BMW M5 Forum and M6 Forums banner

1 - 20 of 27 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
251 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Does anyone know the performance stats difference between the two?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,638 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,548 Posts
mricorp said:
Does anyone know the performance stats difference between the two?
At C&D the E39 M5 was timed in the 1/4 mile at [email protected] versus [email protected] for the 545i. 0-60mph was 4.9 in the M5 versus 5.5 in the 545i. When you drive the two back-to-back, the greater power of the M5 is very noticeable. The 545i is only just slightly faster than the E39 540i. The 545i with the sport package and active steering is a handful to drive quickly...I was glad to be done with the thing on the track at Spartanburg. Getting into the M5 was a huge relief. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
312 Posts
CSBM5 said:
Getting into the M5 was a huge relief. :)
We test drove these two cars back to back (granted, the test drive was in the middle of downtown Chicago, with only the briefest squirt up Lake Shore Drive). I remember thinking while we were in the 545 "zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz . . . just doesn't rock my world", but then getting into the M5 and thinking ":wroom: Sweeeeeet!" The M5 had such a viscerally more engaging ride experience that there was just no contest between the two.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
147 Posts
Mrs_Struth said:
We test drove these two cars back to back (granted, the test drive was in the middle of downtown Chicago, with only the briefest squirt up Lake Shore Drive). I remember thinking while we were in the 545 "zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz . . . just doesn't rock my world", but then getting into the M5 and thinking ":wroom: Sweeeeeet!" The M5 had such a viscerally more engaging ride experience that there was just no contest between the two.
I couldn't agree more. Before I bought the M5, I was strongly considering the 545i until I drove it. I was NOT at all impressed with it in any way. In fact, I was MUCH MUCH more impressed with the Infiniti M45 which is a much more capable car. The feel of the 545i vs. the M5 is night and day.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
184 Posts
I think the newest R&T clocked the 545 at 5.2/13.7.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
86 Posts
I have had my M5 for 3 years now and just drove my brothers new '05 545i sport for a couple of days and really liked it. Power is fine, handling is great. Logic 7 stereo is much better than the M Audio in the E39.Seats could be better in a 64K car.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
184 Posts
CBM5 said:
. . .Power is fine, handling is great. . .
How were they in comparison to your M5?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,469 Posts
Interesting,

Seven responses and no one mentioned the look of the E60 yet. grrrrrrr grrrrrrr

I did drive the 545i, sports package and all. It is an under-whelming experience, for me at least. Much as I disliked the exterior, I was less thrilled with the interior. Performance is so so. (it's unfortunate that I went to the test drive in my RUF) There is little driving pleasure associated with that car. Certainly insufficient to overcome the design short-comings.

CP
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
86 Posts
WannaM5 said:
How were they in comparison to your M5?
Not as good. But I did not mention the looks of the new car. Rear end is bad, front is so so. From the side its ok. The inside is too plain looking, and still has a bad cupholder setup. But it drives well and power is fine, not as much as the E39 M5 but it moves.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,246 Posts
I have had the oppurtunity to drive both back to back and race the 545/6 on a number of occasions. I must say the dirving was a bit odd (everything was very light) and the feeling just was not there. That being said, it is plenty quick and smooth and will have no trouble keeping up/staying close with an m5 until around 120 mph or so. Then the M5 hits it stride.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,548 Posts
Not sure if by staying close you mean the 5-6 car length lead the M5 will have at the end of the 1/4 mile :M5launch: , but it doesn't look close in the 545i as the M5 immediately opens up a lead off the line and then just extends it continually.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,353 Posts
Is it just me or does anyone else think that the E60 looks like a peugeot 406??
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
776 Posts
mricorp said:
Does anyone know the performance stats difference between the two?
New road and track, i dont have it with me but something like this!
545i M5
0-60 5.2 4.9
0-100 12.7 Dont remember
1/4 13.7 12.9
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,151 Posts
Motor Trend tested the M5 to 60 in 2002 and 2001 at 4.6 and 4.7 seconds respectively. Car & Driver tested the M5 at 4.7 to 60 in 2002 as well. The Motor Trend tests mentioned showed 13.07 and 13.08 in separate tests 1 year apart. 4.9 is a bit conservative.

The 2 are not that close. If you ask Lscman, he'll probably say the 545 is faster.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,099 Posts
I too was under-whelmed with the 545i. It had the sport package & SMG. I didn't care for the looks and the SMG was too much of a learning curve on a test drive to appreciate. It really colored the test drive. Off topic, I did enjoy a 645i with auto. It was a hair slower off the line but similar to the 545i once going and sooo much smoother shifting. I also like the 645i interior much better than the 545i.

However, neither match the raw power of the M5 and total driving experience.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
776 Posts
HBRAMSTEDT said:
Motor Trend tested the M5 to 60 in 2002 and 2001 at 4.6 and 4.7 seconds respectively. Car & Driver tested the M5 at 4.7 to 60 in 2002 as well. The Motor Trend tests mentioned showed 13.07 and 13.08 in separate tests 1 year apart. 4.9 is a bit conservative.

