Improviz

Lol...my nasty packrat habit has carried over to my surfing; whenever I come across something useful, into the bookmarks it goes!

I *am* in DFW.

SL BRABUS

Improviz....... You love to bring out the slowest test time of Brabus and the fastest test time of AMG....... you are not making a fair comparison.....a Brabus 5.8L will smoke your CLK 55 at any giving day...... test by Auto Sport mag, auto motor sport,ect..... 0-100km/h 4.9 sec......which mean 0-60 in 4.6sec....... Road & Track (Oct. 2000)Brabus 7.3 0-60 in 4.5 sec....... European Car (Dec.2000) Brabus 6.5L in 4.4 sec....... Oh yeah Book of Guinness name Brabus for the world fastest car........


http://www.fast-autos.net/vehicles/Brabus/2001/C_V8/
http://www.supercars.net/cars/1275.html

Improviz

Bull****. I posted test numbers from the publications that tested them. And the supposed "400 hp" Brabus 5.8L was beaten by the 342 horsepower CLK55 AMG.

If you have any actual test numbers for the 5.8L that are faster, let's see them. Because the site I linked to had no other tests for that car, or I'd have posted them.

More bull****. I posted the test by Sport Auto, and if there is one for this car in AMS, I haven't been able to find it. Do you have it? Let's see it.

The sites you linked to are junk. They do not cite any publications, only Brabus marketing material.

If you have test articles, scan 'em and post 'em. Becuase I found them, and they show that you're wrong.

I don't have this particular issue, but it is interesting that this test doesn't appear in any road test summary in R&T from late 2000 or 2001. Got a link? Got the article to scan? Usually they put what they test in these summaries.

Nothing about this on their website....scanned article to see? Link?

Not the Brabus we're talking about here, now is it? That's a twin turbo model, not a 5.8L or a 6.5L.

You said that the 6.5L would keep up with an E55k, and that it "would be a driver's race". Still more bull****.

I posted tests for this car from Sport Auto, one of the mags you list. Here it is again:
http://www.einszweidrei.de/mercedes/...e6501997-1.htm
Brabus E650 6.5L, claimed at 450 hp, in sport auto 8/1997
Gewicht 1762 kg
0 - 80 km/h 3,8 s
0 - 100 km/h 5,2 s
0 - 120 km/h 7,0 s
0 - 130 km/h - s
0 - 140 km/h 9,0 s
0 - 160 km/h 11,4 s
0 - 180 km/h 14,5 s
0 - 200 km/h 18,1 s

Now, here are the test results for an E55k, same mag:
http://www.einszweidrei.de/mercedes/e55amg2003-1.htm
Test in sport auto 01/2003
Gewicht 1944 kg
0 - 80 km/h 3,3 s
0 - 100 km/h 4,6 s
0 - 120 km/h 5,9 s
0 - 130 km/h - s
0 - 140 km/h 7,6 s
0 - 160 km/h 9,8 s
0 - 180 km/h 12,2 s
0 - 200 km/h 14,6 s

Sorry, but the E55 would give that a rather major ***-waxing. And the 6.5L Brabus would barely beat my CLK55 AMG (here's the CLK55 AMG tested by Auto Motor und Sport, one of the magazines you listed):
http://www.einszweidrei.de/mercedes/clk55amg1998-1.htm
Test in ams 25/1998
Gewicht 1591 kg
0 - 80 km/h 3,9 s
0 - 100 km/h 5,3 s
0 - 120 km/h 7,3 s
0 - 140 km/h 9,4 s
0 - 160 km/h 11,9 s
0 - 180 km/h 15,2 s
0 - 200 km/h 19,3 s

Got that? My CLK55 is closer to the Brabus 6.5L than the 6.5L is to the 5.5k.

And as to the 5.8L smoking my CLK55? Still more bull****:
http://www.einszweidrei.de/mercedes/...58st1998-1.htm
Supertest of "400 hp" Brabus 5.8L CLK in sport auto 12/1998
Gewicht 1592 kg
0 - 80 km/h 4,4 s
0 - 100 km/h 5,9 s
0 - 120 km/h 7,7 s
0 - 140 km/h 9,9 s
0 - 160 km/h 12,5 s
0 - 180 km/h 15,9 s
0 - 200 km/h 20,3 s

Hmm, a bit of basic subtraction shows you're full of it, dude. CLK55 AMG is faster to all speeds than the 5.8L Brabus CLK.

