Saw CLK63 test on Motorweek this past weekend...
Thread Starter
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,679
Likes: 0
CLS55 AMG
Saw CLK63 test on Motorweek this past weekend...
....here are results:
http://www.mpt.org/motorweek/reviews/rt2611a.shtml
0-60 mph: 4.9 seconds
1/4 Mile: 13.2 seconds @ 112 mph
60-0 mph: 126 feet
EPA: 13 mpg city/ 20 mpg highway
Mixed loop: 17 mpg
Trap is a bit off what I'd be expecting for an approximate 4,000 pound curb weight and 475 rated horsepower. I'd be expecting 113 or so, and this is assuming that MB was actually honest with their detuned rating for this car. If not, it'd be more like 115.
They also tested an ML63:
0-60 mph: 5.3 seconds
1/4 Mile: 13.6 seconds @ 108 mph
60-0 mph: 125 feet
EPA: 12 mpg city/ 16 mpg highway
Mixed loop: 12 mpg
For this thing to trap 108, it's putting out about 518 crank hp. Definitely seems like that CLK63 wasn't up to snuff.
http://www.mpt.org/motorweek/reviews/rt2611a.shtml
0-60 mph: 4.9 seconds
1/4 Mile: 13.2 seconds @ 112 mph
60-0 mph: 126 feet
EPA: 13 mpg city/ 20 mpg highway
Mixed loop: 17 mpg
Trap is a bit off what I'd be expecting for an approximate 4,000 pound curb weight and 475 rated horsepower. I'd be expecting 113 or so, and this is assuming that MB was actually honest with their detuned rating for this car. If not, it'd be more like 115.
They also tested an ML63:
0-60 mph: 5.3 seconds
1/4 Mile: 13.6 seconds @ 108 mph
60-0 mph: 125 feet
EPA: 12 mpg city/ 16 mpg highway
Mixed loop: 12 mpg
For this thing to trap 108, it's putting out about 518 crank hp. Definitely seems like that CLK63 wasn't up to snuff.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 4,846
Likes: 291
From: Dallas TX
2013 650i Coupe, 2010 IS250 AWD, 1999 S500
Yeah I expected a little better out of the CLK too. The CLK550 can probably get close to that 0-60 number, but MW isn't a good source for acceleration numbers. They're almost always slower than the mainstream mags.
M
M
Thread Starter
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,679
Likes: 0
CLS55 AMG
Hmm, I checked out their E55 test for comparison.....
http://www.mpt.org/motorweek/reviews/rt2247.shtml
They didn't do so well in it either:
0-60 mph 4.4 seconds
1/4 mile 12.7 seconds @ 114 mph
60-0 mph 126 feet
The 0-60 is pretty good, but the 1/4 time and trap are a few tenths and mph off of what others have gotten respectively....so maybe the CLK63 will fare better in the mainstream mags after all...if they ever bother to test the damn thing.
I mean, is this just poor Mercedes marketing, or what? Every new BMW to come down the pike gets tested, but it seems that Mercedes doesn't get near the press. Wtf is up here??
There are no tests in the US mags of the S65. There is one of the CL65. There is one of the CL55. None of the CLK63.
Meanwhile, there are plenty of tests of BMW: 325, 330, 335, 525, 530, 545, 550, 645, 650, 745, 750, all of the X series, all of the Z series....
If I were the head of Mercedes, I'd fire all of my marketing people and hire some who knew how to market cars.
Sorry for hijacking my own thread, but this is getting ridiculous.
They didn't do so well in it either:
0-60 mph 4.4 seconds
1/4 mile 12.7 seconds @ 114 mph
60-0 mph 126 feet
The 0-60 is pretty good, but the 1/4 time and trap are a few tenths and mph off of what others have gotten respectively....so maybe the CLK63 will fare better in the mainstream mags after all...if they ever bother to test the damn thing.
I mean, is this just poor Mercedes marketing, or what? Every new BMW to come down the pike gets tested, but it seems that Mercedes doesn't get near the press. Wtf is up here??
