The primary reason the KLEEMANN cars dont accelerate to 60 mph much faster than a stock AMG 55 is traction. 275's are what can reasonably fit in the wheel wells without rolling/clearancing. Street tires- whatever brand they are- just dont provide enough grip against 500+ lbs/ft of torque.

A KLEEMANN CLK55K will accelerate to 60 .2th faster than stock- with the wheels spinning almost the entire time! If the traction could be improved the times would drop significantly. What no one ever seems to write about in this country is roll-on acceleration.

Attached is an image on an ESP off 0-100 kph run conducted by a German magazine, Auto Bild.

Kleemann!

You guys never cease to amaze me with all that power! Simply incredible!

Kleeman wrote:That's precisely the point!

With a $20,000 Kleeman package, the CLK 55 accelerates only .2 seconds faster 0-60 mph. Very negligible. :o

WAAAAHHHH!!

Let's see about 60-120, doubt that's negligible.

If all you wanna do is beat a (whatever of your choice) off the line at the stop light, then leave it stock.

If you want to beat them and do it SMOKING THE TIRES THE WHOLE FU*KING WAY, then KLEEMANN'ize it!!!


just my $.02

Once again, TRACTION is the majar problem with the 0-60 times. The CLK55 with Kompressor will accelerate to 60 .2th second quicker than stock- smoking the tires the entire run. Better tires (like slicks) would drop the times substantially. Other factors: gear ratio and rear ratio play a small part in this equation. The relationship of power to acceleration is NOT linear. EX: making twice the power will not make the car twice as fast to a given speed.

Also, bear in mind that 0-60 is only one measure of performance, and not the end-all of performance ratings. Trying to catapult a dead wieght of over 4000lbs to sixty is far different than 40 to 120 mph acceleration, or 100 to 150 mph. What about 40 to 120? Mid range torque?

Just a few things to think about.

Mr. Vanos wrote:Tnx for the physics refresher. Good old Isaac (Newton) had it right re inertia and his laws on motion.

It's amazing that the CLK55 AMG with that much Kleeman ad-on power does not self-destruct.

It obviously is not meant for street use, because it appears to be out of control for "commuter applications." Hmmm...

Now, - if a parallel to the De Lorean concept as in "Back to the Future" Spielberg movie could be realized, then all this HP would be welcome in an airborne state of commuting with a "CLK55 AMG Kleeman Bird!"

Back to original question A naturally aspirated 550 hp engine that has been professionally prepared and bolstered to handle the extra HP and stress on the engine and drive train. Sounds like one hell of a car. As far as a super charger kit that can duplicate the results is like comparing apples to oranges. I’m sure that the power curves are quite different with the N/A car having more usable power available at lower RPM’s than the super charged equitant.

Randy

Dyno

Randy

The site doesn't mention that the car had a broken intercooler that day. Go to the performance forum, I just answered a similiar question yesterday.

...You pay $20k for two tenths of a second to 60 and it breaks down all the time? But oh yeah, you can lay some really good patches, when it is working. Smoking tires? Wow, I tried that in high school, all it did was make me sleepy.

Breaks all the time?

What are you talking about? A hose clamp fails once and suddenly "IT" breaks all the time?

No one is suggesting burnouts are where its at- simply that the standard tires cannot accomodate the power increase.

I would say you have it exactly backward in this case. Have you ever driven a car with a positive displacement supercharger?

The beauty of natural aspiration is it's power curve...for the street, there is nothing better. Sure with forced induction, you can spin the tires through 3rd gear, but what's the point. Why is it that DTM and F1 choose all motor applications? Why have they departed from forced induction? Simple...with today's technology, forced induction is overkill...nature's 14.7 PSI is more than enough. The new M5 will prove that

I would disagree- The lack of forced induction engines in these series is the governing bodies attempt to level the playing field while keeping speeds down for driver and crowd safety. F1 outlawed turbos just about the time BMW was getting over 900HP from a 1.5 liter engine.

Gruppe B WRC cars were outlawed not because they were outside the golden triangle of the NA engine- but outright too fast. Crowd memebers werent used to be closed in on by a 800+HP Rally car and subsequently quite a few of them got killed.

From a pyshics stand point a forced induction engine is far more efficient than a normally aspirated one. Modern NA engines are making incredible power given their displacement, no doubt. Electronics, variable length intakes, variable cams, dizzying redline speeds and direct injection are taking NA engines beyond the once elusive 100hp per liter mark.

As usual, Kleemann makes good points. Evo, the other thing you're missing here is that while a n/a route to more power may have the desirable qualities you're talking about (driveability, broad power curve, etc.) if you get there by increasing displacement, the opposite is true if you get there the way they apparently did with the car in your original post. If you don't increase displacement, the way you make lots more power with a n/a engine is through some combination of increasing compression and lightening the top end, allowing the engine to rev higher, as was apparently done with the CLK you're talking about. This moves peak power significantly higher in the rpm range and causes a drop in low end torque and usually driveability. The new M3 is a good example of this route, and while BMW has done it about as well as it can be done, I don't know many people that would prefer the M3 powerband to that of the CLK55, even though both cars wind up at approximately the same place as far as peak power. A positive displacement blower, if done correctly, makes a small engine feel like a much larger n/a one--tons of low end grunt and good top end without a peaky powerband. That's why Mercedes used a pd blower on the C32 instead of going the BMW route.