Stock CLK550 vs Stock E46 M3
Banned
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 139
Likes: 0
I think both cars in the "story" are nice but under no circumstance is a CLK550 walking a E46 M3 with its engine actually running by 4 real car lengths in the speeds mentioned in the "story" unless the driver of the M3 died before he could launch , his engine fell out or he wasnt racing at all and just laughing at the CLK driver with his GF like "WTF was that about". Its just not going to happen sorry.
/END Thread
/END Thread
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,856
Likes: 4
02 C32 AMG
I think both cars in the "story" are nice but under no circumstance is a CLK550 walking a E46 M3 with its engine actually running by 4 real car lengths in the speeds mentioned in the "story" unless the driver of the M3 died before he could launch , his engine fell out or he wasnt racing at all and just laughing at the CLK driver with his GF like "WTF was that about". Its just not going to happen sorry.
/END Thread
/END Thread
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,679
Likes: 0
CLS55 AMG
You might want to take a look at the numbers for the CLS550 and E550, both of which are considerably heavier than the CLK550, before dismissing people's statements out of hand.
C&D test of 2007 CLS550:
Zero to 60 mph: 4.7 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 11.6 sec
Zero to 130 mph: 20.9 sec
Street start, 5-60 mph: 5.0 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 13.3 sec @ 107 mph
Similarly, the E550 they tested ran 0-60 in 4.8, and the 1/4 in 13.4 @ 106.
In the E550 they tested, Road & Track got:
0–60 mph 4.9 sec
0–100 mph 11.5 sec
0–1320 ft (1/4 mile) 13.3 sec @ 108.1 mph
That engine is rated at 382 horsepower, and from the traps the cars above are hitting that rating is quite clearly conservative; crank hp is probably 400 hp or better.
That's a 67 horsepower advantage over the M3, 50 even if you use the ridiculously low factory rating. And the CLK550 is a few hundred pounds lighter than the E550 or CLS550, which would give it an even higher trap speed and lower ET.
So why is it so hard to believe that it would reliably pull one? I ran numerous E46 M3s in my old CLK55, and always pulled them, and that thing only had 349 horsepower, although it was lighter than the 550, but still....
C&D test of 2007 CLS550:
Zero to 60 mph: 4.7 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 11.6 sec
Zero to 130 mph: 20.9 sec
Street start, 5-60 mph: 5.0 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 13.3 sec @ 107 mph
Similarly, the E550 they tested ran 0-60 in 4.8, and the 1/4 in 13.4 @ 106.
In the E550 they tested, Road & Track got:
0–60 mph 4.9 sec
0–100 mph 11.5 sec
0–1320 ft (1/4 mile) 13.3 sec @ 108.1 mph
That engine is rated at 382 horsepower, and from the traps the cars above are hitting that rating is quite clearly conservative; crank hp is probably 400 hp or better.
That's a 67 horsepower advantage over the M3, 50 even if you use the ridiculously low factory rating. And the CLK550 is a few hundred pounds lighter than the E550 or CLS550, which would give it an even higher trap speed and lower ET.
So why is it so hard to believe that it would reliably pull one? I ran numerous E46 M3s in my old CLK55, and always pulled them, and that thing only had 349 horsepower, although it was lighter than the 550, but still....
Banned
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 139
Likes: 0
You might want to take a look at the numbers for the CLS550 and E550, both of which are considerably heavier than the CLK550, before dismissing people's statements out of hand.
C&D test of 2007 CLS550:
Zero to 60 mph: 4.7 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 11.6 sec
Zero to 130 mph: 20.9 sec
Street start, 5-60 mph: 5.0 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 13.3 sec @ 107 mph
Similarly, the E550 they tested ran 0-60 in 4.8, and the 1/4 in 13.4 @ 106.
In the E550 they tested, Road & Track got:
0–60 mph 4.9 sec
0–100 mph 11.5 sec
0–1320 ft (1/4 mile) 13.3 sec @ 108.1 mph
That engine is rated at 382 horsepower, and from the traps the cars above are hitting that rating is quite clearly conservative; crank hp is probably 400 hp or better.
That's a 67 horsepower advantage over the M3, 50 even if you use the ridiculously low factory rating. And the CLK550 is a few hundred pounds lighter than the E550 or CLS550, which would give it an even higher trap speed and lower ET.
