S65 vs. Gallardo
09-24-2006, 03:24 AM
#102
Member
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 221
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Looks like you wont address me since you realize I live in AZ. But yea sometime in December when I have time to waste I will try and set up a BMW M/// get together and hopefully we can get some AMG's. I dont know if PIR has any open track days in December or not but it would be fun to meet up and run some AMG and M's at a track then listen to Allen call our cars crap.
I wont address you because you live in Az? Wanna bet?
Still so much bench racing, and no one up to the challange. One sorry *** loser driving around in a CLK all the while reading about cars he'll never own.
As I said, Ive got the G, bring on the Benz.
09-24-2006, 07:17 AM
#103
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Norway
Posts: 404
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ALPINA B12 5,7 Coupe #22/57
Yes, I did see the time for the M6, but that car had Pilot Sport Cups mounted up, with treadwear 80, and those are a semi-race tire (Car & Driver will not allow their usage in their tests, and recently forced a tuner to mount other tires up before they would test their car). I'm sure you're aware the very sticky tires help a car's launch and acceleration times. 
So was the Gallardo in one of your links.
http://www.m5board.com/vbulletin/sho...3&highlight=M6
Includes scan of the "Supertest".
Its about 0,2 to 0,5 sec ( depending on source) faster than the more heavy and "slower" M5 until 62 mph so its not a huge advantage on straight line. But yes it helps.
They also need to be warmed up before giving you good grip, cold they are useless.
I have used this tires on my cars and you need 1-2 laps of hard driving before they works as they are design to.
BTW: The car need to be setup for such tires before you can expect to get the benefit of the full potential of such tires.
IMO the M5 makes more sence, but cars are not always about commons sence.
09-24-2006, 07:19 AM
#104
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Norway
Posts: 404
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ALPINA B12 5,7 Coupe #22/57
Just curious.
09-24-2006, 11:51 AM
#106
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,679
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CLS55 AMG
09-24-2006, 01:17 PM
#107
Member
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 221
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EXPERIENCE
Here is what happens when someone knows how to drive. The Gallardo is a 2004 Egear (Egear is slower than 6 speed) vs an 06 Z06, which later that day turned an 11.6@125mph bone stock. The guy driving the Gallardo is a friend of mine. That Z06 would OBLITERATE an S65, not to mention there is a video out there of a Z06 beating a worked Renntech AMG.
In this video they raced to over 150mph.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=14H2kcnQuMo
Why do I continue to hear cricket noises when I announce Im ready to run someone?
09-24-2006, 01:20 PM
#108
Member
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 221
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Im pretty certain that if you were to drive up to the Benz dealer in that spectacular 01 Clk, they wouldnt even let you drive the S65, and steer you towards the C230's.
09-24-2006, 02:01 PM
#109
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,679
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CLS55 AMG
No facts, only dismissal. Every American magazine tested the Gallardo at several mph slower to the 1/4 mile. You don't argue this fact.
Oh, I've got plenty of experience, and you really don't know anything about me to be making comments like that. Do you? You know nothing about me. You don't even know my name, let alone my state of financial affairs.
If you've got anything to back up your allegation that I cannot afford any of these cars, produce it. Otherwise, you're exposed as a liar, yet again. You know zip about me, liar.
09-24-2006, 02:16 PM
#110
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,679
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CLS55 AMG
Says the liar who hasn't even raced an S65, and who dismisses every available data point showing the S65 is faster.
You mean, who has faster reaction times than the Z06 owner. In that video, the Gallardo, which is less than one second slower than the Vette, jumped on it well before the Vette. And even then, the 'vette ran him down and passed him. The 'vette kept his window down while the lambo passenger had the presence of mind to roll his up, which helped the lambo make a better showing, thanks to the rather substantial drag force created by an open window at xxx slowing the 'vette down.
Actually, it's the other way around.
Video of CL65 versus 2006 Z06 from 60-165: CL65 wins by 3+ carlengths
Here's another one: a CL65 AMG versus a RUF Porsche Turbo. Read what they write at the end:
http://videos.streetfire.net/search/...259c97df9b.htm
In the video of an M5 running a Gallardo, twice, from rolling starts where both drivers get on it a bit closer at the same time, we see how the Gallardo loses once and barely edges out the second time a BMW M5, which is significantly slower than the '06 Z06.
You're modded, and you want to run a stocker? Not really fair, now is it?
