[Wolfman64]

Originally Posted by vtknight

Again - I am trying to stick to facts as opposed to bias. I recognize you are a MB guy - that is clear from your Avatar description and posts.

Here's why:

You state you are "surprised" the base 600 HP 533 lb ft F90 M5 did not have a larger difference in performance when compared to the 604 HP, 627 lb ft AMG E63...S? I will have to go ahead and ask you why not - factually please. By all accounts, as the general rule, each 10 lbs of weight is equal to a 1 HP difference, therefore the 250 lb difference is ~25 HP. The Merc is up nearly 100 ft lbs of torque however.

As to your point about equalizing the race - no - as they are completely different cars, with different outputs, chassis's and tunes - there are million of things different between the two cars. Tires however - the PS4's - which the F90 can come with - they are not aftermarket - is something that can and should be equalized in a comparison test - and it is something that makes a significant performance difference for ANY car. If BMW - in their wisdom - provide Pirelli tires ONLY for the F90 in the UK - as according to Goonba, they are so perfectly suited for the UK environment - while Mercedes - somehow in their infinite lack of wisdom it would seem having obviously missed this "well-known" information, chooses the Michelin PS4's (yet somehow getting much improved performance despite their apparent "inferiority" compared to the Pirelli's) there is not much I can say. For UK owners anyway.

So - Yes - if you live in the UK - Maybe give your BMW Rep a call. Swap your crappy Pirelli tires as your first mod and get what we have here in North America - from the BMW factory - and you will go from losing to the more powerful and higher tier E63S by one tenth of a second on a short, tight road course, where tires literally matter most, to beating the more powerful, higher tier E63S by a full SECOND.

Fairly clear to me. Objectively.

No brand bias here. Had BMW's, have MB's, looking at the M8 when out...

That said, I find your focus on the tire brand a bit overblown given how different the cars are. Not just weight and torque (as you stated) but also the AWD setup, torque delivery and the real engine output which varies significantly from the published numbers.

AMG's in the US are also randomly delivered with P-Zeros...

[jc05e46m3]

Can you spot the fanboys?

[Phatcat]

Guys perhaps what we need is M5's with Michelin and Pirellis on test and see what are the differences between them.

Some of us assumes the Michelins will be much faster but is it actually the case?

[bm323]

Originally Posted by Goonba

The M5 is on Pirelli PZ4s, which is the supplied tyre in the UK. The reason being is that in colder/slippery conditions (aka the UK) the tyre performs better (google some reviews). It has less road noise and leads to better fuel consumption (which in the UK is more important). They also come standard on the E63.

Originally Posted by gmd2003

Actually the M5 in the Autozung test was on Pzero..... the new PZ4 is a faster tire and has pretty impressive grip , they came on my Turbo S and hands down they are softer/ faster AND less durable compound more temp finicky tire than the Michelin 4s or PSS . They do not however perform well in the cold , mine become bricks below 55 degrees .

and

"After all, both the Pirelli P Zeros (BMW: 275/35 ZR20, 285/35 ZR20) and the Continental SportContacts (Mercedes: 265/35 ZR20, 295/30 ZR20) need a hot, grippy surface to demonstrate their superglue talents. That’s grippy and hot like at the Autodromo do Estoril where you can brake car lengths later and step back on the gas seconds earlier than on the winding E10-1 public highway. According to the official data sheets, the E63 S weighs 1880 kilos and is thus only a token 25 kilos heavier than the new M5. Yet first impressions after a couple of spirited laps reveal that the all-in BMW does indeed feel a tad lighter and thus a tick more agile than the fully loaded Mercedes-AMG."

https://www.carmagazine.co.uk/car-re...n-test-review/

[vtknight]

Originally Posted by Wolfman64

No brand bias here. Had BMW's, have MB's, looking at the M8 when out...

That said, I find your focus on the tire brand a bit overblown given how different the cars are. Not just weight and torque (as you stated) but also the AWD setup, torque delivery and the real engine output which varies significantly from the published numbers.

AMG's in the US are also randomly delivered with P-Zeros...

Both cars vary significantly from advertised numbers. Racing is math and the bill always come due - the best combination of power, weight, traction and aero win - driver being equal.

Again - I stated the same thing above. My point is simple - tires are both something that can be controlled to rule out their affect and are critical to (especially) a smaller, tight road course. In testing is best not to increase variables - but to decrease them. Therefore we can best see which setup - the E63S or the M5 - is superior.

[vtknight]

Originally Posted by Phatcat

Guys perhaps what we need is M5's with Michelin and Pirellis on test and see what are the differences between them.

Some of us assumes the Michelins will be much faster but is it actually the case?

I can only go by the testing I have seen - and in most cases - the PS4 shod cars have been consistently better. From personal experience I can also state that the Michelin's have been better than Pirelli tires - depending on the tire and application.

[vtknight]

Originally Posted by jc05e46m3

Can you spot the fanboys?

Not as easily as those who don't have BMW's and have a gripe to share.

I welcome anyone to highlight where my bias is showing. I have and still do discuss my cars weaknesses at length. In fact - for my first GM car - a C7Z I helped to get GM to "fix" their heat soak issue (they didn't) and took major flaming from the extremely devout Corvette community for almost a year - until they saw the facts (and class action lawsuits) for what it was. The C7 platform in general - under-performed and is only now - through modding (and maybe the C7 ZR1) - starting to show its potential almost 5 years later. That is the way it goes sometimes with the cars we buy.

Me getting a BMW - after my last E63S - holds no brand loyalty. Right now it is the superior performing car. Not by much - but it is - straight line and definitely on a road course. Most tests have confirmed this. I will likely near never road course my car - but it doesn't change that fact. They are both solid performers and have insane performance for what they are; luxury GT cruisers.

[Phatcat]

Originally Posted by bm323

and

"After all, both the Pirelli P Zeros (BMW: 275/35 ZR20, 285/35 ZR20) and the Continental SportContacts (Mercedes: 265/35 ZR20, 295/30 ZR20) need a hot, grippy surface to demonstrate their superglue talents. That's grippy and hot like at the Autodromo do Estoril where you can brake car lengths later and step back on the gas seconds earlier than on the winding E10-1 public highway. According to the official data sheets, the E63 S weighs 1880 kilos and is thus only a token 25 kilos heavier than the new M5. Yet first impressions after a couple of spirited laps reveal that the all-in BMW does indeed feel a tad lighter and thus a tick more agile than the fully loaded Mercedes-AMG."

https://www.carmagazine.co.uk/car-re...n-test-review/

Both SA and Auto Zeitung's actual weighting of the car shows the M5 is over 100kg lighter.

[Goonba]

Thanks to Ferrari we all know the press car vs. customer car reality.

My only gripe is that now the first non-press numbers are being mentioned, they are definitely not C&D numbers.

At this moment the only properly filmed races (track and drag) we have are Auto Express and CarWow. I'm ignoring the South African one as, just like you mention, they don't actually mention any of the variables - no distance, time, speed, dash shots, seems like the guy is shifting manually, jumping starts etc. etc. CarWow is a dealership comparison website, when they take cars on the drag in UK, they take customer/dealer cars.

Secondly, the Sochi F1 customer day thing is the first event that I know of (maybe there was one in US) where it isn't strictly press focused. There the feedback was underwhelming about the engine and breaks, and people were pissed off that BMW banned VBoxs ahahah. The one VBox time they did allow was pretty poor and pretty much matches the CarWow time.

With the E63s it was the opposite, the first customer cars were pulling 2.9s to 60 (or 3.1 to 100km/h), consistently. This made me respect AMG a bit more (I used to think only drug dealers and arms dealers had AMGs).

[bm323]

Originally Posted by Goonba

Thanks to Ferrari we all know the press car vs. customer car reality.

My only gripe is that now the first non-press numbers are being mentioned, they are definitely not C&D numbers.

At this moment the only properly filmed races (track and drag) we have are Auto Express and CarWow. I'm ignoring the South African one as, just like you mention, they don't actually mention any of the variables - no distance, time, speed, dash shots, seems like the guy is shifting manually, jumping starts etc. etc. CarWow is a dealership comparison website, when they take cars on the drag in UK, they take customer/dealer cars.

