Close

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 80
  1. #51
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    974
    Rep Points
    442.4
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    5


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by ezec63 Click here to enlarge
    @Sticky haha you got to admit I pretty much nailed it! .4 seconds quicker through the quarter mile and only .4 slower trap speed which is not much so that video everyone keeps referring to is obviously BS
    @leveraged sellout so much for you BMW guys and your handling lol exactly the same stats and the AMG wasn't equipped with the optional carbon ceramic brakes that the m5 had so the AMG would have even better numbers. Seems like your the one who needs to read up on current AMG's and let that stereotype go. And exactly as I said the m5 is said to be numb and out of control while the AMG has much better feel, feels lighter, and puts it power down much better coming out of corners with AWD. These are 4500 pound cars with over 600 hp.

    So we know from a dig the m5 has no chance for the AMG to keep its advantage on a roll all it's needs is a 40whp advantage which the m157 has over the m stock and much more if both are modified.

    I find it hard to read your posts so I'm just going to try to reply to everything I think you said....

    First. I'm not a fanboy. I own a BMW. I like BMWs. There's nothing wrong with that. You might want to look at some of you own posts in regards to being a fanboy. I love German cars in general. I wouldn't ever drive anything else, unless it was Italian. But I also like to stick to facts, and not just what the moron Motor Trend editors say. I spend lots and lots of time on F10 Post, and there is not one owner there who is unhappy with their M5. Not one. Not one who thinks it is numb or dull. Have you driven one? Or are you taking someone's word? I also spend lots of time on MBWorld, and members there that have driven both (and on F10 post, and M5 board) have said they prefer the M5's handling. Now, I realize that's not everyone. But I'll take the tens of real world stories and accounts vs a quick test by a magazine that has already demonstrated that they can't handle the damn thing. I still have to drive both, so I'm definitely keeping an open mind. I'm simply trying to tell you what owners are saying.

    Second, I have driven AMGs, I've actually driven a C63, and I loved it. Belongs to one of my good friends, he's on here, it's now Wesitec S/C'd and crazy fast. I'm well up on what every single tuner is doing for any German car. You don't need to tell me. But again...we basically have nothing for the M5 yet. Some tunes that, and I have to disagree with sticky for the first time, are of dubious value, and DPs that seem to do a lot. And some exhausts, and an intake. Bragging about how much power a tuned M157 makes isn't really relevant because I'd be willing to bet that with similar mods an S63 would make the same or more horsepower. Not as much torque to be sure, but we can see that this doesn't really matter given the quarter mile times people are getting out of the M5.

    Overall, we both have our preferences and that's awesome...that's why we're all here. But I really think the M5 has barely been tapped as far as performance potential, and even looking at what REAL owners are getting in the REAL world on crappy under-prepped drag strips in real world weather and conditions, I think it is quite fair to say the cars are at best evenly matched. And I far prefer the looks, interior, sound and design of the M5, plus COMMAND compared to iDrive is a joke. M5 for me. And when AMS unveils their 800 hp upgrade, watch out.

  2. #52
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    118,891
    Rep Points
    31,838.9
    Mentioned
    2090 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    319



    Yes Reputation No
    It's going to go back and forth. The cars are very close. I don't get why anyone would take issue one way or another.

    Stage 2 or 2.5 E9X M3 S65 V8 supercharger kit for sale
    : http://www.boostaddict.com/showthrea...r-kit-for-sale

  3. #53
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    1,117
    Rep Points
    962.8
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    10


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by leveraged sellout Click here to enlarge
    I find it hard to read your posts so I'm just going to try to reply to everything I think you said....

    First. I'm not a fanboy. I own a BMW. I like BMWs. There's nothing wrong with that. You might want to look at some of you own posts in regards to being a fanboy. I love German cars in general. I wouldn't ever drive anything else, unless it was Italian. But I also like to stick to facts, and not just what the moron Motor Trend editors say. I spend lots and lots of time on F10 Post, and there is not one owner there who is unhappy with their M5. Not one. Not one who thinks it is numb or dull. Have you driven one? Or are you taking someone's word? I also spend lots of time on MBWorld, and members there that have driven both (and on F10 post, and M5 board) have said they prefer the M5's handling. Now, I realize that's not everyone. But I'll take the tens of real world stories and accounts vs a quick test by a magazine that has already demonstrated that they can't handle the damn thing. I still have to drive both, so I'm definitely keeping an open mind. I'm simply trying to tell you what owners are saying.

    Second, I have driven AMGs, I've actually driven a C63, and I loved it. Belongs to one of my good friends, he's on here, it's now Wesitec S/C'd and crazy fast. I'm well up on what every single tuner is doing for any German car. You don't need to tell me. But again...we basically have nothing for the M5 yet. Some tunes that, and I have to disagree with sticky for the first time, are of dubious value, and DPs that seem to do a lot. And some exhausts, and an intake. Bragging about how much power a tuned M157 makes isn't really relevant because I'd be willing to bet that with similar mods an S63 would make the same or more horsepower. Not as much torque to be sure, but we can see that this doesn't really matter given the quarter mile times people are getting out of the M5.

    Overall, we both have our preferences and that's awesome...that's why we're all here. But I really think the M5 has barely been tapped as far as performance potential, and even looking at what REAL owners are getting in the REAL world on crappy under-prepped drag strips in real world weather and conditions, I think it is quite fair to say the cars are at best evenly matched. And I far prefer the looks, interior, sound and design of the M5, plus COMMAND compared to iDrive is a joke. M5 for me. And when AMS unveils their 800 hp upgrade, watch out.
    Dont know whats so hard to read about my post they were short without any fluff.

    Well a comment like "us BMW guys and you AMG guys" is something a fanboy would say. Like ive stated I have owned bmw's (x6 and driven many M's) ive owned MB's (CLS500, SL 55, and my current C63 Coupe) So i obviously am not a fan boy if i spend my hard earned money to buy a BMW because i loved it. Like stated previously i buy whats best at the time and for me its obviously the E63 right now. But i wouldnt buy either honestly they are to heavy for my taste.

    Do you honestly think someone who just spent over 100K on an m5 is going to admit that the competitor is better? Not happening ... Do you know what the owners on MBWorld are saying about the E63 S? Thats its the best car and much better than the m5 its no surprise theyre defending their purchase. Besides Vic55 who now has 2 s63tu's and he himself says the M157 is superior in power

    No I have not driven the M5 have you? Its not just motortrend its almost unanimous from reviewers that its numb, heavy, and to insulated from the driving experience basically the Anti-M. I have driven the CLS 63 PP that was a 2012 RWD and it was phenomenal for such a big heavy car. I still wouldnt take it over my c63 especially the way i have it set up now I prefer the driving experience and the E63 nor M5 provides what i want its just that the E63 S does it better.

    The M5 has been out for a while now it just seems there isnt as much wiggle room as the M157. Its also down over a liter of displacement. Watch out for what? The M157 is already making basically 800whp with turbos from AMS on a completely stock car otherwise.
    Its obvious we have different opinions and im not looking to get into an internet war over something I dont even own I was just trying to provide some facts so readers can understand both sides of the story and they can make their own decisions from their.

  4. #54
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    1,117
    Rep Points
    962.8
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    10


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    It's going to go back and forth. The cars are very close. I don't get why anyone would take issue one way or another.
    They def are very close their is no doubt about it and i have no issue with it. The only thing i had an issue with was saying BMW's automatically handle much better and have better balance, unsprung weight etc. When the facts are now out there that prove the contrary. The numbers are basically the same with the E not having the CC brakes the M5 did and was said to have better feel/control. Just want the truth thats it

  5. #55
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    118,891
    Rep Points
    31,838.9
    Mentioned
    2090 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    319



    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by ezec63 Click here to enlarge
    Do you honestly think someone who just spent over 100K on an m5 is going to admit that the competitor is better? Not happening ... Do you know what the owners on MBWorld are saying about the E63 S? Thats its the best car and much better than the m5 its no surprise theyre defending their purchase. Besides Vic55 who now has 2 s63tu's and he himself says the M157 is superior in power
    No offense the majority of people are MBworld are retards and have the AMG symbol so far up their rear ends they can't see straight. These are the same idiots that said the C63 is soooo much more powerful than the E92 M3 without having a clue what they were talking about. These same people said the C32 was oh so much better than the E46 M3 which today takes a dump all over the C32 which has been all but forgotten. That is Mercedes fanboy central.

