Top Gear Track Times. CLS55 places 16th!!
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 355
Likes: 0
Top Gear Track Times. CLS55 places 16th!!
Considering the company, the CLS55 did amazingly well. Thought this was interesting for a post.
1st Maserati MC12 - 1.18.9
2nd Ferrari F60 Enzo - 1.19.0
3rd Ariel Atom - 1.19.5
4th Porsche Carerra GT - 1.19.8
5th Mercedes McLaren SLR - 1.20.9
Ford GT - 1.21.9
Ferrari 360 CS - 1.22.3
Porsche GT3 RS - 1.22.3
Murcielago - 1.23.7
Zonda - 1.23.8
Koenigsegg - 1.23.9
Noble - 1.25.0
Gallardo - 1.25.8
Lotus Exige - 1.26.4
Chevrolet Corvette - 1.26.8
Mercedes CLS 55 AMG - 1.26.9
Porsche 911 GT3 - 1.27.2
TVR 350C - 1.27.5
BMW M3 CSL - 1.28.0
Dodge Viper SRT-10 - 1.28.5
MG SV - 1.28.6
Porsche 911 Carrera S - 1.28.9 (very wet)
Mitsubishi Evo VIII - 1.28.9
BMW Alpine Z8 - 1.29.0
Mercedes CL65 - 1.29
Alfa 3.7 GTA - 1.30.0
Subaru Impreza STI - 1.30.1
Aston Martin DB7 GT - 1.30.4
Vauxhall Monaro VXR - 1.30.16
Audi S4 - 1.30.9
Porsche 911 turbo - 1.31.0
Vauxhall VX 220 turbo - 1.31.3
Honda NSX Type R - 1.31.6
BMW M3 - 1.31.8
Nissan 350Z - 1.31.8
Mazda RX8 - 1.31.8
BMW 535d - 1.31.8
Ford Focus RS - 1.32.2
Lotus Esprit V8 - 1.32.5
Audi TT V6 - 1.32.7
MG ZT - 1.33
Noble - 1.33.1
Mercedes SL 55 AMG - 1.33.2
Volkswagen Golf R32 - 1.33.2
Cadillac CTS-V - 1.33.3
Holden Monaro - 1.33.9
Volvo S60R - 1.35.0
Ferrari 575 - 1.35.2
Alfa 147 GTA - 1.35.6
Lotus Elise - 1.35.6
Aston Martin Vanquish - 1.36.2
Renault Clio v6 - 1.36.2
Honda Civic Type R - 1.36.5
Saab 95 hot aero - 1.37.9
Mazzer - 1.38.0
Bowler Wildcat - 1.39.4
Bentley Arnarge - 1.40.8
Overfinch - 1.44.0
1st Maserati MC12 - 1.18.9
2nd Ferrari F60 Enzo - 1.19.0
3rd Ariel Atom - 1.19.5
4th Porsche Carerra GT - 1.19.8
5th Mercedes McLaren SLR - 1.20.9
Ford GT - 1.21.9
Ferrari 360 CS - 1.22.3
Porsche GT3 RS - 1.22.3
Murcielago - 1.23.7
Zonda - 1.23.8
Koenigsegg - 1.23.9
Noble - 1.25.0
Gallardo - 1.25.8
Lotus Exige - 1.26.4
Chevrolet Corvette - 1.26.8
Mercedes CLS 55 AMG - 1.26.9
Porsche 911 GT3 - 1.27.2
TVR 350C - 1.27.5
BMW M3 CSL - 1.28.0
Dodge Viper SRT-10 - 1.28.5
MG SV - 1.28.6
Porsche 911 Carrera S - 1.28.9 (very wet)
Mitsubishi Evo VIII - 1.28.9
BMW Alpine Z8 - 1.29.0
Mercedes CL65 - 1.29
Alfa 3.7 GTA - 1.30.0
Subaru Impreza STI - 1.30.1
Aston Martin DB7 GT - 1.30.4
Vauxhall Monaro VXR - 1.30.16
Audi S4 - 1.30.9
Porsche 911 turbo - 1.31.0
Vauxhall VX 220 turbo - 1.31.3
Honda NSX Type R - 1.31.6
BMW M3 - 1.31.8
Nissan 350Z - 1.31.8
Mazda RX8 - 1.31.8
BMW 535d - 1.31.8
Ford Focus RS - 1.32.2
Lotus Esprit V8 - 1.32.5
Audi TT V6 - 1.32.7
MG ZT - 1.33
Noble - 1.33.1
Mercedes SL 55 AMG - 1.33.2
Volkswagen Golf R32 - 1.33.2
Cadillac CTS-V - 1.33.3
Holden Monaro - 1.33.9
Volvo S60R - 1.35.0
Ferrari 575 - 1.35.2
Alfa 147 GTA - 1.35.6
Lotus Elise - 1.35.6
Aston Martin Vanquish - 1.36.2
Renault Clio v6 - 1.36.2
Honda Civic Type R - 1.36.5
Saab 95 hot aero - 1.37.9
Mazzer - 1.38.0
Bowler Wildcat - 1.39.4
Bentley Arnarge - 1.40.8
Overfinch - 1.44.0
Member
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 168
Likes: 0
From: Boston
Originally Posted by Speed Thrills
Considering the company, the CLS55 did amazingly well. Thought this was interesting for a post.
1st Maserati MC12 - 1.18.9
2nd Ferrari F60 Enzo - 1.19.0
3rd Ariel Atom - 1.19.5
4th Porsche Carerra GT - 1.19.8
5th Mercedes McLaren SLR - 1.20.9
Ford GT - 1.21.9
Ferrari 360 CS - 1.22.3
Porsche GT3 RS - 1.22.3
Murcielago - 1.23.7
Zonda - 1.23.8
Koenigsegg - 1.23.9
Noble - 1.25.0
Gallardo - 1.25.8
Lotus Exige - 1.26.4
Chevrolet Corvette - 1.26.8
Mercedes CLS 55 AMG - 1.26.9
Porsche 911 GT3 - 1.27.2
TVR 350C - 1.27.5
BMW M3 CSL - 1.28.0
Dodge Viper SRT-10 - 1.28.5
MG SV - 1.28.6
Porsche 911 Carrera S - 1.28.9 (very wet)
Mitsubishi Evo VIII - 1.28.9
BMW Alpine Z8 - 1.29.0
Mercedes CL65 - 1.29
Alfa 3.7 GTA - 1.30.0
Subaru Impreza STI - 1.30.1
Aston Martin DB7 GT - 1.30.4
Vauxhall Monaro VXR - 1.30.16
Audi S4 - 1.30.9
Porsche 911 turbo - 1.31.0
Vauxhall VX 220 turbo - 1.31.3
Honda NSX Type R - 1.31.6
BMW M3 - 1.31.8
Nissan 350Z - 1.31.8
Mazda RX8 - 1.31.8
BMW 535d - 1.31.8
Ford Focus RS - 1.32.2
Lotus Esprit V8 - 1.32.5
Audi TT V6 - 1.32.7
MG ZT - 1.33
Noble - 1.33.1
Mercedes SL 55 AMG - 1.33.2
Volkswagen Golf R32 - 1.33.2
Cadillac CTS-V - 1.33.3
Holden Monaro - 1.33.9
Volvo S60R - 1.35.0
Ferrari 575 - 1.35.2
Alfa 147 GTA - 1.35.6
Lotus Elise - 1.35.6
Aston Martin Vanquish - 1.36.2
Renault Clio v6 - 1.36.2
Honda Civic Type R - 1.36.5
Saab 95 hot aero - 1.37.9
Mazzer - 1.38.0
Bowler Wildcat - 1.39.4
Bentley Arnarge - 1.40.8
Overfinch - 1.44.0
1st Maserati MC12 - 1.18.9
2nd Ferrari F60 Enzo - 1.19.0
3rd Ariel Atom - 1.19.5
4th Porsche Carerra GT - 1.19.8
5th Mercedes McLaren SLR - 1.20.9
Ford GT - 1.21.9
Ferrari 360 CS - 1.22.3
Porsche GT3 RS - 1.22.3
Murcielago - 1.23.7
Zonda - 1.23.8
Koenigsegg - 1.23.9
Noble - 1.25.0
Gallardo - 1.25.8
Lotus Exige - 1.26.4
Chevrolet Corvette - 1.26.8
Mercedes CLS 55 AMG - 1.26.9
Porsche 911 GT3 - 1.27.2
TVR 350C - 1.27.5
BMW M3 CSL - 1.28.0
Dodge Viper SRT-10 - 1.28.5
MG SV - 1.28.6
Porsche 911 Carrera S - 1.28.9 (very wet)
Mitsubishi Evo VIII - 1.28.9
BMW Alpine Z8 - 1.29.0
Mercedes CL65 - 1.29
Alfa 3.7 GTA - 1.30.0
Subaru Impreza STI - 1.30.1
Aston Martin DB7 GT - 1.30.4
Vauxhall Monaro VXR - 1.30.16
Audi S4 - 1.30.9
Porsche 911 turbo - 1.31.0
Vauxhall VX 220 turbo - 1.31.3
Honda NSX Type R - 1.31.6
BMW M3 - 1.31.8
Nissan 350Z - 1.31.8
Mazda RX8 - 1.31.8
BMW 535d - 1.31.8
Ford Focus RS - 1.32.2
Lotus Esprit V8 - 1.32.5
Audi TT V6 - 1.32.7
MG ZT - 1.33
Noble - 1.33.1
Mercedes SL 55 AMG - 1.33.2
Volkswagen Golf R32 - 1.33.2
Cadillac CTS-V - 1.33.3
Holden Monaro - 1.33.9
Volvo S60R - 1.35.0
Ferrari 575 - 1.35.2
Alfa 147 GTA - 1.35.6
Lotus Elise - 1.35.6
Aston Martin Vanquish - 1.36.2
Renault Clio v6 - 1.36.2
Honda Civic Type R - 1.36.5
Saab 95 hot aero - 1.37.9
Mazzer - 1.38.0
Bowler Wildcat - 1.39.4
Bentley Arnarge - 1.40.8
Overfinch - 1.44.0
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 355
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by RezF
You forgot the E60 BMW M5 --> 1.26.2
Member
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 168
Likes: 0
From: Boston
Originally Posted by Speed Thrills
I dont mind being in the E60s company at all, but being that the M5 isn't even available in the states yet and I have my CLS55 in the garage counts for something. BMW is floundering on getting their cars out there. Funny how the M5 is actually old news now and still not here.
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 355
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by RezF
Actually, the CLS55 is more my cup of tea. IF they ever decided to make a 65, I would be all over it. The styling of the M5 leaves little to be desired. It is "one french frye short of a happy meal"
Very true as well. I wonder how they are going to handle the 65 / 63 models.
Phasing out the Kompressors with the new naturally aspirated engines has me a bit worried about the old engine models really taking a hit. I'm already on the list for the CL63.
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 375
Likes: 1
From: So. Cal.
2006 CLS55-030, 2002 BMW 540 Wagon, 1995 VW Jetta GLX
A Sought After Motor !!
Speed Thrills - I think it will be totally different than what you are thinking. The 55K Motor will be one of those motors that will go down in Automotive History as a great motor and will prop up the resale value of the cars it was used in.
The reason MB is changing from the 55K Motor to the 63 motor are the pedestrian frontal impact rules in the EU, which require a crush zone before any hard object in the engine compartment is reached. With the 55K Motors installed MB was unable to design that "Crush Room" into their cars. This is also the reason they are changing over to Turbos when they eventually put FI on the 63 motor (a very expensive option - $ 50,000.00).
- Bob
The reason MB is changing from the 55K Motor to the 63 motor are the pedestrian frontal impact rules in the EU, which require a crush zone before any hard object in the engine compartment is reached. With the 55K Motors installed MB was unable to design that "Crush Room" into their cars. This is also the reason they are changing over to Turbos when they eventually put FI on the 63 motor (a very expensive option - $ 50,000.00).
- Bob
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 355
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by Evolution Marine
Speed Thrills - I think it will be totally different than what you are thinking. The 55K Motor will be one of those motors that will go down in Automotive History as a great motor and will prop up the resale value of the cars it was used in.
The reason MB is changing from the 55K Motor to the 63 motor are the pedestrian frontal impact rules in the EU, which require a crush zone before any hard object in the engine compartment is reached. With the 55K Motors installed MB was unable to design that "Crush Room" into their cars. This is also the reason they are changing over to Turbos when they eventually put FI on the 63 motor (a very expensive option - $ 50,000.00). - Bob
The reason MB is changing from the 55K Motor to the 63 motor are the pedestrian frontal impact rules in the EU, which require a crush zone before any hard object in the engine compartment is reached. With the 55K Motors installed MB was unable to design that "Crush Room" into their cars. This is also the reason they are changing over to Turbos when they eventually put FI on the 63 motor (a very expensive option - $ 50,000.00).
- BobVery interesting. But I think the general public will think the new is the improved and "better". As I said it will be interesting. One bad thing is it will make mods very expensive. There is something attractive though about a NA engine that puts out 500+ hp. Just not sure if it fits into the MB style and blend of luxury and performance.
Trending Topics
Almost a Member!
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by Evolution Marine
Speed Thrills - I think it will be totally different than what you are thinking. The 55K Motor will be one of those motors that will go down in Automotive History as a great motor and will prop up the resale value of the cars it was used in.
The reason MB is changing from the 55K Motor to the 63 motor are the pedestrian frontal impact rules in the EU, which require a crush zone before any hard object in the engine compartment is reached. With the 55K Motors installed MB was unable to design that "Crush Room" into their cars. This is also the reason they are changing over to Turbos when they eventually put FI on the 63 motor (a very expensive option - $ 50,000.00). - Bob
The reason MB is changing from the 55K Motor to the 63 motor are the pedestrian frontal impact rules in the EU, which require a crush zone before any hard object in the engine compartment is reached. With the 55K Motors installed MB was unable to design that "Crush Room" into their cars. This is also the reason they are changing over to Turbos when they eventually put FI on the 63 motor (a very expensive option - $ 50,000.00).
- Bob
MB World Stories
The Best of Mercedes & AMG
Manual Mercedes? 6 Times Sindelfingen Let Drivers Have All The Fun
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes SLR McLaren 722 S Is Extremely Rare Example Modified by McLaren
Verdad Gallardo
8 Classic Boxy Mercedes Designs That Have Aged Like Fine Wine
Verdad Gallardo
Flawlessly Restored Mercedes 190E Evo II Heads to Auction
Verdad Gallardo
Electric Mercedes C-Class Unveiled: 11 Things You Need to Know
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes EQS Gets A Major Update: Everything You Need to Know
Verdad Gallardo
5 Underrated Mercedes-Benz Models That Don't Get the Love They Deserve
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes 300D Has Pushed Well Past 1 Million Miles and It Ain't Stopping
Verdad Gallardo
10 Most Reliable Mercedes-Benz Models You Can Buy Used
Verdad Gallardo
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 375
Likes: 1
From: So. Cal.
2006 CLS55-030, 2002 BMW 540 Wagon, 1995 VW Jetta GLX
To Many RPMs !
Speed Thrills - I agree with you. I think the MB crowed will have a hard time with a 7200 RPM motor. Not the sedate understated monster that the 55K motor is at 6400 RPMs. Might be to sporty for the traditional MB image. However, with the EU rules, MB does not have a choice, and Mods (As you pointed out) will be very expensive and not near as productive on a HP/$ basis, and will force tuners to raise the RPM,s to gain the desired HP and lower final drive ratios. All this, going against the MB Image as we know it today. 
- Bob
- Bob
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 355
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by slk55lvr
Boy those sti's and evo's post some really impressive numbers at the track! 
I didn't notice the new vette on here, wonder where that would place?
I didn't notice the new vette on here, wonder where that would place?