The 2 are not that close. If you ask Lscman, he'll probably say the 545 is faster.
These are the ones I have seen, never under 4.8 (then again I might have missed an issue or two):

http://www.roadandtrack.com/article.asp?section_id=3&article_id=594&page_number=3

http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp?section_id=15&article_id=6567&page_number=4

Car and driver:
Staying in the heart of the power band was more important for the M5 this time around than three years ago, when it was hard to imagine 400 horsepower might not be enough. But that was the case in this encounter. The Bimmer was third to 60 mph at 4.9 seconds and third in the quarter-mile, 13.4 seconds at 108 mph. And even though the M5 began to gain on the Audi when speeds crept above 130 mph, it couldn’t touch the Benz. Just as in the old “Hot Rod Lincoln” rockabilly tune, “by then the taillight was all you could see.”

ROad and track:

Back down at reasonable elevations at our test track, the M5 shows why it was king of the roost for so long, with a 0-60 sprint of 4.8 sec. and a quarter-mile posting of 13.3 sec. at 108.5 mph, beating the Jag in this last contest by a sound 0.4 sec. and tying the considerably more powerful Audi to 100 mph, in 11.3 sec. The BMW also turned in the shortest stopping distance from 60 mph at 116 ft. (it should be noted that the total variance in this group was only 4 ft.). Powerful though the brakes are, the first bit of pedal travel feels soft, the only blemish in a very tight, responsive overall package.



I was surprised myself about the closenes in results between the old M5 and the 545i. The M5 is sometimes hard to launch and for an amateur launcher like me the 545i might even be quicker. The sound and looks of course are not that good! I was also surprised that the 645 in road and track was 5.3s, so it was slower???!!!!

Car and driver got worse results for the 545i:

http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp?section_id=3&article_id=8011&page_number=1

Sixty mph is yours in 5.5 seconds, same as a 282-hp 540i we tested in 1998. But the older, less powerful car, which was 232 pounds lighter, was 0.9 second slower to 100 mph and two seconds slower to 130 mph.

Our 545i cleared the quarter-mile in 14.1 seconds at 103 mph, an improvement of 0.2 second and 6 mph over a 3924-pound automatic-transmission 540i we tested in 2001. That's sports-car performance—similar to, say, a Nissan 350Z Touring's—from a two-ton sedan

This is the earlier road and track text (now it was 0-60 in 5.2!):

BMW 545i

Why did we test the 530i and not the $55,000 V-8-powered 545i? Well, the BMW's inline-6 engine is the bread and butter of the manufacturer. The V-8 adds an extra 325 lb. to the test weight as well as 100 horsepower, giving it a more substantial, powerful feel. Tested at the drag strip, the 545i pulled off a 0-60-mph time of 5.3 seconds and reached the quarter mile in 13.8 sec. at 103.3 mph. The optional front 18 x 8 and rear 18 x 9 wheels definitely improve the looks of the car, filling out its fenders nicely. That extra rubber also seems to improve the ride quality and overall cornering performance. Engine power is delivered smoothly with only the slightest of engine vibration coming into the cabin. The automatic transmission does its job well. The conclusion? If it's a gunfight, you've got to have a .45. — Shaun Bailey"

But I think it safe to say, there isnt that! much difference, especially at lower speeds. Atleast compared to the old 540i the M5 was superior after about 80mph, but until that atleast a no-good-shifter is in trouble!

Just to keep the conversation going..... :byebye:

KIP

P.s. Everyone loves the M5, so there is no substitute.....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,548 Posts
Having owned a 2002 540i/6 for a number of months after getting the M5, there is no contest right from the start. The M5 leaps out ahead and opens up the distance between the two cars dramatically with time. The 540i traps right at 100 in the 1/4, the 545 at 103 -- the M5 at 108-109...there is a big difference in a car able to trap 109 versus just over a 100. Don't blame getting poor results on a poor driver -- that isn't the car's fault. Have you ever tried to launch a 6-spd 540i or 545i? They aren't even available with a limited slip differential, so you have to be **** perfect not to just spin the daylights out of the right rear tire (what a pain in the butt to try to drive these cars hard through a corner too -- all it will do is spin the inside tire when you try to put down power from the apex). With equal drivers in the two cars, the contest is over by the 60' mark.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,151 Posts
I hadn't seen those tests KIP. Did they use the same M5?

Anyway, there are many more tests that confirmed the M5 in the 4.7/13.2 range than the ones I mention. 13.4 is the slowest time I have seen an M5 run. 13.4 also appeared when the first model year E39 M5 was tested. Anyway the majority of the tests were in the 4.7/13.2 range.

There is a huge difference between 13.8 and 13.2 in the 1/4-mile. The difference is gigantic. 1/2 of a second to 60 is also a giant difference. Based on the test times, they are not close.

You can take the best 545 time and compare it to the absolute worst E39 545 time and they still are not close. Maybe you are trying to make the case because you want to buy a 545 and feel you are the measure of an E39 M5. Your confusion will be quickly dispelled the first time you line up against one on the street.
 
1 - 20 of 27 Posts
Top