    Who cares if they say the E63 is better? A Mercedes site favors a Mercedes? Shocker. The M5 is currently the faster car and it is also lighter with a dual clutch. There's two things the E63 AMG S can't do better.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by ezec63 Click here to enlarge
    The M5 has been out for a while now it just seems there isnt as much wiggle room as the M157. Its also down over a liter of displacement. Watch out for what? The M157 is already making basically 800whp with turbos from AMS on a completely stock car otherwise.
    I'm sorry but the issue with the M5 isn't 'wiggle room' it's electronics as always. How about wiggle room for larger turbos? In the E63 space is at a premium. I'm well aware of things in the pipeline for it that you are not but let's just say the M5 with its top mount turbos may sway a large advantage back in its favor. The M157 simply has an advantage due to time on the market. What this will come down to in all honesty is who fits the largest snails win. And guess what? That may just be the M5 and even if both cars have equal power the M5 will always pull due to lower drivetrain losses, less weight, and a quicker shifting transmission. Just like how the M3 is able to beat the C63.

    Stage 2 or 2.5 E9X M3 S65 V8 supercharger kit for sale
    : http://www.boostaddict.com/showthrea...r-kit-for-sale

  6. #56
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    118,891
    Rep Points
    31,838.9
    Mentioned
    2090 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    319



    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by ezec63 Click here to enlarge
    They def are very close their is no doubt about it and i have no issue with it. The only thing i had an issue with was saying BMW's automatically handle much better and have better balance, unsprung weight etc. When the facts are now out there that prove the contrary. The numbers are basically the same with the E not having the CC brakes the M5 did and was said to have better feel/control. Just want the truth thats it
    The M5 is lighter than the E63 AMG S. I think it will have the better laptime. I don't see any facts to the contrary thus far.

    Stage 2 or 2.5 E9X M3 S65 V8 supercharger kit for sale
    : http://www.boostaddict.com/showthrea...r-kit-for-sale

  7. #57
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    1,117
    Rep Points
    962.8
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    10


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    No offense the majority of people are MBworld are retards and have the AMG symbol so far up their rear ends they can't see straight. These are the same idiots that said the C63 is soooo much more powerful than the E92 M3 without having a clue what they were talking about. These same people said the C32 was oh so much better than the E46 M3 which today takes a dump all over the C32 which has been all but forgotten. That is Mercedes fanboy central.

    Who cares if they say the E63 is better? A Mercedes site favors a Mercedes? Shocker. The M5 is currently the faster car and it is also lighter with a dual clutch. There's two things the E63 AMG S can't do better.



    I'm sorry but the issue with the M5 isn't 'wiggle room' it's electronics as always. How about wiggle room for larger turbos? In the E63 space is at a premium. I'm well aware of things in the pipeline for it that you are not but let's just say the M5 with its top mount turbos may sway a large advantage back in its favor. The M157 simply has an advantage due to time on the market. What this will come down to in all honesty is who fits the largest snails win. And guess what? That may just be the M5 and even if both cars have equal power the M5 will always pull due to lower drivetrain losses, less weight, and a quicker shifting transmission. Just like how the M3 is able to beat the C63.
    Haha and Bimmerpost isnt BMW fan boy central with the M symbol up their ass and the N54 shrine at home? Im not talking about c32 days im talking about today now. Um you totally missed my point ! Thats what i was saying ofcourse a Benz forum will favor the Benz and the BMW forum will favor the BMW. Did you not read what the user said before me? Your point was exactly my point to him. And yes the C63 is actually Sooooo much faster than the M3? A P31 Coupe (MCT) ran completely bone stock tires and all 11.9 @119 there m3 is nowhere close to that.

    How is the M3 able to beat the C63? Lets not bring up the pre MCT cars the current MCT cars are a good amount faster than DCT M3's dual clutch torque multiplication thru revs and all. And modified N/A the gap becomes even bigger. Supercharged they have proven to be faster we all saw the air strip vids. The only chance they have is your car and that has still to be proven. Not doubting it but as of now they are the ones to beat
    Last edited by ezec63; 10-24-2013 at 01:15 AM.

