C6 kill!
01-10-2007, 10:30 PM
#76
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,679
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CLS55 AMG
Hey bro! like I said "I agree w/some of your points" and yes anything can/will happen w/cars that are a sec apart... I just think a long w/this comes the usual exaggeration value that seems to be over looked continuously, for instance if this race had been w/say a newer 211 E55k there would be a lot more outrage and expletives being tossed around..
Anyway, wrt a modded C32, they do lay down some pretty good numbers, but they don't trap w/E55ks...
01-11-2007, 02:58 AM
#77
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Southern, CA.
Posts: 9,155
Likes: 0
Received 19 Likes
on
18 Posts
V12-Biturbo
Well, if I went to a Corvette forum and posted that I'd beaten an E55k in my car, I doubt that I'd catch as much flak as I would were I to post that I'd beaten a C6, so that's not really surprising. People are always like that....rootin' for the home team!
Sure, because they're more familiar with what each can do, I suspect...also, maybe they're following a modified version of Reagan's 11th Commandment: Thou shalt not speak ill of thy fellow Mercedes owners.
Well, sure, but also keep in mind that on the other hand, several Mercedes owners, myself included, pointed out that C6's are faster, and that this race was won by the jump and reaction time rather than superior weight/horsepower.
I thought yours had an airbox?? Or am I thinking of someone else...
Anyway, wrt a modded C32, they do lay down some pretty good numbers, but they don't trap w/E55ks...
Sure, because they're more familiar with what each can do, I suspect...also, maybe they're following a modified version of Reagan's 11th Commandment: Thou shalt not speak ill of thy fellow Mercedes owners.
Well, sure, but also keep in mind that on the other hand, several Mercedes owners, myself included, pointed out that C6's are faster, and that this race was won by the jump and reaction time rather than superior weight/horsepower.
I thought yours had an airbox?? Or am I thinking of someone else...
Anyway, wrt a modded C32, they do lay down some pretty good numbers, but they don't trap w/E55ks...
Yes I see, & appreciate you & others that speak the truth when discussing these races, what I meant when I said they make these races w/faster cars seem like the X Mercedes had an inevitable win coming there way,was the original posters 1st strory/post sets this tone & intimates further certain reactions by posting "Oh I smoked this guy no problamo" instead of "I ran a faster car today and beat him I know he would've beat me if this, or that wasn't in my favor"
Yes I know this is a Mercedes forum & I love it...Of course the members here are going to rally in favor of there favorite brand, no biggie just disecting the vernacular around here
Last edited by Thericker; 01-11-2007 at 03:03 AM.
01-11-2007, 08:08 PM
#78
Banned
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Poor, and false, analogy. You've seen the test numbers for ML63's, friend, and they're running low 13's. 'vette's are testing in the mid-to-high 12's.
That's less than one second of difference. Know any minivans which run within a second of a Viper??
And don't you think it's just kinda, sorta impressive that a 5,000+ pound SUV is within a second or so of a Corvette? To me, that's impressive.
Another poor analogy. The ML got on it, the 'vette got on it, i.e. the 'vette was fighting. And a win is a win. If I go to a strip, line up against a Viper, he blows his launch and runs a 13.6 @ 113 to my 13.2 @ 106, ya know what?
He lost the race, and it's me who'll be going home with the trophy.
Not really. Reality is the ML won. Your ego can't handle the reality, and so are trying to ruin it for people with silly false analogies. If you race a faster car and you win, you win. Happens all the time. Doesn't change the fact that the C6 is faster (as I wrote in the post that I linked you to and that you obviously didn't bother to read), any more than your silly tirade changes the outcome of this encounter.
That's less than one second of difference. Know any minivans which run within a second of a Viper??
And don't you think it's just kinda, sorta impressive that a 5,000+ pound SUV is within a second or so of a Corvette? To me, that's impressive.
Another poor analogy. The ML got on it, the 'vette got on it, i.e. the 'vette was fighting. And a win is a win. If I go to a strip, line up against a Viper, he blows his launch and runs a 13.6 @ 113 to my 13.2 @ 106, ya know what?
He lost the race, and it's me who'll be going home with the trophy.
Not really. Reality is the ML won. Your ego can't handle the reality, and so are trying to ruin it for people with silly false analogies. If you race a faster car and you win, you win. Happens all the time. Doesn't change the fact that the C6 is faster (as I wrote in the post that I linked you to and that you obviously didn't bother to read), any more than your silly tirade changes the outcome of this encounter.
You were not even there!
You are talking like you actualy saw it!
Here is the bottom line:
The ML63 is the BADDEST SUV on the planet,
and it will still not touch a C6 in a race.
Just because a guy CLAIMS he was racing a C6,
it doesn't mean the C6 was racing him.
Go to a track if you want to race.
But,
just because you get in front of a faster car while commuting,
it doesn't mean you RACED or BEAT him.
We are waiting for you back here in the state of reality.
Come back.
We miss you.
Last edited by TT C6; 01-11-2007 at 08:13 PM.
01-11-2007, 09:21 PM
#79
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Toronto,ON
Posts: 2,793
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AMG
Are you kidding us?
You were not even there!
You are talking like you actualy saw it!
Here is the bottom line:
The ML63 is the BADDEST SUV on the planet,
and it will still not touch a C6 in a race.
Just because a guy CLAIMS he was racing a C6,
it doesn't mean the C6 was racing him.
Go to a track if you want to race.
But,
just because you get in front of a faster car while commuting,
it doesn't mean you RACED or BEAT him.
We are waiting for you back here in the state of reality.
Come back.
We miss you.
You were not even there!
You are talking like you actualy saw it!
Here is the bottom line:
The ML63 is the BADDEST SUV on the planet,
and it will still not touch a C6 in a race.
Just because a guy CLAIMS he was racing a C6,
it doesn't mean the C6 was racing him.
Go to a track if you want to race.
But,
just because you get in front of a faster car while commuting,
it doesn't mean you RACED or BEAT him.
We are waiting for you back here in the state of reality.
Come back.
We miss you.
+1
01-11-2007, 10:24 PM
#80
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,679
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CLS55 AMG
This is pretty elementary, really....I mean, have you ever been to a drag strip in your life? I doubt it, because I'm not really talking rocket science here.
Is this really so difficult to grasp?
So, you think if you lined up against an ML63 and gave him a one second head start, that you would win??
Bull****.
If you let him start at time = 0, he will cross the finish line after 13.3 seconds. If you start at time = 1, *and* assuming you can launch and drive far better than most ****-talkers I've come across in person and could actually run a 12.7 in your C6 (which is NOT a foregone conclusion), you will cross the finish line at 13.7 seconds.
Now, I don't know how mathematics works in your world, if at all, but in mine, 13.3 seconds occurs before 13.7.
I have. Have you? I doubt it.
Either that, or you're just acting like a dunce on purpose to annoy all of us. In which case you're succeeding, but you're certainly not winning (or even presenting) any arguments.
If you have a 12.7 car and give a 13.3 car a one second head start, you will lose. Got that? Not "might", "may", "possibly", "could", etc.; will. 12.7 + 1 = 13.7. 13.7 > 13.3. First grade math. What a concept!
01-12-2007, 08:12 PM
#81
Banned
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Have I ever been to the track?
A couple times.
Name the time and place.
One condition.
I get to video tape the entire ordeal,
INCLUDING the verbal abuse you receive from all when you are exposed for what you are.
My PM box is open.
Come back to reality.
Somebody misses you,
right?
PS
A 100% stock base C6 runs 12.5 with a driver behind the wheel.
Not that I would know.
A couple times.
Name the time and place.
One condition.
I get to video tape the entire ordeal,
INCLUDING the verbal abuse you receive from all when you are exposed for what you are.
My PM box is open.
Come back to reality.
Somebody misses you,
right?
PS
A 100% stock base C6 runs 12.5 with a driver behind the wheel.
Not that I would know.
Last edited by TT C6; 01-12-2007 at 08:15 PM.
01-12-2007, 08:28 PM
#82
Member
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada
Posts: 160
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
'08 CL63
I'll bet that "eagleeye", the original poster, never in his wildest imagination thought that his experience beating the Corvette would draw this much "fire" !!
Improviz you're right on with your explanation of basic "stuff" to that corvette owner. He just don't get it
You probably should save your breath because he's not going to either.
Dave
Improviz you're right on with your explanation of basic "stuff" to that corvette owner. He just don't get it
You probably should save your breath because he's not going to either.
Dave
01-12-2007, 08:43 PM
#84
Banned
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You guys are going to teach me about automotive "stuff"?
If you brought a SLR,
you would leave embarrased.
MB builds the world's baddest SUV.
But the buck stops there.
You need to get over yourselves.
If you brought a SLR,
you would leave embarrased.
MB builds the world's baddest SUV.
But the buck stops there.
You need to get over yourselves.
01-12-2007, 09:16 PM
#85
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Toronto,ON
Posts: 2,793
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AMG
yea i dont know why you guys even continuing this thread, C6 vette is faster in 1/4 PERIOD. That particular race was either a big headstart for ML or vette had bad driver or it didnt race at all.
move on.
move on.
01-13-2007, 12:34 AM
#86
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,679
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CLS55 AMG
01-13-2007, 12:58 AM
#87
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,679
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CLS55 AMG
OK, so how about this: you show up at a strip in a stock C6. You run an ML63.
But see, here's the deal: you have to give him him a one second head start just as was described in the race.
And then beat him.
You're arguing that I'm wrong. I'm saying if you give an ML63 a one second spot, you'll lose.
And what would I be "exposed" as being? Somone who made a cohesive, logical argument, which you have yet to refute?
Why not show me where my math was wrong?
Are you claiming that if you run a 12.5, and he runs a 13.3, but you give him a one second head start, you'll win?
I asked you this once. You refused to answer.
Care to enlighten me and explain that one there, sparky?
For what? I have no desire to meet you and prove what I already proved with simple mathematics. Plus, I don't have an ML63 anyway...did you happen to read my sig there, genius?
If you run a 12.5 but start a second after a 13.3 car, he'll get to the 1/4 mile mark 0.2 seconds ahead of you.
This is simple subtraction.
Are you really too stupid to grasp it?
Again, I challenge you to provide any proof that the argument I made was unrealistic. You can't, which is why you keep dodging it and acting like a moron.
Again: why not show me where I made a mathematical error? You can't, because I didn't, and so you keep repeating the same stupid **** over and over, like a semiretarded parrot.
Braaak, sqwawks the semiretarded parrot...."come back to reality"...brraaakkk...."somebody misses you"....brraaak..."polly wanna cracker!!".
How is it that saying a car which runs a 12.7 (or, have it your way: a 12.5) would lose if it spots a 13.3 car one second in a 1/4 mile race unrealistic?
Remember, dip****: I *never* said that a C6 would lose to an ML63 if they both started the race at the same time. In fact, if you'd pull your head out of your *** long enough to go back and read my first post in this thread, you'd see that in fact I said exactly the opposite, and that the ONLY way the ML63 would beat a C6 is if he got the jump.
You claim that this is unrealistic. What you don't do is provide anything other than stupid remarks.
Care to explain what is unrealistic about what I wrote?
I'm waiting for an answer.
Try not sqwawking for a change and actually debate, parrot. What is unrealistic about what I wrote?
Idiot.
But see, here's the deal: you have to give him him a one second head start just as was described in the race.
And then beat him.
You're arguing that I'm wrong. I'm saying if you give an ML63 a one second spot, you'll lose.
Why not show me where my math was wrong?
Are you claiming that if you run a 12.5, and he runs a 13.3, but you give him a one second head start, you'll win?
I asked you this once. You refused to answer.
Care to enlighten me and explain that one there, sparky?
For what? I have no desire to meet you and prove what I already proved with simple mathematics. Plus, I don't have an ML63 anyway...did you happen to read my sig there, genius?
If you run a 12.5 but start a second after a 13.3 car, he'll get to the 1/4 mile mark 0.2 seconds ahead of you.
This is simple subtraction.
Are you really too stupid to grasp it?
Again, I challenge you to provide any proof that the argument I made was unrealistic. You can't, which is why you keep dodging it and acting like a moron.
Again: why not show me where I made a mathematical error? You can't, because I didn't, and so you keep repeating the same stupid **** over and over, like a semiretarded parrot.
Braaak, sqwawks the semiretarded parrot...."come back to reality"...brraaakkk...."somebody misses you"....brraaak..."polly wanna cracker!!".
How is it that saying a car which runs a 12.7 (or, have it your way: a 12.5) would lose if it spots a 13.3 car one second in a 1/4 mile race unrealistic?
