PC Valkyrie

Well, the MBUSA website has some info now on the CLK550 with the new 5.5L V8 making 382HP and 391lb-ft torque.

We all knew the output of this new 4 valve engine many months ago, and I was fully expecting the new non-AMG CLK550 to be faster in a straighline than the C55 AMG (with the old 3 valve 5.4L V8 making 362HP and 376lb-ft torque).

Well, according to the MBUSA website, the 0-60mph time for the CLK550 is 5.1 seconds, while the C55's time is 4.9 seconds.

The CLK550 coupe is a bit heavier than the C55 AMG (3720lb vs 3540lb), and they have different transmissions (7G-tronic vs 5 speed AMG Speedshift).

What do you guys think? Is MBUSA deliberately downrating the 0-60mph times for the CLK550?....or is there a chance the C55 still is a bit faster in acceleration than the CLK550?

I know this is all speculation now, but I still find this point quite interesting.

PC Valkyrie

And here is another wrinkle. According the MBUSA website, the CLK55 AMG coupe (last sold in MY2005) weighs 3635 lbs and has a 0-60mph time of 5.0 seconds. In other words, it's weight and acceleration time fits neatly between the C55 and new CLK550.

Does this seem deliberately made up to keep C55 and CLK55 owners happy?

Moviela

Mercedes for years has conservatively rated their cars. Partly to avoid truth in advertising issues, and partly to allow reviewers like Jeremy Clarkson to turn in better times.

1V8C55

Yeah it seems like a marketing strategy. It's hard to believe that the CLK550 would be slower than the C55. I think I will try to test drive the new CLK550 to get first hand impressions. Does anyone know the MSRP for the CLK550?

Bif powell

Seems more likely that a couple tenths would be due to environmental factors, differences in engines, tires, stuff like that. On any given day, 5 different C55s with 5 different drivers would have much wilder swings in acceleration than 2-tenths?...which I guess begs the question - how are they arriving at these numbers?

Brabus C55

Since they have completely different transmissions, one would really need the Torque Conveter Stall Ratio/RPM, Gear Ratios in the Slush Box and Rear Axle Ratio to get a better idea of where the .2 of a second went (as well as differences in the 1/4 mile)... yeah too much work for me ...

The old rule for the 1/4 mile for F-Bodies (Camaro/Firebirds) was each 100 lbs of weight increases you 1/4 mile time by .1 second ... don't believe this works for 0 to 60 times in this case.

e1000

I find it odd that the CLK550 is 100lbs heavier than the CLK55 is. Another thing to consider is that they could have a 2-3 shift just before the car hits 60 and makes the 0-60 time artificially high, for example, the C350 is just as quick to 60 as the SLK350 because it dosen't have the 2-3 shift, but it weighs 200lbs more than the SLK350. I'd bet that the CLK550 is quicker over a quarter mile than the CLK55, unsure how it would fare against a C55 due to weight.

TopGun32

to 60 it might not be as fast....

but 1/4 and trap speed the C55 won't be able to touch it..

2 more speeds and bit more hp and torque..

200lbs is significant difference, but not enough.

m3_eater

I agree with you - but whenever I have even one normal ~170lb passenger in my car with me, I feel the difference!

SLK55R

Don't forget that the 7 speed in the CLK550 hasn't been tuned by AMG.

genechien

seems like a poor effort on the part of mercedes to disguise the fact that a normal CLK 550 will be faster than a currently offered C55 AMG, since they most likely won't be producing a C63 AMG (at least not in mass quantities)

if the CLK 550 is priced similar to the old CLK 500, even say a few thousand more, it'll still be cheaper than a C55. so in order for the C55 to stay attractive, they've got to say it's faster, even if by only .2 seconds.

still, it would be hard to decide between the 2 cars if you didn't care about coupe vs. sedan. CLK 550 has a sexy style, more HP/Torque, and also might be cheaper. the C55, on the other hand, has the extra AMG touches, more exclusive, and is ever so slightly faster (if only on paper).

SteveL

The C55 is discontinued in North America for 2007 so other than the remaining 06s, it won't be an issue here.

FrankW

the CLS550 is $2000 more than the CLS500. You can probably expect the same for CLK and E.

For people that buys AMG they want exclusivity. You only see one once in a while.

But a normal MB quicker and faster than the AMGs...you can only blame technology. LOL. The new E550's more powerful than the old W210 E55. Imagine the faces of the W210 E55 owner when they get beat. It's just a fact, nothing much we can do. Remember the C43 AMG wasn't that much faster than the W208 CLK430 either.

thanks to the supercharger on the C32 we at least have a chance to mod ours to around 400hp without losing an arm&leg. lol

offtopic: unless EPA changed their rules...I really don't see how a 2007 C55 is going to be any different than the 2005-2006 other than few updated features. I think it's just MBusa's way of avoiding buyers bashing on how the C55 AMG is less powerful than the CLK550, so instead of maybe standard some AMG manufactur options like the LSD to the C55 they simply choose not to sell it at all.

SteveL

According to a thread on the AMG Lounge which was replied to by AMG, there will be no 2007 C55 in North America.

FrankW

lol...i haven't signed up for AMG lounge yet. Only no 07 in North America tho.

SoCalCLK

The weight and 7-speed gearing of the CLK550 have some affect on the 0-60 speed in comparison to the C55 AMG, although the CLK550 has 20 more Hp and tq.

1/4 mile the CLK550 I think might be faster, but 0-60 it just might be dead even!

MBUSA puts the new 550 engine in the W209 as an effort to revive interest in the chassis as it goes into its swan song/last lap.

amgmark

I drove both the same day.. an 06 C55 and an 07 CLK550.. The CLK550 definitely seemed faster and I could feel the difference in torque.. I was very impressed with the CLK550 but it only had 2 doors so got the 335.

marc32

The CLK550 is still faster. When the car was released here I was called in by salesperson to come in and test drive one. When I was pulling out of the dealer I pulled in behind someone test driving the CLK55. We were on a three lane highway and from a stop the the CLK550 walked the CLK55. At first I wasn't sure so at the next light we did it again and I got the same result. At that point I was kind of laughing because my salesperson was commenting on how the other sales person was going to explain that one to his potential client. When we returned back to the dealer, the gentleman driving the CLK55 came over to look at the CLK550 and wanted to see it and drive it as well.
I think MBUSA still has a couple of these CLK55's to unload so it's not in there best interest that a lower priced car is faster then the amg model.

AMG_55

550 should be faster than both the c55 and clk. 0-60, 1/4, everywhere....
e550 has done 4.8 to 60 (dont remember the mag)

this new motor is a monster

MercedesFTW

The E550 and CLK550 are the best deals from MB right now IMO!

kjb55

Of course it's faster - that's why there is no C550! No one would buy a C63. The C550 would be a bargain, and the speed difference... would be miniscule.

+1 for the E550 and CLK550 being the best deals. Incredible sleepers.

DarkXerox

I agree, my dad still swears my C32 "feels" faster than the E550, but I really can't say either way. And considering we paid almost the same for each car...I feel like the E might have been the better deal.