Wheels with spinners ghetto or ok?
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,679
Likes: 0
CLS55 AMG
Internet racer? Hey, bud, YOU'RE the one coming to a CLK55 forum and saying a Ford
Will beat up on our CLK55s, and then calling me a liar when I tell you I've wasted the Lightnings I've faced. And then you have the ***** to act like it's *me* who's being a jerk? I don't come to your Lightning forums and troll, now do I?
Even after I post five (count 'em, five) magazine tests of the Lightning which clearly show that it's not as fast as a CLK55, you still won't relent. So, how about you explain the following: unless Einstein was wrong, Force=mass*acceleration, yes?
So, acceleration=force/mass (I'm hoping that you at least understand algebra, although since you can't read test results in plain English, I'll admit this is somewhat of a stretch).
The mass of a CLK55 AMG is 1564Kg (3450 pounds, divide by 2.2 to get Kg). The mass of a Ford Lightning is 2118Kg (4670 pounds).
Now then, suppose the force of the CLK55 is standardized to 2000 (I'm doing this so that the answer will be a nice number, because I assume that you might have trouble with fractions). The CLK55's actual power is 342 horsepower, so if we scale the Lightning's power up by the percentage increase it actually has over the CLK55, it would be 2000(380/342) = 2222. Got that?
So, if what you're saying holds true, then the Lightning's calculated acceleration should be greater than that of the CLK.
Well, let's plug them in. Lightning = 2222/2118 = 1.05
CLK55 = 2000/1564 = 1.28 .
Last time I checked, 1.28 is indeed greater than 1.05.
To put it simply: an 11% increase in horsepower cannot make up for a 35% increase in mass. Or, even more simply, your truck is too friggin' heavy for 38 horsepower to make up the difference.
Dream on, bud...against a CLK55, a stock Lightning is TOAST!
Even after I post five (count 'em, five) magazine tests of the Lightning which clearly show that it's not as fast as a CLK55, you still won't relent. So, how about you explain the following: unless Einstein was wrong, Force=mass*acceleration, yes?
So, acceleration=force/mass (I'm hoping that you at least understand algebra, although since you can't read test results in plain English, I'll admit this is somewhat of a stretch).
The mass of a CLK55 AMG is 1564Kg (3450 pounds, divide by 2.2 to get Kg). The mass of a Ford Lightning is 2118Kg (4670 pounds).
Now then, suppose the force of the CLK55 is standardized to 2000 (I'm doing this so that the answer will be a nice number, because I assume that you might have trouble with fractions). The CLK55's actual power is 342 horsepower, so if we scale the Lightning's power up by the percentage increase it actually has over the CLK55, it would be 2000(380/342) = 2222. Got that?
So, if what you're saying holds true, then the Lightning's calculated acceleration should be greater than that of the CLK.
Well, let's plug them in. Lightning = 2222/2118 = 1.05
CLK55 = 2000/1564 = 1.28 .
Last time I checked, 1.28 is indeed greater than 1.05.
To put it simply: an 11% increase in horsepower cannot make up for a 35% increase in mass. Or, even more simply, your truck is too friggin' heavy for 38 horsepower to make up the difference.
Dream on, bud...against a CLK55, a stock Lightning is TOAST!
Originally posted by Ashenor
You talk a lot of smack and numbers. Feel free to post your timeslips so we can see what sort of internet racer you are.
You talk a lot of smack and numbers. Feel free to post your timeslips so we can see what sort of internet racer you are.
