[Phatcat]

Originally Posted by miamiten

I have no issue with and understandably see how an unsubstantiated Nordschleife time for an F10 CP with M Driver's Package of under 7:30 is delusional. At the same time, M Driver's Package is the key difference. A non-CP with it will do better than a CP without. There are 3 sections where the normal 250 km/h limiter can be hit with an F10 M5. Two of these are fairly long stretches. The longest of the two will even hit the M Driver's Pack 320km/h limiter. This can easily shed 10sec off. The course is so long and diverse that significant amounts of time can be gained or lost, 1/10th to 1sec+ at a time. Doing so requires a bit of work. Also helps when the driver is about 40kg soaking wet.

On the other topic, the X5M isn't a little heavier, it's almost 207kg more than the M760i (DIN-DIN). It also has 20% more frontal area and almost 30% more aerodynamic drag. The M760i and S63 (LWB) have the exact same curb weight (4806lbs), tiny aerodynamic advantage for the BMW, yet the S63 consistently produces performance numbers within spitting distance of the much heavier X5M/X6M. If the Bentley Continental GT3-R can pull off an 11.54 @ 122.1 with a slightly higher weight, much more drag above 110km/h, and less BHP/Torque available, why would 2.9 mph more be unimaginable for the slippery BMW?

Let me get this straight, so you are saying the reason all those M5 CP times are slow because they don't have the M driver's package? First of all, the M5 CP that SA tested has the M driver's package. Secondly, BMW said M5 ran 7:55, while Max Ahme (responsible for chassis development at M GmbH) said M5 CP is 10 sec. faster, so that would put it at 7:45.

I am surprised BMW didn't use you as their test driver, you could do 7:39 while not even familiar with track. If you drive the M4 GTS, I bet you can crack 7:20.

I am a reasonable man, I don't mind proven wrong, but despite all the technical jargons you threw out there, I am still not seeing any hard evidence to support your claims. I hope at least some magazines will get their hands on the 760 and we will see if it can trap 125+.

[lemetier]

Originally Posted by Phatcat

Let me get this straight, so you are saying the reason all those M5 CP times are slow because they don't have the M driver's package? First of all, the M5 CP that SA tested has the M driver's package. Secondly, BMW said M5 ran 7:55, while Max Ahme (responsible for chassis development at M GmbH) said M5 CP is 10 sec. faster, so that would put it at 7:45.

I am surprised BMW didn't use you as their test driver, you could do 7:39 while not even familiar with track. If you drive the M4 GTS, I bet you can crack 7:20.

I am a reasonable man, I don't mind proven wrong, but despite all the technical jargons you threw out there, I am still not seeing any hard evidence to support your claims. I hope at least some magazines will get their hands on the 760 and we will see if it can trap 125+.

No I'm saying there are variables to what times have been recorded by journalists and the numbers BMW have claimed.

BMW time of 7:55 is with a standard car. No CP, No M Driver's Pack. The statement CP is 10 sec faster is just with CP. AMS tests are consistent and substantiate the claim. They're just a bit slower over all. The first F10 M5 time of 8:05 was with an MDP equipped car. The M5 CP also had MDP and did 7:54 (11 sec faster). Horst also had 2 passengers in the car on both occasions (he always has at least one). He doesn't push hard in the more complex sections nor can he drive certain sections as quickly as possible if he wanted to.

You claim to be reasonable but want to hit back with childish statements. No I wouldn't do a 7:20 in an M4 GTS, nor would I ever expressly claim or imply I could. The 7:28 lap was about spot on. There isn't very much more to get from it; .5sec maybe at the most. I in fact frequently do evaluative driving for several manufacturers including BMW. These sessions are not to see how fast I can do a lap, but in the case of BMW, to analyze the behavior of components my company provides. Pushing a car to the edge for the sake of time saving isn't necessary. I do push them, to and past their limits, but that requires a margin of safety to recover. When evaluating components that are both functional and aesthetic, it helps to cut some people out of the process. I can go straight from the car to the computer, make revisions to the CAD/CAM files, and send those along with my notes to design and engineering so they can make any needed additional revisions, sign off, rapid prototype, send the revised components over, and typically only a final evaluation session is needed. Rarely do we encounter multiple revisions.

