1033 hp M5, quarter mile in 9.41

[helden2000]

You are right about Porsche but you know that Turbo engines don`t last.Anyway,you could mount a turbo on your car at every dealer in the street`s corner.This is not a real job.What is the most powerful engine in the F1?The BMW.But the chassis and aerodynamics delivered by Williams turned out to be not so good.Anyway, when it comes to naturally aspirated engines,I personally respect BMW and Ferrari.They know how to handle the situation.You saw what happens when a BMW gets a turbine. Why should i spend $60,000 on a simple Carrera when i could buy the M3 CSL that is more beautiful and 10 years + technically advanced that the 911.Again, the Turbo is another story.Don`t you see what is happening these days?Mercedes noticed that they will not stand on the market with those stupid AMG engines(5,500 cm and 347 hp)old E55 AMG when the BMW M5 had 400 hp delivered from 5,000 cm.And we are talking about year 1998.So what they thought?Lets NOT THINK and grab some compressors and the job is easily done.We have more horsepowers than the BMW. I have 24 years old and i am driving BMW`s from the day that i had the license and i will not buy another car until they prove that they actually think for the customer.

[Speedster25]

Ferrari also gets the most out of natural aspiration engines. Just look at the Tipo 140 engine in the Enzo, its one of the gretest on Earth. But, with BMW I agree, just look at the McLaren F1, there is no turbo on either of these engines and they make 620 bhp. But helden you are wrong with Porsche. The engine in their Carrera GT is insane. Its a 5.7 liter V-10. And it creates 605 bhp, in a V-10! Compare that too a Viper engine which only makes 500 bhp and its 8.3l. Both the McLaren's and Ferrari engines are V-12's (Ferrari 5.998 liter, McLaren/BMW 6.064 liter to be specific).

[skyline_r34v]

Originally Posted by helden2000 You are right about Porsche but you know that Turbo engines don`t last.Anyway,you could mount a turbo on your car at every dealer in the street`s corner.This is not a real job.What is the most powerful engine in the F1?The BMW.But the chassis and aerodynamics delivered by Williams turned out to be not so good.Anyway, when it comes to naturally aspirated engines,I personally respect BMW and Ferrari.They know how to handle the situation.You saw what happens when a BMW gets a turbine. Why should i spend $60,000 on a simple Carrera when i could buy the M3 CSL that is more beautiful and 10 years + technically advanced that the 911.Again, the Turbo is another story.Don`t you see what is happening these days?Mercedes noticed that they will not stand on the market with those stupid AMG engines(5,500 cm and 347 hp)old E55 AMG when the BMW M5 had 400 hp delivered from 5,000 cm.And we are talking about year 1998.So what they thought?Lets NOT THINK and grab some compressors and the job is easily done.We have more horsepowers than the BMW. I have 24 years old and i am driving BMW`s from the day that i had the license and i will not buy another car until they prove that they actually think for the customer.

HOLY non-grammarized post, Batman!!!

[wEstSide]

I doubt he's from America, this forum is big in Germany right? Note the part where he says he's driven bimmers his whole life. Huge bias right there.

[helden2000]

Hello,

I am from Munich, Germany but i think i can handle english.Sorry for the mistakes.Anyway i think America is a great country but you can`t have all.The greatest cars are made in Europe you know.Again sorry for the possible grammar mistakes.

Regards

[bleh]

Originally Posted by helden2000 You are right about Porsche but you know that Turbo engines don`t last.

ummmm.. i rock out na but i know turbo engines last just as long as any other engine when thought out correctly.

dont worry about the grammar i understood. unfortunately, i tried translating "non-grammarized" and came up a tad short

[Thunf]

Originally Posted by helden2000 You are right about Porsche but you know that Turbo engines don`t last.Anyway,you could mount a turbo on your car at every dealer in the street`s corner.This is not a real job.What is the most powerful engine in the F1?The BMW. But the chassis and aerodynamics delivered by Williams turned out to be not so good

Actually it's the BAR Honda nowadays, and that is by far the most powerful. Mercedes was said to have similar power as BMW the last few races of the season.

Originally Posted by helden2000 Anyway, when it comes to naturally aspirated engines,I personally respect BMW and Ferrari.They know how to handle the situation.You saw what happens when a BMW gets a turbine. Why should i spend $60,000 on a simple Carrera when i could buy the M3 CSL that is more beautiful and 10 years + technically advanced that the 911.

Yes and for how long will we see this turbine BMW? It's one thing to design an engine ready for all types of customers and have it lasting, than having this much power a year or two.
The Carrerra is allot cheaper than a BMW M3 CSL.

