Ran with an SL600
11-04-2006, 03:27 PM
#51
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Arizona
Posts: 2,767
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BMW FTW
Actually, I chose this example because the only reason the S4 *can* hang with the M3 from a dig is because its AWD enables a much shorter 60' time. This is the same when comparing the M3 to the SL600; the M3's 0-30 time is 1.7 seconds. The SL600's is 2.2. This guarantees that the M is getting a 60' time around a half second better than the SL600, which translates to about a full second in the 1/4 mile.
Btw, I did some digging through my old car mags, and found the following. In May 2001, Car & Driver tested an S600. This had the same motor, drivetrain, engine etc. as the SL600 we're discussing here, and also weighed 4439 pounds, about the same as an SL600.
It ran 0-60 in 5.4, but just as with the others we've seen, once rolling it picked up steam and ran a 13.7 @ 103 1/4 mile. This is only 2-3 mph less than an M3, and is 2-3 mph more than a 350Z.
Two other interesting figures are the car's 30-50 and 50-70 passing times. They are:
30-50: 3.0
50-70: 3.2
I was actually surprised, as these compare pretty favorably to the CLK55, which got:
30-50: 2.7
50-70: 3.1
Which again lends credence to that V12 pulling hard up high, as the gap is 0.3 seconds 30-50, but only 0.1 50-70. And these are pretty good times: the RS6, in fact, ran 2.4/3.1 respectively. Quite an eye-opener.
Also, I checked again, and the M3 they tested against the CLK55 ran 0-150 in 34.5 seconds. The test Brabus has it at 34.1.
So it seems that the faster you get, the harder that thing pulls. I think a properly-run rolling start race where both cars were in the proper gear (if the SL driver just stomps it and waits for the car to kick down, he's toast) at the honk would be pretty close....but driver reaction time is going to be a big factor here as well. I'd like to see it if it ever goes down.
Btw, I did some digging through my old car mags, and found the following. In May 2001, Car & Driver tested an S600. This had the same motor, drivetrain, engine etc. as the SL600 we're discussing here, and also weighed 4439 pounds, about the same as an SL600.
It ran 0-60 in 5.4, but just as with the others we've seen, once rolling it picked up steam and ran a 13.7 @ 103 1/4 mile. This is only 2-3 mph less than an M3, and is 2-3 mph more than a 350Z.
Two other interesting figures are the car's 30-50 and 50-70 passing times. They are:
30-50: 3.0
50-70: 3.2
I was actually surprised, as these compare pretty favorably to the CLK55, which got:
30-50: 2.7
50-70: 3.1
Which again lends credence to that V12 pulling hard up high, as the gap is 0.3 seconds 30-50, but only 0.1 50-70. And these are pretty good times: the RS6, in fact, ran 2.4/3.1 respectively. Quite an eye-opener.
Also, I checked again, and the M3 they tested against the CLK55 ran 0-150 in 34.5 seconds. The test Brabus has it at 34.1.
So it seems that the faster you get, the harder that thing pulls. I think a properly-run rolling start race where both cars were in the proper gear (if the SL driver just stomps it and waits for the car to kick down, he's toast) at the honk would be pretty close....but driver reaction time is going to be a big factor here as well. I'd like to see it if it ever goes down.
The elasticity times of the SL600 vs CLK just might be affected by gear changes.
Two other interesting figures are the car's 30-50 and 50-70 passing times. They are:
30-50: 3.0
50-70: 3.2
I was actually surprised, as these compare pretty favorably to the CLK55, which got:
30-50: 2.7
50-70: 3.1
Again I found more M3 numbers for you...
30-50 mph: 1.9 sec.<<<< This is really fast since the M3 is in its sweet spot ready to go.
50-70 mph: 2.7 sec.
And the magazine that tested this car only got a 5.4 0-60.
03 audi S4 for comparison same magazine it was a head to head test.
30-50 mph: 2.4 sec.
50-70 mph: 3.0 sec.
They got a 0-60 of 5.6 seconds for the S4 so again my guess bad test drivers, but a bad driver should not matter for elasticity times since you leave the car in 1 gear and floor it in the M3's case you would be in 2nd gear for the 30-50 run and for the 50-70 run you have to make a 2-3 gear change which of course slows down the time a bit.
