Does anybody road race their C32's?
10-18-2005, 11:41 PM
#76
Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 133
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Jack Olsen
But I thought I came here to taunt Benz drivers?
I'm picking up an E55 next week. It should be faster than my 911. Now I really need to learn how to drive!
10-19-2005, 12:52 AM
#77
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wassup, brutha Jack?
You got a Benz I don't know about?
That guy that runs the 1:30's in the daily driver is SICK fast...
You got a Benz I don't know about?
That guy that runs the 1:30's in the daily driver is SICK fast...
Originally Posted by Jack Olsen
I've driven with P51Aviator. He's not a guy who lies about his lap times.
No insult intended, but your good friend is kind of slow. A 1:31 is a very respectable time for the big track, but I've been told that a 1:30 can be done in a daily driver with heat, air conditioning, full interior, leather, everything -- and with only 247 horsepower, and on 200-wear-rated BFGoodrich street tires, in a 32-year-old car that's 150 pounds heavier than it came stock.
The Road and Track driver said he was doing 1:32's in the C6 Z06 -- on its stock run-flat tires, with no changes to the stock suspension settings. That's a very impressive car.
How about we add one more German luxury brand to that list?
Smack aside, it'd be great to see some Benzes out at the Open Track Racing event. It's a nice, laid-back track day, and I'm sure P51Aviator and some of the rest of us would be happy to help instruct newbies.
If Jim Brady comes with his Turbo, you'll also get to see some very fast driving.
________________________
Jack Olsen
1972 Porsche 911
No insult intended, but your good friend is kind of slow. A 1:31 is a very respectable time for the big track, but I've been told that a 1:30 can be done in a daily driver with heat, air conditioning, full interior, leather, everything -- and with only 247 horsepower, and on 200-wear-rated BFGoodrich street tires, in a 32-year-old car that's 150 pounds heavier than it came stock.
The Road and Track driver said he was doing 1:32's in the C6 Z06 -- on its stock run-flat tires, with no changes to the stock suspension settings. That's a very impressive car.
How about we add one more German luxury brand to that list?
Smack aside, it'd be great to see some Benzes out at the Open Track Racing event. It's a nice, laid-back track day, and I'm sure P51Aviator and some of the rest of us would be happy to help instruct newbies.
If Jim Brady comes with his Turbo, you'll also get to see some very fast driving.
________________________
Jack Olsen
1972 Porsche 911
10-19-2005, 02:53 PM
#80
Originally Posted by Jim Brady
Why is Jack Olsen fast at WSIR? He understands that mechanical grip is only good till 90-100mph, then you need downforce. I haven't calculated the down force on his wing but I'm betting its around 400-500 lbs at 125 mph.
Porsche addressed the 911's aero problems with the re-design they did in 1990, and they made bigger improvements in 1994 and 1998. Most modern performance cars generate no lift at all at turn 8 speeds. A wing, for them, can produce really large amounts of downforce. But the old buggies aren't so lucky.
Without the wing, in the past, I lost just under two seconds. But good tires could make up for that.
However (and it's a big 'However,'), my car weighs 2500 pounds with a tank of gas in it. The difference between this and a 3000 or 3500 pound car is pretty huge. Horsepower can make up for some of it, but horsepower doesn't do anything for a car in turns or under braking. Low weight helps everywhere.
My car's quickness can be explained by the low weight and the fact that I run pretty big tires (275/315) relative to that weight. Plus, the tub only cost me $3,500, so I'm maybe more willing than other guys to roll the car.
But enough about my 911. I've got to admit, I don't know anything about the C32. What's it weigh when you roll it onto a scale? What kind of power is it capable of putting out? What's its suspension like? Tire widths? Maybe someone will trade me a ride in one on Wednesday?
10-19-2005, 05:05 PM
#81
MBWorld Fanatic!
