Volvo VS new M5

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RJ's325ITS

Ok this will be very hard for you to understand but BMW are known to do a lot w/ so little power.... my friend's M3 w/ 215rwtq tags a long w/a 370+whp SR-T 4..... I taged a long with a 600whp+ porsche in the turns on pump gas that's only 340rwtq.

There is more that meets the eye. Like engine to tranny efficiency, tq curve and aerodynamics... In all the above the M5 chassis has proven superior by taging a long with a Gallardo. And the M5 power plant has shown that in a stock form has a lot to give, imagine when you fine tune the DME for raw power and not gas efficiency nor driveability.. add to the equation some aggresive cams and open exhaust and then you get the ultimate sedan.

By the way E60 M5 dyno at 424whp 311wtq vs a 510 car I think is ok to lose by a car...

---

I completly understand what you are saying. BMW's are great and they do ALOT wih not as hp as other cars, but it still dosesn't make sense to me that a stock m5 would beat a 600 WHP porsche. When I see a video then I will believe it.

And talking about HP in the twisties makes no sense. I LITERALLY destroyed (he crashed inta a tree trying to keep up) a supercharged e36 M3 in the twisties, and I had a basically stock honda. Does that mean my car is faster?? nope, it just means that on that day, I out drove him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nick

And talking about HP in the twisties makes no sense. I LITERALLY destroyed (he crashed inta a tree trying to keep up) a supercharged e36 M3 in the twisties, and I had a basically stock honda. Does that mean my car is faster?? nope, it just means that on that day, I out drove him.

---

you are totally right about this one. Once you step out of the straight line in to a course with a couple of turns. The factors multiply and one of those faactors is the "driver factor".

If we put a roadcar w/ 300whp race ready next to a 700whp muscle car... and then we put a stupid driver in the racecar and an F1 driver in the muscle car, we will get the same results; the racecar will end up on the wall and the muscle car will make it to the end very slow but will make it.

That is the magic of racing in a course or "twisties" like you call it. It's 1000x more fun since it's not about stupid raw power... it's about the right amount of power and how well you used it.

IMO I'm glad that some people in here understands the different comcepts of racing like you :goodjob:.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RJ's325ITS

you are totally right about this one. Once you step out of the straight line in to a course with a couple of turns. The factors multiply and one of those faactors is the "driver factor".

If we put a roadcar w/ 300whp race ready next to a 700whp muscle car... and then we put a stupid driver in the racecar and an F1 driver in the muscle car, we will get the same results; the racecar will end up on the wall and the muscle car will make it to the end very slow but will make it.

That is the magic of racing in a course or "twisties" like you call it. It's 1000x more fun since it's not about stupid raw power... it's about the right amount of power and how well you used it.

IMO I'm glad that some people in here understands the different comcepts of racing like you :goodjob:.

---

not only that but the feeling you get when you power out of turns just enough to break the rear end loose just so... not too much to lose control though. And with a good harness, pulling a full G and being plated in the seat. No drag race can compare.

in car and driver they recorded the new M5 0-60 in 4.2..and had top speed of 175(limited)but taken off it will go 200mph..i saw one on 75 that was black and was turboed,shit sounded good.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HypnoToad

in car and driver they recorded the new M5 0-60 in 4.2..and had top speed of 175(limited)but taken off it will go 200mph..i saw one on 75 that was black and was turboed,shit sounded good.

---

Gtech says I am 0-60 in ... not going to tell but slightly faster than the M5. I do have an APC muffler though and the M5's muffler was stock.


Gtech was right in line with factory claims when stock and 1/4 times right in line with track slips.

G-tech Lmmfao

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fred Sanford

G-tech Lmmfao

---

I tell you I have a APC muffler... and you Lmmfao at the G-tech?:???:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by R_Rated

I tell you I have a APC muffler... and you Lmmfao at the G-tech?:???:

---

Well I know APC is a joke, but you seem to really believe the G-tech is accurate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fred Sanford

Well I know APC is a joke, but you seem to really believe the G-tech is accurate.

---

We got this frase that we used in the pit lane.. some data beats no data...

G-Tech might not be the most accurate but is data and any data acquisition on the level of racing we chat about in here is priceless. Besisdes that I remember one open track day at RA, when a guy I know was having problems with his GPS data acquisition system and I had to look up a AMB transponder for him... once again good for lap times only, but better some data that no data at all:goodjob:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fred Sanford

Well I know APC is a joke, but you seem to really believe the G-tech is accurate.

---

so every magazine that has tested them and said they are right on is wrong? And after ... about 50 some 1/4 mile passes on a track and mine being scary close... all 50+ times were flukes? Just because you heard something from a freind who heard...

they ARE accurate IF you use them right. I do have dynos and timeslips to validate though. But more importantly, they are consistent. So, the way dynos are MEANT to be used... as a tuning tool; the Gtech works great for this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by R_Rated

so every magazine that has tested them and said they are right on is wrong? And after ... about 50 some 1/4 mile passes on a track and mine being scary close... all 50+ times were flukes? Just because you heard something from a freind who heard...

they ARE accurate IF you use them right. I do have dynos and timeslips to validate though. But more importantly, they are consistent. So, the way dynos are MEANT to be used... as a tuning tool; the Gtech works great for this.

---

Magazine racing are we? Scary close doesn't mean it's right. I could probably watch a car run the 1/4 and come as close as a G-tech. I know guys at the track who can do that and come scary close.
I stand by my opinion, G-tech is trash.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fred Sanford

Magazine racing are we?......

I stand by my opinion, G-tech is trash.

---

isn;t that what everyone on this forum has done when they "judge" what a volvo R can do?

and your statement about the Gtech is pretty ignorant... If I set my Gtech right then it is right on par with the track timer... on SEVERAL tracks... and again, 50 times consecutively... before you share your expertise about Gtech, you should use one. then you can speak based on experience not out your asshole.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by R_Rated

isn;t that what everyone on this forum has done when they "judge" what a volvo R can do?

and your statement about the Gtech is pretty ignorant... If I set my Gtech right then it is right on par with the track timer... on SEVERAL tracks... and again, 50 times consecutively... before you share your expertise about Gtech, you should use one. then you can speak based on experience not out your asshole.

---

Some of us actually know things about cars and aren't quick to label them all as slow or fast.
As for G-tech.....I have used one you retarded cockpuffer. I've also used the new Dashhawk. Neither are anything more than toys. Though I will admit Dashhawk is actually useful to monitor some engine parameters and is a lot easier than toting a laptop.

*off topic* but khan351 you got your 40 bucks back from Boris yet??? :)