Secondly, the Sochi F1 customer day thing is the first event that I know of (maybe there was one in US) where it isn't strictly press focused. There the feedback was underwhelming about the engine and breaks, and people were pissed off that BMW banned VBoxs ahahah. The one VBox time they did allow was pretty poor and pretty much matches the CarWow time.

With the E63s it was the opposite, the first customer cars were pulling 2.9s to 60 (or 3.1 to 100km/h), consistently. This made me respect AMG a bit more (I used to think only drug dealers and arms dealers had AMGs).

You're the man, the big boss who can disregard all reviews from Germany, UK and US which consider the F90 the better car

C & D's acceleration numbers for cars incl AMGs are quicker, this you should know.

Btw, the highlighted portion of your post above makes me wonder ... How about posting a photo of your E63S outside your home so that we can admire it

[Goonba]

Originally Posted by bm323

You're the man, the big boss who can disregard all reviews from Germany, UK and US which consider the F90 the better car

C & D's acceleration numbers for cars incl AMGs are quicker, this you should know.

Btw, the highlighted portion of your post above makes me wonder ... How about posting a photo of your E63S outside your home so that we can admire it

Yes, I guess you're the type to 100% agree with all hotel, restaurant, exhibition etc. reviews in magazines as well. Personally, I would read TripAdvisor to look at CUSTOMER opinions, but hell I must be the only person to trust a website like that when "GQ says otherwise".

I would happily share a photo of my car if it weren't for a completely unique "paint job" from which you can find out about my whole life.

[Goonba]

For those that complain about tyres:

http://www.evo.co.uk/volkswagen/golf...-test/page/0/6

The new PZ4s were the fastest around wet and dry circuits. So BMW UK do seems to know a thing or two.

[elitex]

AMG's are God's gift to mankind. There. Mission accomplished. You made us see the light....

[onfireX5]

Originally Posted by elitex

AMG's are God's gift to mankind. There. Mission accomplished. You made us see the light....

My Dealer is a Porsche, Merc and BMW combo Dealership. Guess I'll go back and trade UP on the 63 he has sitting.

[RPiM5]

How many times does the E63S have to beat the F90 in order for people to really accept it? Maybe as many as it takes to get to the center of a tootsie pop? E63S is a beast. Never have been an AMG fan but I'm drinking this new Kool Aid and it's good.

[bm323]

Originally Posted by Goonba

For those that complain about tyres:

http://www.evo.co.uk/volkswagen/golf...-test/page/0/6

The new PZ4s were the fastest around wet and dry circuits. So BMW UK do seems to know a thing or two.

Good find on the link, now see the details

http://www.tyrereviews.co.uk/Article...-Tyre-Test.htm where the difference in dry braking was 0.1m (35.3 m for the Pirelli) and PS4S was overall the top tyre. See the wet braking and difference in handling too.

Now, see also Sport Auto's test

http://www.tyrereviews.co.uk/Article...-Tyre-Test.htm

and what they said "Dry braking is a key advantage for track day tyres, which have a softer compound and less tread pattern to increase the tyres contact patch with the road."

Here, the PS4S performed better substantially better for dry braking 34.4m vs 35.2m and was the overall top tyre. See the wet braking and difference in handling too.

ps btw, you do recall your initial point was that the Pirelli performed better in the cold

[bm323]

Originally Posted by Goonba

I would happily share a photo of my car if it weren't for a completely unique "paint job" from which you can find out about my whole life.

Wow, either you have the most unique 1 of a kind car on this planet or ...

[Goonba]

Originally Posted by bm323

Good find on the link, now see the details

http://www.tyrereviews.co.uk/Article...-Tyre-Test.htm where the difference in dry braking was 0.1m (35.3 m for the Pirelli) and PS4S was overall the top tyre. See the wet braking and difference in handling too.

Now, see also Sport Auto's test

http://www.tyrereviews.co.uk/Article...-Tyre-Test.htm

and what they said "Dry braking is a key advantage for track day tyres, which have a softer compound and less tread pattern to increase the tyres contact patch with the road."

