EDMUNDS 0-60 time can this be right???
Thread Starter
Member
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 163
Likes: 1
From: Newport Beach, CA, ARIZONA
08 clk63 amg black series
EDMUNDS 0-60 time can this be right???
just checked out Edmunds.com review of the black series
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do...ticleId=120993
and might i add the mars red looks amazing....
but was looking at some of their test numbers especially the 0-60 time and was wondering if this could be so?
4.4 seconds 0-60 seems very slow for 135k
what do you make of it?
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do...ticleId=120993
and might i add the mars red looks amazing....
but was looking at some of their test numbers especially the 0-60 time and was wondering if this could be so?
4.4 seconds 0-60 seems very slow for 135k
what do you make of it?
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 342
Likes: 1
2012 C63 Black Series Coupe
I don't know how Edmunds' times stack up against the buff mags. I'm guessing that the mags all get times very close to 4-seconds flat...
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,309
Likes: 86
From: Cave Creek, AZ and Newport Beach
'22 G 63 AMG, '21 GLE 53 AMG, '20 NSX
Ya its real slow, don't buy it. 
Or if you believe C&D at 3.8 and 7:45 at the Ring which is a better measure of its capabilities its at gotta have.
0-60's on 500 hp are traction dependent. Do you think Edmunds droped the tire pressure to get the best times.
The factory's conservative numbers are at 4.2. Why didn't Edmunds acknowledge that, and describe conditions during the test. My guess is they are a little light in the testing department.
Or if you believe C&D at 3.8 and 7:45 at the Ring which is a better measure of its capabilities its at gotta have. 0-60's on 500 hp are traction dependent. Do you think Edmunds droped the tire pressure to get the best times.
The factory's conservative numbers are at 4.2. Why didn't Edmunds acknowledge that, and describe conditions during the test. My guess is they are a little light in the testing department.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 4,846
Likes: 291
From: Dallas TX
2013 650i Coupe, 2010 IS250 AWD, 1999 S500
This is just one 0-60 time and Edmunds is sometimes, more often than not, slower than the rest. I'd wait to see what Car and Drivers and Road and Track get for this beats. If Road and Track can get a E63 AMG Wagon to 60 in 4.1 seconds than the Black Seris should be faster in their hands. Edmunds basically said that if launch it like you're going to the supermarket, i.e. they didn't brake torque it as much as Car and Driver or R&T would. Just wait for more tests to come in.
M
M
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,283
Likes: 395
The vast majority of car owners would never subject their vehicles to the abuse car magazines put on test cars to get the best possible acceleration time. Edmunds obviously doesn't either...which is fine, as long as their test methods are consistent. You can never compare two different publications or manufacturers times and consider them relevant.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 3,436
Likes: 6
300ce
.......the 0-60 time is not so much the problem. there have been better times recorded for E63 estate for example. The problem here is the 1/4 and trapspeed. Of the two, the trapspeed of 115mph is the most important. Even if the car was launched poorly, a supercar as it is being billed to be should trap above 120mph. This car is a modified CLK63 for track use. The trapspeed of 115mph is consistent with this. The 0-60 time that Edmunds recorded is probably not representative of the cars abilities, but the trapspeed is. As I understand it, this car shines at the track. At nearly $140K, it is up to buyers to decide if it is worth it. If I were interested in buying the car, I wouldn't care about the 0-60 time but I'll worry quite a bit about the trapspeed.
........on another note, I notice that there is a tendency for 63 admirers to focus on 0-60 times because the 63's generally record decent 0-60 times. The lack of excessive torque actually helps the 63's in this regard. But once a 55 or 65 hooks up, it is lights out.
Ted
........on another note, I notice that there is a tendency for 63 admirers to focus on 0-60 times because the 63's generally record decent 0-60 times. The lack of excessive torque actually helps the 63's in this regard. But once a 55 or 65 hooks up, it is lights out.
Ted
Trending Topics
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 4,846
Likes: 291
From: Dallas TX
2013 650i Coupe, 2010 IS250 AWD, 1999 S500
Just like the 0-60 time anything could have lowered the trap speed too, other tests will shed more light on this, you can't go by one test and call it a day with 0-60 or trap speed.
M
M
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
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 3,436
Likes: 6
300ce
M[/QUOTE]
..........actually you are incorrect. I don't know if you drag race. If you do, you see what i'm saying. You can have really bad et's but your trapspeed is usually the same within one to 2mph. The trapspeed here is similar to that of the E63 and CLs 63 and consistent with the weight and engine output of the car as advertised. So it is correct. The times will change but the trapspeed will stay the same. I don't dissagree that other tests are needed.
Ted
Ted
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,064
Likes: 1
From: Canada
C55 AMG, 135i, 911 GT3, GLE43 AMG
I agree with everyone who thinks the 0-60 and 1/4mile time are on the "slow" side. I would await the more mainstream magazines (like C&D, R&T, MT) testing this car before making any conclusions.
