03-26-2018, 09:12 AM | #23 |
Lieutenant Colonel
3157
Rep 1,749
Posts |
This thread is the first time I've ever read that an extra shift in a timed/instrumented test is somehow a good thing and an advantage. We're not talking about a 5-speed AT vs. a 9-speed AT. Its an 8 vs. a 9-speed, both of these will keep the car in the optimum rev range, therefore an extra shift will only hurt the E63. I don't give a damn how fast that shift may be.
What is this BS about doing a roll race in comfort mode? If you're on the highway lining up to roll, you are not going to be in comfort mode (at least not if you're trying to win)...and guess what, neither is the guy that's trying to beat you. If you're anticipating a race you'll be ready. This is just stupid. From what I've read in this forum, M5s have been delivered to customers on two different sets of tires. Could the test car have had the less sticky version? Also, is it just me or does it seems to anyone else like the M5 bogs down after the initial jump in the first race allowing the E63 to pass it? 1:05 into the video it show the race from the E63s interior. Almost looks like a premature short shift into second. Anyways, not making excuses for the M5 (as illustrated by my first point) but I'm a bit disappointed in the outing of this one. This one seems to be the outlier and not the norm thus far. Let's hope it remains that way. |
Appreciate
0
|
03-26-2018, 09:27 AM | #24 | |
CarGeek
63
Rep 186
Posts |
Quote:
__________________
F13 M6 Competition - Sakhir Orange
2003 M3 Coupe - Phoenix Yellow - Turbo F10 5 Series - Black - Stock |
|
Appreciate
0
|
03-26-2018, 12:15 PM | #25 |
Brigadier General
3619
Rep 4,532
Posts |
|
Appreciate
0
|
03-28-2018, 06:35 AM | #26 |
Lieutenant Colonel
3157
Rep 1,749
Posts |
https://www.roadandtrack.com/new-car...ocialflowFBRAT
Interesting that R&T would discuss this but they are...and they are attributing the result to less grippy tires. |
Appreciate
0
|
03-28-2018, 07:50 AM | #27 | |
Lieutenant
168
Rep 454
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
03-28-2018, 09:20 AM | #28 |
New Member
27
Rep 13
Posts
Drives: 22 M5 Comp, 21 RS6, 20 Taycan
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Colorado, Arizona
|
I love both cars, having owned e39 m5 (loved that car) in past and currently edition one e63. On the C&D test they used 91 octane in AMG versus 93 in all the other cars when you look at data sheets. I wonder why they would use different fuel in comparison test?
|
Appreciate
0
|
03-28-2018, 09:55 AM | #29 | |
First Lieutenant
288
Rep 371
Posts |
Quote:
The comparison test was also done in California, where 93 octane is not available anyway. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
03-28-2018, 10:43 AM | #30 | |
Brigadier General
3619
Rep 4,532
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
03-28-2018, 12:53 PM | #31 |
New Member
27
Rep 13
Posts
Drives: 22 M5 Comp, 21 RS6, 20 Taycan
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Colorado, Arizona
|
If you look at the fuel on the C&D test, different fuel was used, 93 in 3 cars, 91 AMG. I'll try to post pix
__________________
2022 BMW m5 Comp
2021 Audi RS6 2020 Porsche Taycan Turbo S |
Appreciate
0
|
03-28-2018, 01:07 PM | #33 |
First Lieutenant
288
Rep 371
Posts |
Yes, this chart is what I linked to in my earlier post.
Rating is in the "Fuel" section, along with the capacity of the tank, and EPA mpg figures. It is unclear whether this is the type of fuel they used in the test, or it is just the type of fuel recommended by the manufacturer. We know that BMW recommends 93 octane, while Mercedes recommends 91 octane, so that's not news. Did they say anywhere in the test that this is the rating of fuel they used (as opposed to say using 91 for every car because it is California, or 100 octane race gas for every car because they presumably tested all this on a race track with race gas available)? |
Appreciate
0
|
03-28-2018, 01:10 PM | #34 |
Lieutenant
168
Rep 454
Posts |
I believe what he is trying to say is that the 91/93 is under the basic factory spec section (eg. mpg, tank size) so it could just be the recommended gas by the manufacturer, not necessary the actual gas used for their test.
