AMG and other Pics
02-27-2002, 11:51 PM
#27
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Florida
Posts: 2,065
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
2002 CLK 55 AMG Coupe ;)
Yep, at this point, I'll skip this new 209 CLK generation.
That tanslates to 0-60 mph takes 4.9 seconds for the new CLK 55 AMG with 20 more horses over
the present CLK 55 AMG, which does the identical time:
0-60 mph in 4.9 seconds! NO CHANGE from the current 208 to the new 209 CLK 55 AMG with 20 more HPs.
The new CLK 500 accelerates to 100 km/h in only 6.0 seconds, while the CLK 55 AMG takes just 5.2 seconds.
the present CLK 55 AMG, which does the identical time:
0-60 mph in 4.9 seconds! NO CHANGE from the current 208 to the new 209 CLK 55 AMG with 20 more HPs.
02-28-2002, 01:01 AM
#29
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Florida
Posts: 2,065
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
2002 CLK 55 AMG Coupe ;)
Shahin wrote:
You are wrong again! Do NOT fabricate facts.
This is the official MB site, which traditionally tends to be conservative when stating acceleration times.
2002 CLK 55 AMG Acceleration: 0-60 mph in 4.9 seconds.
http://www.mbusa.com/brand/container...enu=3_0&spec=3
The old clk does not do 0-60 in 4.9 second!!!!!!!!
This is the official MB site, which traditionally tends to be conservative when stating acceleration times.
2002 CLK 55 AMG Acceleration: 0-60 mph in 4.9 seconds.
http://www.mbusa.com/brand/container...enu=3_0&spec=3
02-28-2002, 02:03 AM
#30
Member
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
please find me a magazine which shows these times actually recieved. And while your at it, find a magazine article which shows the c coupe at 7.2 seconds which the mercedes site claims as well.
02-28-2002, 09:47 AM
#31
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Houston,TX-moving to The Woodlands,TX SOON!!!
Posts: 1,990
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Toyota Tacoma & Lexus IS250
so I guess all you 2002 and below CLK drivers hate the new 03 SL as well ?
It has the exact front end treatment as the new CLK.
It has the exact front end treatment as the new CLK.
02-28-2002, 10:32 AM
#32
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: 2000 ft over the Fl coast in a B-17
Posts: 5,824
Received 262 Likes
on
187 Posts
Originally posted by karl k
Yep, at this point, I'll skip this new 209 CLK generation.
That tanslates to 0-60 mph takes 4.9 seconds for the new CLK 55 AMG with 20 more horses over
the present CLK 55 AMG, which does the identical time:
0-60 mph in 4.9 seconds! NO CHANGE from the current 208 to the new 209 CLK 55 AMG with 20 more HPs.
Yep, at this point, I'll skip this new 209 CLK generation.
That tanslates to 0-60 mph takes 4.9 seconds for the new CLK 55 AMG with 20 more horses over
the present CLK 55 AMG, which does the identical time:
0-60 mph in 4.9 seconds! NO CHANGE from the current 208 to the new 209 CLK 55 AMG with 20 more HPs.
02-28-2002, 03:41 PM
#33
Member
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: California
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CLK320
No, I feel that the new 2003 SL look much better than the new CLK.
The Headlights of 2003 SL look more circular and do not appear warped laterally like the new CLK. The rear of 2003 SL does not appear as narrow as the new CLK. Overall the new 2003 SL look more proportional.
The Headlights of 2003 SL look more circular and do not appear warped laterally like the new CLK. The rear of 2003 SL does not appear as narrow as the new CLK. Overall the new 2003 SL look more proportional.
02-28-2002, 03:46 PM
#34
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Florida
Posts: 2,065
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
2002 CLK 55 AMG Coupe ;)
shahin wrote:
Perhaps you should spend more time in your reading class, instead of wasting cyberbytes.
I provided you with the official MB website, which has crosslinks to various press articles. To overcome your reading shortcoming/deficit/inadequacy, here is an excerpt from one of such crosslinks from the MB site.
MB crosslink to CAR & DRIVER article:
Of these, the CLK55 is easily the most interesting, as it will likely be the quickest AMG model ever sold in America. Equipped with initially the same engine as the E55 -- with 342
horses instead of 349, due to a tighter exhaust system -- and about 300 fewer pounds, the CLK55 will reportedly rip to 60 mph in just under five seconds flat.
NOTE: No more responses to your posts from me. Your posts remind me of a recent Taliban Press conferences: Amusing, but short of facts.
please find me a magazine which shows these times actually recieved. And while
your at it, find a magazine article which shows the c coupe at 7.2 seconds which
the mercedes site claims as well.
your at it, find a magazine article which shows the c coupe at 7.2 seconds which
the mercedes site claims as well.
I provided you with the official MB website, which has crosslinks to various press articles. To overcome your reading shortcoming/deficit/inadequacy, here is an excerpt from one of such crosslinks from the MB site.
MB crosslink to CAR & DRIVER article:
Of these, the CLK55 is easily the most interesting, as it will likely be the quickest AMG model ever sold in America. Equipped with initially the same engine as the E55 -- with 342
horses instead of 349, due to a tighter exhaust system -- and about 300 fewer pounds, the CLK55 will reportedly rip to 60 mph in just under five seconds flat.