I asked you yesterday if you're going to go to the Scottsdale Club's meet in December and video you, in your car, trapping at 123 mph plus. SO far, I've gotten only crickets in response.
Are you going?
You mean, who has faster reaction times than the Z06 owner. In that video, the Gallardo, which is less than one second slower than the Vette, jumped on it well before the Vette. And even then, the 'vette ran him down and passed him. The 'vette kept his window down while the lambo passenger had the presence of mind to roll his up, which helped the lambo make a better showing, thanks to the rather substantial drag force created by an open window at xxx slowing the 'vette down.
The Gallardo is a 2004 Egear (Egear is slower than 6 speed) vs an 06 Z06, which later that day turned an 11.6@125mph bone stock. The guy driving the Gallardo is a friend of mine. That Z06 would OBLITERATE an S65, not to mention there is a video out there of a Z06 beating a worked Renntech AMG.
Video of CL65 versus 2006 Z06 from 60-165: CL65 wins by 3+ carlengths
Here's another one: a CL65 AMG versus a RUF Porsche Turbo. Read what they write at the end:
http://videos.streetfire.net/search/...259c97df9b.htm
In the video of an M5 running a Gallardo, twice, from rolling starts where both drivers get on it a bit closer at the same time, we see how the Gallardo loses once and barely edges out the second time a BMW M5, which is significantly slower than the '06 Z06.
I asked you yesterday if you're going to go to the Scottsdale Club's meet in December and video you, in your car, trapping at 123 mph plus. SO far, I've gotten only crickets in response.
Are you going?
Last edited by Improviz; 09-24-2006 at 07:51 PM.
09-25-2006, 10:50 AM
#111
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Hell
Posts: 1,030
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EFF YOU JACKIE
Haha, well stated.. It's funny, Improviz is always attacking those who provide information they've found in articles and such. But when he posts it MUST be WORD.. Congrats on the Ride. I just unloaded a 360 and have been looking at the Gallardo. Not sure about that or a 430 F1. Not sure yet, boss has the final say. Good luck with the Gallardo. Too bad I am on the "right" coast, otherwise I would come visit your gathering.
Where do I begin with you? Lets see Johnny Cochran, lets start with the Road and Track article. I dont have time to look for and scan the article, but Ill let you know that on the very first page of that article , it says that it is from their friends at Quattroroute in Italy. Since you have soo much time on your hands to quote every single magazine in the nation, you may want to follow up on that little tidbit.
As for facts, the facts are that:
A:I own and drive these cars, you read about them.
B:My time travel Gallardo which I am picking up on Oct 6th, was purchased several months ago and sent directly to SP Engineering. When I do something, I document EVERYTHING. For example, when I bought my Lotus Esprit, that Modified Luxury and Exotics did an article on, word was that the final editions made more power. I dynoed the car before I ever even saw it. 344 rwhp, out of a car rated at 350crank hp. We documented every single modification, and backed it up with real word dynoes. Such is the same with the Gallardo. I purchased it, sent it to SP, modified it, and have yet to have sat in it. The dyno confirmed, that brand new, unbroken in, the SE makes approx 50hp at the crank more than an 04/05 Gallardo. We then proceeded to test an intake, and exhausts on my car which were claimed to make power, and with the real word proof we gathered found out that aftermarket exhausts for the 06 LOST power. At that point, we proceeded to design our own one off exhaust system, which on the dyno was proven to gain power. The car was also lowered, wheels, tints, lights tinted, custom mats, calipers painted etc. I dont drive stock. And I want to have REAL facts to back up my numbers, and not read someone elses. Someone like you, an encyclopedia of textbook knowledge has no choice but to experience life through other peoples eyes. I live it through my own. For someone like you, when someone says vanilla is best, you follow along. I taste chocolate and vanilla and find out for myself. You will be able to read my Gallardo story for yourself when the issue with my Gallardo comes out, but for now, you can subscribe to LA Times and read about my Murcielago.
As I said, I will be in L.A. Oct 6th to the 8th. On the 8th we have a gathering of Lambos. We are available to race. Shortly thereafter Ill be at my home in Scottsdale, and will have the Gallardo shipped to me, where again, I will be able to race.
As for racing the S65, no I have not, but I have driven one. And yes, Im ready to race one at anytime. So please, bring your out........ Oh ****, I just noticed, you have an 01 Clk. Wanna race that instead?
