F10 M5 runs neck and neck with c6 zo6 vette

[48Laws]

Originally Posted by Sauce

I don't understand this? It's the tune? Meaning if they're tuned or not? Well either way, those cars you mentioned weigh a ton, but also have a ton of power. Their power to weights are similar to many high performance cars.

No. Engineering, a la tuning, addresses this conundrum. That's why you can have the X6M, for example , performing just as well as cars with similar power despite it weighing 5300 lbs. The P-2-W ratio isn't the same.

[Sauce]

Originally Posted by 48Laws

No. Engineering, a la tuning, addresses this conundrum. That's why you can have the X6M, for example , performing just as well as cars with similar power despite it weighing 5300 lbs. The P-2-W ratio isn't the same.

So what you're really saying is grip and gearing are making up for it? Engineering/tuning is such a broad thing to say.

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by Sauce

horsepower and torque are the SAME THING. They are just different words for force. HP= torque x rpm/5250. You can have horsepower by having more torque ie: c63's or by rpm's ie: Honda motors, but at the end of the day it's all just force.

Ugh, perhaps the most often misunderstood concepts in automobiles... They are very far from the same thing. Next sentence is basically correct. Finally the last bit about force is too but really force/weight...

[Sauce]

Originally Posted by swamp2

Ugh, perhaps the most often misunderstood concepts in automobiles... They are very far from the same thing. Next sentence is basically correct. Finally the last bit about force is too but really force/weight...

Would you elaborate?

[Endless619]

Originally Posted by erm324

The new M5 is nowhere near Z06 quick. Bottom line.

From the videos it is. Never impressed with the Z06. I would take the ZR1 over a ZO6 any day of the week.

The new M5 is pretty quick, Z06 quick with equal drivers and road conditions.

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by Sauce

Would you elaborate?

Power and torque are entirely different concepts with different meanings, units and real world consequences. Ultimately it comes down to gearing. Crank torque is entirely meaningless in a car to describe forces or torques at the wheels or on the car itself - you must include gearing. Power is sort of a gearing independent way to describe torque. Now that is very "touchy feely"... Power is precisely force x velocity (and that is force at the wheels after losses specifically...). Now it happens that you can relate the concepts by knowing rpm, but the subtlety that involves is deceptive and even sublime.

The debate about what these mean and what actually matters is a pretty old one. Google around specifically on this forum for some of the discussions on this point. Some of the threads are pretty epic...

Peak acceleration
A "proof" of the importance of power to weight (page 7 and many more pages in)
Final drive mods (a debate about final drive modification - concepts in this are very important to understanding power vs. torque)
Power vs. torque 1M and M3 (it appears I am losing the argument for some time but I rallied strong in post #93)

Pardon the appearance of ego here... I was heavily involved in all of these discussions. Thus they are the ones I know. Fellow m3post.com member bruce.augenstein@comcast. has also contributed greatly to these discussions and debates and has also made it a small "mission" to help folks understand these differences. He has posted here in this thread as well.

[erm324]

Originally Posted by Heckler&Koch

From the videos it is. Never impressed with the Z06. I would take the ZR1 over a ZO6 any day of the week.

The new M5 is pretty quick, Z06 quick with equal drivers and road conditions.

There is so much wrong with your post its sad.

From the videos it is? You might as well go watch a video of a prius racing a bugatti and beating it and assume that the race was legit and ignorantly conclude the pruis is the faster car. Z06 in the video is either sandbagging or has a grandma shifting. Yeah I'd rather have a ZR1 over a Z06, but your in denial if you can say your never impressed with the Z06. With good tires and DA they have run 10's stock at 130 - not bad for a n/a V8 car that was released in 2006 right? Throw a tune+intake on them and they are getting 40+rwhp, not to mention of you do a serious head/cam/bolt on package that will throw you into 9's@140+ with over 600rwhp n/a (not even going to mention doing a blower setup or twin turbo). In the following video, the Z06 is most impressive in my eyes - amazing hwo it holds its own as well as it does with ONLY those mods, and its quite frankly pathetic how much you have to spend on the other cars in the video to make it run with the vette:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=iZM1o8GU1Fw

And since when is the new M5 "Z06 quick with equal drivers"? You obviously dont know too much about cars if you follow up your "Z06 being unimpressive" comment with a more ridiculous comment stating the M5 is just as fast as one.

[Sauce]

Originally Posted by swamp2

Power and torque are entirely different concepts with different meanings, units and real world consequences. Ultimately it comes down to gearing. Crank torque is entirely meaningless in a car to describe forces or torques at the wheels or on the car itself - you must include gearing. Power is sort of a gearing independent way to describe torque. Now that is very "touchy feely"... Power is precisely force x velocity (and that is force at the wheels after losses specifically...). Now it happens that you can relate the concepts by knowing rpm, but the subtlety that involves is deceptive and even sublime.

The debate about what these mean and what actually matters is a pretty old one. Google around specifically on this forum for some of the discussions on this point. Some of the threads are pretty epic...

Peak acceleration
A "proof" of the importance of power to weight (page 7 and many more pages in)
Final drive mods (a debate about final drive modification - concepts in this are very important to understanding power vs. torque)
Power vs. torque 1M and M3 (it appears I am losing the argument for some time but I rallied strong in post #93)

Pardon the appearance of ego here... I was heavily involved in all of these discussions. Thus they are the ones I know. Fellow m3post.com member bruce.augenstein@comcast. has also contributed greatly to these discussions and debates and has also made it a small "mission" to help folks understand these differences. He has posted here in this thread as well.

I 100% understand what gearing does, it is a torque multiplier, when people think of torque what I think they are really looking at is power delivery, a motor like the S65 that picks up at the top end and may "feel" more sluggish at the bottom will be thought of as lacking torque, even if it is actually putting down decent power to the ground. I think I see what you are getting at. Your descriptions/analysis are looking at everything to the wheels-post gearing. I am looking at purely the motor. Lets imagine the engine on an engine dyno, not even in a car. Can you explain how torque is fundamentally different than horsepower?

[bruce.augenstein@comcast.]

Originally Posted by Sauce

I 100% understand what gearing does, it is a torque multiplier, when people think of torque what I think they are really looking at is power delivery, a motor like the S65 that picks up at the top end and may "feel" more sluggish at the bottom will be thought of as lacking torque, even if it is actually putting down decent power to the ground. I think I see what you are getting at. Your descriptions/analysis are looking at everything to the wheels-post gearing. I am looking at purely the motor. Lets imagine the engine on an engine dyno, not even in a car. Can you explain how torque is fundamentally different than horsepower?

Yes, he can. Me too. Go here.

Bruce

[Z K]

Instead of seeing it as how great it is the all new M5 is just as fast as the fast Z06... look at it this way:

The new $100K M5 is now just as fast as the 6 year old Z06 which you can buy for $40K used. Somehow spending $100K on an M5 doesn't sound as appealing if speed is your objective.

[krnnerdboy]

I'd put my money on the z06 100% as long as I'm driving

The f10 m5 is only trapping 115 with a 6 SPd manual and 120 w/dct. But then again there's an m6 that only traps 120 but kills z06 130+ mph so trap isn't all indicative of a vehicles performance

[spearfisher]

2 differnet cars but the M5 will be easy to get HP out of due to turbos, Z much harder to drive fast, take a good driver that knows his car to be able to launch effectively and not loose time in between gear changes. Novice drivers always miss 2-3 shift.

[erm324]

The very same M3 against a F10 M5 and stock Z06......if both the Z06 and M3 started at the same time and the Z06 had a guy who could row through the gears they would be neck and neck. /Endthread

[Sauce]

Originally Posted by bruce.augenstein@comcast.

Yes, he can. Me too. Go here.

Bruce

Ok, I have been waiting to find some flaw or something that we see different. I wanted to hear your explanations before saying anything. Where we differ is in interpretation. I now see where you guys are drawing the line. You are undoubtedly more technical than I am in your explanations, so understand that I am not an engineer as you seem to be. But the way interpret all of that is horsepower and torque are in the same, lets say "family". You cannot change torque without affecting horsepower as well, whether it be where the torque is in the rpm range or how much there is, it all affects horsepower. In one of your posts you even state how horsepower on a dyno is found by finding where the engine stays constant at full throttle and then using the torque/5250=hp calculation.

Understand I am not saying that at any point you are incorrect, I just believe that how I see it is not incorrect either. I think we see the same result meaning different things. I feel as if I have a good broad understanding of all this, however you definitely see this stuff on a more technical level than I, so keep that in mind as well

[Onurleft]

Originally Posted by Heckler&Koch

From the videos it is. Never impressed with the Z06. I would take the ZR1 over a ZO6 any day of the week.

The new M5 is pretty quick, Z06 quick with equal drivers and road conditions.

I don't understand this. A ZO6 with the Z07 package handles better then a ZR1. Not to mention an 06 model with coil overs would set you back 45k and will run low 11's@124-126 stock

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by Sauce

Where we differ is in interpretation. ...

I just believe that how I see it is not incorrect either. I think we see the same result meaning different things. I feel as if I have a good broad understanding of all this, however you definitely see this stuff on a more technical level than I, so keep that in mind as well

The devil is in the details in such matters and I still think you don't quite have it. Your prior statement was patently false and still is. Just because there is an equation relating two quantities and that if you know one you know the other does not capture the subtlety here. The rpm term is key, not just a fixed constant that scales one quantities units to another (say like converting °F to °C). They are ENTIRELY different physical concepts, different units and have different consequences in the realm of automobile performance or the performance of any dynamic moving or rotating system.

[Sean Alexander]

The interesting thing is that even the "technical" respondents are getting the equation wrong. They may be very close, but you know what they say about close...

Horsepower IS Torque x RPM / 5252

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by Sean Alexander

The interesting thing is that even the "technical" respondents are getting the equation wrong. They may be very close, but you know what they say about close...

Horsepower IS Torque x RPM / 5252

I didn't see this error but it is only very likely a typo if present.

Noting a relationship between two entirely different physical quantities in no way shape or form indicates they are the same. Certainly knowing torque (or force) and rpm (or velocity) gives you power. But your line of reasoning (or others who claim that this formula indicates they are "the same thing") is dead wrong. By analogy one might say force and mass are the same thing because of Newton's Law, F = ma. Utterly false. Different units, different concepts and different implications in a practical sense with cars.

[e46e92love]

Originally Posted by swamp2

Absolutely. BMW blew it pretty bad on this point. It does not matter if it is real engine sounds, synthesized ones, intake sound or not. Whatever they've done is completely lame...

Could not have said it better myself.

Cheers,
e46e92