Here, the PS4S performed better substantially better for dry braking 34.4m vs 35.2m and was the overall top tyre. See the wet braking and difference in handling too.

ps btw, you do recall your initial point was that the Pirelli performed better in the cold

You are a bit weird.

"Fastest around the lap was the Pirelli, in 84.13sec, just over a second faster than the second-placed Michelin (85.27sec). They both felt grippy and exploitable, but subjectively the Michelin was preferred. It offered lots of grip and tactile feedback, letting you know how hard you were pushing. You could be accurate with it, turn-in was crisp and the rear would swing because the front was so hooked up. The Pirelli gave a less complete performance, feeling distinctly average in a straight line but great when turning. The rear was loose but the front found the mid-corner traction to pull the car out of corners like no other. Uncanny. Not the best feel but undeniably effective."

"Unusually, the same tyre sets the pace in the dry as it did in the wet – the Pirelli. And, as in the wet, the second-placed tyre, the Michelin, felt better to drive. It gave the best steering feel – sharp, connected, direct – and although there was some adjustability it wasn’t needed because it turned in so well, held the line and took power early. It gets the best out of the Golf and is quiet, too. The Pirelli does everything the Michelin does – finds every apex, hugs the line, drives out of turns well and isn’t noisy – but is let down by dulling the steering and being less engaging."

Yes, I did say the tyres perform better in cold/moist because that is what I read. Now, low and behold the Pirelli performed over a second faster in the wet than the Michelin.

And in the dry.....0.14s. So yes, it seems like on a circuit they are faster.

They also out stopped the Michelin by a whole.......10cm

The Michelins won the comparison simply because they got a higher score in aquaplaning and for steering feel (which the M5 lacks anyway).

[Goonba]

Originally Posted by bm323

Wow, either you have the most unique 1 of a kind car on this planet or ...

You would be very surprised.

[bm323]

Originally Posted by Goonba

You are a bit weird.

"Fastest around the lap was the Pirelli, in 84.13sec, just over a second faster than the second-placed Michelin (85.27sec). They both felt grippy and exploitable, but subjectively the Michelin was preferred. It offered lots of grip and tactile feedback, letting you know how hard you were pushing. You could be accurate with it, turn-in was crisp and the rear would swing because the front was so hooked up. The Pirelli gave a less complete performance, feeling distinctly average in a straight line but great when turning. The rear was loose but the front found the mid-corner traction to pull the car out of corners like no other. Uncanny. Not the best feel but undeniably effective."

"Unusually, the same tyre sets the pace in the dry as it did in the wet – the Pirelli. And, as in the wet, the second-placed tyre, the Michelin, felt better to drive. It gave the best steering feel – sharp, connected, direct – and although there was some adjustability it wasn’t needed because it turned in so well, held the line and took power early. It gets the best out of the Golf and is quiet, too. The Pirelli does everything the Michelin does – finds every apex, hugs the line, drives out of turns well and isn’t noisy – but is let down by dulling the steering and being less engaging."

Yes, I did say the tyres perform better in cold/moist because that is what I read. Now, low and behold the Pirelli performed over a second faster in the wet than the Michelin.

And in the dry.....0.14s. So yes, it seems like on a circuit they are faster.

They also out stopped the Michelin by a whole.......10cm

The Michelins won the comparison simply because they got a higher score in aquaplaning and for steering feel (which the M5 lacks anyway).

The difference is minimal based on Evo's and you are disregarding SportAuto's review which shows a substantial difference compared to Evo's.

So now you are just talking about performance in the wet, not in the cold. Well, Sport Auto states that the Michelin beats the Pirelli in both wet handling and wet braking.

Btw, I'm not surprised you likely don't own a E63S; a fanboy of the E63S yes, owner of a Merc yes

[Wolfman64]

Originally Posted by Goonba

You would be very surprised.

Seriously? You can't be on a car forum and not be willing to share a pic of your ride.

Now I like to see it too

[vtknight]

Originally Posted by Goonba

For those that complain about tyres:

http://www.evo.co.uk/volkswagen/golf...-test/page/0/6

The new PZ4s were the fastest around wet and dry circuits. So BMW UK do seems to know a thing or two.

I wonder why Mercedes UK isn't choosing to use them? Hmm.