There are no tests in the US mags of the S65. There is one of the CL65. There is one of the CL55. None of the CLK63.
Meanwhile, there are plenty of tests of BMW: 325, 330, 335, 525, 530, 545, 550, 645, 650, 745, 750, all of the X series, all of the Z series....
If I were the head of Mercedes, I'd fire all of my marketing people and hire some who knew how to market cars.
Sorry for hijacking my own thread, but this is getting ridiculous.
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 497
Likes: 0
From: Canada
Looking for a new toy.
If the car was still fairly new, then break-in will still free up a few more ponies. And to be fair a 112mph trap speed indicates the car is capable of a lot better than a 13.2 ET. A 112 trap speed will give an easy 12 second slip, if launched/driven properly.
Thread Starter
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,679
Likes: 0
CLS55 AMG
Yup, and it should definitely get a better 0-60 time than that! Sounds like to me they weren't hooking up worth a flip; with a 4.9 second 0-60 and a 113 trap, they obviously lost some time in the 60'.
Trending Topics
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 497
Likes: 0
From: Canada
Looking for a new toy.
Exactly, even a half-assed 2.0 sixty foot (I'd bet they got around a 2.4 on that 13.2 run) on an otherwise decent pass would give a 12.6 with that trap speed in that car IMO.
MB World Stories
The Best of Mercedes & AMG
Manual Mercedes? 6 Times Sindelfingen Let Drivers Have All The Fun
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes SLR McLaren 722 S Is Extremely Rare Example Modified by McLaren
Verdad Gallardo
8 Classic Boxy Mercedes Designs That Have Aged Like Fine Wine
Verdad Gallardo
Flawlessly Restored Mercedes 190E Evo II Heads to Auction
Verdad Gallardo
Electric Mercedes C-Class Unveiled: 11 Things You Need to Know
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes EQS Gets A Major Update: Everything You Need to Know
Verdad Gallardo
5 Underrated Mercedes-Benz Models That Don't Get the Love They Deserve
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes 300D Has Pushed Well Past 1 Million Miles and It Ain't Stopping
Verdad Gallardo
10 Most Reliable Mercedes-Benz Models You Can Buy Used
Verdad Gallardo
Thread Starter
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,679
Likes: 0
CLS55 AMG
Vindication for the CLK63 in the new Car & Driver:
Current issue just arrived, and it has a short take test of the car.
Results:
0-60: 4.2 seconds
5-60 rolling start: 4.4 seconds
0-100: 9.5 seconds
0-150: 22.2 seconds
1/4 mile: 12.5 @ 116
These are in line with the times C&D got for the E55, in fact up high the CLK is substantially faster, probably thanks to gearing:
0 to 60: 4.3 seconds
0 to 100: 9.9
0 to 150: 24.5
1/4 mile: 12.5 seconds at 116
Results:
0-60: 4.2 seconds
5-60 rolling start: 4.4 seconds
0-100: 9.5 seconds
0-150: 22.2 seconds
1/4 mile: 12.5 @ 116
These are in line with the times C&D got for the E55, in fact up high the CLK is substantially faster, probably thanks to gearing:
0 to 60: 4.3 seconds
0 to 100: 9.9
0 to 150: 24.5
1/4 mile: 12.5 seconds at 116
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 4,846
Likes: 291
From: Dallas TX
2013 650i Coupe, 2010 IS250 AWD, 1999 S500
http://www.mpt.org/motorweek/reviews/rt2247.shtml
They didn't do so well in it either:
0-60 mph 4.4 seconds
1/4 mile 12.7 seconds @ 114 mph
60-0 mph 126 feet
The 0-60 is pretty good, but the 1/4 time and trap are a few tenths and mph off of what others have gotten respectively....so maybe the CLK63 will fare better in the mainstream mags after all...if they ever bother to test the damn thing.
I mean, is this just poor Mercedes marketing, or what? Every new BMW to come down the pike gets tested, but it seems that Mercedes doesn't get near the press. Wtf is up here??
