wws699

iTrader: (3)

At the track this weekend they shut down the full 1/4 mile due to the top end of the track being slippery.. I have never ran just the 1/8th mile. Was BS'ing with the guy about his BMW, was telling me all about it 5.0, V-10, 7 speed F1 gear box, F1 engine technology, 500+ HP and the size of the front disc's were probably 19" he even let me sit in it and play with the shifter and all the buttons even has a 400 to 500Hp button you can push! pretty amazing car, cool guy!

I know this should be obvious but these cars really arnt that slow? Are they? I was trying to help him with his 60ft, pulled a consistant high 2.3 60ft.. and was trapping 87 mph in the 1/8th and 8.9 ET.. I kept asking him if he was spinning off the line and he said no not at all .. Is the traction control on? Are you pushing the pedal to the floor lol? yes yes i am.. Let me see the keys Yeah I wish


Does anyone know what these cars really run in the 1/4 cuz I think if I was driving his $88,000 car It would be in the low twelves or High 11's..

And I would like to quot an article I read on the net..

Out to Launch
The only mechanical difference between the European-spec M5 and the one sold in America is the elimination of the SMG's Launch mode. At least, that's the only difference BMW will admit to. Although Launch mode does make it easier to blow off that Camaro from a stoplight, and it is similar to the system used in BMW's F1 racers, you won't miss it. Even without Launch mode, BMW says the M5 will hit 60 mph in 4.5 seconds.

Link>>> http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do...ticleId=103035

wrp

I hate the magazine racing but an 87 MPH trap in a 1/8 mile ought to look something like an 8.2 ish ET. An 8.2/87 MPH pass should equate to something like about 12.6/109 ish which is not slow considering all the weight he is pushing (more than my GTO).

I've heard a couple of interesting things about them. While the technology of the M Button seems to be a new and novel concept and the transmission is perhaps the biggest innovation of the car, even compared to the V-10 engine, some of the underlying systems are genuinely blase'. Whatever that means for $88,000 or more dollars. I have also heard dealer techs say that the M Button (500 HP Mode) does not activate until after the car has x number of miles on it. If this car had paper tags it might have been running at 400 HP.

Also, everyone seems to chit their pants at the 500 + HP mode which is actually a DIN rating of the hp to the flywheel. Figuring a minimum of 18-20% driveline loss even the 500 hp mode is only getting at most 400-420 to the wheels and the car weighs over 4000 lbs I think. I would believe a Cadillac STS-V would eat his *** alive. JMHO guys if I mistated some of the data its cause I was just to lazy to look it up.

Bottom line is they paid some heavy marketing tabs to have everyone dropping turds over them before the production models got on the road even. Now, put one of those suckers in the Big Bend Open Road Race or at Texas World Speedway, the whole equation changes.

300bhp/ton

Some of you Americans get way too obsessed with rwhp.

A sequential gearbox will always show up lower rwhp numbers, but the more gears allow better acceleration and it will shift in a fraction of the time it takes a human so the car will be faster.

Good old fashioned power to weight ratio is still one of the best markers.

The Cadillac only has 469bhp this is also at the flywheel and thru an auto I can’t see it making more HP than the M5. Sure it has more torque but once rolling the SMG gearbox will eliminate a lot of this.

STS-V:

Engine Type
4.4L Supercharged Northstar V8 VVT
Horsepower/Torque
469 hp @ 6,400 rpm / 439 lb-ft @ 3,900 rpm
Bore x Stroke
91 x 84 mm
Compression Ratio
9.0 : 1

The M5 has gone mid 12’s @ up to 116mph in the 1320 so yes they can shift. They are also capable of 205mph top speed if you remove the factory limiter.

TORNATIC!!

In the lighter BMW M6 coupe I've seen a bone stock time of 12.4 at 121 from one mag.

The M5/M6 pull at 100+ is amazing. Even the last gen M5 with 400 hp was a beast capable of low 13's/high 12's trapping at 107+ stock.

wrp

Thanks, I love being called an American. Too bad Europeans are losing their national identities.

Your points are well taken and in my opinion pretty much substantiate the points I was trying to make except the measurement standards you recommend are equally as imprecise and subject to the effects of uncontrollable variables as mine are.

Most village idiots in America do understand that power to weight is a major factor but also realize the latest numbers from manufacturers, magazine writers that use professional drivers or manufacturer data for their articles, and obsessive apologists are equally subject to debate. I think you and I both agree that the manufacturer's data tends to skew the view of the vehicle in the more favorable light. Gasping and say OMG 500 HP is really an empty comment. BTW, Cadillac STS-Vs have automatic Transmissions and the top performing GTOs are all automatics so we agree on that too.

