CLK55 vs. E46 M3
Uhhh...so are you saying I doctored that clip? I would be the highest paid video editor in the world, if I could fake movie clips like that. The proof is there...mind you, the driver of the M3 was hardly a pro driver, but nonetheless he did know how to drive. I will also have a clip soon of my car vs. a C32, so that should be interesting.

My buddy is always taunted on I-95, here in South Florida, and he always smokes'em.. He raced some 'Stang yesterday on the highway. The stang pulled up, and started to take off. My buddy let him go a bit, and caught up with him, and then dropped it ino 4th, and smoked him.
I don't think the stang knew what hit him..
Last edited by Mr. Xristo; Mar 8, 2002 at 02:32 PM.
Oh one other thing, The motor trend magazine was paid to favor BMW Ms over the AMG models. I have driven most AMG cars and
BMWs M and there was no comparison. AMG RULES.
AMG RULES. THANK YOU.
To CLK55 vs M3:
I still can't believe CLK55 beat M3. I love both cars, so there is no bias in me. Driver problem?!?!? I don't know. At least my friend and I have no arguements when CLK55 lost to M3.
Last edited by vivianlove; Mar 8, 2002 at 06:19 PM.
This IS the car
<img src="http://www.ice-pla.net/wpfest/tuningwerks%20011.jpg">
Last edited by Samir; Mar 9, 2002 at 01:40 PM.
I still say to this day, that he's penned up in some institution thanks to non believers.....
Woud like to see you take on a '02 M5

My buddy is always taunted on I-95, here in South Florida, and he always smokes'em.. He raced some 'Stang yesterday on the highway. The stang pulled up, and started to take off. My buddy let him go a bit, and caught up with him, and then dropped it ino 4th, and smoked him.
I don't think the stang knew what hit him..
The Best of Mercedes & AMG
given that, I wuold add 0.5+ seconds driver error for a M3 or M5, that put them both in the 5+ seconds territory, clearly slower than a CLK55,
but i have to admit on paper or in the hand of a pro driver, both the m3 & m5 is quicker than clk55.
just IMHO.
Its very easy to understand why a M3 or even a M5 would lose to a CLK55, to reach the 0-60 #'s claimed by the magzine you either have to be pro driver or properly trained, it would be very lucky if a normal drive can hit the # 20% of the time,
given that, I wuold add 0.5+ seconds driver error for a M3 or M5, that put them both in the 5+ seconds territory, clearly slower than a CLK55,
but i have to admit on paper or in the hand of a pro driver, both the m3 & m5 is quicker than clk55.
just IMHO.
they say the SMG II engages clutch and shifts in less than .08-.15 sec.
that is pretty fast...
what does everyone think? i think SMG is the future...
however, if you have the 2002 M3 SMG II, the CLK55 will be in trouble. you should consistently get sub-5 sec. mark for 0-60 and mid/low 13s for the 1/4 mile. this i hard to beat.
they say the SMG II engages clutch and shifts in less than .08-.15 sec.
that is pretty fast...
what does everyone think? i think SMG is the future...
Its very easy to understand why a M3 or even a M5 would lose to a CLK55, to reach the 0-60 #'s claimed by the magzine you either have to be pro driver or properly trained, it would be very lucky if a normal drive can hit the # 20% of the time,
given that, I wuold add 0.5+ seconds driver error for a M3 or M5, that put them both in the 5+ seconds territory, clearly slower than a CLK55,
but i have to admit on paper or in the hand of a pro driver, both the m3 & m5 is quicker than clk55.
just IMHO.
You are 100% right !!
Faster on paper but on street is a different story .......
I can not understand why BMw posts numbers wich are very hard to proove. THe same with the new BMW 745-- on their page they claimed 0-60 in 5.9 sec. BUT edmunds.com review posted 6.2 sec. and british magazine auto cross or something like that posted 6.3 time. IN the new issue of Automobile magazine S500 at 0-60 in 6.0 sec beat new BMW 7 at 6.2 sec. I don't know how BMW got that number but it has to have been with half the car missing to make it lighter and probably on auto pilot and the car is automatic so all you have to do is punch it no need to play it like clavecin as in manual case. What ever they post has to be viewd with extreme caution.
All I know is that video doesn't prove anything. It's a simple street race and that's all it is. There are no professional drivers in both cars that weigh the same. Comon guys, think about this like a science experiment. Yeah, remember those, in High School? You compare various variables under the SAME conditions. This would mean stock vs. stock, same type of fuel, same TYPE of tires, same driver capabilities, same weights of drivers--heck you can go on forever. You can even talk about how one car warmed up longer than the other or how the part of the asphalt one car was under had more traction than another.
Finally, when you have all these "control" variables under control, and when both cars launch at the same time at their best capabilities, you will see who wins. Now you may ask, "how do I control so many variables?"
It's quite simple.
These very specific variables are controlled by the very companies that build the cars: BMW and MB. They take professional drivers onto the track and record their speeds. The time given for a 0-60 is NOT the best time out of a number of trials, rather, it is an average of SEVERAL trial runs that have been recorded under the SAME ideal road conditions that ALL cars are driven on. Without this "standard," there would be no way to compare cars. This standard is allegorical to the French SI Metric system. Instead of people debating over how long "3 Feet" are, (which, when the foot measurement was created, was based on the size of the foot of the King of England,) there is now a standard the entire world and scientists can base their facts on.
Therefore, the numbers are displayed in manuals and magazines that come from the very manufacturers that they are describing, do in fact tell us the truth of the quickness of the vehicle.
Looking at the CLK55 0-60 Speeds: ~5.1-5.2 Seconds
Looking at the E46 M3 0-60 Speeds ~4.7-4.8 Seconds
It doesn't take an idiot to read the data above. The E46 ///M3 is simply quicker than the CLK55.
The reason the video is nonsense is because neither of the drivers are professional. There should be no CLK-55 owners saying their car is faster than an E46-M3 just because an idiot didn't know how to drive his M3 or vice/versa.
If you want to argue that the CLK 55 is quicker based on that video, you're making a mistake. If you're arguing that the CLK 55 is quicker, your only argument is that the CLK 55 had a much better driver than the E46 M3. Plain and simple.
My 2 cents.
John
P.S. And in no way am I biased in any sense. The only thing I am arguing is that no one should base THEIR arguments about the quickness of their vehicle based on an amateur race between a CLK 55 and an E46 M3. Finally, flaming the "noise" that the M3 makes is just ridiculous and childish.
Last edited by Deejay Falco; Mar 21, 2002 at 04:52 AM.
Looking at the CLK55 0-60 Speeds: ~5.1-5.2 Seconds
Looking at the E46 M3 0-60 Speeds ~4.7-4.8 Seconds
Maybe I am not a good stick shift driver
but how many of you normal drivers can actually achieve the 4.7 seconds posted by BMW ??the correct # for CLK55 is 4.9, if the M3 miss a shift, game over !!
Being that we have both an E46 M3 and an E55, and in the past a CLK55, I can tell you that the 55's are faster than the E46 M3. This is assuming that both cars have perfect starts and perfect shifts. If I had to choose either an M3 or CLK55 and leave it stock, I would choose an M3 based on its peformance/handling. The M3's ability to out negoitate the CLK55 on turns is what grabs me. As far as aesthetics, I find both cars to be quite attractive, but in their own ways. The M3 in my opinion looks sportier than a CLK, but it is supposed to. The CLK is a GT car, and offers much more in terms of luxury. Again, the CLK55 is faster, but compare the average drivers of both cars. A typical M3 owner is a car fanatic. They buy an M3 because they love sports cars, and drive it like one at every chance they get. The typical CLK55 owner buys the car because it is the best CLK available. In many cases, they almost never punch it. This both makes them far less experienced when it comes to a race, and effects their car's computer, as it adapts to each individual's driving.
Bottom line. The CLK55 is faster on a straight course, than an E46 M3 (assuming both run perfectly). On a track, assuming that both drivers are equally skilled, the E46 M3 will beat the CLK.
This is funny to me...so what car is it then? An E36 M3? The car in the video is 100% an E46 M3...laguna seca, with full Hamann body kit/wheels/exhaust.
This IS the car
<img src="http://www.ice-pla.net/wpfest/tuningwerks%20011.jpg">
Hi Samir. I don't know if we have met before. I'm Rod...I have a 2001 Jet Black M3. I was at this TuningWerks show where you show the picture of the LSB M3 you raced.
Out of curiosity...when did you race this Laguna Seca Blue M3. Was it a while ago?
Thanks.
Rod
2001 Jet Black M3
4.8 Sec 02 BMW M5 Datasheet
2: BMW AG preliminary test results. Actual acceleration results may vary, depending on specification of vehicle; road and environmental conditions; testing procedures and driving style. These results should be used for comparison only and verification should not be attempted on public roads
4.9 Sec 02 CLK55 Performance Sheet
1. Stated rates of acceleration are based upon manufacturer's track results and may vary depending on model, environmental and road surface conditions, driving style, elevation and vehicle load.
Thx vivianlove
Last edited by CLK 69; Mar 21, 2002 at 03:09 PM.


