[hb]

Originally Posted by crypto

lol what a dick response.

All good. My fault for getting involved to explain things or to correct them.

[hb]

Originally Posted by M5 London

I was actually calling out a famous youtuber who was suggesting another famous youtuber was being untruthful to his massive audience.

Would be good to understand the thinking behind his comments, which from the outset seem rather disjointed and dare I suggest slanderous.

BMW has not lost its way. I have a G90 M5 arriving in January 2025. I currently own an F90 M5 LCI Comp, E39 M5, E34 M5, E92 M3, E30 M3 and non BMWs a 996 Carrara, 996 Turbo and Mclaren 570S Spider.

I appreciate their modern offerings as much as I do their classic ones.

If I see foul play, in my opinion, I will call it out.

No one said Joe was unfaithful. FYI, I'm friends with Joe, or at least I'd like to think so. I was just saying that most reviewers set the app to 1 ft roll out so that will have an impact on the 0-60 times recorded by the GPS box.

This is why I reached to Joe to ask what his settings were because we pretty much tested the same car and it's not rocket science.

[M5 London]

Originally Posted by hb

The app was set to 1 foot roll out so it will record accordingly. Due to the huge wheel slip and wheel hop initially, it will get better times if you set the GPS box to 1 ft rollout. Feel free to test this theory. Not sure what else to say.

What was your recorded 0 to 60 mph time please?

You keep seeming to compare your 0 to 62 mph time with Joe's 0 to 60 mph time.

I've asked several times now, I look forward to hearing it, if you care to share it.

[hb]

Originally Posted by M5 London

What was your recorded 0 to 60 mph time please?

You keep seeming to compare your 0 to 62 mph time with Joe's 0 to 60 mph time.

I've asked several times now, I look forward to hearing it, if you care to share it.

The 0-62mph time was 3.6 seconds as I said in the video. I just did another run yesterday, which can be seen on Instagram, 0-62mph 3.5 sec. Same GPS box, set to not count 1 foot roll out. I did not measure 0-60. I did the typical 0-100 km/h since I was in Germany.

I think that's pretty much what BMW counts in best case scenario. Could it be faster in some situations? For sure, but the biggest struggle was again the loss of grip in the first half a second.

[M5 London]

Originally Posted by hb

The 0-62mph time was 3.6 seconds as I said in the video. I just did another run yesterday, which can be seen on Instagram, 0-62mph 3.5 sec. Same GPS box, set to not count 1 foot roll out. I did not measure 0-60. I did the typical 0-100 km/h since I was in Germany.

I think that's pretty much what BMW counts in best case scenario. Could it be faster in some situations? For sure, but the biggest struggle was again the loss of grip in the first half a second.

Thanks. So was it 3.5s or 3.6s as you stated on your first post on this thread as per below:

Originally Posted by hb

Need to ask him also because none of us managed to get that. I got 3.5 to 62 mph, maybe with a better surface and warmer weather, save another .2 seconds.

When you say none of us managed to get that, what are you actually saying really?

That none of us got to 62mph in Joes 3.1s?

OR None of us could get lower than 3.5s to 62mph?

My point is, that you are not understanding that Joe was measuring to 60mph so when you say none of us managed to get that, that's pretty obvious because you are NOT measuring the same metric as he was, correct?

Anyway you are at 3.5/3.6s for 0 to 62mph

If your timing gear does not also show a result to 60mph on your above run, like Dragy does for example, then please try to do one when you have some spare time. That's going to be the only way to assess a comparison to Joe's 0 to 60 mph run. There is no point coming on here stating OH, wow me and the rest of us couldn't do it in 3.1s, because you were all not measuring what Joe was testing, so invariably there will be large deltas in the timings.

I am fully versed in the 1 ft roll out setup. I feel it should not be used. Why I am surprised to hear that you say Joe has used it, is my own acceleration figures on my F90 M5 Comp LCI match Joe's own numbers on his several videos on that car, and I do not use 1 ft roll out.

[hb]

Originally Posted by M5 London

Thanks. So was it 3.5s or 3.6s as you stated on your first post on this thread as per below:



When you say none of us managed to get that, what are you actually saying really?

That none of us got to 62mph in Joes 3.1s?

OR None of us could get lower than 3.5s to 62mph?

My point is, that you are not understanding that Joe was measuring to 60mph so when you say none of us managed to get that, that's pretty obvious because you are NOT measuring the same metric as he was, correct?

