Installshield

I never claimed that an X-type was a competitor for a 5-series BMW. I only stated that an M5 is faster than an XJR, which has nothing to do with and X-type or the new s-Type R. The first post on this thread refered to an XJR.

Also the fact that the BMW is RWD does not hamper its acceleration that much at all. The M3 and M5 both get the fastest 0-60's by launching at just above idle. Every review I ever read said that if you bump the cluth out at about 1300 RPM and hammer it you will get a faster time then by melting the tires, which is rare normally. Most RWD cars get there fastest times by letting go at about 2500-3500 RPM (like the GT-2), which is why any AWD car has such an acceleration advantage. The M5 and M3's Double Vanos cylinder heads are the key to allowing this type of launch though. The M5s have 95% of the engine's torque available at about 1,600 RPM, much lower than most cars. This allows you to drop the clutch at a really low RPM and achieve a steady surge of acceleration with very little wheel spin. The Newest car and driver tests or previews the S-Type R with 400hp and I forget if it is AWD or RWD, but it did not out run and M5. There was an excerpt somewhere in there about the M5 still being the sedan king.

Installshield

Very True. More power is lost through an AWD system, plus it is heavy. The GT-2 still accelerated faster than Ruf's Turbo R which was just a modified standard 911 Turbo ( I think he did make one that used the GT-2's Transaxle as well, but I did not read the whole article). it is true that Turbo R launched a little better due to its AWD and extra power, but even with 50 or so extra hp, the GT-2 still beat it 0 to 60 and in the 1/4 mile.

You had a great point, but I heard that the true reason that the GT-2 had RWD was to bring back the feel of a "Vintage" 911. Since the realese of the AWD turbo in both 993 and 996 chassis versions, lots of Porsche enthusiasts (R/T stated that Jerry Seinfeld, who owns 30+ porsches,) complained about it not having the feel of a true 911, so Porsche dropped it on the GT-2.

So the GT-2 has lots of advantages, and on 1/4 mile runs I don't think wheel spin would be that much of a problem. The damn car has 315/30 R18 Pirrelli Roso's in back with a hefty intercooled 3.6L flat six twin turbo sitting directly between them. With a lot of weight right over the wheels that increases with acceleration, grip should not be a riduculous problem as it is in front engine rear drive cars

kc5zom

Well, I got my look at an M5. I had never had the chance to see one up close and sit in it. I think I would rather buy a luxury sedan and a Corvette Z06 than spend what they want for one of those. Sure its fast but the interior, at least on the one I saw, was not very tastefully done. I liked the X-Type and S-Type a lot more. I have a problem with any manufacturer that offers leather in colors other than tan and black (unless they are using body color inserts or something). You can, if you are used to Ford, notice that some of the switchgear and such on the X-Type is definitely from Ford land. Oh. And I already knew but I went ahead and gave a visual confirmation. The XKR and XJR are only using one supercharger. My advice is to get an XJR Vanden Plas, most comfortable damn car I ever sat in (with sub 6 second 0-60 to boot).

Makaveli

Wouldn't one be enough?

mazdamp3_18

toyota has got a twin supercharger set up possibly coming out for the v6 pickups... i think i saw it in super street...

kc5zom

I'll believe that when I see it. The cost of engineering a dual supercharger setup would be more expensive than putting a V8 in there. Besides I think that Toyota V6 would be bogged down by all that added resistance at idle. Maybe you meant a single charger setup?

DanMan

have reed this earlier abou the fastest Sedan is the M5 competition version. But U want The RS4 That Audi, has in Europe.

mazdamp3_18

nope it was a dual supercharger... i remember b/c when i saw it i was like HOLY CRAP... i personally think dual turbo's and superchargers are a waste of time and money when you can have better with single... its just a matter of how far you want to go... and how much you want to spend

kc5zom

A V6 would react well to dual turbos or superchargers. Feeding each bank directly is more efficient than forcing the intake system to spread the air from a single source to each bank. Still with a V6 a dual turbo setup makes better sense than a dual supercharger. Besides these are trucks. Who wants extra things that break? Now we will just have another punk in a truck with a powerful motor thinking he is the fastest thing on the road. Had three people I knew back home get killed driving a truck like a Ferrari (took a turn too fast and met a nice rock on the side of the road). I'd rather not see it again.