CLK vs. 997C4S vert.
997 C4S vs CLS63:
997 C4S vs CLS63:
Last edited by FastDonzi; May 8, 2009 at 07:59 AM.
I pay attention to what cars do on paper too-and w/ a pro driver-I cant seem to get mine to either.....
Trending Topics
Your car traps at 100, maybe 1-2 mph more w/tune and exhaust.
This won't put you in the same county as a CLS63, let alone in the same ballpark. Either this was a 996, and a slow one at that, or he was incompetent, or something was wrong with his car, or this is just a fabrication at worst.
The Best of Mercedes & AMG




997 C4S vs CLS63:
Your car traps at 100, maybe 1-2 mph more w/tune and exhaust.
This won't put you in the same county as a CLS63, let alone in the same ballpark. Either this was a 996, and a slow one at that, or he was incompetent, or something was wrong with his car, or this is just a fabrication at worst.

It would then have to play catch-up the entire time, the CLK with the tune and exhaust should do a decent job if he got a strong launch. Factor in the aerodynamics (Porsche was vert), and it seems plausible.
I know sometimes when I just jump on the throttle in my car, say at like 50mph, it drops to 3rd instead of 2nd and drastically reduces my performance. Just a thought... I highly doubt the OP is trying to impress everyone with his CLK by making up some BS story.

It would then have to play catch-up the entire time, the CLK with the tune and exhaust should do a decent job if he got a strong launch. Factor in the aerodynamics (Porsche was vert), and it seems plausible.
I know sometimes when I just jump on the throttle in my car, say at like 50mph, it drops to 3rd instead of 2nd and drastically reduces my performance. Just a thought... I highly doubt the OP is trying to impress everyone with his CLK by making up some BS story.
I've offered some sort of insight, as I do not believe your bs'ing just to amuse yourself rather your telling the truth and there were variables in play you yourself may have been unaware of.
Be safe out there.
Here are the numbers for a 997 C4S, as tested by C&D:
Zero to 60 mph: 4.0 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 9.5 sec
Zero to 150 mph: 26.2 sec
Street start, 5–60 mph: 4.5 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 12.5 sec @ 113 mph
Now, that's the new one, w/PDK. Here are the numbers for the very first iteration of the 997 C4S, from '06:
Zero to 60 mph: 4.3 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 10.2 sec
Zero to 150 mph: 28.4 sec
Street start, 5-60 mph: 5.0 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 12.8 sec @ 111 mph
Your car would simply not stand a snowball's chance in hell in a 30-120 race against a halfway well-driven 997 C4S, period.
Not only that, but what is really odd about your story is that you say he got a jump, hopped on it first, then you did. So now you've spotted a car which runs mid 12's, 1.5 seconds faster than your car, at 113 mph, 13 mph faster than your car, a one second spot at a minimum, and you would have us believe that he couldn't even get past you???
Sorry, but this is a five-BS story on a scale of one to five, unless he really did run w/the parking brake on, or did something else that was equally stupid.

I've been round laguna seca several times in my previous r6 and "conquered" the infamous corkscrew
...i'm far from an expert on bikes and am still getting used to the r1 which I've still not taken to the track,, but i did test the top speed very late one night...
I'm assuming you're much more experienced?
As regards posters like Improviz they're good, knowledgeable guys and don't mean any offense...it's just a load of BS'ers come through here...doesn't seem to me like you are one at all...
-Rob


though. what a tool.
Idiot....Hell, I assraped CLK500s in my old 55, in my new one it would be a slaughter.
Your car is in the 350Z range, not the C4S range. You should go to bed, and dream some more, because that's all this is, a wet dream.
Last edited by Improviz; May 8, 2009 at 11:22 PM.


