2003 Bmw M5 E39 - Page 4
Cadillac
 

Cadillac Forums | Help Us Help You | Advertise | Cadillac Parts | Cadillac News | Cadillac Classifieds / (Old System)

Cadillac Technical Archive | Cadillac Dealers | Cadillac Reviews | Cadillac Dealer Reviews | Cadillac Vendors

CadillacForums.com is the premier Cadillac Forum on the internet. Registered Users do not see the above ads.
+ Reply to Thread
Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 62
Cadillac or competing brand model ? Why ? Discussion, 2003 Bmw M5 E39 in Item Specific Cadillac Discussion; Originally Posted by Deuuuce Interestingly, also from C&D, the CSRT-8 hit 120mph in 15.9 seconds, the CTS-V at 16.0. Definitely ...
  1. #46
    mdc
    mdc is offline Cadillac Owners Fanatic
    Automobile(s): 06 Raven CTS-V No CAGS & UUC Shifter/Bushings
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Toronto, C,eh,N,eh,D,eh
    Age
    36
    Posts
    274

    Re: 2003 Bmw M5 E39

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuuuce View Post
    Interestingly, also from C&D, the CSRT-8 hit 120mph in 15.9 seconds, the CTS-V at 16.0. Definitely a drivers race and possible edge to the CTS-V if powershifted.
    and BTW, stop taking what C&D, R&T and MT report as fact. All of those magazines have a formula to compensate for weather conditions and location. Most of their "test results" look nothing like what they actually run

    Again, you can't prove anything on paper ... but you can easily prove something an asphalt. Get out of your chair and into the driver's seat

  2. #47
    Deuuuce is offline Cadillac Owners Fanatic
    Automobile(s): Charger SRT-8
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    San Jose area
    Posts
    118

    Re: 2003 Bmw M5 E39

    Nice rant.

    I wrote I surprised by the outcome when it's obviously a driver's race. How many are going to post they lost to an M5 once they hit 135mph anyway? It's obviously a drivers race.

    I posted the facts, if you can't understand the numbers, than go race one yourself at from a roll at 120mph and see what happens.

    The formula is used for quarter mile results only but we're not debating that now, are we?

    And your absolutely wrong about the test results. It's what 95% of the owners can expect without drag prep, a decent launch, practice not speedshifting. Real world results prove that. If they were so wrong, how come stock CTS-Vs are not running 12s or hitting 110mph traps? Huh?

    Take 2 identical Vs, change the gearing on one of them to the M5s ratios. Once in the OD gear, the race is over. No one hear posted results of racing past 135mph after I amended my statement, now did they?

  3. #48
    thebigjimsho's Avatar
    thebigjimsho is offline Cadillac Owners 10000+ Posts
    Automobile(s): ZIP
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    In the barrel of a gun...
    Posts
    49,458

    Re: 2003 Bmw M5 E39

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuuuce View Post
    If they were so wrong, how come stock CTS-Vs are not running 12s or hitting 110mph traps? Huh?

    Take 2 identical Vs, change the gearing on one of them to the M5s ratios. Once in the OD gear, the race is over. No one hear posted results of racing past 135mph after I amended my statement, now did they?
    Some Vs have hit 12s. The reason it's rare is blamed on one thing: vicious wheel hop. It certainly has the ability to hit high 12s at well over 110mph.

    The V has the torque to hit 150 before the M5 does. As for noone posting results of racing past 135, maybe noone has actually done it. If you're going to use your hypothetical as saving face, that's pretty pathetic.

    "Uh, yeah, like the V may totally take the M5 to like 135 but from like 135 to 150, the M5 like totally comes back, man. Totally. Like, yeah."

    Funny.

  4. #49
    thebigjimsho's Avatar
    thebigjimsho is offline Cadillac Owners 10000+ Posts
    Automobile(s): ZIP
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    In the barrel of a gun...
    Posts
    49,458

    Re: 2003 Bmw M5 E39

    And now, since the M5 is limited to 155mph, you've got 20mph to makeup a few carlengths. And the V's 3.73 final drive ratio is going to keep the M5 from doing that. Again, a transmission's gear depend on the differential's final drive ratio to get power to the ground.

