w211 E55 VS CLK550 with exhaust
#201
![rolf](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/rofl.gif)
#202
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Mexico
Posts: 555
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
09 CLK550
I did do research. I did tons of it when I had my CLK55, in fact. That's how I know Car & Driver's 5-60 time for a 208 CLK55 like yours, which FYI was 5.2, not 4.6.
I also did research in terms of knowing that you're cherry picking a freakishly fast 209, of which no other tested example hit those numbers; for example, this 209 CLK55, which C&D tested, didn't come **CLOSE** to the numbers you're claiming for it as routine and normal (we'll do the 209 too, just to be thorough, but here's a teaser):
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...take_road_test
Zero to 60 mph: 4.7 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 11.3 sec
Zero to 130 mph: 20.2 sec
Zero to 150 mph: 30.5 sec
Street start, 5-60 mph: 5.0 sec
Standing 1/4-mile: 13.2 sec @ 107 mph
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't 5.0 sec. a tad bit slower than 4.6?
But hey, you want to talk numbers for the 208 CLK55, which is what you've got, by golly, let's "do some research" and roll them ALL out:
Car & Driver:
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...mparison_tests
0-60: 5.0
0-100: 12.2
5-60: 5.2 (a far cry from 4.6)
1/4 mi: 13.6 @ 106
Road & Track (2001 road test, their website is screwed up so I had to look it up hard copy):
0-60: 5.3
0-100: 12.4
1/4 mi: 13.7 @ 105.6
Motor Trend:
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/.../features.html
0-60: 5.36
0-90: 10.77
0-100: n/a
1/4 mi: 13.60 @ 104.98
Cab:
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...car_price.html
0-60: 5.23
0-100: n/a
1/4 mi: 13.74/104.44
Edmunds.com:
http://www.insideline.com/mercedes-b...clk55-amg.html
0-60: 5.0
0-100: n/a
1/4: 13.48 @ 106.3
Motorweek.com:
http://www.mpt.org/motorweek/reviews/rt2025.shtml
0-60: 5.2
0-100: n/a
1/4: 13.4 @ 107
So by no means do these numbers, in aggrate, point to a 4.6 second 5-60 run, or anything close to it.
So how about the European press? How did they do in the 208 CLK55?
Well, let's look, shall we?
http://www.einszweidrei.de/mercedes/clk55amg1998-1.htm
Test in ams 25/1998
Gewicht 1591 kg
0 - 80 km/h 3,9 s
0 - 100 km/h 5,3 s
0 - 120 km/h 7,3 s
0 - 140 km/h 9,4 s
0 - 160 km/h 11,9 s
0 - 180 km/h 15,2 s
0 - 200 km/h 19,3 s
http://www.einszweidrei.de/mercedes/...mgst2000-1.htm
Supertest in sport auto 05/2000
Gewicht 1593 kg
0 - 80 km/h 3,9 s
0 - 100 km/h 5,3 s
0 - 120 km/h 7,6 s
0 - 130 km/h - s
0 - 140 km/h 9,9 s
0 - 160 km/h 12,4 s
0 - 180 km/h 15,6 s
0 - 200 km/h 19,8 s
http://www.einszweidrei.de/mercedes/clk55amg2002-1.htm
Test in sport auto 12/2002
Gewicht 1698 kg
0 - 80 km/h 3,9 s
0 - 100 km/h 5,3 s
0 - 120 km/h 7,2 s
0 - 140 km/h 9,3 s
0 - 160 km/h 11,6 s
0 - 180 km/h 14,6 s
0 - 200 km/h 18,7 s
Hmm, given that 100 km/h is 62 mph, and 160 is 100 mph, those numbers look pretty close to the American tests!! And THEY don't point to a 4.6 second 5-60 run either.
