HLG600

The GT3 is a fine-tuned precision instrment, lighter and more aerodynamic that the cumbersome W210. That is why I defend Brabus - to think that a decade ago, a humble 4DR family sedan was turned into a 205+ mph autobahn hauler. Frankly, I find that impressive.

Thank you for the kind words, likewise to you, hope all is well!

Improviz

I'm not introducing a whole new set of cars, dude....I've been concentrating on Brabus *as a whole* since the beginning of this debate; it is YOU who has been relentlessly trying to restrict the discussion to this one, and only this one, car, which I might point out is rather intellectually dishonest of you.

Me: Brabus overrates their horsepower. Here are some examples.

You: What about the EV12?

Me: Already addressed it. It is outaccelerated by a stock 211 E55, with over 100 less rated horsepower. What about the other examples?

You: (still ignoring other examples, still ignoring acceleration data)...um...err...well, you should *call* Brabus!

Me: why should I call them when I've got test results that show the AMG cars are faster with far fewer rated horsepower? You know, these examples you keep ignoring?

You: (still ignoring other examples, still ignoring acceleration comparisons)...um...err...well, the EV12 will go 205 mph, and I read somewhere that you need 500 horsepower to go 185 mph!

Me: wrong. that 500 figure is from a different car with poorer aerodynamics. here's the actual number of horsepower you'd need in a 210 E Class. Now could you address those other examples? Could you answer these questions?

You: dodge dodge dodge evade evade evade spin spin spin rhetoric rhetoric rhetoric dogma dogma dogma

Are you reading another thread or something?? YOU jumped into the middle of an argument that I was having with your Special Friend SL Brabus, which was centered around the fact that Brabus underrates their cars.

In fact, if you'd bother to go back and read my first post wrt this matter, you'd see that I discussed first the Brabus 5.8 CLK, and then the E V12, which as I pointed out accurately did not manage to accelerate as briskly as a stock W211 E55, *despite* being rated at over 100 more horsepower--a fact you still refuse to admit, let alone discuss, as you have from the point you hopped in. In my follow-up to your Dear Friend SL Brabus, I listed even more examples, which again you have ignored, in typical dogmatic fashion. Why deal with those nasty li'l ol' facts when you've got beliefs?

I don't care what you doubt. The numbers show it. If you've got some sort of metrics to prove it, provide them. You might also try explaining how it is possible for a 586 horsepower car to get soundly beaten by a 469 horsepower car while you're at it, which, again, you've been dodging for the better part of this thread.

Quit ducking and answer: how is it possible that so many of these Brabus cars are slower than AMG cars which have far less rated horsepower?

You can't answer, because you know the facts show you're wrong, and so you jump from lame argument to lame argument like a ritalin-dosed kid on a pogo stick. A textbook example of intellectual dishonesty and cowardice.

Typical debate technique of a loser: get crushed on the points, simply step aside and erect a new strawman.

Your last point was that an E Class would need 500 horsepower to hit 185. I showed that with 490, it could hit 205. BUZZ! Thanks for playin'!!

And now you go from claiming that the car *hit* 205 to claiming that it was limited to 205?? Proof of claim??

And as I stated: I find the fact that you do not find it offensive that he lied to you, and commited fraud and forgery to do it, to be indicative of rather poor judgement on your part. Perhaps honesty and character do not matter to you, a sad thing if true.

So, here are a few more questions for you: do you think that he did anything whatsoever wrong? Is forging a timeslip good behavior? Is trying to BS all of the members of this forum by fabricating a kill story and backing it up with a forged timeslip admirable behavior?

I claimed it was producing in the high 400 range, and you mocked this claim. Now that I've produced numbers to show that you were absolutely, flat-out, totally wrong, what do you do? Admit that I was right, and you were wrong? Oh, heavens no; we can't have that, so let's just forget that earlier point and move on, hoping no one will notice. So now you're reduced to asking rhetorical questions?

Give me a break.

Which indicates a rather strong masochistic streak, methinks.

Improviz

There you go again, with your careful fact-checking. Drag coefficient for both cars is the same, 0.29.

And gee, funny that just a few moments ago, you were using the Bugatti Veyron, which weighs in at around 4400 pounds, to determine the horsepower needed for a 3700 pound W210 E Class to hit 185 mph...but I guess you always have kind of tailored your facts to suit your arguments.

HLG600

Your calculations are actually getting me interested in physics. Ha, who would have thought?

However, there is an error in your calculation. The EV12 weighs closer to 4100 lbs, not the 3800 you plugged into your equation. Also, in the orginal article from 1997, two drivers were in the vehicle as it approached its limited 205 mph. The average adult male weighs 190 lbs. So, you fell short about 680 lbs of the real weight at the time of that test. Plug in 4480 lbs into your formula.

Improviz

Well, you might actually try comprehending physics instead of just getting an interest in them. Drag force, not mass, is the dominant factor to be overcome at those speeds, as ye shall soon see.

The car weighs 4070 pounds (from the einsdrei link earlier), and with 380 pounds of extra weight, it comes to 4450 pounds. The only thing this changes is the rolling resistance (guess you didn't bother to read that link, eh sparky?), which is now .013*4450 = 57.85.

