# E60 M5 prototypes, 540hp at 10,000 rpm



## nate (Dec 24, 2001)

http://www.autocarmagazine.co.uk/news_article.asp?na_id=204209

:yikes:

Also notice the estate speculation. TD should save his pennies, who gives a crap about the eyebrows considering the performance?


----------



## mbr129 (Aug 23, 2002)

nate328Ci said:


> http://www.autocarmagazine.co.uk/news_article.asp?na_id=204209
> 
> :yikes:
> 
> Also notice the estate speculation. TD should save his pennies, who gives a crap about the eyebrows considering the performance?


 :yikes:

It sucks that the car is so damned ugly because it sounds awesome. Of course, with enough money one could change those hideous headlamps, but it will be hard to give it an a$$-reduction.


----------



## The HACK (Dec 19, 2001)

55,000 pounds? That's what, about $125,000 US for the brits market, which is notorious for charging about 1/3rd more than the U.S. market?

So the base price for the U.S. is about $88K? :yikes: Time to take out a 2nd mortgage on the house man.


----------



## Alex Baumann (Dec 19, 2001)

9,000 rpm, 10,000 rpm ..... 

I'm still amazed that they have been testing almost since half a year and they still have one year test schedule ahead.

I hope they won't make the mistakes they did on the M3.


----------



## nate (Dec 24, 2001)

The HACK said:


> 55,000 pounds? That's what, about $125,000 US for the brits market, which is notorious for charging about 1/3rd more than the U.S. market?
> 
> So the base price for the U.S. is about $88K? :yikes: Time to take out a 2nd mortgage on the house man.


 55K GBP is $91,923.30 USD at current exchange rates.


----------



## mbr129 (Aug 23, 2002)

nate328Ci said:


> 55K GBP is $91,923.30 USD at current exchange rates.


 :tsk: That is just crazy.


----------



## nate (Dec 24, 2001)

mbr129 said:


> :tsk: That is just crazy.


 Why?

British prices are generally higher though, and I bet they would sell every M5 made for that price...


----------



## Alex Baumann (Dec 19, 2001)

nate328Ci said:


> Why?
> 
> British prices are generally higher though, and I bet they would sell every M5 made for that price...


Agreed. I'm guessing that it will be low $80K in the USA.


----------



## mbr129 (Aug 23, 2002)

nate328Ci said:


> Why?
> 
> British prices are generally higher though, and I bet they would sell every M5 made for that price...


I guess if you are wealthy enough, anything is ok. You are right, that is not much more than the previous one was.

I still get nervous when I think that I spent 37K on my car. Maybe over the years I will get over it.


----------



## nate (Dec 24, 2001)

Alex Baumann said:


> Agreed. I'm guessing that it will be low $80K in the USA.


 That would be my guess, and I think that would be a very fair price.


----------



## nate (Dec 24, 2001)

mbr129 said:


> I guess if you are wealthy enough, anything is ok. You are right, that is not much more than the previous one was.
> 
> I still get nervous when I think that I spent 37K on my car. Maybe over the years I will get over it.


 There is a big difference between an M5 buyer and an E46 buyer.

For instance, I don't know anyone with an M5 that financed their car, including my father.


----------



## PhilH (Jun 7, 2002)

> All M5s have been manuals and so will the new car,' said our source.


 :thumbup:


----------



## mbr129 (Aug 23, 2002)

nate328Ci said:


> There is a big difference between an M5 buyer and an E46 buyer.
> 
> For instance, I don't know anyone with an M5 that financed their car, including my father.


I agree 100%. It wasn't a comment aimed at the pric eof the M5 per se, but rather at the concept of spending that much money on a car.

"I am just a poor boy, though my story..."  :angel:


----------



## Nick325xiT 5spd (Dec 24, 2001)

Remember that UK prices most liekly include the VAT which is 17.5%. The US price should be more like $78k. Still not cheap, but reasonable given the competition.


----------



## mbr129 (Aug 23, 2002)

Nick325xiT 5spd said:
 

> Remember that UK prices most liekly include the VAT which is 17.5%. The US price should be more like $78k. Still not cheap, but reasonable given the competition.


Right. That changes things. Because at 90K it would be 15K or so more expensive than an E55, although that stupid car has only an auto tranny. :tsk:


----------



## Kaz (Dec 21, 2001)

Heh, the 'five car.' Sorta like the new Viper, which was targeted at 500hp/500ftlb/500cid.

