m3
06-16-2004, 10:05 PM
#153
Originally posted by jddumas
I agree with all of your post vraa, except for the Bush/Cheney banner.LOL
I agree with all of your post vraa, except for the Bush/Cheney banner.LOL
It's just temp until I find time to make a decent sig.
06-16-2004, 10:10 PM
#155
Unfortunetly I'm not a Kerry/Edwards supporter so that's out of the question And the girl, well I'm already on the edge with that avatar as itself!
Trying to sneak shots of my cousins W208 to turn into my sig. He has some nice Carlsson's and it look pretty with the black car.
06-17-2004, 02:23 AM
#156
MBWorld Fanatic!
Don't Mess With Texas!
We may have a lot of gun$ out here in SoCal, but in Texas they have bull's eye accurate aim and they will shoot back!
I'm not a Kerry supporter either....go Arnold!
We may have a lot of gun$ out here in SoCal, but in Texas they have bull's eye accurate aim and they will shoot back!
I'm not a Kerry supporter either....go Arnold!
06-17-2004, 01:00 PM
#157
Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Pensacola, FL
Posts: 104
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
1999 CLK 320
Originally posted by SoCalCLK
Don't Mess With Texas!
We may have a lot of gun$ out here in SoCal, but in Texas they have bull's eye accurate aim and they will shoot back!
I'm not a Kerry supporter either....go Arnold!
Don't Mess With Texas!
We may have a lot of gun$ out here in SoCal, but in Texas they have bull's eye accurate aim and they will shoot back!
I'm not a Kerry supporter either....go Arnold!
06-18-2004, 12:36 AM
#159
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Gulf Coast
Posts: 335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2006 E55 & 2009 Audi S5
Texas is a great state, I agree. I have a bunch of family in Houston.
I'm not really a Kerry fan either I was just kidding. I do like him more than George W. though. I was actually hoping John Edwards would be the Democratic nominee, but I'd still be happy if he was #2.
Is there a MB club in Houston? I'll be out there the week after the 4th of July to visit my grandparents and to Austin to visit a client. Just wondering if there might be a meet going on during that week somewhere.
I'm not really a Kerry fan either I was just kidding. I do like him more than George W. though. I was actually hoping John Edwards would be the Democratic nominee, but I'd still be happy if he was #2.
Is there a MB club in Houston? I'll be out there the week after the 4th of July to visit my grandparents and to Austin to visit a client. Just wondering if there might be a meet going on during that week somewhere.
07-15-2004, 12:30 PM
#161
Junior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: SoCal
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
1999 CLK 430
You are talking literally of fractions of a second around one lap on a track. Point being, unless we're all professional drivers (most of us aren't), the difference is really negligible.
Chappy,
Although on face value, the time differential appears minimal, it is quite deceiving. A couple of factors that are found much deeper in the testing data is that the CLK 55 that was tested ran a 5 speed manual tranny,(not the sluggish auto versions we are used to in the states, damn those lucky europeans). This allows for full advantage of the torque rates that the CLK has over the M3. This is one reason the overall track times are so close.
However, the M3 really dominated the braking and slalom testing.
The last factor that is huge was track and air temps. The BMW test favored a 61 degree F track temp. This affords much better tire grip and consequently, handling. The CLK test was held during a chilly 37 degree F track temp. Though less grip would be available, the motor would certainly generate more horses with the cool air temps. Based on the data, the CLK would certainly enjoyed much better top end / straight away speeds while the M3 would have been much quicker in and out of the corners based on tire grip.
There's also a good chance that since there was a 7 month difference in testing dates, the same driver did not run each car.
It's always more complicated than it seems isn't it? So, the debate rages on...
Chappy,
Although on face value, the time differential appears minimal, it is quite deceiving. A couple of factors that are found much deeper in the testing data is that the CLK 55 that was tested ran a 5 speed manual tranny,(not the sluggish auto versions we are used to in the states, damn those lucky europeans). This allows for full advantage of the torque rates that the CLK has over the M3. This is one reason the overall track times are so close.
However, the M3 really dominated the braking and slalom testing.
