SLK350 vs. WRX STI
.
Last edited by FishtailnZ; Mar 16, 2007 at 06:16 PM.
Reading comprehension owns you. Where did I say that I missed some shifts. It's an automatic guy so hard is to tap the gear lever at redline.
Also, I never said that the STI missed some shifts. If he did miss a shift, I would simply get on the brakes and line up again. He wasn't particularly the fastest shifter, but where did I mention that he missed a shift which would have an affect on a run.
only difference is mine was fwd lower loss rolling from 40 and 1005kg kerb weight ! (no back seats but nor has the 350
)clio 178 hp per tonne
350 188hp per tonne but then again the auto box is slower than manual shifting in the clio so figures about right.
above this i wouldnt have dare gone any faster as its so light and floaty the 350 would have pulled some at this point for sure.
USA impreza 260hp STI is also 180 pertonne but the UK version STIprodrive would eat a 350 for lunch at 202bhp pertonne with 310hp and 320lbft as standard
Last edited by --phill--; Mar 17, 2007 at 01:48 PM.
But nice story though! I wish I could race them someday.
During some of the runs, I thought he might have had some difficulties with his shifting as I pulled a bit at times during his shift. We took the same exit, and he mentioned that other than a blow-off valve, that he was stock. From what I know, the blow-off valve might actually hinder performance in this case.
oh an i am 30 and have been into cars since i was about 8..... so i am not some kid that thinks he knows his stuff i pretty much do....... and i have driven many sport coupes, sport cars, luxury vehicles...... yours might not be slow, but not a sports car.... glad you think your car is great and all..... but like most euro cars, they are quick but no heart stopper
and ask me if i know how to drive
here is a quick 0-60 vid of my a4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_WsTXRz3VEs
apr stage 1(91 oct) stratosphere dv
stock 170 hp about 200 lb trq
now 205ish hp 245 lb trq
and i am about 6'4" 245, had a guy with me that is 6' 215 and another that is about 5'11 150.....so i had some weight on top of the heavy **** car
Last edited by turbo kraut; Mar 19, 2007 at 06:28 AM.
The Best of Mercedes & AMG
oh an i am 30 and have been into cars since i was about 8..... so i am not some kid that thinks he knows his stuff i pretty much do....... and i have driven many sport coupes, sport cars, luxury vehicles...... yours might not be slow, but not a sports car.... glad you think your car is great and all..... but like most euro cars, they are quick but no heart stopper
If you bother to read the thread and posts, I say that he wasn't the fastest shifter, but no where did I say that he missed a shift during a run. He lagged a bit at times which gave me an edge, but that doesn't count as a missed shift. If he did indeed miss a shift, I would have been in front of him by at least a few car lengths.
You calling me an "idiot" because I start from 3rd gear is ridiculous. Since you apparently have reading comprehension problems, I'll repeat that these runs were not initiated from a dig. These runs were on the freeway and were started from around 50mph. From those speeds, what gear would you have liked me to start from you F-in moron.
Say what you will about the car, I'm not here to defend it. I'm just here to state my experience I had on the road with another car. I too have driven a good amount of cars. Do a search on my screen name if you wish, and you'll see that I've driven a number of different vehicles in the past couple of years. I know how the SLK fits in the grand scheme of things along with how it compares to other cars in things other than straight line speed.
here is a quick 0-60 vid of my a4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_WsTXRz3VEs
apr stage 1(91 oct) stratosphere dv
stock 170 hp about 200 lb trq
now 205ish hp 245 lb trq
and i am about 6'4" 245, had a guy with me that is 6' 215 and another that is about 5'11 150.....so i had some weight on top of the heavy **** car
And the fact is that these cars' trap speed is the same (as tested by C&D):
C&D: Scoobie traps at 102:
C&D: Benz traps at 102:
Scoobie from a dig can launch at 6,000 rpm and just scoot off the line, which gets it a huge advantage in 60' time, which helps its 1/4 mile time. But from a 60 mph roll, this evaporates. For a better indication of how they'll do from a roll, look at the two cars' times from 60 mph to the 1/4 mile trap of 102:
Scoobie: 13.1 - 4.9 = 8.2 seconds
Benz: 13.9 - 5.4 = 8.5 seconds
As you can see, the two cars' 60-102 mph times are within 0.3 seconds. And a small difference like this in time-speed is pretty negligible in a time-distance race. I would, in fact, expect the two to be pretty even based on this.
And Road & Track's results were even more favorable to the Benz:
R&T: Scoobie traps at 99.6: 60-100 mph split: 8.7 seconds.
R&T: Benz traps at 103.9: 60-100 mph split: 7.4 seconds.
In this case, the Benz was the faster of the two 60-100.
So, before you guys start accusing people of lying in the future, you might want to take a look at some actual numbers. The traps and splits plainly show that these two cars are close, particularly from a roll.
Last edited by Improviz; Mar 22, 2007 at 01:22 AM.
here is a quick 0-60 vid of my a4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_WsTXRz3VEs
apr stage 1(91 oct) stratosphere dv
but yea all i am saying is, the sti doesnt have the top speed or higher end acceleration so after around 120 or 140km/h he will fall behind.
i just did a run yesterday again
Stock EVO and STI are about midrange power (advantage of their turbo over NA cars) so when at upper rev range in 4th and 5th at over 100mph they don't have any advantage over a NA car with close to the same peak power rating and the NA car is operating around its best range (where all its power is).
Oh yea, btw last night I raced an SLK32 on a redlight, and I won by the distance of a car. I don't know whether he got a heavy passanger against me myself in the car, or it was just my luck, because I thought the 32 amgs are faster than the 350s. And weird thing is he got the stockies and I was using my 20" rims on. Or probably he didn't push it to the max
Now for the 55 vs the STI. I've raced him several times again. He has a full exhaust and ECU now (not during the race with the 350.) I still beat him and even off the line it's pretty close... as in he doesn't get a huge jump like before. What's funny is the feeling of speed. Everyone that's been in my car and his car swears the STI feels faster. I wouldn't doubt the STI having a higher acceleration G-force between shifts. The 55 speed is progressive and the shifts are very quick. Therefore, the 55 feels fast but the STI feels faster.
You can't compare the 300 hp (or 293 hp for MY2006+) to the SLKs 268hp. Both cars are being measured for horsepower at the flywheel, not at the ground. The STi loses a significant amount of power in the transfer to AWD. The SLK only has to put power to 2 rear wheels, which in this case would give it an advantage as it didn't need the grip to pull off the line. That said, the STi would still take ya. It has more than enough power to take ya and the time stats to back it up.
The approx 10% difference in HP is more than overcome by the 7g tranny.
Try it - you'll be surprised.
Sti's are nothing special from a roll. From a dig, different story.



