What is wrong with this picture?!?
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Los Angeles, CA, USA
Posts: 298
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
2002 CLK55 Cabriolet (DEAD: 1989 300E, 1984 Cadillac Eldorado Biarritz Convertible)
What is wrong with this picture?!?
On the road the other day I saw my first BMW 645 ci cabriolet, a white one. Nice looking car ... anyway, I looked up the specs on it today, and found:
Displacement - 4.398 liters
Valvetrain - 4 valves / cylinder, DOHC, w/ Valvetronic
Power - 333 hp @ 5500 rpm
Torque - 332 ft-lbs @ 3600 rpm
0-60 mph - 6.1 seconds
Curb weight - 4001 - 4178 lbs. (depending on who you believe)
Now, compared to my Beast:
Displacement - 5.439 liters
Valvetrain - 3 valves / cylinder, SOHC
Power - 342 hp
Torque - 376 ft-lbs
0-60 - 5.9(?) seconds
Curb weight - 3650 lbs.
OK, so this new BMW is an overweight pig, but still - how the heck did they get within 10 hp of the W208 CLK55 with an engine that's slightly more than a full liter smaller?!?
Displacement - 4.398 liters
Valvetrain - 4 valves / cylinder, DOHC, w/ Valvetronic
Power - 333 hp @ 5500 rpm
Torque - 332 ft-lbs @ 3600 rpm
0-60 mph - 6.1 seconds
Curb weight - 4001 - 4178 lbs. (depending on who you believe)
Now, compared to my Beast:
Displacement - 5.439 liters
Valvetrain - 3 valves / cylinder, SOHC
Power - 342 hp
Torque - 376 ft-lbs
0-60 - 5.9(?) seconds
Curb weight - 3650 lbs.
OK, so this new BMW is an overweight pig, but still - how the heck did they get within 10 hp of the W208 CLK55 with an engine that's slightly more than a full liter smaller?!?
#2
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 423
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
W208 55 & R170 230
ONE thing VERY simple!
The engine technology in our cars IS OLD!! DOHC verus SOHC.,.,
BMW Double Vanos., VERUS US,,,......No vanos.,no vtech,no vvti NO what
nothing!!!
Don't mention it,. ITS a SHAME..,., even ford ,Honda and Toyota has better engine technology than us,.
example ., Honda S2000., 2000CC engine. output at 250Hp... (yeah well no torque and high rpm.,)....... double the displacment.!!! make it 4000cc... easily achieve 400 HP...
The engine technology in our cars IS OLD!! DOHC verus SOHC.,.,
BMW Double Vanos., VERUS US,,,......No vanos.,no vtech,no vvti NO what
nothing!!!
Don't mention it,. ITS a SHAME..,., even ford ,Honda and Toyota has better engine technology than us,.
example ., Honda S2000., 2000CC engine. output at 250Hp... (yeah well no torque and high rpm.,)....... double the displacment.!!! make it 4000cc... easily achieve 400 HP...
Last edited by mtimmy; 02-12-2005 at 02:17 PM.
#3
I read somewhere ( might have been these forums ) that the 645 bmw was a nice car, didn't have the quickness until you got out of 3rd gear. The coupe in black looks stunning with those 20" rims.
I looked at them before I got my clk55, and I couldn't get past that iDrive :puke, and the back seat has ZERO legroom. We have 4 people in our family and Merc is the only one with rear seat side airbags - or I would have considered the 911 too.
I looked at them before I got my clk55, and I couldn't get past that iDrive :puke, and the back seat has ZERO legroom. We have 4 people in our family and Merc is the only one with rear seat side airbags - or I would have considered the 911 too.
#4
Super Member
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 740
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No longer car shopping...
Originally Posted by Riot Nrrrd
On the road the other day I saw my first BMW 645 ci cabriolet, a white one. Nice looking car ... anyway, I looked up the specs on it today, and found:
Displacement - 4.398 liters
Valvetrain - 4 valves / cylinder, DOHC, w/ Valvetronic
Power - 333 hp @ 5500 rpm
Torque - 332 ft-lbs @ 3600 rpm
0-60 mph - 6.1 seconds
Curb weight - 4001 - 4178 lbs. (depending on who you believe)
Now, compared to my Beast:
Displacement - 5.439 liters
Valvetrain - 3 valves / cylinder, SOHC
Power - 342 hp
Torque - 376 ft-lbs
0-60 - 5.9(?) seconds
Curb weight - 3650 lbs.
OK, so this new BMW is an overweight pig, but still - how the heck did they get within 10 hp of the W208 CLK55 with an engine that's slightly more than a full liter smaller?!?
Displacement - 4.398 liters
Valvetrain - 4 valves / cylinder, DOHC, w/ Valvetronic
Power - 333 hp @ 5500 rpm
Torque - 332 ft-lbs @ 3600 rpm
0-60 mph - 6.1 seconds
Curb weight - 4001 - 4178 lbs. (depending on who you believe)
Now, compared to my Beast:
Displacement - 5.439 liters
Valvetrain - 3 valves / cylinder, SOHC
Power - 342 hp
Torque - 376 ft-lbs
0-60 - 5.9(?) seconds
Curb weight - 3650 lbs.