NOTE: No more responses to your posts from me. Your posts remind me of a recent Taliban Press conferences: Amusing, but short of facts.
02-28-2002, 03:54 PM
#35
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Afghanistan / South Florida / Camp Lejeune, NC
Posts: 6,261
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes
on
7 Posts
2008 BMW M6, 2008 Ducati 1098, 2008 Ducati Monster S2R1000, 1971 Ducati Scrambler
Originally posted by bagwell
so I guess all you 2002 and below CLK drivers hate the new 03 SL as well ?
It has the exact front end treatment as the new CLK.
so I guess all you 2002 and below CLK drivers hate the new 03 SL as well ?
It has the exact front end treatment as the new CLK.
02-28-2002, 07:01 PM
#36
Member
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by karl k
shahin wrote: Perhaps you should spend more time in your reading class, instead of wasting cyberbytes.
I provided you with the official MB website, which has crosslinks to various press articles. To overcome your reading shortcoming/deficit/inadequacy, here is an excerpt from one of such crosslinks from the MB site.
MB crosslink to CAR & DRIVER article:
Of these, the CLK55 is easily the most interesting, as it will likely be the quickest AMG model ever sold in America. Equipped with initially the same engine as the E55 -- with 342
horses instead of 349, due to a tighter exhaust system -- and about 300 fewer pounds, the CLK55 will reportedly rip to 60 mph in just under five seconds flat.
NOTE: No more responses to your posts from me. Your posts remind me of a recent Taliban Press conferences: Amusing, but short of facts.
shahin wrote: Perhaps you should spend more time in your reading class, instead of wasting cyberbytes.
I provided you with the official MB website, which has crosslinks to various press articles. To overcome your reading shortcoming/deficit/inadequacy, here is an excerpt from one of such crosslinks from the MB site.
MB crosslink to CAR & DRIVER article:
Of these, the CLK55 is easily the most interesting, as it will likely be the quickest AMG model ever sold in America. Equipped with initially the same engine as the E55 -- with 342
horses instead of 349, due to a tighter exhaust system -- and about 300 fewer pounds, the CLK55 will reportedly rip to 60 mph in just under five seconds flat.
NOTE: No more responses to your posts from me. Your posts remind me of a recent Taliban Press conferences: Amusing, but short of facts.
02-28-2002, 07:51 PM
#39
Super Member
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 603
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ML 500 Sport
I concur
I sold my 55 because it's steering, handling and chassis were not up to the standards and demands of the motor (which was fabulous)
The newest series of MB chassis (w209, w211, r230) were designed from the ground up to handle AMG engines.
I sold my 55 because it's steering, handling and chassis were not up to the standards and demands of the motor (which was fabulous)
The newest series of MB chassis (w209, w211, r230) were designed from the ground up to handle AMG engines.
Last edited by jco-amg; 02-28-2002 at 07:55 PM.
03-01-2002, 03:00 AM
#40
Almost a Member!
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
W203 C-Class
Mercedes Germany are very conservative and records the 0-100km sprints for their cars with the tank at 90% full, driver 68 kg, and luggage 7 kg. Mercedes USA always quotes faster time in comparison.
0-100km/h for W208 CLK is 5.4 seconds according to Mercedes Germany, click HERE for the link, this equates to about 5.2 seconds from 0-60mph but Mercedes USA have the W208 CLK's 0-60mph time at 4.9 seconds.
0-100km/h for the new W209 CLK is 5.2 seconds according to Mercedes Germany, meaning 0-60mph in about 5 seconds flat and I am sure when the new W209 CLK arrives in US, Mercedes USA will have the 0-60mph for this car at 4.7-4.8 seconds.
-G'day-
0-100km/h for W208 CLK is 5.4 seconds according to Mercedes Germany, click HERE for the link, this equates to about 5.2 seconds from 0-60mph but Mercedes USA have the W208 CLK's 0-60mph time at 4.9 seconds.
0-100km/h for the new W209 CLK is 5.2 seconds according to Mercedes Germany, meaning 0-60mph in about 5 seconds flat and I am sure when the new W209 CLK arrives in US, Mercedes USA will have the 0-60mph for this car at 4.7-4.8 seconds.
-G'day-
03-04-2002, 05:59 AM
#41
Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree that the upcoming CLK has some styling characteristics resembling the Volvo C70 in the rear, but I think it's really nice. Gives it a really sleek appearance. Although initially I thought the upcoming CLK was distasteful, the car seemed to grow on me. I actually wouldn't mind picking one up. Yeah, it might be a baby Mercedes CL, but hey, why not. However, the Mercedes CL does have separate oval headlights while the upcoming CLK has merged headlights matching the new SL. The CLK outward appearance will fit well into the Mercedes family considering the upcoming E-Class. But then again, one could raise the homogeneous argument...why does Mercedes want all of its cars to look alike?...what happened to uniqueness, being distinct, and an easily recognizable Mercedes in regards to which class you're driving? Afterall, if you paid big money for a CLK, you don't want someone to think it's a C-Class at first blush because of the front headlights.
