znod

G-meters are very, very accurate given that they are calibrated properly. But, regardless, there are no g-meter results in the table I posted in my reply to you. And, all the tests appear to be equally well grounded. Whatever, though, you made a great choice. Enjoy.

znod

0 to 62 is not given--only 0 to 60. The 0 to 60 given implies 0 to 62 of about 6.25 (maybe more)--which is good. But, even 6.25 is only one data point. And, what about the preponderance of evidence given in post #244 and in the last table I posted above pertaining only to German mag results? I mentioned the FastSaloon data on post #244, but did not include them because I have no idea how credible they are or even how the 535d values were determined.

BetterMakeWay

And who dictates wich are credible and wich are not and thus resulting the preponderace? You...

znod

I determine what I feel to evidence enough credibility for me to report. Everyone else does the same for themselves I presume. Do you have any idea how the FastSaloon times are determined? I'd greatly appreciate it if anyone would/could figure it out. Your possible insinuation seems a tad out of line.

BetterMakeWay

Nope...i don't but we simply have to take into consideration all the tests, except obviously the ridiculous ones.
So there you have it, everyone goes interpreting wich are credible and not so there must be a preponderance for each and every one. On that basis i dpn't know what you are trying to prove with "your own preponderance"

znod

I have included everything I know about on post #244--including the fastsaloon.com data--in a footnote.. You continually try to find ways to make what I say and the conclusions I draw look bad. You must understand that it is not me who ends up looking bad the way you go about things. The idea of including data without any idea of how they are determined is preposterous. Oh, by the way, I heard that a guy did 4.29 to 60 and 12.24 @ 116.32 in the 1/4 in an unmodded 545i. Should I include these data in my results?

BetterMakeWay

I'm not continuing anything, i just said some logicly stuff. I don't pursuit to make you look bad or anything, you're taking it too personaly. I just said some logicly, objective and true stuff on my last post.
I mentioned "ridiculous" there in my last post. Of course you should not include that time, or go ahead do it, i don't care, i know it's impossible. But to say 14.1-14.5 for 1/4 in the 535d or around 6 sec 0-62 is ridiculous also (by analogy) is too much imo.

znod

Hmmmm.

znod

I am willing to report anything I think is reasonably credible as information. I even report things am unsure about in "footnotes." I think each individual should decide on the evidence that he or she is willing to accept as information. But, until I have some confidence in data, then I won't glorify them by elevating them to the level of information. At this point, I even like the theoretical calculations of modcar better than the data of fastsaloon because I have no idea how the data of the later were derived. Still, I report both in "footnotes." Note that fastsaloon also reports on the 545i: 0 to 60 5.6; 0 to 62 5.8; and 0 to 125 20.8. But, just as with its 535d data, I don't consider these data to constitute information because I have no idea how they were derived--despite their reasonableness. I may change my mind if I ever find out how fastsaloon gets its data (other than those it gets through its own tests).

Maybe you don't believe what I am going to say, but it looks like you believe that I am somehow trying to pull the wool over peoples' eyes by selectively including and excluding data/information. But, I am not out to prove a point--although I will "debate" when I think that someone is drawing fanciful conclusions from the data/information I post. I simply am out to provide data for others to base their performance beliefs on--which certainly may differ from mine. I have to admit being surprised when I see individuals focus on only the data points that support their "wants"/car ownership while ignoring the more substantive data indicating otherwise.

0700700

my friend, being bulgarian i dont want to diss you , but you surely are taking teh pi$$. I have driven both and the six series is so much more spectacular, so much quicker, and so much more refined ! have you seen the 80-120km time of the 650i ? its half a second in front of the m3 ... stock 535d against a 645i ... now youre really dreaming.. im sure a big part of your decision was made by the fact that the 535d was 52000euro and the cheapest 645i is around 71000euro

the 650i goes as quick as the m3.. would you call that gutless?

and on the 745i with dtc on and sport, everytime when i half press on the accelerator, i get wheelspin.. what more do you want?