So why is it so hard to believe that it would reliably pull one? I ran numerous E46 M3s in my old CLK55, and always pulled them, and that thing only had 349 horsepower, although it was lighter than the 550, but still....
C&D test of 2007 CLS550:
Zero to 60 mph: 4.7 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 11.6 sec
Zero to 130 mph: 20.9 sec
Street start, 5-60 mph: 5.0 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 13.3 sec @ 107 mph
Similarly, the E550 they tested ran 0-60 in 4.8, and the 1/4 in 13.4 @ 106.
In the E550 they tested, Road & Track got:
0–60 mph 4.9 sec
0–100 mph 11.5 sec
0–1320 ft (1/4 mile) 13.3 sec @ 108.1 mph
That engine is rated at 382 horsepower, and from the traps the cars above are hitting that rating is quite clearly conservative; crank hp is probably 400 hp or better.
That's a 67 horsepower advantage over the M3, 50 even if you use the ridiculously low factory rating. And the CLK550 is a few hundred pounds lighter than the E550 or CLS550, which would give it an even higher trap speed and lower ET.
So why is it so hard to believe that it would reliably pull one? I ran numerous E46 M3s in my old CLK55, and always pulled them, and that thing only had 349 horsepower, although it was lighter than the 550, but still....
Last edited by jonmartin; Jul 15, 2009 at 01:34 AM.
MB World Stories
The Best of Mercedes & AMG
Manual Mercedes? 6 Times Sindelfingen Let Drivers Have All The Fun
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes SLR McLaren 722 S Is Extremely Rare Example Modified by McLaren
Verdad Gallardo
8 Classic Boxy Mercedes Designs That Have Aged Like Fine Wine
Verdad Gallardo
Flawlessly Restored Mercedes 190E Evo II Heads to Auction
Verdad Gallardo
Electric Mercedes C-Class Unveiled: 11 Things You Need to Know
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes EQS Gets A Major Update: Everything You Need to Know
Verdad Gallardo
5 Underrated Mercedes-Benz Models That Don't Get the Love They Deserve
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes 300D Has Pushed Well Past 1 Million Miles and It Ain't Stopping
Verdad Gallardo
10 Most Reliable Mercedes-Benz Models You Can Buy Used
Verdad Gallardo
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,679
Likes: 0
CLS55 AMG
Anyway, original story isn't what I was defending; you seemed to be dismissing the possibility of a CLK550 pulling an E46 period, which isn't borne out by the numbers. Maybe I misunderstood you?
Thread Starter
Banned
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 555
Likes: 0
From: Mexico
09 CLK550
as i stated before he might of let off when he saw my tail get loose, we ran a lot more times where i pulled on him hard. Lets not forget he was the one that wanted to race me and not me looking for a race. On a 20mph roll i gave him 1 car ahead of me and i still passed him. As many of you said the driver factor and the conditions undwe which we ran, lets not forget my car is 1 month old i have k&N filters and gutted out trunk.
M3 is a bit older and it was a convertible and we don't know if it had any tuneups in the past few years. I know M3 is a fast car and i am not denying that fact, as i stated before.... i always wanted E46 M3. I saw the same guy i ran in his M3 he honked at me and waved i did the same...
M3 is a bit older and it was a convertible and we don't know if it had any tuneups in the past few years. I know M3 is a fast car and i am not denying that fact, as i stated before.... i always wanted E46 M3. I saw the same guy i ran in his M3 he honked at me and waved i did the same...
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,679
Likes: 0
CLS55 AMG
You never mentioned that he was a convertible, that will make a big difference as they're something like 2-300 pounds heavier than the hardtop.
Also hadn't seen the one where you wrote he "backed up" (I think you meant "backed *off* :7 ) when you were spinning...so really, the races you had were rolling start runs starting at about 20 mph, which is right in the meat of your engine's torque band and where the M3's launch advantage isn't a factor. A CLK550 would definitely put the hurt on an E46 M3 ragtop under those conditions, and imo a multi-carlength pull would be a certainty, even worse if the driver made any mistakes.
As I recall the M3 coupe when perfectly driven had a rolling-start 5-60 time of about 5.2 or 5.3, ragtop would add another few tenths so figure around 5.5...meanwhile the CLS550, at about 3-400 lbs heavier than the CLK550, does it in 5.0, so subtract few tenths from that for the lighter CLK, and a good rolling-start spanking will be the result.