Remember, dip****: I *never* said that a C6 would lose to an ML63 if they both started the race at the same time. In fact, if you'd pull your head out of your *** long enough to go back and read my first post in this thread, you'd see that in fact I said exactly the opposite, and that the ONLY way the ML63 would beat a C6 is if he got the jump.
You claim that this is unrealistic. What you don't do is provide anything other than stupid remarks.
Care to explain what is unrealistic about what I wrote?
I'm waiting for an answer.
Try not sqwawking for a change and actually debate, parrot. What is unrealistic about what I wrote?
Idiot.
01-13-2007, 01:01 AM
#88
How come.......
Does anyone else get a kick out of the same behavior that always happens with just about every kill? No matter what cars race, which forum....
{replace with any non Benz}
1. Hey I beat a {C6 twin turbo LPE with the 1000HP pacakge} in my Benz
2. BS thats impossible!
3. Awesome, great Kill!
4. Someone with 10 posts (Vette): Agreed
string theory shows that it is theoritically impossible... my Vette RULES THE WORLD
5. But its possible if there is human error
6. 0-10, 0-20......0-180mph shows clearly that the {C6} is faster. (R&T, Motortrend, Autoweek clippings)
7. But a win is a win
8. {Vette} dude was not racing
9. Agreed, {Vette} dude is a poor driver
10. this thread is beaten to a dead horse...lets close it
11.
I am done talking to myself dellusionally (sp)
{replace with any non Benz}
1. Hey I beat a {C6 twin turbo LPE with the 1000HP pacakge} in my Benz
2. BS thats impossible!
3. Awesome, great Kill!
4. Someone with 10 posts (Vette): Agreed
string theory shows that it is theoritically impossible... my Vette RULES THE WORLD5. But its possible if there is human error
6. 0-10, 0-20......0-180mph shows clearly that the {C6} is faster. (R&T, Motortrend, Autoweek clippings)
7. But a win is a win
8. {Vette} dude was not racing
9. Agreed, {Vette} dude is a poor driver
10. this thread is beaten to a dead horse...lets close it
11.
I am done talking to myself dellusionally (sp)
Last edited by e55 baller; 01-13-2007 at 10:41 AM.
01-13-2007, 04:05 AM
#89
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: mymbonline
Posts: 4,276
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
mymbonline
OK, so how about this: you show up at a strip in a stock C6. You run an ML63.
But see, here's the deal: you have to give him him a one second head start just as was described in the race.
And then beat him.
You're arguing that I'm wrong. I'm saying if you give an ML63 a one second spot, you'll lose.
And what would I be "exposed" as being? Somone who made a cohesive, logical argument, which you have yet to refute?
Why not show me where my math was wrong?
Are you claiming that if you run a 12.5, and he runs a 13.3, but you give him a one second head start, you'll win?
I asked you this once. You refused to answer.
Care to enlighten me and explain that one there, sparky?
For what? I have no desire to meet you and prove what I already proved with simple mathematics. Plus, I don't have an ML63 anyway...did you happen to read my sig there, genius?
If you run a 12.5 but start a second after a 13.3 car, he'll get to the 1/4 mile mark 0.2 seconds ahead of you.
This is simple subtraction.
Are you really too stupid to grasp it?
Again, I challenge you to provide any proof that the argument I made was unrealistic. You can't, which is why you keep dodging it and acting like a moron.
Again: why not show me where I made a mathematical error? You can't, because I didn't, and so you keep repeating the same stupid **** over and over, like a semiretarded parrot.
Braaak, sqwawks the semiretarded parrot...."come back to reality"...brraaakkk...."somebody misses you"....brraaak..."polly wanna cracker!!".
How is it that saying a car which runs a 12.7 (or, have it your way: a 12.5) would lose if it spots a 13.3 car one second in a 1/4 mile race unrealistic?
Remember, dip****: I *never* said that a C6 would lose to an ML63 if they both started the race at the same time. In fact, if you'd pull your head out of your *** long enough to go back and read my first post in this thread, you'd see that in fact I said exactly the opposite, and that the ONLY way the ML63 would beat a C6 is if he got the jump.
You claim that this is unrealistic. What you don't do is provide anything other than stupid remarks.
Care to explain what is unrealistic about what I wrote?
I'm waiting for an answer.
Try not sqwawking for a change and actually debate, parrot. What is unrealistic about what I wrote?
Idiot.
But see, here's the deal: you have to give him him a one second head start just as was described in the race.
And then beat him.
You're arguing that I'm wrong. I'm saying if you give an ML63 a one second spot, you'll lose.
And what would I be "exposed" as being? Somone who made a cohesive, logical argument, which you have yet to refute?
Why not show me where my math was wrong?
Are you claiming that if you run a 12.5, and he runs a 13.3, but you give him a one second head start, you'll win?
I asked you this once. You refused to answer.
Care to enlighten me and explain that one there, sparky?
For what? I have no desire to meet you and prove what I already proved with simple mathematics. Plus, I don't have an ML63 anyway...did you happen to read my sig there, genius?
If you run a 12.5 but start a second after a 13.3 car, he'll get to the 1/4 mile mark 0.2 seconds ahead of you.
This is simple subtraction.
Are you really too stupid to grasp it?
Again, I challenge you to provide any proof that the argument I made was unrealistic. You can't, which is why you keep dodging it and acting like a moron.
Again: why not show me where I made a mathematical error? You can't, because I didn't, and so you keep repeating the same stupid **** over and over, like a semiretarded parrot.
Braaak, sqwawks the semiretarded parrot...."come back to reality"...brraaakkk...."somebody misses you"....brraaak..."polly wanna cracker!!".
How is it that saying a car which runs a 12.7 (or, have it your way: a 12.5) would lose if it spots a 13.3 car one second in a 1/4 mile race unrealistic?
Remember, dip****: I *never* said that a C6 would lose to an ML63 if they both started the race at the same time. In fact, if you'd pull your head out of your *** long enough to go back and read my first post in this thread, you'd see that in fact I said exactly the opposite, and that the ONLY way the ML63 would beat a C6 is if he got the jump.
You claim that this is unrealistic. What you don't do is provide anything other than stupid remarks.
Care to explain what is unrealistic about what I wrote?
I'm waiting for an answer.
Try not sqwawking for a change and actually debate, parrot. What is unrealistic about what I wrote?
Idiot.
nice ownage improviz
01-13-2007, 12:46 PM
#91
Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: England, UK
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AMG ML63, M3 CSL, Z4M Coupe, New Audi TT, Audi R8 (coming)
Here's a part of the story. Can't wait for 1/13!
http://www.autosport-international.c...ssId=pressRe47
http://www.autosport-international.c...ssId=pressRe47
For anyone who is interested, here is the sign in front of the stand which was displaying the ML63 at today's Autosport International Show.
01-13-2007, 01:10 PM
#92
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 339
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2012 C63 Black Series Coupe
01-13-2007, 11:57 PM
#94
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Southern, CA.
Posts: 9,155
Likes: 0
Received 19 Likes
on
18 Posts
V12-Biturbo
Yes I can handle this truth, can you? every tenth of a sec in a race = 1 car length, C6 Vette 12.5 1/4 ----- ml63 13.2 1/4 = 7 car lengths hell that's a beatin' SON
This is using the best 1/4 mile times reported for both ML63, & C6 vehicles...
since my C6 is A4 auto this is the best time 12.5, if I were to use M6 or A6 it would be much worse there bests are 12.20's all day long w/good driver in manual, and point and click w/new C6 A6 auto
01-14-2007, 12:10 AM
#95
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Southern, CA.
Posts: 9,155
Likes: 0
Received 19 Likes
on
18 Posts
V12-Biturbo
Yes I did read the sign...No weeping my C6 wasn't listed as one of the vehicles the ml63 could beat...
01-14-2007, 12:11 AM
#97
Member
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada
Posts: 160
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
'08 CL63
You're quick...responding that is
Any now you're saying that your chevy is quicker than the Aston Martin???? Come on!
Dave
01-14-2007, 12:12 AM
#98
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Southern, CA.
Posts: 9,155
Likes: 0
Received 19 Likes
on
18 Posts
V12-Biturbo
Nope, I read it allready, no biggie guy
You guys misunderstand me, I love high HP trucks, suv's, cars of every kind, especially luxury models such as the new ML63, I'd buy one in a sec if I had the money, it would be a great addition to my C6, I'd have the perf market nearly covered so to speak
You guys misunderstand me, I love high HP trucks, suv's, cars of every kind, especially luxury models such as the new ML63, I'd buy one in a sec if I had the money, it would be a great addition to my C6, I'd have the perf market nearly covered so to speak
Last edited by Thericker; 01-14-2007 at 12:16 AM.
01-14-2007, 12:18 AM
#99
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Southern, CA.
Posts: 9,155
Likes: 0
Received 19 Likes
on
18 Posts
V12-Biturbo
How is the C6 slower?
01-14-2007, 12:39 AM
#100
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Southern, CA.
Posts: 9,155
Likes: 0
Received 19 Likes
on
18 Posts
V12-Biturbo
The Aston Martin Vantage (the one the ml63 beats in article) is a slow over priced turd....
380HP
300TORQUE
0-60 in 5.1
Just because it's expensive doesn't mean it's fast! boy do you look funny now Rider1 read this and laugh at your self bro!
2006 Aston Martin Vantage
$117,000
General information provided by third-party sources.
2006 Aston Martin V8 Vantage Base
2 door Coupe, RWD, 4.3Liter Overview
Pricing
Standard Features
Options
Technical Specs
Specifications & Dimensions
Wheelbase 102.4 inches
Overall Length 172.5 inches
Vehicle Height 49.4 inches
Vehicle Width 73.5 inches
Curb Weight 3461 lbs
Seating Capacity 2/2 passengers
Final Assembly Location England
Brakes
Antilock Brakes Standard
Front and rear ventilated disc Standard
Braking assist Standard
Braking Distance in Feet(60mph - 0mph) 113.0ft
Drive
Rear wheel drive Standard
6-speed manual transmission Standard
Rear limited slip differential Standard
Engine
4.3L V8 380 hp gas Standard
Number of cylinders: 8
Number of valves: 32
Timing: Variable valve timing
Camshaft: Double overhead cam (DOHC)
Horsepower: 380 hp @ 7300 rpm
Torque: 302 ft-lbs @ 5000 rpm
Acceleration in Seconds (0-60mph): 5.1
Fuel Type: Premium unleaded fuel
Fuel Capacity (gallons): 20.2
Fuel Economy (City/Hwy): 13/19
Suspension
Four-wheel independent suspension Standard
Front and rear stabilizer bar Standard
Wheels
18 x 9.5 in. alloy Standard
Tires, P275/40R18 Z Standard
Tire type, performance Standard
18 x 8.5 in. alloy Standard front
Front Tires, P235/45R18 Z Standard
380HP
300TORQUE
0-60 in 5.1
Just because it's expensive doesn't mean it's fast! boy do you look funny now Rider1
read this and laugh at your self bro!2006 Aston Martin Vantage
$117,000
General information provided by third-party sources.
2006 Aston Martin V8 Vantage Base
2 door Coupe, RWD, 4.3Liter Overview
Pricing
Standard Features
Options
Technical Specs
Specifications & Dimensions
Wheelbase 102.4 inches
Overall Length 172.5 inches
Vehicle Height 49.4 inches
Vehicle Width 73.5 inches
Curb Weight 3461 lbs
Seating Capacity 2/2 passengers
Final Assembly Location England
Brakes
Antilock Brakes Standard
Front and rear ventilated disc Standard
Braking assist Standard
Braking Distance in Feet(60mph - 0mph) 113.0ft
Drive
Rear wheel drive Standard
6-speed manual transmission Standard
Rear limited slip differential Standard
Engine
4.3L V8 380 hp gas Standard
Number of cylinders: 8
Number of valves: 32
Timing: Variable valve timing
Camshaft: Double overhead cam (DOHC)
Horsepower: 380 hp @ 7300 rpm
Torque: 302 ft-lbs @ 5000 rpm
Acceleration in Seconds (0-60mph): 5.1
Fuel Type: Premium unleaded fuel
Fuel Capacity (gallons): 20.2
Fuel Economy (City/Hwy): 13/19
Suspension
Four-wheel independent suspension Standard
Front and rear stabilizer bar Standard
Wheels
18 x 9.5 in. alloy Standard
Tires, P275/40R18 Z Standard
Tire type, performance Standard
18 x 8.5 in. alloy Standard front
Front Tires, P235/45R18 Z Standard
Last edited by Thericker; 01-14-2007 at 12:43 AM.
