F10 M5 ran 11.78 quarter mile at the drag strip last night!

[Northern X5M]

Originally Posted by reiss91

Would like to see some launches on a firmer suspension setting. Curious about the time impact.

I think the OP has the right I idea with the softer setting. A firmer setting may cause the the rear tires to unload easier. Maybe drop the tire pressure to 20-25 psi.

[amgthis]

Originally Posted by Darthartur

We live in the real world. People who can afford M5 (afford, not go broke for it) can afford panny turbo which is with porwerkit is 540PS and not 160 grand like an S. Also in the real world all wheel drive is A LOT faster and safer. And since Porsche's AWD is so good. RWD lose almost any appeal over it. Smaller displacement is not our problem its BMW's. It's engine's dimentions and weight is what important. Panny also got more room in the back for 2 people. BMW's were always cramped in the back (X3 is amazing though).

Just because you can afford doesn't doesn't mean you will buy it. I cant justify the extra cash (keep in mind that options on the panty drive the price wayy up) when the M5 offers similar performance for a fraction of the cost. In spite of the fact it lacks AWD, it still performs stunningly well. I sat in the back of a 4S in the past and found the leg room to be lacking compared to the F10. Not sure how the F10 is cramped in any way. Anyhow, let's just say everyone has a preference

Originally Posted by Vtec Abuser

I beg to differ..

Read my post, I said 1/4 mile and 0-60, not from a roll

[nbennettksu]

F10 M5 gives a whole new meaning to its knickname; BEAST.

[NlckyBlack]

Originally Posted by Darthartur

We live in the real world. People who can afford M5 (afford, not go broke for it) can afford panny turbo which is with porwerkit is 540PS and not 160 grand like an S. Also in the real world all wheel drive is A LOT faster and safer. And since Porsche's AWD is so good. RWD lose almost any appeal over it. Smaller displacement is not our problem its BMW's. It's engine's dimentions and weight is what important. Panny also got more room in the back for 2 people. BMW's were always cramped in the back (X3 is amazing though).

More room in the back of a panty? I highly doubt that.

[F555]

dang.. that is fast..
will get to low 11second if it run on higher octane fuel.

[M3 Esq]

119 mph??!! What a beast!

[Richard Cranium]

Originally Posted by 515

dang.. that is fast..
will get to low 11second if it run on higher octane fuel.

Highly unlikely. Unless the car is pulling timing on the fuel he ran putting higher octane won't help one bit.

There are numerous other tweaks that could be done to incrementally improve these times, even though they are serious times already.

[BrendanSC]

Fame!

http://jalopnik.com/5944949/the-stoc...8-quarter-mile

[Tigumz]

Originally Posted by BrendanSC

Fame!

http://jalopnik.com/5944949/the-stoc...8-quarter-mile

Congrats to OP. I just don't get some of the people who make stupid comments

[DarrinB]

very impressive time

What rpm were you launching at? Whats the max you can rev the LC to?

[2013awm5]

I was launching at 3200 . It think it went as low as 2500 and as high as 3500. The only bad thing is there is no memory . You have to set it every time you use it. It standard setting is 3000. This is really a pain in the ass when in competition it's a lot of things to do when pulling up at the line.

[mainly]

Originally Posted by 2013awm5

I was launching at 3200 . It think it went as low as 2500 and as high as 3500. The only bad thing is there is no memory . You have to set it every time you use it. It standard setting is 3000. This is really a pain in the ass when in competition it's a lot of things to do when pulling up at the line.

i don't know if you read my thread but did you get any wheel hopping or violent shuttering (thats the only way i can describe it) when you used launch control?

i tried it twice and gave up because this was happening. it totally ruined my times because my 60' times were so bad - 2.2 , 2.3


thing is, without launch control i managed a 12.2 with almost the exact same speed you got with your 11.78 run. (i was going 119.79)

so it makes me think its just down to the launch.

[2013awm5]

No I didn't get any wheel hop
, but I see that you did not do a burn out. Also we're your settings for suspension in comfort mode.

[sickem]

Hey it was nice meeting you! I had the black E90 335i and came over to talk go you/drool on your car! Guess you'll have to get that oil pump sorted, eh? Saw the recall!

[mainly]

Originally Posted by 2013awm5

No I didn't get any wheel hop
, but I see that you did not do a burn out. Also we're your settings for suspension in comfort mode.

yeah, always in comfort mode.

did you do burnouts?

[2013awm5]

Yes. Nothing to big just to clean off the tires.

[2013awm5]

Originally Posted by sickem

Hey it was nice meeting you! I had the black E90 335i and came over to talk go you/drool on your car! Guess you'll have to get that oil pump sorted, eh? Saw the recall!

No recall for me. I missed it by a few days. My car was built before the 12th of July.(for now let's see what happens in a few days)

[DarrinB]

Your car will run even better when it gets over 5,000 miles on it.

I'd say 11.6 is possible in a bone stock F10 M5

[mainly]

Originally Posted by DarrinB

Your car will run even better when it gets over 5,000 miles on it.

I'd say 11.6 is possible in a bone stock F10 M5

i just dont see how you can get the traction. i think im afraid to use the launch control again, after the violent shuttering the car did both times i tried it.

i wish someone could tell me what this is.

[CocoPops]

That is an amazing time!!

Would you tell me what cotane fuel you ran please?

91/93/102?

Would appreciate it if you could share! Thanks!

[2013awm5]

93 octane

[CocoPops]

sho, makes this time even more amazing! well done bud!