pukka

Where did I imply that it is NOT better to have good crash safety test scores? I only said that I wasn't too interested in that statistic - where's the argument?

There is a high percentage of SUV's and Pickup trucks on the roads here in the U.S.. Picture your children in the back seat of any car with a high safety rating when it gets T-boned by a Suburban or Expedition and maybe you will understand where I'm coming from.

BTW - MY child rides in the back seat of my wife's GL-450

How do you get away without any personal injury, BETTER???

Scudeyyy

from 60 mph the f10 stops in about 110ft... exactly the same as the old e60 if not worse because the old 550i stopped in 111ft tested by inside line
they both prevent crashes very well, but inevitably someone will end up in a crash situation, even if it isnt their fault, in these situations the f10 performs better

Bimmer32

May I put a nail in this coffin? If you can afford a new F10 or E60, you can definitely afford one of those cheap ass SUV to up your odds of safety for the kids. I have a Toyota Sequoia for ladies in the house. Michiganmike is quite intelligent in his post. It's a pleasure to read; thank you. As for the original OP, it's obvious that it's very opinionated and assumes unintelligence, and for lack of a better word, ignorance, to say about other car companies. You should just stick to e60 vs. f10 comparo.

bm323

dayvboyc

Hello everyone

A few of points from a newbie.

I've now got 52 days until my f10 arrives. I didn't like the old E60 so the new design has converted me to a BMW driver, well done the design chaps.

And as for all the complaints about the F10 getting big and fat?........... You could always just buy a 3 series??

Last point to all those people who have waited ages for their order, I placed mine on the 6th June. Due to a crappy company car scheme it arrives 15th December

Much love

bm323

New 5 or Old 5? 5 Things You Should Consider (Besides Looks)

Shebs

The article was an enjoyable read overall so thanks for posting.

The author seems to lack knowledge in certain areas however. He states that the F10 has improved aerodynamics when compared to the E60, which is not correct. Not only does the F10 have larger frontal surface area, but it also has a worse coefficient of drag adding to aerodynamics deterioration.

Furthermore, the author refers to "the new lightweight composite material that replaced much of the heavy steel in the doors", which is not correct as well. The new material in the doors is pure Aluminum. Composite materials are a completely different materials engineering concept where the material is made from two or more constituent materials. Composite materials are made from a matrix material and a reinforcement material forming a structure and a filler consecutively. Sorry for referring too much to engineering terminologies, but that is a mistake that should be highlighted.

It seems that the author thought initially when he wrote the article that the E60 had double wishbone suspension in front. The fourth comment below his article, posted by Ghane, states that the author wrongfully addressed the suspension of the E60 initially. The credibility of the author is in question then, since the major change in front suspension from the previous 5 series platforms to current F10 platform is that the front suspension was changed from McPherson Strut to Double Wishbones. This fact is well known to any car enthusiast.

Finally, I totally agree with the author regarding the handling of the F10 when compared to the E60. He states: "I believe that the new handling dynamics are a Con for the F10 in comparison to the E60." This agrees with my personal feelings after testing both cars back to back.

Michiganmike

Bimmer32 thanks for the support and your thoughtful comments on this topic. I participate in this forum seeking an intelligent, civil exchange that may inform me. I acknowledge that there are many participants that know more about cars in general and BMWs in particular than I do. Unfortunately, some threads degenerate into the equivalent of a rant where someone repeatedly posts opinions without much support and belittles anyone that expresses a different view. IMHO it is time to move on to threads that offer more substance.

bm323

This seems to suggest they are 2 separate matters. The larger frontal surface area (required in Europe?) results in a higher drag coefficent.

The E60 523i at 0.28, E60 550i at 0.30, the F10 lower models at 0.28, F10 535d/535i at 0.29 and the F10 550i at 0.30.

If you were testing the F10 523i, it was probably 0.28 ie the same as the E60.

So the F10 has improved on its drag coefficient generally, but ends up the same/about the same as the equivalent E60 although the F10 has the larger frontal area.

Porsche 911 generally has 0.30 Cd but the Mercedes present E class is lower than the E60 or the F10.

Shebs

The larger surface area (A) is the simple cars dimensions (Width x Height) minus the recess of the inclination of the cars A pillar towards the roof minus the ground clearance.

The frontal surface area of the F10 is bigger than that of the E60 due to its bigger dimensions whether in Europe or any where else.

The coefficient of drag of my E60 523i is 0.27. the number was listed on BMW international site when the E60 was still produced. I remember that number very well because I was going to buy a E90 320i with Cd of 0.26, then I bought the E60 with Cd of 0.27. That was in 2006.

It might be that you found the Cd on another site that stated the wrong or a different E60 version.

Autozine refers to the F10 aerodynamics deterioration when compared to the E60.

The article states: "Aerodynamic efficiency has also taken a backward step. The outgoing car (E60) not only had a smaller frontal area but also a lower drag coefficient down to 0.27. The new car starts from 0.28 in the modest models, rising to 0.29 in 535i and 0.30 in 550i. This is a night and day difference from the latest Mercedes E-class, whose drag coefficient ranges from 0.26 to 0.28. Ridiculously, BMW has already applied an innovative automatic flaps to its nose intake, which draws the right amount of air to the radiator depending on cooling demand , thus keep aerodynamic drag to the minimum. It's probably time to head hunt the aerodynamicists from Stuttgart."

The force of drag on a car depends on both the Cd multiplied by A. Since both numbers are bigger in the F10 when compared to the E60, then the force of drag will be higher. BMWblog author is mistaken to state that aerodynamics were improved.

Sports cars including Porshces and Ferraris (F430 0.33) use different concepts when they are aerodynamically designed. They need more down force to avoid aerodynamic lift at very high speeds which will result in lower stability in high speed corners and might lift the car off the ground in straights. That's why they will end with with higher Cds compared to our sports saloons.

In Formula 1, aerodynamics are configured for either top speed (low drag) or cornering stability (higher drag) depending on the track type. If the track has a lot of long straights the aerodynamics will be optimized for top speed, if it has a lot of corners aerodynamics will be optimized for down force while top speed is compromised.