5th Mar 2001, 14:10
The Cossie with a correctly put together engine will churn out 380BHP for 40,000 miles where as the BMW will do it all day everyday up to 150,000. I have full respect for the Cossie, but the M5 is a different class of car!!!!!
16th Apr 2001, 11:01
The standard 1991 M5 is a 3.6, and has 315BHP - so care to explain how on earth you are coming up with the figure of 380BHP?!?!
I would be impressed to see you get 325HP, with a SuperChip from a 3.6.
I also doubt the 3.6 can go up to 168MPH plus, the 3.8 Possibly, but not the 3.6.
Get your facts straight mate...
12th May 2001, 15:07
The 3.6L M5 will run to 60mph in 5.6 seconds and 120mph in 21.0 seconds, I have a CAR&DRIVER (America), SCI (America) which proves this. The manufacturers rating is 6.4 seconds which most know is conservative.
4th Aug 2001, 12:20
Of course M5 beats every Ford or something like that... And the standard M5 has 340 hp IMO :) ). Is the 3.6 a limited edition or something like that (I've only heard of 3.8 engines)??
22nd Jul 2004, 05:46
Speaking as an owner of both a Cosworth Sierra tuned to 330+, not just one, but I owned two of these cars - AND I have owned two M5's - and currently own one, I can safely say this:
The Cossworth's were both tuned to above 330hp - weighed around 1400kg. They were a whole lot of fun, BUT very unreliable, crappy interiors, no top end power.
The M5 beats the Cossies, on most points, except the rush of the turbo on full blast. But remember once that has expired the M5 's wonderfully noisy 3,8 flat six - just keeps going and going...
8th Nov 2008, 23:53
Doesn't the M5 of this vintage have a STRAIGHT SIX... not a Flat six as mentioned above...
Starting to doubt the posters experience with the cars...
2nd Mar 2001, 13:55
A standard Cossie will do 0-60 in 5.8, the M5 takes 6.4? Where are you getting your info from? Plus a Cossie is only 2 litre... me thinks you should take a little more time and research your put downs...