"M is for Holy Sweet Mother Of God"

Wallie05 · Oct 10, 2004

poboyis said:

http://www.bmwcca.org/Roundel/rdelfset.shtml

Just read through the article online. It says, "essential aspects of a car that will cost over 86,000 euros on the Continent (including 16% VAT)."

86,000 Euros at last Friday's exchange rate of 1.24172 Euro on the dollar, equals
106,790 USD. Still too much if you ask me.... [doorpeek]

xLibelle · Oct 10, 2004

this M5 is going to be so fawking HOT

///M SPEED · Oct 10, 2004

Talking to the dealer near me they stated the cars should be selling anywhere from 85K to 95K. I don't really think BMW wants the car to break the 100k barrier. With options who knows, but coming out base it shouln't.....

tool fan · Oct 10, 2004

Wallie05 said:

Sorry chief let me elaborate...the AUDI NEW RS6 GETS BEAT IN EVERY TEST THAT WAS PERFORMED ON THE GERMAN TV SHOW >>>TUNING WORLD>>>which shows every saturday evening at 1800 on RTL 2. I am not "inventing" I know the difference between the new 6er and the old. Maybe I do and maybe I don't have the inside scoop....I do live in the country where these cars are produced...so I would naturally gather that test results from even a prototype Audi would be aired on German TV before U.S. Just my guess.[???1]

Yes read you hp ratings 469 vs. 507 hmmm I only worry about top speed!
torque? well all I can say about that is MB C65 AMG ....over 708fpds of torque. So what....it is still limited to 155mph...I said Green Party....which means limited to 155 mph....get rid of the Green Party standards and the M5 wastes the E55. I LOVE the E55...don't get me wrong...but respect must be paid where respect is due. As a PERFORMANCE car I notice I said I believe the M5 will outperform the MB on the track as well. Time will tell.

frolf · Oct 10, 2004

i'm pro M5 like you would'nt believe. yeah its expensive and that sucks, but STFU cause what other production car comes with a 7speed tranny or with a V10 that redlines around 8000. NO ONE. i also thought the Rs6 was done and over with. yeah its a monster, but i thought was a limited production that has come and passed.

i think the e60 is hot too.

MrElussive · Oct 10, 2004

According to mbusa.com, the E55 AMG does 0-60 in 4.5 seconds. I can believe the 4.2 second time assuming they did a brake-torque launch, which launches the car well but is not good for the tranny and the brakes.
The BMW M5 has the 507hp, 5.0 liter V10, naturally aspirated. I think the E55 AMG is stronger down low, but the M5 is a high-revving naturally aspirated engine that developes 38hp more than the E55 and is stronger up top. Also, the new M5 weighs almost 350lbs less (4,087lbs vs 3,750lbs) and has the SMG III transmission working for it (faster shifts and shorter gears to keep the engine in its power band).
I am a HUGE fan of the E55 AMG, but I think the new M5 is faster and handles better (I can't speak for braking because the E55's 8-piston front calipers look like MONSTERS). Either way, my decision between the two is EASY: BMW M5 all the way baby!
Mercedes has a great car with the E55 AMG, along with all the other AMG cars, but all Mercedes vehicles suffer from the same problem: as good as they are, they always have such a serious (boring) personality! The car isolates you from the road, the interior is all business, and the car does not reward you (with good feelings running through your body) for pushing it hard. Also, I think that the SMG transmission is the PERFECT transmission for the new M5. It is faster on the track and the lack of a real manual does not let you abuse the transmission, which would be a pretty easy thing to do with 507hp under the hood. And these cars are luxury sedans and sports cars, so I think the SMG transmission also offers that true manual "feel" and performance without the impracticality of a clutch (such as all those business people who have to deal with traffic every single day)....best of all worlds.
As you can see, I did not hold the E55 AMG's automatic transmission against it (I only mentioned how the SMG is superior to it) because Mercedes has "perfected" the automatic transmission in that 0-60 and 1/4-mile times between a Mercedes auto and manual is a difference of literally no more than 0.1 second.

