|
Post Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
04-20-2012, 09:07 AM | #1 |
Administrator
42844
Rep 21,308
Posts |
Sport Auto Tests M5 F10 vs Panamera Turbo S and E63 AMG PP. M5 Dynos at 620 HP!
BIMMERPOST NEWS Sport Auto Tests M5 F10 vs Panamera Turbo S and E63 AMG PP. M5 Dynos at 620 HP! Here are the results of Sport Auto's comparison test among the M5 F10, Panamera Turbo S, and E63 AMG Performance Package. The M5 doesn't come out on top in the raw number categories, but still gets the nod from Sport Auto for its handling and overall dynamic package. 1st place: BMW M5 - 620 hp on the dyno (claimed: 560) Tires: Michelin Pilot Supersport Weight: 1963 kg (4,327 lb) 0-100 km/h (62 mph): 4.3 s 0-200 km/h (124 mph): 13.0 s Flexibility (80-120 km/h) (50-75 mph) in 5th/6th gear: 4.5 s/5.6 s Flexibility (80-180 km/h) (50-75 mph) in 5th/6th gear: 12.2 s/15.3 s 18 m slalom: 66.3 km/h Braking (100-0 km/h) (62-0 mph), warm: 37.5 m Braking (200-0 km/h) (124-0 mph), warm: 150.0 m Laptime (Kleiner Kurs Hockenheim): 1:13.6 min 2nd place: Porsche Panamera Turbo S - 555 hp on the dyno (claimed: 550) Tires: Michelin Pilot Supersport N0 Weight: 2024 kg (4,462 lb) 0-100 km/h (62 mph): 3.7 s 0-200 km/h (124 mph): 12.4 s Flexibility (80-120 km/h) (50-75 mph) in 5th/6th gear: 4.6 s/7.0 s Flexibility (80-180 km/h) (50-75 mph) in 5th/6th gear: 11.9 s/16.8 s 18 m slalom: 65.0 km/h Braking (100-0 km/h) (62-0 mph), warm: 34.9 m Braking (200-0 km/h) (124-0 mph), warm: 144.2 m Laptime (Kleiner Kurs Hockenheim): 1:12.1 min 3nd place: Mercedes-Benz E63 AMG PP - 610 hp on the dyno (claimed: 557) Tires: Continental Sport Contact 5P Weight: 1941 kg (4,279 lb) 0-100 km/h (62 mph): 4.4 s 0-200 km/h (124 mph): 13.2 s Flexibility (80-120 km/h) (50-75 mph) in 5th/6th gear: 4.5 s/6.4 s Flexibility (80-180 km/h) (50-75 mph) in 5th/6th gear: 12.0 s/16.2 s 18 m slalom: 64.9 km/h Braking (100-0 km/h) (62-0 mph), warm: 37.5 m Braking (200-0 km/h) (124-0 mph), warm: 151.8 m Laptime (Kleiner Kurs Hockenheim): 1:14.6 min |
04-20-2012, 01:06 PM | #2 |
Lieutenant Colonel
197
Rep 1,680
Posts |
Among the 3 manufacturers, BMW is the only one that had a big difference between claimed HP and dyno HP.
Keeping it subtle eh BMW? for the win!
__________________
Hellaflush? All I could say is "effyo'flush","flushnuff", and Instead of 'illest', I'm calling it "faillest". It's just form over function nowadays... -END RANT |
Appreciate
0
|
04-20-2012, 01:11 PM | #4 |
Banned
3160
Rep 9,134
Posts |
|
Appreciate
0
|
04-20-2012, 01:16 PM | #5 |
Negotiator
15
Rep 198
Posts
Drives: E60 M5 (LCI), i3 BEV
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Huntington Beach, CA
|
Wow that's a huge underrated difference!!
|
Appreciate
0
|
04-20-2012, 01:20 PM | #7 |
Captain
169
Rep 826
Posts
Drives: 2017 C43 AMG
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: NOVA
|
How is it that it's 620 on the dyno and 560 to the crank? I thought if anything it'd put out less power on the dyno. Am I wrong?