What else have you learned from your magazines? Which is faster Egear or 6 speed? Which is lighter? Whats the best RPM to launch a Gallardo? A Murcielago? A Diablo?
Have you driven a Veyron? Or have you read about one?
Where do I begin with you? Lets see Johnny Cochran, lets start with the Road and Track article. I dont have time to look for and scan the article, but Ill let you know that on the very first page of that article , it says that it is from their friends at Quattroroute in Italy. Since you have soo much time on your hands to quote every single magazine in the nation, you may want to follow up on that little tidbit. As for facts, the facts are that:
A:I own and drive these cars, you read about them.
B:My time travel Gallardo which I am picking up on Oct 6th, was purchased several months ago and sent directly to SP Engineering. When I do something, I document EVERYTHING. For example, when I bought my Lotus Esprit, that Modified Luxury and Exotics did an article on, word was that the final editions made more power. I dynoed the car before I ever even saw it. 344 rwhp, out of a car rated at 350crank hp. We documented every single modification, and backed it up with real word dynoes. Such is the same with the Gallardo. I purchased it, sent it to SP, modified it, and have yet to have sat in it. The dyno confirmed, that brand new, unbroken in, the SE makes approx 50hp at the crank more than an 04/05 Gallardo. We then proceeded to test an intake, and exhausts on my car which were claimed to make power, and with the real word proof we gathered found out that aftermarket exhausts for the 06 LOST power. At that point, we proceeded to design our own one off exhaust system, which on the dyno was proven to gain power. The car was also lowered, wheels, tints, lights tinted, custom mats, calipers painted etc. I dont drive stock. And I want to have REAL facts to back up my numbers, and not read someone elses. Someone like you, an encyclopedia of textbook knowledge has no choice but to experience life through other peoples eyes. I live it through my own. For someone like you, when someone says vanilla is best, you follow along. I taste chocolate and vanilla and find out for myself. You will be able to read my Gallardo story for yourself when the issue with my Gallardo comes out, but for now, you can subscribe to LA Times and read about my Murcielago.
As I said, I will be in L.A. Oct 6th to the 8th. On the 8th we have a gathering of Lambos. We are available to race. Shortly thereafter Ill be at my home in Scottsdale, and will have the Gallardo shipped to me, where again, I will be able to race.
As for racing the S65, no I have not, but I have driven one. And yes, Im ready to race one at anytime. So please, bring your out........ Oh ****, I just noticed, you have an 01 Clk. Wanna race that instead?
What else have you learned from your magazines? Which is faster Egear or 6 speed? Which is lighter? Whats the best RPM to launch a Gallardo? A Murcielago? A Diablo?
Have you driven a Veyron? Or have you read about one?
09-25-2006, 11:23 AM
#112
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,679
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CLS55 AMG
Haha, well stated.. It's funny, Improviz is always attacking those who provide information they've found in articles and such. But when he posts it MUST be WORD.. Congrats on the Ride. I just unloaded a 360 and have been looking at the Gallardo. Not sure about that or a 430 F1. Not sure yet, boss has the final say. Good luck with the Gallardo. Too bad I am on the "right" coast, otherwise I would come visit your gathering.
1) your first post in thread:
Originally Posted by ldangeli
Here is what I don't get. If the S65 is running 0-60 in 4.2 or so, tops out at 165, and the gallardo, AWD on, is running 4.0, tops out at 215 or so, how is it the s65 jumped off the line and smoked the gallardo so badly? Doesn't make any sense.
Originally Posted by improviz
(title Trap speed is the key The SL65 (Car & Driver didn't test the S65, but weights are close) traps at 123 mph to the Gallardo's 118. 5mph is pretty substantial in the 1/4, and to 130 mph the SL65 was 1.6 seconds faster.
Gallardo ACCELERATION Seconds
60 mph 4.1
100 mph 9.2
130 mph 15.0
Street start, 5–60 mph 4.6
Standing 1/4-mile 12.4 sec @ 118 mph
SL65 ACCELERATION Seconds
Zero to 60 mph: 3.8 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 8.2 sec
Zero to 130 mph: 13.4 sec
Street start, 5-60 mph: 4.3 sec
Standing 1/4-mile: 11.9 sec @ 123 mph
From a roll, the Gallardo should get handily pulled with that difference in traps, especially at higher speeds.
It would have been closer, though, but the Gallardo driver here was obviously short-shifting, which cost him extra time. Gotta use the whole power band of that V10!!
Trap speed is the key The SL65 (Car & Driver didn't test the S65, but weights are close) traps at 123 mph to the Gallardo's 118. 5mph is pretty substantial in the 1/4, and to 130 mph the SL65 was 1.6 seconds faster.Gallardo ACCELERATION Seconds
60 mph 4.1
100 mph 9.2
130 mph 15.0
Street start, 5–60 mph 4.6
Standing 1/4-mile 12.4 sec @ 118 mph
SL65 ACCELERATION Seconds
Zero to 60 mph: 3.8 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 8.2 sec
Zero to 130 mph: 13.4 sec
Street start, 5-60 mph: 4.3 sec
Standing 1/4-mile: 11.9 sec @ 123 mph
From a roll, the Gallardo should get handily pulled with that difference in traps, especially at higher speeds.
It would have been closer, though, but the Gallardo driver here was obviously short-shifting, which cost him extra time. Gotta use the whole power band of that V10!!
This is what Internet forums are designed for: the exchange of ideas. You then asked "so the SL65 is faster than the McClaren SLR?"; I replied that it was not, and posted road test results from the same magazine, Car & Driver, was faster. No attack there either.
So, what did you do? Continue to argue, even though I already had agreed with you that the Gallardo driver botched the race.
You stated that "every other website around says the the S65 is 4.4 seconds, ". I showed that this was simply not true, that you were erroneously quoting the 0-100 km/h time, not the 0-60 time. You then said that Car & Driver, presumably because the numbers didn't support what you were arguing, is a "rag". So, I quoted test numbers from four other mags for the SL65 showing that it did test at about the same as it had done in Car & Driver.I then produced a test from Motor Trend of a CL65 showing similar numbers. And again, I ended the post up by agreeing with you: that the Gallardo driver in the video seen in the first post of this thread had screwed up, which is why the margin of victory was so large. Finally, I stated that with the xx65 cars all trapping several mph faster than the Gallardo in the 1/4 mile, then the S65 should pull from a roll. Again: no attack or insult, only using the Internet for the free exchange of ideas: I was simply trying, as you were, to support my point.
So it is OK for you to do it, but not for me to do it?
Now it is important to note that, up to this point, I had in no way attacked you in any fashion. I had pointed out to you that you should reread my earlier posts, wherein I had stated that I agreed with you about the Gallardo driver had messed up.
So what was your response it was here:
Originally Posted by ldangeli
But apparently that was over looked. But then again, this is an MB forum, you are IPROVIZ and this discussion would and could continue to go round and round. In anycase, IMHO I much prefer the Lambo over the Merc. Two reasons, Italian, and not sharing parts with Chrysler. Oh right, its not a chrysler and it's not sharing parts. Just like the Lambo isn't sharing parts with the Audi. a.k.a. Platform sharing. In anycase, I personally wouldn't spend 3k a month on a MERC, and I've spent more on other cars. and ??
1) attack me, and;
2) attack Mercedes using the age-old "Chrysler" asset
So who was it who started the attacks, ldangeli? At no point in this thread did I attack or insult you up to this point. Who threw the first stone, ldangeli?
The only thing that seemed to annoy you was that I was coming up with many data points which refuted your argument. Well, sorry, but the facts weren't on your side. And if you don't like the give-and-take that is debate, and cannot engage in it without insulting and/or attacking any person or magazine which does not agree with you, then I'd say you might consider finding another hobby.
09-25-2006, 11:30 AM
#113
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Hell
Posts: 1,030
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EFF YOU JACKIE
Nothing you do annoys me, I don't give you that much thought. You're too funny. Read my posts again. I was using your numbers as a comparison and asking, based on your data was the SL65 faster than the McLaren, since you original started spewing data about the SL and not the S. But no matter. Once again you are correct. Nice 01 BTW. Talk all the trash you want. You're still a pompous ***. Your posts keep proving that point. 
Attacking? In fact, if we look back through the thread, it becomes clear that it was you who started the "attacking". Sequence was this:
1) your first post in thread:
2) my first post in thread, made in response to you a few posts after this:
Now, see that? Was that insulting or attacking? No. It is called "venturing an opinion". And in fact, you might have noted the last sentence: I was, in effect, agreeing with you, in that the Gallardo driver in the video obviously screwed up. Fra from "attacking" you, I was agreeing with you.