Originally Posted by Jack Olsen
However (and it's a big 'However,'), my car weighs 2500 pounds with a tank of gas in it. The difference between this and a 3000 or 3500 pound car is pretty huge. Horsepower can make up for some of it, but horsepower doesn't do anything for a car in turns or under braking. Low weight helps everywhere.
10-19-2005, 05:13 PM
#82
MBWorld Fanatic!
Originally Posted by Jack Olsen
But enough about my 911. I've got to admit, I don't know anything about the C32. What's it weigh when you roll it onto a scale? What kind of power is it capable of putting out? What's its suspension like? Tire widths? Maybe someone will trade me a ride in one on Wednesday?
10-19-2005, 08:11 PM
#83
3800 pounds? I think maybe the sandbagging has begun.
A quick internet search says 349 hp, with 332 foot-pounds of torque, in a 3310-pound car. It's got a six-speed gearbox and a pretty amazing suspension, from what I see.
A quick internet search says 349 hp, with 332 foot-pounds of torque, in a 3310-pound car. It's got a six-speed gearbox and a pretty amazing suspension, from what I see.
10-19-2005, 08:37 PM
#84
MBWorld Fanatic!
Originally Posted by Jack Olsen
3800 pounds? I think maybe the sandbagging has begun.
A quick internet search says 349 hp, with 332 foot-pounds of torque, in a 3310-pound car. It's got a six-speed gearbox and a pretty amazing suspension, from what I see.
A quick internet search says 349 hp, with 332 foot-pounds of torque, in a 3310-pound car. It's got a six-speed gearbox and a pretty amazing suspension, from what I see.
although not with me in the car, i weight a portly 145#
10-20-2005, 12:36 AM
#85
I think the car weighs mid 3,500 or just about 3,600 dry. When I corner balanced it with me inside at 185, it tiped the scales just over 3,800 with the spare loaded.
349 hp @ 6100, 333 ft lb @ 4400.
Bore is 3.54", Stroke is 3.30".
349 hp @ 6100, 333 ft lb @ 4400.
Bore is 3.54", Stroke is 3.30".
10-20-2005, 10:31 AM
#86
MBWorld Fanatic!
Yeah but your car has lightweight rims and brakes, and a lightweight spare. You must have had a empty tank of gas too 
With my set of rear tires/rims on the front and heavier swaybars, CD Changer, mine weighed 3740 without me in it.
With my set of rear tires/rims on the front and heavier swaybars, CD Changer, mine weighed 3740 without me in it.
10-20-2005, 03:06 PM
#91
Found it. Corner balance weights.
No Driver inside:
LF 962 RF 997
LR 844 RR 841
Total weight = 3,644
Driver inside:
LF 1039 RF 1011
LR 906 RR 878
Perfect cross weights of 1917
Total weight = 3,834
Difference is driver weight of 190 lbs. Must have been right after lunch
No Driver inside:
LF 962 RF 997
LR 844 RR 841
Total weight = 3,644
Driver inside:
LF 1039 RF 1011
LR 906 RR 878
Perfect cross weights of 1917
Total weight = 3,834
Difference is driver weight of 190 lbs. Must have been right after lunch
10-20-2005, 04:56 PM
#92
MBWorld Fanatic!
Originally Posted by smgC32
Found it. Corner balance weights.
No Driver inside:
LF 962 RF 997
LR 844 RR 841
Total weight = 3,644
Driver inside:
LF 1039 RF 1011
LR 906 RR 878
Perfect cross weights of 1917
Total weight = 3,834
Difference is driver weight of 190 lbs. Must have been right after lunch
No Driver inside:
LF 962 RF 997
LR 844 RR 841
Total weight = 3,644
Driver inside:
LF 1039 RF 1011
LR 906 RR 878
Perfect cross weights of 1917
Total weight = 3,834
Difference is driver weight of 190 lbs. Must have been right after lunch
10-20-2005, 07:03 PM
#94
MBWorld Fanatic!
Originally Posted by Vadim @ evosport
If I recall correctly mine was at 3550lbs. without driver.
