575M Ferrari vs SL55 AMG
05-01-2008, 01:02 PM
#76
MBWorld Fanatic!
Listen. And understand. That Improviz is out there. It can't be bargained with. It can't be reasoned with. It doesn't feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are dead.
05-01-2008, 01:02 PM
#77
Super Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
none
05-01-2008, 01:03 PM
#78
Super Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
none
Just with *my* E55, which again, at the time unknown to me was suffering from heat soak, the supercharger would just shut off. Once it was fixed, the 55 definitely handed an *** whuppin.
05-01-2008, 01:13 PM
#79
Super Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
none
Then we'll be here awhile. Fact is, he just twists words, throws in half-truths, and because of his extensive research he visually provides, people count on it as being 100% accurate when the fact is, all he know's is what he see's on the internet.
05-01-2008, 01:22 PM
#80
MBWorld Fanatic!
05-01-2008, 02:27 PM
#81
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,679
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CLS55 AMG
Which you continue to spew (surprise, surprise). You're the new ClayJ, nothing more.
05-01-2008, 02:39 PM
#82
Super Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
none
All I see is you proving that at one point I didn't much care for AMG/Mercedes. Wow, congrats
If that does make me a "clayj" then so be it.
05-01-2008, 02:53 PM
#84
MBWorld Fanatic!
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Seattle
Posts: 6,728
Received 559 Likes
on
369 Posts
'19 E63S, ‘16 CLS63 RIP, '09 E63 Gone, '06 M5 Gone, '97 Supra TT Gone
Wooooow. Sorry Exo, looks like the hounds are after you and there's no escaping. You've said some questionable stuff in the past, and now it's all coming together. Now I know I can be pretty ruthless, but nobody here goes for the jugular like Impro.
Somebody page Jakpro, we need to salute, "Mr. Teenage Fake Car Collector"
Somebody page Jakpro, we need to salute, "Mr. Teenage Fake Car Collector"
05-01-2008, 02:57 PM
#85
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,679
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CLS55 AMG
Yup, I was naive-- what can I say?
And I still hold to it, a 6.0 GTO can and WILL roast a SLK55, and a GTO can and WILL run a E55 door to door-- I should know, I had the E55. When I ran my brother, we went from 50-137 ish where my car shut off, the 55 was lagging due to heat soak, which at the time I had no idea off *hence* the results.
That's why I was "hating" on AMGs, I was in truth shocked my own E55 couldn't pull away from the GTO. I did get it fixed and the tables did turn, obvious from the fact I don't own a GTO or Vette.
And I still hold to it, a 6.0 GTO can and WILL roast a SLK55, and a GTO can and WILL run a E55 door to door-- I should know, I had the E55. When I ran my brother, we went from 50-137 ish where my car shut off, the 55 was lagging due to heat soak, which at the time I had no idea off *hence* the results.
That's why I was "hating" on AMGs, I was in truth shocked my own E55 couldn't pull away from the GTO. I did get it fixed and the tables did turn, obvious from the fact I don't own a GTO or Vette.
The thing is, the post where you "hated on the AMGs" was dated 8/3/2006...and this presents a tiny problem, because....
....drumroll, please....
....it's coming....
YOU (supposedly) BOUGHT YOUR E55 IN JUNE 2007!!!!
Posted 6/30/2007:
OK, I see now...so, you bought your E55 in June '07, then promptly travelled back in time to August 2006, where you raced your brother (funny, in August 2006 you wrote that he was your "friend", and now he's morphed into your "brother"....I guess time travel can make your memory a bit fuzzy
), and, disappointed with the results, you "hated on AMGs". You then travelled back to the future (is this an E55, or a DeLorean?
) to 2007, where you ran an 11.9 @ 119 in the car, which was presumably made faster by time travel, as back in 2006 it couldn't beat a 13.7/106 GTO....oh, no wait, what's that you say:EDIT: Yup, that wasn't my E55, close friends. Because I used to wiegh in around 130, I drove it at the track for his 200 lb ***. I did acquire the E55 when I said I did. He insisted the weight difference would break 11s, and wouldn't you kow it? I know, I know-- Captain Cook with no proof right? Anyways I just never mentioned the one I ran wasn't mine. Sorry for the misunderstanding.
What a tangled web you've woven there, sport....keep it up, this is fun!
Last edited by Improviz; 05-01-2008 at 03:00 PM.
05-01-2008, 02:58 PM
#86
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: OC, SoCal
Posts: 2,318
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
08 S65, 06 M3 CS(stick), 02 BMW X5 4.6iS, 07 R1 Raven, 08 F-450 4x4, 08 CooperS JCW
Are you saying a F430 traps at 132mph? Are you sure? When I got my car back from Evosport an F430 was one of the first cars I raced (in Vegas) and I beat it in 3 (20mph-about 110 mph) roll-ons in a row. The driver was so suprised and impressed he follwed me to my hotel and checked my car out for 15 minutes in the vallet line.
The F430 traps around 118mph if i remember correctly, so are neck and neck with the E60 M5.
05-01-2008, 03:00 PM
#87
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: OC, SoCal
Posts: 2,318
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
08 S65, 06 M3 CS(stick), 02 BMW X5 4.6iS, 07 R1 Raven, 08 F-450 4x4, 08 CooperS JCW
Wooooow. Sorry Exo, looks like the hounds are after you and there's no escaping. You've said some questionable stuff in the past, and now it's all coming together. Now I know I can be pretty ruthless, but nobody here goes for the jugular like Impro.
Somebody page Jakpro, we need to salute, "Mr. Teenage Fake Car Collector"
Somebody page Jakpro, we need to salute, "Mr. Teenage Fake Car Collector"
05-01-2008, 03:01 PM
#88
MBWorld Fanatic!
Are you saying a F430 traps at 132mph? Are you sure? When I got my car back from Evosport an F430 was one of the first cars I raced (in Vegas) and I beat it in 3 (20mph-about 110 mph) roll-ons in a row. The driver was so suprised and impressed he follwed me to my hotel and checked my car out for 15 minutes in the vallet line.
05-01-2008, 03:03 PM
#89
MBWorld Fanatic!
05-01-2008, 03:06 PM
#91
Super Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
none
05-01-2008, 03:08 PM
#92
MBWorld Fanatic!
05-01-2008, 03:09 PM
#93
MBWorld Fanatic!
Exodus:
You kind of lost some credibility there with the E55 "door to door" with the GTO. You can't make that claim if the E55 your are using to make that statement is running without boost...c'mon now!!! That would be like me saying I smoked an SLR....and then later qualifying that statement by disclosing the SLR was running spare donuts on the rears...and yet still maintaining "hey it happened". The reasonable standard is two cars running in optimal condition....otherwise it is an abberation.
As far as the SLK55...you do realize they are using a the 7 G-tronic tranny and they have 355hp and 376lbs-ft of torque and weigh only 3,420lbs.
http://www.edmunds.com/used/2006/mer...307/specs.html
The 6.0 GTO weighs 3,725lbs...seems to me that comes out to a 305lbs difference in the SLK55's favor (yeah...I know...I am good at math). The horsepower (and torque) to weight ratios are very close (hp favoring GTO...torque favoring SLK55). However, the 7 speed tranny is a huge benefit to the SLK. There will be no "roasting" of SLK55's...even from a roll.... not to mention that on drag times two stock SLK55's are running 12.7-12.8 and no completely stock GTO is running under 12.9 (and there are a ton of GTO times out there...and only 3 stock SLK55's). Now there are many tuned GTO's running much better times...but let's compare apples to apples...
Tom
You kind of lost some credibility there with the E55 "door to door" with the GTO. You can't make that claim if the E55 your are using to make that statement is running without boost...c'mon now!!! That would be like me saying I smoked an SLR....and then later qualifying that statement by disclosing the SLR was running spare donuts on the rears...and yet still maintaining "hey it happened". The reasonable standard is two cars running in optimal condition....otherwise it is an abberation.
