M5 versus Shelby GT500

"Eisboch" > wrote in message
...
>
> "bfd" > wrote in message
> . ..
> >
> >>
> > Since you have an 06 M5, this is probably not a concern for you, but one
> > thing I'm wary about is the durability of SMG. Will SMG trannies be as
> > durable as BMW automatics or its manual transmission? For those who
> > purchase
> > E60 M5 when it has over 100K miles, they maybe in for an expensive
> > surprise.
> > However, if SMG trannies are "as durable" as manual transmission, then
it
> > might be OK.
> >
> > Further, a recent study has shown that only something like 15% of all
> > Americans know how to shift a manual transmission. That's really sad....
> >
> >
>
> The durability of the SMG remains to be established, for sure. The E60 M5
> has been out in Europe since the 2005 model year and in the US for the
2006
> model year (still less than 12 months) so it's way to early to tell. So
far
> though there have been more problems with minor issues such as bad
steering
> angle sensors and a batch of bad Vanos oil lines. Both have been
addressed
> by BMW. I know of two cases where the transmissions had to be replaced,
one
> in Great Britain and one in the US, but these are on cars with relatively
> low mileage and could be manufacturing defects. The one in Great Britain
> however is owned by a "launch control junkie", so that may have been a
> factor.
>
> The E60 M5 is a high performance car and most (but not all) owners are
like
> me .... the car is not a daily driver and does not accumulate mileage
> quickly. Since last December, when I first took delivery, I've only put
> 3000 miles on mine. That, plus the fact that both the SMG and the V10
engine
> have their design origins in BMW Formula One race cars, significantly
> detuned to extend their life and durability works in favor of the second
> owner market.
>
> I've noticed that some owners have decided to trade their M5s in within a
> few months of ownership and frankly, it crossed my mind also. The car has
> so much performance capability that you really can't utilize unless you
take
> it to a closed track that you start wondering if it makes sense to have
it.
> When I get this feeling I take it out for a spin and quickly convince
myself
> to keep it.
>
> Eisboch
>
>
>

Bit OT but out of interest what sort of MPG are you getting? Having just
sold my M3 I'm thinking of an M5 but keep hearing horror stories of 8-9mpg
which in the UK at £1 per litre is scary! Especially with a small tank.

"TonyK" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Eisboch" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "bfd" > wrote in message
>> . ..
>> >
>> >>
>> > Since you have an 06 M5, this is probably not a concern for you, but
>> > one
>> > thing I'm wary about is the durability of SMG. Will SMG trannies be as
>> > durable as BMW automatics or its manual transmission? For those who
>> > purchase
>> > E60 M5 when it has over 100K miles, they maybe in for an expensive
>> > surprise.
>> > However, if SMG trannies are "as durable" as manual transmission, then
> it
>> > might be OK.
>> >
>> > Further, a recent study has shown that only something like 15% of all
>> > Americans know how to shift a manual transmission. That's really
>> > sad....
>> >
>> >
>>
>> The durability of the SMG remains to be established, for sure. The E60
>> M5
>> has been out in Europe since the 2005 model year and in the US for the
> 2006
>> model year (still less than 12 months) so it's way to early to tell. So
> far
>> though there have been more problems with minor issues such as bad
> steering
>> angle sensors and a batch of bad Vanos oil lines. Both have been
> addressed
>> by BMW. I know of two cases where the transmissions had to be replaced,
> one
>> in Great Britain and one in the US, but these are on cars with relatively
>> low mileage and could be manufacturing defects. The one in Great Britain
>> however is owned by a "launch control junkie", so that may have been a
>> factor.
>>
>> The E60 M5 is a high performance car and most (but not all) owners are
> like
>> me .... the car is not a daily driver and does not accumulate mileage
>> quickly. Since last December, when I first took delivery, I've only put
>> 3000 miles on mine. That, plus the fact that both the SMG and the V10
> engine
>> have their design origins in BMW Formula One race cars, significantly
>> detuned to extend their life and durability works in favor of the second
>> owner market.
>>
>> I've noticed that some owners have decided to trade their M5s in within a
>> few months of ownership and frankly, it crossed my mind also. The car
>> has
>> so much performance capability that you really can't utilize unless you
> take
>> it to a closed track that you start wondering if it makes sense to have
> it.
>> When I get this feeling I take it out for a spin and quickly convince
> myself
>> to keep it.
>>
>> Eisboch
>>
>>
>>
>
> Bit OT but out of interest what sort of MPG are you getting? Having just
> sold my M3 I'm thinking of an M5 but keep hearing horror stories of 8-9mpg
> which in the UK at £1 per litre is scary! Especially with a small tank.
>
>

I average around 14-15 mpg (US gal). Drive it hard and it will drop to 12.
Drive it crazy and it drops to about 10 mpg. Easy highway driving yields
about 17. The tank *is* small however (I forget how many gallons) but it
seems like a full tank is good for about 220 miles or so, maybe a bit more.

Eisboch

wrote:
> Am I right? Is there other side to
> this that I am ignorant about? Enlighten me please if I am.

No grasshopper, you are wrong.
Yes grasshopper, you are undoubtably ignorant about many things, this
just being one of them.
Poor grasshopper, enlightenment can't come to a troll.

Here's a goodie for you M5 fans from the current Roundel...

A current 3-series (might even be with a 5-Series) diesel will out
accelerate an M5 in the 50-70 mph range because of the superior torque of
the diesel.

I think that is way cool and wish BMW sold their diesels in the U.S.



> wrote in message ...
> 2006 BMW M5 (5 liter V10 7 speed with 500 horsepower & 383 torque)
> versus 2007 Ford Shelby GT500 ( 5.4 liter V8 6 speed with 500 horsepower
> & 480 torque). I am not a mechanic and don't know exactly what torque
> is but I heard that if a car has more torque, it has more power. If I
> am right, does that mean Ford Shelby can out run M5 from zero to sixty
> and high speed?. Also M5 costs almost twice as much than Shelby GT500
> so seems Shelby is a better value. Am I right? Is there other side to
> this that I am ignorant about? Enlighten me please if I am.
>