Sort of mad right now
05-07-2008, 05:54 PM
#26
MBWorld Fanatic!
Thread Starter
I did 186MPH in my Renntech'd S65. I did the same thing. It was a highway in Montana during the day with no cars around... It was a one time thing and I just had to do it... AMAZING feeling. All I can say is that it was a rush and that I will never do it again.... I actually recorded my speedometer by the passenger.
The tires and cops are the only thing that make me nervous. Good to hear from you. Haven't seen you on the forum much but of course I usually hang out here on the W221 mostly.
05-08-2008, 10:04 AM
#27
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 259
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C350
Yes thats true.. around here any ticket over 110 is pretty much a license suspension and anything above that usually gets you picking up trash on the side of the road for 10 days.
Still I had a chance to take out the stock S63 and I agree the performance is amazing.. its strange to feel such a big heavy car accelerate that fast.
btw: how has your experience been with the work renntech did.. seeing the gains you got has got me thinking about seeing what they can do with my C.
05-08-2008, 11:53 AM
#28
Super Member
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Paradise (a.k.a. Austin, TX)
Posts: 888
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
'09 S63 AMG
I did 186MPH in my Renntech'd S65. I did the same thing. It was a highway in Montana during the day with no cars around... It was a one time thing and I just had to do it... AMAZING feeling. All I can say is that it was a rush and that I will never do it again.... I actually recorded my speedometer by the passenger.
Wow!
05-13-2008, 04:16 PM
#29
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 340
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm glad to see that Bob stepped up to help you out. We've been a RENNtech dealer for over 3 years now and only have the upmost amount of respect for RENNtech and there staff there. I'm sure that the speed limiter has been removed, it is typically moved to about 186 or 200mph.
enjoy! and get it dyno'd again once you get the 93 in there.
enjoy! and get it dyno'd again once you get the 93 in there.
05-13-2008, 06:28 PM
#30
MBWorld Fanatic!
Thread Starter
I'm glad to see that Bob stepped up to help you out. We've been a RENNtech dealer for over 3 years now and only have the upmost amount of respect for RENNtech and there staff there. I'm sure that the speed limiter has been removed, it is typically moved to about 186 or 200mph.
enjoy! and get it dyno'd again once you get the 93 in there.
enjoy! and get it dyno'd again once you get the 93 in there.
Yes, Bob and the guys did a great job and always get it back quickly. It was only down 2 days! I can tell already that the torque is awesome. I rarely tap into that much power....usually only when needing to squeeze into traffic while in a merging situation. Otherwise, you'd think I'm driving a 6 cylinder. I don't like to abuse my car.
05-21-2008, 11:28 PM
#32
MBWorld Fanatic!
Thread Starter
05-22-2008, 12:27 AM
#33
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: South Orange County, CA
Posts: 5,143
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
4 wheels
Good to see Renntech helped you out there. If you ever come by the SoCal area and want a speed rush, let me know. I have a CLS55 with K4 an a brand spanking new SL63 you can test out.
As for the S65 it truly is rush, my father wanted an S65 instead of his S600 and just this week, I traded it in for him. The S65 is a true beast in every aspect.
As for the S65 it truly is rush, my father wanted an S65 instead of his S600 and just this week, I traded it in for him. The S65 is a true beast in every aspect.
05-22-2008, 07:20 AM
#34
Newbie
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
S350 - 2008
I did 186MPH in my Renntech'd S65. I did the same thing. It was a highway in Montana during the day with no cars around... It was a one time thing and I just had to do it... AMAZING feeling. All I can say is that it was a rush and that I will never do it again.... I actually recorded my speedometer by the passenger.
I like very high speed, but I never have experince of driving my car like a rocket , it must be awsome, unfortuntly the max speed that I can get from my car is 150 mph no more..
05-24-2008, 10:14 PM
#35
MBWorld Fanatic!
Thread Starter
Does anyone know if there is a set universal standard as to where the value for HP and TQ is derived from..... Is it at the flywheel, or the rear wheel?????
I want to know which location does MB, Renntech, Carlsson, Wald, Brabus, etc, derive their numbers from? Are they always quoting flywheel TQ and HP just to give us a high number?
My hunch is the flywheel , but I may be wrong. If it is the rear wheel, then I'm not even getting the advertised stock MB S600 HP or TQ !!!!!!
I want to know which location does MB, Renntech, Carlsson, Wald, Brabus, etc, derive their numbers from? Are they always quoting flywheel TQ and HP just to give us a high number?
My hunch is the flywheel , but I may be wrong. If it is the rear wheel, then I'm not even getting the advertised stock MB S600 HP or TQ !!!!!!
