2005/06 BMW M5: Is it really that special??

Wallie05 · Oct 9, 2004

Ok, so I think the new M5 is really awesome--I've even gotten used to Bangle's look. But to play devil's advocate, after having read several raving reviews of the car, the latest being on www.canadiandriver.com, I'm wondering if the M5 is really THAT special. Yes, I know, I should have been swayed by the raving nature of said reviews. But every time I read one, I'm always comparing the M5 to the E55--thinking what does the M5 does better, and frankly, it doesn't seem like it does anything the E55 can't.

Furthermore, it seems like the Mercedes E55 has got the M5 beat on acceleration levels: 0-60, 1/4 mile. let's say the'yre about tied when it comes to handling (I haven't looked up skidpad or slalom numbers). The latest time I've seen for the M5 is 0-60 in 4.7s, while Motortrend reports a 4.2s for the E55. If 0-60 in 4.7 is something to giggle about, what getting there a half-second faster??

While there's a lot to admire about the 507hp that the new V10 produces, has anyone noticed that the new engine "only" produces 384ft/lbs of torque, while the E55 makes 516ft/lbs? Sure the E is heavier, but the higher torque more then compensates. I mean, the E39 M5 produced 369ft/lbs. So the new engine produces over 100 more horsepower, but only 15ft/lbs more of torque??

Any thoughts? [???1]

bigdavid1001 · Oct 9, 2004

the handling is going to be the main factor between the two. Around a track there will be no reasonable comparision. The m5 is just meant to be so much more of a track/luxury car more than the mainly luxury of the benz. just my $.02

Chesty Bonds · Oct 9, 2004

Yeah the M5 will undoubtedly be a more focussed driver's car - as it should be. The problem i see with the new generation of cars is that they're far too technical. Ditch the 7 speed SMG and replace it with a true 6 speed manual. Get rid of drive-by-wire and restore the throttle cable (drive by wire means the car's electronics can STILL override your accelerator even with DSC swithced off). Lose all the i-drive crap. And why, on a supposedly driver-focussed car, is there an option between 400BHP and 507BHP with the flick of a switch? Just have it at maximum power for crying out loud! There are too many nannying features in the new breed of 'performance cars' and BMW would be getting a lot more respect from me if they made cars that sorted the men from the boys (as they used to).

HornyHornet · Oct 9, 2004

The new M5 is so special because of its history of dominace. A NA V10 that revs to 9000 rpms and weighs the same as the out going V8. IMO, far superior than the FI V8 from the E55.

Wallie05 · Oct 10, 2004

Nicely said, Chesty. I couldn't agree more. The 400hp button is just ridiculous. A 6spd should be offered, if not standard.

HornyHornet: It doesn't seem like the M5 is dominating anymore. The E55 is definetly faster, and when Audi's next RS6 comes out, I'm sure the M5 will fall to the back of the pack. Hell, the old RS6 is about as quick as this new M5. Furthermore, if the new engine is so superior (granted 9K is impressive), why doesn't it produce more torque?? A 15ft/lbs improvement over the old engine doesn't seem like much of an improvement, and as well all know, torque is crucial to acceleration.

HornyHornet · Oct 10, 2004

Wallie,
I do agree that 384ft/lbs is just ridiculous. My jaw dropped when I first saw the engine specs. But I give a lot of credit to BMW M for their effort to stay competitive with NA engines vs. FI (cheap HP) like Audi and MB. As far as the E60 M5 dominating, I dont know. From what it looks like, it doesnt seem like it will; we'll see.

Wallie05 · Oct 10, 2004

Yeah Hornet, I also give credit to BMW for their technological savvy. Although I think some of it is overkill (like the 400hp "button"). But yeah, they are definetly innovators. I just wish they could trounce M-B (and Audi) once and for all. But then again, without those automotive "battles," the car scene wouldn't be nearly as fun. After all, competiton breeds advancement. Which later gets passed down to more "everyday" cars....