It's really too soon for debating. It's a time to be intrigued and look forward to some astonishing feats of engineering. The days of widespread, traditional, carnal emotion, are numbered and these may be some of the very last cars to provide it.

[Phatcat]

Originally Posted by miamiten

No I'm saying there are variables to what times have been recorded by journalists and the numbers BMW have claimed.

BMW time of 7:55 is with a standard car. No CP, No M Driver's Pack. The statement CP is 10 sec faster is just with CP. AMS tests are consistent and substantiate the claim. They're just a bit slower over all. The first F10 M5 time of 8:05 was with an MDP equipped car. The M5 CP also had MDP and did 7:54 (11 sec faster). Horst also had 2 passengers in the car on both occasions (he always has at least one). He doesn't push hard in the more complex sections nor can he drive certain sections as quickly as possible if he wanted to.

You claim to be reasonable but want to hit back with childish statements. No I wouldn't do a 7:20 in an M4 GTS, nor would I ever expressly claim or imply I could. The 7:28 lap was about spot on. There isn't very much more to get from it; .5sec maybe at the most. I in fact frequently do evaluative driving for several manufacturers including BMW. These sessions are not to see how fast I can do a lap, but in the case of BMW, to analyze the behavior of components my company provides. Pushing a car to the edge for the sake of time saving isn't necessary. I do push them, to and past their limits, but that requires a margin of safety to recover. When evaluating components that are both functional and aesthetic, it helps to cut some people out of the process. I can go straight from the car to the computer, make revisions to the CAD/CAM files, and send those along with my notes to design and engineering so they can make any needed additional revisions, sign off, rapid prototype, send the revised components over, and typically only a final evaluation session is needed. Rarely do we encounter multiple revisions.

It's really too soon for debating. It's a time to be intrigued and look forward to some astonishing feats of engineering. The days of widespread, traditional, carnal emotion, are numbered and these may be some of the very last cars to provide it.

How is my statement childish? You claimed you can drive the M5 CP around 7:39, which is faster than BMW themselves claimed, all the while you said you are not even familiar with the ring. So if BMW were to give you the M4 GTS to drive, why wouldn't you crack 7:20? Provided that you get familiar with the track?

And how do you know BMW's 7:55 time doesn't have M driver's package? BMW never said so, and why would any manufacturer use a speed limited car to set the ring time? You are not even making any sense.

But I do agree with you on one thing, the days of these types of cars are numbered.

[lemetier]

Originally Posted by Phatcat

How is my statement childish? You claimed you can drive the M5 CP around 7:39, which is faster than BMW themselves claimed, all the while you said you are not even familiar with the ring. So if BMW were to give you the M4 GTS to drive, why wouldn't you crack 7:20? Provided that you get familiar with the track?

And how do you know BMW's 7:55 time doesn't have M driver's package? BMW never said so, and why would any manufacturer use a speed limited car to set the ring time? You are not even making any sense.

But I do agree with you on one thing, the days of these types of cars are numbered.

Never once did I state I was unfamiliar with Nordschleife. I'm quite familiar with it (along with dozens of other courses). To reiterate and clarify, I'm not comfortable with going balls out in every car there or on any other course. The M4 GTS has aerodynamic components which help significantly. The F10 doesn't which is why it so happily kicks the ass out; lateral load or not. It's why the 30 Jahre and CP600 perform in specified tests the way they do. A lack of tractive force. How much downforce is applied to the front and rear axles on the F10 M5 at specified speeds? Do you know? Not a chance in hell. Do you know at what point DSC re-activates certain functions and by what degree at different velocities despite what mode is selected by the button? Nope. Have you driven Nordschleife? I'll guarantee no. Otherwise this bullshit comparison between two cars with completely different characteristics wouldn't be made. The off-point discussion in this thread is over.

