Improviz

They ran the following:

0-60: 3.4
0-100: 8.9
0-120: 11.9
1/4: 11.9@120 mph



According to the article, this bests the 0-60/quarter mile times times C&D got in the brand new 500 horsepower Viper (3.9/12.1), the Porsche 911 GT3 (3.8/12.3), and the Ferrari Challange Stradale (4.0/12.4).



Now, those of you who are familiar with drag racing will realize that this trap speed is not physically possible in a 4,500 pound car with 'only' 493 horsepower; you're right...just as with the 5.5L S/C motors, MB is underrating the sh*t out of this motor...real crank horsepower calculates out to (using 180 pounds for driver/test equipment):

true crank horsepower = 4680*(120/234)^3 = 631 actual crank horsepower!!



FYI, according to Road & Track this equation (hp = w*(spd/234)^3 is accurate to within +-5% of actual horsepower, and in using it on mag's road tests, I've found it to be even better, normally within 5-10 hp of rated...except for these latest Uber-Benzes!!

DslBnz

I saw a video of an S55 AMG doing similar times you mention. Yep, its definitely true. Will it make a good used car purchase, though? It sounds nice! I hope it lasts as long as older MB's did.

I'd be dissapointed with only 250K miles out of the engine. Gosh wouldn't it be cool if it did go 400K? But I don't think so. Maybe a normally aspirated 55.

Improviz

They're spinning at significantly higher RPMs than the engine, and wear out much more quickly.

RU_MATRX

Big discussions already on that in the SL55 and R230 SL500/SL600 forums...

Lexani

Am I too late for this discussion?

Lexani

Yeah! Eat that 65s and 75s and 85s and so on and so forth. :p

Deuce

I get car and driver and it says the SL 600 can do 0-60 in 3.6 seconds and the sl 65 amg in 3.8 seconds. And it says they both get 11.9 seconds for the quarter mile run. The only thing is that you will be reaching 123 mph with the SL 65 AMG at the quater mile and with the SL 600 it is at 120 mph. But before that Car and Driver says not to call them and ask for a competitive test because there is to much horsepower in the SL 65 AMG that the traction of the rear tires can not control the car, the rear tires on the SL 65 AMG are the same size as the SL 600. Now that the SL 65 AMG has 111 more hp and 148 more lbs-ft of torque than the SL 600, you can see that the SL 65 AMG does not have good rear traction tires. This is where AMG made a mistake, they probably saw the problem but could not put a bigger tire on the car and decided that it would be okay, well they were wrong, cause the SL 600 can beat a SL 65 AMG, which is $50 to $60,000 less.

Still good, that is really fast, I like it, so what does this mean for the SLR? IS it faster than what they claim, 3.8 seconds is the 0 to 60 for the SLR. And how about the SLK 55 AMG, I feel like my car is faster than what they claim to be 0 to 60 in 4.8, i think it is a little faster.

Improviz

Afaik, nobody here has taken theirs to the strip and videotaped it...Lexani, you could be the first!

Saw a gorgeous SL600 today...lovely car.

Lexani

I never was into tracks. I'll do a run or two on the street or something, but I would never go to the track. Might hurt my credibility, but-- I don't like going to the track. Went there once with a friend, and I saw this Lamborghini Murcielago run an 11.9 and it ticked me off. Because he had a chance agaisnt my SL6. Sounds crazy, but I hate losing. :p On the street, the chance of me running into a Lamborghini are slim to none, so Im king!!!!!!

Also- related to track, I have heard talk of different types of tires to use, are my Michellens bad? If I went to the track with Michellens would I be slow? Im confused. I never was into tires. I just always knew low-profile looked awefully nice.

BTW: If not conflict, may I ask in what state/city or as much as you would like to give, do you reside? I would not mind meeting with you- it would be awesome, I have always wanted a run agaisnt an E55. I live in Califronia, Huntington Beach. So... around this area?

adx

Never to late for this discussion. What ever happen to the video with your SL600 and SL55?

Lexani

Not exactly Mr. Current affairs, eh? Check the thread, technical problems, thats why next time I go out with my friend, we use his camera. I don't know what Im doing. Obviously. Its all good. I don't mind being labeled a liar.

adx

Who's labeling you a liar, I just want to see the video.

Lexani

A few people. I know there out there. Tuscan Raider, CLK430ROB, reggid-- I mean, need I continue? Come on, check the thread bud. But like I said, I see where there coming from, so I respect their beliefs on the matter.

adx

That thread goes on and on and on. To save time, I just simply ask.

Improviz

....and I do not have an E55, but a CLK55.

SL BRABUS

Better be careful..... ....M&M might show up and race you... ....lol.... :p ..

Improviz

....yeah, that would be fun! I'd have a full camera crew on hand for that one!!

SamE55

I watched a drag racing video of an SL65 doing 1/4 mile in 11.6 seconds and it was bone stock

Lexani

Lexani

Not doubting that.

Bilal

My guess is, and treynor will confirm this is, that particular SL600 was a Renntech-tuned motor. The stock engines are pretty much cranking out close to 580hp. Put that car on drag slicks and you get 0-60 in 3.6, on the street NO ONE will get that time.


The stock power dyno's of 600's are pretty much ridiculous because Brabus said with their 570 T12 kit for the 600 engine which just gives more boost that the stock turbo's were pretty much on the limit. This makes sense since only small turbos that can cope with the exhaust gases of a 5.5 V12 will give such immense low-mid range torque. But what is Brabus thinking charging for a 570hp upgarde when the stock motor is already pumping out that much! Fleecers I tell ya!

Chappy

https://mbworld.org/forums/showthrea...5&page=4&pp=10

Erik

I have to admit I am a bit supprised by the numbers gotten.

They look a bit strange to, according to Improwiz`s post they got this numbers

0-60: 3.4
0-100: 8.9
0-120: 11.9
1/4: 11.9@120 mph

If I compare with some results gotten in Europe I noticed something.
We use 62 mph ( 100 kph), but I think you agree if we add +/- a 1 tenth for the 60 - 62 mph we are not far from reality, OK.
Lets say for arguments sake the SL600 in this test would pass 62 mph in 3,5 sec..... (at least less than 3,6.)

Look at this just for fun.....
3,4 sec to 60 or 3,5 to 100 kph is insanly fast, its faster than;
SLR by 0,4 sec ( 3,9 sec to 62 mph),
Tech Art Porsche Bi Turbo 626 Hp/850Nm, 3150 Punds by 0,5 sec. 4 sec to 62 mph
Lambo Murch 580 Hp AWD by 0,4 sec, 3,9 sec to 62 mph
Porsche CGT by 0,3 sec. 0-62 mph in 3,8.
BMW M5 by 1,3 sec. 0-62 mph in 4,7 sec.
MB SL55 by 0,8 sec, 0-62 in 4,3

Im have a hard time to see how a big heavy car can outrun a car with more Hp and much less weight like the SLR, the and the Carrara GT

Then if we look at the 0-100 time it gets strange.

SL 600- 8,9
SLR-7,6
CGT-7,1
Tech Art Porsche - 7,8
Lambo Murch - 8,9
BMW M5 - 9,2
MB55SL - 9,4

Now, the SL 600 0-62 mph is by far the fastest, but if we look at the 62-100 mph sprint it is the slowest.....

62 - 100 mph:
SL 600- 5,4
SLR- 3,7
CGT- 3,3
Tech Art Porsche - 3,8
Lambo Murch - 5
BMW M5 - 4,7
MB55SL - 5,3

Does this make any sence. The fastest car to 62 mph is here suddenly the slowest of them all.

The SL is not fast due to amazing grip and 4 WD, no its a car with 2WD with enough torque to pull a train and that torque should not just run out after 62 mph.

Even the M5 and the SL55 is faster from 62 and up to 100 mph.......

So to me it looks like, either the 62 mph time wrong or the 100 mph wrong.... , The 62 time is to fast or the 100 mph is to slow. Either way it looks like someone did mistake here.

All times I have quoted is from the same mag and driver and should be representative from what this car can do with a real PRO begind the wheel. Test are made on the same track. NOT on the same day, but still they should be close enough for comparisson

So please dont start and hit me in the head with all kind of report from other mags....

Its late, so I may have been wrong in my calculation...

M-phibian

This never happened. It's not on video, therefore it's complete and utter BS. Sound familiar, Imp?

miroj

Many of the gains derived from a supercharger eminate from the greatly improved combustion. It is one of the few improvements that actually aid engine performance as compared to some types of technology that simply add heat and wear.