znod

Hi All:

Here is some discussion fodder. I'm a tad bored. But, above all, remember, we are on the same side--at least for now. The following discussion appears on the M5 discussion, but either no one saw it or was interested as it died a quick death. If no one is interested, then, fine, my feelings won't be hurt. The gist of this discussion applies to an excuse given about 5-Series acceleration that I have seen here and on the M5 discussion. The excuse comes up when someone mentions that so-and-so car accelerates, or may accelerate, faster that a roughly comparable 5-Series car, and the "way more than about acceleration" part alludes to the excellent handling of the 5 series. I've identified the messages, replies, etc., below.

What I am interested in thinking about at this point is anything that comes to your mind when reading the following. But, I am also interested in comparisons of acceleration and handling times for cars that are major competitors with any roughly comparable 5-series cars you are interested in. To some extent, I have dealt with the M5 and some roughly comparable Mercs below. I encourage you to toss any biases out the window and have a sprited discussion based on the best "facts" that can be found.

vnod: I am trying to understand. It seems to me that all the expensive German cars, including the Mercs, are about more than just acceleration [even though we often use this "excuse" to justify BMW acceleration deficiencies in comparison to the competition.] OK, perhaps the M5 is better on curves than the Mercs, but it is very close at least some of the time. For example, on the test track Evo uses, the M5 got around the course in 1.29.95, while the SLK55 AMG and SL600 got around in 1.29.30 and 129.95. So, why do so many of us talk about the M5 being about way more than acceleration as though the Mercs also are not about way more than acceleration? I know I am comparing cars in different classes, but don't the Mercs that are more in the M5's acceleration class (e.g., the E55) handle reasonably well too? I wonder what the E55's time might have been on the Evo test track.

Responder: I don't think it's fair to compare the SLK and the SL to any type of e60, but from all accounts the driving dynamics of the e55 pale in comparison to a sports equipped e60, let alone a m5.

vnod: Thank you for the reply. Yes, I indicated that the cars are in different classes. Still, we claim that the M5 is a race car in disquise. So, despite the different classes, I think the comparison actually is fine. And, the M5 does very well in the comparison so it should not be embarassed.

Resonder: I'd readily assume the times would not be that close, but even if they are, the on road manners and driving characteristics would surely be distinct.

vnod: Right, that is what everyone assumes. But, I am looking for data. I'd like to have more info. I have a comparison test from Kraft-Ausdr?cke. This mag shows the following for a test circuit and the slalom, respectively.

Handling/Test Circuit (min/sec): M5--1:43.3 CLS55 AMG--1:44.9
Slalom (km/h): M5--66.7 CLS55 AMG--64.3

Now, the CLS55 AMG, in relation to the M5, has only 476 HP, only a 5-speed transmission, carries about 300 more lbs., and costs (published) $98,880. Thus, it looks like MB is doing OK on handling in relation to the M5, with a class comparable car, and seems like it too is "about more than just acceleration." And, the CLS55 is likely to at least match the M5 in acceleration (see the topic "Our Fearless Forecasts"). For example, MT (a fairly conservative mag), in a 7/05, test shows 0-60 in 4.4 and the 1/4 in/at 12.6/114.4 for the CLS55.

Similarly, a 2003 MT test deals with the E55 AMG; its tests yield: 0-60 in 4.2 and the 1/4 in/at 12.39/116.21. Given these observations, I would be surprised if the E55 would not do reasonably well against the M5 in track times. And, note that the E55 weighs about 154 lbs less than the M5. Also, the E55 AMG (2004), in relation to the M5 has only 469 HP and only a 5-speed transmission. Its published cost was $76,720 in 2003. This test also showed the following for the Audi RS 6 and the E55, respectively: 600-ft slalom (mph) 67.8 and 66.5. Thus, the E55 acquitted itself reasonably well in relation to the RS 6. Again, while the E55 may not handle as well as the M5, I think it is fair to conlude that the MB is "about more than just acceleration." Unforutunately, I have no current data showing a direct comparison of the track times of the M5 and the E55.

You say that even if the track time of the E55 and the M5 are the same, then "the on road manners and driving characteristics would surely be distinct." Your supposition very well may be true. However, then the choice between the handling characteristics of the two cars would be personal perference and not because the M5 is "about way more than acceleration."


Responder: Acceleration times are one thing, but not sure what the deal with track times are, since the m5 is still a four door saloon with plenty of sport. The m5 could surely do well at the track, but if one is going to regularly go to the track, it would make sense go with something else.

vnod: There won't be any track time for me in any expensive car I own; that's part of my point. I won't be pushing any expensive car to its handling limits on the track or the street. And, I don't think that those who argue that the M5 is "about way more than acceleration" will be doing so either. Thus, I doubt that it would matter to very few of us handling-wise if we were driving an M5, a CLS55 AMG, or an E55 AMG. Handling-wise the issue would reduce to personal preference as discussed above.

Responder: If your main interest is in straight line acceleration, then an AMG equipped car would seem to be a better fit versus a M5. I mean no offense to this, just that mods would go a bit further, it would arguably be more luxurious and something like a CLS55 just looks so much better fear.gif

vnod:I agree. Given two equally priced, equally attractive, equally high-quality, and other things equal cars such that: (1) the first car is slightly faster accelerating and slightly slower in curves and (2) the other car is vice versa, I will take the faster accelerating car--no matter what its brand name. For me, this decision would be purely practical. For various reasons, I would be able to utilize the acceleration of the quicker car to the max with some frequency, but I never would use the cornering ability of either of the cars to their maxes. In this regard, I drive straight lines and city curves 99% of the time and would not trust myself to test the maximum cornering abilities of expensive cars on the street or the track.

heezy545i

Hmm....who's this responder character.....

I apologize if you were expecting a reply in the previous thread, but my limited to non-existent experience in these cars would make my comments mere speculation. I agree with you for the most part however.

I don't know if I'm contradicting myself, but if I were to own a M5, I would surely push it and attempt to examine its limits. If this were not the case, then the purchase of a M5 would not make sense, as you might as well stick to a 545/550 or even a 530 for that matter. I suppose one could purchase for prestige, but that's not really my deal (though I have to admit, I did like the feeling of driving the e60 when it was still a rarity on the road).

dgjk

To me acclereation ad conering are a nice way to compare a car, but really do not matter to most people. It is the "feeling" that a car gives you when you get in it. You can not explain this. I doubt anyone ever pushes their car to its limits. I read somewhere that .4g is where most people start to back off (can't remember the source but I did read it and in this discussion hearsay is legal). Also most of us do not know how to get the max acceleration out of their car - like the magazines do. It is more than just stomping the pedal.
Anyway, my point is that the numbers may matter for bragging rights but I doubt anyone has ever bought a car after taking it to the limits on a track and decididing to get the faster one becasue it would suit thier needs better. It is about more than that. There is something about the e60 that I had to have and even though I looked at a few other cars the360 was the only real one. Some other people feel that way about MB or even cadillac. As a matter of fact a cadillac sedan deville is probably the bast car for the way most people drive on a daily basis.
Do not know if this was relevent but these are some of the thoughts that go through my tiny mind when I read comparison tests of cars like the any of these at the limit. Does anyone really "drift" in their car on a semi-regular basis.
BTW - this is an American perspective becasue we have no autobahn.

znod

I was just keeping the responder (sort of) annonymous if, for any reason, he or she didn't want to be quoted. No problem. I really wasn't expecting a reply from you, but, of course, you were welcome to do so. I usually think about three things primarily when buying--looks, performance, and cost. But, the prestige thing slips in there too. While I believe I buy nice things primarily for myself (i.e., the one I keep my car clean for), I do like for others to think that my car is nice. I just like for people to say "that's really a nice car." I just reply "Thank you. I really enjoy driving it."

If I wanted to really splurge, then I would buy a high-performance expensive car knowing full well that I would not push it to the limits except on acceleration or top-end if the chance presented itself--which it won't on US roads. That's one of the reasons that the nth-degree in handling is not important to me. But, yes, good handling, which I would use, is important to me. I have never pushed my Z06 to its handling limits, but it's acceleration limits, definitely, yes, and its general handling abilities have been fun.

Simple1

Vnod I understand what you are saying, go check M5board.com, there are severals threads about this very discussion. What i got from most of the discussion on that board though was that the M5 was just more driver oriented and engaging, while the CLS55 was just a bullet luxo cruiser with mind-blowing acceleration. People said @ least their perception (owners of both cars) was that the M5 felt glued to the ground while the CLS55 felt front-heavy when dipped into a corner. For me personally the reason why I would choose the M5 is not even because it necessarily handles better than the CLS55 but it's the design and technology behind the M5 that has me excited. I mean even MB has their 7 speed box in the SLK32 Amg but again the technology behind the BMW is more engaging. These are other's opinions not mine since I haven't driven any of the above vehicles.

znod

You have made some interesting points. I mentioned above the 3 primary things I take into consideration when buying a car--looks, performance, and cost. But, you are right on the "feel" factor. This facotr also is imprtant to be and is not subsumed by "looks." Thank you for clarifying my thinking. Yes, hearsay is legal. The "had-to-have" factor you mention is part of the looks thing to me. There was no other car in the 545i's class that looked nearly as good--to me.

And, your comments about performance tests are interesting. Some do drift their cars. There was a recent topic dealing with this activity. The topic was styled something like "How often do you turn DSC off?" And, yes, how do they get some of the numbers that are reported in performance tests? Are their drivers really that much better than BMW drivers. BMW claims 0-60 for the 545i Steptronic of 5.8 secs., and you know that BMW would not claim an overly slow number (i.e., at least they would have done numerous runs to get a good, let's say, average time across a good sample of 545i's). But, the big 3 US auto mags get the following 0 - 60 results.

BMW 545i R&T 6/05 5.2
BMW 545i MT 8/04 325 5.4
BMW 545i MT11/05 325 5.5

And, you say "BTW - this is an American perspective becasue we have no autobahn." Yes, darn it. :thumbsdown: I would participate in top-end on the Autobahn after some practice attempts.

EBMCS03

I read your post and glanced at some of the responses so I dont know if what I'm about to say has any revelance but I want to say it.

I think when most people say "BWM handles better than a Merc" is referring to the driving feel. Its not so much about the times any more... it use to be...

A Merc AMG version can get around the track or corner or Slalom at very close times but when doing it you might not feel as confident than in a BMW ///M.

I do like AMGs very much too! If I can I would like BOTH the E55 and M5 but if I had to chose one I'm stuck with the BMW thats my problem.

heezy545i

I believe it's common for bmw to understate performance. Also I agree with the previous poster as magazine numbers are ideal as many owners are not willing or able to punish or push their cars to those limits.

Sure I could practice my launches at the expense of my clutch, but unless I line up with someone or go to the dragstrip, the practice would seem somewhat fruitless.

ipp

I believe it's common for bmw to understate performance. Also I agree with the previous poster as magazine numbers are ideal as many owners are not willing or able to punish or push their cars to those limits.

Sure I could practice my launches at the expense of my clutch, but unless I line up with someone or go to the dragstrip, the practice would seem somewhat fruitless.
[/quote]
From what I've read somewhere the the performance a car company claims is calculated, not measured. Anyone knows?

znod

My problem with the above gist is simply that it doesn't tend to verify or to contradict the idea that the AMG CLS55 is about way more than acceleration--just as the M5 is about way more than acceleration. That is, the discussants state preferences for how the cars feel, but they do not give comparative track times derived in the hands of highly capable drivers. In this regard, comparative track times very well could confirm that the two cars are quite similar on all performance dimensions. If so, it would make little sense to say, in defending the M5's acceleration ability (assuming slower than the AMG CLS55--which is unclear at this time), "yeah, but the M5 is about way more than acceleration." Such statements are based, in effect, on the assertion that the CLS55's handling is not high level--whether or not it is as good as that of the M5.