Oh, and so I picked such a fast test for the CLK55? Still more bull****. Here's a test from 2001 by Sport Auto:
http://www.einszweidrei.de/mercedes/...mgst2000-1.htm
Supertest in sport auto 05/2000
Gewicht 1593 kg
0 - 80 km/h 3,9 s
0 - 100 km/h 5,3 s
0 - 120 km/h 7,6 s
0 - 130 km/h - s
0 - 140 km/h 9,9 s
0 - 160 km/h 12,4 s
0 - 180 km/h 15,6 s
0 - 200 km/h 19,8 s

Still cooks the 5.8L, thank you very much.

Got any more bull**** you'd care to shovel? If you start accusing me of lying, you'd better put some facts on the table.

SL BRABUS

Improviz......why are you mad......?? cause a C Class Brabus 5.8 beat your CLK 55...... Auto motor sport (Nov. 2000) You good at looking up thing......I am too tired and I have better thing to do..... to the scan the information...... Well the information is out there ...... just keep looking for it....... Here the informaiton.....

Auto motor sport (Nov. 2000) about C class 5.8 Brabus

European Car (Dec.2000) Brabus 6.5L M119 motor

Road & Track (Oct. 2000)Brabus 7.3

just fact no bull crap.......if it bull crap I would not post it......

I guess you don't know much about Brabus........ Book of Guinness name brabus the world fastest 1996 E class, 1996 SUV, 1997 E class wagon, 2006 CLS rocket....

Brabus built the car fit your need...... For example you want fast 0-60 and 1/4 mile time your top speed will be reduce...... You want peak top speed your 0-60 and 1/4 mile will reduce......... Most of the Brabus car have traction problem due to the power....... If you have a chance to drive a real Brabus car you would take back all the Bull carp that you just say....... By the way AMG 63 did not live up to what it claims....... your post.......

https://mbworld.org/forums/clk55-amg-clk63-amg-w208-w209/171466-saw-clk63-test-motorweek-past-weekend.html

What up with the S65..??....it slow.......

https://mbworld.org/forums/showthrea...58#post1857458

I guess Brabus not the only one who overinflated horsepower claims.......


You know I am cool with you Improviz.........

SL BRABUS

Improviz....... you telling me your CLK 55 with 350 hp do 0 - 100 km/h time in 5.3sec...... which mean 0-60 time is 5.0 sec flat....... so tell me why a CLk 63 with over 475 hp do 0-60 time in 4.9sec....??... So give me some answer Improviz......... For example.......If I have a CLK 63 will you want to run me.....?? With this kind of time who ever got the jump will win....... right Improviz....... https://mbworld.org/forums/showthread.php?t=171466

Improviz

Again: if you have any one of these supposed articles scanned, let's see them.

As I pointed out: Road & Track's road test summaries from that period list no Brabus tests. They record the cars they test in these summaries. Not there.

No test of any Brabus on European Car's website either.

And here's a total listing of all of the Euro Mercedes tests recorded by the guy at einszwiedri.de.
http://www.einszweidrei.de/mercedes/list.htm

It lists NO Brabus tests in 2000.

Further, here's another site verifying that the CLK 5.8 Brabus gets its clock cleaned by the CLK55 AMG:
http://www.track-challenge.com/compa...ar1=30&Car2=27
Acceleration CLK55 CLK 5.8 Brabus
0 - 40 Km/h 1,8 s 2,1 s
0 - 60 Km/h 2,6 s 3,1 s
0 - 80 Km/h 3,9 s 4,4 s
0 - 100 Km/h 5,3 s 5,9 s
0 - 120 Km/h 7,6 s 7,7 s
0 - 140 Km/h 9,9 s 9,9 s
0 - 160 Km/h 12,4 s 12,5 s
0 - 180 Km/h 15,6 s 15,9 s
0 - 200 Km/h 19,8 s 20,3 s

Faster? Bull****. There's the data, dude.