As far as the RS6 debate, let's stick to one RS6: the last model before the brand new 2005 model, with the 450hp biturbo V8. Great car and very fast but suffers from two things: the automatic transmission and the Quattro AWD. Fortunately, this car weighs in at about 4,024lbs so it does not suffer from traditional Audi "chubbiness" but that Quattro AWD really slows the car down a lot (but as much as Quattro slows the car down is as much as it helps the handling). It's a true 50/50 power split and without Quattro AWD and auto transmission (unlike Mercedes, Audi auto trannies do take an acceleration hit over their manual trannies, but supposedly biturbo engines work very well with auto setup because the engine never actually "stops" working like in a manual but this is all subjective, I'm just drawing my own conclusion in that auto makes it slower as that is typical Audi fashion), the car would easily do 0-60 in a SOLID 4 seconds flat (but this is my own hypothesis, obviously not proven).

Wallie05 · Oct 10, 2004

tool fan said:

http://koti.mbnet.fi/rmx/m5/m5ttv_maxM5.wmv

I'm almost positive I found the clip you're talking about, above, from German "Tuning TV." See link. (Great M5 footage by the way).

However, this is NOT the lastest generation RS6. As I said, I don't think Audi has a working prototype. I don't really think you can tell the difference between the new and the old.

Oh, and by the way, if you "only worry about top speed," then you have a lot to learn. And what's with the Green Party rant?!? Who cares if they're governed to 155. I doubt you get up to that speed on most American roadways anyway. But there are definetly plenty of intersections where the M5 and E55 could go at it to 60 or the 1/4. And like I said earlier, at any such given stoplight, it seems like the E55 pulls ahead of the M5.

PS Mr. E: Take a look at the numbers. Motortrend is pretty good about reporting accurate numbers. And by the way, manufacturers are always a little more conservative in their times than actual testers (look at Porsche's official times, then take any car mag and see for yourself. Cayenne Turbo is a perfect example. Actual times generally beat factory times by 2/10ths to even 6/10ths of second).

Great article about the RS6 and E55.
http://motortrend.com/roadtests/sedan/112_0309_axes/index5.html

MrElussive · Oct 10, 2004

Wallie05, like I said I do believe the 0-60 times they recorded but I have a feeling they launched the RS6 and the E55 AMG (whereas manufacturers' web sites posting their cars' 0-60 auto tranny times do not consist of a brake-torque launch). The Motor Trend times are very believable in this case, but most of the time I personally do not trust magazines as sometimes they post 0-60 times of certain cars that are faster or slower than I would ever expect (going against the manufacturer's 0-60 time, of course).
Among the three vehicles, it seems that the Audi makes the best use of the horsepower and this is surprising to me. Typically BMW is always great with getting the most performance out of its engines, and Audi is the one always lagging behind because of their Quattro AWD and auto transmission. Perhaps these cars have so much horsepower that the Quattro AWD does not let the RS6 experience any time-wasting wheelspin.

Also, tool fan lives in Germany and drives on the autobahn every day, so top speed and acceleration above 100mph are pretty important to him.

I'd also like to add that although I'd take the M5 among the three of them, with 507hp under the hood, I'm not a fan of the M5 being RWD. Yeah yeah, I know "RWD is the way to go" blah blah, but these cars are pushing out MASSIVE horsepower and I'm not a fan of ridiculous oversteer.

adrean8j · Oct 10, 2004

Yeah its like you said Mr. E....speeds over 100mph are very important over here in Deutschland! I regularly travel in excess of that speed...almost everyday in fact. Although I have never gotten up to 155mph(The fastest i have been on the Autobahn was 230Kph in my car= 143mph). Much faster than that isnt really necessary. And all this talk of tenths of a second is not really important UNLESS you are a racer and get paid money for it.....so at that level and that close to each other(the MB and the BMW M5 AND the RS6)the 0-60times and 1/4 mile times are really a moot point! Whatever car suits you and you can afford is the bottom line.....are you not gonna buy the M5 you like because the E55 beats 0-60 by 2/10ths of a second? Come on people lets get real here!

MrElussive · Oct 10, 2004

adrean8j, I totally agree with you, but these "marginal" differences in acceleration are suddenly the most important if, let's say you're in the Audi RS6 and some guy in an E55 or M5 pulls up next to you at a red light.

adrean8j · Oct 10, 2004

Not so....can the human eye catch 2/10's of a second? In a light to light sprint without anyone on the outside watching(and even if they were) you wouldnt be able to tell the difference. If it was possible for humans to do it there wouldnt be any "Photo finishes" in any type of race, automotive or otherwise. Correct me if i am wrong! LOL

p.s. Do you have any pics of your G35? I absolutely love those cars and if they had a dealer near me I would have probably traded in my 5er already! [thumb]

Wallie05 · Oct 10, 2004

MrElussive said:

I agree with MrE. These times in acceleration aren't that marginal. People will pay TOP dollar to be able to say they have the fastest 4-door. Furthermore, I know plenty of people who don't give a rats ass is they drive a BMW, M-B, or Audi. They just want the latest, fastest, coolest, etc. car out there. To many people, brand loyalty is a thing of the past. Especially among the upper echelon of cars. Why do you think BMW, MB, Audi always have to practically reinvent their top models every few years. Most people will jump from an S-class, to a 7-series, or A8 (or AMG to M for that matter) if it suits their taste.

Furthermore, when it comes to racing from stoplights, you can spot the car that hits 60 in 4.2 versus one that hits it a half-second later. There are plenty of county roads around Chicagoland where you can get up to about 70, 80, maybe even a 100 for a while. It's all about who get's there first, not about who will max out as the fastest speed. After about 120-130 though, nothing much else matters--at least stateside, or more specifically, around Chicago from experience.

jrt67ss350 · Oct 10, 2004

MrElussive said:

Come on, how many times do you see an E55 racing an M5 or RS6 from stoplight to stoplight????? The people that can afford these cars aren't the kind of people who go out cruising looking for competition.

adrean8j · Oct 10, 2004

Sigh....Back to school once again..... if two cars that have a 2/10's of a second difference in 0-60 times based on given statistics are driven by two separate drivers are at a stop light and race to the next stop light who will win?

YOU DONT KNOW! And why dont you know? Because it depends on the skill of the driver(in some cases not all because of the type of tranny), road conditions, tire condition, visual acuity of the driver...etc, etc.......and about that 120-130 and after that it doesnt matter bit.....yeah right...after 85 doesnt matter in 99% of the country(and i am american by the way born in Evanston). Mr E. was right especially in America it is the curse of bigger, badder, and faster...even if it is not truly usable. When i say marginal i mean literally....I dont mean when you want to spout out some numbers to your buddy across the way in his RS6.....all just opinions I guess but 2/10's of a second will not make me SPEND or NOT SPEND a few thousand dollars more or less......

Wallie05 · Oct 10, 2004

adrean8j said:

Adrean, yeah I do agree. I think I did go a little too high with the 120-130. I agree, 85mph is probably the fastest usable/most likely you're gonna get up to 99% of the time. The thing is though. I'm not saying there's a 2/10ths of a second difference between the E and the M to 60. That much I will agree also, you can't tell. But a half-second (0.5) you can tell, and that's what the difference between the E and the M is (at least for now, who knows, maybe actual tests will prove otherwise).

Also, with these kinds of cars, I don't think you really need an experienced driver. The E55 is fully auto (that's actually how you get the best times) and M5 is capable of that as well (I think the SMGIII on the M is supposed to drive awesome and fast even in auto, unlike the current SMG). You mash the throttle (brake-torque if you want like MrE said) and you're off. Nothing else to it. Sure, one driver might chicken out or take it easy, but let's talk about what the cars are capable of.

Finally, it looks the M5 is going to be a considerable amoung more than the E--close to $100K. Nearly 15-20k more than E55! That might change a few people's minds?

