New BMW M5 clocked at Hockenheim!

  • Thread starter Thread starter hampus_dh
  • 12 comments
  • 1,390 views

hampus_dh

(Banned)
Messages
1,897
attachment.php


For a 4-door saloon this thing deserves some respect :)

Time: 1.12.90
Driver: Horst von Saurma

Track: Hockenheim Short.

attachment.php
 
Not as fast as the M3 GTS.

Which may be cheaper.

The M3 GTS is a light weight hardcore super-M3 while the M5 is a 4-door family car that weighs nearly 2 tonnes.
The M5 should not even be up there in the first place, just look at the cars it´s surrounded by.

And yes, it was more expensive then the new M5. And a hell of alot more rare.
 
The M3 GTS sold for 115,000 euros. The M5 is much cheaper. Not to mention the GTS is a hardcore racer, where as the M5 comes with all the creature comforts at the speed of some very fast cars.
 
Not as fast as the M3 GTS.

Which may be cheaper.

But it's faster than the '12 M3... And it's also faster than a V12 Vantage, DBS, even a 360 CS! And it's 2 tenths of a second off the F430, R8 4.2 V8 and the V10 Spyder...
 
Yea that is BMW´s own time. Have to wait for a third party to drive the car to remove an biased views but in doubt it should break the 8 min mark.
 
Unbiased? Like Porsche?

"Yes, ve haff tested the M5... and while ve haff been able to do 7:50 with our Panamera Turbo, ve cannot get the M5 to go under 8:30."

"Yes, ve used the same drivers as vit our GT-R test. Why do you ask?"

---

Considering no Ring time is actually "official", you basically have to trust that all times are done with standard cars. But still, third-party tests are not often as quick as manufacturer tests simply because the drivers don't have as much practice time in the car.

And then there's the surface, the weather, the traffic, etcetera, etcetera, etcetera...

I think the Hockenheim time (considering all laptimes are by Horst) is more indicative.
 
Considering no Ring time is actually "official", you basically have to trust that all times are done with standard cars. But still, third-party tests are not often as quick as manufacturer tests simply because the drivers don't have as much practice time in the car.

You can´t trust the car manufacturer when it comes to numbers because they will always tweak it some. It´s a selling point for alot of cars so the best possible way is to get numbers from a magazine or whoever that is not associated with the brand itself.

I´m pretty sure they get the car for atleast a day and do more then one lap aswell.
 
You can´t trust the car manufacturer when it comes to numbers because they will always tweak it some. It´s a selling point for alot of cars so the best possible way is to get numbers from a magazine or whoever that is not associated with the brand itself.

I´m pretty sure they get the car for atleast a day and do more then one lap aswell.

And even then, you can only compare it to laps in other cars by the same driver and you have to adjust for conditions, as magazines do their laps on public days in traffic.

-

Manufacturers know how much is riding on ring time publicity, which is why they provide videos. There's little doubt they use standard cars on standard tires, but they can game the times in other ways... shaving the tires a bit, doing lots of practice runs, waiting for perfect weather... if you're Ferrari or McLaren, who have cars that can be tweaked as a factory default, you can also optimize the suspension for the racetrack.

-

Still, I'd take a lap set on a regular racetrack, one where wind speed and direction won't change your lap times by a few seconds per lap, over the Nurb as an indicator of actual performance. Nurb times are merely for bragging rights.
 
Back