You're the guy making the claims, and so far you've produced nothing BUT claims, not a shred of actual data. I'm not doing your homework for you. If you have a test which shows what you claim, post it, or else buzz off. I've provided data which shows that in all cases, the competing AMG blew the Brabus out of the water. If you have data to show otherwise, present it.

Talk is cheap.

AMG_55

i doubt a 55 (clk) will beat a 58 (brabus clk) but it will be close, brabus bases their v8 cars on 500's, the tranny is the same etc...
those critical shifts are worth some time.
i would put my $ on a 58 in the long run.

AndrewAZ

pics or ban

AMG_55

it was definitely not fake, complete brabus car.
maybe b/c the shove of the 55k wasnt there it didnt feel as fast, but i will put my $ on a 55k each and every time
to 60 it might be close but definitely after 100 the 55k will murder it, eat it and then **** it out

AMG_55

i personally ran 4.95 in my clk55 w/ 2 people and 19's

clk63 is a 4.5-4.6 car (traction limited)

Improviz

Your answer comes in the form of this month's Car & Driver, which I just received in the mail yesterday. The CLK63 ragtop was tested. Here are the numbers:
0-60: 4.2 seconds
5-60 rolling start: 4.4 seconds
0-100: 9.5 seconds
0-150: 22.2 seconds
1/4 mile: 12.5 @ 116

How's that?

Wrt the thread of mine you cited: yes, Motorweek tested the CLK63 a bit on the slow side, but this is often the case with their cars. But here's a hint: read the last post in the thread. Or, read this:

As to allenlambo's thread: EVO often gets slower times than other mags. Look at their test of the Gallardo vs. M5, for example: they ran over-13s 1/4 mile times in both cars, but both have been tested faster elsewhere.

And therein lies the problem: both of these publications have a long record of recording slower times (with EVO, it's usually rain-related; with Motorweek, it's bad 60' times as discussed in the thread you provided).

But these times aren't from those publications. They're from European publications, and the same publications show that the CLK55 was faster. Further, I posted two different CLK55 tests from two years apart, and both were virtually identical. Why not the Brabus? Only the Brabus cars were tested slower? Ridiculous.

Oh, and you are correct: while the CLK63 is definitely a lot quicker, the W208 CLK55 is a 5.0 or better 0-60 car. Here's Car & Driver's numbers for the car:





Now then: I've posted data which backs up each and every thing I've written. Where's your data?

AMG_55

imagine what the coupe can do with some wider ps2's
high 3's

SL BRABUS

ok you ask for it Improviz.......

Auto motor sport (Nov. 2000) about C class 5.8 Brabus



European Car (Dec.2000) Brabus 6.5L M119 motor



Road & Track (Oct. 2000)Brabus 7.3

SL BRABUS

Yeah......you right...... anything with more hp and tq will murder it.....

AndrewAZ

So far improv has only proved the E46 M3 is teh fastest.

Improviz

Which is why I've waxed each and every one I've ever raced.....

Fact is that the M has 262 lb-ft of torque which occurs at 4900 rpm, a limited slip, 255mm width rear tires, and a manual, while the CLK55 has 376 lb ft of torque which occurs at 3,000 rpm, no limited slip, and 245mm width rear tires.

Result: the M3 is easier to get out of the hole without excessive spin.

But did you look at the rolling-start 5-60 numbers, andy? Here's a hint: they're identical. If the M3 overpowered the CLK, they would not be identical.

Improviz

....I fail to see how the test of a C-Class Brabus or of a 7.3L SL class with 600 rated hp establishes the first claim you made earlier, which is that the Brabus 6.5L E Class could hang with an E55k car.

If you can provide a test of one of these, let's see it.

And while it true that the C 5.8 is faster than the CLK 5.8 Brabus they tested (same magazine), it still doesn't prove that the CLK 5.8 Brabus will beat a CLK55; after all, I posted two tests of the CLK55, and both were faster than the CLK 5.8 test I also provided.

Further, the European Car article you listed has no acceleration numbers in it. Is this supposed to prove something, other than the fact that Brabus built such a car?? Where are the numbers you said were in there??

Also, given the discrepancies we've seen from magazine to magazine, assuming you can produce the numbers for the CLK 5.8, do you have the numbers that EC got for the CLK55?