Its good to hear that it will NOT be SMG-only as it was earlier speculated.

And if it comes in under $85k, that slots between the S55 and E55AMG, I believe.

I wonder if a lip spoiler will make the 'Z4 hump' on the E65 less obvious...


----------



## Mr. The Edge (Dec 19, 2001)

PhilH said:


> :thumbup:


too bad they can't say that about M3's

:tsk:


----------



## Andre Yew (Jan 3, 2002)

540 HP at 10k RPM is almost a linear increase of power from 500 HP at 9k RPM. I wonder if this engine is also a race homologation for them to make it breathe so well at an RPM they're not going to use. Either that or they're making sure CAIs are really pointless on this engine. 

--Andre


----------



## rost12 (Dec 22, 2001)

Anyone else finds it strange that they didn't get an increase in torque at all? That's the beauty of the "old" M5, torque all over, and now the new one won't feel much different?

Also...with dinan headers, velocity stalks and exhaust S62 is at about 450bhp as it is, possibly more with software and CAI. The new engine only gets 50bhp more through extra 2 cylinders and 2000 rpms?

It's going to be an impressive (driving wise) package, no doubt, but those power increases seems ... well ... :dunno:


----------



## nate (Dec 24, 2001)

rost12 said:


> Anyone else finds it strange that they didn't get an increase in torque at all? That's the beauty of the "old" M5, torque all over, and now the new one won't feel much different?
> 
> Also...with dinan headers, velocity stalks and exhaust S62 is at about 450bhp as it is, possibly more with software and CAI. The new engine only gets 50bhp more through extra 2 cylinders and 2000 rpms?
> 
> It's going to be an impressive (driving wise) package, no doubt, but those power increases seems ... well ... :dunno:


 The new one will likely have more of an S54-like power delivery.

I hope it is lighter and not as numb as the E39...


----------



## Kaz (Dec 21, 2001)

Although there is the obvious tie-in to F1 (which IIRC will disappear as F1 engine regs will be changing soon) as well as the engineering reasoning behind a V-10, there is also a marketing perception thing as well.

I don't know if this is the case worldwide, but in the US, 'V8' means brute power, 'V12' connotates luxury, but V10 doesn't really have an identity except as 'Viper' or 'truck' in the US and 'F1' in other parts of the world. From a marketing standpoint (and you KNOW that is very important to the BMW of Helmut Panke) it's a favorable position to be in.


----------



## Kaz (Dec 21, 2001)

Andre Yew said:


> I've met some people who are impressed by the fact that some cars can go 80 MPH in second gear, come what may.
> 
> --Andre


Those people would say my car is a POS. Only does 53 in 2nd.


----------



## pdz (Nov 17, 2002)

andy_thomas said:


> Bear in mind that the engineering of the Gallardo is supported by the might of Volkswagen, the biggest car company in Europe. The Lambo's V10 is, apparently, hamstrung by very tall gearing. Make of that what you will!
> 
> I hope the next M5 is lighter than the outgoing 4,000 lb beast. The E39 M5 was, for me, disappointingly heavy; instead of outstripping the lighter E55 AMG of the day it struggled to beat it in a straight line, and was extremely heavy on brakes and tyres especially on a fast road/track (all versions, not just US). A 3,700lb car is still no lightweight, but it would be a welcome 300lb improvement.


so nice to have people who think alike around. 

but yes, on deeper thought, you boys are right. it's not just a boutique company, precisely. VW does foot the bill for that v10, but lambo still has developed the engine. i don't believe there is a v10 anywhere else in use in the VAG empire?

um......i think gearing has a fair bit to do with how cars at the track respond, but even with aggressive gearing, if you're waiting on the power or rpms to stay up or go up, you're losing something upon exit to cars with more torque, not just under the area of the curve, but also peaking lower in the power band.

Kaz: to your comment. all that i was saying, putting price aside, although, the gallardo isn't to be all that expensive, that if some second rate italian boutiqe carmaker can make a better v10 than BMW, who powers a F1 team, then there will be a lot of trouble given to bmw for going to all of this trouble to develop a road going M engine when it could have saved a fair bit by developing a v8 or making a badass v12.

that's all. this is fun. we're all speculating on a car still very much in testing on the 'ring.


