Why bother with a 500bhp V10 if....

[E65Ross]

You never use it. On the drive home from work most evenings I see a lovely dark blue '55 plate BMW M6 with the 5.0 V10 and every single time I see the guy (which is about 2, maybe 3x per week) he is sat on the motorway on a 55mph cruise.

It's not like sometimes he's doing 65-70, sometimes 55, it's literally 55mph every day. Surely he'd be better off with a 630i if he wants a 6er bmw with a smooth engine, or a 635d if he wants more economy....

Who knows, maybe off the motorway when he turns off he nails it to over 8000rpm

Either way, fair play for having the car, but it just seems a waste of a glorious engine.

[E65Ross]

Sump said:

I sit at 70mph in my 6.0 V12.

What's your point?

I like having some power incase I need it. If I don't need it then I simply don't use it

Honestly, poor people start such strange threads

Poor? I wouldn't go that far. I have a weedy 4.4L V8 though.

[E65Ross]

Mound Dawg said:

mattcov said:

Sometimes you get there just as quick with the cruise on @ 55 in the 1st lane and you haven't got Jonny 118d "M Performance" 2ft from your bumper waiting to cause an accident. You can save the fuel for other roads

I hit the cruise control when I get to 60 and watch the world go by. Average speed on the computer for a tank of fuel is always 43 mph. For the last tankfull I tried mixing it with the photocopier salesmen in the German Cars Lane to see what effect this had on fuel economy. This dropped from 57 Mpg to 49 unsurprisingly but my average speed for that tank went up to 44.

Wow, a whole 1 mph faster over 500 miles.

17 miles of my 20 mile (each way) commute is motorway and I finish work at 7pm, by which time the motorway is clear. The difference in economy is obviously still there, but I can make up a surprising amount of time if I'm getting hungry. More than 1mph average, that's for sure.

[E65Ross]

Motorways are boring, is that not a reason to go quicker if the traffic is clear, to get off them faster?

[E65Ross]

fulham911club said:

E65Ross said:

17 miles of my 20 mile (each way) commute is motorway and I finish work at 7pm, by which time the motorway is clear. The difference in economy is obviously still there, but I can make up a surprising amount of time if I'm getting hungry. More than 1mph average, that's for sure.

So going 70 rather than 55 on the motorway stretch saves a max of 4 mins. You must be hungry

And if I do 100? Not that I do, of course.

[E65Ross]

You guys who do 55-60 a lot, if you ever do long trips, such as 250 miles or more, do you still do 55-60 or do you go quicker? Then the time made up is quite significant.

I recently did 460 miles in a day and the difference between 60 and 80, for example, becomes quite a lot!

[E65Ross]

T0MMY said:

How long did your 460 miles take?

No comment but let's say for 250 miles the traffic was clear and let's say a cruise at 90 would take 1 hour 25 mins less than at 60. That's significant imo. I'll leave it there.

[E65Ross]

There can be a thrill had on long open roads when going seriously quick; but in the UK that'd mean an instant ban or worse. I'm sure 200mph on the motorway would be quite interesting.

[E65Ross]

Rawwr said:

Because as mentioned by other posters, driving on a motorway is about as much fun as having a rash on your ballbag, regardless of whether you're doing 60mph or 160mph. There are much better places to enjoy driving.

That's in your opinion. I've driven at those speeds and found 160 more thrilling than driving at 60.

[E65Ross]

RenOHH said:

stephen300o said:

When you go faster, you get there quicker, it is a simple thing. Also motorways are a very safe place to go fast, as unposed to pushing on on country lanes. Which is quite the opposite.

Smart arse. You don't gain that much time in my experience. On paper it looks like you do but any time gained is lost with inevitable congestion. Lorries overtaking lorries, middle laners, everyone driving in L3 etc. Which motorway can you actually do a sustained 80-90mph on during the hours of 7am - 7pm?

That'll explain why the last time a few mates of mine and myself went up to Aviemore from Southampton. They sat at 65mph on the motorway when traffic allowed. We got there almost 2 hours before them.

I perhaps should have said that the time I see this car is always around 7:15pm and the traffic on the motorway is clear, so yes, you can make up significant time if going a reasonable distance; and surely the argument of "you only make up 2-3mins" is a pointless one to counter when you claim "but you save loads on fuel" because if you only save a few mins, then the distance is quite short, meaning you don't save much in fuel either.

I'll admit then when the traffic is quite heavy I won't sit in the outsie lane, I'll happily cruise along at a slower speed and be more consistent....but when the traffic is nice and clear I find motorways a little boring so I'l rather not spend too much time on them.

[E65Ross]

Fox- said:

Because you travelled almost the ENTIRE length of the country! It was the sheer distance that enabled you to get a credible gap. Now think if you only did 100 miles rather than 550 - your time saving is now barely 20 minutes. Hardly with the extra fuel and the risk of a speeding ticket is it?

I was being a little facetious

saving 20 minutes over 100 miles is fairly substantial and, as motorways generally aren't especially interesting I'd rather get to my destination 20 mins earlier.

Having said that, it does totally depend on the mood I'm in. If I'm tired, in no hurry at all or whatever I'll happily pootle at 60-70 but the savings in fuel aren't too much of an issue, I'd rather spend the extra time doing what I want to do rather than save £2.50 or whatever.

OT - how are the F10 and E39 getting along? Seems a shame the E39 has all but been "retired"

[E65Ross]

Jon1967x said:

9mm said:

Any enthusiast knows exactly how fast each car on the road is and so some other point is being made when something like a Transit wants to hassle something like an M3.

Its either

a, That they are the better driver despite being in a slower car.

b, They have very little to brag about between their ears or between their thighs.

C, they're in a hurry and want to go quicker than what you're currently doing. I suspect that's the most likely explanation.

[E65Ross]

Zwolf said:

E65Ross said:

C, they're in a hurry and want to go quicker than what you're currently doing. I suspect that's the most likely explanation.

Just as the most likely explanation for the question you posed in the OP is the opposite of that.

touche

[E65Ross]

Patrick Bateman said:

Have you dreamt that?

I remember the 535d vs 545i round the track but don't recall any other e60 M5 pieces save the original one Clarkson did.

Yup, except they also did the E61 M5 touring vs the E63 AMG Wagon. They did do a 535d vs 545i, where the 545i was quicker (it does have more power....); I still think they should have tested it against the 535i, but there we go.

[E65Ross]

Fox- said:

dcb said:

I save many many hours driving anything from 90 to 155 mph in Germany
and it only ever costs me about 2-3 mpg. BMW 325 Auto.

I find that very hard to believe - I found that my 530i manual was into the teens mpg wise at 130-140ish mph on the Autobahn, whereas it had been doing high 30's at 70mph. The fuel economy penalty for such high speeds was very significant indeed. At 155mph the mpg needle looked like it was on about 10!

I also found that despite crossing the entire country the number of people flashing past me at 140+ was very small - most people just didn't seem to drive at VMAX.

Agreed, I was once very tired and and did an 80 mile trip at 60-65 and my 745i (from a cold start, some town stuff etc) managed 34-35mpg. The next day I did the return leg at, erm, a bit quicker, and managed around 24-25mpg

[E65Ross]

TobyLerone said:

Say what?!

If you're serious, do you ride your bike on the redline in 6th? For someone riding a ZZR1400, that's fast...

If everyone thrashed their car to it's max, not only would there be many more dead vehicles that just expire on the road, everyone would be travelling much, much faster than would be safe. Even an 800-odd cc classic mini is able to break speed limits... Is everyone who operates a motor vehicle a poser by your logic?

He did say something in brackets which may be worth reading

I don't agree that you need to hoon it everywhere though; I regularly drive quite sedately but certainly not every single journey, otherwise....where's the fun in having a V8 petrol?

[E65Ross]

RenOHH said:

I hate to quote Clarkson (I can't actually remember the quote anyway), but he has a great analogy for this involving his waterproof watch that he knows he will never use to its depth limit.

Good to know that it'll be alright if you drop it in the kitchen sink...

[E65Ross]

Zwolf said:

Also, just typing that has made me realise L1 contains more power and torque than the other two combined most of the time, I bet.

Not a chance, there are 1 million cars in L2 for every 1 vehicle in L1

[E65Ross]

I don't think going slow is dangerous, so long as it's not so slow lorries have to pull out to overtake you.... You tend to find (not always, of course) that lorry drivers aren't especially considerate when it comes to pulling out to overtake...