Also hadn't seen the one where you wrote he "backed up" (I think you meant "backed *off* :7 ) when you were spinning...so really, the races you had were rolling start runs starting at about 20 mph, which is right in the meat of your engine's torque band and where the M3's launch advantage isn't a factor. A CLK550 would definitely put the hurt on an E46 M3 ragtop under those conditions, and imo a multi-carlength pull would be a certainty, even worse if the driver made any mistakes.
As I recall the M3 coupe when perfectly driven had a rolling-start 5-60 time of about 5.2 or 5.3, ragtop would add another few tenths so figure around 5.5...meanwhile the CLS550, at about 3-400 lbs heavier than the CLK550, does it in 5.0, so subtract few tenths from that for the lighter CLK, and a good rolling-start spanking will be the result.
Thread Starter
Banned
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 555
Likes: 0
From: Mexico
09 CLK550
^^^ i didn't see that he was vert because it was at night and i was looking at the road. Last night he had his roof down, pulled up next to me honked and waved at me thats when i found out it was a vert. Respect to the driver tho he actually saying whats up after loosing and then started showing off how well he can dodge raised manholes.
Banned
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 2,048
Likes: 0
From: Brooklyn
02 S500 Sport
Banned
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 139
Likes: 0
Ya ok go wash your 02 S500. Have you seen my sig. I'm Really a BMW Fanboy. You have neither car so I don't even see why you're talking about it at least I've had a E46 M3 SMG coupe. Either way now the OP added extra details so it Doesn't really matter he won ok woohoo.
Last edited by jonmartin; Jul 15, 2009 at 09:12 PM.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,856
Likes: 4
02 C32 AMG
and while a 335i isnt the fastest car in the world, they would surely push your ***** in.....(as would an E46)....and if you're wondering, no im not a BMW fan. i just know whats up.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=INaTwWAUB88
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,679
Likes: 0
CLS55 AMG
jturkel, here are some vids for you:
Here is my old CLK55 vs one stock M5, one modded M5. Four races, four wins, up to 125 mph.
And M5s shred M3s up high.
CLK55 vs modded M5, roll:
CLK55 vs modded M5, dig:
CLK55 vs stock M5, roll:
CLK55 vs stock M5, dig:
As to M3s supposedly being faster up high: wrong. I ran several M3s repeatedly in Mexico, and the higher the speeds got, the more the CLK55 pulled, which mirrors the results that others have reported both here and at M3 boards vs CLK55s. M5s run stronger than M3s up high, and you can see who won the encounters above.
And M5s shred M3s up high.
CLK55 vs modded M5, roll:
CLK55 vs modded M5, dig:
CLK55 vs stock M5, roll:
CLK55 vs stock M5, dig:
As to M3s supposedly being faster up high: wrong. I ran several M3s repeatedly in Mexico, and the higher the speeds got, the more the CLK55 pulled, which mirrors the results that others have reported both here and at M3 boards vs CLK55s. M5s run stronger than M3s up high, and you can see who won the encounters above.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,856
Likes: 4
02 C32 AMG
Here is my old CLK55 vs one stock M5, one modded M5. Four races, four wins, up to 125 mph.
And M5s shred M3s up high.
CLK55 vs modded M5, roll:
CLK55 vs modded M5, dig:
CLK55 vs stock M5, roll:
CLK55 vs stock M5, dig:
As to M3s supposedly being faster up high: wrong. I ran several M3s repeatedly in Mexico, and the higher the speeds got, the more the CLK55 pulled, which mirrors the results that others have reported both here and at M3 boards vs CLK55s. M5s run stronger than M3s up high, and you can see who won the encounters above.
And M5s shred M3s up high.
CLK55 vs modded M5, roll:
CLK55 vs modded M5, dig:
CLK55 vs stock M5, roll:
CLK55 vs stock M5, dig:
As to M3s supposedly being faster up high: wrong. I ran several M3s repeatedly in Mexico, and the higher the speeds got, the more the CLK55 pulled, which mirrors the results that others have reported both here and at M3 boards vs CLK55s. M5s run stronger than M3s up high, and you can see who won the encounters above.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,679
Likes: 0
CLS55 AMG
Which gives it a better weight/hp rating than my old car had, similar torque, and don't forget: he's got two more gears, closer ratio, than mine did...so to act as though an E46 is going to send it to school is, in my view, completely inaccurate, especially up high, particularly when you see what my li'l ol' CLK55 did to the big, bad M5.
