Tesla S performance outdrags BMW M5

Tesla S performance outdrags BMW M5

Timo | October 11, 2012

Well, the manufacturing costs, material costs and other assorted basic car part costs are not going down. They have had over 100 years now to get those down, and they still cost quite a bit.

Battery cost will go down and electronics probably also quite a lot, but even with those completely out of equation we are still looking for ~$50k+ car with all options and ~$30k with minimal configuration.

jaq1 | October 11, 2012

I got a good laugh from the M5 forum as well but at the end of the day the numbers don't lie nor do your eyes.

Now what's the excuse.

Volker.Berlin | October 11, 2012

Phew. That's a hefty scorcher by insideline.

Epley | October 11, 2012


They did say that the Model S won "2 out of 3" so clearly it's a tight race. The video was likely chosen for the drama. I'm guessing the one the BMW won had a better launch. Nonetheless, the message is pretty clear.

Volker.Berlin | October 11, 2012

epley, agreed.

petero | October 11, 2012

Timo. “GenIII Roadster will beat Model S Performance in every way…”
Keep in mind the GIII is designed to be a smaller LESS expensive BEV. I think pricing will trump performance on the priority list. TM needs a volume car and making $50K+ pocket rockets is not going to produce volume. IMO, the GIII will likely have less performance and greater range than the “S”. Even if battery performance improves and prices reduce the goal will probably be “the peoples EV.”
Then again, I could be wrong on the GIII. Elon Musk seems to have a wicked performance streak and builds things … because he can. The next generation Roadster, built on the GIII chassis is another story.

epley. My guess, the M5 won the third race as the battery was getting a bit low in juice.

JOHN HOLLINGSWORTH | October 11, 2012

Agreed BMWs are know for handling, I had one an it was great. One advantage the model S has is the CoG so it might be close on the track too especially considering the weight penalty is only about 7%. Be interesting to see a track test.

jaq1 | October 11, 2012

@ J. Hollingsworth - see Inside lines track test 5 posts earlier.

Volker.Berlin | October 11, 2012

My guess, the M5 won the third race as the battery was getting a bit low in juice. (petero)

I don't think so. Just jack-rabbiting from 0-100 mph a couple of times hardly drains any significant amount of juice from the battery. Overheating is more likely, but the Model S seems to be much more robust in that regard than the Roadster, and the performance loss would be so drastic that they would have mentioned it. No, I firmly believe that the M5 had a clean, straight launch just once and the Model S reliably and reproducibly delivered its max performance during each of the three runs.

Volker.Berlin | October 11, 2012

jaq1, having read the entire inside line piece I think it's a bit laughable. They praise practically every aspect of the car, criticizing very few details, and those may well be a matter of taste; and then prominently conclude they don't like it. Of course that's fair as an opinion, but it's not like the new M5 is an underperformer.

Driftster | October 11, 2012

So....No one is commenting that 1....The BMW didn't start at the same time for ONE.....

but 2 and more importantly..The M5 wasn't using Launch control, which drastically reduces it's standing start acceleration figures.....

Seems legit..Lol

jaq1 | October 11, 2012

@ Volker - fair enough
@ Drifster - I think we did touch on that in the last couple of posts but I would like your thoughts on the Inside line track test. I believe it offers a more objective comparison. Ultimately, I'm of the belief that they are both great cars. I simply prefer a great car that does not require gas.

Brian H | October 11, 2012

Timo was talking about the GIII→Roadster, i.e. the new Roadster to be built on the GIII skateboard. It will have little else in common with it, and will probably outperform the current Roadster.

Driftster | October 11, 2012

I personally have no doubt as to the cars capabilities. Numbers alone lend it great credibility in terms of performance. But numbers also are the counterargument towards some of these tests results either having large margins of error that are unaccounted for or unreferenced or simply being skewed deliberately.

Those asside, in the grand scheme of things looking at a "performance automobile"; you're faced with the same gargantuan difference. The market is dominated by BMW, Porsche and AMG; 3 companies that have been in the segment for a very very long time and have hammered out every last detail that comes along with making a heavy powerful car handle as deliberate and effective as possible.. Tesla's new, so that's going to transfer without question to their products. There's only so much you can learn by running simulation and crunching numbers before you need to put the rubber on the road and get feedback, and givin this is Tesla's maiden release into the segment it's of course going to be a few steps behind in those respects...

So did they get acceleration right? yeah FOR the product of course..Handling, braking, and driver feel/feedback? That'll take some work without question which is where the differences will be the most glaring. But BACK on the subject of just PURE acceleration, if you're going to compare a car that has peak power production at 1RPM it's silly to compare it to a car that doesn't have it's peak power at the rpm you're going to start it at when that RPM is availible for use (ie launch control).. You might as well compare a v8 to a V10 and plug the intake ports on 2 of the cylinders on the v10 then say the v8's the clear winner. By not using the BMW's launch control, theyve all but deliberately handicapped the car.

BYT | October 11, 2012

Tesla Motors took something as complex as a car with an Internal Combustion Engine and simplified it and in the process made it a hell of a lot better.

Kinda like what they did with NASA, took a mufti-billion dollar space budget to send stuff to the space station and simplified it to make it so we can do the same thing for penny's on the dollar in comparison.

It's hard for the layman to understand but like Elon Musk, I'm just trying to simplify the concept for you Driftster. ;)

This is not comparing apples to apples, this is comparing Rolex to Sundial. For a lack of a better analogy that is.

BYT | October 11, 2012

By they in the second paragraph, I meant SpaceX.

Volker.Berlin | October 12, 2012

So....No one is commenting that 1....The BMW didn't start at the same time for ONE..... but 2 and more importantly..The M5 wasn't using Launch control (Driftster)

I did, in this thread one page back.

Volker.Berlin | October 12, 2012

Ultimately, I'm of the belief that they are both great cars. I simply prefer a great car that does not require gas. (jaq1)

+1 :-)

Timo | October 12, 2012

@petero, I have always considered GenIII more a platform than a car. Their affordable car is build on GenIII platform, but that platform can be used for several different models.

So "affordable" car will be GenIII, but also next Roadster will be GenIII.