This is what Internet forums are designed for: the exchange of ideas. You then asked "so the SL65 is faster than the McClaren SLR?"; I replied that it was not, and posted road test results from the same magazine, Car & Driver, was faster. No attack there either.
So, what did you do? Continue to argue, even though I already had agreed with you that the Gallardo driver botched the race. You stated that "every other website around says the the S65 is 4.4 seconds, ". I showed that this was simply not true, that you were erroneously quoting the 0-100 km/h time, not the 0-60 time. You then said that Car & Driver, presumably because the numbers didn't support what you were arguing, is a "rag". So, I quoted test numbers from four other mags for the SL65 showing that it did test at about the same as it had done in Car & Driver.
I then produced a test from Motor Trend of a CL65 showing similar numbers. And again, I ended the post up by agreeing with you: that the Gallardo driver in the video seen in the first post of this thread had screwed up, which is why the margin of victory was so large. Finally, I stated that with the xx65 cars all trapping several mph faster than the Gallardo in the 1/4 mile, then the S65 should pull from a roll. Again: no attack or insult, only using the Internet for the free exchange of ideas: I was simply trying, as you were, to support my point.
So it is OK for you to do it, but not for me to do it?
Now it is important to note that, up to this point, I had in no way attacked you in any fashion. I had pointed out to you that you should reread my earlier posts, wherein I had stated that I agreed with you about the Gallardo driver had messed up.
So what was your response it was here:
So, let's see. In your response, you:
1) attack me, and;
2) attack Mercedes using the age-old "Chrysler" asset
So who was it who started the attacks, ldangeli? At no point in this thread did I attack or insult you up to this point. Who threw the first stone, ldangeli?
The only thing that seemed to annoy you was that I was coming up with many data points which refuted your argument. Well, sorry, but the facts weren't on your side. And if you don't like the give-and-take that is debate, and cannot engage in it without insulting and/or attacking any person or magazine which does not agree with you, then I'd say you might consider finding another hobby.
1) your first post in thread:
2) my first post in thread, made in response to you a few posts after this:
Now, see that? Was that insulting or attacking? No. It is called "venturing an opinion". And in fact, you might have noted the last sentence: I was, in effect, agreeing with you, in that the Gallardo driver in the video obviously screwed up. Fra from "attacking" you, I was agreeing with you.
This is what Internet forums are designed for: the exchange of ideas. You then asked "so the SL65 is faster than the McClaren SLR?"; I replied that it was not, and posted road test results from the same magazine, Car & Driver, was faster. No attack there either.
So, what did you do? Continue to argue, even though I already had agreed with you that the Gallardo driver botched the race.
You stated that "every other website around says the the S65 is 4.4 seconds, ". I showed that this was simply not true, that you were erroneously quoting the 0-100 km/h time, not the 0-60 time. You then said that Car & Driver, presumably because the numbers didn't support what you were arguing, is a "rag". So, I quoted test numbers from four other mags for the SL65 showing that it did test at about the same as it had done in Car & Driver.I then produced a test from Motor Trend of a CL65 showing similar numbers. And again, I ended the post up by agreeing with you: that the Gallardo driver in the video seen in the first post of this thread had screwed up, which is why the margin of victory was so large. Finally, I stated that with the xx65 cars all trapping several mph faster than the Gallardo in the 1/4 mile, then the S65 should pull from a roll. Again: no attack or insult, only using the Internet for the free exchange of ideas: I was simply trying, as you were, to support my point.
So it is OK for you to do it, but not for me to do it?
Now it is important to note that, up to this point, I had in no way attacked you in any fashion. I had pointed out to you that you should reread my earlier posts, wherein I had stated that I agreed with you about the Gallardo driver had messed up.
So what was your response it was here:
So, let's see. In your response, you:
1) attack me, and;
2) attack Mercedes using the age-old "Chrysler" asset
So who was it who started the attacks, ldangeli? At no point in this thread did I attack or insult you up to this point. Who threw the first stone, ldangeli?
The only thing that seemed to annoy you was that I was coming up with many data points which refuted your argument. Well, sorry, but the facts weren't on your side. And if you don't like the give-and-take that is debate, and cannot engage in it without insulting and/or attacking any person or magazine which does not agree with you, then I'd say you might consider finding another hobby.
09-25-2006, 11:36 AM
#115
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Hell
Posts: 1,030
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EFF YOU JACKIE
09-25-2006, 11:40 AM
#116
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,679
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CLS55 AMG
Lol....so, ldangeli: two posts ago, you state that I'm "always attacking" people...in response, I show how it was you who attacked me first in this thread, and in response, you....well, attack me with profanity and personal insults.
Thanks for proving my point.
Thanks for proving my point.
09-25-2006, 11:46 AM
#118
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Hell
Posts: 1,030
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EFF YOU JACKIE
Profanity and insults? Ok, sure if that’s what you want to call stating the obvious. Do you even read your own posts. How about the ones calling everyone a liar? How about for every person that posts information contradictory to yours, you blatantly attacking them and insulting them indicating that they are wrong and you are right? Please, your really are a child. BTW, did you notice that you have way too much time on your hands. Oh no, was that an insult or personal attack.. 
Hey everyone, from this day forward, it is important to let IMPROVIZ know that he is absolutely, unequivocally, without a doubt, right, 100% of the time.
Hey everyone, from this day forward, it is important to let IMPROVIZ know that he is absolutely, unequivocally, without a doubt, right, 100% of the time.
09-25-2006, 12:05 PM
#120
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,679
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CLS55 AMG
Do you know what my financial state of affairs is? No. So if you stated that I cannot afford this car or that, obviously this would be a deliberate, false statement: you cannot possibly know. And so
You got offended and began insulting me when I corrected your false claim that "every website out there" shows that the S65 is 4.4 seconds 0-60; in fact, none do, not even Mercedes. But you can't handle being shown to be wrong, and so launched personal attacks, which continue even now:
I know you have a problem with my presenting actual test data of actual cars which doesn't support what you'd like to believe. Sorry, but all I'm doing is quoting magazine tests, showing videos, and time slips. The only issue you have is not the facts themselves, but that they don't back you up.
09-25-2006, 12:07 PM
#122
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Hell
Posts: 1,030
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EFF YOU JACKIE
On another note, I know a bunch of cars that can beat the SL65, S65, Gallardo and Z06.
http://www.2sportscars.com/fastest-cars.shtml
http://www.2sportscars.com/fastest-cars.shtml
09-25-2006, 12:10 PM
#123
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Hell
Posts: 1,030
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EFF YOU JACKIE
And another...
http://www.leftlanenews.com/2006/07/...s-fastest-car/
http://www.leftlanenews.com/2006/07/...s-fastest-car/
On another note, I know a bunch of cars that can beat the SL65, S65, Gallardo and Z06.
http://www.2sportscars.com/fastest-cars.shtml
http://www.2sportscars.com/fastest-cars.shtml
09-25-2006, 12:20 PM
#124
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Hell
Posts: 1,030
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EFF YOU JACKIE
Again, no, I don't get offended by you. Yes, I do disagree with you on points and that’s fine, everyone is allowed an opinion. It seems that you take disagreeing with you as a personal attack.. It also seems that when someone presents you with data they found surfing the web, you also take that as a disagreement and a personal attack. So maybe the issue is on your end.
A wise man once told me that it can't always be everyone else who has the problem.
I could care less what your financial state is. It has no relevance here. I never once stated you couldn't afford any car..
Debates are healthy, what you do is attack every person that presents data. YES I SAID ATTACK.
And I didn't get "offended and began insulting me when I corrected your false claim that "every website out there" shows that the S65 is 4.4 seconds 0-60; in fact, none do, not even Mercedes. But you can't handle being shown to be wrong, and so launched personal attacks, which continue even now" I didn't understand why when you were presented with data from multiple sources "debating" your stance, you refuted it calling it false and non-accurate, but when you post some data it has to be gospel.
You said it yourself below,
" I know you have a problem with my presenting actual test data of actual cars which doesn't support what you'd like to believe. Sorry, but all I'm doing is quoting magazine tests, showing videos, and time slips. The only issue you have is not the facts themselves, but that they don't back you up."
But when I present similar data, you contradict what you yourself say, as all I am doing is presenting you with similar data from similar sources. If you want to call that an attack, than by all means, please do so. I unfortunately do not have the time you apparently do, to troll the net looking to disprove, argue and refute anything anyone says that does not conform to your beliefs provided by said data.
A wise man once told me that it can't always be everyone else who has the problem.
I could care less what your financial state is. It has no relevance here. I never once stated you couldn't afford any car..
Debates are healthy, what you do is attack every person that presents data. YES I SAID ATTACK.
