[zil]

[RPiM5]

Was just about to post this.

It's plain to see. BMW has taken the L on this one.

Cant wait for the MotorTrend instrumented test between the two. No doubt Pobst will have a faster lap time in the BMW than the Merc, then again we could be surprised by that one too.

[zil]

I wonder if the result would be different if they switched sides ...

[Phatcat]

Originally Posted by RPiM5

Was just about to post this.

It's plain to see. BMW has taken the L on this one.

Cant wait for the MotorTrend instrumented test between the two. No doubt Pobst will have a faster lap time in the BMW than the Merc, then again we could be surprised by that one too.

Yeah as I have said in another thread, both are good cars. Obviously between the two I would take the M5 any day but those AMG nowadays are pretty good too.

[uniqueMR]

M5

[AKRAPOVICOWNS]

In before "unfair! It wasnt the M5 CP"

[stealth.pilot]

Originally Posted by RPiM5

Was just about to post this.

It's plain to see. BMW has taken the L on this one.

Cant wait for the MotorTrend instrumented test between the two. No doubt Pobst will have a faster lap time in the BMW than the Merc, then again we could be surprised by that one too.

I have no doubt the Mercedes will beat the BMW in the Motortrend lap time if they are tested back to back.

Mercedes E63S will beat the BMW through the corners. The suspension tuning and steering is way beyond any BMW I have ever driven.

[Herofmine]

Originally Posted by stealth.pilot

I have no doubt the Mercedes will beat the BMW in the Motortrend lap time if they are tested back to back.

Mercedes E63S will beat the BMW through the corners. The suspension tuning and steering is way beyond any BMW I have ever driven.

Does Amg uses Magnetic suspensions?

[CarlosM4]

Originally Posted by Herofmine

Does Amg uses Magnetic suspensions?

Yes.

[CarlosM4]

Originally Posted by stealth.pilot

I have no doubt the Mercedes will beat the BMW in the Motortrend lap time if they are tested back to back.

Mercedes E63S will beat the BMW through the corners. The suspension tuning and steering is way beyond any BMW I have ever driven.

Tough to tell because from reviews it appears the M5 F90 is on a whole different league to previous M cars. I know the E63S completely murders any M car up to date (without considering the M5 F90). I just know that I love both, I just happen to be too damn poor to afford these cars brand new in Brazil, especially considering they depreciate 45% of their value in 3 years. (US$ 220k for the M5 F90 and US$ 235k for the E63 S)

I just hope Magazines do the test fairly by taking a steel roof E63 S to the track vs a carbon fiber roof M5. If you take a carbon fiber M5 to a Panoramic roof E63 S, you are putting an extra 100kg weight difference that in theory shouldn't be considered. I think it is ridiculous that the M5 F90 doesn't come standard with a panoramic roof (and that the standard option is the CF roof, although it is 0 dollars to change things around). The M5 is a family car before a track weapon, and a Panoramic Sunroof like the E63's is just so damn nice.

[benny Blanco]

... Bimmer got owned

[Mfan600hp]

Can someone explain me how come this happened??
Everywhere else the M5 is clearly quicker.
The M5 should demolished this Merck especially coming out 1.5 year later! I am in shock and pissed off.

[vtknight]

Originally Posted by Mfan600hp

Can someone explain me how come this happened??
Everywhere else the M5 is clearly quicker.
The M5 should demolished this Merck especially coming out 1.5 year later! I am in shock and pissed off.

Again - as this thread is on the main page - remember - these two cars were tested by Carwow previously with the M5 quicker. And much quicker than it did on this test. What they should have shown was the trap speeds - as that would have told us everything. If the trap speeds were at what the previous test was - then it comes down to a poor traction issue for the M5. But we didn't get that info. So there is no way to know how this car compared to the last. Because the ET was so far off (11.4 to 11.1 on its previous test) - compared to the MB which was identical to the first Carwow test (11.2).

Also - the roll race was close to even, with the MB pulling. This also shows an issue with this M5 versus the last. The last car they tested out trapped the MB - so the roll result should have showed the M5 pulling the MB.

