E39 M5 vs Dinan S2 vs E60 M5 power curves - Page 2

digger · 28th June 2004, 15:04

How does the S2 compare to an e55 or RS6?
1700kg or below would help. The 545i is at 1640kg and the e39 m5 was about 40kg above e39 540i at 1790kg.

Cheers

bernhtp · 28th June 2004, 15:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by rsteele

I would personally prefer that the E60 had the power curves of the S2 engine.

I'm happier with the more powerful E60 engine that will go faster when I want it to. I'm not concerned with available power when the engine is loafing as I am not adverse to go from loafing to screaming when the occasion arises. The new SMG technology appears to accomodate this.

The E55 engine has more low-end grunt than the S2 engine but I don't want that one either. I like the direction and design philosophy of BMW M on this one.

Speaking of the S2, the results posted here do not appear representative of many others. I have seen lots of complaints on the E39 forum by those whose S2 dyno results fall short of Dinan claims. Between the enormous cost of the upgrade, the unclear performance increase, and the the indeterminate effects on a clutch-transmission already stressed on longevity, I passed on it.

Tom

VladCanada · 28th June 2004, 15:14

Here's stock E55k dyno i found.

CSBM5 · 28th June 2004, 15:16

That's power to the wheels on that dyno chart, so an assumption of drivetrain losses has to made to translate it to crank HP. In any event, that chart will be very hard to get numbers from due to the poor quality.

VladCanada · 28th June 2004, 15:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by CSBM5

That's power to the wheels on that dyno chart, so an assumption of drivetrain losses has to made to translate it to crank HP. In any event, that chart will be very hard to get numbers from due to the poor quality.

Also here's one from Mercedes site.

http://www.mercedes-benz.com/omb/amg...ch_data_06.htm

rsteele · 28th June 2004, 15:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by bernhtp

...Speaking of the S2, the results posted here do not appear representative of many others. I have seen lots of complaints on the E39 forum by those whose S2 dyno results fall short of Dinan claims. Between the enormous cost of the upgrade, the unclear performance increase, and the the indeterminate effects on a clutch-transmission already stressed on longevity, I passed on it.

Tom

...and I agree with you. I wouldn't do the S2 upgrade either. I was only expressing my fondness for the power curves, whether or not they are real or appropriate for the rest of the drivetrain.

Richard

CSBM5 · 28th June 2004, 16:01

Dinan does a nice job evaluating how the M5 cuts back on ignition advance and enriches the mixture on the dyno when not supplied with enough cooling airflow. Given the high state of tune of the M5, BMW thankfully did a nice conservative design of the system. There are essentially no dyno setups that can provide the on-road conditions a radiator sees (i.e. large pressure differential from what is almost an infinite plenum condition in front of the radiator), but he appears to have created one that is close. I think the reasons he outlines in the white paper on dyno testing are responsible for people who have had disappointing dyno test results on their stock M5s even. Some then assume their car is "down on power" when in fact it is fine...it was just the poor test conditions that created the outcome.

That said, I agree. I'm not interested in the S2 conversion either, but if I did do it, I would definitely put in the UUC clutch I had a chance to experience last month.

Also, from the looks of the power curve, snapping off the shifts on the 7spd SMG of the E60 and likely running between 6-8k rpm, the E60 M5 will leave the S2 behind nicely assuming the weight comparison is close. I think the power curve of the E60 shows exactly why the 7-spd is necessary and also why BMW isn't all that interested in a manual for the car. I can see the burnt clutches already from people slipping it like mad trying to obtain a fast start. Think of how tricky this car will be to launch for a max acceleration run -- you need to get "way up there" on the torque curve to get out of the hole hard.

fastsaloons · 28th June 2004, 17:10

I'm not sure the E60 M5 is going to work - It looks like a Civic Type-R power graph - torque is real late too - it maybe a little too specialist for most people...

As for the lack of manual I agree - anyone trying to extract the max will certainly be pushing it - Hopefully the E60 would get a proper clutch - but even so !

Not exactly an effortless cruiser - it'll be interesting to see how it pans out...

jos · 28th June 2004, 17:43

Isn't it normal that an evolution of a car, which the E60 M5 is, has better performance,higher HP, and higher torque figures than the previous model. Anyway, the E60 will give a lot of cars a good run for their money, and I am looking forward to hear the high-revving V10.

CSBM5 · 28th June 2004, 21:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by VladCanada

Also here's one from Mercedes site.

http://www.mercedes-benz.com/omb/amg...ch_data_06.htm

I pulled that chart into Photoshop and got the data from it also. I stuck it into these charts up above, but I'm not going to post the results as I don't think at this early point in the E60 M5's pre-life it is worth attempting to compare the two. Not until the final production information is available from BMW does it make sense to do much more with this subject imo. We may find that the above data is in error for the E60 M5 also (but you wouldn't think BMW would release that power curve if it wasn't relatively close to the production plan). One thing is clear though, in a roll-on run next to the W211 E55, you sure don't want to be caught one gear too high.