In my view the OP is exaggerating somewhat, and I'm kind of at a loss to explain how someone could mistake a ragtop for a hardtop given the different shape unless it was pitch black (unlikely in an urban setting), **but** the point I'm arguing is that I'd expect the CLK550 to pull an E46 from 20 mph rolls bigtime...and if the M3 driver wasn't very, very good, it would be even worse.
Last edited by Improviz; Jul 16, 2009 at 01:03 AM.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,856
Likes: 4
02 C32 AMG
Which gives it a better weight/hp rating than my old car had, similar torque, and don't forget: he's got two more gears, closer ratio, than mine did...so to act as though an E46 is going to send it to school is, in my view, completely inaccurate, especially up high, particularly when you see what my li'l ol' CLK55 did to the big, bad M5.
In my view the OP is exaggerating somewhat, and I'm kind of at a loss to explain how someone could mistake a ragtop for a hardtop given the different shape unless it was pitch black (unlikely in an urban setting), **but** the point I'm arguing is that I'd expect the CLK550 to pull an E46 from 20 mph rolls bigtime...and if the M3 driver wasn't very, very good, it would be even worse.
In my view the OP is exaggerating somewhat, and I'm kind of at a loss to explain how someone could mistake a ragtop for a hardtop given the different shape unless it was pitch black (unlikely in an urban setting), **but** the point I'm arguing is that I'd expect the CLK550 to pull an E46 from 20 mph rolls bigtime...and if the M3 driver wasn't very, very good, it would be even worse.
ok....so we might be on the same page here.....i'm not doubting he pulled, im doubting he pulled the "4-5" CLs in a span of 20-80 mph......and i showed the calculations that showed in a perfect scenario in the 1/4 mile involving greater speeds (and thus more time to pull more) that it still isnt possible......which is why i came to the conclusion the driver wasnt racing or something is wrong with the story. do we agree on that? that is basically my entire point....
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,679
Likes: 0
CLS55 AMG
and the AMG does have speedshift, which as you know, does make a difference too.
ok....so we might be on the same page here.....i'm not doubting he pulled, im doubting he pulled the "4-5" CLs in a span of 20-80 mph......and i showed the calculations that showed in a perfect scenario in the 1/4 mile involving greater speeds (and thus more time to pull more) that it still isnt possible......which is why i came to the conclusion the driver wasnt racing or something is wrong with the story. do we agree on that? that is basically my entire point....
ok....so we might be on the same page here.....i'm not doubting he pulled, im doubting he pulled the "4-5" CLs in a span of 20-80 mph......and i showed the calculations that showed in a perfect scenario in the 1/4 mile involving greater speeds (and thus more time to pull more) that it still isnt possible......which is why i came to the conclusion the driver wasnt racing or something is wrong with the story. do we agree on that? that is basically my entire point....
I think we're in basic agreement that a 4-5 CL victory from 20-80 is probably a bit high (alhough against a ragtop it is plausible, as those things are markedly slower ), assuming a well-driven M3--not necessarily a safe bet, btw; in my experience M3 drivers' egos >> their driving skills.
So against a well driven M3 hardtop, it would be tighter, against an average-driven ragtop, it would be less tight, and any M-mistake and his goose is cooked.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,856
Likes: 4
02 C32 AMG
Unfortunately, the 208s didn't have speedshift.
I think we're in basic agreement that a 4-5 CL victory from 20-80 is probably a bit high (alhough against a ragtop it is plausible, as those things are markedly slower ), assuming a well-driven M3--not necessarily a safe bet, btw; in my experience M3 drivers' egos >> their driving skills.
So against a well driven M3 hardtop, it would be tighter, against an average-driven ragtop, it would be less tight, and any M-mistake and his goose is cooked.
I think we're in basic agreement that a 4-5 CL victory from 20-80 is probably a bit high (alhough against a ragtop it is plausible, as those things are markedly slower ), assuming a well-driven M3--not necessarily a safe bet, btw; in my experience M3 drivers' egos >> their driving skills.
So against a well driven M3 hardtop, it would be tighter, against an average-driven ragtop, it would be less tight, and any M-mistake and his goose is cooked.
and yes, ive noticed in my personal experiences some egos doing talking and not driving skills. i've never owned an M3 or a BMW for that matter, but i find that this (for me) has been the general case and not the exception
glad we are in agreement