Furthermore, this car is supposed to a "track car you can drive on the road". In other words, what is probably more indicative of its overall abilities is lap times around a track. That's why I eagerly await Sport Auto testing this car on Nurburgring and Hockenheim to see how it fairs against its competitors.
If all you want is a fast straightline car, don't bother spending so much money on this car.
Furthermore, this car is supposed to a "track car you can drive on the road". In other words, what is probably more indicative of its overall abilities is lap times around a track. That's why I eagerly await Sport Auto testing this car on Nurburgring and Hockenheim to see how it fairs against its competitors.
If all you want is a fast straightline car, don't bother spending so much money on this car.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 4,846
Likes: 291
From: Dallas TX
2013 650i Coupe, 2010 IS250 AWD, 1999 S500
..........actually you are incorrect. I don't know if you drag race. If you do, you see what i'm saying. You can have really bad et's but your trapspeed is usually the same within one to 2mph. The trapspeed here is similar to that of the E63 and CLs 63 and consistent with the weight and engine output of the car as advertised. So it is correct. The times will change but the trapspeed will stay the same. I don't dissagree that other tests are needed.
Ted
Ted
M
Last edited by Germancar1; Jun 6, 2007 at 12:43 AM.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 3,436
Likes: 6
300ce
Ok, we'll see. I seriously doubt one set of numbers will change and the others won't. If the trapspeed changes by 2 mph then the time could change too couldn't it? So can the 0-60 time. Still though I think this about 1/4 mile times is matterless for a car that is so obviously track biased. I'm more interested in its lap times compared with other similarly focused cars.
M
M
…….no, trapspeed stays relatively unchanged while et changes. The trapspeed is a measure of your cars HP and the HP doesn’t change between runs. The et is a measure of how you get the HP to the ground and that can change.
….As to 0-60times, those that worship this car need to decide if they do or do not care about its 0-60 times. I agree that laptimes are more important for this car. However in the last week there have been two separate threads about the 0-60 times for the CLK63 BS. In the earlier thread, I pointed out that the seemingly impressive 0-60 time of 3.9secs is not that impressive when you consider that the heavier non supercar regular cabriolet version recorded a 0-60 time of 4.1 secs. This means that the less heavy regular CLK63 will probably have identical 0-60 times as the BS. I was attacked. An E63 estate has now recorded a 0-60 time of 4.1 secs. It appears that the straight line acceleration of the CLK63 Bs is not different from that of the non supercar versions. This of course makes sense because the car was built as a track car. But if those that worship it really do not care about its straight line acceleration, then they should stop posting it. I suspect they do care.
Ted
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 4,846
Likes: 291
From: Dallas TX
2013 650i Coupe, 2010 IS250 AWD, 1999 S500
…….no, trapspeed stays relatively unchanged while et changes. The trapspeed is a measure of your cars HP and the HP doesn’t change between runs. The et is a measure of how you get the HP to the ground and that can change.
….As to 0-60times, those that worship this car need to decide if they do or do not care about its 0-60 times. I agree that laptimes are more important for this car. However in the last week there have been two separate threads about the 0-60 times for the CLK63 BS. In the earlier thread, I pointed out that the seemingly impressive 0-60 time of 3.9secs is not that impressive when you consider that the heavier non supercar regular cabriolet version recorded a 0-60 time of 4.1 secs. This means that the less heavy regular CLK63 will probably have identical 0-60 times as the BS. I was attacked. An E63 estate has now recorded a 0-60 time of 4.1 secs. It appears that the straight line acceleration of the CLK63 Bs is not different from that of the non supercar versions. This of course makes sense because the car was built as a track car. But if those that worship it really do not care about its straight line acceleration, then they should stop posting it. I suspect they do care.
Ted
….As to 0-60times, those that worship this car need to decide if they do or do not care about its 0-60 times. I agree that laptimes are more important for this car. However in the last week there have been two separate threads about the 0-60 times for the CLK63 BS. In the earlier thread, I pointed out that the seemingly impressive 0-60 time of 3.9secs is not that impressive when you consider that the heavier non supercar regular cabriolet version recorded a 0-60 time of 4.1 secs. This means that the less heavy regular CLK63 will probably have identical 0-60 times as the BS. I was attacked. An E63 estate has now recorded a 0-60 time of 4.1 secs. It appears that the straight line acceleration of the CLK63 Bs is not different from that of the non supercar versions. This of course makes sense because the car was built as a track car. But if those that worship it really do not care about its straight line acceleration, then they should stop posting it. I suspect they do care.
Ted
I'm going to shock you Ted and agree with you here!!!!!
I just want to get the chance to see and/or hear one!
We'll have to see what the leadfoots at Car and Driver can get out of it, since they're the ones that got that 4.1 out of the Cabrio. Road and Track must be using C&D's methods now going by this month's test of the E63 Wagon of all things! Mercedes' 0-60 times are getting ridiculous. I remember when 5.5 secs was considered blistering for the old W124 500E, now that is downright "slow"..lol!
M