[Phatcat]

Originally Posted by miamiten

Never once did I state I was unfamiliar with Nordschleife. I'm quite familiar with it (along with dozens of other courses). To reiterate and clarify, I'm not comfortable with going balls out in every car there or on any other course. The M4 GTS has aerodynamic components which help significantly. The F10 doesn't which is why it so happily kicks the ass out; lateral load or not. It's why the 30 Jahre and CP600 perform in specified tests the way they do. A lack of tractive force. How much downforce is applied to the front and rear axles on the F10 M5 at specified speeds? Do you know? Not a chance in hell. Do you know at what point DSC re-activates certain functions and by what degree at different velocities despite what mode is selected by the button? Nope. Have you driven Nordschleife? I'll guarantee no. Otherwise this bullshit comparison between two cars with completely different characteristics wouldn't be made. The off-point discussion in this thread is over.

Lol, doesn't matter if I know downforce or not, you lost all credibility when you claimed BMW used a speed limited M5 to set the ring time. And that you set a faster time than BMW's own test driver, without going all out. So was I wrong to assume you can also drive M4 GTS faster than BMW's 7:28? It's only a logical assumption, and it has nothing to do with whether I have driven the ring or not, which I never claimed that I have. You are the one making all those claims.

You are right though, no point in continuing this discussion. Besides throwing out technical mumbo jumbo, you have nothing to prove your case, where's the proof that BMW used speed limited M5 to set the ring time? Where?

[C5 FOR]

Somebody post a pic of something, ANYTHING!!, the war of words above is doin my head in!!!!

[Paul-Bracq-BMW]

A very crude 1st render on how the M5 bumper might look like based on my G30 M sport render...

[Needsdecaf]

Originally Posted by miamiten

. The Fxx M5/M6 could be significantly faster both in time and velocity if they weren't hampered by the significant tractive force limitation and drivetrain resistance at lower velocities. The tricks the Nissan GTR utilize to achieve its high figures appear in the B7, M760i, and upcoming M's. Some already appear which is why the current M5/M6, when equipped a certain way, have very different acceleration values above a particular velocity point.

Regarding this point, I would ask you to expand on this statement for the current M5/M6. Namely, what would those technologies be and how are they helping the acceleration?

Genuinely asking you the question, not trolling. I am an engineer so feel free to delve into the geeky stuff.

[C5 FOR]

Originally Posted by Paul-Bracq-BMW

A very crude 1st render on how the M5 bumper might look like based on my G30 M sport render...

OMFG!! It's a 4 series!!!

[lemetier]

Originally Posted by Needsdecaf

Regarding this point, I would ask you to expand on this statement for the current M5/M6. Namely, what would those technologies be and how are they helping the acceleration?

Genuinely asking you the question, not trolling. I am an engineer so feel free to delve into the geeky stuff.

I'd take the latest comments from Van Meel (which coincidentally came immediately and almost seemingly a rebuttal to my latest comments) with a grain of salt.

My understanding of the "AWD" system proposed for the F90 is rear wheel drive with "added traction" (this nomenclature had been used before by Van Meel himself). It is RWD most of the time; 100/0 split rear to front with very lightweight components utilized for the front axle drive system. With launch control, the bias splits and engages the front axle. Additionally, the Stereoscopic Cameras and 3D Flash LIDAR assist the DSC control unit in lateral acceleration/deceleration to increase or decrease the front bias. At speed (which occurs with Fxx M5/M6 Competition Package/M Driver's Pack), the rear differential unlocks acting as a fully open differential, reducing the induced drivetrain loss.

To understand true vehicle acceleration, take a look at fluid dynamics (for aerodynamic effects), parasitic drivetrain loss, tractive force, and rolling resistance. Elasticity is the key.

There is a video recently of the F90 and M4 GTS on the Nordschleife at the same time. There is no way an F10 M5 can go from braking to acceleration. Prior to the apex in that corner without some type of additional traction. It would spit the rear out prior to the apex.