Anyway you are at 3.5/3.6s for 0 to 62mph

If your timing gear does not also show a result to 60mph on your above run, like Dragy does for example, then please try to do one when you have some spare time. That's going to be the only way to assess a comparison to Joe's 0 to 60 mph run. There is no point coming on here stating OH, wow me and the rest of us couldn't do it in 3.1s, because you were all not measuring what Joe was testing, so invariably there will be large deltas in the timings.

I am fully versed in the 1 ft roll out setup. I feel it should not be used. Why I am surprised to hear that you say Joe has used it, is my own acceleration figures on my F90 M5 Comp LCI match Joe's own numbers on his several videos on that car, and I do not use 1 ft roll out.

Again, this is not an argument about the times. I spoke with Joe to find out what settings he used so I can figure out why my time was slower. So it is confirmed he used the 1 foot roll out setting.

Secondly, I setup my Racebox profile for that run to 0-100 kph. Not to 60 mph (96.5 km/h). I guess even if you do the delta between 60 and 62 mph, I still won't get 3.1. That's my guess which will be tested in the future.

In the end, these times are irrelevant for many people. It's fun to see, but way too many variables in getting the perfect launch.

[M5 London]

Originally Posted by hb

Again, this is not an argument about the times. I spoke with Joe to find out what settings he used so I can figure out why my time was slower. So it is confirmed he used the 1 foot roll out setting.

Secondly, I setup my Racebox profile for that run to 0-100 kph. Not to 60 mph (96.5 km/h). I guess even if you do the delta between 60 and 62 mph, I still won't get 3.1. That's my guess which will be tested in the future.

In the end, these times are irrelevant for many people. It's fun to see, but way too many variables in getting the perfect launch.

I am glad that you now finally acknowledge that you were timing 0 to 100 km/h and Joe was in fact timing 0 to 96.5 km/h. They are different metrics as you see now.

When you first came onto this thread, it was to question the times. They are irrelevant to some of course, but they seem very relevant to you, as that is why you came on here, to specifically discuss and actually question his time compared to your time. On the contrary you seem very interested in times.

For your reference my 2.99s run to 60 mph took 3.14s to 62 mph. There's quite a substantial delta in times between 0 to 60 and 62 mph.

[hb]

Originally Posted by M5 London

I am glad that you now finally acknowledge that you were timing 0 to 100 km/h and Joe was in fact timing 0 to 96.5 km/h. They are different metrics as you see now.

When you first came onto this thread, it was to question the times. They are irrelevant to some of course, but they seem very relevant to you, as that is why you came on here, to specifically discuss and actually question his time compared to your time. On the contrary you seem very interested in times.

For your reference my 2.99s run to 60 mph took 3.14s to 62 mph. There's quite a substantial delta in times between 0 to 60 and 62 mph.

Ok, I think you misunderstood my intentions. But it's all fine, you're right.

[x622]

Originally Posted by Moewron

I have a two-year-old iX with tons of that black, and it all looks just fine. Even the stuff on the front that you'd expect to get beat up by debris.

Good to know, I wouldn't expect it to last.


I think we both can agree it looks very cheap however.

[Moewron]

Originally Posted by x622

Good to know, I wouldn't expect it to last.


I think we both can agree it looks very cheap however.

We disagree.

[M5 London]

This dude must have been using 1ft roll out too.

0-60mph in damp conditions in a Touring...3.19 seconds:

[hb]

Originally Posted by M5 London

This dude must have been using 1ft roll out too.

0-60mph in damp conditions in a Touring...3.19 seconds:

He did. Most GPS boxes are setup that way and most use that 1 ft roll out feature. The car does not do 3.19 seconds without that. Tried it a few times already on different surfaces. We're having the same conversation over and over again.

[x622]

Originally Posted by Moewron

We disagree.

Enjoy your black plastic then I guess.

[M5 London]

Originally Posted by hb

He did. Most GPS boxes are setup that way and most use that 1 ft roll out feature. The car does not do 3.19 seconds without that. Tried it a few times already on different surfaces. We're having the same conversation over and over again.

But you have never done 0 to 60 mph testing, as you have clearly stated in this thread.

If you have, please kindly share your results.

What are your 0 to 60 mph timings without 1 ft roll out?

You seem to really like to ridicule other Youtubers, with absolutely no evidence whatsoever.

I cannot wait to see your 0 to 60 MPH times without 1ft roll out.

[hb]

Originally Posted by M5 London

But you have never done 0 to 60 mph testing, as you have clearly stated in this thread.

If you have, please kindly share your results.

What are your 0 to 60 mph timings without 1 ft roll out?

You seem to really like to ridicule other Youtubers, with absolutely no evidence whatsoever.

I cannot wait to see your 0 to 60 MPH times without 1ft roll out.