Btw, could you post the second page of that Road & Track article? I'd like to see where they actually put the instrumented test data. Clearly you have it; please post it. I'd like to see what that car trapped in the 1/4 mile and how much it weighed. Because with 600 horsepower at about 4200 pounds (guesstimate), it should be trapping at about 122 mph.

I'd also be interested in comparing how this 600 horsepower car does in comparison to the newer SL600s, which are rated at 493 horsepower

Because, after all, my claim was, and still is, that Brabus drastically overrates the power of these cars. And the data I produced shows that. Nothing you've shown disproves this,

You claimed that the 6.5L E Class could hang with an E55k. Nothing you've shown yet proves this. You claimed that it was absurd to think a CLK55 could hit 60 in 5.0 seconds. I provided a Car & Driver test where it did just that.

You produced numbers for the 7.3L SL, which supposedly produced 599 horsepower, which stated the car could run 0-60 in 4.5 (again: please post the actual road test results, which I'm hoping are on the next page of the article).

But here are the test results for an SL73 AMG, which was rated at 525 horsepower, 75 fewer than the Brabus:
http://www.einszweidrei.de/mercedes/amgsl731999-1.htm
Test in ams 01/1999
Gewicht 1951 kg
0 - 80 km/h 3,5 s
0 - 100 km/h 4,8 s
0 - 120 km/h - s
0 - 140 km/h 7,9 s
0 - 160 km/h - s
0 - 180 km/h 12,1 s
0 - 200 km/h 15,0 s

4.8s 0-100 km/h is about 4.5 0-60. So again, we see: a Brabus car with far more rated horsepower than an AMG fails to beat the AMG.

Now, admittedly, this is only 0-60, which is why I'd like to see the other page of that R&T test.

But again: I posted several examples above where Brabus cars with *far* more rated horsepower than AMG cars failed to meet, let alone beat, the AMG cars' performance.

If you want to ignore this, fine. But nothing you've provided shows why we should ignore it. The preponderance of the evidence clearly points to these cars' power being overstated.

Carl Lassiter

W for Improviz

Improviz

OK, SLBrabus: let's have a look at the actual numbers for some Brabus cars vs. stock AMG cars, where the Brabus cars are rated with lots more hp than the AMGs, shall we?

Three tests of stock SL600, rated at 500 horsepower:
http://www.einszweidrei.de/mercedes/sl6002003-1.htm
Test in sport auto 4/2003
Gewicht 2001 kg
0 - 80 km/h 3,5 s
0 - 100 km/h 4,6 s
0 - 120 km/h 5,9 s
0 - 140 km/h 7,6 s
0 - 160 km/h 9,2 s
0 - 180 km/h 11,4 s
0 - 200 km/h 13,9 s

http://www.einszweidrei.de/mercedes/sl60003-2.htm
Test in Auto Bild 18/2003
Gewicht 2000 kg
0 - 80 km/h - s
0 - 100 km/h 4,6 s
0 - 120 km/h - s
0 - 140 km/h - s
0 - 160 km/h - s
0 - 180 km/h - s
0 - 200 km/h 14,1 s

http://www.einszweidrei.de/mercedes/sl60003-3.htm
Test in ams spezial 08/2003
Gewicht 1998 kg
0 - 80 km/h 3,0 s
0 - 100 km/h 4,1 s
0 - 120 km/h 5,4 s
0 - 130 km/h 6,2 s
0 - 140 km/h 6,9 s
0 - 160 km/h 8,9 s
0 - 180 km/h 10,8 s
0 - 200 km/h 13,5 s

Two tests of Brabus SL 6.3, rated by Brabus at 640 horsepower:
http://www.einszweidrei.de/mercedes/...sv122003-2.htm
Nardo-Test in ams 24/2003
Gewicht 2040 kg
0 - 80 km/h - s
0 - 100 km/h 4,5 s
0 - 120 km/h - s
0 - 130 km/h - s
0 - 140 km/h - s
0 - 160 km/h - s
0 - 180 km/h - s
0 - 200 km/h 13,9 s

http://www.einszweidrei.de/mercedes/...sv122003-1.htm
Test in sport auto 8/2003
Gewicht 2040 kg
0 - 80 km/h - s
0 - 100 km/h 4,3 s
0 - 120 km/h - s
0 - 130 km/h - s
0 - 140 km/h - s
0 - 160 km/h - s
0 - 180 km/h - s
0 - 200 km/h 12,9 s

Result:
0-100 km/h: Stock SL600 is fastest, beats fastest Brabus by 0.2 seconds.
0-200 km/h: Brabus is fastest, beats fastest stock by 0.6 seconds.