    One's gear may change from 1-6, but the final drive is always there to influence the outcome. And the V has more useable torque.

  5. #50
    urbanski is offline Cadillac Owners 10000+ Posts
    Automobile(s): 05 CTS-V
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    San 'tone, TX
    Posts
    23,228

    Re: 2003 Bmw M5 E39


  6. #51
    nikon's Avatar
    nikon is offline Cadillac Owners Connoisseur
    Automobile(s): 05' CTS-V
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Palm Beach Gardens, FL
    Age
    29
    Posts
    3,718

    Re: 2003 Bmw M5 E39

    ^^

  7. #52
    Deuuuce is offline Cadillac Owners Fanatic
    Automobile(s): Charger SRT-8
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    San Jose area
    Posts
    118

    Re: 2003 Bmw M5 E39

    Quote Originally Posted by thebigjimsho View Post
    And now, since the M5 is limited to 155mph, you've got 20mph to makeup a few carlengths. And the V's 3.73 final drive ratio is going to keep the M5 from doing that. Again, a transmission's gear depend on the differential's final drive ratio to get power to the ground.

    One's gear may change from 1-6, but the final drive is always there to influence the outcome. And the V has more useable torque.
    You're right, absolutely right. Transmission ratios and aerodynamics make no play, I never did amend my statement to 5th, an OD gear, torque makes all the difference at high speed and 6600rpm power peak can't possibly have an influence. My bad. Thank you for being so understanding.

  8. #53
    04CTSVFLA is offline Cadillac Owners Connoisseur
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,643

    Re: 2003 Bmw M5 E39

    meow meow meow meow....meow meow meow meow.....meow mix meow mix please dellllllivver.. THIS THREAD IS GIBBBBBBBERRRIIIISHHHHHHHH

    Deuuuce your unfounded assinine bench racing comments hold zero value to this community. Several people including I, have outran e39's like it's a career.

    Go drop a deuce, and with the higher thought to weight ratio after you take that deuce you may come up with some more ingenious comments.....have you ever even driven, been in, or seen for that matter, an e39 m5 or a V...and no not on project gotham racing.....that doesnt count.

  9. #54
    MWD's Avatar
    MWD
    MWD is offline Cadillac Owners Fanatic
    Automobile(s): 2005 CTS-V Stealth Gray
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Apex, NC
    Age
    44
    Posts
    139

    Re: 2003 Bmw M5 E39

    Quote Originally Posted by thebigjimsho View Post
    What can you not understand? Yes the M5 has quicker gearing in 4th. But you totally ignore a simple fact. The V has a 3.73 final drive ratio. What does the M5 have? Guess what? It's much taller. The V walks the M5 in 4th. Deal with it.

    I'VE DONE IT PERSONALLY. Stock for stock. Game over.
    The V is going to have an advantage in 4th vs. the E39 M5, because more hp. is getting through the V gearbox at 1:1, vs. the M5 at non 1:1 4th. With 1:1, there is technically no gearing, i.e. there is no loss from transerring power via gear mesh across to the secondary shaft and back across another gearmesh. Not a huge difference, but definitely some, and since gearing loss is typically a percentage, the more hp, the more gear loss.

    Michael

  10. #55
    MWD's Avatar
    MWD
    MWD is offline Cadillac Owners Fanatic
    Automobile(s): 2005 CTS-V Stealth Gray
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Apex, NC
    Age
    44
    Posts
    139

    Re: 2003 Bmw M5 E39

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuuuce View Post
    My entire point which seems to have gone way over your head, is the cars are about as close as you can get and even in 4th at 1:1, the M5 is NOT in a 1:1 ratio and once in an OD 5th, it's over. The M5 unrestricted can hit approx. 180mph.
    Slipperiness plays BIG dividends above 160mph, so the M5 with roughly equal (or slightly less hp) and better aerodynamics can hit a higher top speed. The V isn't really geared to match the peak hp. with air resistance for top speed.