And I didn't get "offended and began insulting me when I corrected your false claim that "every website out there" shows that the S65 is 4.4 seconds 0-60; in fact, none do, not even Mercedes. But you can't handle being shown to be wrong, and so launched personal attacks, which continue even now" I didn't understand why when you were presented with data from multiple sources "debating" your stance, you refuted it calling it false and non-accurate, but when you post some data it has to be gospel.
You said it yourself below,
" I know you have a problem with my presenting actual test data of actual cars which doesn't support what you'd like to believe. Sorry, but all I'm doing is quoting magazine tests, showing videos, and time slips. The only issue you have is not the facts themselves, but that they don't back you up."
But when I present similar data, you contradict what you yourself say, as all I am doing is presenting you with similar data from similar sources. If you want to call that an attack, than by all means, please do so. I unfortunately do not have the time you apparently do, to troll the net looking to disprove, argue and refute anything anyone says that does not conform to your beliefs provided by said data.
09-25-2006, 12:57 PM
#125
Member
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 221
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Says the liar who hasn't even raced an S65, and who dismisses every available data point showing the S65 is faster.
You mean, who has faster reaction times than the Z06 owner. In that video, the Gallardo, which is less than one second slower than the Vette, jumped on it well before the Vette. And even then, the 'vette ran him down and passed him. The 'vette kept his window down while the lambo passenger had the presence of mind to roll his up, which helped the lambo make a better showing, thanks to the rather substantial drag force created by an open window at xxx slowing the 'vette down.
Actually, it's the other way around.
Video of CL65 versus 2006 Z06 from 60-165: CL65 wins by 3+ carlengths
Here's another one: a CL65 AMG versus a RUF Porsche Turbo. Read what they write at the end:
http://videos.streetfire.net/search/...259c97df9b.htm
In the video of an M5 running a Gallardo, twice, from rolling starts where both drivers get on it a bit closer at the same time, we see how the Gallardo loses once and barely edges out the second time a BMW M5, which is significantly slower than the '06 Z06.
You're modded, and you want to run a stocker? Not really fair, now is it?
I asked you yesterday if you're going to go to the Scottsdale Club's meet in December and video you, in your car, trapping at 123 mph plus. SO far, I've gotten only crickets in response.
Are you going?
You mean, who has faster reaction times than the Z06 owner. In that video, the Gallardo, which is less than one second slower than the Vette, jumped on it well before the Vette. And even then, the 'vette ran him down and passed him. The 'vette kept his window down while the lambo passenger had the presence of mind to roll his up, which helped the lambo make a better showing, thanks to the rather substantial drag force created by an open window at xxx slowing the 'vette down.
Actually, it's the other way around.
Video of CL65 versus 2006 Z06 from 60-165: CL65 wins by 3+ carlengths
Here's another one: a CL65 AMG versus a RUF Porsche Turbo. Read what they write at the end:
http://videos.streetfire.net/search/...259c97df9b.htm
In the video of an M5 running a Gallardo, twice, from rolling starts where both drivers get on it a bit closer at the same time, we see how the Gallardo loses once and barely edges out the second time a BMW M5, which is significantly slower than the '06 Z06.
You're modded, and you want to run a stocker? Not really fair, now is it?
I asked you yesterday if you're going to go to the Scottsdale Club's meet in December and video you, in your car, trapping at 123 mph plus. SO far, I've gotten only crickets in response.
Are you going?
You are such a ***** it makes me laugh. You post videos, of cars that are clearly modified, says so right in the video. Let me give you a clue, I DONT DENY THAT A LIGHTLY MODIFIED 65 can beat a Gallardo. Thats the Beauty of Turbos. Very easy to get 100-150 extra hp. What I do deny is that a stock S65 will beat a Gallardo.
I didnt notice your post on the Scottsdale day. Not a problem. Whether I run a 123 or not, I dont care, I can run a 115 in the 1/4 and I will still tell you I will beat a S65, because a stock S65 WILL NEVER RUN 123 in the 1/4 unless its downhill and off a cliff.
I dont care about your financial situation, your car situation etc, what you have is ZERO personal experience. What have YOU raced? What have YOU driven? What does YOUR car run? All you have is Joe Bob from Car and Driver drove this, and he said that, and an Sl65 that weighs 4500lbs ran this, so therefore a 600lb heavier S65 must run the same, because an E55 ran this in Car and Driver, and that in Road and Track. I could see you banging your wife, honey i read this in Playboy, so it must feel good for you to stick gerbils in my ***.