  8. #58
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    1,117
    Rep Points
    962.8
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    10


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    The M5 is lighter than the E63 AMG S. I think it will have the better laptime. I don't see any facts to the contrary thus far.
    Did you not watch the new motortrend video of the E63 S vs the M5 competition package? How is the M5 the faster car? The E63 S beat it by .3 seconds in the quarter mile with basically identical trap speeds and the E63 S didnt have the CC brakes the M5 did which is a huge advantage of unsprung rotational mass. The handling numbers were exactly the same with the E63 S said to have much better feel again without the CC brakes that are optional. Add in the AWD to put down the power out of corners the M5 will not have better track times

  9. #59
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    118,891
    Rep Points
    31,838.9
    Mentioned
    2090 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    319



    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by ezec63 Click here to enlarge
    Haha and Bimmerpost isnt BMW fan boy central with the M symbol up their ass and the N54 shrine at home? Im not talking about c32 days im talking about today now. Um you totally missed my point ! Thats what i was saying ofcourse a Benz forum will favor the Benz and the BMW forum will favor the BMW. Did you not read what the user said before me? Your point was exactly my point to him. And yes the C63 is actually Sooooo much faster than the M3? A P31 Coupe (MCT) ran completely bone stock tires and all 11.9 @119 there m3 is nowhere close to that.

    How is the M3 able to beat the C63? Lets not bring up the pre MCT cars the current MCT cars are a good amount faster than DCT M3's dual clutch torque multiplication thru revs and all. And modified N/A the gap becomes even bigger. Supercharged they have proven to be faster we all the air strip vids. The only chance they have is your car and that has still to be proven. Not doubting it but as of now they are the ones to beat
    Yes, Bimmerpost is filled with even more brain dead retards hence why this place exists. I would not cite either of those sites as bastions of intelligent automotive performance discussion or understanding.

    A P31 car IS faster, yes. This option came later. A non-P31 car is not. Good luck explaining that on MBworld.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by ezec63 Click here to enlarge
    How is the M3 able to beat the C63?
    The E46 M3 is currently well ahead of the C63 and my E92 is as well.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by ezec63 Click here to enlarge
    Lets not bring up the pre MCT cars the current MCT cars are a good amount faster than DCT M3's dual clutch torque multiplication thru revs and all.
    I'm trying to make sense of this. The MCT isn't anywhere near on the same level as a true dual clutch.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by ezec63 Click here to enlarge
    And modified N/A the gap becomes even bigger.
    The NA gap will always be in the M156's favor due to the displacement advantage. No argument there.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by ezec63 Click here to enlarge
    Supercharged they have proven to be faster we all saw the air strip vids. The only chance they have is your car and that has still to be proven. Not doubting it but as of now they are the ones to beat
    Um I beat every AMG that showed up to the airstrip so I don't know what needs to be proven there. The M3 is lighter, revs higher, and has a dual clutch. It's mean and I'm just getting warmed up. I intend to bruise a lot of egos if I haven't already.

    Stage 2 or 2.5 E9X M3 S65 V8 supercharger kit for sale
    : http://www.boostaddict.com/showthrea...r-kit-for-sale

  10. #60
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    1,117
    Rep Points
    962.8
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    10


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    Yes, Bimmerpost is filled with even more brain dead retards hence why this place exists. I would not cite either of those sites as bastions of intelligent automotive performance discussion or understanding.

    A P31 car IS faster, yes. This option came later. A non-P31 car is not. Good luck explaining that on MBworld.



    The E46 M3 is currently well ahead of the C63 and my E92 is as well.



    I'm trying to make sense of this. The MCT isn't anywhere near on the same level as a true dual clutch.



    The NA gap will always be in the M156's favor due to the displacement advantage. No argument there.



    Um I beat every AMG that showed up to the airstrip so I don't know what needs to be proven there. The M3 is lighter, revs higher, and has a dual clutch. It's mean and I'm just getting warmed up. I intend to bruise a lot of egos if I haven't already.
    Right that was my point ! He tried to use the argument that Bimmerpost members with M5's say its better so it has to be better and i replied with basically the same point you did !

    Yes the P31 car with MCT is faster the non P31 with the 7G is close but the M3 has the advantage as speeds go up but were talking about current cars which have MCT's

    Your E92 is well ahead of over 1100 whp from the M156? Id like to see you prove me wrong but as of now the M156 has the title of power over the S65. Not sure about the E46 so i wont stick my foot in my mouth.
    The current fastest E92 on drag times is basically even with dodgers N/A C63 so thats tell a lot.

    I didnt mean the trans itself The DCT is def a better trans than the MCT i was talking about the cars they are attached to.

    You have a built motor sleeved block S65 so running basic stage 3 cars is no comparison. You have to run the big dogs built motor built trans just like you will be. So until you beat JRcart/ Earl i believe they are the ones that hold the belt. They have power numbers, 1/4 mile slips and multiple runway victories. The CLK trapped over 185 at the half mile event and is 200 whp stronger than before. Not doubting you Sticky take it easy just stating my opinion I hope you go out there and kick ass.