As far as the SLK55...you do realize they are using a the 7 G-tronic tranny and they have 355hp and 376lbs-ft of torque and weigh only 3,420lbs.
http://www.edmunds.com/used/2006/mer...307/specs.html
The 6.0 GTO weighs 3,725lbs...seems to me that comes out to a 305lbs difference in the SLK55's favor (yeah...I know...I am good at math). The horsepower (and torque) to weight ratios are very close (hp favoring GTO...torque favoring SLK55). However, the 7 speed tranny is a huge benefit to the SLK. There will be no "roasting" of SLK55's...even from a roll.... not to mention that on drag times two stock SLK55's are running 12.7-12.8 and no completely stock GTO is running under 12.9 (and there are a ton of GTO times out there...and only 3 stock SLK55's). Now there are many tuned GTO's running much better times...but let's compare apples to apples...
Tom
Last edited by TMC M5; 05-01-2008 at 03:13 PM.
05-01-2008, 03:09 PM
#94
Super Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
none
05-01-2008, 03:11 PM
#95
Super Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
none
Exodus:
You kind of lost some credibility there with the E55 "door to door" with the GTO. You can't make that claim if the E55 your are using to make that statement is running without boost...c'mon now!!! That would be like me saying I smoked an SLR....and then later qualifying that statement by disclosing the SLR was running spare donuts on the rears...and yet still maintaining "hey it happened". The resonable standard is two cars running in optimal condition....otherwise it is an abberation.
As far as the SLK55...you do realize they are using a the 7 G-tronic tranny and they have 355hp and 376lbs-ft of torque and weigh only 3,420lbs.
http://www.edmunds.com/used/2006/mer...307/specs.html
The 6.0 GTO weighs 3,725lbs...seems to me that comes out to a 305lbs difference in the SLK55's favor (yeah...I know...I am good at math). The horsepower (and torque) to weight ratios are very close (hp favoring GTO...torque favoring SLK55). However, the 7 speed tranny is a huge benefit to the SLK. There will be no "roasting" of SLK55's...even from a roll.... not to mention that on drag times two stock SLK55's are running 12.7-12.8 and no completely stock GTO is running under 12.9 (and there are a ton of GTO times out there...and only 3 stock SLK55's). Now there are many tuned GTO's running much better times...but let's compare apples to apples...
Tom
You kind of lost some credibility there with the E55 "door to door" with the GTO. You can't make that claim if the E55 your are using to make that statement is running without boost...c'mon now!!! That would be like me saying I smoked an SLR....and then later qualifying that statement by disclosing the SLR was running spare donuts on the rears...and yet still maintaining "hey it happened". The resonable standard is two cars running in optimal condition....otherwise it is an abberation.
As far as the SLK55...you do realize they are using a the 7 G-tronic tranny and they have 355hp and 376lbs-ft of torque and weigh only 3,420lbs.
http://www.edmunds.com/used/2006/mer...307/specs.html
The 6.0 GTO weighs 3,725lbs...seems to me that comes out to a 305lbs difference in the SLK55's favor (yeah...I know...I am good at math). The horsepower (and torque) to weight ratios are very close (hp favoring GTO...torque favoring SLK55). However, the 7 speed tranny is a huge benefit to the SLK. There will be no "roasting" of SLK55's...even from a roll.... not to mention that on drag times two stock SLK55's are running 12.7-12.8 and no completely stock GTO is running under 12.9 (and there are a ton of GTO times out there...and only 3 stock SLK55's). Now there are many tuned GTO's running much better times...but let's compare apples to apples...
Tom
The GTO can, believe that.
05-01-2008, 03:14 PM
#97
MBWorld Fanatic!
They're not that bad. Great motor with a myriad of aftermarket parts for under $20K. Someone wants a reliable fast car to trash, vuala. But to say stock for stock it runs with a 360 Modena with equal drivers...yeah, maybe in straight line with a 100 shot.
05-01-2008, 03:14 PM
#98
MBWorld Fanatic!
05-01-2008, 03:15 PM
#99
Super Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
none
