1033 HP E34 M5 at Racetrack Lapping everyone!

[Bryan in Coral Springs]

http://www.germantechnik.com/showthr...threadid=12530

[Jason]

it seems like the driver needs to brush up on his skills.

[shragon]

i'm assuming it's this car:

http://www.vsmotor.no/en_index.html

[andyman32]

That car is made for one thing and one thing only: stripping tires.

Can you imagine 1033 bhp? You tap on the gas a little and it would peel out!

[Bryan in Coral Springs]

Yes I posted the Dragstrip run a few months back!

[632 Regal]

ZERO traction at any speed, 10 mph?? hit it and smoke em, very spooky.

[cary]

I am a bit sceptical of this car. While I can believe the raw horsepower numbers, I don't think they are very usable. Looking at the turbo size and watching it go around the track, it is apparent, this motor has either no power, or is under full boost. While this setup makes for impressive dragstrip numbers and neat demos at the track, it doesn't make for a fast track car.

Why did the company that built this not go for a twin turbo setup that allows for faster boost building as well as a much flatter power curve? They could have built a really fast 600-700 horsepower car that would turn in better lap times because it is controlled when under throttle rather and firecracker. Raw horsepower numbers mean little in the real world.

[632 Regal]

its apparent that the driver is not accustomed to the raw power that it can produce, thus the long time before he gets into the slides and blown smokin burnouts around the track.

He doesnt use the rpms properly and under revs/over revs trying to get a feel for the power.

On the street or on the track that car is completely useless unless he over revs it or under revs it because when the tires are liquid tar the traction is similar to ice in the winter.

I have had cars without adequit traction, old days yes before i learned how to make a car hook and all it is like, is driving on ice...loose every race cause id get beat by cars half as fast cause Id incinerate the tires at any speed.

I have a 4400 lb can am with only about 450-500 hp which is power to weight a lot slower than most performance cars these days but if I throttle it just right I can get enough grip to send it in front of the others...ie: aim it like a boat.

[winfred]

i am impressed it hung together through that abuse, lack of traction was probably it's saving point, just because you can make that kind of power on a dyno don't mean it will reach that output when it's not strapped down. if it ever hooked up good it'd probably rip the subframe in half, like a local 500 hp dinan m6 that was famous and personally known to my last two bosses, he'd start a street drag leaning against the fender and then run them down, one day this caught up with him and the subframe was ripped in two both axles snapped and the diff spun around several times

[cary]

I think the car is as much to blame as the driver. This M5 is far different than old american muscle cars (I am old enough to have played with traction bars, carbs, and cars with lots of torque) which had a great deal of torque. Lets take an example, a 455 Olds motor. Probably 450ft/lbs of torque from the factory and 350 hp in the top tuned motor. The torque curve would come on strong at 2000 rpms and the motor would pull strongly to about 5000-5500 rpms. Anywhere between you could jump from coasting to full throttle and develop huge power, or feather the throttle to maintain the limit of available traction.

Now this M5 Turbo, has this big honkin turbo off the side. On the dyno it supposedly puts out 1000hp. But what they don't show is horsepower and torque curves. Yes the motor puts out 1000hp at 7500rpm, but with the low compression pistons and huge turbo, it probably is only putting out 200hp at 4000 rpms (where boost just starts) and the torque peak is probably at 6500 rpms. What you have is a motor that while claiming high horsepower has a power curve that looks like a cliff (compared to the relatively flat curve the above 455 motor example).

Now, with the turbo, not only do we have a steep power curve, but we have horrible turbo lag. Imagine that at 3000 rpm you stomp on the gas, now count, one thousand one, one thousand two, one thousand three, boost is just starting to build. Then, oops, to much power, back off the throttle. Guess what, that turbo has to wind down, takes a second where the car still wants to go. There is no feathering the throttle on this car, it is a light switch.

They could have built a far more impressive track car that had less power, but a much more usable power curve like the olds example. Twin turbos for lower mass. Boost could start at 1500-2000rpm, much less turbo lag, much more torque. Same car would probably have 400 hp at 3000 rpm, 500ft lbs torque at the same point. Difference would be at 7500 rpms, it might only make 600-700hp. But it would have a powerband of 4000rpms compared to 1000.

Just my thoughts.

Cary