There are no tests in the US mags of the S65. There is one of the CL65. There is one of the CL55. None of the CLK63.
Meanwhile, there are plenty of tests of BMW: 325, 330, 335, 525, 530, 545, 550, 645, 650, 745, 750, all of the X series, all of the Z series....
If I were the head of Mercedes, I'd fire all of my marketing people and hire some who knew how to market cars.
Sorry for hijacking my own thread, but this is getting ridiculous.
They didn't do so well in it either:
0-60 mph 4.4 seconds
1/4 mile 12.7 seconds @ 114 mph
60-0 mph 126 feet
The 0-60 is pretty good, but the 1/4 time and trap are a few tenths and mph off of what others have gotten respectively....so maybe the CLK63 will fare better in the mainstream mags after all...if they ever bother to test the damn thing.
I mean, is this just poor Mercedes marketing, or what? Every new BMW to come down the pike gets tested, but it seems that Mercedes doesn't get near the press. Wtf is up here??
There are no tests in the US mags of the S65. There is one of the CL65. There is one of the CL55. None of the CLK63.
Meanwhile, there are plenty of tests of BMW: 325, 330, 335, 525, 530, 545, 550, 645, 650, 745, 750, all of the X series, all of the Z series....
If I were the head of Mercedes, I'd fire all of my marketing people and hire some who knew how to market cars.
Sorry for hijacking my own thread, but this is getting ridiculous.
You also have to remember that every Mercedes except the C-Class got new or revised engines for 07, everything from the CLK550 to S65. That is a lot of product to cover.
M
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 4,846
Likes: 291
From: Dallas TX
2013 650i Coupe, 2010 IS250 AWD, 1999 S500
Current issue just arrived, and it has a short take test of the car.
Results:
0-60: 4.2 seconds
5-60 rolling start: 4.4 seconds
0-100: 9.5 seconds
0-150: 22.2 seconds
1/4 mile: 12.5 @ 116
These are in line with the times C&D got for the E55, in fact up high the CLK is substantially faster, probably thanks to gearing:
0 to 60: 4.3 seconds
0 to 100: 9.9
0 to 150: 24.5
1/4 mile: 12.5 seconds at 116
Results:
0-60: 4.2 seconds
5-60 rolling start: 4.4 seconds
0-100: 9.5 seconds
0-150: 22.2 seconds
1/4 mile: 12.5 @ 116
These are in line with the times C&D got for the E55, in fact up high the CLK is substantially faster, probably thanks to gearing:
0 to 60: 4.3 seconds
0 to 100: 9.9
0 to 150: 24.5
1/4 mile: 12.5 seconds at 116
M
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 4,846
Likes: 291
From: Dallas TX
2013 650i Coupe, 2010 IS250 AWD, 1999 S500
Likely due to weight and drag from the convertible top. I think 4.2 secs is off the charts for a 4-seat convertible. I think some of you guys are way too hung up on a few tenths of a seond here and there.
M
M
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 9,734
Likes: 65
From: Hotlanta
AMG
....here are results:
http://www.mpt.org/motorweek/reviews/rt2611a.shtml
0-60 mph: 4.9 seconds
1/4 Mile: 13.2 seconds @ 112 mph
60-0 mph: 126 feet
EPA: 13 mpg city/ 20 mpg highway
Mixed loop: 17 mpg
http://www.mpt.org/motorweek/reviews/rt2611a.shtml
0-60 mph: 4.9 seconds
1/4 Mile: 13.2 seconds @ 112 mph
60-0 mph: 126 feet
EPA: 13 mpg city/ 20 mpg highway
Mixed loop: 17 mpg
The W208 has a 60-0 distance of only 112ft - same at the Boxster!
Thread Starter
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,679
Likes: 0
CLS55 AMG
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 9,734
Likes: 65
From: Hotlanta
AMG
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,289
Likes: 4
From: Indiana
2003 AMG SL55, 2002 AMG CLK55, 2002 AMG ML55, 2005 ML350, 1995 S320 LWB - totaled
-O