Average times for Stock vs. Brabus:
Speed Stock Brabus
0-100: 4,4s 4,4s
0-200: 13,8s 13.4s

So, a supposed gain of 140 hp picks you up no net gain to 100 km/h, and a whopping 0.4s to 200? Yeah, right.


Here's another:
Test of AMG 500E, rated at 374 horsepower:
http://www.einszweidrei.de/mercedes/amg500e601992-1.htm
Test in ams 19/1992
Gewicht 1805 kg
0 - 96 km/h 4,5 s
0 - 100 km/h 5,9 s
0 - 120 km/h 7,9 s
0 - 130 km/h - s
0 - 140 km/h 10,4 s
0 - 160 km/h 13,1 s
0 - 180 km/h 16,6 s
0 - 200 km/h 21,7 s

Test of Brabus 500E 6.0, rated at 408 horsepower:
http://www.einszweidrei.de/mercedes/bra500e601992-1.htm
Test in sport auto 07/1992
Gewicht 1789 kg
0 - 80 km/h 4,4 s
0 - 100 km/h 5,9 s
0 - 120 km/h 7,9 s
0 - 130 km/h - s
0 - 140 km/h 10,2 s
0 - 160 km/h 13,2 s
0 - 180 km/h 16,9 s
0 - 200 km/h 21,9 s

Test of Brabus 400E 6.0, rated at 408 horsepower:
http://www.einszweidrei.de/mercedes/bra4001993-1.htm
Test in sport auto 6/1993
Gewicht 1743 kg
0 - 80 km/h 4,3 s
0 - 100 km/h 5,8 s
0 - 120 km/h 7,8 s
0 - 130 km/h - s
0 - 140 km/h 10,2 s
0 - 160 km/h 13,0 s
0 - 180 km/h 16,8 s
0 - 200 km/h 22,5 s

So, we have three tests. Two Brabus cars rated at 34 more horsepower (nearly 10% more) than the AMG. Two Brabus cars which are lighter than the AMG. And yet the AMG is faster than either one.

Moving right along:
As posted before, here's a test of the Brabus-E V12 7.3 W210 from 1996, which was supposedly putting out 582 horsepower:
http://www.einszweidrei.de/mercedes/braev12731996-1.htm
Test in sport auto 10/1996
Gewicht 1850 kg
0 - 80 km/h 3,6 s
0 - 100 km/h 4,9 s
0 - 120 km/h 6,4 s
0 - 130 km/h - s
0 - 140 km/h 8,3 s
0 - 160 km/h 10,4 s
0 - 180 km/h 13,0 s
0 - 200 km/h 16,0 s

Compare this to the test by the same magazine of the E55, which is rated at 476 horsepower:
http://www.einszweidrei.de/mercedes/e55amg2003-1.htm
Test in sport auto 01/2003
Gewicht 1944 kg
0 - 80 km/h 3,3 s
0 - 100 km/h 4,6 s
0 - 120 km/h 5,9 s
0 - 130 km/h - s
0 - 140 km/h 7,6 s
0 - 160 km/h 9,8 s
0 - 180 km/h 12,2 s
0 - 200 km/h 14,6 s

So...the Brabus car is supposedly putting out 100 more horsepower, weighs 100 Kg/200 pounds, which is the same as giving it another 20 hp...so now we're at 120 more. And yet the E55k beats it to 200 by nearly 3 seconds??

Come on. This thing isn't putting out anywhere *near* 582 horsepower. More like in the high 400s.