10-22-2005, 02:35 PM
#95
Okay, now I did some research. I'd never even heard of this model before, honestly, but it looks like it's a freakin' little M3 killer!
Officially, it's like 5.1 or 5.2 seconds to 60 (although AutoCar reported getting a 4.6 second run out of it). It's got more horsepower than the M3 and loads more torque than the M3. Better braking, too.
Even at 3540, it's got a slightly better power-to-weight ratio to the M3 (and again, much better torque than the BMW's 255 foot pounds).
In fact, it looks like it's also got a better power-to-weight ratio than my own car.
349 hp 3540 lb - AMG C32 - 10.1 pounds per 1 hp
247 hp 2514 lb - My 911 - 10.2 pounds per 1 hp
330 hp 3400 lb - BMW M3 - 10.3 pounds per 1 hp
Officially, it's like 5.1 or 5.2 seconds to 60 (although AutoCar reported getting a 4.6 second run out of it). It's got more horsepower than the M3 and loads more torque than the M3. Better braking, too.
Even at 3540, it's got a slightly better power-to-weight ratio to the M3 (and again, much better torque than the BMW's 255 foot pounds).
In fact, it looks like it's also got a better power-to-weight ratio than my own car.
349 hp 3540 lb - AMG C32 - 10.1 pounds per 1 hp
247 hp 2514 lb - My 911 - 10.2 pounds per 1 hp
330 hp 3400 lb - BMW M3 - 10.3 pounds per 1 hp
10-22-2005, 05:00 PM
#96
MBWorld Fanatic!
M3 killer in what a drag race? It is equal too if not a tenth quicker than an M3 in a straight line but that is where it ends. Since we are talking Road Course, the M3 will kill a C32. Hell, my 150hp Honda is 10 seconds quicker per lap than my C32.
10-22-2005, 05:06 PM
#97
MBWorld Fanatic!
Originally Posted by Zeppelin
M3 killer in what a drag race? It is equal too if not a tenth quicker than an M3 in a straight line but that is where it ends. Since we are talking Road Course, the M3 will kill a C32. Hell, my 150hp Honda is 10 seconds quicker per lap than my C32.
10-22-2005, 07:28 PM
#98
Must be some weight differences between an '02 and '03? Or loaded vs. base model? Maybe the factory quotes don't include the full size spare?
Jack, the C32 is a pig, and slides around like one in the corners. The inherent suspension design is inferior to the BMW. The lower thrust arm bushing are filled with liquid! With that said, we can push this car pretty hard and produce good times at a road course, but with the same driver driving, the M3 will always be quicker. That is, up until we install all those little bespoke goodies in the works
Jack, the C32 is a pig, and slides around like one in the corners. The inherent suspension design is inferior to the BMW. The lower thrust arm bushing are filled with liquid! With that said, we can push this car pretty hard and produce good times at a road course, but with the same driver driving, the M3 will always be quicker. That is, up until we install all those little bespoke goodies in the works
10-23-2005, 03:44 PM
#99
Originally Posted by smgC32
Must be some weight differences between an '02 and '03? Or loaded vs. base model? Maybe the factory quotes don't include the full size spare?
Originally Posted by smgC32
Jack, the C32 is a pig, and slides around like one in the corners.
10-23-2005, 11:49 PM
#100
MBWorld Fanatic!
Originally Posted by Jack Olsen
Curb weight, generally defined, is an empty car with a full tank of gas. The weight would include no options -- not even options the manufacturer might include on all imported models.
Where's the pride, people?
Where's the pride, people?
I had a c32 and it was a pig
Still liked it but it was a big pig! Now I have an E55 and its an EVEN BIGGER pig
It is such a big pig that I never even bothered to buy wheels for it 
But like SMG said the C32 will be fun soon.. things are in the works!!!
Last edited by CynCarvin32; 10-23-2005 at 11:55 PM.
