Is the E60 M5 the greatest sedan ever?

[DinanM3_S2]

I saw this question on C&D's website and it was pretty evenly split at 51% yes - 49% no. BMW's newest M car seems to be exactly what BMW needed to beat out the RS6 and the E55. Heres a link to an article and some pics of BMWs newest sports sedan.

http://www.supercars.net/cars/2005@$BMW@$M5g.html

Heres a brief summary of some key facts

5.0L V10
507 Hp
101 hp/L
7-Speed SMG
RWD
near 50:50 weight distribution
8,000ish rpm redline

In my opinion this puts the M5 way ahead of all of the competition.

[91300zxtt]

nope still isnt. still doesnt compare to the audi sorry. that and its ugly as hell. whats the price on this thing gonna be?

[Jimster]

While it looks pretty good, BMW's unwillingness to put a manual in them is sad, since BMW were the only makers to still put a manual in thier super-sedans (I think)

[DinanM3_S2]

Sorry, but do you really think that a 450 hp turbo Audi can beat a 500 hp naturally aspirated BMW. If so I think you are sadly mistaken. A 5 speed Audi vs. BMWs 7-Speed SMG, which is probably that fastest transmission in the world. Naturally aspirated power is soooo much better then turbo because of lag. The E60 5-series handles better then the E-Class and the Audi 6 cars according to everyone (C&D, EVO, CAR). Can't be certain on the M5's handling v RS6's because nobody's drivin the M yet, but if the trend continues then the bimmer will probably win that one. Styling... really thats an opinionated thing that cant be scientifically tested, but when I first saw the bangle styled E60, i hated it. I saw it as the next step in the downfall of BMW styling after the 7-series and the Z4 (which i still dont like as much as the Z3). However after a year or so of seeing the E60, i think its grown on me. While I still dont like Bangle, I like how the new M5 looks with the M bodywork. So where the M5 falls short of the RS6 (except possibly styling) I still cant really see.

I read somewhere that the price was going to be somewhere between $80,000 and $90,000. Similar to the E39 M5.

[91300zxtt]

well seeing as how im a die hard audi fan i would much rather take the audi still no matter what.the audi is way more luxurious, and most ppl dont think audi as being fast as hell. so the rs6 is a sleeper with a big price tag to the unsuspecting motorist haha. i love bmw as well, i know the m5 is faster, that doesnt bother me. this is not a rhetorical question- how big do you think the new m5 aftermarket will be? im just asking, because w/ 500 odd horsepower do you think there is really gonna be an aftermarket? i know with the audi there is because of the turbo, upgrade the turbo and bam bye bye m5 or even increase psi and see ya. i think handling will be about even though, as both are at the top of everyones lists of great handlers. so heres how i break it down to mkae my descision.
1. performance w/o upgrades- bmw for sure
2. handling- tie
3. looks- Audi
4. aftermarket- for now Audi, but who knows about the future so cant be determined.
5. interior- Audi audi makes some of if not the best interiors in the world

[Neutrino]

Originally Posted by DinanM3_S2

Naturally aspirated power is soooo much better then turbo because of lag.

That is false. Forced induction, turbocharging in particular if far superior to NA. There is no profesional motorsport in the world that would not use it if it weren't banned.

Read this:

http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbul...d.php?t=244431

to familiarise yourself with turbos, and read some of SaabJohan's old posts in the engineering technical and forced induction forums (he knows more about car engineering that anyone here at AF)

and understand that lag is actually the NA power of that engine before boost, it just feels like lag because of the difference.

The STI guys put it best, an NA engine is like having endless lag.

[NISSANSPDR]

I would take a 500HP Evo over a 500HP M5...based on the simple principle that I can row my own gears...I still love the last M5 the best...400HP....mmmm!

[DinanM3_S2]

As for the aftermarket for the M5 im pretty sure there will be one. Dinan for sure will make a chip, exhaust, and suspention upgrades. What would be amazing would be if Active Autowerkz made a supercharger/turbo package for the M5... O god that would be great. Cant say being 100% sure but odds are there will be.

I read the article that Neutrino sent me to, and he makes some good points. Im not incredibly well familiarized with Turbos being a BMW guy, and I may be wrong about this, but im under the impression that not as much air is allowed to flow into the engine while the turbo engaging. Let me know if im wrong, im gunna go look around at more threads to see if im right or not for now though. I know I've said this many times, but I still look at most of the supercars out there and their mostly naturally aspirated. For road cars, where there is no restriction on turbos, the fastest cars opt out of them. The McLaren F1, the CGT, all modern Ferraris, and more just dont have turbos. Nobodys been able to give me a very good explaination for that either.

Finally, as for reliability, turbos break, much longer before the rest of the engine. Granted Audi has done a great job with making their turbos reliable, but its still not the same.

[Neutrino]

Originally Posted by DinanM3_S2

As for the aftermarket for the M5 im pretty sure there will be one. Dinan for sure will make a chip, exhaust, and suspention upgrades. What would be amazing would be if Active Autowerkz made a supercharger/turbo package for the M5... O god that would be great. Cant say being 100% sure but odds are there will be.

I read the article that Neutrino sent me to, and he makes some good points. Im not incredibly well familiarized with Turbos being a BMW guy, and I may be wrong about this, but im under the impression that not as much air is allowed to flow into the engine while the turbo engaging. Let me know if im wrong, im gunna go look around at more threads to see if im right or not for now though. I know I've said this many times, but I still look at most of the supercars out there and their mostly naturally aspirated. For road cars, where there is no restriction on turbos, the fastest cars opt out of them. The McLaren F1, the CGT, all modern Ferraris, and more just dont have turbos. Nobodys been able to give me a very good explaination for that either.

Finally, as for reliability, turbos break, much longer before the rest of the engine. Granted Audi has done a great job with making their turbos reliable, but its still not the same.

There are several reasons that turbos don't make it on production cars, and for those you have to look at the clientelle and not at performance.

People want engines that scream (turbos mufle the exaust), they whant a linear power delivery (turbo cars have a variable power band - good if you know how to use it), and finally they don't want to put up with the proper maintenance of a turbo car. And for super cars beside those reasons many of them are suposed to be the offsprings of race cars (which are most often than not NA due to restrictions).

But from a thermodynamical standpoint and performance turbos are far better.

The simplest example would be: give all the F1 cars the option to add turbos except Ferrari and you'll see Shumi get lapped so many times it would not be funny.

Also for high specific output again turbos are far more reliable. Example which is more reliable a 2.0L NA angine putting out 350HP or a 2.0L Turbo engine with 350HP both on pump gas. Then look at their power bands the 350Hp NA will be super peaky while the turbo would be spread.

[kman10587]

Call me crazy (or a dumb ricer), but I'd take a brand new STi over a brand new M5 any day.

[DinanM3_S2]

I think I'll take you up on that deal to call you crazy kman...

I also have to make the arguement that the N/A BMW engine has more potential then the RS6 engine. If one were to remove the stock turbocharger on an RS6 and replace it with a larger unit, you would not get the same power increase as you would if you put the same sized turbo on the BMW.

[91300zxtt]

umm? thats gonna take alot of work and alot of money. for the rs6 all you have to do is upgrade the turbos. and if you just add a turbo its not gonna work you need alot more that a single turbo to convert a N/A engine to a turbocharged. sorry wont happen. also for the price of a new m3 i could get a hell of alot more cars, mod them and blow the hell away the m5

[Joseph1082]

I have to say I have never heard of an FI car being more relaible that an n/a. Forced Induction is more pressure an stress on an engine than n/a. Also, I like linear powerbands, would rather have my big beefy n/a motor than a smaller turbo motor making the same HP but w/ lag.
And yes "lag" is the engine n/a, but keep in mind you can't just rip the Turbo off and have an n/a motor... most of the motors have the compression dropped for the Turbo. You can have a 6cyl n/a making say 220HP... this same car is offered in Turbo. On the turbo car, the compression is very close to 8.4 while it'll be higher on the n/a motor, so if you decide to rip the turbo off, instead of 220hp you'll be lucky you have 160.

[Neutrino]

Originally Posted by Joseph1082

I have to say I have never heard of an FI car being more relaible that an n/a. Forced Induction is more pressure an stress on an engine than n/a.

look at what i said

Originally Posted by Neutrino

Also for high specific output again turbos are far more reliable. Example which is more reliable a 2.0L NA angine putting out 350HP or a 2.0L Turbo engine with 350HP both on pump gas. Then look at their power bands the 350Hp NA will be super peaky while the turbo would be spread.

do you actually think a 350hp NA would be more reliable than a 350HP turbo engine???

also do you think in ANY automotive sport if all the teams were allowed to use forced induction do you think any team would choose to go NA? It would be equivalent to giving up

[3000ways]

Call me crazy, but I like the styling of the M5, to me it looks alot more aggressive and I like that. I'm not big into purist stuff, change is not a bad thing in my mind. I think the M5 does have the potential to be the best Sedan for under $100,000, acceleration should be close between it and the E55 AMG. The Mercedes has less power at 469HP (honestly who really believes that this car only has 469HP and not 493? Come on Mercedes you can't fool me.) But a lot more torque. Handling and braking should if the trend continues be in favor of the M5. I can't wait for this car to come out, should make things interesting, not that I could ever afford one, but I can dream right?