SCANS [scans] Sport Auto - BMW M5 vs. Mercedes-Benz E63 AMG PP & Porsche Panamera Turbo S

First time in Sport Auto's history: dyno-figures!

Interesting results: M5 and E63 AMG are on the same level, same acceleration, E63 pulls a bit better in 4th and 5th gear - despite its longer gearratios. Braking results are pretty bad, considering the perfect conditions: 17 Degrees Celsius air- and 25 Degrees Celsius tracktemperature.

The Panamera Turbo S is the quickest around the Hockenheimring, with its best time of 1.12,1 min it is 1,5 seconds quicker than the M5 and 2,5 s quicker than the E63 AMG.


1st place: BMW M5 - 620 hp on the dyno (claim: 560)

• Tyres: Michelin Pilot Supersport
• Weight: 1963 kg
• 0-100 km/h: 4,3 s
• 0-200 km/h: 13,0 s
• Flexibility (80-120 km/h) in 5th/6th gear: 4,5 s/5,6 s
• Flexibility (80-180 km/h) in 5th/6th gear: 12,2 s/15,3 s
• 18 m slalom: 66,3 km/h
• Braking (100-0 km/h), warm: 37,5 m
• Braking (200-0 km/h), warm: 150,0 m

2nd place: Porsche Panamera Turbo S - 555 hp on the dyno (claim: 550)

• Tyres: Michelin Pilot Supersport N0
• Weight: 2024 kg
• 0-100 km/h: 3,7 s
• 0-200 km/h: 12,4 s
• Flexibility (80-120 km/h) in 5th/6th gear: 4,6 s/7,0 s
• Flexibility (80-180 km/h) in 5th/6th gear: 11,9 s/16,8 s
• 18 m slalom: 65,0 km/h
• Braking (100-0 km/h), warm: 34,9 m
• Braking (200-0 km/h), warm: 144,2 m

3nd place: Mercedes-Benz E63 AMG PP - 610 hp on the dyno (claim: 557)

• Tyres: Continental Sport Contact 5P
• Weight: 1941 kg
• 0-100 km/h: 4,4 s
• 0-200 km/h: 13,2 s
• Flexibility (80-120 km/h) in 5th/6th gear: 4,5 s/6,4 s
• Flexibility (80-180 km/h) in 5th/6th gear: 12,0 s/16,2 s
• 18 m slalom: 64,9 km/h
• Braking (100-0 km/h), warm: 37,5 m
• Braking (200-0 km/h), warm: 151,8 m

M5 = 315.8hp/ton
Panny Turbo S = 274.2hp/ton
E63 AMG PP = 314.3hp/ton

Considering the discrepancy between what they should produce and what they actually are on this dyno (M5 & E63) compared to the Porsche which is the one AWD car here and is the quickest not only off the line by maintains this gap almost suggests that the dyno can't accurately calculate the output of the Panny because of it's drivetrain because no way under the rising sun should a car which is down 40hp/ton maintain the margin well into triple figures IMO.

620ps = +11%!!!
p.s.
620ps and 0-200 13.0s?

IS this an example of car manufacturers "massaging" the performance of the cars they have in the press fleets?

Seems odd that two cars with a claimed power output of around 560hp should actually produce over 600hp.

EDIT: Nevermind. Read that backwards. in that case, my point is further proven, claimed HP is irrelevant. However BMW underrated their car most heavily, while the others also very much underrated their cars.... Porsche being the least of which.

These dyno figures are very interesting and will generate lots of discussion. I assume those dyno figures are not wheel hp. Does Sport Auto provide the drivetrain losses used to arrive at those figures?

Also, I am interested to see why the best performaning Panamera was marked down. Price?

here an user writes "panamera 557 hp (apparently and i didnt now that, there are softwares witch are able to detect dinos and there fore can reduce power to the official output (written in the article, seems quit strange)
"

http://www.m5board.com/vbulletin/f10-m5-discussion/204045-sport-auto-test-pana-turbo-s-vs-e63-pp-vs-m5.html"

The Panamera S is a beast, it's techanically superior to the M5. Weights 61kg more and has 65hp less, which probably means the M5 puts 560whp and the Panamera about 480whp. What a massacre. BMW will eventually give it that AWD can put the power down with more grip. Porsche has no such drama over AWD.
Mercedes is expected.

PS. In this test. BMW 130k, Merc 155k and the Porsche 195k

...
We have seen faster figures than 0-200 in 13 seconds though for the M5.

Though it may very well be true that the AWD system is playing a trick on the dyno, do note that the stated figures are peak numbers, which convey only a part of the story. May well be the Porsche is able to maintain close to 550 for longer and the Beemer has a shorter peak of 620. Either way accelleration numbers don't lie.

bmw also realise that awd cant give you such driving pleasure, so they will rather just reduce the weight or something

By the way, if the M5 actually puts down 620 hp. It does make the initial tuners claiming to take it to 620 hp look very bad.

Not uncommon in that industry though...

The Panamera is a beast!! No 4door car in the world can beat it.

1. Panamera
2. M5
3. E63 (great engine, but looks so "normal E350" to me)

Bingo.............which is why when I read claims that AWD cars especially don't match up to claims I suggest to ignore those results and purely believe what the acceleration figures state because that tells you exactly what is geniune.

WTF is up with those dyno numbers??? I have never seen anything like that before! BMW and MB uprated their engines to get a better result in the test? 620 hp is unheard of.

Either way, much deserved win for the M5. The king of sedans.

So? M5 pulls a lot better in 6th gear.
There's nothing interesting about it, because, as said, different gear ratios.

More like the king of "cost effective" sedans. The M5 won by 1 point... because it beat the Panny by 5 points in the price category. The Panny is the true king of performance sedans, if you can afford it...

Even being a RWD adept, I have nothing against AWD performance sedans, and there is no denying in the performance and capability of the Panamera Turbo S, but the rear is as ugly as the 5 Series GT, maybe even more, so for me it can't be first. About the engines, I think the S63 4.4l Biturbo V8 is the best one on the market ATM, so superior the the Porsches'. The M5's first place is deserved, it even is the most "affordable", though price may play little role in this class.

Concerning the dyno result, I do not believe it. If there was such a difference in claimed power and its true output, both BMW and Mercedes would have problems with the authorities. Here is a much more reliable dyno result from PP-Performance, from whom you can get the ECU remapped to 620 PS.



http://f10.germancarforum.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=62 2374&d=1324572310


Alot more plausible:

BMW claim: 560 PS
PP-P result: 581 PS



PS: Funny how so many say the Panamera Turbo S is not overpriced, and when it comes to the LFA, it is overpriced.

That's completely justified. If BMW and MB spend that extra $$$ on their cars, they would utterly kill the Panamera

And besides that, the Panamera needs AWD traction, apparently. I'd like to see a RWD Panamera Turbo S, and then compare it's performance numbers. It will never happen of course though.

Panamera is not even a sedan It's a hatchback/fastback/hunchback/whatever.

Not to mention that:

1) M5 engine >> Panamera Turbo S engine
2) The M5 is more fun to drive

Really? Which "authorities" do dyno testing?

What makes a lower hp stock dyno test from someone trying sell you a power increase more "reliable"? Personally, I am more inclined to believe Sport Auto who don't have a clear vested interest in the dyno result.