So, how about the 209 CLK55:
Car & Driver:
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...take_road_test
Zero to 60 mph: 4.7 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 11.3 sec
Zero to 130 mph: 20.2 sec
Zero to 150 mph: 30.5 sec
Street start, 5-60 mph: 5.0 sec
Standing 1/4-mile: 13.2 sec @ 107 mph
http://www.caranddriver.com/var/ezfl...4f58116c18.pdf
0-60: 4.5
0-100: 11.0
5-60: 4.6
1/4 mi: 13.1 @ 109
Motor Trend:
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...ecs_price.html
0-60: 4.9
1/4 mile: 13.24 @ 107.41
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...ecs_price.html
0-60: 4.8
0-100: 11.5
1/4 mi: 13.14 @ 108.07
So there's the data. Most of the 208's ran in the 106-107 range, with a few in the 104-105 range. Same for the 209: most were in the 107-108 range, with the fastest one running the 109 and 4.6 5-60.
But given that there are 9 tests of the 208 CLK55 and none of them ran anywhere close to the fastest 209. So frankly, the data you urged me to "research" IN NO WAY points to a 4.6 sec 5-60 run as being "the norm", even for a 209, and DEFINITELY not for a 208. And taking the one that's the fastest by a large margin and trying to hold this up as the norm is also pretty dumb, as the data show that the norm is not even in this ballpark for a 208.
Keep dreaming, jon...from what I've read, you're a pretty good dreamer. Posting dyno results that a tuner told you were basically suspect, wild kill stories about pulling an E90 M3 up past 130 mph, supercharged Mustangs, etc. etc. etc...
I also did research in terms of knowing that you're cherry picking a freakishly fast 209, of which no other tested example hit those numbers; for example, this 209 CLK55, which C&D tested, didn't come **CLOSE** to the numbers you're claiming for it as routine and normal (we'll do the 209 too, just to be thorough, but here's a teaser):
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...take_road_test
Zero to 60 mph: 4.7 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 11.3 sec
Zero to 130 mph: 20.2 sec
Zero to 150 mph: 30.5 sec
Street start, 5-60 mph: 5.0 sec
Standing 1/4-mile: 13.2 sec @ 107 mph
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't 5.0 sec. a tad bit slower than 4.6?
But hey, you want to talk numbers for the 208 CLK55, which is what you've got, by golly, let's "do some research" and roll them ALL out:
Car & Driver:
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...mparison_tests
0-60: 5.0
0-100: 12.2
5-60: 5.2 (a far cry from 4.6)
1/4 mi: 13.6 @ 106
Road & Track (2001 road test, their website is screwed up so I had to look it up hard copy):
0-60: 5.3
0-100: 12.4
1/4 mi: 13.7 @ 105.6
Motor Trend:
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/.../features.html
0-60: 5.36
0-90: 10.77
0-100: n/a
1/4 mi: 13.60 @ 104.98
Cab:
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...car_price.html
0-60: 5.23
0-100: n/a
1/4 mi: 13.74/104.44
Edmunds.com:
http://www.insideline.com/mercedes-b...clk55-amg.html
0-60: 5.0
0-100: n/a
1/4: 13.48 @ 106.3
Motorweek.com:
http://www.mpt.org/motorweek/reviews/rt2025.shtml
0-60: 5.2
0-100: n/a
1/4: 13.4 @ 107
So by no means do these numbers, in aggrate, point to a 4.6 second 5-60 run, or anything close to it.
So how about the European press? How did they do in the 208 CLK55?
Well, let's look, shall we?
http://www.einszweidrei.de/mercedes/clk55amg1998-1.htm
Test in ams 25/1998
Gewicht 1591 kg
0 - 80 km/h 3,9 s
0 - 100 km/h 5,3 s
0 - 120 km/h 7,3 s
0 - 140 km/h 9,4 s
0 - 160 km/h 11,9 s
0 - 180 km/h 15,2 s
0 - 200 km/h 19,3 s
http://www.einszweidrei.de/mercedes/...mgst2000-1.htm
Supertest in sport auto 05/2000
Gewicht 1593 kg
0 - 80 km/h 3,9 s
0 - 100 km/h 5,3 s
0 - 120 km/h 7,6 s
0 - 130 km/h - s
0 - 140 km/h 9,9 s
0 - 160 km/h 12,4 s
0 - 180 km/h 15,6 s
0 - 200 km/h 19,8 s
http://www.einszweidrei.de/mercedes/clk55amg2002-1.htm
Test in sport auto 12/2002
Gewicht 1698 kg
0 - 80 km/h 3,9 s
0 - 100 km/h 5,3 s
0 - 120 km/h 7,2 s
0 - 140 km/h 9,3 s
0 - 160 km/h 11,6 s
0 - 180 km/h 14,6 s
0 - 200 km/h 18,7 s
Hmm, given that 100 km/h is 62 mph, and 160 is 100 mph, those numbers look pretty close to the American tests!! And THEY don't point to a 4.6 second 5-60 run either.
So, how about the 209 CLK55:
Car & Driver:
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...take_road_test
Zero to 60 mph: 4.7 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 11.3 sec
Zero to 130 mph: 20.2 sec
Zero to 150 mph: 30.5 sec
Street start, 5-60 mph: 5.0 sec
Standing 1/4-mile: 13.2 sec @ 107 mph
http://www.caranddriver.com/var/ezfl...4f58116c18.pdf
0-60: 4.5
0-100: 11.0
5-60: 4.6
1/4 mi: 13.1 @ 109
Motor Trend:
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...ecs_price.html
0-60: 4.9
1/4 mile: 13.24 @ 107.41
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...ecs_price.html
0-60: 4.8
0-100: 11.5
1/4 mi: 13.14 @ 108.07
So there's the data. Most of the 208's ran in the 106-107 range, with a few in the 104-105 range. Same for the 209: most were in the 107-108 range, with the fastest one running the 109 and 4.6 5-60.
But given that there are 9 tests of the 208 CLK55 and none of them ran anywhere close to the fastest 209. So frankly, the data you urged me to "research" IN NO WAY points to a 4.6 sec 5-60 run as being "the norm", even for a 209, and DEFINITELY not for a 208. And taking the one that's the fastest by a large margin and trying to hold this up as the norm is also pretty dumb, as the data show that the norm is not even in this ballpark for a 208.
Keep dreaming, jon...from what I've read, you're a pretty good dreamer. Posting dyno results that a tuner told you were basically suspect, wild kill stories about pulling an E90 M3 up past 130 mph, supercharged Mustangs, etc. etc. etc...
you also said i berally beat that g37x in the video well lets see i gave him car length i was with a 250lbs passenger, and i drove in c mode to make it fair to the g37 and still took it by about 6 cars.
Last edited by BLKCLK550; 12-21-2009 at 12:12 AM.
#203
Your G37xvideo doesn't show your pulling a g37x by anything close to that, nor does the Nismo video. In both vids, as soon as you get a length or so out, the camera guy turns the thing around and starts filming the road in front.
There is simply NO WAY to verify this claim watching those videos, and given your penchant for making stuff up (the bull***** 12.8 run you keep trotting out without a timeslip/video/post in the forum discussing it), I'm not going to accept that claim as factual. When the cameraman panned down, he was nowhere near 8 lengths back, not by a longshot.
As to what a CLK550 will run: I'd say mid-low 13's in stock form, based on the stuff I've found, but I've yet to see a 1/4 mile timeslip or a video for one--particularly yours.
![rolf](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/rofl.gif)
#204
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Mexico
Posts: 555
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
09 CLK550
I invite anyone who is interested to watch the following two videos and try to discern margins of victory like he's claiming.
Your G37xvideo doesn't show your pulling a g37x by anything close to that, nor does the Nismo video. In both vids, as soon as you get a length or so out, the camera guy turns the thing around and starts filming the road in front.