----------



## andy_thomas (Oct 7, 2002)

Kaz said:


> Although there is the obvious tie-in to F1 (which IIRC will disappear as F1 engine regs will be changing soon) as well as the engineering reasoning behind a V-10, there is also a marketing perception thing as well.
> 
> I don't know if this is the case worldwide, but in the US, 'V8' means brute power, 'V12' connotates luxury, but V10 doesn't really have an identity except as 'Viper' or 'truck' in the US and 'F1' in other parts of the world. From a marketing standpoint (and you KNOW that is very important to the BMW of Helmut Panke) it's a favorable position to be in.


For all outside the US, V10 means F1 - to those who are interested.

No-one really knows what the Dodge Viper has under its hood, except that being an American car it's going to be more than five litres . Anyway you never see them, because Chrysler charges around £80,000 for them over here.

The only SUV with a V10 in it is the Touareg diesel. And that's a £60,000 VW, so the number of people buying it will be minimal.

In that anything can be "virtually unique" (it's either unique or it's not), the BMW's V10 will be "virtually unique" and is more likely to draw comparisons with the likes of the VW Gallardo.


----------



## andy_thomas (Oct 7, 2002)

pdz said:


> so nice to have people who think alike around.
> 
> but yes, on deeper thought, you boys are right. it's not just a boutique company, precisely. VW does foot the bill for that v10, but lambo still has developed the engine. i don't believe there is a v10 anywhere else in use in the VAG empire?


Diesel yes, but petrol no. The Gallardo's engine is bespoke. I wouldn't discount seeing it used in high-end Audi or VW sports cars in the future, though.


----------



## TGD (Aug 7, 2002)

*Gallardo V10*

There is a V8 used by Audi, Porsche and VW. The V10 is a development of that engine. Can someone check if the Gallardo V10 has common elements with the diesel V10?


----------



## Andre Yew (Jan 3, 2002)

Not sure about the architecture of the Gallardo V10 (which is indeed thought to be a development of the Audi V8), but I looked up some numbers for it: 493 HP at 7800 RPM, 376 foot-lbs at something like mid 3000s RPM with a 5-liter displacement, so the engine doesn't offer more in terms of paper specs than the rumored specs of the E60 M5 engine. The Gallardo also weighs 3300+ lbs, seats two, and costs twice as much as the M5 (US$150K+), and differs completely in its packaging than the M5 (mid-engined, rear gearbox, all-wheel drive, etc.). A comparison between the two is really silly, even if the engine paper specs were different.

--Andre


----------



## pdz (Nov 17, 2002)

Andre Yew said:


> Not sure about the architecture of the Gallardo V10 (which is indeed thought to be a development of the Audi V8), but I looked up some numbers for it: 493 HP at 7800 RPM, 376 foot-lbs at something like mid 3000s RPM with a 5-liter displacement, so the engine doesn't offer more in terms of paper specs than the rumored specs of the E60 M5 engine. The Gallardo also weighs 3300+ lbs, seats two, and costs twice as much as the M5 (US$150K+), and differs completely in its packaging than the M5 (mid-engined, rear gearbox, all-wheel drive, etc.). A comparison between the two is really silly, even if the engine paper specs were different.
> 
> --Andre


oh, i don't doubt that comparing the two cars is silly. but think like an automotive writer:

how many V10s are there in the US market?

i can think of the viper and the gallardo. whatever the specific output of the E60 M5 will be, it DEFINITELY will be compared to the other engines for specific output per litre as well as net power. there is no obvious comparison with the more in common with a truck engine than a car engine viper 8.0 litre v10, but italian exotica will be the standard and then BMW will be compared against it.

it's pretty predictable how the car review will go. i'm sure we could all write one and by now, the template is so well worn that we'd mostly all get it right.

'we were excited to get our hands on the all new M5. bmw purists have had to wait X years for this iteration of the car which has grown in dimension to X, Y, Z. more aluminum, slightly lighter than previous generation (e39) M5 which had a fantastic v8.

the looks of the new M5 polarize the editorial staff here at X magazine, but we agree that the aggressive bodywork enhance the new M5's styling........the engine is a v10 powerplant with a fairly distal relation to the powerplant that BMW has made for F1 racing........(insert some spinal tap reference here about "going to 11" or making "10 louder").....the two extra cylinders make their presence known....blah blah blah. compare this to the other V10s on the market......BMW has done its homework for the roadgoing market.....blah blah blah.

being lighter than the previous M5, this new M5 handles remarkably better, the steering feel, while it took our staff some time to get used to, is far better than the last generation M5. this car was unofficially timed at 8:15 on the famed nurburgring...........

.....stay tuned for an upcoming comparison between this car and MB's E55 AMG".


----------