Chesty Bonds · Oct 11, 2004

Yeah I agree that the ///M division are truly miles ahead of the relevant competitors at Merc and Audi (AMG, RS etc). BMW don't simply shoehorn massively powerful 'charged engines into a big-tyred saloon and call it a performance car which i think is great. What i do abhor is the current power-war. Who said more power was the key to driving enjoyment? I still say cut back on all the bullshit technology (because that's what it is) and concentrate on making the car a driver's delight. I want to see BMW get back to making the definitive gentleman's express saloon; with understated power, no f***ing around handling, manual tranny, LSD, and most importantly, NO CRAPPY DRIVER-INHIBITING TECHNOLOGY!

finally330i · Oct 11, 2004

Here's what Car and Drivver said of the E55 AMG in March 03:

"No doubt the E55 has power to spare, so I'd like to return a few of the 469 ponies in exchange for things the E55 lacks. For more progressive brakes, AMG can have back 20 horses and the four hair-trigger clamps the car has now. Sharper and less weighty steering? I'll swap 10 ponies, and another 10, if it'll trim off 200 pounds. As soon as AMG can locate a proper manual transmission, it can expect 35 horsepower by return airmail. Then I'll have a 394 horsepower German supersedan with brilliant brakes and steering, a 4000-pound curb weight, and a six-speed stick. Now, why does that sound so familiar?"
—Aaron Robinson, Car and Driver

Highs: Positively silly amounts of power, stability slightly greater than that of the earth.

Lows: What, they couldn't do 600 horsepower? Wimps! An M5 is more fun. Electronics actually drive the car.

MrElussive · Oct 11, 2004

Wallie05 said:

First off, I'm not holding my breath for the magazines. Personally, I do not trust magazine 0-60 times unless they are decently close (within 0.3 seconds) of what the manufacturer posts on their web site. If the manufacturer does not post 0-60 times on their web site, then I usually go with an "average" of what the car magazines post for 0-60 times during their testing and I disregard any 0-60 time that is simply unbelievable (such as when C&D posted a 0-60 time of 5.8 seconds for the BMW 330xi).
As for the "torque issue" here is your answer:
First, let's look at the M5 engine. It is a 5.0 liter, 507hp, V10. Certainly quite a big engine(so initially you'd think it has gobs of torque), but the engine produces over 100 horses per liter. And as with any engine that produces over 100hp/liter (such as the M3, S2000, etc.), torque is never really strong and in fact it sometimes suffers, such as in the case of the S2000. Second, having a lot of torque will only help the M5 out down low. But the M5's engine is a very true racing engine and is designed for high rpm's, where the engine absolutely screams (507hp @ ~8K rpm). So in the case of E55 vs M5 acceleration to 60mph, the E55's beastly torque (thanks to a big V8 and the always-on power of a supercharger) really helps it out down low. But overall, I think the M5 should be the overall faster performer (to 60mph, to 100mph, and the 1/4 mile) because it's sporting 38 more horsepower, 250lbs less weight, and a faster-shifting direct gearbox. Third, when it comes to sports cars, their engines, and making them go fast, torque isn't very important (or at least horespower is really the determining factor, but this is subject to a case-by-case basis). The key is maximum horsepower and this is achieved with a high-revving engine - the higher the redline of that particular engine, the more horsepower it delivers, as well as really great engine characteristics (power builds progressively with engine speed).

All in all, the acceleration difference between the two cars is kind of marginal but I think the M5 should be the faster car. As for handling, it is quite obvious that the M5 is the better performer. You do also have to keep two things in mind:
1.) BMW doesn't really play the "horsepower war" game....this is probably their first real attempt to beat the competition and I think they did a great job. Where Audi and MB use forced induction (which is good for more low-end power), BMW stuck to the "BMW way" and just produced a high-output V10 monster that boasts more horsepower than all of the competition. Grantede the torque figure is quite poor, I think BMW took the "S2000 route" and focused more on horsepower than torque.
2.) The new M5 has not proven itself in terms of "blowing the competition out of the water" with devastating acceleration compared to the E55 and RS6 but this is because it is simply impossible. The M5 has to stick to its competition's price tag and the engine is overall better than the competition - naturally aspirated and produces 38 more hp than the E55. But normally where a 38hp gain is quite significant, this advantage is simply marginal as all three of these cars are in 450+ horsepower territory (diminishing returns).

HornyHornet · Oct 12, 2004

Mr E you always say the most wonderful things. [:I]

Im with you. It is obvious that FI really helps with low-end torque. Look at the Big Rigs and heavy duty trucks. The new V10 is a true bred racing engine to produce where they are meant to, at high RPMs. Stayin NA has my vote for BMW.

wood_e · Oct 12, 2004

MrElussive said:

First off, I'm not holding my breath for the magazines. Personally, I do not trust magazine 0-60 times unless they are decently close (within 0.3 seconds) of what the manufacturer posts on their web site. If the manufacturer does not post 0-60 times on their web site, then I usually go with an "average" of what the car magazines post for 0-60 times during their testing and I disregard any 0-60 time that is simply unbelievable (such as when C&D posted a 0-60 time of 5.8 seconds for the BMW 330xi).
As for the "torque issue" here is your answer:
First, let's look at the M5 engine. It is a 5.0 liter, 507hp, V10. Certainly quite a big engine(so initially you'd think it has gobs of torque), but the engine produces over 100 horses per liter. And as with any engine that produces over 100hp/liter (such as the M3, S2000, etc.), torque is never really strong and in fact it sometimes suffers, such as in the case of the S2000. Second, having a lot of torque will only help the M5 out down low. But the M5's engine is a very true racing engine and is designed for high rpm's, where the engine absolutely screams (507hp @ ~8K rpm). So in the case of E55 vs M5 acceleration to 60mph, the E55's beastly torque (thanks to a big V8 and the always-on power of a supercharger) really helps it out down low. But overall, I think the M5 should be the overall faster performer (to 60mph, to 100mph, and the 1/4 mile) because it's sporting 38 more horsepower, 250lbs less weight, and a faster-shifting direct gearbox. Third, when it comes to sports cars, their engines, and making them go fast, torque isn't very important (or at least horespower is really the determining factor, but this is subject to a case-by-case basis). The key is maximum horsepower and this is achieved with a high-revving engine - the higher the redline of that particular engine, the more horsepower it delivers, as well as really great engine characteristics (power builds progressively with engine speed).

All in all, the acceleration difference between the two cars is kind of marginal but I think the M5 should be the faster car. As for handling, it is quite obvious that the M5 is the better performer. You do also have to keep two things in mind:
1.) BMW doesn't really play the "horsepower war" game....this is probably their first real attempt to beat the competition and I think they did a great job. Where Audi and MB use forced induction (which is good for more low-end power), BMW stuck to the "BMW way" and just produced a high-output V10 monster that boasts more horsepower than all of the competition. Grantede the torque figure is quite poor, I think BMW took the "S2000 route" and focused more on horsepower than torque.
2.) The new M5 has not proven itself in terms of "blowing the competition out of the water" with devastating acceleration compared to the E55 and RS6 but this is because it is simply impossible. The M5 has to stick to its competition's price tag and the engine is overall better than the competition - naturally aspirated and produces 38 more hp than the E55. But normally where a 38hp gain is quite significant, this advantage is simply marginal as all three of these cars are in 450+ horsepower territory (diminishing returns).

Ohh Emile, you took the words right out of my mouth... I'm late to this party... [hihi]

Average Jae · Oct 12, 2004

there was a torque discussion somewhere before, and torque has a direct relationship to horsepower and rev. if you have a high reving, high hp engine, you'll have lower torque, only due to math. that is one of the reasons why original honda v-tecs had such lowly torque numbers, but high horsepower count, since it reved like a motorcycle engine.

i like the fact that the m5 v-10 will have a screaming F1 engine, but at the same time i don't like the fact that you have to rev the guy so high to get max horsepower numbers. (i remember this argument from the wonderful s2k motor, you have to drive the car like you hate it to get everything out of it.) and maybe that's why they figure smg is a better tranny for it.

i wonder if the M guys put on that 400hp switch because the 507 is bit of an overkill for everyday driving. just as we turn our dsc off for some serious driving, it maybe a similar thing for the M. i'm sure it helps w/ the fuel economy and other things too. (just maybe ^^;

400 for ricers, 507 for the germs i guess.. [:p]

i used to be a huge numbers guy from the mags, but as i got older, and drove longer, i realize measurements are mere measurements. the most important thing is driving experience. so what if my car in theory can pull 60 under 6 secs? do i peel out every stop light to achieve that number? altho i sometimes miss the sheer acceleration feel of the g35,but i'm also a huge fan of the overall civility of my 330i compared w/ other alternatives i had before purchasing. numbers will prove g35 is a faster car for less money, but that really isn't everything. (i only bring that up, because that was my reasoning when i got my car.) and so what if you can get a .2 mph better on the slalom or a .01g better in the skid? esp w/ the current bigshots, big freakin deal. you just gotta go w/ what feels right, not what looks right on paper.

Wallie05 · Oct 12, 2004

MrElussive said:

First, I'm with Average Jae with not liking the fact that you have to rev the M5 engine so high to get peak hp numbers. Sure its more racecar-like, but that has nothing to do with my argument. Furthermore, this seems more impractical (as if any of these cars are practical to begin with) and will limit the "kick-in-your-pants" feeling you can get with an E55 when you mash the throttle (especially at lower speeds), which produces all 516lft/lbs of its torque at a mind-numbingly low 2650rpm!!!

Secondly, I think you really have to specify what kind of speed you're talking about when you say the M5 will be the faster car. Are you talking top speed, or are you talking acceleration; it seems like you're saying both. But I'd have to disagree with you on the acceleration times. With regards to acceleration, torque is crucial (and high hp numbers matter less) when you're talking 0-60, 0-100, 1/4 times. If the new M5 is able to keep par with the E55/RS6 in these times, its not because of its 507hp (hell the M5 was nearly as fast with 400), it's because it weighs nearly 300lbs less and will shift faster. But what happens when M-B/AMG drops their new 7spd tranny (which is awesome by the way) in their AMGS??

If you're talking about top speed, sure, the M5 will scream all the way to a claimed 205mph, which seems like bragging point for BMW and detraction from weaker than expected accel. figs. Sure it's fast--it can 200, but how long will that take??

By the way, I never came across top speed numbers for the E55 when it came out--once people realized it could hit 100 in less than 10 and do the 1/4 in damn near 12 @ 116mph, nobody bothered reporting about it because 1) it's limited, and 2) few people would dare drive that fast anyway.

I don't know, I'm looking forward to what the car pros at big mags have to say about the M5, and how it will compare in a shootout with the E--you know its coming...

PS Anyone remember summer 2003 Motortrend/C&D/Automobile insider claims that the next-gen M5 would "cream" the E55/RS6 by hitting 60 in less than 4 seconds?? I still have some of the mags if you want proof.....

MrElussive · Oct 13, 2004

Wallie05 said:

Excellent response. I know that the MB is the big guy among the three when it comes to ridiculous torque at low rpm's, but I still think BMW's higher top end horsepower will really help it out at speeds after 60mph (so I really have a feeling it's faster than the E55 to 100mph and in the 1/4 mile, and probably faster to 60mph but I have less faith in that). There is also one major downside to the E55: it is a boring straight up serious Benz! I grew up around Mercedes and a little bit with BMW, so I am a superman of knowledge when it comes to the Mercedes driving experience. To put it short, there is none! The engines are smooth and the cars are generally very calm about their power, the steering feel is not nearly as nice as BMW, and is not nearly as good. The whole interior is so serious and boring and the driving experience just doesn't feel good....there is no feeling of sportiness in the car at all, and you are not "rewarded" for pushing them hard. I'd rather have the M5 with its SMG transmission and 507hp racing V10, and a great driving experience over the E55's serious nature.

As for the lack of low end torque in the M5, I don't think this is a big deal. Keep in mind that it has low torque compared to its hp and compared to the previous M5 but it still has freaking 507hp and 384 torque!!!! Those numbers are so god damn high, I bet the M5 is still a rocket even for gentle driving around! There is NO way this is thing is "slow" by any means....this is not the low torque of a Honda S2000.....we're still pushing 384 torque and that 507hp is too massive to mean much less at lower rpm's.

HornyHornet · Oct 13, 2004

Wow, I like this thread.
The M5 is the better car; thats my story and Im sticking to it. 300+ pounds needs more low-end torque to get that pudge of a MB to a 4.2s 0-60mph. And once at crusing speed, rev that V10 to oblivion and wave goodbye. Plus, the lighter 50/50 BMW will go through corners like lightning...Grease Lightning!!

brahtw8 · Oct 13, 2004

Horsepower and gearing are the key to the M5's success. There is a reason it has a 7 speed SMG, so the V10 can stay in the powerband.

Go find a video of the new M5 running 0-270 kmh. It simply screams.

Straight-line acceleration should be the equal or better of the current E55 and previous RS6. On a road course, the M5 should leave them both, particularly the E55.

The 4.7s 0-60 time being quoted is a factory claim AFAIK. I expect the magazines will test it at 4.2-4.5 seconds.

It all depends on what you want, which is why it is great to have so many choices like this. Wait until Cadillac unleashes the super CTS with something like 600 hp.

Competition improves the breed. Bring it on.

HornyHornet · Oct 13, 2004

Cadillac already has the CTS-V which has something like 400hp. It scored very well againt the M3 AND M5

brahtw8 · Oct 13, 2004

HornyHornet said:

I thought someone might respond with that. I am well aware of the CTS-V. I am talking about something that is not out yet. Cadillac is working with one of the tuners on the development of a 500-600 hp. CTS 'Super-V'.

HornyHornet · Oct 13, 2004

oohhhh!! Sh!t, for a minute there I thought I had outsmarted someone. Who tunes Cadillacs! Funny how nowadays, everyone has their tuner divisions.
BMW = M
M-B = AMG
Ford = SVT
Subaru= STi
Nissan = Nismo
To name a few.

2005/06 BMW M5: Is it really that special??

Member

Member

2

2

Member

2

Member

2

Member

2

2

2

2

Member

2

2

2

2

2

2