Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Sedans High Performance Luxury Sedans
1038 messages, Last post on Jun 18, 2008 at 12:12 PM
You are in the Sedans Forum. Your Hosts are pat & karens
|
Thanks for the update. Have their been any problems with it? M |
|
|
1. audio gateway occasional static & DVD acting up, requiring software update. 2. very faint squeak over bumps, dealer traced back to sunroof clip, replaced. 3. center front speaker buzzing when playing certain cello pieces, replaced. 4. aux port was not active (dealer forgot to turn it on during PDI). 5. auto trunk closer (truly great option) button occasionally not working, fixed. The bottom line is, yes there were minor problems but they fixed them all. |
|
|
|
Couple of questions about the E60 M5. Somewhat suprising is the torque 383lb feet, i was thinking maybe over 400. As far as torque goes how much does the engine displacement affect the amount of torque. Also no true 6 speed manual, find it hard to believe for a car that prides itself on race car inspired performance will not offer a true manny. And what about the ability to use "only" 400hp and at the push of a button have access to all 507? What a novelty. 0-60 in 4.7s seems like a reserved number. Can't wait for the RS6, E55, M5 comparo.
|
|
|
Yeah that is a very conservative estimate. I'm looking for a 4.0 sec 0-60 time or even lower if the SMG has a "launch" mode specifically for such things. I can't wait to see the comparos either and that all important first drive/roadtest from the U.S. mags. w210, A bunch of relatively minor things with your E55 huh. That is Mercedes biggest problem because I'm sure if you get a survey it won't be good for Mercedes. M |
|
|
Replying to: portknoxxa (Jul 27, 2004 3:42 pm) The current E55 and future M5 are able to compete with the 911 Turbo in stoplight drag racing, and both are capable of sustaining speeds of 100+ mph over any legal limit in the United States. Personally, I think further escalation of the power war is not productive. I'd like to see the handling and "fun to drive" side of the equation further improved. I recently had the opportunity to drive the 545i 6-speed sport and, although it is very good by sedan standards, it did not match the handling and steering precision of my former $32k Honda S2000. Nor did the BMW 6-speed transmission shift as precisely and effortlessly as the little Honda's. I realize that this is a tall order for a 4,000 lb 5 passenger sedan. But I'd rather see some effort on the part of BMW's Motorsports and Mercedes AMG engineers redirected to that objective, rather than seeing who will be the first to break the 600, 700 and 800 hp barriers. Hell a Honda Formula 1 car "only" has 700+/- horspeower. But it's capable of pulling 3g's vs the 0.65 to 1.05 g's representing the range of an Isuzu Trooper to an Enzo. And the E55 and M5 are only in the upper middle of that rather unimpressive range. I believe there is room for handling improvement that would make my daily 35-40 mph drive through D.C.'s Rock Creek Park more enjoyable. I'd prefer this improvement over having to go to the Bonneville Salt Flats just to see the difference between the last M5 and the next one. And, as I said before, the fact that the V10 M5 "only" has 380 ft-lbs of torque to go along with its 500+ horsepower is a potentially very good thing in my book. Made even better by the 8,250 rpm redline. But completely pissed away on me, if they only offer an SMG transmission. For the infititesimal increase in 0-60 performance the Game Boy inspired SMG might offer against my amateur old-fashioned hand and foot shifting, they have taken away 75%+ of the fun to drive factor for me. I would have never bought the former E55 against the former M5 for that very reason. Now I've got two lousy choices compared to the former M5 6-speed on the fun to drive front. And for what - to have me act like a stupid, immature high school kid at a stop light just to tell the difference between the old and new M5? I don't think so. |
|
|
I agree with you on the manual trans issue, but I think you're asking too much of a 4000lb+ sedan to even come close to matching a Honda S2000 in handling. Likewise the Honda can't come close to matching those sedans in ride and comfort, every vehicle is a compromise. Even the S2000 was toned down for better daily use. Sure BMW and Mercedes could build a sedan to match a S2000 in handling if they truly wanted, but it would ride like it had no suspension at all and wouldn't appeal to anyone but dedicated track folk and lets face it most of the people that buy these cars still are luxury car buyers for the most part or at least expect some luxury (reasonable ride comfort) in these cars. M
