BMW M5 (E60) Sport Auto Supertest

Discussion in 'European Cars' started by Porsche996Turbo, Nov 18, 2004.

  1. A bit disappointing, I was expecting a time under 8 mins on the Nürburgring. And I think the 645i has a very similar time on the Hockenheim circuit. Anyway, the acceleration isn't bad.

    SportAuto:

    Nordschleife: 8.13min
    Hockenheim: 1.16,5min (like the 645i)
    0-100km/h: 4.5s
    0-200km/h: 13.8s

    On the track: EDC Sport is slower than Comfort.
    Suspension is too comfortable.

    Excellent result: 58 out of 80 points new method with wet handling.

    Last sentence: "With the announcment, the M5 would combine the every day requirements with racing demands, the M-GmbH have claimed a bit too much."

    WOW! Looks like they almost tried to copy Mercedes, straight-forward rocket. (not saying the M5 is slow, but I and many others expected much more)
     
  2. OMG! BUT ITS THE BEST CAR EVAR!!! ITS FASTER THAN THE FARARRRI!!!
     
  3. FERRARI CANT LOSE
     
  4. Thanks for the info. Do you have the test conditions? (Temps)
     
  5. Why do they test it like a track car? Silly. It's a freaking sedan. Use it in real world applications, and see that it is a great combination of speed and usability.
     
  6. sane ring time as the Dodge Viper SRT-10
     
  7. I think this is even better than AMG in terms of handling.
     
  8. the mecerdes has always played catch up to the 5 series bmw... as far as "OVERALL", and this is no different this year.
     
  9. This only further justifies me not liking it much.
     
  10. i would definately like to know the conditions.. 8:13 isnt "a little over 8" to me.
     
  11. FARARRI CONSPIRACY! OMG!!!
     
  12. On the track: EDC Sport is slower than Comfort.
    Suspension is too comfortable.

    Excellent result: 58 out of 80 points new method with wet handling.

    if this doesnt sound like something lost in translation, i dont know what is..

    they said the suspension in sport mode was comfortable? slower then comfort mode? others said it was ruthless and very firm.. wet handling? do they mean wet track? or that the car behaves as if it was on wet pavement? because other reports say that the M5 is much hard to cowerse into a slide then the previous generation (1.x gs on the skidpad doesnt feel like a sliding car on a dry hot track). but dont jump on the bandwagon to quick, 0-100kmph is 4.5? you know, M5 antagonists would have swore to me it was 4.7. so how much valitity do you put in these numbers?

    but at this point all i wanna know is the track conditions, and if they were good, then im expecting a lot better results from a different publication.. lets make a bet for 2006, panda. when R&T, C&D, or MT test it.
     
  13. I'll give you 146 million dollars if it beats the F430 on any type of track.
     
  14. now thats a bet im not willing to make.. but ill bet that if it gets tested by some compotent people on a good day, it makes less then 8:10.
     
  15. 55.4 air
    60.8 ground


    but it depends on who drove it, you dont see the fastest lap times from porsche with anyone but Walter Rohl driving
     
  16. I thought all the recent Sport Auto laps were driven by Horst Von Saurma, the same driver who got 7:32:44 in the Carrera GT.
     
  17. i have no idea, i was talkin out of my ass, but id like to see someone like one of the ring taxi drives or Hans Stuck to see what time they get

    the only reason i say that is beause Sabine got a 8:16 in the E39, i find it hard to believe the E60 is only 3 seconds faster. i could be wrong though
     
  18. looks like Herr Goebbels is at it again.
     
  19. So the M% lines up with the

    1:16.3 --- Dodge Viper SRT-10
    1:16.3 --- BMW M3 (E46)
    1:16.388 Porsche Boxster, Timo Klock*
    1:16.391 MTM Audi RS6**
    1:16.4 --- AC Schnitzer V8 Roadster
    1:16.4 --- Sportec Audi RS4
    1:16.5 --- G-Power BMW M Roadster
    1:16.5 --- BMW M5 (E39), 507 hp
    1:16.5 --- Lotus Exige, 192 hp
    1:16.5 --- Lotus Elise 111R, 192 hp

    with the M3 being slighly fatser. As you can see, power is not everything, on a short track much lighter but also much less powerful cars like the Lotus Exige and Elise with only 192 hp can compete agaisnt such a hevy beast as the M5.
     
  20. some people would flip for an e39 with 507hp <A BORDER="0" HREF="http://www.supercars.net/emoticons.html"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="http://speed.supercars.net/pitlane/emoticons/wink.gif"></A>..

    when it does sub 8:10 at nurburgring, im literally gonna do a jig.
     
  21. It doesn´T!

    The M5 lines up with the

    8:12 --- 150.732 kph -- Mercedes Benz SL55 AMG, 400 hp, 1651 kg, sport auto 04/2002
    8:12 --- 150.732 kph -- Porsche 993 Turbo
    8:13 --- 150.426 kph –- BMW M5 (E39), 507 hp, sport auto 12/2004
    8:13 --- 150.426 kph -- Lotus Esprit Sport 350, 354 hp, 1324 kg, sport auto 05/1999
    8:13 --- 150.426 kph -- Dodge Viper SRT-10, 506hp sport auto, 10/2004

    But didn´t we expect more?!
    Not that much surprising.
     
  22. That time sucks. Either they stuffed up or the M5 is really disappointing. Probably the former.
     
  23. SL 55 AMG 400 hp and 1651 kg ??? what car is that ? SLK ?
     
  24. Its a pretty good time for such a car.
     
  25. The SL55AMG with 476hp does the Ring in 8:12

    I think the new M5 was tested in wet conditions. I cannot believe that the M5 isn't quicker than 8:13.

    Here are some pictures of impressieve acceration times of the new M5.

     

Share This Page