Model S Performance vs BMW M5

[stopcrazypp]

Accel - 0-60 in 4.4 seconds

BMW M5
Accel - 0-60 in 3.7 seconds

2013 BMW M5 Road Test Car and Driver

If it's any consolation, the official 0-60 for the M5 appears to be 4.4 seconds. The 3.7 seconds was a best case achieved by C&D after multiple tries and with launch control.
http://www.topspeed.com/cars/bmw/2012-bmw-m5-ar100010.html

At a stop light, I think they would be pretty close. At a drag strip I think the M5 will win (since the person would likely use launch control and near the end the M5 will probably do better). I think it's really something that Tesla was able to create a car that is pretty damn close to the M5, a long time benchmark for performance sedans (not to mention the Model S is electric and only has one gear). Even if the M5 wins by a slight margin, it's nothing to be ashamed of.

 

[Jason S]

No kidding, I was ready to vote for him, go knock on doors and write a check to the campaign!

Not necessarily in that order.

 

[W8MM]

Thank you, but it would be much more insightful to see the torque vs speed, instead of power vs speed, since acceleration is proportional to force/torque, not power.

I agree!!

 

[spatterso911]

I think it's really something that Tesla was able to create a car that is pretty damn close to the M5, a long time benchmark for performance sedans (not to mention the Model S is electric and only has one gear). Even if the M5 wins by a slight margin, it's nothing to be ashamed of.

And this, my friends, is the reason why my M5 tradition ended in March...

(+ about 100 other reasons why driving an ICE car no longer makes sense)

 

[Zextraterrestrial]

And this, my friends, is the reason why my M5 tradition ended in March...

(+ about 100 other reasons why driving an ICE car no longer makes sense)

CHEERS :biggrin:!
(so much noise and shifting for nothing)

 

[rowan]

I was the one who wrote that review. It is here: Rowan Trollope | Test drive - Tesla model S - AWESOME

The car that I compared the Tesla Model S (perf. edition) against was a 2010 BMW M6 convertible. I have a manual transmission, so no launch control. I just looked up the zero to 60 times here BMW 0-60 Times & BMW Quarter Mile Times | BMW E36, X5, BMW M3 0-60, M5, M6, M1, 330, Z4 and Cabrio Bimmer 0 to 60 stats!, which lo and behold reports a 4.5 second zero to 60, vs the Tesla claimed 4.4 second zero to 60... Like I said, it feels faster, and it IS faster. The other point is that to get the claimed 4.5 seconds on the BMW one must be practiced at launching the car, not spinning the wheels, etc. etc.

When I went to test drive the Tesla, I felt I would probably keep the M6 as a weekend car because I wanted to keep the "performance" car. After being wowed by the Tesla performance, the only reason I'll have for keeping the M6 over the Tesla S is for the convertible. Now I will be the first to admit that these are radically different cars, however if one was to compare an M5 to a Tesla, you'd be looking at two much more comparable cars.

I would also point out that the handling is FAR superior in the Tesla (at least it felt that way to me). Furthermore the electronics in the Tesla make the M6 (and every other car on the road for that matter) look like a complete dinosaur. I absolutely look forward to taking these to the track, and my (completely uneducated) guess is the Tesla will win.

BTW (and this is frankly quite surprising if true), as reported by the internal computer, on average my M6 gets 9MPG! I am guilt of loving the sound of my engine and driving the engine in the least efficient way possible!

The BMW wins in two areas: 1) Extremely loud and sweet sounding exhaust (mine is an aftermarket exhaust), and 2) (this is my general impression) fit and finish are superior on the BMW.

As kitted out, my signature performance Tesla Model S will likely cost 105k plus tax. More expensive that the M6.

One final subjective thought: The Tesla was way more fun to drive. Like WAY more fun. As some commenters have pointed out, to get the full performance of my M6 requires effort. You have to drive it hard, and hold on for dear life, revving the engine to near 8k RPM's, shifting quickly, slamming pedals, etc. All of these things are what I have always considered as "fun" to get the most from my car. The Tesla is fun in a different way: it is effortless, just push on the accelerator and steer. Admittedly, it is also a new experience and so perhaps some of the thrill of this car is related to the novelty, which, like all things new and exciting will dull with time. Like I said, its the difference between a bucking bronco and a rocket ship. They are different, but to me, after having ridden MANY bucking bronco's in my life, I'm ready for the new thrill of driving that the Tesla Model S will usher in. The rocket ship ride.

All hail Tesla.

 

[CapitalistOppressor]

Um, technically we already have "Roadster 2" as Tesla used that designation for all the changes they made between the 2008 and 2010 model year.
I think it would be more correct to refer to the next Roadster as "Roadster 3.0"

Sorry, I prefer my naming conventions over Tesla's and my opinion is the one that counts

Seriously though, I am aware of Roadster 2, but it was not a real technological departure from the original Roadster. In the software terminology I was using I'd consider Roadster 2 to be Roadster v1.1 or v1.2. Meaning essentially it was an improvement on an existing design. The improvement was substantial but it was the same basic platform.

If there is going to be a next Roadster (which might not even be named Roadster) it will be a ground up design by Tesla rather than a re-purposed Lotus Elise.

 

[CapitalistOppressor]

Not really. Power drawn from the batteries is just a tad higher than power put to the wheels (heating losses, ...).
Model S attains its max power at 95 kmh (58 mph). All acceleration below this speed 'happens' at lower power and lower battery output. Average power for 0-60 time is about half the peak power.

If Model S or Roadster or any car had some "magic CVT" that allowed the engine/motor to stick to its max power RPM all the time, 0-60 time would be half the current time with same load onto the batteries. I'm ignoring time limits in allowed high-C currents and assuming enough grip.

If on the other hand you would double the battery output, the curve would only be higher, not wider.

Sorry, I was being imprecise. I was building a case that to make further large improvements in performance you will probably need a transmission but I didn't necessarily realize that when I first started writing. Batteries are going to improve substantially in the next 4 years along with the potential power output and engine performance. There might be some room for increases in top end performance by increasing engine power but you are limited with a single gear ratio. At some point you are forced to sacrifice performance at one end of the spectrum or the other, no matter how powerful your engine is.

Either you optimize for low and mid speed performance (as is currently the case in Model S), in which case you are limited by RPM limits on the engine before it breaks. Or you optimize for mid and high speed performance and are limited at the low end by how much torque you can apply to the drive train before you blow something apart.

This is only a "limitation" if there is an actual need or desire on the part of Tesla to fully match ICE vehicles in the entire spectrum of 0-200mph performance (assuming that it is outside of our capability to economically engineer a single gear solution that can withstand the forces required to achieve good acceleration numbers at the low end while gaining significant high end performance that is currently out of reach).

 

[dsm363]

If the Model S can feel fast/quick and outperform ICEs in the 0-80mph range, that will help sell more cars than if it can hit 180mph. Many people love the feeling of unlimited acceleration and can't thankfully usually get it up past 80-100 on public roads so don't notice that it may fall off.

 

[bonnie]

I was the one who wrote that review. It is here: Rowan Trollope | Test drive - Tesla model S - AWESOME

The car that I compared the Tesla Model S (perf. edition) against was a 2010 BMW M6 convertible. I have a manual transmission, so no launch control. I just looked up the zero to 60 times here BMW 0-60 Times & BMW Quarter Mile Times | BMW E36, X5, BMW M3 0-60, M5, M6, M1, 330, Z4 and Cabrio Bimmer 0 to 60 stats!, which lo and behold reports a 4.5 second zero to 60, vs the Tesla claimed 4.4 second zero to 60... Like I said, it feels faster, and it IS faster. The other point is that to get the claimed 4.5 seconds on the BMW one must be practiced at launching the car, not spinning the wheels, etc. etc.

When I went to test drive the Tesla, I felt I would probably keep the M6 as a weekend car because I wanted to keep the "performance" car. After being wowed by the Tesla performance, the only reason I'll have for keeping the M6 over the Tesla S is for the convertible. Now I will be the first to admit that these are radically different cars, however if one was to compare an M5 to a Tesla, you'd be looking at two much more comparable cars.

I would also point out that the handling is FAR superior in the Tesla (at least it felt that way to me). Furthermore the electronics in the Tesla make the M6 (and every other car on the road for that matter) look like a complete dinosaur. I absolutely look forward to taking these to the track, and my (completely uneducated) guess is the Tesla will win.

BTW (and this is frankly quite surprising if true), as reported by the internal computer, on average my M6 gets 9MPG! I am guilt of loving the sound of my engine and driving the engine in the least efficient way possible!

The BMW wins in two areas: 1) Extremely loud and sweet sounding exhaust (mine is an aftermarket exhaust), and 2) (this is my general impression) fit and finish are superior on the BMW.

As kitted out, my signature performance Tesla Model S will likely cost 105k plus tax. More expensive that the M6.

One final subjective thought: The Tesla was way more fun to drive. Like WAY more fun. As some commenters have pointed out, to get the full performance of my M6 requires effort. You have to drive it hard, and hold on for dear life, revving the engine to near 8k RPM's, shifting quickly, slamming pedals, etc. All of these things are what I have always considered as "fun" to get the most from my car. The Tesla is fun in a different way: it is effortless, just push on the accelerator and steer. Admittedly, it is also a new experience and so perhaps some of the thrill of this car is related to the novelty, which, like all things new and exciting will dull with time. Like I said, its the difference between a bucking bronco and a rocket ship. They are different, but to me, after having ridden MANY bucking bronco's in my life, I'm ready for the new thrill of driving that the Tesla Model S will usher in. The rocket ship ride.

All hail Tesla.

Great first post! Welcome.

 

[Discoducky]

I was the one who wrote that review. It is here: Rowan Trollope | Test drive - Tesla model S - AWESOME

The BMW wins in two areas: 1) Extremely loud and sweet sounding exhaust (mine is an aftermarket exhaust), and 2) (this is my general impression) fit and finish are superior on the BMW.

Great review and I'll be paying extra attention to the points you call out for my Test Drive experience in Seattle next weekend. Specifically, where you think the car falls short.

1) Interior fit and finish. Didn’t quite seem up to the quality of a 100k car like the M6. It was good, but it is not great. Examples: - the door handles are cool (they pop out when you touch them), but the pop out mechanism is subtly jerky - cool idea, needs better execution. - Interior door handles are sculpted, but felt like a cheap car. Hard to put my finger on why, just that is how they felt (I didn’t have much time with them). - there is a cross bar in the center of the roof in the panoramic glass roof model. The covering on this cross bar looked cheap. - the seatbelt buckles were large and clunky. Not normal for a luxury car. Hopefully they fix this. - I could go on, but I only had a few minutes, and these things stood out.

2) Seats. They design feels a bit cheap. Non adjustable head rests are odd.

3) The typeface for the “model S” badge. It’s a custom typeface. They seem to be copying the angular elements of their logo. To my eyes it looks cheap, poorly designed and clunky. I love the naming “model S” reminiscent of the “model T”. I hate the typeface. All the other typefaces used in all of their designs are fantastic, clean, element and modern. This one seems very out of place. I may have to simply remove this from my car when I get it.

4) The black plastic covering the grill. Looks cheap and fragile.

 

[vfx]

... The Tesla is fun in a different way: it is effortless, just push on the accelerator and steer. Admittedly, it is also a new experience and so perhaps some of the thrill of this car is related to the novelty, which, like all things new and exciting will dull with time.....

Nice post Rowan. I wonder if you have driven a Tesla Roadster? I would guess not since all the emotional parts of driving a performance electric car apply to that Tesla as well.

Your comment about the novelty of this new driving paradigm and how it may fade with time is worth some more consideration. As a 3 year Roadster owner I can say there have been days when the harsher realities of life may have overshadowed the fun of driving the car but when when all things return to normalcy (whatever that is) there is the Roadster. It embodies fun, freedom and wind through the air silence. Remarkably even horrible traffic jams are more tolerable with one foot driving in an electric.
After 47,000 miles my car still brings a smile, it still makes me feel good. One thing I can guarantee you as many recent Model S reviewers have pointed out is that getting back in the old ICE will never be the same. The effort, the heat, the noise and the smoke of internal combustion all seems so old.
Petroleum based transportation is suddenly so dated, like a Victrola or a photographic tin type, or dialing a telephone. Each of those devices have changed the world but even the best ICEs made are still analogous to a quality record player, a 35MM film camera or wireless home phone. Those pale next to the convenience and abilities of MP3s, Digital cameras and smart phones. We still use the same tools but they are updated.
The act of carving out new technology creates collections of antiques as it forms the future. We may still hold nostalgia for the old but for day-to-day living, we prefer the innovation. Digital cars are the new future of transportation.

 

[rowan]

Great review and I'll be paying extra attention to the points you call out for my Test Drive experience in Seattle next weekend. Specifically, where you think the car falls short.

I have not driven a roadster, sounds nice though.

I think your points about ICE cars are spot on. It nicely sums up how I felt about getting back in the M6 after the S test driv: dated and antiquated.

If they had a forum for Ford Model T enthusiasts in the 1920's, the conversations they had probably would mirror many of these sentiments, just replace "Model S" with"Model T", and replace "ICE" with "Horse"! Ahahahaha

The only difference is the horses weren't destroying our planet.

 

[jerry33]

The only difference is the horses weren't destroying our planet.

Strictly speaking that's not correct. Horse pollution and the associated health problems were a big factor in the acceptance of the automobile. It's discussed here.

 

[PV4EV]

I was the one who wrote that review. It is here: Rowan Trollope | Test drive - Tesla model S - AWESOME
...
The Tesla was way more fun to drive. Like WAY more fun. As some commenters have pointed out, to get the full performance of my M6 requires effort. You have to drive it hard, and hold on for dear life, revving the engine to near 8k RPM's, shifting quickly, slamming pedals, etc.
...
The Tesla is fun in a different way: it is effortless, just push on the accelerator and steer.

All hail Tesla.

Nice to read a summary from someone who has actually driven both - Thanks !

 

[spatterso911]

Nice to read a summary from someone who has actually driven both - Thanks !

I will be posting a review perhaps Sunday night with a fair comparison of the M5 and the Model S. I feel emotional about both of them, and having had thousands of miles (road, track, city, freeway) behind the wheel of an M5, hopefully it will be an equally relevant one like Rowan's. I have had a go behind the wheel of a roadster, and after I stopped giddily giggling, I realized I had just launched a missile with all of the inherent G-force thrills associated with a continuous push of linearly increasing thrust.

Stay tuned

 

[PV4EV]

....
I was building a case that to make further large improvements in performance you will probably need a transmission but I didn't necessarily realize that when I first started writing.

Not necessarily !!

The Model X uses the same basic chassis / platform as the Model S, yet the 4WD version features a 2nd motor.

You could end up with a car that can switch-in the 2nd motor to give even more acceleration AND extend the top end speed (which in my view is a bit of a waste in the real world). Changing the direct gearing ratio would be easy enough to cater for a specific top speed without overheating everything at a sustained high speed.

Having a 2nd motor at the front could also significantly increase the amount of regen energy that can be harvested (although buffering it into ultra-caps or similar would be needed as batteries can only charge at a certain maximum rate)

Also, such a two motor solution would be just as energy efficient as the existing single motor chassis at the same given speed.

Combine that with a 500 mile battery pack and a slightly plusher interior, and you've got a EV vehicle that no conventional high-end ICE can touch.

I want that version !

 

[gocken2]

Not necessarily !!

switch-in the 2nd motor to give even more acceleration AND extend the top end speed

I want that version !

The only way this would work is if you had some way of disconnecting the 1st motor since it's still limited by max RPM. I believe that a 2+ speed gearbox would be the best bet if you wanted to race the M5 on a track where it has the ability go above 130mph.

 

[PV4EV]

I will be posting a review perhaps Sunday night with a fair comparison of the M5 and the Model S. I feel emotional about both of them, and having had thousands of miles (road, track, city, freeway) behind the wheel of an M5, hopefully it will be an equally relevant one like Rowan's. I have had a go behind the wheel of a roadster, and after I stopped giddily giggling, I realized I had just launched a missile with all of the inherent G-force thrills associated with a continuous push of linearly increasing thrust.

Stay tuned

Looking forward to that !

 

[PV4EV]

The only way this would work is if you had some way of disconnecting the 1st motor since it's still limited by max RPM. I believe that a 2+ speed gearbox would be the best bet if you wanted to race the M5 on a track where it has the ability go above 130mph.

Tesla spent ages trying to make a 2 speed box work with the early Roadsters. The single speed final design is way more efficient mechanically, and far less prone to self destructing with all the torque, and does away with all the gear change mechanisms.

My original comment suggests a way of achieving a higher sustainable speed by raising the fixed gearing slightly so that the safe maximum motor speed equates to, say, 150mph, but such a speed would only be possible with the combined power of both existing motors.

However, building a Model S capable of sustaining 150mph for any length of time is a bit pointless in the real world as it would only be for bragging rights against an M5 around The Ring etc etc ... and not in line with Tesla's mission to make highly efficient cars. The energy drain on the ESS at 150 mph (up from 130 mph max) would probably require some redesign of the maximum power delivery and heat dissapation and a whole load of other problems.

Personally I think anything more than 110/120mph is a waste of engineering, but I do enjoy getting there really quick with laugh-inducing acceleration :biggrin: