View Full Version : To: Mr. 2.8 as fast as 4.2 vs BMW vs THE WORLD!!!


M5 ETR
03-02-2001, 04:21 PM
Just jumped over from the S8 forum and couldn't resist....

Wait until this idiot finds out that the first M5 just got smoked light-to-light the other night... S8 did the honors, thank you.

Now, you A6/S6 guys seem like a pretty vicious bunch, so before you get the entire tribe together to stone the village-idiot, let me just say that the culprit is that trigger happy rear-wheel drive bimmer (or is it bummer....?)

It takes true mastery to extract the max from all of that power and a manual tranny. (Lotto slipping and such - weird smells - megga bucks...) It was a little damp out and I was drinking some bubbly straight out of the bottle (one of the benefits to the tip-option in Audi) while celebrating the market...(Mr. 2.8 vs 4.2 vs BMW - take a hint: Next time the market goes DOWN, you must go SHORT - not long....!)

Any way, man was that guy pissed....! He was shifting and screeching and he wouldn't give it up either.

I think that it was "2.8 as fast as 4.2" 's brother....

Just wanted to let you all know that us 8'ters are doing our part to keep the four rings connected....

Cheers, JvR.

Kenny
03-02-2001, 05:05 PM
Sorry, as much respect as I have for the new S8, it is no match for the E39 M5 with a competent driver behind the wheel...

mhoii
03-02-2001, 05:10 PM
did the M5 have it's parking brake on? I can't understand how you could possibly "smoke" a car that is lighter and has more horsepower/torque than you, unless you were driving in snow.

muhammadc
03-02-2001, 06:26 PM
I have to agree with the others... I just don't see how you could 'smoke' an M5, if it was an E39... maybe a 540i you could smoke but the M5 is kind of everything the S8 isn't: 6-speed, lighter, and 400hp. That doesn't = getting smoked by an S8, which does what... 0-60 in 6.3s? M5 does something like 4.8 0-60, I think.

April
03-02-2001, 06:33 PM

MellonC
03-02-2001, 08:22 PM

Style12v
03-03-2001, 07:02 AM
I see alot of people on all sorts of car message boards claiming to beat rediculess odds in drag racing for lights.

Not to insult anyone, or doubt anyone... but I am thinking that many cases the other driver doesn't know he is racing...

I think there was a post earlier about a 2.7t beating a Viper... As much as I would rather have a 2.7 than a viper, I don't think that is likely.

But hey, this one time... I totally left this 911 in the dust with my 12v... (of cource the driver was making a left turn, but what does that have to do with it?)

muhammadc
03-03-2001, 08:14 AM

Gerry
03-03-2001, 10:31 AM
One of my other cars is a '95 Chevy Impala SS. Primarily its the tow-mobile for my track car (spare me the heat guys, with tons of torque at 1500 rpm, it does tow well) and although I actually don't drive it much, its one of those cars that when you pull up to a light, every yahoo in the area seems to want to run you. I would never compare this car in any other way to an M5 but I'll bet they suffer a similar syndrome at the multi lane intersections, probably they get it even more. Some cars unfortunately are more of an attraction I guess.

Anyway, I got over that novelty some 20 years ago and hardly ever pay any attention to the people trying to "challange" at a light. Most times I just accelerate briskly (as I would normally just about any time) which in that car is reasonably quick but nowhere near flat out or dramatic. 9 times out of 10 the other car goes squeeling away and my wife and I laugh about how they're racing back to their PC to tell the world how they just knocked off an SS with their souped up econo-can. I'm sure this happens way more often than most of the "victors" ever imagine.

Bollinger
03-03-2001, 11:03 AM
Why did GM stop making that car? Hold on to it, it's going to be valuable some day soon.

PDennis
03-03-2001, 11:32 AM
I know that I am writing to a series of enthusiasts so this will not come as a surprise. Point one... I think any race that I have ever won has been enthusiastically communicated as "Smoking" the opponent. Something about that tall tale gene that runs in most of us. In the same way every race I have ever lost has been communicated as "Really Close"... I live in Rochester New York, for those of you that don't know it snows here. It is an icy tundra that also has a beautiful autumn, spring and cost of living (to explain why I stay). I have owed a Z3 2.8, M3, A4 2.8, and now a 2.7t... I also have constant access to a 740il, and a rather nice NSX. The only cars listed above that should be driven in the winter are the Audi's. The Z and M 3 are competent cars with snows, but they are certainly not meant to travel at any more than 40 in the winter. The 740 runs snows (MZ02's), and is fine for plowed and salted roads. This is why I sold my summer car (BMW) and my winter car, to pick up a single car to serve both purposes (the A4 at the time). Now onto the topic of rain, the M and Z ran on Hamman Monobloc II 18", with 35 series Toyo's in the summer. I would not drive those cars over 40 in the rain.

The moral to this whole story is I can believe that the S8 beat an M5 in the rain, assuming tires and drivers (You are less sensible when you drink so there may have been factors that caused the other driver to hesitate). Hind sight in every race is how you smoke the person... and as for the 540 vs A6 thing. I don't want to buy another car for the winter so the a6 gets my vote and my money. I will use the spare 15k to do something else fun...


Patrick

snow day
03-03-2001, 12:06 PM
Patrick, we share a few things in common in Rochester (A4 2.8, A6 2.7T, NSX). Do I know you?

Bruce
00' 2.7T Sport Silver/Onyx
nuthin' better than a snow day

'98 A4 2.8
'91 NSX CTSC
'77 Ducati 860GTS
'67 M715

Gerry
03-03-2001, 12:44 PM
Its been an entertaining ride but it will be the trade-in (or sold privately) on an S6. I have the #1 slot at Commonwealth I believe. I'm not doing as much track work as I used to and am finding I need more family capacity than towing capacity these day.

The answer to why they stopped making them is of course that there's more money in SUVs. The plant in Texas where they were made was converted to produce more Tahoes and Suburban's. I'm sure you're not surprised.

M5 ETR
03-03-2001, 01:07 PM
OK

Bollinger
03-03-2001, 01:07 PM
I forgot about that. Same reason there are no Cadillac RWD cars right now.

M5 ETR
03-03-2001, 01:11 PM
M5 is lighter by a case of bubbly - that's it!
M5 has 394 horses not 400...
Best tested M5 0-60 was 5.3...
No mag has tested a US SPEC>>> S8 (Shorter ratios) 6.3 is a guess....

IT WAS WET OUT!

Been getting sub-sixes all morning on a G-meter (0-62.......)

M5 ETR
03-03-2001, 01:15 PM
M5 is lighter by a case of bubbly - go check it out....

IT WAS WET OUT!

Re-read.

M5 ETR
03-03-2001, 01:18 PM
...didn't say it was...

In this case, it was wet out...

"Smoking" is a relative thing: Car-length, to me is smoking.

Wet or no wet; Audi took BMW. Game over.... until BMW makes an awd....