Quote:
Originally Posted by CarlosM4
First things first. The Carwow test with 11.1 was done at a far grippier track in Portugal (as was mentioned on the actual video, if you paid attention and watched it to the end, you would have seen it.) The E63 was tested on that English track all long. Therefore 11.2 in all tests, actually shows quite a lot of consistency.
The roll race, the Merc is always going to beat the M5. It was 0.1s down on the comparo from Car and Driver in the 0-60, and in the 0-150mph the E63 S was within the same tenth, showing that it caught up. The difference in trap speed (128 vs 129 in the C&D) is so minimal and irrelevant, that it doesn't determine what car will pull more in the roll race. The E63 although 135 kg heavier in all these comparos (in the setup done, where you take a CF roof M5 F90 with a Panoramic Roof E63, which is unfair, you either take both with Panorama, or take a Steel Roof E63), it still has a more aerodynamic body, more power, more torque, and shorter gearing ( 9 vs 8 gears). The result is pretty damn obvious, the Merc is expected to lead at top end.
Both are excellent and equally fast, but I don't get why everyone is saying the CarWow comparo is off. It isn't. In fact it is the closest simulation to how a real race between both cars would happen in the real road. In the real world, you don't have a perfectly even grippy track to launch. And to achieve the 10.9, Car & Driver used a special feature (extracted from their review) "(. That torque-converter automatic that we’d worried might take the eagerness out of BMW’s supersedan comes with a simple launch-control function that works with the all-wheel-drive system to help the new M5 turn some ridiculous times. A perfect launch is as easy as holding the brake and the accelerator while stopped. When fluid temperatures are right, the computer allows the engine to rev to nearly 3000 rpm, and the rear tires start spinning as if the M5 were rear-wheel drive. Release the brakes, the front wheels kick in, and the M5 pounds forward. In 2.8 seconds you’re at 60 mph and in 10.9 you’re whisked through the quarter-mile at 129 mph....After a couple of runs, the launch-control system dialed back the launch rpm to 2500 rpm, which isn’t enough to start the rear tires spinning. Launching without that rear-wheel spin adds a couple of tenths to the zero-to-60-mph time. Our test car supposedly arrived with the lower, 155-mph governor, but it didn’t stop the party until we’d hit a verified 163 mph. (A $2500 M Driver’s package brings a 189-mph limiter.))" . So this 10.9s and 2.8s to 0-60 is not consistent, it is the best possible outcome for the car. The E63S on the other hand will run 11s all day any day.
So no, the Carwow test is not an aberration. It is the closest to how a race between these two cars would happen in the real world.
|
You bring up some good points - many of which I commented on elsewhere. I commented on the 0-150 catch up by the MB on the other thread and agree the top end of the E63S - which is the more powerful car (torque) makes complete sense. It also has 9 gears with a lower gear ratio.
I will go further by saying - factually - the CD test of a 129 MPH trap speed is an outlier compared to most of the tests provided where the car was at least high 126 to high 127 MPH - because each MPH does in fact make a huge difference as this number represents the potential of the car.
That said - and going back to the CD test or RT tests - the fact that the MPH stayed at least the same or better than the E63S while being quicker is important. In drags - spinning or lack of traction (as long as it isn't excessive) will actually "lengthen" the track and can result in a higher trap speed. With a solid 60' and getting traction - you will usually lose some MPH.
My point is - the E63S either lost some traction and then made it up with its MPH and that MPH only gets better due to its gearing and number of gears (spacing etc) which is why it makes up the time in the 0-150 - and will always outrun the M5 on a roll. The other option is the E63S had good traction, that is the best ET it will get on its AWD system and stock tires and it's gearing will only start to show its additional power after the 1/4 - and it depends where (what speed) the roll takes place before it starts pulling the M5.
I believe it is the latter and the F90 M5 will be quicker 9/10 times to the Merc in major tests to 60 and the 1/4. Including the upcoming Motortrend test. 8/10 times at the worst.
Now - your other excellent points - consistency. It does seem the MB is the much more consistent car as it doesn't have any TCU limitations. If it is so that the launch control RPM on the M5 will be reduced after "x" number of launches and that is what happened in this or any other comparison - that is a huge factor. I'm assuming there is a cool down (as the newer GTRs do this as well). So my suggestion to anyone racing is to not race sub-optimally - I doesn't make sense to keep racing until the car literally stops working properly lol. Your other point is the weight of the CF roof. This is a valid point as well and I agree - I cannot say what that difference would be - but the general rule of 1 HP per 10 lbs of weight - it would help - but I believe the other factors (gearing ratios and the BMW AWD system) being better for 0-60 and up to the 1/4 mile.
So - If done optimally - with all systems working as they should - I believe we will see the F90 come out on top.
Good discussion!