In the original post (OP) the question was why the poor 1/8 mile perfomance numbers and I think we'd agree that with a better 60' the numbers given should be consistent with a mid 12 second car or 8.2 ish. I'm a little faster than that. A few rwhp ago I had a stock STS-V hang to within a couple of tenths of my 1/8 mile ETs, in the 8.2-8.4 with 1.8 60' times which would put it side by side with even a well driven new M5. The superior nature of the M5 certainly doesn't show itself in the 60' time or 1/8 trap in the OP.

As to the torque, GTOs with 40-50 more rwtq than me are pulling consistent 11.5-11.6s and my car is an M6. I totally agree that the real place that wonderful tranny kicks in is on the top end. Now that the cars are being reviewed by non BMW influenced journalists we are seeing more reports of disappointing performance on the low end. at least performance not up to the expectations the hype brings.

Not trying to be argumentive or dis the M5. I think they are great cars. However, another American characteristic is our refusal to just say sieg hiel and move on when some gestapo marketing department tells us to, well at least until we started living in the unreal world of magazine reviewers.

Lighten up guys, some of this is written in jest.

mcG

iTrader: (1)

what happens when you push the 500 hp button? factory nitrous ?

300bhp/ton

That's ok I'm not European, I'm British

It's not a dig at your race or anything, but ALL and I mean ALL American car forums always bark on about rwhp and what the car makes on the dyno. Go to a British based forum and almost no one cares.

I persoanlly think it's interesting to know the rwhp, but it really is pretty meaningless to use it as a measure of real world performance across different car types.

Take 2 identical cars, one with a sequential gearbox and the other with a convential H gate manual. The H gate will put down a significant amount more power to the wheels but will most likely be slower.

This is the point I was trying to make. The rwhp of a BMW M5 is pointless to compare to any other vehicle unless it uses the same 7 speed SMG gearbox and drivetrain being used in a car of similar weight.

And I know of vehicles which would struggle to make 200rwhp on a dyno yet would beat a C6 z06 down the 1320.

All guesses are guesses. But generally a light weight car with more power will be faster than a heavier one with less.

Not sure exactly which data you are talking about. But most of the data published in magazines this side of the pond is generally just what happened.

There is no reason for it to be otherwise. And no it's not about car makers paying lots of money because often the underdogs are the ones that win and certainly don't have the financial backing to buy the decision.

Not at all, on an engine dyno the BMW's engine will make 500bhp. So what's so wrong with that.

Not sure what you mean by "top performing". From the factory the fastest cars are always manuals, they will also be the most economical and fastest on a race circuit.

Well the 1/8th is hardly the pinnicle of performance testing is it. If BMW only claim 4.5 seconds 0-60mph then that doesn't leave much time for the BMW to make an impression.

1/8th is not racing, but mearly launchung. Try running a de-restricted M5 and STS-V over a standing mile and then see if there's a difference.

Of course not, sequential cars are no know for thier launching ability anyhow which is key in the 1/8th.

Plus I think you'll find the superior nature of the BMW is that it can carry 4 in comfort yet still give a Ferrari F430 a run for it's money on the circuit.

Remember this side of the Atlantic drag racing is small. Hardly any magazines test 1/4 mile times because it's totally irrelavent to our road systems.

Not yet seen a dissappointed review of the M5's performance, care to post a link???

Serisouly I would guess they simply don't know how to drive it, like using a hammer to put a screw in a piece of wood.

Well personally I have a great DISLIKE of BMW's, certainly wouldn't buy one and can't stand the look of the M5 or the stupid iDrive system.

But they do get my respect and they are fast no matter how you slice it. Infact for the money I don't know of a faster or more capable 4 door saloon (that'll be sedan )

wrp

They call it the M button, push it just right and she throws back her head and screams.


Chieu Hoi dude, you've come into a thread where the OP asked why a particular car sucks in 1/8 mile runs. Fact is the description he has given shows that particular car seems to have had issues though track prep and driver inadequacy may be the biggest factors. Further, to argue the car's superiority over 1 mile runs, road courses, walmart parking lot orange cone racing or anything other than a dig out of the hole is moot, we all agree.

Fact is a junior dragster with a 1 cylinder lawn mower engine and a 10 year old kid driving will out perform the M5 times he posted isn't relevant either. However, that makes your point about weight, 200 hp cars being fast, and the gearing being relevant (they have less drivetrain loss but less gearing issues).

I gave it my best shot though I agree I could have articulated it better and probably avoided a lot of the BS we are both sharing. The ratios you use for measuring the performance are no more meaningful than mine so long as they are applied equally. Normally when a guy is asking why some exotic car sucks at a 1/8th mile pass he will tend to understand the relationship of the rwhp so he can compare it to his own car's output. The main reason for that is cause drag racing among other things is small in Europe. Insisting on using the bhp figure which is normally in European DIN and must be converted to SAE Net doesn't give him a frame of reference any more or less accurate than looking at rwhp/rwtq and deducing power to weight ratios thusly. And it is precisely that raw power application with the drivetrain loss factor that factors in the launches and that is precisely why the STS can stay right with an M5 in that realm even if it cannot run with it up top. However, by your own argument if it is in the gearing, the STS could probably go just as fast.

Of the 25-30 new era GTOs running 11 second 1/4 miles or below, probably 90-95% are automatics. Consistently the GTOs with the A4 transmissions are a tenth or so faster than the M6 cars, again, in straightline 1/4 mile acceleration.

I must have missed the memo where the UK decided to opt out of the Union, sorry for insulting you about being European. Don't feel bad though, we got Texans here in America

Here is the review: http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcont...1.1feeb48.html

wws699

iTrader: (3)

Didnt look to see how many miles were on it, I doubt he will bring it out to the track very often either.

The M Button for who ever asked, limits the 10 throttle bodies to 90% max open. Not sure that I understand the concept of that. Is It for fuel economy? Probably not, who cares about fuel economy when you push the pedal to the floor. I think I read that the M5 gets 11 mpg in the city lol. I like the cylinder unloading that Chrysler offers seems more logical.

Not trying to start a BMW bash sesson here, was just curious about the car. Seems to have some great technology that can be passed down to other auto manufactures. I would love to see a transmission like that in a domestic, but with out all the Idrive crap. I hate having to turn stuff "off" or "on" when I get in my car like traction control. Its embarassing enough doing a burn out with the TCS on. I couldnt Imagine getting smoked by an F-body in my $88,000 BMW cuz I forgot to push the M button .

wws699

iTrader: (3)

Another question? They make a manual transmission for this car right? I found some 1/4 mile times of 12.2 with a 1.8 60ft for this car, Trap was 116mph. Just trying to figure out if these time were with a manual.

Vid>>> http://www.dragtimes.com/2006-BMW-M5-Videos-10816.html

Irunelevens

Yeah, they debuted it with the SMG only, and started offering a conventional 6spd... this year?

wrp

The review I submitted earlier appeared to be from a 6 speed car.

Don't feel bad, I got called an American for having the audacity to even ponder it.

chaman

iTrader: (5)

....you gonna see some serious ****....!!

germeezy1

The M6 M5's are high 12 low 13 second cars because you can't turn off the TCS. The SMG cars usually run 12.4-12.7 1/4 mile. With only 383 lb ft at 6100 rpm and no LC of course its not a car that will show its best in the 8th. Its a car that needs room and revs to really show its best.

wrp

+1 I think that is what we are all trying to say. Thanks for the insight.

BlackScreaminMachine

iTrader: (17)

Power to weight ratio is ricer math, that only really works from a roll in a perfect world, the race is won in the 1st 60 feet 98% of the time. I swear Supra's get the exception.

germeezy1

And just so you know the 7speed SMG is not a sequential box, its a standard manual transmission that is computer controlled. They arranged the shift mechanism for faster shifts in a way that can't be shifted by a standard H pattern. It will have the same drivetrain loss any MT will have, as would a DSG. Drivetrain loss is based on the type of transmission not the way its controlled.

germeezy1

Test 1 - 5.0 L, V-10, 7 speed Automatic
0-604.20 sec.
1/4 Mile12.50 sec.
70 mph68.00 dBA
70-0 Braking158.00 ft.
Full Throttle79.00 dBA
IssueJan-06
Skidpad0.89 g.
Top Speed161.00 mph
idle47.00 dBA
back to top

Test 2 - 5.0 L, V-10, 6 speed Manual
0-604.70 sec.
1/4 Mile13.00 sec.
70 mph65.00 dBA
70-0 Braking166.00 ft.
Full Throttle75.00 dBA
IssueFeb-07
Skidpad0.83 g.
Top Speed162.00 mph
idle45.00 dBA

The truth is the 7 speed SMG is the only way to mask the fact that the M5 is a relatively heavy car, with a high torque peak, and not a lot of torque to get it moving. That and the fact that you can't turn off the traction control not only proves how fragile the drivetrain is in the M5 it also proves that the SMG was needed to keep the engine in its powerband.

JTH2000SS

iTrader: (2)

[/Quote]Don't feel bad, I got called an American for having the audacity to even ponder it. [/QUOTE]

WTF?

Vettestir

I was there and looked at that car real nice. I took off when they changed it to 1/8 mile my car was running like crap. I did manage beat a Kenny bell Mustang w/DR's in my one and only 1/4 mile pass. He had a 2.2 60' and ran 13.49 @ 107mph must have miss a gear or could not drive.