The last factor that is huge was track and air temps. The BMW test favored a 61 degree F track temp. This affords much better tire grip and consequently, handling. The CLK test was held during a chilly 37 degree F track temp. Though less grip would be available, the motor would certainly generate more horses with the cool air temps. Based on the data, the CLK would certainly enjoyed much better top end / straight away speeds while the M3 would have been much quicker in and out of the corners based on tire grip.
There's also a good chance that since there was a 7 month difference in testing dates, the same driver did not run each car.
It's always more complicated than it seems isn't it? So, the debate rages on...
07-15-2004, 12:44 PM
#162
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: The President must win the Peace
Posts: 1,300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Who and where are you getting your information from?
Originally Posted by varainstructor
You are talking literally of fractions of a second around one lap on a track. Point being, unless we're all professional drivers (most of us aren't), the difference is really negligible.
Chappy,
Although on face value, the time differential appears minimal, it is quite deceiving. A couple of factors that are found much deeper in the testing data is that the CLK 55 that was tested ran a 5 speed manual tranny,(not the sluggish auto versions we are used to in the states, damn those lucky europeans). This allows for full advantage of the torque rates that the CLK has over the M3. This is one reason the overall track times are so close.
However, the M3 really dominated the braking and slalom testing.
The last factor that is huge was track and air temps. The BMW test favored a 61 degree F track temp. This affords much better tire grip and consequently, handling. The CLK test was held during a chilly 37 degree F track temp. Though less grip would be available, the motor would certainly generate more horses with the cool air temps. Based on the data, the CLK would certainly enjoyed much better top end / straight away speeds while the M3 would have been much quicker in and out of the corners based on tire grip.
There's also a good chance that since there was a 7 month difference in testing dates, the same driver did not run each car.
It's always more complicated than it seems isn't it? So, the debate rages on...
Chappy,
Although on face value, the time differential appears minimal, it is quite deceiving. A couple of factors that are found much deeper in the testing data is that the CLK 55 that was tested ran a 5 speed manual tranny,(not the sluggish auto versions we are used to in the states, damn those lucky europeans). This allows for full advantage of the torque rates that the CLK has over the M3. This is one reason the overall track times are so close.
However, the M3 really dominated the braking and slalom testing.
The last factor that is huge was track and air temps. The BMW test favored a 61 degree F track temp. This affords much better tire grip and consequently, handling. The CLK test was held during a chilly 37 degree F track temp. Though less grip would be available, the motor would certainly generate more horses with the cool air temps. Based on the data, the CLK would certainly enjoyed much better top end / straight away speeds while the M3 would have been much quicker in and out of the corners based on tire grip.
There's also a good chance that since there was a 7 month difference in testing dates, the same driver did not run each car.
It's always more complicated than it seems isn't it? So, the debate rages on...
07-16-2004, 03:05 PM
#163
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Hell
Posts: 1,030
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EFF YOU JACKIE
Drove the clk for the first time in a month since I purchased the S4, and man, it truly is not a "drivers" car. It is definitely a cruising, straight line auto, which is great, but just not for me. The soon-to-be wife has been driving it mostly and she loves it. But that should tell you something. She also loves her jeep. Honestly, I know y'all love the CLK and rightfully so, but to even try and compare it's handling to anything else is futile. it can't be done. I know for most, when coming from an auto with so much less to offer, the MBZ feels like the most amazing thing on the planet. But coming from similarly tuned autos the MBZ just doesn't feel the same. Say what you will, but IMHO that is how it feels..
07-18-2004, 12:55 AM
#164
MBWorld Fanatic!
Originally Posted by ldangeli
Drove the clk for the first time in a month since I purchased the S4, and man, it truly is not a "drivers" car. It is definitely a cruising, straight line auto, which is great, but just not for me. The soon-to-be wife has been driving it mostly and she loves it. But that should tell you something. She also loves her jeep. Honestly, I know y'all love the CLK and rightfully so, but to even try and compare it's handling to anything else is futile. it can't be done. I know for most, when coming from an auto with so much less to offer, the MBZ feels like the most amazing thing on the planet. But coming from similarly tuned autos the MBZ just doesn't feel the same. Say what you will, but IMHO that is how it feels..
07-18-2004, 01:31 PM
#165
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Hell
Posts: 1,030
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EFF YOU JACKIE
Originally Posted by SoCalCLK
BLAH, BLAH, BLAH
07-18-2004, 08:12 PM
#166
MBWorld Fanatic!
I have owned a 2001 Audi S4. Prior to that was messing a lot with Civic Si and VTEC engines with NOS (it was very convenient that NOS used to be HQ in Cypress, CA prior to being bought by Holley).
The Audi was very high-tech and great low-end torque, but handled LIKE A COUCH. The S4 is an iron pig and not a driver's car. The CLK has a better weight distribution (although not by that much) and with the BRABUS springs, it handles a lot better than my B5 S4.
If your replacement car for the CLK was a new Porsche 996 C4, then talk on this board all you want about handling. But being that you bought the new S4 (which is better than the Old S4) and how "wowed" you are by this new S4, really de-values your opinions on handling to me.
"Blah, blah, blah" means everytime you post YOU SAY THE SAME THING OVER AND OVER.
The Audi was very high-tech and great low-end torque, but handled LIKE A COUCH. The S4 is an iron pig and not a driver's car. The CLK has a better weight distribution (although not by that much) and with the BRABUS springs, it handles a lot better than my B5 S4.
If your replacement car for the CLK was a new Porsche 996 C4, then talk on this board all you want about handling. But being that you bought the new S4 (which is better than the Old S4) and how "wowed" you are by this new S4, really de-values your opinions on handling to me.
"Blah, blah, blah" means everytime you post YOU SAY THE SAME THING OVER AND OVER.
07-19-2004, 07:11 AM
#167
MBWorld Fanatic!
Originally Posted by varainstructor
Chappy,
Although on face value, the time differential appears minimal, it is quite deceiving. A couple of factors that are found much deeper in the testing data is that the CLK 55 that was tested ran a 5 speed manual tranny,(not the sluggish auto versions we are used to in the states, damn those lucky europeans).
07-19-2004, 12:45 PM
#168
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Hell
Posts: 1,030
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EFF YOU JACKIE
Originally Posted by SoCalCLK
I have owned a 2001 Audi S4. Prior to that was messing a lot with Civic Si and VTEC engines with NOS (it was very convenient that NOS used to be HQ in Cypress, CA prior to being bought by Holley).
The Audi was very high-tech and great low-end torque, but handled LIKE A COUCH. The S4 is an iron pig and not a driver's car. The CLK has a better weight distribution (although not by that much) and with the BRABUS springs, it handles a lot better than my B5 S4.
If your replacement car for the CLK was a new Porsche 996 C4, then talk on this board all you want about handling. But being that you bought the new S4 (which is better than the Old S4) and how "wowed" you are by this new S4, really de-values your opinions on handling to me.
"Blah, blah, blah" means everytime you post YOU SAY THE SAME THING OVER AND OVER.
The Audi was very high-tech and great low-end torque, but handled LIKE A COUCH. The S4 is an iron pig and not a driver's car. The CLK has a better weight distribution (although not by that much) and with the BRABUS springs, it handles a lot better than my B5 S4.
If your replacement car for the CLK was a new Porsche 996 C4, then talk on this board all you want about handling. But being that you bought the new S4 (which is better than the Old S4) and how "wowed" you are by this new S4, really de-values your opinions on handling to me.
"Blah, blah, blah" means everytime you post YOU SAY THE SAME THING OVER AND OVER.
My previous statement stands, the 430 would feel like the greatest car on the planet, coming from that platform type.
You honestly think, stock to stock that the 430 handles better? Ok, I guess you like the recirculating, loose touch with the road feeling the the MBZ has to offer. Enjoy...
07-19-2004, 10:20 PM
#170
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Hell
Posts: 1,030
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EFF YOU JACKIE
Originally Posted by J Lucas
I dont think anyone is saying or can say that the clk handles better than the m3.. That cant be the argument...
07-20-2004, 04:58 PM
#171
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Hell
Posts: 1,030
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EFF YOU JACKIE
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
