Originally Posted by needforspeed' post='255060' date='Mar 15 2006, 04:36 AM

Znod - admire the scientific approach and thanks for adding the graph, funnily enough I drew a little graph with the same data prior to my post to you.

Statistical data is almost always manipulated to suit the user. So manufacturers will do various things to make their official performance statistics look as good as possible. Most magazine tests are less scientific and almost always show performance less than the official data.

For the data set you have used the 545 and 550's performance seems to be extremely close, but I think that the only conclusive statement you could make at the moment is that a 545 can be made to accelerate very nearly as quickly as a 550. If one wants to get REALLY picky then the only way to compare properly is to have the same driver run each car at the same time in the same conditions and with the same level of experience of the vehicle - not very achieveable. Even if you drag raced the cars 100 times, there would be a difference in respect of the drivers ability / approach / reaction time.

In terms of the graphical example - can you not plot distance vs time? Although the 'curve' between the data points would be interpolated this will be the most intuitive way to view things. I guess to do this you probably also need full data from a 550 with distance measurements as well as time.

Originally Posted by grogan545' post='255231' date='Mar 15 2006, 02:13 PM

I believe when we get some well broken in 550's in the hands of some enthusiatic owners with a test meter they will eventually get better times than a 545.The engines are basically the same except for larger dispalcement for the 550.I think the times to 60mph/100km will always be close due to traction limitations but in the upper speed ranges the 550 will show its power advantage.My car seemed to loosen up and perform better after 10000 miles.I now have almost 20000 miles on the odometer and it never ran better.

Originally Posted by Znod' post='255291' date='Mar 15 2006, 01:14 PM

Hi g-man:

I wonder how well broken in my car is with respect to the "new" 550i since I still have less than 7k miles. And, I still am wondering if it would be better to present our weather adjusted data at 1,000' feet rather than 500' feet. I am thinking of using an altitude that would be "unquestionably" higher than the altitude any magazine would ever be tempted to test at. I am pretty sold on this idea. What do you think? I am sure that all of my sub 5 second 0 to 60's would go away, but, regardless, we virtually always would be presenting more conservative data than the magazines. To get a feel for my car's conservative potential, I could additionally adjust to 1,000' without weather adjustment.

Originally Posted by ipse dixit' post='255311' date='Mar 15 2006, 04:39 PM

I don't believe the number of miles necessarily equals "well broken in".

In your case, Znod, I think your car is probably more broken in than most other 545i with similar mileage because you've been constantly doing those aggressive 0-60 mph runs.

Originally Posted by grogan545' post='255225' date='Mar 15 2006, 02:02 PM

Thanks for the information on octane.I was wondering why Znod only has 91 octane available in his area(1500' altitude).I have been using 94 octane in my car for the last 6 weeks and did not notice a difference in performance or mileage.I guess i'll go back to 93 octane since it appears to be fine for my car.

Originally Posted by grogan545' post='255231' date='Mar 15 2006, 02:13 PM

I believe when we get some well broken in 550's in the hands of some enthusiatic owners with a test meter they will eventually get better times than a 545.The engines are basically the same except for larger dispalcement for the 550.I think the times to 60mph/100km will always be close due to traction limitations but in the upper speed ranges the 550 will show its power advantage.My car seemed to loosen up and perform better after 10000 miles.I now have almost 20000 miles on the odometer and it never ran better.

Originally Posted by Znod' post='255958' date='Mar 16 2006, 06:50 PM

I wish some 550i guys would turn up. And, I hope EuroCarFan gets around to testing his Dinan outfitted car. I don't know about the traction issue on the 550i. As you know, I used to have many traction problems, but good old 20.01.00 took care of that issue for me. I might still have one in the kind of weather you have been having, but I doubt it.

Originally Posted by Znod' post='254009' date='Mar 12 2006, 06:18 PM

Here you go Eric. Maybe the following data will provide some mind candy on the issue.

The values for the 550i on the left above the line are taken from a test produced by Auto Zeitung. The related article in on the BMW Germany website. The 550i seems fast. Recall that BMW USA shows 5.4/5.5 for zero to 60 for the car. But, the one tested does zero to 62.14 in 5.5. The values on the right above the line are from my 5 best unadjusted passes. These values were produced in Phoenix AZ in February and March of 2006 at 1,600'. I have no idea about the weather and altitude conditions that produced the 550i results. In this regard, I have no idea what test procedures were used by the 550i testers.

Originally Posted by Don Juan' post='256065' date='Mar 16 2006, 07:28 PM

Znod, I will be in Phoenix this sunday for Business..so if you want to lend me your device I will do some runs and return it to you via mail.. what do you think?