I just finished a precision driving course for a law enforcement department utilizing my F10 as the lead and pursuit car. If the department will allow, I'll post some videos showing various aspects of these phenomenon and the role of DSC (regardless of switch position).

[C5 FOR]

Originally Posted by miamiten

I'd take the latest comments from Van Meel (which coincidentally came immediately and almost seemingly a rebuttal to my latest comments) with a grain of salt.

My understanding of the "AWD" system proposed for the F90 is rear wheel drive with "added traction" (this nomenclature had been used before by Van Meel himself). It is RWD most of the time; 100/0 split rear to front with very lightweight components utilized for the front axle drive system. With launch control, the bias splits and engages the front axle. Additionally, the Stereoscopic Cameras and 3D Flash LIDAR assist the DSC control unit in lateral acceleration/deceleration to increase or decrease the front bias. At speed (which occurs with Fxx M5/M6 Competition Package/M Driver's Pack), the rear differential unlocks acting as a fully open differential, reducing the induced drivetrain loss.

To understand true vehicle acceleration, take a look at fluid dynamics (for aerodynamic effects), parasitic drivetrain loss, tractive force, and rolling resistance. Elasticity is the key.

I love that, "elasticity is the key"

Wtf does it mean?

[Needsdecaf]

Originally Posted by C5 FOR

I love that, "elasticity is the key"

Wtf does it mean?

Could mean a few things. Could mean power under the curve of the engine. Could be literally the elasticity of the suspension creating the ability to put down power. He'll have to elaborate.

[Needsdecaf]

Originally Posted by miamiten

To understand true vehicle acceleration, take a look at fluid dynamics (for aerodynamic effects), parasitic drivetrain loss, tractive force, and rolling resistance. Elasticity is the key.

There is a video recently of the F90 and M4 GTS on the Nordschleife at the same time. There is no way an F10 M5 can go from braking to acceleration. Prior to the apex in that corner without some type of additional traction. It would spit the rear out prior to the apex. .

Understand what you're saying here. If I recall, aerodynamic force increases with the square of speed. I've never learned how drivetrain loss changes with speed.

F=MA, so A=F/M. M is what it is, but F being subject to the all of the variables it does, traction quickly is the limiting factor. The M Active Differential surely is a huge benefit in the absence of AWD on the F10. So what else can the F90 do in the absence of AWD? I'd think that the F90 will have:

CFP driveshaft for reduced rotational inertia and less driveline windup - be willing to be this 100%
Lightened halfshafts - 75%?
Active swaybars to reduce weight transfer - probably only 25% as this adds a lot of weight.
Lightened engine internals and flywheel - Likely 75% or greater. One thing about the M177 engine in the C63 is the response of the damn thing. Revved in neutral, the rate at which it loses revs is positively race-car like.

There are only so many tricks you can do on a street car before you run out of the ability to put the power down.

[SCOTT26]

The problem is that in interviews market specific information is addressed to one particular market in general because they cannot give anything away at this time.
And that things are construed by the media to be determined as market specific when in fact it is not respective of other markets.

[stealth.pilot]

Originally Posted by SCOTT26

The problem is that in interviews market specific information is addressed to one particular market in general because they cannot give anything away at this time.
And that things are construed by the media to be determined as market specific when in fact it is not respective of other markets.

Fair enough but without AWD or autopilot technologies this car is going to have very limited sales.

[Nordkeyz73]

Originally Posted by stealth.pilot

Fair enough but without AWD or autopilot technologies this car is going to have very limited sales.

Agreed. It needs to differentiate itself from the current M5. They should take a page from the S6 and lower the damn price if the F90 is more of just a refresh. It's competitors in the price category have AWD, and better specks even though it pains me to say it.

[SCOTT26]

Originally Posted by stealth.pilot

Fair enough but without AWD or autopilot technologies this car is going to have very limited sales.

Sorry have I got this right?
You want an Autonomous M5?
The M5 is a car that has to be driven and not by itself.

[lemetier]

Originally Posted by SCOTT26

Sorry have I got this right?
You want an Autonomous M5?
The M5 is a car that has to be driven and not by itself.

