Transcript
8/9/2019 2015 CHEVROLET SS vs. 2003 BMW M5
1/10
T H E C O M P A R I S O N
2 1 5 C H E V R O L E T
SS
2 3
B M W M 5
C TEGORY FIVE
WITH
V-8
REAR-WHEEL DRIVE AND STICK SHIFT THE CHEVY SS
IS THROWBACK
TO THE
THIRD-GEN BMW
MS.
BUT IS
IT
AS GOOD?
B Y M A X P R I N C E P H O T O G R A P Y B Y D E A N S M I T H
8/9/2019 2015 CHEVROLET SS vs. 2003 BMW M5
2/10
8/9/2019 2015 CHEVROLET SS vs. 2003 BMW M5
3/10
8/9/2019 2015 CHEVROLET SS vs. 2003 BMW M5
4/10
8/9/2019 2015 CHEVROLET SS vs. 2003 BMW M5
5/10
WHY HAVE WE BROUGHT THESE CARS TOGETHER,
and what
makes them so special? Understand thatthe E39 MS, produced
between
1998
and
2003,
comes from a high-water period
for
BMvV r
oad
cars. During
that
era, the Bavarians were turn
ing out a specific flavor of automobile: outwardly,
status
sym
bols with
mass
-
market
appeal; at heart, driver-focused
and
dynami
cally impeccable.
The E39
is
that id
eology
incarnate,
Yet for all
that
voodoo between its fenders, the E39
MS
is
a fundamentally simple creature. Its brilliance boils down to
an
engine (eight cylinders,
non
-turbo), bolted
to
a transmission
(
manual
),
running
back
to th
e r
ear
wheels, delivered
in
sensible
packaging (four-door sedan). It's a shame the next
Ms,
a self
shifting V-10 monstrosity, burned
the blueprint
so spectacu
larly
when it
arrived
in the
U.S.
in
200S.
sleeker, meaner, and more capable than
any
sport
sedan prior. So when the folks at
BMW
M
tuned
one,
they didn t
just
throw
down
the fast-four-door gau ntlet. They
spiked it through the earth's core and out
the other side.
WHEN PONTIAC
Robert A. Lutz, however, knows an arche
type when he sees one. Before he became
an
ReJT
columnist,
he
was
charged with right
ing
the
ship at Pontiac. The GM exec, a.k.a.
Maximum Bob, ordered
up
t
he
screwball
Pontiac GS GXP, which paired a
Co
rvette
engine
and
gearbox
with
suspension geom
etry
and
dimensions eerily reminiscent
of
a
S-series. These similarities were not coinci
dental.
The
G was a rebadged Australian-
Of
course,
there
was plenty
of
hoopla over
the
engine. The MS's calling
card had
long
been a megapotent, 24-valve
stra
ight-six,
derived from BMW's homologation-special
Ml, that scared the
living sauerkraut out
of
911 drivers on the autobahn. For the E39,
BIT
THE
BULLET,
WE WERE
STARVED
OF A SPORT SEDAN
MADE IN
THE
E39
MS S IMAGE. THEN
THE
CHEVROLET
SS
SHOWED UP.
market Holden Commodore, developed
entirely in Melbourne, where GM directed
said six was replaced
by
a mighty quad-cam V-8,
at the time
the most
advanced roadgoing example
of
its
ki
nd.
The
4.9-liter
used independent variable valve timing for each of the four
camshafts (a feature also found in
the
McLaren Fl's V-12 and
its top rear-drive engineers to evaluate the
car
against BMW
sedans
. Also along for
the
ride were a
handful of
eggheads
who
had helped develop the E39, as well as Holden's chassis tuner,
Peter Hanenberger, a man known for
be
n
chma
rking
the
Com
modore against-you guessed i
t
n
eq
uivale
nt
S-series . Alas,
n electromagnetic, lateral-g-force-activated,
se
midry-
sump
oiling system
involving
no
fewer
than
tlu·ee
pumps.
Subsequent output, a tidy
394
hp, matched
that
of the Ferrari 36
Modena.
The
enthusiast
media
soiled its collective Unterhose
46 ROADANDTRACK.COM MARCH/APRIL 2
5
ABOVE: BM W
s
nterio
r
is
Ferrar
i -gra
de.
RIGHT:
The SS
lacks cockpit
panache
but delivers
he
goods
wh
e
re
it counts.
the
GXP hit dealerships just months before Pon
tiac bit
the
bullet
in 2009. And
we were once again
starvedof
a
sport
sedan made in the
E39 MS's image.
Until the Chevrolet SSshowed up .
8/9/2019 2015 CHEVROLET SS vs. 2003 BMW M5
6/10
8/9/2019 2015 CHEVROLET SS vs. 2003 BMW M5
7/10
Like the
G
before it, the SSborrows its
Zeta
chassis architec
ture from the Commodore, sized between the
current
Camaro
and
Chevy's Caprice police cruiser. Stashed
under the
hood is
a 6.2-liter LS3 V-8, producing
415
hp
and 415
lb-ft of torque
.
Curb weight is 3935 pounds,
and
a clutch-type limited-slip dif
ferential is
standard.
For 2015, the SS swaps nonadjustable shocks for Magnetic
Ride Control (see: magnetorheological suspension, like that
in the
Corvette Stingray Z51). GM's close-ratio Tremec six
speed manual
transmission, complete
with
a 3.70:1 axle ratio,
becomes a no-cost option. (As in, you payno monies and receive
a manual gearbox.
The
best things in life, right?) Ofcourse, you
can still spec last year's six-speed paddle-shi ft automatic and
taller 3.27:1 final drive, butyou'd be missing the point entirely.
Because
the
Chevy SS
is now the
only
three
-pedal, rear-drive
sedan with room for five
and
enough naturally aspirated V-8
grunt to give every passenger a
hernia
. Which raises the ques
tion: Could
this
be a
rightful heir to the
E39's
throne?
•
THE MOMENT HE HITS
THE
IGNITION BUTTON Cammisa's
impulse is to do a burnout. Mine, too. A massive burnout some
thing
a SWAT
team
could use
to
disperse unruly protestors.
We're all beasts of
condition, big, slobbering Pavlovian dogs,
and
when
the
SS shimmies
and
snarls at start-up, it's ringing
the Gen
IV small-block bell.
Everybody likes a bit of rashy, Cammisa admits.
Even so, he's having t rouble
wa
rming up to the SS. It's like a
raked 4x4 limousine next to the M5, and neither of
us
loves
the
Chevy's chrome body trinkets. But
the
broad, generic nose jibes
with the sleeper-car motif,
and
the tail is all wide haunches
and
meaty275-section rubber and cool duckbill trunkspoiler. Viewed
dead-on
at
the rear from 10 paces, it looks the absolute business.
Still, that means zilch once you're peering down the hood
bulge
and pounding
on California blacktop.
The
seating posi
tion is higher
than
in the BMvV more upright, and the SS tram
ples the road instead of massaging it . Those new magnetorheo
logical dampers? They
might as
well be filled
with granite
8/9/2019 2015 CHEVROLET SS vs. 2003 BMW M5
8/10
One plunge in to the th rottle, though, and the ca
romin
g sus
pension is forgiven: This 6.2-liter lump delivers on every sin
ful crate-engine-catalog fantasy you've ever had . The noise is
somewhere between ays of hunder and the end of days. Max
engine speed is a thrashy 66 rpm, but there's no use swing
ing the
ach
needle north of59 Torqueis everywhere, always.
The
entire experience is a singular, blunt,
pushrod
onslaught
broken onlyby hang
in
g moments ofclutch engagement.
And,
God, are
those
moments sweet. The heavy
pedal
and
solid, resonating driveline
thunk
of
his
six-speed fit
the
Chevy's
personality perfectly.It makes you want to play
around
with the
car, actually get down and drive instead of ust vigorously aim
ing the
th in
g
f
you're
int
ent on hooning,
the
SS will hammer
around a
nd
make raucous sounds and powerslide out of ha ir
pins. It'll do
that
every day,
half
-trying, for the rest of eternity,
until cockroaches die off and Tw
in
kies expire. You can do all
the
Cam
ara stuff, and Camarastuff s neat. Butwhen you're
read
y to
ante
up
to
do M5 work, the SS reallyhits its stride.
Bend
afte
r
bend,
nearing h ighway speed, we're approching
the limit.
The
Chevy's much bigger
than
the BMW and
just
as
controlled- when it comes to braking and steering accu
racy, it's better.
But you've got to
be
deliberate
and trust
the
car We pour into a succession of
third-gear
esses that'd
se
nd
some well-honed coupes tank-slapping toward a ditch. Instead,
the
SS politely steps out, asks for a bit
of stee
r
ing and
throttle,
then
gets in
line
and back to wasting
asphalt
. It's as capable
and composed
as
hairy-chested four-doors get, two tons of
blue-collar killer. Even Cammisa, who
has
serious reservations
about the ride quality, has to offer props: Brutallyfast and
fan
tastically Am
erica
n. Or Australian. Whatever. But, man, is this
thing brilliant on a back road.