Originally Posted by helden2000 Again, the Turbo is another story.Don`t you see what is happening these days?Mercedes noticed that they will not stand on the market with those stupid AMG engines(5,500 cm and 347 hp)old E55 AMG when the BMW M5 had 400 hp delivered from 5,000 cm.And we are talking about year 1998.So what they thought?

They are designed to have instant power, that is MB philosophy.

Originally Posted by helden2000 Lets NOT THINK and grab some compressors and the job is easily done.We have more horsepowers than the BMW. I have 24 years old and i am driving BMW`s from the day that i had the license and i will not buy another car until they prove that they actually think for the customer.

I see you don't care much in other brands than your own. That's like tifosies, they don't care if their Ferrari wound't even start - it's a Ferrari so they must be best? right?
Easily done? Come on. Putting a compressor on is in your way of thinking just bad. It's just simple to put a compressor, right?

Look at this please.
E60 M5, CO2 emissions: 357 g/km
E55 AMG Komp., CO2 emissions: 276 g/km

E60 M5, 12.38 l/100 km
E55 AMG kompressor, 9.562 l/100 km

I don't say any of these engines are bad, it's just that you shouldn't bash AMG when you don't know the whole story. Isn't it fantastic with an engine with 700 NM and 476 hp to be this efficient? I think AMG and Mercedes have made a helluva job. It's made to last, it's doesn't rev much - everything is made on purpose. Who says you must take everything out of a small displacement? BMW made an engine that was 55 hp/ litre! they didn't push it there, did they? And that year was 2000+.
So they must be bad now because like you said about AMG, BMW was unable to push more out of it.

[LateNightCable]

Originally Posted by Thunf Yes and for how long will we see this turbine BMW? It's one thing to design an engine ready for all types of customers and have it lasting, than having this much power a year or two. The Carrerra is allot cheaper than a BMW M3 CSL.

It might be helpful to have a look at the products of Alpina. These are built to last. - www.alpina.de

They are designed to have instant power, that is MB philosophy.

Everone wants instant power. And it's not hard to get with a decently sized engine.

I have yet to see any official ratings for the E60 M5, but the E55 is hardly efficient by any means. With a combined milage rating of 17 mpg. And when it comes to greenhouse emissions, it's pretty bad. In fact the E55 AMG wagon is on the EPA list of 9 Least Fuel Efficient cars. And about BMW engines, not everyone is tuned for maximum power, no one's are.

[thepolarfoxqx]

fleet wide, BMW's average gas mileage is better. Let's do some comparisons, shall we?

These are all 2005 model year BTW:

760li: 18/26 - 73hp/l
S600: 12/19 - 89 hp/l - turbocharged
Hmm, so the BMW get's 50% better mileage in town than the merc.

745i: 18/26 - 74hp/l
S500: 16/24 - 60.4hp/l

Keep in mind, the merc has an extra gear.

530i: 20/30 - 75hp/l
E320: 20/28 - 67hp/l

M3: 16/24 - 104hp/l
C55 16/22 - 67hp/l

Engine effeciency and design has been a BMW hallmark. If mercedes can make one with more brute force, that is their style, BMW has always made more sophisticated and efficient motors. Both are good, but trust me, plenty of BMW engines are about instant thrust.

[Thunf]

Originally Posted by LateNightCable I have yet to see any official ratings for the E60 M5, but the E55 is hardly efficient by any means. With a combined milage rating of 17 mpg. And when it comes to greenhouse emissions, it's pretty bad. In fact the E55 AMG wagon is on the EPA list of 9 Least Fuel Efficient cars. And about BMW engines, not everyone is tuned for maximum power, no one's are.

Ok, not maximum, but more in that direction than the other.

17 mpg it says 21.9mpg (combined) in some places.
And welcome to the list E60 M5. 9 least fuel efficient cars / power is a completely different thing. There aren't many 1700+ kg sedans or saloons offered with 450 + hp out there. So somebody has to get on the list.

shall we compare the mighty ///M with ///AMG older versions ala 98'?
E55: 17/24
M5: 13/21

Thing is that I was defending AMG. I've yet to see some of the ordinary cars get more efficient. I know MB have badder areas. But so have BMW, I don't appreciate people who claims nothing is good on a MB because of the power/ displacement isn't good enough. How about safety? The new 5 series got 3 stars in EuroNCAP before they revised it, so now they have 4. And looking at the interior quality of some of them they have definately not staked in that area as well. So bash on MB, I can bash BMW. Everything they do isn't right, is it?