If you haven't already, arrange a test drive of the Bosch 550ix and 991 demonstrators. After that, the definition of "autonomous" should hopefully be different than the norm

Comfortable and useful in daily driving, can make anyone drive a line as well as Senna, kick the tail out and hold a perfect drift, or allow one to realize their true limits.

[stealth.pilot]

Originally Posted by SCOTT26

Sorry have I got this right?
You want an Autonomous M5?
The M5 is a car that has to be driven and not by itself.

The M5 is like the ultimate Swiss Army knife. You can drive the family, you can use it as a comfy cruiser in city traffic, and you can drive it like a maniac on the highway and in the mountains.

But if BMW thinks us M5 drivers are redlining it with paddle shifters in city traffic, then you are idiots! autonomous driving is useful for the occasions when you are stuck in traffic and doing the mind numbing stop go exercise. In this scenario I would love to switch to autopilot because then I can use my phone and relax a bit.

So yes I want autonomous features in my M5 and if BMW doesn't offer it then I will switch to a W214 E63S instead because Mercedes is going to offer it.

The kind of narrow minded comment you just posted is the kind of hubris that causes great companies to fail. If you think every M5 driver is driving flat out on country roads all the time then you know nothing about your customers.

[SCOTT26]

Originally Posted by stealth.pilot

The M5 is like the ultimate Swiss Army knife. You can drive the family, you can use it as a comfy cruiser in city traffic, and you can drive it like a maniac on the highway and in the mountains.

But if BMW thinks us M5 drivers are redlining it with paddle shifters in city traffic, then you are idiots! autonomous driving is useful for the occasions when you are stuck in traffic and doing the mind numbing stop go exercise. In this scenario I would love to switch to autopilot because then I can use my phone and relax a bit.

So yes I want autonomous features in my M5 and if BMW doesn't offer it then I will switch to a W214 E63S instead because Mercedes is going to offer it.

The kind of narrow minded comment you just posted is the kind of hubris that causes great companies to fail. If you think every M5 driver is driving flat out on country roads all the time then you know nothing about your customers.

I think I know what the M5 is as I have owned one from E34 to the present day with an E61 M5 Touring and 30 Jahre. So I know all too well about its flexibility.
And that is the great thing about the 30 Jahre getting it onto the road after work and stretching its legs on the way home to Grünwald.
I use an i3 if I residence in Munich.

We know our customers well and that is why they nixed the idea of having autonomous technology in the M5 because it is a driving machine with a various selection of attributes that offer further flexibility that is what the customer wants from the M5. I am sure that the alternatives M550d and M550e will offer Autonomous technology as per the regular 5er but I can understand why they do not want to introduce it on the new M5 especially when they have done so much to take the weight off.

I have noticed that there is an increasing desire here to see BMW fail because they are not following company A. Yet there is no acceptance to the fact that BMW conceive and develop its own ideas in relation to markets and customer without resorting to company A or company B's business model.
Yet still people say this is the reason why the company will fail with failing to take on board that the company is in fine financial health and adapting to the market and its trends with resorting to imitating another's ideas. And are expected to one of the first manufacturers to reach all legislation for EU/Cafe early.
Individuality is what makes BMW the worlds most admired car company, without that individuality we become a typical car company by following everybody else.

[Nordkeyz73]

Originally Posted by SCOTT26

I am sure that the alternatives M550d and M550e will offer Autonomous technology as per the regular 5er but I can understand why they do not want to introduce it on the new M5 especially when they have done so much to take the weight off.

I agree and am hoping this autonomous stuff is left out of M and even M Performance models (option only). On a side note, is it 550e or 550i? Still hoping for that V8...

[Cars are the new horse]

Originally Posted by SCOTT26

The problem is that in interviews market specific information is addressed to one particular market in general because they cannot give anything away at this time.
And that things are construed by the media to be determined as market specific when in fact it is not respective of other markets.

Are you suggesting, then, that there is still a possibility that the next M5/M6 may still have an AWD option or is that possibility foreclosed at this point?