|
|
|
Replying to: merc1 (Jul 28, 2004 2:46 am) I agree that the "supersedans" are indeed sedans and, as such, they have a broader duty than a dedicated sports car. But I'll somewhat stick to my position that 500 horsepower is enough, already. Perhaps an adjustable suspension system, like the ones popping up on Porsche and VW SUV's could be further engineered to provide both luxury and a more serious sport setting. I know Mercedes utilizes an airmatic suspension, but it could probably be developed further if the AMG guys got their heads out of the engine compartment. Speaking of harsh, the S2000 wasn't. Sitting on 16" wheels with 55 and 50 series rubber, I didn't find the ride harsh except over serious potholes. No more so than our new Acura TL sitting on 17" wheels and 45 series tires. And probably less so than the "luxury" oriented E55 sitting on 18" and 40 and 35 series tires. Which gets back to my point, that, for the relative harshness of the former E55, I was not at all impressed with it's handling. The less harsh M5 handles much better, IMO. I have not yet had the opportunity to drive the new E55. IMO, the S2000's "harshness" wasn't the ride, but the noise. My wife never got used to the sound of the engine and interior even when cruising on the highway. I didn't find it too objectionable, but it certainly wasn't as easy on the ears as an Acura TL or Mercedes E-class. Still, I wouldn't trade the 9,000 rpm 2002 model we had for the new 8,000 rpm de-tuned version. Earplugs are cheap. 9,000 rpm was unique. It still hurts a little to be driving down the road in our insulated cabin, listening to a digital music DVD, checking the 8" voice activated navigation system for directions, calling a restaurant on the Bluetooth phone and then seeing a Spa Yellow S2000 cruise by with it's top down. Oh well, at least our TL has a "real" 6-speed! |
|
|
|
Why have a M- Divison and and AMG division if you are not going go all the way with performance. 4 years ago a 394hp M5 was the king of the hill, and now you have the S65 with 600hp. I know this has probably been said before, but when Fast and Furious came out, men, women, and children wanted fast and sporty cars, weather coupe, sedan, suv, or truck. The story in autoweek did say that E60 M5 will have a launch button. The S2 Dinan recorded 0-60 in 4.2s. 0-60 times are very important to the M and AMG. I'm also curious to see the curb weight of the E60 M5. Not fare to compare sedans to roadsters. It's funny but in all the comparos i've seen for the M3, they've always compared it to a C32 AMG, Audi S4, and even a porcshe and corvette. Saw one comparo against a CLK55 AMG. I know i rambling but i admire the M5, mainly for not using turbo/super chargers, and having a true manny. How does a S2000 match up to a Z4?
|
|
|
No problem with passion, I enjoy reading your posts. When I was talking about the S2000 I meant they made it more driveable/livable for everyday use, not just better riding. I didn't mean to imply that it had a rough ride. I agree about the old E55 vs the old M5, they old M5 did handle better without the ride penalty according to most, though Road and Track did say the E55 handled better - a curious decision. M |
|
|
Replying to: portknoxxa (Jul 28, 2004 7:06 pm) And to go a little further out on that limb, I am going to bet that fewer than one tenth of 1% of those that paid $6.50 to see the Fast and Furious will ever actually be able to afford an AMG or M car. The Motorsport and AMG divisions clearly have performance as a priority, as they should. I would submit, however, that prospective buyers that can actually afford their cars have a different and broader definition of "performance" than those that can't. And if I were in charge of AMG or BMW, I'd make damn sure I focused my attention on the former. As far as an S2000 matching up against a Z4, both are very good cars that achieve similar results using very different methods. The S2000 essentially has a half size Formula 1 engine. Low torque, 9,000 rpm redline (pre-2004) and perhaps the best 6-speed transmission money can buy. The Z4 uses a torquier ubiquitous engine that you can find in every vehicle they sell from the X5 to the 330i to the 530i. It gets the job done with power, but not as much sophistication, intensity or excitement. Similar comparison could be made between the chassis. |
|
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2000 Jaguar XJR
2011 Mercedes-Benz E-Class
2011 BMW M5
2000 Mercedes-Benz E55 AMG
2010 Audi S6
2009 Maserati Quattroporte
2009 Audi S8
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