    Honestly though, things are flying by fast at 170, so I would willingly secede the top speed bragging rights. I don't really want to be cruising along at 170 in a stock V or M5, as there isn't enough crash protection for my comfort.

    Michael

  11. #56
    Deuuuce is offline Cadillac Owners Fanatic
    Automobile(s): Charger SRT-8
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    San Jose area
    Posts
    118

    Re: 2003 Bmw M5 E39

    Quote Originally Posted by MWD View Post
    The V is going to have an advantage in 4th vs. the E39 M5, because more hp. is getting through the V gearbox at 1:1, vs. the M5 at non 1:1 4th. With 1:1, there is technically no gearing, i.e. there is no loss from transerring power via gear mesh across to the secondary shaft and back across another gearmesh. Not a huge difference, but definitely some, and since gearing loss is typically a percentage, the more hp, the more gear loss.

    Michael
    Thank you, a mature voice able to conduct a technical discussion without bashing. It's like little kids yelling in the background.

    The question is 5th gear, which starts at 135mph for both cars. The V now in an OD gear, the M5 at 1:1 which is 5th.

  12. #57
    StealthCTSVJJL is offline Cadillac Owners Fanatic
    Automobile(s): Cadillac CTS V
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    118

    Re: 2003 Bmw M5 E39

    You still don't get it, the V in 5th has a 0.85 I believe od, which with a 3.73 diff works out to 3.58 overall gearing, still lower (numerically higher) gearing than the M5, so the V will still have superior torque multiplication in that particular gear also. Unfortunately car magazines don't test 0-150 acceleration so there are no reference guides. This is all speculation, even the above reference to the M5 having better aerodynamics. There is only one way to find out, and I have no idea where you would conduct such a test, without risking jail time and lives (which is why magazines don't test more than 0-130 on a regular basis). My suggestion would be to live in reality: the 70-120 spurts in a momentarily open highway which is extremely rare these days, and where the V will walk the old V8 M5, been there done that!

  13. #58
    thebigjimsho's Avatar
    thebigjimsho is offline Cadillac Owners 10000+ Posts
    Automobile(s): ZIP
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    In the barrel of a gun...
    Posts
    49,458

    Re: 2003 Bmw M5 E39

    Plus, at 135, the V has at least a couple lengths already. IF the gearing allows the BMW to gain, it doesn't have enough time.

  14. #59
    thebigjimsho's Avatar
    thebigjimsho is offline Cadillac Owners 10000+ Posts
    Automobile(s): ZIP
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    In the barrel of a gun...
    Posts
    49,458

    Re: 2003 Bmw M5 E39

    edit...

  15. #60
    Deuuuce is offline Cadillac Owners Fanatic
    Automobile(s): Charger SRT-8
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    San Jose area
    Posts
    118

    Re: 2003 Bmw M5 E39

    Quote Originally Posted by StealthCTSVJJL View Post
    You still don't get it, the V in 5th has a 0.85 I believe od, which with a 3.73 diff works out to 3.58 overall gearing, still lower (numerically higher) gearing than the M5, so the V will still have superior torque multiplication in that particular gear also. Unfortunately car magazines don't test 0-150 acceleration so there are no reference guides. This is all speculation, even the above reference to the M5 having better aerodynamics. There is only one way to find out, and I have no idea where you would conduct such a test, without risking jail time and lives (which is why magazines don't test more than 0-130 on a regular basis). My suggestion would be to live in reality: the 70-120 spurts in a momentarily open highway which is extremely rare these days, and where the V will walk the old V8 M5, been there done that!
    That I understand, I appreciate you explaining that.

    Actually C&D still tests to 150mph but didn't w/ the V for some reason.

Quick Reply Quick Reply

Register Now

Please enter the name by which you would like to log-in and be known on this site.
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.

Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Bookmarks

Cadillac Posting Rules

  • You may post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Read about Lincoln | Buick | Kia Forte Forum
Need products for your Cadillac? Check out your options at the links below:

custom floor mats | Cadillac Chrome and Black Chrome Wheels | window tinting