So then required bhp to go 205 mph is (686 + 57.85)*205/375...which raises the total up from my previous calculation from 402 rear wheel horsepower to: (drumroll, please)....


....it's coming...


.....any moment now....


......the anticipation is killing you now, isn't it???......


.....one final pause for dramatic, oozing with sarcasm effect:......

TA-DAAAH!!!!

407 rear wheel horsepower!!

That's right, sparky: you picked up a whopping five horsepower!

Unfortunately, this still puts crank at 496, which is, I believe, yes, let me check, yes, I'm pretty sure that it is, in fact, in the high 400's, as I estimated previously.

So, how do ya like *them* apples, Mr. Wannabe Einstein? Inspector Gadget just forked you with Physics, again!!



Hint: next time plug and chug before triumphantly throwing a big fat nothing up in someone's face and making yourself look silly.

Second hint: have you ever heard of the First Rule of Holes? If not, now might be a good time for a google search!

HLG600

Oh no! Inspector Gadget and physics, my kryptonite!

I'll tell you what. Maybe tomorrow, if I find some time, I'll give Brabus a call, and ask them for a engine dyno.

ellery

good point... hell, even I have though of posing. I'm thinking of adding a "0" to the C32 on my car.

Improviz

Great idea! While you're at it, call up Joe Weider and ask him if his Super Monster Muscle Mass powder will turn a 98 pound weakling into Lou Ferrigno...I'm sure he'll answer in the affirmative, and have nice pics to prove it!

And then, you can call up a distributor of Ginko Biloba and ask them to provide you with proof that Ginko improves brain function and makes you smarter....I'm sure that they, too, will have it.

Or, call up SnakeOilCosmetics and ask them if their Anti-Aging Cream really *does* eliminate sunspots, wrinkles, and stop aging. I'm sure they've got company-funded tests to show it!!

And if anyone dares to present you with any scientifically conducted tests which call these claims to doubt, why you just ignore them and their findings with the tenacity and determination with which you gleefully ignore each and every test showing that AMGs with far less rated horsepower to be faster than Brabus cars.

For example, here's a new one I just found: EVO magazine.
http://www.evo.co.uk/news/evonews/33...us_record.html
Gee, this gels with the results that Auto Motor und Sport got: somehow, both magazines tested the 469 horsepower W211 E55 to be faster than the 574 horsepower Brabus. This despite the fact that the E55 is heavier, and has over 100 fewer rated horsepower!! That's two sets of tests, by two world-class mags, that show this!!

But why listen to this when we can call Brabus and get the *real* truth? Who needs real-world data when we can live in fantasy land?

Man....something tells me that people are going to make a lot of easy money off of you, dude....you are waaaaay too gullible.

HLG600

Gullible? Dude, this is entertainment for me. Everytime you rant on and on, I cannot help but shake my head with a smirk on my face.

You know what? Forget it. I won't call Brabus. Even if I post a motor dyno graph proving you wrong, it still wont be enough for you, who would spend the next 24 hours attempting to prove it fradulent. I have procrastinated enough tonight, yet learned a valuable lesson, and that is not waste this much time on an internet argument. Hold up, I knew that, and breaking my own rule proved to be wrong. I have already began to sway on the borderline obsessive level you seem to passionetely reside on. I tried arguing physics, and lost. I have never taken a physics course, yet tried anyway, oh well. Since it will not apply to my career goals in life, I am not too consumed by that. I underestimated you Improviz. However, I feel you might have a problem - 5 pg replies...wow. Ah, the cost of being MBWorld's very own obsessive.

Improviz

"Rant" being defined in the Dictionary of HLG600 as "Proving me wrong and assaulting my beliefs with facts."

Were the multiple magazine tests I posted enough for you? You don't even have the intellectual honesty to acknowledge their existance, let alone explain how the results show what they show if what Brabus claims about their horsepower is true.

You want simple physics: force=mass*acceleration. Therefore, acceleration=force/mass. If mass is relatively equal, i.e., say, a 4070 pound Brabus E V12 and a 4150 pound W211 E55 AMG, then whichever vehicle has the greater force will have the greater acceleration, absent some huge advantage like drag radials (nope), gearing (same), etc...

But the resuts are clear: two different publications tested both cars. Both publications found the 469 horsepower E55 to be faster than the Brabus. The result is dictated by physics: the E55 was producing more power.

Now, if you've been reading these forums for some time, you know that the 469 rating on the E55s is ridiculously low, and that they're producing more like 520-530 crank. The Brabus, producing more like 475-490 hp in stock form by my estimation, is simply not as powerful.

Now, wtf is the problem with admitting this, exactly?? Even with the highballing, it was still damn impressive.

What was it you said about not being gullible?? You are prepared to put more stock in a dyno, provided to you by a company who has a vested financial interest in the matter, than in independently conducted third party tests!

WTF do you call this if not gullible?

Particularly when your opponent actually knows what he's talking about, and has facts and figures to support his argument, and shoots your arguments full of holes.

Furthermore, for you to even claim that you *were* arguing is kind of a stretch, given that your technique was to simply ignore each and every data point that doesn't support your preconceived ideas, change your argument, and press on. Go back and see how many points of mine you refused to address, and then see how many of yours that I failed to address. Faith-based arguments don't work very well where there are concrete facts to be presented.

I would also note that, for a college-age male, you certainly have a rather alarming resistance to persuasion via factual presentation. The facts show what they show, but you spent an awful time trying to avoid them for some reason.

My only concern here is facts, and frankly, were it not for SL Brabus' being such a jerk in the first place and your rather odd after-the-fact defense of him, I wouldn't even have bothered. And *if* the data unfailingly showed Brabus' stuff to perform at the level their horsepower ratings would indicate, a) I would have no data to present, and b) I would have Brabus mods on my CLK55.

1985mb

...you need to take a break.

Most of us at MBW, to varying degrees, like to debate and call out BS if they see it. You did a good job busting SL Brabus and his fake timeslip. Take those laurels and walk away.

Getting into an argument with HLG600 was needless, IMHO. Were you just itching for another internet fight, after having owned SL Brabus and having nothing else to do?

From what I've seen at MBW (and I don't know him personally), HLG is one of the "good guys" here. I might have read this thread quickly, but in general he was relatively polite, mature and good-humored about this. Regardless of who is right or wrong about the Brabus E V12 (and most people could care less), you became increasingly condescending and insulting. There was no need for that.


PS: And of course credibility matters. Which is why I've mostly agreed with your exposing of SL Brabus. But I don't know how you went from there to your self-glorifying physics lessons...

Improviz

Well, thanks, lol....

Not really; I just was absolutely floored that he would defend SL Brabus after what SL Brabus did, and then he continued this Brabus thing even after the reams of data were presented showing they were getting outperformed by AMGs with far less rated horsepower....

[QUOTE=1985MB380SE;1888401]From what I've seen at MBW (and I don't know him personally), HLG is one of the "good guys" here. I might have read this thread quickly, but in general he was relatively polite, mature and good-humored about this. Regardless of who is right or wrong about the Brabus E V12 (and most people could care less), you became increasingly condescending and insulting. There was no need for that. [/quote.]

It gets frustrating to keep repeating the same point over and over and over, and have it ignored, over and over and over.

That would be because it was necessary to disprove the claim HLG made that 500 hp is necessary to obtain 185 mph in a 210 E Class, not because I enjoy physics lessons.

I certainly don't think there's anything "self-glorifying" about being able to handle a few elementary physics concepts, either, unless a freshman level physics course is regarded as some sort of monumental achievement. I was simply showing that he was wrong, which, I might add, was in defense of his claim that *I* was wrong.

Anyway, thanks for the kudos on the SL Brabus bust.

1985mb

Firstly, let me just say, I am not ignoring any of the points in your latest post above. (btw, no one can or will always respond to all of your points)

Having said that, there is 1 point I'd like to respond to, and that's the one I am quoting here.

IMHO, you can't let these things frustrate you that much. We've all had frustrating arguments, but sometimes winning these arguments is not worth it.

If you thought this was frustrating, you should check out the Off Topic forum. Posers pretending to own multiple SLRs, or online tough-guy commandos pretending to be saving the world on the front lines in Iraq, or unemployed 21yr olds pretending to give financial advice... the list just goes on and on.

Like I said before, a lot of members at MBW call out BS when they see it, despite battling the rudest j**koff trolling liars around here. You, on the other hand, had the benefit of debating a polite and civil MBW member. Remember that next time

Improviz

...which is why you never see me over there! I've browsed it a few times, and decided not to wade into that little swamp, lol!

I know what you're trying to say, but defending the indefensible (SL Brabus) was what really set me off, and to continue this silly Brabus argument in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary...well, both of them combined to light my fuse.

Sorry if it bothered you, but remember: it does take two to tango.

ChicagoX

Impro:

If you aren't a touch typist, you're a sick man.

Hell, you may be sick anyway.

Improviz

Lol!

Can Drive 55

Took the words out of my mouth.

Seriously, Improviz, let me know if you are about to wear out your keyboard and I will get one and deliver it pronto. I can't imagine one standing up to the wear and tear that you are capable of dishing out. What dedication and good work, my man.

I have a couple of proposals that I would like to throw your way. First, how about one of the mods doubling your post count. Your actual number is nowhere reflective of reality. Second, maybe you would let amgdriven and me buy you a beer or a cup of coffee. Call it a victory celebration or whatever. You name it and I will be there, and if my intuition serves me well, he will join us.

I now yield the floor to the Great One. Take it away I.

Improviz

Thanks so much, guys....really appreciate it!

Sure, I'd love to meet up w/you and amgdriven....maybe over the holidays we could meet up and have a few beers/drinks....PM me and we'll figure out schedules, etc.

amgdriven

I'm in fellas. Maybe I can get my wife to dress like a elf. If not a elf, maybe a bad school girl. or maybe...........

Improviz