Last edited by trumpet1; 05-24-2008 at 10:36 PM.
05-24-2008, 10:25 PM
#36
Member
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada
Posts: 160
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
'08 CL63
Does anyone know if there is a set universal standard as to where the value for HP and TQ is derived from..... Is it at the flywheel, or the rear wheel?????
I want to know which location does MB, Renntech, Carlsson, Wald, Brabus, etc, derive their numbers from? Are they always quoting flywheel TQ and HP just to give us a high number?
In other words, if you were looking at any car's advertised HP/TQ numbers, which location are you to assume the company is referring to? Flywheel or rear wheel?
My hunch is the flywheel , but I may be wrong. If it is the rear wheel, then I'm not even getting the advertised stock MB S600 HP or TQ !!!!!!
I want to know which location does MB, Renntech, Carlsson, Wald, Brabus, etc, derive their numbers from? Are they always quoting flywheel TQ and HP just to give us a high number?
In other words, if you were looking at any car's advertised HP/TQ numbers, which location are you to assume the company is referring to? Flywheel or rear wheel?
My hunch is the flywheel , but I may be wrong. If it is the rear wheel, then I'm not even getting the advertised stock MB S600 HP or TQ !!!!!!
Dave
05-24-2008, 10:30 PM
#37
Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Long Island
Posts: 179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Turbonetics G35
Trumpet, have no doubt you were thoughtful in terms of where to test such speeds....
Having done my own "testing" of my prior '07 CL600, I suspect real issues w/600 in terms of 100++ MPH are tires, steering, chassis, brakes and generally poor US pavement.....
Now drive CL63 030 (186 MPH limited), but top speeds are fairly meaningless to me....have always argued precision/stability at 125++MPH has various controversial risk/reward considerations, even in Germany...
And fully agree...aftermkt stuff is almost always a waste of money....the latest/greatest factory-spec stuff is usually best available tech; am always amused how my dealer (a very good major dealer where I'm treated very well) can barely deliver my cars w/appropriate tire P's and accomplish minor stuff like topping my oil or doing an oil change....wouldn't trust any (even reputed) post-factory place to do much else....
Have no issues w/frequently trading-in AMGs to get new copies of latest/greatest-tech, but refuse to waste my money on anything aftermkt or on any major svc costs...would rather deploy money for new, latest/greatest-tech cars more often....will argue today's cars are rather akin to smartphones....who wants a >1-2yo Blkberry/iPhone????
Having done my own "testing" of my prior '07 CL600, I suspect real issues w/600 in terms of 100++ MPH are tires, steering, chassis, brakes and generally poor US pavement.....
Now drive CL63 030 (186 MPH limited), but top speeds are fairly meaningless to me....have always argued precision/stability at 125++MPH has various controversial risk/reward considerations, even in Germany...
And fully agree...aftermkt stuff is almost always a waste of money....the latest/greatest factory-spec stuff is usually best available tech; am always amused how my dealer (a very good major dealer where I'm treated very well) can barely deliver my cars w/appropriate tire P's and accomplish minor stuff like topping my oil or doing an oil change....wouldn't trust any (even reputed) post-factory place to do much else....
Have no issues w/frequently trading-in AMGs to get new copies of latest/greatest-tech, but refuse to waste my money on anything aftermkt or on any major svc costs...would rather deploy money for new, latest/greatest-tech cars more often....will argue today's cars are rather akin to smartphones....who wants a >1-2yo Blkberry/iPhone????
I agree with you on buying factory tuned cars and leaving them be.
There is nothing better than a fast factory tuned car, you get none of the noises, smells, or problems that cars with tons of aftermarket upgrades have.
05-24-2008, 10:40 PM
#38
MBWorld Fanatic!
Does anyone know if there is a set universal standard as to where the value for HP and TQ is derived from..... Is it at the flywheel, or the rear wheel?????
I want to know which location does MB, Renntech, Carlsson, Wald, Brabus, etc, derive their numbers from? Are they always quoting flywheel TQ and HP just to give us a high number?
In other words, if you were looking at any car's advertised HP/TQ numbers, which location are you to assume the company is referring to? Flywheel or rear wheel?
My hunch is the flywheel , but I may be wrong. If it is the rear wheel, then I'm not even getting the advertised stock MB S600 HP or TQ !!!!!!
I want to know which location does MB, Renntech, Carlsson, Wald, Brabus, etc, derive their numbers from? Are they always quoting flywheel TQ and HP just to give us a high number?
In other words, if you were looking at any car's advertised HP/TQ numbers, which location are you to assume the company is referring to? Flywheel or rear wheel?
My hunch is the flywheel , but I may be wrong. If it is the rear wheel, then I'm not even getting the advertised stock MB S600 HP or TQ !!!!!!
I tend to drive any of these cars on real-world fast fwys and mtn twisties.....and assess qualitative, subjective mid-range accel, precision/stability, braking, etc vs real-world, sometimes bumpy, wet roads....and draw own conclusions....
And mfrs are always iterating cars...esp consider that easier, more intra-MY debugs/refinements are poss in era of advcd software/hardware....for ex., my '07 SL65 had simply awful tq/trac balance....would drive my '07 CL600....and currently drive my underpowered CL63 030 faster in most conds than my SL65....
Recently test-drove '08 CL65....was fairly impressed w/tq/trac balance....
Recently rd a review of '09 SL65 in which reviewer indicated he was told AMG titrated throttle response of 65 for better trac balance in certain maneuvers....and reviewer seemed impressed w/latest changes....
Overall dynamics are far more complex than any claimed hp/tq....or 0-xxx MPH value....
BTW, I also have a <5mi daily commute (I wish I had the 80mi+ SF-MenloPk daily roundtrip commute
)....it's almost criminal to not explore cars like these on interesting nearby rds on wkend AMs....I had immense fun driving my humble CL600 in mtn twisties and esp on fast fwys....
05-25-2008, 09:13 AM
#42
Out Of Control!!
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: West Michigan
Posts: 18,414
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes
on
5 Posts
2007 E63
Does anyone know if there is a set universal standard as to where the value for HP and TQ is derived from..... Is it at the flywheel, or the rear wheel?????
I want to know which location does MB, Renntech, Carlsson, Wald, Brabus, etc, derive their numbers from? Are they always quoting flywheel TQ and HP just to give us a high number?
My hunch is the flywheel , but I may be wrong. If it is the rear wheel, then I'm not even getting the advertised stock MB S600 HP or TQ !!!!!!
I want to know which location does MB, Renntech, Carlsson, Wald, Brabus, etc, derive their numbers from? Are they always quoting flywheel TQ and HP just to give us a high number?
My hunch is the flywheel , but I may be wrong. If it is the rear wheel, then I'm not even getting the advertised stock MB S600 HP or TQ !!!!!!
05-26-2008, 01:04 PM
#43
MBWorld Fanatic!
05-26-2008, 03:59 PM
#44
MBWorld Fanatic!
Thread Starter
Nothing went wrong. It's just that the car already had enough stock power for American roadways and I guess I wished that I had used that money for adding the AMG package instead. That's about the only thing that I can think of missing on an S600.
That would have made a bigger impact on the car than power. Let's face it, in USA, we have no reason to go over 80 mph in some instances and a car with 600+ ft/lb of TQ will be plenty enough to zip through a tight spot any day.
But nothing went wrong. I guess what I'm saying is I wish I could have gotten an S65
05-27-2008, 12:13 PM
#45
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Arizona
Posts: 3,703
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
3 Posts
SL55AMG, Ferrari 348, Ferrari Testarossa, Ferrari F40, Ferrari Mondial t, Ducati 916, Indycar
Nothing went wrong. It's just that the car already had enough stock power for American roadways and I guess I wished that I had used that money for adding the AMG package instead. That's about the only thing that I can think of missing on an S600.
That would have made a bigger impact on the car than power. Let's face it, in USA, we have no reason to go over 80 mph in some instances and a car with 600+ ft/lb of TQ will be plenty enough to zip through a tight spot any day.
But nothing went wrong. I guess what I'm saying is I wish I could have gotten an S65
That would have made a bigger impact on the car than power. Let's face it, in USA, we have no reason to go over 80 mph in some instances and a car with 600+ ft/lb of TQ will be plenty enough to zip through a tight spot any day.
But nothing went wrong. I guess what I'm saying is I wish I could have gotten an S65
Take the SL55 for instance. In stock form the SC kicks on around 2200-2500 RPM. One of the things that we do is get the SC to kick on around 1400 RPM. That alone will give the car a nice kick in performance from a real world side.
btw... there is a really nice and very empty road in NV that one can hit 200 mph in an SL55.... but I wouldn't know anything about that!
05-27-2008, 08:56 PM
#46
MBWorld Fanatic!
Thread Starter
I'm now on the 2nd full tank of 93 octane after burning up that 89 octane gas as my driving has picked up a bit lately. I hope to get by the dyno shop and do another test on it. I'll post the results ASAP. I hope to see at least a 5% improvement maybe.
05-27-2008, 10:20 PM
#47
MBWorld Fanatic!
Nothing went wrong. It's just that the car already had enough stock power for American roadways and I guess I wished that I had used that money for adding the AMG package instead. That's about the only thing that I can think of missing on an S600.
That would have made a bigger impact on the car than power. Let's face it, in USA, we have no reason to go over 80 mph in some instances and a car with 600+ ft/lb of TQ will be plenty enough to zip through a tight spot any day.
But nothing went wrong. I guess what I'm saying is I wish I could have gotten an S65
That would have made a bigger impact on the car than power. Let's face it, in USA, we have no reason to go over 80 mph in some instances and a car with 600+ ft/lb of TQ will be plenty enough to zip through a tight spot any day.
But nothing went wrong. I guess what I'm saying is I wish I could have gotten an S65
Fund prob w/600 is, even w/its factory-spec steering/brakes/chassis, feel somewhat uncomfortable driving it very briskly, esp if accustomed to CL63 030/65 dynamics....many forget that theoretic hp/tq/accel/speed is meaningless unless chassis engineering/dynamics isn't over-compensating....
There are several urban fwys in CA which flow at 80+MPH in rush-hr.....so relevance of tq is local-dependent....doubt there are any urban fwys in mythical Germany that daily-stress-test tq/precision/stability/safety like 280 on SF Peninsula....
And have always argued tq/trac balance is critical...many iterations of factory-spec 65s had disappointing tq/trac balance....so much so that many jaded repeat new 65 buyers are now CL63 030 addicts....
To AMG's credit, they seem to be working hard to refine 65's tq/trac balance in subsequent iterations....I'll get '09 CL65 to see if true....if underwhelming, will simply revert to '09 CL63 030....if AMG struggles w/basic tq/trac balance and steering/brakes/chassis balance, it's simply laughable when any aftermkt shop attempts to "dial-in" more hp/tq.....there's no "free lunch" in many aspects of life or real-world dynamics/safety of any car....
05-28-2008, 12:02 AM
#48
MBWorld Fanatic!
Thread Starter
Trumpet, it's all about how car behaves/reassures on one's favorite local rds....
Fund prob w/600 is, even w/its factory-spec steering/brakes/chassis, feel somewhat uncomfortable driving it very briskly, esp if accustomed to CL63 030/65 dynamics....many forget that theoretic hp/tq/accel/speed is meaningless unless chassis engineering/dynamics isn't over-compensating....
There are several urban fwys in CA which flow at 80+MPH in rush-hr.....so relevance of tq is local-dependent....doubt there are any urban fwys in mythical Germany that daily-stress-test tq/precision/stability/safety like 280 on SF Peninsula....
And have always argued tq/trac balance is critical...many iterations of factory-spec 65s had disappointing tq/trac balance....so much so that many jaded repeat new 65 buyers are now CL63 030 addicts....
To AMG's credit, they seem to be working hard to refine 65's tq/trac balance in subsequent iterations....I'll get '09 CL65 to see if true....if underwhelming, will simply revert to '09 CL63 030....if AMG struggles w/basic tq/trac balance and steering/brakes/chassis balance, it's simply laughable when any aftermkt shop attempts to "dial-in" more hp/tq.....there's no "free lunch" in many aspects of life or real-world dynamics/safety of any car....
Fund prob w/600 is, even w/its factory-spec steering/brakes/chassis, feel somewhat uncomfortable driving it very briskly, esp if accustomed to CL63 030/65 dynamics....many forget that theoretic hp/tq/accel/speed is meaningless unless chassis engineering/dynamics isn't over-compensating....
There are several urban fwys in CA which flow at 80+MPH in rush-hr.....so relevance of tq is local-dependent....doubt there are any urban fwys in mythical Germany that daily-stress-test tq/precision/stability/safety like 280 on SF Peninsula....
And have always argued tq/trac balance is critical...many iterations of factory-spec 65s had disappointing tq/trac balance....so much so that many jaded repeat new 65 buyers are now CL63 030 addicts....
To AMG's credit, they seem to be working hard to refine 65's tq/trac balance in subsequent iterations....I'll get '09 CL65 to see if true....if underwhelming, will simply revert to '09 CL63 030....if AMG struggles w/basic tq/trac balance and steering/brakes/chassis balance, it's simply laughable when any aftermkt shop attempts to "dial-in" more hp/tq.....there's no "free lunch" in many aspects of life or real-world dynamics/safety of any car....
06-03-2008, 10:16 PM
#50
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 340
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Great to hear that your 600 is performing correct!
Have you had a chance to get it dynoed?
Let me know if you would like some pricing to improve your braking power.
Maybe its time to look into some brembos
James
Have you had a chance to get it dynoed?
Let me know if you would like some pricing to improve your braking power.
Maybe its time to look into some brembos
James
