V10 M5

[Aronis]

The V10 M5 is to have 493 hp and 369 lb-ft torque.

Should be interesting....RS6 still has higher stock Torque. Sounds like an S2000, lots of HP not much Torque....LOL...

Big HP at HIGH REV, may not be enough to beat an RS6...

Now if only the RS6 had a manual transmission, BMW would have a hard time beating it...

[Aronis]

0-60 4.4. even with supercharger....

LOLOLOL

[Gustav]

The M5 will do 0-200 km/h in 13 s which no tuned or original Rs6 can do today. :0:

Some more pics:

http://www.bmwm5.com/articles/tenerife/tenerife.htm

[jgun81]

duh~~
yeah of course M5 will be faster 0-200km
AWD vs RWD?
AT vs MT?
It'd better be faster in high speed
Anyways I am having fun with my RS6 in any kinds of
weather condition.

[jgun81]

By the way, new M5 looks better than I expected.
But I still like E39

[djinn]

I too like the E39 m5 it's still a nice car

[Bauer]

The M5 will do 0-200 km/h in 13 s which no tuned or original Rs6 can do today.

Really....have YOU actually SEEN the the numbers or is this what is CLAIMED?

I can claim monkeys can fly out my a$$ but would you beileve me unless you saw it?

On a side note if those do turn out to be the numbers then that is very impressive.

I am pretty sure the Champion Racing RS6 could probably beat those numbers:D :D

[Gustav]

I've SEEN them in an official press release by BMW:

http://www.m5board.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=39836

I have never seen any case where BMW have overstatede their performance figures.

911 GT2 times almost :0:

[steve]

Gustav, BMW 530d perhaps? 7.2 seconds. Have only seen it once.
Even AMS had 8.2 seconds.

[itisme]

Well.. the M5 has no chance against the RS6.. the actual RS6 will have 480 Hp and the limit raisis from 250km/h to 280 km/h and no stock M5 is as fast as this stock RS6 :p :D.. gess who`s the king on our german autobahn?

but I like the M5, too.. it looks more sportive and that`s a big plus for me. But we`ll see how the next generation RS6 with the new grill will look like.. think it`s goiing to be very aggressive.. :alig: :thumb:

[djinn]

If I'm not wrong the new m5 won2t have turbos or any supercharge system. It means it can make high rpms. M5 has this advantage. It's max rpm would be probably 7000 or 8000. However rs6 does max 6500 rpm.But there is a plain truth that rs6 is more powerful than m5 :addict:

[nyrs6]

Originally posted by djinn
If I'm not wrong the new m5 won2t have turbos or any supercharge system. It means it can make high rpms. M5 has this advantage. It's max rpm would be probably 7000 or 8000. However rs6 does max 6500 rpm.But there is a plain truth that rs6 is more powerful than m5 :addict:

on the spy pics i think car and driver they sae the tach that it redlined at 8k :revs: that means a wild sound

[Benman]

Originally posted by Gustav
I've SEEN them in an official press release by BMW:

911 GT2 times almost :0:
Remember Gustav, that these are "official" times for the concept. BMW is smart enough to make no such claim for the production version. After all like you said, GT2 times. This I doubt!
Ben:addict:

[Artur Costa]

Hey hey!!!??

Some of you talk like the RS6 can beat the E39 M5 easly...actualy in a strait line from 0-160 the RS6 is fast , after that... you all know the M5 is faster..

Now you compare the RS6 to the E60 M5 ? Where do you live? Mars?
:race:

The Rs6 will keep up until the M5 gets traction...then :bye: no way...you ll just have to wait for the next gen RS6!

:incar:


:bow: M5

[absent]

It is all pure speculation right now,however considering that the E39 M5 is almost equal (at high speeds even slightly faster) to RS6,I suspect the E60 M5 will be devastating.

[jgun81]

Originally posted by Artur Costa

Some of you talk like the RS6 can beat the E39 M5 easly...actualy in a strait line from 0-160 the RS6 is fast , after that... you all know the M5 is faster..


The Rs6 will keep up until the M5 gets traction...then :bye: no way...you ll just have to wait for the next gen RS6!

:incar:


:bow: M5 [/B]

Yes, we all know that E39M5 is a fast car.
As you said 0-160 Rs6 is faster...after that?
Of course Rs6 is faster
Which car has higher max speed? :doh: then :bye: no way
you just wait for the new M5.

:bow: RS6

[Gustav]

Have anyone figured out the real unrestricted top speed of the RS6? Is it really over 300 km/h? 306 or 303 km/h if I remember from an old Auto Motor und Sport page?

[CarbonFibre]

Let's also mention its 7 speed SMGIII transmission. I'm sure that somewhat makes up for the engine being similar to the old S2000 in terms of power/torque ratio.

[djinn]

of course e39 m5 has higher max speed because it's engine volume is 5000 cc but rs6 has 4200 cc engine volume. More the engine volume higher the max speed. By the way e39 m5 has manuel transmission. It is a big advantage for bmw. I think it's acceleration to 0-100km was 5.4 secs with manuel transmission. however rs6's 1-100km acceleration with TIPTRONIK TRANSMISSIONM is4.7 secs. Think of an rs6 with a manuel transmission... It would FLY. :incar: One last thing is that m5 has no turbos and rs6 has twin turbo system. Turbo system produces the max torque at low rpms. So it is very normal that rs6 makes a better 0-160 acceleration than m5. Turbo cannot make high rpms. But atmospheric engines like m5's can make high rpm's .It means high performance at high speeds. That's why m5 is faster after 160km :thumb:

[Artur Costa]

Originally posted by djinn
of course e39 m5 has higher max speed because it's engine volume is 5000 cc but rs6 has 4200 cc engine volume. More the engine volume higher the max speed. By the way e39 m5 has manuel transmission. It is a big advantage for bmw. I think it's acceleration to 0-100km was 5.4 secs with manuel transmission. however rs6's 1-100km acceleration with TIPTRONIK TRANSMISSIONM is4.7 secs. Think of an rs6 with a manuel transmission... It would FLY. :incar: One last thing is that m5 has no turbos and rs6 has twin turbo system. Turbo system produces the max torque at low rpms. So it is very normal that rs6 makes a better 0-160 acceleration than m5. Turbo cannot make high rpms. But atmospheric engines like m5's can make high rpm's .It means high performance at high speeds. That's why m5 is faster after 160km :thumb:

Couldnt say it any better than that :bow:

:thumb:

I would love to own and drive a RS6 but the never ending power of a M N/A engine its just impossible to forget :revs:

[CarbonFibre]

In general a higher displacement engine will be capable of higher top speeds but two other important factors are aerodynamics and gearing. Without electronic limiters, these are the two things that will stop a car at top speed. Tires are not a factor as they may be unsafe after a certain speed, but they would not make you unable to reach certain speeds.

[djinn]

carbon, actually not the aerodinamics but gearing is very important at accelerations. Aerodinamics is very important while making high speeds. While accelerating you need a good gearing not a wonderful aerodinamics because these are really powerful cars and beat the aerodinamic obsticle easily.
:incar:

[CarbonFibre]

Yes, I said for top speed those are the two restrictions. Acceleration at lower speeds is about gearing and hp/torque, but aerodynamics do play a part in acceleration of like 0-150 mph.

[Klint]

Originally posted by djinn
carbon, actually not the aerodinamics but gearing is very important at accelerations. Aerodinamics is very important while making high speeds. While accelerating you need a good gearing not a wonderful aerodinamics because these are really powerful cars and beat the aerodinamic obsticle easily.
:incar:

Power to weight ratio and traction play major parts in acceleration times aswell as the gearing itself. I can't see a 00.1 cd difference in aerodynamics making too much difference in acceleration times.

However weight doesn't affect top speed, gearing, aerodynamics and an area to do such speeds does.

djinn,

With the post where you compare engine sizes, gearboxes and so fourth, you don't clearly make sense...I don't see how an engine with a bigger capacity will be faster at higher speeds, faster as in RPM faster or faster as in car speed relative to the ground faster? It's the performance of the engine that matters whether it has turboes or not, although a bigger capacity engine assists in getting a better performance.

I also don't see how the RS6 would "FLY" with a manual gearbox, since the E39 M5 (Manual Gearbox) has slower acceleration times over the RS6 (Auto Gearbox)?

Gustav,

Your claims that the E60 M5 will nealy match a GT2 are absurd. Whether or not it's an official BMW press release, it's you who I'm hearing it from.

Load the E60 M5 up with four fat podges, with approx. 100kgs each, then with two suitcases each and the GT2 will be saying :bye:

Since afterall isn't this what the M5 is supposed to do? Haul obese business men around. :D

[djinn]

Klint, I don't know why I couldn't make so much sense. As you say a bigger capacity engine assists in getting a better performance. Performance is also very important but its not everything. Because it has more performance than m5 (because of turbos) and because it produces max torque and horsepower at low rpms(because of turbos) it is faster than m5 at 0-160. However m5 is faster after 160 with the effect of 5000 cc, bigger capacity of engine than rs6.The other reason of why m5 is faster after 160 is that m5 produces max torque and horsepower at high rpms( high speed high rpm relation).The last thing is the transmission. Even rs6 has auto transmission and can beat manuel transmission m5 easily at 0-100km ,think of an rs6 wth manuel gearbox. We all know taht manuel gearbox is more powerful than auto. M5's 0-100 acceleration with manuel transmission is slower than rs6 because m5 has LESS hp. Now is it make sense? :)

[Gustav]

Dear Klint :)

Im basing my thoughts on the M5 vs GT2 on pressreleases and official facts. How could that be absurd? Im comparing straight line performance, not GT2vs M5 on a track.

"Whether or not it's an official BMW press release, it's you who I'm hearing it from. "

It is the official BMW press release, I dont care what you think it is :)

Your statement about obese businessman is just weird :trash:



Originally posted by Klint

Gustav,

Your claims that the E60 M5 will nealy match a GT2 are absurd. Whether or not it's an official BMW press release, it's you who I'm hearing it from.

Load the E60 M5 up with four fat podges, with approx. 100kgs each, then with two suitcases each and the GT2 will be saying :bye:

Since afterall isn't this what the M5 is supposed to do? Haul obese business men around. :D

[Klint]

Originally posted by Gustav
Dear Klint :)

Im basing my thoughts on the M5 vs GT2 on pressreleases and official facts. How could that be absurd? Im comparing straight line performance, not GT2vs M5 on a track.

"Whether or not it's an official BMW press release, it's you who I'm hearing it from. "

It is the official BMW press release, I dont care what you think it is :)

Your statement about obese businessman is just weird :trash:

Happy Easter, Gustav. :)

If the E60 M5 gets equipped with the 550bhp engine, then now we're talking acceleration times to 124mph a match for a GT2. But it's easy to find a car that does one thing better than another car that's higher than it's own league. Respectively, How would the E60 M5 compare to the GT2 when the test goes into a 0-155mph sprint? I bet the tables are then turned, so it is absurd that your comparing the phenominal E60 M5, with the superior GT2....

Where is this Press Release? Just out of curiosity, I'm not saying it doesn't exist, but the information given is third party information, this doesn't make it the most accurate information out there.

All the best,

[Gustav]

Its on BMW internal press site as well as on numerous other sites. Do a search on any sentence in it and youll find it on a lot of places.

[Klint]

Originally posted by djinn
Klint, I don't know why I couldn't make so much sense. As you say a bigger capacity engine assists in getting a better performance. Performance is also very important but its not everything. Because it has more performance than m5 (because of turbos) and because it produces max torque and horsepower at low rpms(because of turbos) it is faster than m5 at 0-160. However m5 is faster after 160 with the effect of 5000 cc, bigger capacity of engine than rs6.The other reason of why m5 is faster after 160 is that m5 produces max torque and horsepower at high rpms( high speed high rpm relation).The last thing is the transmission. Even rs6 has auto transmission and can beat manuel transmission m5 easily at 0-100km ,think of an rs6 wth manuel gearbox. We all know taht manuel gearbox is more powerful than auto. M5's 0-100 acceleration with manuel transmission is slower than rs6 because m5 has LESS hp. Now is it make sense? :)

That makes alot more sense, thanks for elaborating your post! :thumb:

Gustav,

Looking forward to the E60 M5, without a doubt.

I'll probally get an invite to check it out before it's launched in the UK, something I wont miss!