Again I found someone here in arizona with a white SL600 that has AMG package and I will try and get a video posted I am trying to work out a time that is good for both of us.
But again if instead the poster here said I lost to an Sl600 in my C55 AMG people would be like BS no way an Sl600 could lose to a C55 amg right... But as soon as you say M3 ow crap M3s are the slowest thing they cant accelerate worth crap can they. Again not only is the M3 lighter it has a better power to weight ratio and not to mention more gears.
Last edited by AndrewAZ; 11-04-2006 at 03:32 PM.
11-04-2006, 04:18 PM
#52
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,679
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CLS55 AMG
The elasticity times of the SL600 vs CLK just might be affected by gear changes.
Again I found more M3 numbers for you...
30-50 mph: 1.9 sec.<<<< This is really fast since the M3 is in its sweet spot ready to go.
50-70 mph: 2.7 sec.
And the magazine that tested this car only got a 5.4 0-60.
03 audi S4 for comparison same magazine it was a head to head test.
30-50 mph: 2.4 sec.
50-70 mph: 3.0 sec.
They got a 0-60 of 5.6 seconds for the S4 so again my guess bad test drivers, but a bad driver should not matter for elasticity times since you leave the car in 1 gear and floor it in the M3's case you would be in 2nd gear for the 30-50 run and for the 50-70 run you have to make a 2-3 gear change which of course slows down the time a bit.
Again I found more M3 numbers for you...
30-50 mph: 1.9 sec.<<<< This is really fast since the M3 is in its sweet spot ready to go.
50-70 mph: 2.7 sec.
And the magazine that tested this car only got a 5.4 0-60.
03 audi S4 for comparison same magazine it was a head to head test.
30-50 mph: 2.4 sec.
50-70 mph: 3.0 sec.
They got a 0-60 of 5.6 seconds for the S4 so again my guess bad test drivers, but a bad driver should not matter for elasticity times since you leave the car in 1 gear and floor it in the M3's case you would be in 2nd gear for the 30-50 run and for the 50-70 run you have to make a 2-3 gear change which of course slows down the time a bit.
Anyway, point is that with times (including kickdown) so close in Benzes (which btw share the same transmission, so kickdown time itself should be similar), and with the CLK55 in my experience faster than the M3 from a roll, I think the SL would probably give the M3 a decent race rolling-start.
I've pulled faster cars and been pulled by slower cars in such cases.
Now, if both guys don't screw up, are in gear, and nail it at exactly the same time, I'd expect the M to walk him, by several carlengths--but *not* by buslengths.
Anyway, I'm not arguing that the SL would win, only that it'd be closer than you think. Buslengths to me is a run, not a walk, and when I ran a CL600 from xx-xxx I gave him a good walk, but definitely not a run. But having also run M3s at these same speed, I can definitely say they're faster: I didn't beat them by as many lengths as I beat him!
11-04-2006, 08:27 PM
#53
MBWorld Fanatic!
Just because I keep my username on the autolog feature doesn't mean I stay around all day waiting for a response...lol 
I quoted the 13.6 time because it was documented and was achieved with stock wheels/tires with quite some ease, unlike the M3, which is very easy to screw up the acceleration - speaking from your perspective, since I have never had the opportunity to test one out.
Anyway, I made my point, read some cool info on the SL and M3 (thanks for the slip and data pcviewer and improviz), and am keeping things friendly, as they should be. Who knows, maybe I'll run into an M3 on the highway someday.
Cheers
I quoted the 13.6 time because it was documented and was achieved with stock wheels/tires with quite some ease, unlike the M3, which is very easy to screw up the acceleration - speaking from your perspective, since I have never had the opportunity to test one out.
Anyway, I made my point, read some cool info on the SL and M3 (thanks for the slip and data pcviewer and improviz), and am keeping things friendly, as they should be. Who knows, maybe I'll run into an M3 on the highway someday.
Cheers
Last edited by HLG600; 11-04-2006 at 08:36 PM.