THE
CHEVY CAN'T
TAKE THE MS'S
CROWN, but not
for a lack of
thrills. Adjusting for inflation,
the
SS's sticker price is nearly
half that of the M5's: In terms of overall build quality, a sub
50,000 sedan today simply can't
stand up to
the flagship
8/9/2019 2015 CHEVROLET SS vs. 2003 BMW M5
9/10
shrine
of
a great brand s greatest era. For everything the M5
offers
in
finesse, though, the SS answers in sheer cojones. Both
are
absolute dynamite.
The
commonality
he
re is a rounded competence,
proof
that
cars can still feel elemental even through two tons of leather
and
electronics.
Par
t of hat is
the
healthy, all-motor V-8. Part is
the rear
-drive layout
and
Q-car wrapper.
The crux
is a
manual
gearbox. Whether it s more impressive that BMW perfected
this
formula or that Chevrolet continues to deliver it in a
time
when
nobody else will,
I m not
sure.
To that point, the SS is only here because GM executive vice
honcho at Buick, pulled a similar stunt deliver ing the Grand
National
GNX on the
coattails of GM s turbo V-6 Indy engine
program.) Production
numb
ers will be low,
about 2500
annu
ally,
and whe
n Holden
disappea
rs
in
a few year
s, the
SS will
likely
die with
it. BMW sold
mo
re
th a
n
20,000
examp
les
of
the
E39
M5
worldwide.
From
volume play
to
niche dweller, 12
yea
rs represents an incredible
paradigm
shift. Also an
alarm
ing one.
People may not
buy
cars like this anymore, but they still seep
into yo
ur
soul. Drive one,
and
you ll know a
fast
se
da
n from a
sedan that is fast. It s the difference between a manifestpurpose
president
Mark
Re
us
s, a dyed-in-the-wool
car
guy, leveraged NASCAR
marketing
tie-
in
s
to make it so. (His dad, Lloyd, a former head
Great
c
ha
ssis
balance meets
415
b ft
of o rque and opposite ock.
and a latent function. And when the mountain
road is foggy,
out
for blood, it s
the
difference
between a snake charmer and a mouse. •esults on disp lay.
50
ROADANDTRACK.COM
MARCH/APRIL
15
8/9/2019 2015 CHEVROLET SS vs. 2003 BMW M5
10/10
~
~ T
OFFICI L PERFORM NCE TEST
REPORT
3CALE· ID IN. DIVISIONS
ILLlr.:.•RATIONBY IM BARKER
qo,,
TR Cl HEARSTMAGAZINES
2 0 0 3 BMW
MS
2 0
15
CHEVROLET
SS
PRICE
BA SE
AS
TE S
TED
ENGINE
CONFIGURATION
LA
YOUT
MATERIAL
DISPLACEMENT
BORExSTROKE
COMPRESS ION RATIO
REDLINE
FUEL DELIVERY
TRANSMISSION
DRIVEN WHEELS
TY PE
FINAL·
DR
I
VE RATIO
S P E C I F I C A T I O N S
BMW
MS
69 ,900
(2002)
$ 7 2 ,6 4 5 (2002)
DOHC
3 2 -
valve
V-8
front,
longitud inal
a luminum b lock
and
heads
4 9 41 cc
9 4 .0 x 8 9.0 mm
1 1.0:1
7 0 0 0 r p m
por t inj
ect
ion
rear
6 -s pe ea
manua
l
3.15:1, im ited-s lip d ifferent ial
CHEVROLET SS
$ 4 6 ,740
4 6 ,7 4 0
pushrod
1 6 -va lve
V-
8
f ront , longitud i
nal
a luminum
block and heads
6 1 6 2 cc
1 0 3 .3 x 92 .0 mm
1 0 .7:1
6 0 0 0
rp m
po rt inject ion
rear
6 -s peed
manua
l
3.70:1, im i
te
d
-s
l ip different ial
BMW
MS
0 -7000RP M
CHEVROLET SS
0 7 0 0 0 RPt-<
3 9 4
PEAK HP (SAE)
@6600RPM
36 8
LB T
PE
AK
TO R
QU
E
@3800RPM
415
PEAKHP(SAE)
@5900RPM
415 L
·
FT
PEAK TORQU E
@ 4
6 00
RP
M
TES T
RE S U L T S
BMW
CHEVROLET
GEAR RATIO CALC MAX (RPM) GEAR RATIO CALC MAX (RPM)
0-60MPH,
SECONDS 4 8
13 3
4 7
13 1
STEERING
ASSIST
RATIO
TURNS
,
LOCK-
T
O-LOCK
TURNING CIRCLE
SUSPENSION
FRONT, REAR
BRAKES
&
TIRES
F
RONT
REAR
TIRES
SIZE
BODY
& CHASSIS
STRUCTURE
LENGTH x WIDTH x HEIG
HT
WHEELB
ASE
TRACK, FRONT/REAR
DOORS
/S
EATS
EPACL
ASS
CAR GO CAPACITY
DRAG COEFFIC IENT
x F
RONTA
L
AREA
WEIGHT
CURB
WEIGHT
DIST RIBUTION F/R
WEIGHT-TO· POWER RATIO
F UEL
EPA
CITY/HWY
FUEL CA PACITY
FUEL
RANGE
RECOMMEND
ED FUEL
1
2
3
4
5
6
4 .23
:1
4 0 mph
(7000)
2.53:1 6 7 mph
(7000)
1 .67 :1 1 0 1 mph (7 0 0 0 )
1 .2
3 :
1 1 37 mph (7 0 0 0 )
1 .00
:1 1 5 5 m ph (6425)
0 .8 3 :1 1 5 5 mph
(5325)
hydraulic
14.7
:1
3 .0
38 .1
ft
strut
-
type,
mult i i
nk
1 3 .6
-i
n
ve n
t ed rotors,
1- piston sl iding ca lipers
12 .9
-i r· ro tors,
1-
piston sl
ic i
ng
ca l
ipers
Mi
chelin Pi lo t 5po r t
F 245/40R·18, R
275 / 35R·
18
steel un ibo dy
1 8 8
.3 x 7 0.9 x 56 .6 n
111 .4 n
59 .6 /60
.1 n
4 / 5
compact
1 1 .1
ft
3
0 .3 1 x 2 3.4 (e st )
ft
3 9 7 6
1b
52 / 48%
10.11b/hp
1 2 /1 9
mpg
1
8.Sgal
352mi
pr e
mi
u m
1
2
3
4
5
6
3 .0
1 :1 4 3 mp h
(6000)
2 .07 :1 6 2 mp h (6000)
1 .43:1 9 0 mp h (6000)
1 . 00 : 1
1 28 m ph (6000)
0.71:1 1 7 5 mp
h
(5825)
0 .57 :1 1 7 5 mph (4675)
e lectric
16 .4
:1
2.8
3 7.4
ft
s t
r
ut-type,
m
ulti
li
nk
14 .0-i
n vented rotors,
4 -
piston
fixed ca l ipers
1
4.2-
in ve n t ed
rotors,
4-p
is t
o n
f ixed
ca lip e rs
B r
idgestone Potenza RE050A
F 24 5/40R·19, R
275 / 35R·
19
stee
l un ibo dy
1 9 5.5 x
7 4
.7 x
57.9
in
114 .8 in
62 .6 /62 .4 in
4 / 5
l
arge
ca rs
1 6.4
ft
3
0 .3 4 (est) x 27 . l (est)
ft
39351b
5 2 / 4 8 %
9.51b/hp
1 5 / 2 1
m pg
1 8 .8ga l
395m i
prem i
um
0 1 4 M I L E
SECONDS
@M P
H @108 .0
{ . , ' t . ~ SPEED, 155
@ 109.2
175
~ g ~ g ; N G G
0 9 0 0 97
ACCE LERA
Tl
ON
1FOOT
(ROLLOUT)
- s e c
0.3sec
ROLLING START,
S- 60MPH 5 .0 5 .3
0 -10MPH 0 .4
0- 20 1.2
0 - 30 1 .9 1 .8
0- 40
2 .9 2 .6
0- 50
3 .7
3.6
0 -60 4 .8
4 .7
0 - 70 6 .2 6 .0
0 - 80 7 .6
7 .4
0 -
90
9.2 9 .0
0 - 100 11 .3
11 .2
0 - 110 13 .7 13 .3
0-120
16 .3 16 .0
0-130
19 .5 19 .1
TOP
SP
EED
155mph
1 7 5 m p h
(ELEC
LTD,
MFR) (DRAG-LTD, MFR)
BRAKING
6 0 - 0 MPH
8 0 - 0 MPH
FADE
HANDLING
1 1 6 f t
2 0 3 f t
none
ROADHOLDING
0 .9 0 g
BALANCE
TEST NOTE
moderate
unde
rsteer
1 1 4 f t
2 0 2 f t
non
0 .9 7 g
m i ld
understeer
MS test r sults omprevious test
~ _ . _ _ _
top related