F10 M5 Performance

[clar]

The official figures from BMW has it doing 0-200 km/h (124mph) in 13s. That sounds a little like weak sauce to me. I was expecting much more...

Nevertheless, it's looking increasingly attractive to me if only those tail pipes weren't so anemic.

http://s3.bimmerfile.com.s3.amazonaw...new_BMW_M5.pdf

[brava09]

13s to 124mph is no weak sauce by no means. it's already half a second faster than the E60 M5 and around 2 seconds faster than our M3.

[mmm def]

This F10 M5 is going to be a rocket, especially when awd comes out.

[brava09]

awd has been ruled out for M5

check this http://www.autocar.co.uk/blogs/autoc...to-happen.aspx

[clar]

Originally Posted by brava09

13s to 124mph is no weak sauce by no means. it's already half a second faster than the E60 M5 and around 2 seconds faster than our M3.

That's the problem, .5s faster than E60 M5 is not enough! I am just hoping that they are being conservative.

[Apolonios]

Hmmm it doesn't seem like a big jump. But if you look at all the reviews it seems to have corrected all the shortcomings of the previous M5, which is far more important in my book. I wouldn’t be the least bit disappointed if they took the same philosophy with the next M3 as it is plenty fast as it is.

They seem to have succeeded in making an engine that has lots of down low torque while retaining some of the feel of a high revving engine... well based on the reviews anyway.

But the price…. I hope the next M3 doesn’t touch the 80k’s.

[Garissimo]

Originally Posted by clar

The official figures from BMW has it doing 0-200 km/h (124mph) in 13s. That sounds a little like weak sauce to me. I was expecting much more...

Nevertheless, it's looking increasingly attractive to me if only those tail pipes weren't so anemic.

http://s3.bimmerfile.com.s3.amazonaw...new_BMW_M5.pdf

The Germans always sandbag on official numbers. BMW's press release for the E60 M5 stated 0-200 km/h in 15 seconds flat. Now they're stating 13 flat for the F10 M5. A 2 second improvement in the 0-200 km/h time - assuming real world tests bear that out - is actually quite impressive.

[1cleanm6]

a stock m3 is slow!

[brava09]

Originally Posted by clar

That's the problem, .5s faster than E60 M5 is not enough! I am just hoping that they are being conservative.

.5s at 124mph is a couple of car lenghts.

However, 13s to 124mph is seriously fast....

[clar]

Originally Posted by brava09

.5s at 124mph is a couple of car lenghts.

However, 13s to 124mph is seriously fast....

I guess i had the wrong expectation. I was hoping it would kick some dirt on the face of the Ferrari V8s. F430 does it around 12.1, but the 458 is way faster than that. 2 cars length against the E60 M5 is not impressive at all. I guess we will only know once people get their cars and let rip at some strip. I am seriously considering ordering it to complement my M3...

[clar]

Originally Posted by Garissimo

The Germans always sandbag on official numbers. BMW's press release for the E60 M5 stated 0-200 km/h in 15 seconds flat. Now they're stating 13 flat for the F10 M5. A 2 second improvement in the 0-200 km/h time - assuming real world tests bear that out - is actually quite impressive.

Hey this sounds a lot more reassuring Let's hope they are really sandbagging. I want the F10 M5 to slaughter the E60 M5 just like i want the F80 M3 to do the same to E92 M3. This would help make the transition to turbo motors a lot more palatable.

[bruce.augenstein@comcast.]

Originally Posted by brava09

.5s at 124mph is a couple of car lenghts.

However, 13s to 124mph is seriously fast....

Half a second at 124 mph is about six car lengths (91 feet).

However, just because one car beats another to a certain speed doesn't mean it's ahead at the time. It just means it's going faster at that point. It may be behind the "slower" car and gaining, even with the other car and about to pull ahead, or (and more likely) it's ahead and pulling away.

All that said, the new M5 will almost certainly beat the old M5 in a drag race. By how much depends as much as anything on its weight. Since the 550i weighs about 4400 pounds, and up until now M cars have all been heavier than their more plebeian brethren, I'm nervous.

Mercedes seems to have set the bar in this category, with the new CSL coming in at 12 seconds flat @ 120 mph, according to Car & Driver. The new E63 will likely do even a little better than that, since it's a bit lighter.

Great time to be around.

Bruce

[Tim B.]

Originally Posted by 1cleanm3

a stock m3 is slow!

haha, yeah, ok...........let's keep it in perspective.......10s to 100 is NOT slow........take a step back, how much power do you actually NEED on the street? I get frustrated cause as soon as i wind it out a bit, i'm "illegal"(speed limits), and that's just 2nd gear! I'm not stock, but i can't imagine having a SC'd one with 600hp at my foot......geez, i'd be in jail

[1Sleeper]

Lets not forget this is a V8 with two turbos. Think about this car with a tune. I think you'll have lightly modded M5's making crazy numbers. I am not one of those NA or death types. Some of the most fun cars I've had were turbocharged (think B5 S4, 997tt).

[kyoo]

exactly, power potential with turbocharged cars is ridiculous.. turn up boost, get a tune, etc etc.. you could pick up a LOT of power

[CPWINCH]

having a 335i i know this thing will be crazy modded. catles downpipe/exhaust, tune, 100 octane, and upgraded fmic

[Zero7]

Originally Posted by kyoo

exactly, power potential with turbocharged cars is ridiculous.. turn up boost, get a tune, etc etc.. you could pick up a LOT of power

As the old saying goes, no point having power without control, you need ot get the power down through the rear wheels and unilke the GTR with a tune and 4wd the M5 will struggle with big figures, also turbo power will not be like a SC'd M3 where the power is progressive.

[kindafast]

Originally Posted by clar

That's the problem, .5s faster than E60 M5 is not enough! I am just hoping that they are being conservative.

Several bus lengths is not enough for you, huh?

Originally Posted by Zero7

As the old saying goes, no point having power without control, you need ot get the power down through the rear wheels and unilke the GTR with a tune and 4wd the M5 will struggle with big figures, also turbo power will not be like a SC'd M3 where the power is progressive.

That's a bit absurd. It is easier to hook up at lower speeds with AWD, but you don't need AWD to hook lol... Better tires, progressive throttle, the right gear. Get these right and you'll be good to go.

[clar]

Originally Posted by kindafast

Several bus lengths is not enough for you, huh?

How does .5s difference from 0-200 km/h translates to several bus lengths? U sure?

[JerezblackM3]

Originally Posted by CPWINCH

having a 335i i know this thing will be crazy modded. catles downpipe/exhaust, tune, 100 octane, and upgraded fmic

1
I have an alpina b3 biturbo which is based on a 335, it has slight mods and it eats my m3

[bobbyd1961]

why would i spend 100 grand on an M5 when i can spend 100 grand on an E63 amg and get better performance? just dont know why bmw didnt clearly raise the bar and move into a different stratosphere.

[clar]

Originally Posted by bobbyd1961

why would i spend 100 grand on an M5 when i can spend 100 grand on an E63 amg and get better performance? just dont know why bmw didnt clearly raise the bar and move into a different stratosphere.

If u are spending this kind of money in this segment, u are not likely to choose one over the other simply becos one is slightly quicker. Things like image and character (handling/comfort balance) matters most. A lot of people associate themselves either with BMW or Merc, but not always both.