Also - Car and Driver and Road and Track have tested the same ET (10.9) and almost the same MPH (trap speed) - 127-129.

In the end - the cars are close. But this test in my opinion was off.

Motortrends test - if in the same 10.9-11.1 range at 127ish MPH will tell me that the one Carwow test was an aberration.

[CarlosM4]

Originally Posted by vtknight

Again - as this thread is on the main page - remember - these two cars were tested by Carwow previously with the M5 quicker. And much quicker than it did on this test. What they should have shown was the trap speeds - as that would have told us everything. If the trap speeds were at what the previous test was - then it comes down to a poor traction issue for the M5. But we didn't get that info. So there is no way to know how this car compared to the last. Because the ET was so far off (11.4 to 11.1 on its previous test) - compared to the MB which was identical to the first Carwow test (11.2).

Also - the roll race was close to even, with the MB pulling. This also shows an issue with this M5 versus the last. The last car they tested out trapped the MB - so the roll result should have showed the M5 pulling the MB.

Also - Car and Driver and Road and Track have tested the same ET (10.9) and almost the same MPH (trap speed) - 127-129.

In the end - the cars are close. But this test in my opinion was off.

Motortrends test - if in the same 10.9-11.1 range at 127ish MPH will tell me that the one Carwow test was an aberration.

First things first. The Carwow test with 11.1 was done at a far grippier track in Portugal (as was mentioned on the actual video, if you paid attention and watched it to the end, you would have seen it.) The E63 was tested on that English track all long. Therefore 11.2 in all tests, actually shows quite a lot of consistency.

The roll race, the Merc is always going to beat the M5. It was 0.1s down on the comparo from Car and Driver in the 0-60, and in the 0-150mph the E63 S was within the same tenth, showing that it caught up. The difference in trap speed (128 vs 129 in the C&D) is so minimal and irrelevant, that it doesn't determine what car will pull more in the roll race. The E63 although 135 kg heavier in all these comparos (in the setup done, where you take a CF roof M5 F90 with a Panoramic Roof E63, which is unfair, you either take both with Panorama, or take a Steel Roof E63), it still has a more aerodynamic body, more power, more torque, and shorter gearing ( 9 vs 8 gears). The result is pretty damn obvious, the Merc is expected to lead at top end.

Both are excellent and equally fast, but I don't get why everyone is saying the CarWow comparo is off. It isn't. In fact it is the closest simulation to how a real race between both cars would happen in the real road. In the real world, you don't have a perfectly even grippy track to launch. And to achieve the 10.9, Car & Driver used a special feature (extracted from their review) "(. That torque-converter automatic that we’d worried might take the eagerness out of BMW’s supersedan comes with a simple launch-control function that works with the all-wheel-drive system to help the new M5 turn some ridiculous times. A perfect launch is as easy as holding the brake and the accelerator while stopped. When fluid temperatures are right, the computer allows the engine to rev to nearly 3000 rpm, and the rear tires start spinning as if the M5 were rear-wheel drive. Release the brakes, the front wheels kick in, and the M5 pounds forward. In 2.8 seconds you’re at 60 mph and in 10.9 you’re whisked through the quarter-mile at 129 mph....After a couple of runs, the launch-control system dialed back the launch rpm to 2500 rpm, which isn’t enough to start the rear tires spinning. Launching without that rear-wheel spin adds a couple of tenths to the zero-to-60-mph time. Our test car supposedly arrived with the lower, 155-mph governor, but it didn’t stop the party until we’d hit a verified 163 mph. (A $2500 M Driver’s package brings a 189-mph limiter.))" . So this 10.9s and 2.8s to 0-60 is not consistent, it is the best possible outcome for the car. The E63S on the other hand will run 11s all day any day.

So no, the Carwow test is not an aberration. It is the closest to how a race between these two cars would happen in the real world.

[vtknight]

Originally Posted by CarlosM4

First things first. The Carwow test with 11.1 was done at a far grippier track in Portugal (as was mentioned on the actual video, if you paid attention and watched it to the end, you would have seen it.) The E63 was tested on that English track all long. Therefore 11.2 in all tests, actually shows quite a lot of consistency.