Oh, and as to the 5.8L/6.0L motor: here's a test of a C Class with this motor that you missed:
http://www.einszweidrei.de/mercedes/bracv81995-1.htm
Test of C Class 5.8L Brabus, rated at 408 hp, in ams 19/1995
Gewicht 1605 kg
0 - 80 km/h 4,3 s
0 - 100 km/h 5,7 s
0 - 120 km/h 7,7 s
0 - 130 km/h - s
0 - 140 km/h 9,9 s
0 - 160 km/h 12,4 s
0 - 180 km/h 15,8 s
0 - 200 km/h 20,4 s

The Brabus CLK 5.8 test (again rated at 400 hp) I posted before:
http://www.einszweidrei.de/mercedes/...58st1998-1.htm
Supertest in sport auto 12/1998
Gewicht 1592 kg
0 - 80 km/h 4,4 s
0 - 100 km/h 5,9 s
0 - 120 km/h 7,7 s
0 - 140 km/h 9,9 s
0 - 160 km/h 12,5 s
0 - 180 km/h 15,9 s
0 - 200 km/h 20,3 s

The test of the C Class 5.8L you posted earlier:
Weight: 1657 Kg
0 - 80 km/h 3,7 s
0 - 100 km/h 4,9 s
0 - 120 km/h 6,6 s
0 - 160 km/h 10,6 s
0 - 180 km/h 13,6 s
0 - 200 km/h 17,1 s

The CLK55 AMG tests I posted:
http://www.einszweidrei.de/mercedes/...mgst2000-1.htm
Supertest in sport auto 05/2000
Gewicht 1593 kg
0 - 80 km/h 3,9 s
0 - 100 km/h 5,3 s
0 - 120 km/h 7,6 s
0 - 130 km/h - s
0 - 140 km/h 9,9 s
0 - 160 km/h 12,4 s
0 - 180 km/h 15,6 s
0 - 200 km/h 19,8 s

http://www.einszweidrei.de/mercedes/clk55amg1998-1.htm
Test in ams 25/1998
Gewicht 1591 kg
0 - 80 km/h 3,9 s
0 - 100 km/h 5,3 s
0 - 120 km/h 7,3 s
0 - 140 km/h 9,4 s
0 - 160 km/h 11,9 s
0 - 180 km/h 15,2 s
0 - 200 km/h 19,3 s

So, pick one: of the three Brabus cars tested, *one* ran faster than either CLK55 AMG. Meaning that one Brabus out of three was faster than either of the CLK55 AMGs tested, while two out of three were slower.

With 50 more rated horsepower.

And this constitutes a win for you?

Hmmmmm.....

So, there you have it: by far, the majority of tests show the stock AMG cars with far less rated horsepower to be faster, both down low *and* up high, than the Brabus cars.

If this doesn't prove to you that there is, as I maintained, a history of Brabus cars not producing their rated power, I'm afraid that nothing will.

AndrewAZ

I sure hope your CLK55 is a lot faster than a CLK430. I had a run in on the freeway with one 65-90mph run. Lets just say all full power in 6th gear kept us even and when I downshifted to 5th I would easily pull away. If I was in a real racing mood I would of been in 3rd gear and blow the heck out of him.

Hey remember its better to make torque up top than down low.

I really dont care about the CLK55 anyways especially since it costs $15-20k more than an M3. And all it can do is out drag it and not to mention it does not come with an LSD which is a rip off for that price. Not to mention its just basically a CLK500 with a bigger motor. The M3 uses a different build method than a normal 3 series.

Improviz

The CLK430s ran 0-60 in 6.2, 1/4 in the mid 14s in the 98-99 mph range, so I'm wondering if you ran into a rebadge....an M3 in 6th at 65 should get walked pretty good by a CLK430 at full throttle. NOw, in the proper gear you'd pull him pretty hard, but that's a lot ot gearing to be giving up.

It's actually better to make it throughout the rev range....but I was referring specifically to launching, where making max torque at higher rpms does allow you to launch more agressively. With us, it's kind of an on/off switch, although with practice, you can get it out of the hole pretty good.

IYes, and it also has a six cylinder. If it'd had an eight, I'd have been more interested.

Out handle a CLK55? Not as cut and dried as all that. Afaik, the CLK55 pulled higher skidpad, but M3 pulled higher slalom. M3 will definitely pull better track numbers, thanks to its 4,900 rpm torque peak, limited slip which allow it to get on the power sooner in corners without the inside wheel breaking loose, along with its choice of more gears.