OK, so this new BMW is an overweight pig, but still - how the heck did they get within 10 hp of the W208 CLK55 with an engine that's slightly more than a full liter smaller?!?
#5
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Los Angeles, CA, USA
Posts: 298
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
2002 CLK55 Cabriolet (DEAD: 1989 300E, 1984 Cadillac Eldorado Biarritz Convertible)
Originally Posted by ndabunka
Riot - The CLK55 "coupe" is 4.9 from zero to sixity. I think the Cab is something like 5.3. That's a 1/2 second difference. There's your answer
#6
Super Member
Originally Posted by mtimmy
ONE thing VERY simple!
The engine technology in our cars IS OLD!! DOHC verus SOHC.,.,
BMW Double Vanos., VERUS US,,,......No vanos.,no vtech,no vvti NO what
nothing!!!
Don't mention it,. ITS a SHAME..,., even ford ,Honda and Toyota has better engine technology than us,.
example ., Honda S2000., 2000CC engine. output at 250Hp... (yeah well no torque and high rpm.,)....... double the displacment.!!! make it 4000cc... easily achieve 400 HP...
The engine technology in our cars IS OLD!! DOHC verus SOHC.,.,
BMW Double Vanos., VERUS US,,,......No vanos.,no vtech,no vvti NO what
nothing!!!
Don't mention it,. ITS a SHAME..,., even ford ,Honda and Toyota has better engine technology than us,.
example ., Honda S2000., 2000CC engine. output at 250Hp... (yeah well no torque and high rpm.,)....... double the displacment.!!! make it 4000cc... easily achieve 400 HP...
It is a shame!
#7
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Posts: 3,927
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2002 E55 AMG
Originally Posted by mtimmy
ONE thing VERY simple!
The engine technology in our cars IS OLD!! DOHC verus SOHC.,.,
BMW Double Vanos., VERUS US,,,......No vanos.,no vtech,no vvti NO what
nothing!!!
Don't mention it,. ITS a SHAME..,., even ford ,Honda and Toyota has better engine technology than us,.
example ., Honda S2000., 2000CC engine. output at 250Hp... (yeah well no torque and high rpm.,)....... double the displacment.!!! make it 4000cc... easily achieve 400 HP...
The engine technology in our cars IS OLD!! DOHC verus SOHC.,.,
BMW Double Vanos., VERUS US,,,......No vanos.,no vtech,no vvti NO what
nothing!!!
Don't mention it,. ITS a SHAME..,., even ford ,Honda and Toyota has better engine technology than us,.
example ., Honda S2000., 2000CC engine. output at 250Hp... (yeah well no torque and high rpm.,)....... double the displacment.!!! make it 4000cc... easily achieve 400 HP...
Hmmm, our MB engines have a variable intake manifold but no engine timing. Always wondered about that...
Trending Topics
#8
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 423
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
W208 55 & R170 230
Yes that is CORRECT....
They do have that ., .... Variable intake with no timing!!!... thats like you own the car but no key ., can't use it at all.
Economy!!!!!!!!!................... For them or for US?....I don't think the AMG is any where economy to me!!! ... 1 tank of gas running less than 190miles!...
Its a GAS EATER
They do have that ., .... Variable intake with no timing!!!... thats like you own the car but no key ., can't use it at all.
Economy!!!!!!!!!................... For them or for US?....I don't think the AMG is any where economy to me!!! ... 1 tank of gas running less than 190miles!...
Its a GAS EATER
#9
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Jakarta
Posts: 414
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
300E
The EVO is 1997cc, and pumps out 276HP, plus its easily reach 400HP with mods.
Thats why some ricers out there aren't afraid of German's beasts like us. Benz should beware of this....!!! BUT Lets scares those ricers away.
Thats why some ricers out there aren't afraid of German's beasts like us. Benz should beware of this....!!! BUT Lets scares those ricers away.
#11
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: 2000 ft over the Fl coast in a B-17
Posts: 5,824
Received 260 Likes
on
186 Posts
The modular engines MB has been producing since MY '98 cost MB over 50% less to produce than the previous DOHC 4 valve engines, although the new engines are cleaner burning,more fuel efficient and torquier, they have noisy valvetrains, a rougher idle and have a tendency to have more internal problems ie scored cylinder walls, valvetrain issues etc.
Thankfully MB is now starting to produce better power plants ie; the new 3.5 and shortly 4.5 and 6.3 etc.
Thankfully MB is now starting to produce better power plants ie; the new 3.5 and shortly 4.5 and 6.3 etc.
Last edited by RJC; 02-16-2005 at 12:22 AM.
#12
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: NY
Posts: 388
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CLK320
The current crop of MB engines simply do not belong in a high end luxury car. They are fairly primitive in design, yet from my experience seem to be more reliable than that of the older DOHC design, especially when it comes to issues involving the cylinder heads.