The roll race, the Merc is always going to beat the M5. It was 0.1s down on the comparo from Car and Driver in the 0-60, and in the 0-150mph the E63 S was within the same tenth, showing that it caught up. The difference in trap speed (128 vs 129 in the C&D) is so minimal and irrelevant, that it doesn't determine what car will pull more in the roll race. The E63 although 135 kg heavier in all these comparos (in the setup done, where you take a CF roof M5 F90 with a Panoramic Roof E63, which is unfair, you either take both with Panorama, or take a Steel Roof E63), it still has a more aerodynamic body, more power, more torque, and shorter gearing ( 9 vs 8 gears). The result is pretty damn obvious, the Merc is expected to lead at top end.

Both are excellent and equally fast, but I don't get why everyone is saying the CarWow comparo is off. It isn't. In fact it is the closest simulation to how a real race between both cars would happen in the real road. In the real world, you don't have a perfectly even grippy track to launch. And to achieve the 10.9, Car & Driver used a special feature (extracted from their review) "(. That torque-converter automatic that we’d worried might take the eagerness out of BMW’s supersedan comes with a simple launch-control function that works with the all-wheel-drive system to help the new M5 turn some ridiculous times. A perfect launch is as easy as holding the brake and the accelerator while stopped. When fluid temperatures are right, the computer allows the engine to rev to nearly 3000 rpm, and the rear tires start spinning as if the M5 were rear-wheel drive. Release the brakes, the front wheels kick in, and the M5 pounds forward. In 2.8 seconds you’re at 60 mph and in 10.9 you’re whisked through the quarter-mile at 129 mph....After a couple of runs, the launch-control system dialed back the launch rpm to 2500 rpm, which isn’t enough to start the rear tires spinning. Launching without that rear-wheel spin adds a couple of tenths to the zero-to-60-mph time. Our test car supposedly arrived with the lower, 155-mph governor, but it didn’t stop the party until we’d hit a verified 163 mph. (A $2500 M Driver’s package brings a 189-mph limiter.))" . So this 10.9s and 2.8s to 0-60 is not consistent, it is the best possible outcome for the car. The E63S on the other hand will run 11s all day any day.

So no, the Carwow test is not an aberration. It is the closest to how a race between these two cars would happen in the real world.

You bring up some good points - many of which I commented on elsewhere. I commented on the 0-150 catch up by the MB on the other thread and agree the top end of the E63S - which is the more powerful car (torque) makes complete sense. It also has 9 gears with a lower gear ratio.

I will go further by saying - factually - the CD test of a 129 MPH trap speed is an outlier compared to most of the tests provided where the car was at least high 126 to high 127 MPH - because each MPH does in fact make a huge difference as this number represents the potential of the car.

That said - and going back to the CD test or RT tests - the fact that the MPH stayed at least the same or better than the E63S while being quicker is important. In drags - spinning or lack of traction (as long as it isn't excessive) will actually "lengthen" the track and can result in a higher trap speed. With a solid 60' and getting traction - you will usually lose some MPH.

My point is - the E63S either lost some traction and then made it up with its MPH and that MPH only gets better due to its gearing and number of gears (spacing etc) which is why it makes up the time in the 0-150 - and will always outrun the M5 on a roll. The other option is the E63S had good traction, that is the best ET it will get on its AWD system and stock tires and it's gearing will only start to show its additional power after the 1/4 - and it depends where (what speed) the roll takes place before it starts pulling the M5.

I believe it is the latter and the F90 M5 will be quicker 9/10 times to the Merc in major tests to 60 and the 1/4. Including the upcoming Motortrend test. 8/10 times at the worst.

Now - your other excellent points - consistency. It does seem the MB is the much more consistent car as it doesn't have any TCU limitations. If it is so that the launch control RPM on the M5 will be reduced after "x" number of launches and that is what happened in this or any other comparison - that is a huge factor. I'm assuming there is a cool down (as the newer GTRs do this as well). So my suggestion to anyone racing is to not race sub-optimally - I doesn't make sense to keep racing until the car literally stops working properly lol. Your other point is the weight of the CF roof. This is a valid point as well and I agree - I cannot say what that difference would be - but the general rule of 1 HP per 10 lbs of weight - it would help - but I believe the other factors (gearing ratios and the BMW AWD system) being better for 0-60 and up to the 1/4 mile.

So - If done optimally - with all systems working as they should - I believe we will see the F90 come out on top.

Good discussion!

[onfireX5]

The oil temp has to be under a preset to protect the transmission. My X5M has the same preset. When you go on a transbrake, the temps climb in any transmission. Kudos to BMW for a protection preset. You're nut nuts to make multiple transbrake launches. It also has to be up to operating temp before you can use it to protect the trans,,,,

A MT Instagram posted they went 11.1 with 2 people in the M5. Time will tell the MT details. So if RT was 10.9 , C&D was 10.9 and if MT is true at 11.1 with 2 people inside.......the CarWow 11.4 is an outlier as proven by CarWow earlier with an 11.1.......I lump all of these youtube "vid spots" as entertainment instead of valid tests...the "procedures" are loosey goosey at best without any real hard data....and I felt the same when CarWow posted the M5 was FASTER than the Merc....just entertainment....not real, valid empirical comparisons.

[onfireX5]

Lance is enhancing his revenue stream.

[Mfan600hp]

[QUOTE=vtknight;22962700]Again - as this thread is on the main page - remember - these two cars were tested by Carwow previously with the M5 quicker. And much quicker than it did on this test. What they should have shown was the trap speeds - as that would have told us everything. If the trap speeds were at what the previous test was - then it comes down to a poor traction issue for the M5. But we didn't get that info. So there is no way to know how this car compared to the last. Because the ET was so far off (11.4 to 11.1 on its previous test) - compared to the MB which was identical to the first Carwow test (11.2).

Also - the roll race was close to even, with the MB pulling. This also shows an issue with this M5 versus the last. The last car they tested out trapped the MB - so the roll result should have showed the M5 pulling the MB.

Also - Car and Driver and Road and Track have tested the same ET (10.9) and almost the same MPH (trap speed) - 127-129.

In the end - the cars are close. But this test in my opinion was off.

Motortrends test - if in the same 10.9-11.1 range at 127ish MPH will tell me that the one Carwow test was an aberration.[/QUOTE

You are right!
Looking at the figures, something went wrong in this comparo!
I am waiting for a serious rematch from UK TOP GEAR or HEAD TO HEAD coming soon.
Meanwhile, i try to cheers me up by thinking of the COMP PACK I ordered ouf.....

[Mfan600hp]

Here's another drag race between two owners of M5 and E63s.
I let you read the comments on the right side as the start is not in the video.
The result is more in line with all other comparison )))

[germancarfan]

Originally Posted by Mfan600hp

Here's another drag race between two owners of M5 and E63s.
I let you read the comments on the right side as the start is not in the video.
The result is more in line with all other comparison )))

welp, so much for that

[vtknight]

Originally Posted by germancarfan

welp, so much for that

This is one race where the BMW didn't shift. The full race the M5 walks the E63S.

[vtknight]

Originally Posted by onfireX5

The oil temp has to be under a preset to protect the transmission. My X5M has the same preset. When you go on a transbrake, the temps climb in any transmission. Kudos to BMW for a protection preset. You're nut nuts to make multiple transbrake launches. It also has to be up to operating temp before you can use it to protect the trans,,,,

A MT Instagram posted they went 11.1 with 2 people in the M5. Time will tell the MT details. So if RT was 10.9 , C&D was 10.9 and if MT is true at 11.1 with 2 people inside.......the CarWow 11.4 is an outlier as proven by CarWow earlier with an 11.1.......I lump all of these youtube "vid spots" as entertainment instead of valid tests...the "procedures" are loosey goosey at best without any real hard data....and I felt the same when CarWow posted the M5 was FASTER than the Merc....just entertainment....not real, valid empirical comparisons.

This is also what I believe. You have to go with the most consistent reviewers.

That said - there will literally be a bajillion M5 vs E53S videos this summer. When I have mine - although quite a ways away - I will post my results as I did with my M550ix.

And you can trust me...