By the way, you mean Evanston, IL, right? I'm actually thinking about getting a place up there--it's hot area now. Some great roads, like the county one's I mentioned, up around there....

Don't take this too personally. [cheers]

jrt67ss350 · Oct 10, 2004

Don't sigh, adrean....I agree with you!

adrean8j · Oct 10, 2004

Oh i dont take it personal! LOL....I just like "spirited" discussions!
Now back to the discussion! You mentioned it doesnt take an "experienced" driver. I never said an "experienced" driver! I said it depends on the skill of the driver(s).....if ones reflexes are even 1/10th of a second slower in a car 2/10ths of second faster who will win??? Or even half-second slower reflex? Half-second is REALLY not that long a time! Most light to light races arent decided in half-seconds anyway! If you finish even close to even with the other driver they will give you respect....or am i wrong in this...i dont know i havent lived in the states for a few years now! Anyone seen or heard from Wadula????

Wallie05 · Oct 10, 2004

Ok, I see what you're saying, Adrean and I agree. But things are getting crazy in the States with the "horsepower" wars. Like MrE said, suddenly these slight differences in accleration times are being increasingly agonized over, and/or publicized. Now if you a get a mid-sized car with less than 200hp, suddenly it's deemed underpowered and slow. Hell, Nissan put a 260hp motor in their Altima. That's saying something....

I've been reading car mags for a lot of years now, and in the past couple of years, it seems like any car manufacturer who thinks they have a solid 0-60 time will publicize the hell out of it. Anyone whose seen the new Mercedes SLK ads will know what I'm talking about. So now that public is more conscious of it, and it's become a form of bragging rights. You don't even really need to race anyone, it's all about knowing (and having everyone else know) that you have the baddest, fastest, coolest car out there. To be honest, if had an M5 or E55 I wouldn't even bother racing anybody. I know I'd be faster than the next guy, and most likely, he probably knows it too.

At least that's my take....

MrElussive · Oct 10, 2004

All good points. If it ever does come down to a stop light race among an E55, M5, and RS6, I agree with you guys in that there are too many conditions that will determine the outcome (for instance, if the roads are a bit damp, the Audi will definitely win). But at the same time, as Wallie stated, there is factor in just "knowing" that, let's say you have the M5, you have the most horsepower under your hood.

The reason why we're having a "horsepower war" is because for years and years, the auto industry wasn't able to develope high-horsepower engine that also deliver decent fuel economy and low emissions. We have just gotten past that now, along with everybody simply getting sick and tired of massive SUV's roaming around (SUV's used to be a trend, but the US's new trend is performance). It used to be about how BIG your vehicle was, but now it's about how BIG your engine is.

I just think it is important to state one thing regarding 0-60 times. A half a second acceleration difference becomes more important as cars get faster. If you're comparing two cars, one that does 0-60 in 10 seconds and one that does 0-60 in 10.5 seconds, okay the difference isn't so big. If these two guys went head-to-head, they'd both be accelerating so slow that it would be hard to tell the difference. But when you have 3 450++hp BEASTS that furiously RUSH to 60mph in 4 to 5 seconds, that is just MASSIVE acceleration, and I think every 0.1 second difference among these cars would be noticeable, assuming you have all 3 lined up for a race. And, last but not least, I hate to quote Vin Diesel from The Fast And The Furious, but "It doesn't matter if you win by an inch or a mile...winning is winning."

MrElussive · Oct 10, 2004

adrean8j said:

Yeah, I heard they are super rare in Germany. But there is this one guy on our G35 forum who has a G35 Coupe in Germany and he absolutely loves it. He says the car is surprisingly autobahn-worthy and loves being the only one with it. I believe you will see more of them soon.

Here is a picture that I took back in July...
http://www.amirsaleh.com/G35/G35.jpg
I want my car back. [bigcry]

"M is for Holy Sweet Mother Of God"

Member

2

2

2

2

2

Member

2

1000 Post Club

2

1000 Post Club

Member

2

1000 Post Club

Member

2

1000 Post Club

Member

2

2