|
Appreciate
0
|
03-28-2018, 01:22 PM | #36 |
Brigadier General
3619
Rep 4,532
Posts |
|
Appreciate
0
|
03-28-2018, 02:06 PM | #37 | |
Lieutenant Colonel
3157
Rep 1,749
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
03-28-2018, 03:20 PM | #38 | |
First Lieutenant
288
Rep 371
Posts |
Quote:
Given that we know (a) Mercedes recommends 91 octane and others recommend 93, (b) using gas worse than the manufacturer's recommendation will cause the engine to lose horsepower, and (c) using gas better than the manufacturer's recommendation does nothing: One of the following happened: - C&D used 91 gas in all cars. This causes all cars but Mercedes to produce lower than rated horsepower, giving Mercedes the advantage. - C&D used 91 in MB, and 93 in the rest. This is as per manufacturer recommendations, and all engines perform at their optimal. - C&D used 93 gas in all cars. There is no advantage to Mercedes here because 93 gas does nothing better than 91, so same as the previous scenario. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
03-28-2018, 03:22 PM | #39 |
New Member
27
Rep 13
Posts
Drives: 22 M5 Comp, 21 RS6, 20 Taycan
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Colorado, Arizona
|
BMW runs 24.5 pounds of boost versus 21.8 in AMG, so it probably needs the 93 octane more than the Benz does. BMW would likely be at a disadvantage on 91. I have mine flashed, runs fine on 91 in Colorado.
__________________
2022 BMW m5 Comp
2021 Audi RS6 2020 Porsche Taycan Turbo S |
Appreciate
0
|
03-28-2018, 08:50 PM | #40 |
Brigadier General
3619
Rep 4,532
Posts |
Give us a quick comparo between the 911 and AMG. Daily driver advantages, etc.
|
Appreciate
0
|
03-28-2018, 11:04 PM | #41 |
Lieutenant Colonel
752
Rep 1,857
Posts |
I hope Motor Trend, SportAuto, Auto Bild, and others comes out with their tests soon, with a few tests out there I feel like we are over analyzing.
The more test results the better we can come to a consensus. |
Appreciate
0
|
03-29-2018, 08:09 AM | #42 | |
New Member
27
Rep 13
Posts
Drives: 22 M5 Comp, 21 RS6, 20 Taycan
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Colorado, Arizona
|
Quote:
AMG has a firmer ride, but very good. The last AMG I had was the 2006 e55, this has come a long way. Much improved suspension, brakes, steering, tranny. I have Sottozero 2 snow tires on it and is excellent in mountain snow, 4matic plus is great. Very practical car, can get 3-4 sets of golf clubs in back (Since I don't have the large subwoofer). MCT 9 speed is very close to PDK level with quick shifts, rev matched downshifts, much better than the RS7 I had previously. Engine is masterpiece, great torque, amazing with tune. AMG's are more well rounded now, more BMWish, lol. I love the BMW m5, had the e39 model in 2003 which stands out as one of the best all around cars ever. AMG has that sort of soul as well. Looking forward to driving a m5 as well, esp with comp pack.
__________________
2022 BMW m5 Comp
2021 Audi RS6 2020 Porsche Taycan Turbo S Last edited by botox; 03-29-2018 at 08:17 AM.. |
|
Appreciate
1
vtknight966.50 |
03-29-2018, 08:14 AM | #43 | |
Brigadier General
3619
Rep 4,532
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
03-29-2018, 11:56 AM | #44 | |
Private
14
Rep 70
Posts |
Quote:
In the e63s you can manually increase the revs for launch by clicking the "UP" paddle (i.e. mash the throttle and break and click the paddle). The revs will increase +500rpm to 4,000rpm. This results in much more aggressive launch and 10.9 1/4 is easily achievable. What is surprising is that no journalist in the Western world has done this, but every journalist in Russia has. It will probably result in a much worse beating for the M5. The guy in the video below does this procedure and is able to do 11 flat all day on a terrible surface (I have been there, exotic RWD just cannot launch there). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s41BKOFgb3Y |
|
Appreciate
0
|
Post Reply |
Bookmarks |
|
|