Ok, this is ridiculous already. I did it last week also with the M5, best I got was 3.5.

And no one is ridiculing anyone. I said it before but this is the last time I'm repeating this, I'm not in the game of forum fights. Joe is a friend, period. Raz, I know him well, and we often talk and respect each other. I was simply pointing out the method they use to test the 0-60 which will influence the final result, especially with this new M5 and the initial grip loss.

So I'm not sure what you want me to prove, I just told you a few times what Joe related to me: he used a 1 ft roll out. That doesn't make good or bad, it's just one method to measure which BMW does not use in their official 0-60 times.

This is my last reply to you, if you wanna chat, you know where to find me to have a private conversation .

[hb]

Originally Posted by M5 London

But you have never done 0 to 60 mph testing, as you have clearly stated in this thread.

If you have, please kindly share your results.

What are your 0 to 60 mph timings without 1 ft roll out?

You seem to really like to ridicule other Youtubers, with absolutely no evidence whatsoever.

I cannot wait to see your 0 to 60 MPH times without 1ft roll out.

See attached. Take care

[M5 London]

Originally Posted by hb

Ok, this is ridiculous already. I did it last week also with the M5, best I got was 3.5.

And no one is ridiculing anyone. I said it before but this is the last time I'm repeating this, I'm not in the game of forum fights. Joe is a friend, period. Raz, I know him well, and we often talk and respect each other. I was simply pointing out the method they use to test the 0-60 which will influence the final result, especially with this new M5 and the initial grip loss.

So I'm not sure what you want me to prove, I just told you a few times what Joe related to me: he used a 1 ft roll out. That doesn't make good or bad, it's just one method to measure which BMW does not use in their official 0-60 times.

This is my last reply to you, if you wanna chat, you know where to find me to have a private conversation .

If you want to runaway as you have been called out, that's totally your choice.

All through this thread you have stated things like you do not test 0-60mph on 15th November and today 30th November you are showing 0-60 mph numbers from 13th November??:

Originally Posted by hb

The 0-62mph time was 3.6 seconds as I said in the video. I just did another run yesterday, which can be seen on Instagram, 0-62mph 3.5 sec. Same GPS box, set to not count 1 foot roll out. I did not measure 0-60. I did the typical 0-100 km/h since I was in Germany.

I think that's pretty much what BMW counts in best case scenario. Could it be faster in some situations? For sure, but the biggest struggle was again the loss of grip in the first half a second.

You did it last week yet you are showing data from the 13th November? So after stating clearly on this thread that you do NOT time 0-60mph now you are trying to show your 0-60mph time? This is kind of quite funny:

Originally Posted by hb

Ok, this is ridiculous already. I did it last week also with the M5, best I got was 3.5.

And no one is ridiculing anyone. I said it before but this is the last time I'm repeating this, I'm not in the game of forum fights. Joe is a friend, period. Raz, I know him well, and we often talk and respect each other. I was simply pointing out the method they use to test the 0-60 which will influence the final result, especially with this new M5 and the initial grip loss.

So I'm not sure what you want me to prove, I just told you a few times what Joe related to me: he used a 1 ft roll out. That doesn't make good or bad, it's just one method to measure which BMW does not use in their official 0-60 times.

This is my last reply to you, if you wanna chat, you know where to find me to have a private conversation .

You may suggest that you are not on forums for forum fights, but you are most definitely jumping on forum threads to discredit fellow Youtubers. Subtly suggesting that Joe's and Raz's times are to be discounted as they using 1 ft roll out with out advising their viewing public, is very poor behaviour on your side.

Also for the record I posted Raz's Yellow touring video on here, I did not address it to you, yet you are the first respondent and are essentially ridiculing him, like you ridiculed Joe at the start of the thread. You do seem to like to enter threads to discredit your fellow youtubers' videos and then state you are going to run away after creating the damage. On this occasion you have been called out for it.

Take Care!

[hb]

Originally Posted by M5 London

If you want to runaway as you have been called out, that's totally your choice.

All through this thread you have stated things like you do not test 0-60mph on 15th November and today 30th November you are showing 0-60 mph numbers from 13th November??:





You did it last week yet you are showing data from the 13th November? So after stating clearly on this thread that you do NOT time 0-60mph now you are trying to show your 0-60mph time? This is kind of quite funny:



You may suggest that you are not on forums for forum fights, but you are most definitely jumping on forum threads to discredit fellow Youtubers. Subtly suggesting that Joe's and Raz's times are to be discounted as they using 1 ft roll out with out advising their viewing public, is very poor behaviour on your side.

Also for the record I posted Raz's Yellow touring video on here, I did not address it to you, yet you are the first respondent and are essentially ridiculing him, like you ridiculed Joe at the start of the thread. You do seem to like to enter threads to discredit your fellow youtubers' videos and then state you are going to run away after creating the damage. On this occasion you have been called out for it.

Take Care!

I had the chance to drive again in November. Yes, sorry, it wasn't last week, it was Nov 11-14. My fault for not giving an exact date. Didn't think the date was that relevant.

I tested both 0-62 mph and 0-60 mph, but clearly I didn't pay attention to that until you asked me to look for "proof". I posted the times so no idea what else you want me to do. You asked for times, I gave you the times with a screenshot.

Last time: I wanted to show the difference between 1 ft roll out setup and one without. That means setting the record straight why some times are different. It's simple reporting.

So you can go on about Joe and I, and Raz, but I'm gonna repeat it for the last time: you misunderstood this whole thing.

[Rossocorsa]

Just FYI, 0-60 and 0-62 are not going to be all that different, you’re talking about reaching 3.3% more speed at a healthy part of a power band in a car that has full traction and before wind resistance really starts to kill you. I would not expect the times to differ more than 5% of each other between 60 and 62mph.

[Scamp]

hb i appreciate your content and the information you have provided. Subscribed!

[M5 London]

Originally Posted by hb

I had the chance to drive again in November. Yes, sorry, it wasn't last week, it was Nov 11-14. My fault for not giving an exact date. Didn't think the date was that relevant.

I tested both 0-62 mph and 0-60 mph, but clearly I didn't pay attention to that until you asked me to look for "proof". I posted the times so no idea what else you want me to do. You asked for times, I gave you the times with a screenshot.

Last time: I wanted to show the difference between 1 ft roll out setup and one without. That means setting the record straight why some times are different. It's simple reporting.

So you can go on about Joe and I, and Raz, but I'm gonna repeat it for the last time: you misunderstood this whole thing.

Yep ok cool.

Keep up the good work, thanks.

BMW themselves are quoting an official figure of 3.5s for 0 to 100 km/h for the G90 M5. It's interesting that independent testing, like yours, is not better than this, as has been the the case over several generations of M Cars.

I get sub 3s in my F90 M5 LCI WITHOUT 1FT ROLL OUT to 60 MPH, which is much quicker than BMW's quoted figures for this same statistic.

I believe BMW quote 3.3s for an LCI F90 M5 Competition for 0 to 100 KM/H. I do it in 3.14s without launch control, brake boosting or 1ft rollout. Just press the throttle hard.

My point is I understand that BMW numbers are usually very conservative....however with the G90 M5, BMW numbers are not conservative and exactly what independent testing is suggesting, except Joe and Raz and quite a few others who have dragged the G90 M5 and F90 M5 and the G90 M5 wins....

OR of course independent testing is actually STILL quicker, except for your own...(without 1ft roll out as you suggest)

I must reach out to Joe and Raz and ask them why they are SUDDENLY using 1ft roll out. Both their numbers for the F90 M5 match mine and I did NOT use 1 ft Roll out. Maybe Joe and Raz only use 1 ft roll out with the G90 M5....maybe BMW do not under quote their numbers anymore...?

Which is at odds with early independent dyno numbers for the G90 M5 showing 820HP at the cranks vs BMW's quoted of 727HP.

[M5 London]

Originally Posted by Rossocorsa

Just FYI, 0-60 and 0-62 are not going to be all that different, you’re talking about reaching 3.3% more speed at a healthy part of a power band in a car that has full traction and before wind resistance really starts to kill you. I would not expect the times to differ more than 5% of each other between 60 and 62mph.

2.99s vs 3.14s 0 to 60mph vs 0 to 100km/h respectively on the same run..so circa just over a 5% delta in times. The actual nominal delta is of course larger when a base time is 3.5s at circa 0.175s, assuming a 5% delta.

My point is when there are people showing 3.1s to 3.2s to 60 mph for the G90 M5 and BMW themselves are showing, through their official manufacturer's number of 3.5s to 100 KM/H...I would NOT personally immediately dismiss 3.1 or 3.19s to 60 mph by independent testing, showing actual data. Again if both these famous and respected youtubers are scamming their massive viewing public, I'd be highly surprised, by not declaring they are now suddenly using 1 ft roll out to get better headline numbers. They were not doing this for their well publicised F90 M5 testing numbers, which I match personally without 1 ft rollout.

F90 M5 independent testing crushed BMWs own official numbers with ease and every single time. It seems BMW are also suddenly being less conservative with their acceleration test numbers 🤔