F10 M5 Performance Predictions - Swedish Airfields - Page 3

digger · 20th June 2011, 14:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by T Bone

Where you and I are differing is that it is my belief that BMW is manipulating power by modulating torque. Neither of us has the data, but the drastic drop in torque makes no sense but the convenient constant output of 560 hp is at best suspicious.

I don't think BMW is delivering the best output from this engine. It is very manipulated. I bet they will sell future ECU upgrades and create special M5 models to milk us.

Clearly this is not the best in terms of outright power and torque the evidence is the X5M and X6M which have similar engines that have been tuned in excess of this new engine. Every engine is tuned by BMW to a level below its maximum which is "manipulating" the power. There are obviously several motivations for doing this.

I was more commenting on this "The F10 motor keeps peak power consistent despite falling torque" , the reason being is because it is impossible to keep power consistent without the falling torque based on what we know about physics.

Wolverine · 20th June 2011, 15:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by digger

It doesn't work that way

assume linear acceleration 0-200km/h

0-200 11.8s: After 11.8s = 328m travelled
0-200 13.5s: After 11.8s = 287m or 175km/h

difference = 41m/135ft or approx 8 car lengths

Got it. I was lazy and used time-to-distance rather than time-to-speed.

I still can't see the E60 getting spanked that badly though.

johnbmw6 · 20th June 2011, 16:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by bimmerule

BMW chose 560 to nudge the likes of CTSV and E63 AMG Performance Package cars and reclaim the world's most powerful executive sedan moniker. Audi RS6 uses a derivative of the baby Lambo engine, and is 4WD, so is probably considered a different class. I'm hoping BMW top brass will give the go for a CSL M5 or supersport pkg to top 600 horses. Can't imagine 502lb/ft of torque in second gear bearly out of idle.

The new RS6 using the new V8 TT is on the way with close to 600 BHP, out early next year. BMW beaten yet again, sad aya.

Fly M5 · 20th June 2011, 16:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by verbs

On the turbo motors I've seen from BMW so far, they have a habit of tapering off boost at high rpms for a variety of reasons, and in this instance they could be looking for longevity out of the turbos.....or possibly they wanted to use smaller turbos to spool up faster, and by going smaller, these turbos may not have been in the best efficiency range had they kept the boost to the max all the way to the redline, who knows.

Example of boost tapering off at high rpm and higher gear..This is on my Panamera TT. The boost gauge is on the right upper corner.
My take is the F10 M5 will be similar to this.

YouTube - ‪970tt stock tune‬‏

T Bone · 20th June 2011, 18:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by digger

I was more commenting on this "The F10 motor keeps peak power consistent despite falling torque" , the reason being is because it is impossible to keep power consistent without the falling torque based on what we know about physics.

Sure, I have no problems with your statement. Power is torque X rpm / 5252. From the graphs, I hypothesize that BMW is manupulating torque to keep power constant as rpms rise. In other words, they didn't want to exceed 560 hp for some reason, likely restricted by marketing and not engineering. And I find this discouraging.

However, if BMW comes up with an ECU upgrade for $5000, they we know they are milking us. Or if they give 600 hp to special versions of the M5. Pure market segmentation..... This is not in the ///M tradition. The ///M that I used to know and love would leave it all out there, within safety margins.

digger · 21st June 2011, 11:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by T Bone

Sure, I have no problems with your statement. Power is torque X rpm / 5252. From the graphs, I hypothesize that BMW is manupulating torque to keep power constant as rpms rise. In other words, they didn't want to exceed 560 hp for some reason, likely restricted by marketing and not engineering. And I find this discouraging.

However, if BMW comes up with an ECU upgrade for $5000, they we know they are milking us. Or if they give 600 hp to special versions of the M5. Pure market segmentation..... This is not in the ///M tradition. The ///M that I used to know and love would leave it all out there, within safety margins.

The whole curve is artificial, it's really just 3 lines.

barreoty · 21st June 2011, 11:26

Gents

I have set up an F10 M5 on vimulator http://www.vimulator.com/#/v3/sim/11213 that is set up using bmw official data.

From the figures 0-60 is under 4 secs 0-100 in 8 and standing quarter in 11.7@ 127mph

Let me know if it looks correct ie the car data or if needs amending? Things like the rolling resistance the gear change ms throttle lag etc etc....

Wayne

Wolverine · 21st June 2011, 14:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by barreoty

Gents

I have set up an F10 M5 on vimulator Vimulator.com that is set up using bmw official data.

From the figures 0-60 is under 4 secs 0-100 in 8 and standing quarter in 11.7@ 127mph

Let me know if it looks correct ie the car data or if needs amending? Things like the rolling resistance the gear change ms throttle lag etc etc....

Wayne

Seems a bit optimistic to me. While 0-60 may be under 4 seconds, and the quarter might be just under 12 sec, the trapspeed looks about 10 mph too high.

barreoty · 21st June 2011, 15:30

Wolverine

Have a look at the car stats let me know what you think needs changing?

F10 M5 Performance Predictions - Swedish Airfields-m5.jpg

F10 M5 Performance Predictions - Swedish Airfields-m5a.jpg

F10 M5 Performance Predictions - Swedish Airfields-m5b.jpg

T Bone · 21st June 2011, 15:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wolverine

Seems a bit optimistic to me. While 0-60 may be under 4 seconds, and the quarter might be just under 12 sec, the trapspeed looks about 10 mph too high.

12.1-12.3 with a trap of 120-122 mph seems reasonable to me.