__________________
2014 X5 xDrive50i Mineral White | DinanTronics Stage 1 | Vossen HC3
|
Appreciate
0
|
04-20-2012, 01:24 PM | #8 | |
Private First Class
87
Rep 148
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
04-20-2012, 01:25 PM | #9 |
General
530
Rep 18,849
Posts |
|
Appreciate
0
|
04-20-2012, 01:28 PM | #10 |
Lieutenant Colonel
1129
Rep 1,514
Posts
Drives: 2012 e92 M3 DCT ZCP
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Michigan
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
04-20-2012, 01:35 PM | #11 |
Lieutenant
34
Rep 407
Posts |
|
Appreciate
0
|
04-20-2012, 01:50 PM | #12 |
Lieutenant Colonel
47
Rep 1,855
Posts |
So....those are not WHP numbers? Why don't they just let us have the WHP numbers, instead of extrapolating the crank HP? (I'm assuming they didn't remove the engines and measure them at the crank)
__________________
///M Coupe: RPI Scoop, OE Strut, CDV, Volk RE30, SS Brake Lines, Stromung Exhaust |
Appreciate
0
|
04-20-2012, 01:56 PM | #13 |
Special Agent
74
Rep 1,731
Posts |
because the lay person won't know the difference and that is the market. What magazine in print notes WHP? None that are mainstream, as there is no way to compare outside the test.
__________________
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
|
Appreciate
0
|
04-20-2012, 02:11 PM | #14 |
Brigadier General
399
Rep 4,084
Posts |
porsche has the worst power to weight ratio but best 0-100 lol. this story is full of "what gives" hahaha.
__________________
7/18/09- I pick up my baby- 2009 E92 335i Xdrive, Space Gray over Coral Red. Premium Pkg, Cold Weather Pkg, M-Sport Pkg, 193Ms, Gloss Black grills, Custom Gloss Black Mirrors, Performance shift and E-brake boot, M3 spoiler, Euro fog switch, gloss black interior tim, Coco-Mats (red/black), H&R coilovers, 19'' Alufelgen SF-71s......
|
Appreciate
0
|
04-20-2012, 02:17 PM | #15 | |
Captain
70
Rep 693
Posts |
Quote:
And it better be faster. It starts at $173,000 US! That's almost double the US M5 base price Shows how good of a performance bargain the m5 is for its price. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
04-20-2012, 02:33 PM | #16 | |
The World is Not Enough
172
Rep 1,088
Posts |
Quote:
Can't wait to see how the M6 Gran Coupe tests against the Panny and CLS63- much more fair and realistic IMHO. -Bond |
|
Appreciate
0
|
04-20-2012, 02:35 PM | #17 |
Banned
4141
Rep 6,924
Posts |
It is crazy how close the M5 and E63 are performance/speed wise. Each test they are literally right on top of each other. Looks like the M5 still is the better handling car, no surprise there.
It makes me wonder how hard BMW is pushing that 4.4L to match the speed of the other two that have more displacement. Looking at recent ecu tunes for the E63, Benz left a lot of power on the table for modders. The Porsche is expensive, but damn it hauls the mail. It continues to pull the further down the road you get. Last edited by hellrotm; 04-20-2012 at 03:04 PM.. |
Appreciate
0
|
04-20-2012, 02:37 PM | #18 |
Banned
4141
Rep 6,924
Posts |
Just realized the Panamera lapped 1.5 seconds quicker than the M5 with more weight and less HP.
Give credit to the Porsche engineers. Defying the laws of physics. |
Appreciate
0
|
04-20-2012, 02:40 PM | #19 |
Lieutenant
19
Rep 437
Posts |
Something doesn't seem right with those dyno numbers.
Its funny that all of these cars are making more power to the wheels then at the crank. But then again they are only numbers, its the actual track numbers that count. I'm really impressed with the F10 M5. |
Appreciate
0
|
04-20-2012, 02:41 PM | #20 |
Captain
169
Rep 826
Posts
Drives: 2017 C43 AMG
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: NOVA
|
I was confused and thought the dyno was showing 620 to the wheels, but 620 to the crank is significantly more than what BMW states. That's pretty nice though.
__________________
2014 X5 xDrive50i Mineral White | DinanTronics Stage 1 | Vossen HC3
|
Appreciate
0
|
Post Reply |
Bookmarks |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|