  11. #61
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    118,891
    Rep Points
    31,838.9
    Mentioned
    2090 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    319



    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by ezec63 Click here to enlarge
    Yes the P31 car with MCT is faster the non P31 with the 7G is close but the M3 has the advantage as speeds go up but were talking about current cars which have MCT's
    Regardless it took a P31 package to put the C63 decisively ahead.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by ezec63 Click here to enlarge
    Your E92 is well ahead of over 1100 whp from the M156? Id like to see you prove me wrong but as of now the M156 has the title of power over the S65. Not sure about the E46 so i wont stick my foot in my mouth.
    I haven't seen an 1100 whp C63. I haven't seen any dyno showing 1000+ whp from the M156 all we have is numbers typed on forums from people known to brag. Let me just put it this way, the power argument is not in favor of the M156 when we're talking forced induction. Both motors are VERY capable here.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by ezec63 Click here to enlarge
    The current fastest E92 on drag times is basically even with dodgers N/A C63 so thats tell a lot.
    It says Dodger knows when negative DA hits and when to be at the track.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by ezec63 Click here to enlarge
    I didnt mean the trans itself The DCT is def a better trans than the MCT i was talking about the cars they are attached to.
    As am I and I believe the M5 has a distinct advantage due to its transmission.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by ezec63 Click here to enlarge
    You have a built motor sleeved block S65 so running basic stage 3 cars is no comparison. You have to run the big dogs built motor built trans just like you will be. So until you beat JRcart/ Earl i believe they are the ones that hold the belt. They have power numbers, 1/4 mile slips and multiple runway victories. The CLK trapped over 185 at the half mile event and is 200 whp stronger than before. Not doubting you Sticky take it easy just stating my opinion I hope you go out there and kick ass.
    This does not change my car dispatching with 63 AMG's which according to MBworld people was impossible.

    Well they haven't run me and I haven't run them. For that particular event it is I who holds the belt.

    I appreciate that we'll see soon enough but I am quite familiar with all these cars and their capabilities.

    Stage 2 or 2.5 E9X M3 S65 V8 supercharger kit for sale
    : http://www.boostaddict.com/showthrea...r-kit-for-sale

  12. #62
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    1,117
    Rep Points
    962.8
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    10


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    Regardless it took a P31 package to put the C63 decisively ahead.



    I haven't seen an 1100 whp C63. I haven't seen any dyno showing 1000+ whp from the M156 all we have is numbers typed on forums from people known to brag. Let me just put it this way, the power argument is not in favor of the M156 when we're talking forced induction. Both motors are VERY capable here.



    It says Dodger knows when negative DA hits and when to be at the track.



    As am I and I believe the M5 has a distinct advantage due to its transmission.



    This does not change my car dispatching with 63 AMG's which according to MBworld people was impossible.

    Well they haven't run me and I haven't run them. For that particular event it is I who holds the belt.

    I appreciate that we'll see soon enough but I am quite familiar with all these cars and their capabilities.
    True good point. I believe them but i dont get whats so hard about posting a freakin sheet and putting doubt to rest dont get why they won't. It would actually be better in the c63 than in the clk63 bs the C63 is a bit lighter and the MCT is much better than the pos 7G Torque converter they are using but no one has done it yet. Hopefully it will be me soon enough.
    Actually remember that c63 that hit like 1000whp with the stage 3 blower and a big shot of nitrous? wtf happened to him he went silent quick. Guess that 7G gave out or he blew the motor

    This is true about dodger but the ess e92 that has the record also ran in the same place same conditions. Just shows how badass the M156 can be even N/A one of the great motors. Just like the S65 as you said were lucky to have experienced these masterpieces of german engineering.

    Like ive stated before the DCT is def an advantage. But IMO not enough to overcome 1.1 liters extra displacement and grip of AWD. You see the test the traps are almost identical. The MCT is also much stronger for modifying and the M157 looks to have a good lead in the aftermarket

    No doubt about it you know from my other thread how i feel about Mbworld .. OMGzz Carbon Fiber Start button - 20 Page thread ... Technical disscusion about pioneering black series coolers onto a non BS coupe - 4 replies and 3 were about the price lol

    Thats what im saying until you run and beat them this will be discussed hopefully soon !

    No prob man im glad that even though we dont agree on everything we both have good general knowledge and have debates while keeping it respectful and full of information for others to learn. Keep doing your thing man !!

  13. #63
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    118,891
    Rep Points
    31,838.9
    Mentioned
    2090 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    319



    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by ezec63 Click here to enlarge
    This is true about dodger but the ess e92 that has the record also ran in the same place same conditions. Just shows how badass the M156 can be even N/A one of the great motors. Just like the S65 as you said were lucky to have experienced these masterpieces of german engineering.
    Yes of course it's a great NA motor.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by ezec63 Click here to enlarge
    Like ive stated before the DCT is def an advantage. But IMO not enough to overcome 1.1 liters extra displacement and grip of AWD. You see the test the traps are almost identical. The MCT is also much stronger for modifying and the M157 looks to have a good lead in the aftermarket
    That's where the weight, redline, and gearing come in. Dual clutch transmission have shown in the GTR and Veyron they can take plenty of torque. It's just a matter of beefing it up which is what I'm doing.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by ezec63 Click here to enlarge
    No prob man im glad that even though we dont agree on everything we both have good general knowledge and have debates while keeping it respectful and full of information for others to learn. Keep doing your thing man !!
    I will. The point of the forum is for open discussion and to learn. This would be locked anywhere else.

    Stage 2 or 2.5 E9X M3 S65 V8 supercharger kit for sale
    : http://www.boostaddict.com/showthrea...r-kit-for-sale

  14. #64
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    974
    Rep Points
    442.4
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    5


    Yes Reputation No
    @ezec63 Don't mean to offend you buddy I'm just stating my opinion. I'm not a fanboy. Just telling you what I know.

    To be fair, I've read reviews that do not criticize the M5 as heavy and numb. I think really the only real complaint that can legitimately be levied against the M5 is the fact that the steering is numb. It sure as hell isn't less capable on the track than any E/CLS63.

    The reason you should "watch out" (and I don't mean you personally but anyone with a Weistec/AMS car) is that given the same power, I really think the M5 would be faster than an E63 on a roll. Less weight (140+ pounds is not splitting hairs), DCT, and higher revs. That's all I'm trying to say.

    And no I'm not trying to use forum opinions to say which car is better. I am however referring to what some very reasonable, well-qualified, and long-standing members of both sides have said about both cars. From what I've seen, the biggest criticizers of the M5 are people that have never driven one, followed by people that have never owned one. Always be careful when listening to opinions of these people. As I said, and I think you misread me: Guys on MBW have said they prefer the M handling. So, take that for what you will.

    Again, both are great cars. I just happen to like the BMW a bit better. I have not driven one yet but I'm hoping to arrange that in the near future. Glad you're willing to debate though. I do like talking about this stuff, that's why I'm here.

  15. #65
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    118,891
    Rep Points
    31,838.9
    Mentioned
    2090 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    319



    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by leveraged sellout Click here to enlarge
    "watch out" (and I don't mean you personally but anyone with a Weistec/AMS car) is that given the same power, I really think the M5 would be faster than an E63 on a roll.
    Same here and same with the E92 M3 versus a C63 AMG especially from a roll.

    Stage 2 or 2.5 E9X M3 S65 V8 supercharger kit for sale
    : http://www.boostaddict.com/showthrea...r-kit-for-sale

  16. #66
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    1,117
    Rep Points
    962.8
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    10


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by leveraged sellout Click here to enlarge
    @ezec63 Don't mean to offend you buddy I'm just stating my opinion. I'm not a fanboy. Just telling you what I know.

    To be fair, I've read reviews that do not criticize the M5 as heavy and numb. I think really the only real complaint that can legitimately be levied against the M5 is the fact that the steering is numb. It sure as hell isn't less capable on the track than any E/CLS63.

    The reason you should "watch out" (and I don't mean you personally but anyone with a Weistec/AMS car) is that given the same power, I really think the M5 would be faster than an E63 on a roll. Less weight (140+ pounds is not splitting hairs), DCT, and higher revs. That's all I'm trying to say.

    And no I'm not trying to use forum opinions to say which car is better. I am however referring to what some very reasonable, well-qualified, and long-standing members of both sides have said about both cars. From what I've seen, the biggest criticizers of the M5 are people that have never driven one, followed by people that have never owned one. Always be careful when listening to opinions of these people. As I said, and I think you misread me: Guys on MBW have said they prefer the M handling. So, take that for what you will.

    Again, both are great cars. I just happen to like the BMW a bit better. I have not driven one yet but I'm hoping to arrange that in the near future. Glad you're willing to debate though. I do like talking about this stuff, that's why I'm here.

    same here man ! Just trying to have a convo and insert my opinion which can be right or wrong I'm not Jesus lmao .. As far as the weight to be completely fair it's 100 pounds not 140 the M5 has carbon ceramic brakes that the E63 didn't have and it's good for 42 pounds of weight saving. The CC brakes are an option on the E from the factory this test car
    didnt have them so to be fair it's 100 pounds and 40 pounds of rotational mass is huge that would have made the E63 S even faster and handle better with less weight off the wheels.

    I agree if it did have the same power but what I'm saying is for now the m157 is making much more power and the dct/rwd/100 pounds isn't nearly enough to overcome it. AMS upgrade if it produces 800 crank won't be enough when AMS already has 800 WHEEL package out for the m157 and that was with stock cats/ filters. It will be much more with downpipes, full exhaust, filters, carbon air box, turbo inlet, turbo outlet pipes, inter cooler, and race fuel.
    @Sticky yes maybe but the m3 hasn't shown the ability yet to make more power than the 6.2L m156. Guess we forgot about jrcart raping the ess cars and pulling the built engine/ low compression s65 that Drew had with his stock motor/stock trans c63 bs on a basic stage 3 kit. They are now pushing 790 whp on stock motor/stock trans. S65/Dct isn't close to that power level. There's only one person who can prove that wrong and that's you but that is still to be determined

  17. #67
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    118,891
    Rep Points
    31,838.9
    Mentioned
    2090 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    319



    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by ezec63 Click here to enlarge
    I agree if it did have the same power but what I'm saying is for now the m157 is making much more power and the dct/rwd/100 pounds isn't nearly enough to overcome it.
    It is enough to overcome it as the trap speed shows.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by ezec63 Click here to enlarge
    @Sticky yes maybe but the m3 hasn't shown the ability yet to make more power than the 6.2L m156.
    I believe my build has shown it has...

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by ezec63 Click here to enlarge
    Guess we forgot about jrcart raping the ess cars and pulling the built engine/ low compression s65 that Drew had with his stock motor/stock trans c63 bs on a basic stage 3 kit.
    Those are weak examples though which is why we don't respect them here. If my car was on the level of the ESS cars I'd sell it and move on.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by ezec63 Click here to enlarge
    They are now pushing 790 whp on stock motor/stock trans. S65/Dct isn't close to that power level.
    What are you talking about? Not only am I close I'm past that...

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by ezec63 Click here to enlarge
    There's only one person who can prove that wrong and that's you but that is still to be determined
    I don't think so.

    I mean look the S54 motor in the E46 m3 is ahead of the M156 at this point so doesn't that say enough right there?

    Stage 2 or 2.5 E9X M3 S65 V8 supercharger kit for sale
    : http://www.boostaddict.com/showthrea...r-kit-for-sale

  18. #68
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    1,117
    Rep Points
    962.8
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    10


    Yes Reputation No
    @Sticky no it's not because if they were equipped the same way aka both had CC brakes which are factory options the E63 S would've had an even higher trap speed.

    Your highest dyno still hasn't eclipsed the 870 whp dyno the weistec guys posted a long time ago. Plus for whatever it's worth they are on stock block aka no sleeved cylinders. I understand your car should make a lot more if the clutches didn't slip but if we count that we'd have to count the 1100 whp Jrcart is saying he has now in the m156.

    Yea ess sucks put drews car was at similar power levels to Jrcarts c63 bs at the time. Just showing it can still hang / pull at similar power levels

    i meant close to 790 whp on stock s65 internals/ trans

    the s54 has been out a lot longer so it has that advantage. What's the whp record for them for a street car ? Not some tubbed out 7 second car

  19. #69
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    118,891
    Rep Points
    31,838.9
    Mentioned
    2090 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    319



    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by ezec63 Click here to enlarge
    @Sticky no it's not because if they were equipped the same way aka both had CC brakes which are factory options the E63 S would've had an even higher trap speed.
    It should do better but the cars ran what they ran. Even with carbon ceramic brakes I'll stick take the M5 in a top end race as it is rear wheel drive with a dual clutch and higher redline.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by ezec63 Click here to enlarge
    Your highest dyno still hasn't eclipsed the 870 whp dyno the weistec guys posted a long time ago. Plus for whatever it's worth they are on stock block aka no sleeved cylinders. I understand your car should make a lot more if the clutches didn't slip but if we count that we'd have to count the 1100 whp Jrcart is saying he has now in the m156.
    I don't think they are stock block with what they are doing but maybe they are. I vaguely remember talking sleeves with them. I haven't seen any 1100 whp dyno but even if they do make 1100 whp that's fine. I have a dyno sheet showing the capability I'm talking about though so any intelligent person should be able to put it together.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by ezec63 Click here to enlarge
    i meant close to 790 whp on stock s65 internals/ trans
    You can't expect a higher compression motor with less displacement on a different transmission style to make the same stock internal numbers. Plus, we're mentioning car that are no longer on the stock components anyway so it's irrelevant. To take advantage of the platform things have to be changed like the compression ratio at least for the M3.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by ezec63 Click here to enlarge
    the s54 has been out a lot longer so it has that advantage. What's the whp record for them for a street car ? Not some tubbed out 7 second car
    1100 or something around there?

    Stage 2 or 2.5 E9X M3 S65 V8 supercharger kit for sale
    : http://www.boostaddict.com/showthrea...r-kit-for-sale

  20. #70
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    974
    Rep Points
    442.4
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    5


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by ezec63 Click here to enlarge
    same here man ! Just trying to have a convo and insert my opinion which can be right or wrong I'm not Jesus lmao .. As far as the weight to be completely fair it's 100 pounds not 140 the M5 has carbon ceramic brakes that the E63 didn't have and it's good for 42 pounds of weight saving. The CC brakes are an option on the E from the factory this test car
    didnt have them so to be fair it's 100 pounds and 40 pounds of rotational mass is huge that would have made the E63 S even faster and handle better with less weight off the wheels.

    I agree if it did have the same power but what I'm saying is for now the m157 is making much more power and the dct/rwd/100 pounds isn't nearly enough to overcome it. AMS upgrade if it produces 800 crank won't be enough when AMS already has 800 WHEEL package out for the m157 and that was with stock cats/ filters. It will be much more with downpipes, full exhaust, filters, carbon air box, turbo inlet, turbo outlet pipes, inter cooler, and race fuel.
    @Sticky yes maybe but the m3 hasn't shown the ability yet to make more power than the 6.2L m156. Guess we forgot about jrcart raping the ess cars and pulling the built engine/ low compression s65 that Drew had with his stock motor/stock trans c63 bs on a basic stage 3 kit. They are now pushing 790 whp on stock motor/stock trans. S65/Dct isn't close to that power level. There's only one person who can prove that wrong and that's you but that is still to be determined
    Just a quick note, I think AMS is hoping to push 1000 hp too with built engines, and that might be at the wheels, not sure. Their 800 hp target for the turbo upgrade might be whp too, but I'm not sure. I actually would love for them to chime in on this.

  21. #71
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    974
    Rep Points
    442.4
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    5


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    Same here and same with the E92 M3 versus a C63 AMG especially from a roll.
    Most definitely. Unless you have a V12, ///M cars are the ones to have for the highway races now.

  22. #72
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    1,117
    Rep Points
    962.8
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    10


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by leveraged sellout Click here to enlarge
    Just a quick note, I think AMS is hoping to push 1000 hp too with built engines, and that might be at the wheels, not sure. Their 800 hp target for the turbo upgrade might be whp too, but I'm not sure. I actually would love for them to chime in on this.
    Nice ! Hope they hit their target competition is good for everyone I'm sure they have something epic brewing for the built M157 as well

  23. #73
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    1,117
    Rep Points
    962.8
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    10


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by leveraged sellout Click here to enlarge
    Most definitely. Unless you have a V12, ///M cars are the ones to have for the highway races now.
    You know im going to have to agree to disagree with this Click here to enlarge

  24. #74
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    6,683
    Rep Points
    3,335.6
    Mentioned
    225 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    34


    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    Dual clutch transmission have shown in the GTR and Veyron they can take plenty of torque. It's just a matter of beefing it up which is what I'm doing.
    ..beefing up "and programming" the TCU
    Click here to enlarge

  25. #75
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    118,891
    Rep Points
    31,838.9
    Mentioned
    2090 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    319



    Yes Reputation No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by dzenno@PTF Click here to enlarge
    ..beefing up "and programming" the TCU
    A lot of the 'programming' you hear about is just upping the line pressure.

    Stage 2 or 2.5 E9X M3 S65 V8 supercharger kit for sale
    : http://www.boostaddict.com/showthrea...r-kit-for-sale

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •