ajoe

Was seriously considering this mod to a C55 and read a review of this car in the December car and driver mag. Supposedly has 570 hp and 580 torque. Then I saw the quarter mile times (12.2 at 117) and something doesn't add up. The E55 which has 469 hp and 516 torque and weighs at least 400-500 lbs more has a well established quarter mile time of 12.4 at 116.5 according to most mags including car and driver. If the Kleeman power figures were correct I would expect a trap speed significantly higher than the E55's. Are Kleeman's figures reliable, what gives?

KompressorKev

that's also just one test. i have seen car and driver take some really fast cars and test them super slowly. for instance, just look at the supertuner challenges. all the super fixed up vipers and vettes never test as fast as they can. like the lingenfelter 427 c5 testing around 12-flat. yes even bad off the line launches would result in a slower ET with a higher trap speed, but car and driver tested some tuned cars ridiculously slowly, and even the trap speeds weren't up to par. i don't think they are a really reliable source for comparing tuned cars.

plus perhaps gearing is an issue? i don't know the exact gearing but i think the E55's much taller, i wouldn't be surprised if the c55 hits 4th before the trap and the e55 still in 3rd? or close to it. in this case maybe the c55 might drop out of its max powerband when around the 117 or so speed. the taller gear may help off the line, because ther'es soo much torque that close ratio gearing may cause too much wheelspin if not driven properly.

that said, i also have a lot of trust in kleemann so i might be slightly biased. their claims never seem inflated, dyno proven by 3rd party customers, and everyone i have heard of running kleemann superchargers are thoroughly impressed. best bet, get a kleemann charger and race an e55, tell us the result :p

AMG PWR

I also came across this. That makes sense but wouldnt you think that kleeman would adjust the chip they makes for faster times? Not instigating, just seriously interested...hehe

schwarzwagen

i see the car mags out in the santa monica mountains every once and a while, and they drive so slowly. i dont trust anything they write.

yes, the e55k has a hard enough time hooking up with a 2.65, the c55 has a 3.07 and must be even more of a handful. in my experience, the e55k slips through all of first and part of second gear, so trying to get the c55 to hook would be difficult.

99ITR_SC

with that power i'd imagine you'd need a widebody and 11" rims.!!!

SteveL

They should give more relevant data like 50-150 times rather than 0 to anything. With 0 to anything, so much depends on traction and track conditions.

G55K

Keep in mind that the Kleemann C55 has huge aftermarket rims and brakes which adds significant rotating mass. I've driven this car back to back with an E55 and the Kleemann C55 feels significantly more powerful. I've also seen the car on a dyno and their power claims seem to be accurate.

AMG PWR

Do you know where I can get some pictures of this car? I have the mag article but I cant find it. Also I found the stats on the car but no damned pictures.... :v

NORTH 44 C63

http://www.fast-autos.net/kleemann/kleemannc55k.html

AMG PWR

Now I feel stupid b/c I went to that site before. Thanks!

BenzoAMGpower

the kleeman C55 only traps 117mph on high boost yeilding 570hp and 580lb ft? Even if its lost in wheelspin and cuts a 2.6 60ft time with a 12.2 ET, it should at least be trapping in the 120s with that kind of HP/Weight ratio IMO. 19" wheels should have also gave it more gear!!!

People smoke all of first and 2nd gear on teh E55 if they just stomp it with ESP off but if you can modulate the throttle you wont spin much if none and cut a good 60ft time with a good ET. Im sure the Car and Driver guys should have known that one.

Not taking anything away from the C55K, it is a bad *** car but you are right, the stats dont match up