 M3 go. Just can't quite imagine tracking e60 the same way as M3. I have real concerns about the weight, size and suspension set up of e60 M5 on the track. Previously had 2 e39 M5s and they did OK on the track, but after destroing endless amount of tires, brakes and suspensions.. I switched to a lighter car (M3).
Plus there is no track stuff for e60 yet... I can not find Hawk HT10 pads for it to save my life. Stoptech - brake upgrades?
How about a real suspension, camber plates - any ideas, Ground Control? I'd imagine it would be quite expensive when it comes out sicne there will be fewer takes vs. e46M3 track upgrade market.
At this point money becomes a factor as well. Start with 100K car, and add 15K of modifications to it..The way it's going it will be cheaper to buy a track car plus a great daily driver vs moding e60.
As a daily driver I'd ratehr have 750LI or 550 for that matter and Elise, M3 or Cayman for a track car - same money as moded M5 but more fun. It's funny how it goes. I thought I'm the primary market for the e60 M5.. but I'm confused :(
03-16-2006 12:14 PM #6
gentlemen, I'm a bit confused by your replies
I consider myself a BMW guy (last three cars and last two bikes). Although I have never owned an M5 (the E39 was too small for me - I'm 6'6") I have always been under the impression that the M5 stood for the idea that you can have sports car performance (braking, handling acceleration) in a four door daily driver that has all the conveniences of other BMWs. Its the last part of this equation that begs examination in regard to the E60 M5. I have driven a E39 M5. Its every bit as friendly around town as a 540i 6 speed. But when you turn up the wick, you get more power and a little better handling. And the formula was undeniably a sales success. Using the same formula, the E60 should be as user friendly as a 550i around town. I think we can all agree that this is not the case. You don't get as many "conveniences of other BMWs" with the E60. Gas mileage sucks, and you have to get the engine in the sweet spot to really appreciate it. As you have said, I can't imagine this car is an 'ultimate' track car. Its large and heavy. Before it was released I saw the new M5 as a car that would allow people with means the ability to drive a daily commuter sedan that can blow the doors off of most sports cars, but NOT drive (and shift and rev) like most sports cars....for that you buy a sports car! I'm not suggesting BMW copy AMG either. I wouldn't drive an AMG car if you gave it to me. They are nose heavy, understeering sedans with mediocre handling that is eclipsed by their massive power. They are point and squirt cars. The M5 should appeal to the same buyer as the AMG. One who wants a comfortable sedan, with all the bells and whistles, massive power, but wants BMW handling infused into the package. The M5 has BMW handling allright, but it has a Formula One racing engine and trans. Sounds cool from a marketing standpoint, but there is a reason F1 cars idle at 5000 rpms - they have no bottom end!! Like the new M5. The car is awesome no doubt, but the jury is still out.
P.S. I'm still upset that BMWNA won't import the 550i with the M sport package (as in Canada/Europe/Australia). The M sport is essentially the same chassis as the M5 with 550 power and transmission options. BMW gave a statement that they were concerned the M sport would compete with the M5's market share in the U.S. Man, I think they couldn't be more on the money with that one.
03-16-2006 05:40 PM #7
The V10 is actually a VERY FLEXIBLE motor!!!!!
I assure everyone that anything BMW builds is going to have a healthy dosage of useable torque. If you positively need to have low end grunt to the max, then buy a 550 or something AMG(I HATE BENZ, I would do the 550). But the V10 is definitely not a one sided rev happy motor only. The torque is very well refined and is there to be manipulated. I have driven the M5 and as a daily driver there is nothing to be missed, the motor is VERY FLEXIBLE, you just have to be conscious of your shift points and throttle application. This aint the HONDA S2000 motor which makes mouse sh_t torque at 9000 rpm. I havent seen a torque graph on the V10 but its making at least 275 lbs of torque off of idle. I have always worked on smooth clutch engagements and efficient use of the throttle and when I drove the M5 I found nothing wrong with the motor other than its foreign sounding song at moderate revs, it just sounds funny at idle and low revs. This motor is flexible. You just have to row the SMG box the right way, I also did not mess with the auto mode in the SMG, I am sure there is a learning curve.
The thing about the 550 is that it makes delivering massive torque to the ground so easy with an auto trans that it is ridiculous.
Long story short I think the M5 has a gem of a motor, I wouldnt want to daily drive one but it could do it all day and there is more than enough torque for me.
03-20-2006 01:10 PM #8
Thank you Choncheto - you made my point for me
"I think the M5 has a gem of a motor, I wouldnt want to daily drive one". That is it in a nutshell. No journalist, enthusiast, salesman, owner...NOBODY ever said 'I wouldn't want to drive one daily' about a previous M5. That's the point. That's why M5's across America are getting flat spots on showroom floors.
03-20-2006 06:36 PM #9
03-23-2006 10:51 AM #10
- , , United StatesMember No: 16913
- Join Date
- Oct 2001
- Rep Power
Re: How about a 4.0 V-8 twin turbo M5?
"who would rather see a lighter, twin turbo 4.0 v-8 with roughly 500 horsepower and well over 400 lb./ft. of torque below 5000 rpms? Mate it to a DSG style transmission and then the M5 can regain its crown as the undeniable king of all sport sedans from any prespective"
I agree get that max torque decently below 5000 and put it over 450 ftlbs, then maybe I'd be interested it it. The price it is now with what you get to me is not worth it.
04-30-2006 12:54 AM #11
Re: gentlemen, I'm a bit confused by your replies
May I say that you are all right on the money. I've had mine for about 6 months, and I must tell you that the you need a lot of road to appreciate the high reving engine. Around town, even on the freeway, the car feels aneimic unless you have a lot of room to really fly. Why, because you need to be operating in the upper reaches of the rev range to really get the benefits of all that horespower. The fact is there is little opportunitiy for this, unless you live in the boonies or have a long commute in off hours on the freeway. Otherwise, the car feels like a heavy, lumbering beast which has no guts in the low end. I have owned other cars which were far more satisying in the low end.
This is not meant to take away from the handling - which is incredible. It's simply a drivetrain which has little applicability to the way most of us drive.
05-01-2006 11:58 AM #12
05-01-2006 12:02 PM #13
05-01-2006 05:11 PM #14
05-29-2006 07:45 PM #15
- , , United StatesMember No: 37843
- Join Date
- May 2002
- Rep Power
SMG is much improved compared to M3 too
Makes getting the power down much easier in Auto mode.
I know...but I used it daily until I needed the revs. In the M3 I would go to Manual fast. In M6 I don't really need to, it drops down from 7th to 3rd in an instant without the hunting I found in the M3 SMG which made me go to manual mode. In fact it will drop to 3rd or 4th, depending on how hard you hit the gas, and it finds the appropriate gear. No need to row the SMG. I have owned MANY manual shift cars, almost exclusively for 50 yrs, and the SMG is a true revolution.
Getting to needed revs fast is what is needed for performance, the hell with torque numbers if you can get in the right gear fast. The M6, and apparently the M5, are the real thing.
'06 ///M6 Silverstone
'02 Acura TL-S
'02 ///M3 SMG
'01 ///M3 6sp
Dodge Stealth TT AWD
Acura Legend Cpe.
Piper Cherokee 180
Datsun 510 2dr
MGA Mk.II (<400 manuf)
+ Ford, Mercury, Lincoln, Chev, Buick, Caddy, Plym, Dodge, Chrysler, Toyota, Nissan, Honda, Acura, Mazda and other boring stuff for wife and family.
05-31-2006 09:50 AM #16
Unfortunately you are correct. If the marketing
lads had their way, the M5 would be just another AMG product. Probably a turboed V12 monster with a slushbox.
I've spoken with AMG engineers who look at the M cars as their target. They really want to build cars that will compete with the various Ms. Marketing just wants bigger and biger engines, and they are stuck with the Merc platforms that really don't allow them enough leeway especially in the gearbox department. They are also stuck with a lot of weight that they just cannot shed.
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)