In terms of outright grip, though the two are pretty equal, and who takes corners at 10/10 on the street anyway??

But if track numbers are your number one priority, the M3 is a pretty poor choice for the money. A Lotus Exige, at 1600 pounds lighter, will handle far better than the M3 on any short track, the brakes and tires will be subjected to less stress and will thus hold out for longer, etc...it also lapped the short track Hockenheim a full second faster than the E46, so it's clearly more of a track star.

Further, for that money you could get a C5 Z06, which is 300 pounds lighter than the M3, has 72 more horsepower, and will absolutely anhillate an M3 on any track and in straightline, so the "superior track car" argument is really not very credible.

So then it all boils down to personal preference, and subjective arguments are lame. I spent time driving both cars before I got the CLK55, and Ican assure you that if I'd have preferred the M3, it, not the CLK55, would now be gracing my garage.

Enjoy your M as I enjoy my CLK. Both are great cars.

SL BRABUS

Improviz......I waste enough time with you........ Instead of all the ........ Let take it to the LACR drag track at Palmdale....... Your CLK55 (VS) my overinflated horsepower Brabus... .. This Wed. Dec. 29,2006......Are you up for the challenge. ... By the data that you post you should not have any problem beating my Brabus.... ... Here the information to the drag track....... I am done here till we take it to the track..... ...
http://www.lacr.net/index.html

amgdriven

I think you are asking Improviz to drive 800 miles to race you. Right?
Would you drive 800 miles to race someone?

Would a sane man travel 800 miles--

-to get laid by a supermodel?=yes
-to race another DUDE in a car?=no

HLG600

I doubt an E55 will "annihaliate" a W210 Brabus EV12. In fact, above 100 mph, the Brabus would outrun it. The car is limited to 205 mph, and takes a scant 11 seconds to reach 125 mph from standstill. Off the line, the supercharged motor will have the instant low end grunt for some drag strip fun. But once you change the field from drag strip to highway pulls, then gentlemen, the E55 will have trouble keeping up.

Data Source: Automobile Magazine, May 1997

Since there really isn't much data for the Brabus cars outside of older magazines, you should take your car to the strip SL Brabus, and post the drag times, albeit the car is engineered for autobahn driving as opposed to drag racing. There is no power difference (according to Brabus) between a 500 tuned to 5.8 and a 55 tuned to 5.8 - more horsepower in same body equates to a lower speed? Doesn't make much sense. However, some data would be very helpful. Anyone have a CLK 5.8?

HLG

Improviz

Well, the data I got for both cars, from the same publication, simply doesn't support this. As posted before, here's a test of the Brabus-E V12 7.3 W210 from 1996, which was supposedly putting out 582 horsepower:
Test in sport auto 10/1996
Gewicht 1850 kg
0 - 80 km/h 3,6 s
0 - 100 km/h 4,9 s
0 - 120 km/h 6,4 s
0 - 130 km/h - s
0 - 140 km/h 8,3 s
0 - 160 km/h 10,4 s
0 - 180 km/h 13,0 s
0 - 200 km/h 16,0 s

Compare this to the test by the same magazine of the E55, which is rated at 476 horsepower:
http://www.einszweidrei.de/mercedes/e55amg2003-1.htm
Test in sport auto 01/2003
Gewicht 1944 kg
0 - 80 km/h 3,3 s
0 - 100 km/h 4,6 s
0 - 120 km/h 5,9 s
0 - 130 km/h - s
0 - 140 km/h 7,6 s
0 - 160 km/h 9,8 s
0 - 180 km/h 12,2 s
0 - 200 km/h 14,6 s

The data show that while the cars were within 0.3 seconds to 100 km/h, by 200 km/h (125 mph), the gap is up to 1.4 seconds, indicating that as speeds rise, the distance between the cars is greater, not lessor. Also, the 100-200 split was 11.1 seconds for the Brabus-E V12 7.3 W210, while in the E55k it was 10.0. The 160-200 split in the Brabus was 5.6, while in the AMG it was 4.8. The 180-200 split in the Brabus was 3.0s, while in the AMG it was 2.4.

Anyway, the E55 unlimited hits 200 or thereabouts...check these out, from unlimited E55s: