Am I the only X5M owner not impressed by lack of power???

[amacman]

thanks weasel .
I put my wings to roost years ago.
still trying to get a grip on how to explain this .
too much of the skygod banter in my head to actually remember the classroom stuff .
as for scotty from star trek , people who spend months on a hospital bed have a hard time adjusting to sitting upright and a real scary time if sat in a wheelchair the moment they sense motion .they become hypersensitive to motion .
I gotta find the formula to elaborate on W=mg , can`t remember all the air resistance stuff .
by the way , did you hear the one about the constipated mathematician , he worked it out with his pencil .
I gotta go get some sleep now , I feel as though I am on the GCS(Glasgow Coma Scale )
this was invented at Glasgow University and is used Internationally to diagnose the state of conciousness , probably discovered as a result of the Glasgow kiss ( a headbutt to the face ).
see y`all .

[Viperfreak2]

Hmmm. Invent a pill to induce that 'been in a hopital bed for months' feeling when driving a car.

Driving a Mazda Miata around a track would be more thrilling than driving a V6 Porsche Panamera. Fer sure, totally!

[StanF18]

OK Amacman, I can feel the pain in your synapses as you try to think back to high school physics, so I will lend you a helping hand.

FORGET the mass...and the weight...M and W don't apply to the velocity in TT Bear's "X falling off a cliff" example. The only thing that matters here is the acceleration of gravity (g): 9.8 meters/second^2. This number applies to all objects regardless of their mass. The 2 variables which CAN and do lead to different falling rates is cross-sectional area and coefficient of drag (Cd). Hence, the wonder of PARACHUTES!

However: in TT Bear's example the difference in Cd between a free-falling 4.6is and an X5M is basically negligible. Therefore, the 2 vehicles would finish in a dead heat even if the 4.6is had 3 fat dudes in it.

I think the reason your brain keeps coming back to mass (m) is this: even though the 2 beautiful X5s will hit the ground AT THE SAME TIME, the 4.6is with the 3 fat guys will impact with much higher kinetic energy: KE=1/2*mv^2 Therefore the sunbather at the bottom of the cliff who gets hit with the 4.6is will end up more "compressed" and flatter than the sunbather who gets hit with TT Bear's X5M.

[Fraser]

Originally Posted by StanF18

FORGET the mass...and the weight...M and W don't apply to the velocity in TT Bear's "X falling off a cliff" example. The only thing that matters here is the acceleration of gravity (g): 9.8 meters/second^2. This number applies to all objects regardless of their mass. The 2 variables which CAN and do lead to different falling rates is cross-sectional area and coefficient of drag (Cd).

Not right. When an object is in free fall through the atmosphere there are two forces at work. One is the gravitational pull between the earth and the object (trying to speed things up) and the other is the aerodynamic drag of the object through the atmosphere (trying to slow things down). The object reaches its steady-state velocity when these two forces are balanced.

The gravitation pull between the object and earth is not however constant but is dependent on the mass of the object (as it is also dependent on the mass of the earth).

[JCL]

Originally Posted by Fraser

Not right. When an object is in free fall through the atmosphere there are two forces at work. One is the gravitational pull between the earth and the object (trying to speed things up) and the other is the aerodynamic drag of the object through the atmosphere (trying to slow things down). The object reaches its steady-state velocity when these two forces are balanced.

The gravitation pull between the object and earth is not however constant but is dependent on the mass of the object (as it is also dependent on the mass of the earth).

It seemed pretty right to me. Stan's comment about the two variables that lead to different falling rates (drag and cross sectional area) is the same as your comment about aerodynamic drag.

Not sure why the gravitational pull matters here. Mass cancels back out of the acceleration formulae.

Now, how about we put these X5 puppies on a ramp up to that cliff edge so that we can do some projectile calculations and see how far they can go before they impact? And will 98 RON fuel make the X5M go farther? And most importantly, will the PDC alert the driver to impending impact if the driver turns it on mid-flight?

[StanF18]

Originally Posted by Fraser

Not right. When an object is in free fall through the atmosphere there are two forces at work. One is the gravitational pull between the earth and the object (trying to speed things up) and the other is the aerodynamic drag of the object through the atmosphere (trying to slow things down). The object reaches its steady-state velocity when these two forces are balanced.

The gravitation pull between the object and earth is not however constant but is dependent on the mass of the object (as it is also dependent on the mass of the earth).

Dude, you are funny. First you tell me it's "Not right". Then you repeat the exact same thing I said, using slightly different words. Did you miss the part of my post where I very clearly mentioned cross-sectional area and COEFFICIENT of DRAG as the opposing vectors? Hello? As JCL so aptly pointed out, when comparing the 2 vehicles in play, the Cd difference is negligible, meaning both vehicles' acceleration would be slowed at the same rate. What you are referring to as steady-state velocity, also known as terminal velocity, does not negate the fact that the 4.6is and the X5M would still hit at the same time regardless of the mass difference. Since the Cd difference is negligible, they would attain this terminal velocity within maybe a millisecond of each other. Because the acceleration of gravity is a constant for all objects. And the Cd that acts against it is equivalent for the 2 vehicles in question.

Nothing in my original post is false. Perhaps you need to re-read it.

[amacman]

good stuff
my brain is mince
everything you say was already dancing around my head incoherently , now it makes more sense .
thinking back to how four of us could freefall in formation passing a small ball between us , it all makes sense .

[MFL101]

So, bottom line: X5M is fast...lol

[LeMansX5]

Originally Posted by MFL101

So, bottom line: X5M is fast...lol

....and feels fast to some.

[Nic941]

Bibendum ... could not agree more.
I loved my E39 M5. The X5M is better.
The soon to be M5 may be better yet, though I like the view from up here, and I'm going fast enough!

K