There is simply NO WAY to verify this claim watching those videos, and given your penchant for making stuff up (the bull***** 12.8 run you keep trotting out without a timeslip/video/post in the forum discussing it), I'm not going to accept that claim as factual. When the cameraman panned down, he was nowhere near 8 lengths back, not by a longshot.
As to what a CLK550 will run: I'd say mid-low 13's in stock form, based on the stuff I've found, but I've yet to see a 1/4 mile timeslip or a video for one--particularly yours.![rolf](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/rofl.gif)
Your G37xvideo doesn't show your pulling a g37x by anything close to that, nor does the Nismo video. In both vids, as soon as you get a length or so out, the camera guy turns the thing around and starts filming the road in front.
There is simply NO WAY to verify this claim watching those videos, and given your penchant for making stuff up (the bull***** 12.8 run you keep trotting out without a timeslip/video/post in the forum discussing it), I'm not going to accept that claim as factual. When the cameraman panned down, he was nowhere near 8 lengths back, not by a longshot.
As to what a CLK550 will run: I'd say mid-low 13's in stock form, based on the stuff I've found, but I've yet to see a 1/4 mile timeslip or a video for one--particularly yours.
![rolf](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/rofl.gif)
hahaha HAHAHAH you ****ing kidding me right? all of the drivers can confirm how many cars they lost by.
Just for you i will mount rear and front HD cameras with out a passenger who can't record for ****. will you then shut your trap ?
#205
BLKCLK550's thread, entitled "CLK550 VS G37x video"
So who was it you were calling a moron there, Einstein?
![rolf](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/rofl.gif)
![rolf](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/rofl.gif)
![rolf](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/rofl.gif)
![rolf](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/rofl.gif)
![Roll Eyes (Sarcastic)](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif)
Last edited by Improviz; 12-21-2009 at 11:01 AM.
#207
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 2,048
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
02 S500 Sport
God this thread is going where?
V8 Kompressor Car>CLK55/CLK550
CLK55/CLK550>G37
I smoked some G37 but I think the guy didn't know wtf he was doing. He messed up his launch and I had 1 CL all the way to 80 he never pulled.
As for CLK550 running 12.8 shows the slip otherwise who cares?
V8 Kompressor Car>CLK55/CLK550
CLK55/CLK550>G37
I smoked some G37 but I think the guy didn't know wtf he was doing. He messed up his launch and I had 1 CL all the way to 80 he never pulled.
As for CLK550 running 12.8 shows the slip otherwise who cares?
#208
#211
#214
#215
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Queens, NY
Posts: 1,762
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
04 w211 E55
I won't go on the L.I.E and BQE has only 1 strecth of road that is straight for us to get a good run in. We can talk about it. If you wana take my # down we can set sumthing up.
#216
BLKCLK550, you didn't answer any of the following questions in the other thread, so I'll repost them here.
You claim to have run a 12.8 second 1/4 mile in your CLK550. So please elaborate:
1) when and where was this done?
2) at what trap speed?
3) what was your 60' time?
4) did you ever find the mystery timeslip?
You claim to have run a 12.8 second 1/4 mile in your CLK550. So please elaborate:
1) when and where was this done?
2) at what trap speed?
3) what was your 60' time?
4) did you ever find the mystery timeslip?
#217
MBWorld Fanatic!
#218
#219
#222
So there you go. Why not get in touch with the E55 guy to come here and verify the story?
![Smilie](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/smile.gif)
#223
Even better. So then this means that you know the guy (otherwise how could you be expecting to hear from him?), and he was riding in the E55, so then he must know the guy who has the E55.
So there you go. Why not get in touch with the E55 guy to come here and verify the story?![Smilie](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/smile.gif)
So there you go. Why not get in touch with the E55 guy to come here and verify the story?
![Smilie](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/smile.gif)
#224
#225
Super Member
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 537
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Charger SRT-8
If a CLK550 can trap 108-109mph, there is no reason it can't run high 12s with a good 60ft. I've ran a 12.9x @ 106mph and 12.82 @ 109mph in my 4100lb car...