Close

Results 1 to 18 of 18
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,669
    Rep Points
    31,505.9
    Mentioned
    2062 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316


    Reputation: Yes | No

    Is the new F10 M5 with the twin turbo S63tu V8 under rated? PP-P performance says the car puts out 573 horses

    PP-P Performance put up a dyno vide of the new F10 M5 on their dyno dynamics. The car put down 444 horsepower to the wheels (we are trying to get the graph) and PP-P based on their baseline corrected this out to 573 horsepower. Is the M5 putting out more than the 560 horsepower BMW rated it at? We would think it pretty much has to as the X5M with all wheel drive, less boost, and lower compression is rated at 555 horsepower. The F10 M5 routing its power to the rear wheels through a more efficient dual clutch drivetrain with more boost is likely much stronger. This dyno run is just the first solid evidence we have to prove it.

    Also, keep in mind that BMW is underrating their turbo M cars quite heavily. Just take a look at the BMW 1M dyno results for confirmation: http://www.bimmerboost.com/content.p...eel-horsepower

    Click here to enlarge


  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    1,040
    Rep Points
    938.4
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    10


    Reputation: Yes | No
    So are you saying it's only underrated by 13hp? Kind of a disappointment as people were guessing the whp was going to be closer to BMW's crank figures. Although, does it really matter because the M5 spanks the competition, not only on the track but in a straight line.
    ​#Chuckstrong

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,669
    Rep Points
    31,505.9
    Mentioned
    2062 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by KB Click here to enlarge
    So are you saying it's only underrated by 13hp? Kind of a disappointment as people were guessing the whp was going to be closer to BMW's crank figures. Although, does it really matter because the M5 spanks the competition, not only on the track but in a straight line.
    No, I'm saying this is the first solid evidence of it being underrated. By how much I don't know I'm simply stating it is.

    It will take more data for any solid conclusion.

    The WHP is on a dyno dynamics as mentioned, keep that in mind.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    1,040
    Rep Points
    938.4
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    10


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    No, I'm saying this is the first solid evidence of it being underrated. By how much I don't know I'm simply stating it is.

    It will take more data for any solid conclusion.

    The WHP is on a dyno dynamics as mentioned, keep that in mind.
    I'm not familiar with that dyno, does it read low? All I really know of is the Mustang is the heartbreaker and the Dynojet gives ya the boner.
    ​#Chuckstrong

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    1,888
    Rep Points
    1,422.5
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    15


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by KB Click here to enlarge
    So are you saying it's only underrated by 13hp? Kind of a disappointment as people were guessing the whp was going to be closer to BMW's crank figures. Although, does it really matter because the M5 spanks the competition, not only on the track but in a straight line.
    Spanks? This comparo says otherwise: http://f10.5post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=594332

    I'll take the E63 with the twin turbo 5.5L. Only a tenth slower 0-60 according to Car and Driver, 3.8 vs 3.7 for the M5. But the E63 now weighs less and has been reported to have better handling/steering feel. The extra displacement doesn't hurt. Oh and it sounds way better.


  6. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    1,040
    Rep Points
    938.4
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    10


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by M3_WC Click here to enlarge
    Spanks? This comparo says otherwise: http://f10.5post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=594332

    I'll take the E63 with the twin turbo 5.5L. Only a tenth slower 0-60 according to Car and Driver, 3.8 vs 3.7 for the M5. But the E63 now weighs less and has been reported to have better handling/steering feel. The extra displacement doesn't hurt. Oh and it sounds way better.
    Yes, Spanks! Straight line or track...you go ahead with the one that sounds better. http://f10.5post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=620186
    ​#Chuckstrong

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    1,040
    Rep Points
    938.4
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    10


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by M3_WC Click here to enlarge
    Spanks? This comparo says otherwise: http://f10.5post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=594332

    I'll take the E63 with the twin turbo 5.5L. Only a tenth slower 0-60 according to Car and Driver, 3.8 vs 3.7 for the M5. But the E63 now weighs less and has been reported to have better handling/steering feel. The extra displacement doesn't hurt. Oh and it sounds way better.
    Plus, the header said for 364 days a year, the M5 is better....after that, I got bored by how boring looking the Merc is...so I stopped reading....what day was the one day, that the amg was better?
    ​#Chuckstrong

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    1,888
    Rep Points
    1,422.5
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    15


    Reputation: Yes | No
    You said spanks.

    But in the comparo the Benz has better numbers and lost the comparo.

    And the M5 is a fat heavy pig.
    Last edited by M3_WC; 12-11-2011 at 03:26 AM.


  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    1,888
    Rep Points
    1,422.5
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    15


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by KB Click here to enlarge
    Plus, the header said for 364 days a year, the M5 is better....after that, I got bored by how boring looking the Merc is...so I stopped reading....what day was the one day, that the amg was better?
    Comparo also says this.

    What's not in doubt is the extra handling percision of the Mercedes, or the greater sense of agility it displays when you really start to lean on it through a quick corner.


  10. #10
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    1,040
    Rep Points
    938.4
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    10


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by M3_WC Click here to enlarge
    Comparo also says this.
    Dude, get over it, the M5 beats the Merc....read the times and the last sentence of the comparo...
    ​#Chuckstrong

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,669
    Rep Points
    31,505.9
    Mentioned
    2062 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by KB Click here to enlarge
    I'm not familiar with that dyno, does it read low? All I really know of is the Mustang is the heartbreaker and the Dynojet gives ya the boner.
    If the Mustang breaks your heart the Dyno Dynamics puts a rusty knife through it.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    1,385
    Rep Points
    375.4
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    4


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    If the Mustang breaks your heart the Dyno Dynamics puts a rusty knife through it.
    THIS. I guarantee if you put that same car on a dynojet your getting 30+whp.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Romania
    Posts
    79
    Rep Points
    98.1
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    1 out of 1 members liked this post. Reputation: Yes | No
    Here is the Dyno :

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,669
    Rep Points
    31,505.9
    Mentioned
    2062 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by bogdan_mb Click here to enlarge
    Here is the Dyno :
    Bogdan, I removed the attachment as I'm writing up a mini-article and don't want anyone to steal the dyno that PP-P sent me.

    Thanks for putting it up my man but I want to make sure BB gets full credit for it Click here to enlarge

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Romania
    Posts
    79
    Rep Points
    98.1
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Good idea Click here to enlarge
    - 09 - SLK 350 - AMG PKG -

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    819
    Rep Points
    759.6
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    8


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by M3_WC Click here to enlarge
    You said spanks.

    But in the comparo the Benz has better numbers and lost the comparo.

    And the M5 is a fat heavy pig.
    AND, has to have an exhaust soundtrack piped inside the cabin because it is so insulated!

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    58
    Rep Points
    58.6
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Reputation: Yes | No
    What that dyno done in 6th? That pull took way longer than it should have.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,669
    Rep Points
    31,505.9
    Mentioned
    2062 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    316



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Bimmerbear Click here to enlarge
    What that dyno done in 6th? That pull took way longer than it should have.
    Pull may have been longer due to dyno load as well.

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •