Why are the C43 and C36 Gas Milages Similar??
#77
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Lebanon
Posts: 370
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
1995 C 36 AMG; 1992 W124 300E (M103 Ex Mosselman TT KIT) was 320hp @10psi now stock :(
Yup, but was that 350Z Auto or man? and keep in mind the 36 AMG is 10 yrs older in design than the 350Z. making same kind of HP from almost same capacity engine and getting a 14sec 1/4mile on such a tall gearing.
Pop in a 3.27 diff and the AMG will drop to low - mid 13's easy.
I mean 127km/h in second gear and almost 200km/h in 3rd is seriously tall gearing for the HP involved here.
Pop in a 3.27 diff and the AMG will drop to low - mid 13's easy.
I mean 127km/h in second gear and almost 200km/h in 3rd is seriously tall gearing for the HP involved here.
#78
MBWorld Fanatic!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Connecticut, New Haven
Posts: 1,297
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
95' AMG SeeThreeSix
With my stock wheel on one hand and the AMG's in the other, I'm guessing a 5-10 pound difference. Thats alot of rotational mass X 4. I'll weigh the front and rear Monos in my garage today and possibly pull off one of my 300E's wheels. I'll have to do some research, however, I would assume lighter rims are a great way to improve acceleration qualities?
#79
Yup, but was that 350Z Auto or man? and keep in mind the 36 AMG is 10 yrs older in design than the 350Z. making same kind of HP from almost same capacity engine and getting a 14sec 1/4mile on such a tall gearing.
Pop in a 3.27 diff and the AMG will drop to low - mid 13's easy.
I mean 127km/h in second gear and almost 200km/h in 3rd is seriously tall gearing for the HP involved here.
Pop in a 3.27 diff and the AMG will drop to low - mid 13's easy.
I mean 127km/h in second gear and almost 200km/h in 3rd is seriously tall gearing for the HP involved here.
#81
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Desert
Posts: 3,443
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
02 CLK 55 AMG,09 C63 loaded with P30
With my stock wheel on one hand and the AMG's in the other, I'm guessing a 5-10 pound difference. Thats alot of rotational mass X 4. I'll weigh the front and rear Monos in my garage today and possibly pull off one of my 300E's wheels. I'll have to do some research, however, I would assume lighter rims are a great way to improve acceleration qualities?
#84
MBWorld Fanatic!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Connecticut, New Haven
Posts: 1,297
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
95' AMG SeeThreeSix
Hey hey hey! You are absolutley right . I drove it back from NY during a huge snowstorm so the salt spray wreaked havok on it, bought a cover for it as a welcome home gift to keep the 12+ inches of snow off. I'm just overly excited to "display" her . Should have temp plates by noon tomorrow so a wash will be in store, no worries!
#85
MBWorld Fanatic!
What they weigh
Speaking only of the 2001/2002 model year (because I have no idea whether the wheels were changed from year to year):
- The 17x7.5 and 17x8.5 AMG thin spokes weigh 25.6 and 26 pounds respectively.
- The 17x7.5 and 17x8.5 AMG Monoblocks weigh 27.5 and 28 pounds respectively.
Last edited by MarcusF; 12-22-2009 at 01:23 AM.
#86
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Desert
Posts: 3,443
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
02 CLK 55 AMG,09 C63 loaded with P30
Speaking only of the 2001/2002 model year (because I have no idea whether the wheels were changed from year to year):
- The 17x7.5 and 17x8.5 AMG thin spokes weigh 25.6 and 26 pounds respectively.
- The 17x7.5 and 17x8.5 AMG Monoblocks weigh 27.5 and 28 pounds respectively.