No more rear wheel drive 550's
Super Member
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 623
Likes: 131
From: pittsburgh
'25 740i; '15 targa4s; '24 cayenne
"You live in Chicago and use it for what it is intended for! That is great.
If you lived somewhere that got no snow, would you still prefer the 4WD?"
probably would still prefer the 4matic. the added safety elements of the 4matic system are present as well in rainy conditions not just in snowy conditions. again - i didn't buy the car for a sporty ride. i bought it 1> because it was the safest thing out there (the 4matic system is just one component of said safety); 2> it looked good and drove/rode like a dream; 3> it reminded me of the benzos of the late 80s (126 chassis) in terms of solid build and quality; and 4> it was a terrific departure from that sorry-of-an-excuse 2006 s-class i was driving at the time before i traded for the s550.
i know this departs from your original observation - but i thought i'd give you more opinions for your buck! always a good thing in this recession! ha. ha.
If you lived somewhere that got no snow, would you still prefer the 4WD?"
probably would still prefer the 4matic. the added safety elements of the 4matic system are present as well in rainy conditions not just in snowy conditions. again - i didn't buy the car for a sporty ride. i bought it 1> because it was the safest thing out there (the 4matic system is just one component of said safety); 2> it looked good and drove/rode like a dream; 3> it reminded me of the benzos of the late 80s (126 chassis) in terms of solid build and quality; and 4> it was a terrific departure from that sorry-of-an-excuse 2006 s-class i was driving at the time before i traded for the s550.
i know this departs from your original observation - but i thought i'd give you more opinions for your buck! always a good thing in this recession! ha. ha.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,063
Likes: 2
From: Charlotte, NC
2002 S430, 2004 Cobra, 2004 Tahoe
Super Member
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 950
Likes: 3
From: Maui, Hawaii
CLS63, GLK350
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 1,522
Likes: 162
From: CT
Mercedes, Porsche, BMW, Tesla
The end of December of 2008, the dealer had a new 2008 with the same equipment as the new 2009 setting next to it. I wanted the 2008 because it had ABC and not 4matic. I have a Lexus LX470 for bad weather. I also saved a few $$$ buying the new 2008. Car listed for $118K and I paid $88K. I figured it was a win/win/win.
Super Member
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 972
Likes: 28
From: DFW
BMW M850i Gran Coupe
Well, the 221 doesn't weigh anywhere near that, and I wasn't really talking about the newer models, or the AMGs. I was referring more to the 140 and 126. Also, since the AMGs are only available in RWD, I didn't think I needed to specify. Clearly, some of the S-Class models are designed to be sporty.
That said, I have driven an S65, and while the car was seriously quick, you can absolutely feel the heft in the turns. Even with ABC in its firmest setting, the car still feels like it weighs 4500lbs.
Just because they show a car doing this kind of nonsense doesn't mean thats what it was intended for. I think the point was that they thoroughly tested the car, not that it was really sporty.
Not to mention, that thing rolls like a schooner around those bends.
That said, I have driven an S65, and while the car was seriously quick, you can absolutely feel the heft in the turns. Even with ABC in its firmest setting, the car still feels like it weighs 4500lbs.
Just because they show a car doing this kind of nonsense doesn't mean thats what it was intended for. I think the point was that they thoroughly tested the car, not that it was really sporty.
Not to mention, that thing rolls like a schooner around those bends.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,278
Likes: 377
From: San Jose area
'19 E63S sedan
Based on you several posts here, I'm not quite sure why you are driving your S500 as surely a GL would more suit your comments. The "S" in S-Class still stands for "sport" and even going back to the W126, this Mercedes model is one of the finest handling large cars ever built. Obviously, the past 30 years have improved the breed, but even by 1980 standards, the 500SEL etc was one incredibly quick, well handling large sedan. And speaking of "heft", you probably can't name another sedan that can keep pace with an S65, on or off of the track.
As far as I'm concerned, this is what the car is intended for. If not, somebody ought to tell AMG what is can do.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 2,318
Likes: 0
From: OC, SoCal
08 S65, 06 M3 CS(stick), 02 BMW X5 4.6iS, 07 R1 Raven, 08 F-450 4x4, 08 CooperS JCW
Based on you several posts here, I'm not quite sure why you are driving your S500 as surely a GL would more suit your comments. The "S" in S-Class still stands for "sport" and even going back to the W126, this Mercedes model is one of the finest handling large cars ever built. Obviously, the past 30 years have improved the breed, but even by 1980 standards, the 500SEL etc was one incredibly quick, well handling large sedan. And speaking of "heft", you probably can't name another sedan that can keep pace with an S65, on or off of the track.
As regards handling, the S is better than you'd think but remains a 5000lb beast and nothing's going to make it handle like a true sports sedan.
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: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,271
Likes: 1
From: CA
2010 CL65
Precise and stable chassis performance on a smooth, dry track w/no oncoming traffic is arguably rather different than mountain twisties (like the many on SF Peninsula) which can have many tight turns, camber changes, bumpy stretches, oncoming cars, bicyclists, damp spots, etc
Some lighter, alleged perf cars with great track times are rather disappointing to drive in mtn twisties, e.g., 997TT's annoying turbo lag, unstable PASM damping, effeminate exhaust note, etc
IMO, cannot confidently (and enjoyably) drive any car quickly on a public road if car lacks class-leading active/passive safety (assuming responsible driver judgment)
That said, most fun I've had in yrs of driving various perf cars in mtn twisties is in my 5000lb CL65
Whoover, you'd appreciate this...was on coastal side of Woodside mtns today AM and had rather damp roads from coastal fog/mist....the traction of '09 CL65 is truly astonishing in the wet even on those twisties....one of my gripes w/'07 SL65 I previously had was its awful traction, even if roads were semi-damp or somewhat bumpy....I suspect AMG keeps refining the throttle response, ESP and perf tires of these 65s....the '09 CL65 is so much more confidence inspiring than was the '07 SL65 (a damn good overall car in its day)
And having had several AWD 997TT and 996TTS in past would argue AWD is often a false security blanket, even on rainy CA fwys, let alone Eastern Winter roads....proper tires, brakes and chassis set-up will win over AWD in most settings from a safety standpoint; would rather drive an AMG w/a more perf-oriented chassis and brakes w/proper tires...vs any AWD non-AMG w/girlie brakes and a sloppy, primitive Airmatic chassis
Some lighter, alleged perf cars with great track times are rather disappointing to drive in mtn twisties, e.g., 997TT's annoying turbo lag, unstable PASM damping, effeminate exhaust note, etc
IMO, cannot confidently (and enjoyably) drive any car quickly on a public road if car lacks class-leading active/passive safety (assuming responsible driver judgment)
That said, most fun I've had in yrs of driving various perf cars in mtn twisties is in my 5000lb CL65
Whoover, you'd appreciate this...was on coastal side of Woodside mtns today AM and had rather damp roads from coastal fog/mist....the traction of '09 CL65 is truly astonishing in the wet even on those twisties....one of my gripes w/'07 SL65 I previously had was its awful traction, even if roads were semi-damp or somewhat bumpy....I suspect AMG keeps refining the throttle response, ESP and perf tires of these 65s....the '09 CL65 is so much more confidence inspiring than was the '07 SL65 (a damn good overall car in its day)
And having had several AWD 997TT and 996TTS in past would argue AWD is often a false security blanket, even on rainy CA fwys, let alone Eastern Winter roads....proper tires, brakes and chassis set-up will win over AWD in most settings from a safety standpoint; would rather drive an AMG w/a more perf-oriented chassis and brakes w/proper tires...vs any AWD non-AMG w/girlie brakes and a sloppy, primitive Airmatic chassis
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 4,949
Likes: 39
From: Clifton, NJ
96 and 08 911 turbos
Based on you several posts here, I'm not quite sure why you are driving your S500 as surely a GL would more suit your comments. The "S" in S-Class still stands for "sport" and even going back to the W126, this Mercedes model is one of the finest handling large cars ever built. Obviously, the past 30 years have improved the breed, but even by 1980 standards, the 500SEL etc was one incredibly quick, well handling large sedan. And speaking of "heft", you probably can't name another sedan that can keep pace with an S65, on or off of the track.
Actually, the "S" stands for Sonderklasse or "special class," but your point is well taken. On the way to lunch today, I took a sweeping connector cloverleaf ramp at high speed (about 65 MPH at the apex) to show a passenger how ABC and 738 ft-lbs of torque allow the illusion of suspension of the laws of physics.
As far as I'm concerned, this is what the car is intended for. If not, somebody ought to tell AMG what is can do.
As far as I'm concerned, this is what the car is intended for. If not, somebody ought to tell AMG what is can do.
Precise and stable chassis performance on a smooth, dry track w/no oncoming traffic is arguably rather different than mountain twisties (like the many on SF Peninsula) which can have many tight turns, camber changes, bumpy stretches, oncoming cars, bicyclists, damp spots, etc
Some lighter, alleged perf cars with great track times are rather disappointing to drive in mtn twisties, e.g., 997TT's annoying turbo lag, unstable PASM damping, effeminate exhaust note, etc
That said, most fun I've had in yrs of driving various perf cars in mtn twisties is in my 5000lb CL65
any AWD non-AMG w/girlie brakes and a sloppy, primitive Airmatic chassis
Some lighter, alleged perf cars with great track times are rather disappointing to drive in mtn twisties, e.g., 997TT's annoying turbo lag, unstable PASM damping, effeminate exhaust note, etc
That said, most fun I've had in yrs of driving various perf cars in mtn twisties is in my 5000lb CL65
any AWD non-AMG w/girlie brakes and a sloppy, primitive Airmatic chassis
A precise and stable chassis allow the suspension to work properly on those bumps and such, provided the suspension design and parts choice is suited to both the chassis, the weight, etc. Not to mention, alignment has a lot to do with it.
Any person who calls a 997TT an "alleged" performance car is deranged.
Effeminate exhaust note? Seriously, do you have a prescription for LSD or something?
What I've concluded from all your posts that 5000lb sedans are the most fun to drive on twisty roads is that you simply have very little real driving skill. If you don't have more fun in something like a Lotus Exige S, then you simply can't drive. period.
Girlie brakes? WTF?
Primitive Airmatic chassis? Seriously, you spew this BS again and again, and I call you out on it every single time. The ABC vs Airmatic relates to the shock absorbers, not the chassis. Obviously the chassis of the cars are the same, airmatic or not. There is nothing so super advanced about ABC either. If you want something innovative, look at the magnetic fluid shocks used by both Ferrari and the Corvette. All without 3000psi of fluid, leaks every which way, and $800 fluid flushes.
I don't know how you make your money, but it certainly is not as a professional driver or automotive suspension engineer.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,278
Likes: 377
From: San Jose area
'19 E63S sedan
The car is certainly heavy and has inherent understeer. That said, the ABC is effective enough to make all manners of decreasing radius turns and twisties a joy. And I have owned Porsches, so when I say that while not a sports car by any means, an AMG S-class is much more agile than it has any right to be I speak from experience.
Girlie brakes? WTF?
Primitive Airmatic chassis? Seriously, you spew this BS again and again, and I call you out on it every single time. The ABC vs Airmatic relates to the shock absorbers, not the chassis. Obviously the chassis of the cars are the same, airmatic or not. There is nothing so super advanced about ABC either. If you want something innovative, look at the magnetic fluid shocks used by both Ferrari and the Corvette. All without 3000psi of fluid, leaks every which way, and $800 fluid flushes.
Primitive Airmatic chassis? Seriously, you spew this BS again and again, and I call you out on it every single time. The ABC vs Airmatic relates to the shock absorbers, not the chassis. Obviously the chassis of the cars are the same, airmatic or not. There is nothing so super advanced about ABC either. If you want something innovative, look at the magnetic fluid shocks used by both Ferrari and the Corvette. All without 3000psi of fluid, leaks every which way, and $800 fluid flushes.
Sure the system is complicated, but my 80,000 miles have not been marred by any leaks. In fact, Airmatic cars seem to be prone to more problems.
Yes, the car is a lot more comfortable than a Ferrari or 'Vette, but of course that's the point. An S65 or CL65 is not a sports car, but it offers a very different driving experience than an Airmatic cousin.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 4,949
Likes: 39
From: Clifton, NJ
96 and 08 911 turbos
Actually, ABC only has two settings, Comfort and Sport, but in my experience they are very similar. In any case, my last 80K miles of driving (between an S55 and S65) have been in Sport.
The car is certainly heavy and has inherent understeer. That said, the ABC is effective enough to make all manners of decreasing radius turns and twisties a joy. And I have owned Porsches, so when I say that while not a sports car by any means, an AMG S-class is much more agile than it has any right to be I speak from experience.
ABC is much more than different shocks. Of course the basic suspension setup is the same (and quite sophisticated I might add -- four link up front and five in the rear -- so the chassis is nothing to sneeze at) but ABC's fully active control of body roll is far from a "shock absorber" difference. Lean is reduced by 90-95%, so your earlier references to soft rides and "rolling like a schooner" really speak to more time in an Airmatic car than an ABC one. I have driven both and can assure you they are totally different experiences.
Sure the system is complicated, but my 80,000 miles have not been marred by any leaks. In fact, Airmatic cars seem to be prone to more problems.
Yes, the car is a lot more comfortable than a Ferrari or 'Vette, but of course that's the point. An S65 or CL65 is not a sports car, but it offers a very different driving experience than an Airmatic cousin.
The car is certainly heavy and has inherent understeer. That said, the ABC is effective enough to make all manners of decreasing radius turns and twisties a joy. And I have owned Porsches, so when I say that while not a sports car by any means, an AMG S-class is much more agile than it has any right to be I speak from experience.
ABC is much more than different shocks. Of course the basic suspension setup is the same (and quite sophisticated I might add -- four link up front and five in the rear -- so the chassis is nothing to sneeze at) but ABC's fully active control of body roll is far from a "shock absorber" difference. Lean is reduced by 90-95%, so your earlier references to soft rides and "rolling like a schooner" really speak to more time in an Airmatic car than an ABC one. I have driven both and can assure you they are totally different experiences.
Sure the system is complicated, but my 80,000 miles have not been marred by any leaks. In fact, Airmatic cars seem to be prone to more problems.
Yes, the car is a lot more comfortable than a Ferrari or 'Vette, but of course that's the point. An S65 or CL65 is not a sports car, but it offers a very different driving experience than an Airmatic cousin.
Rolling like a Schooner was in reference to the 140 in the video posted.
As to the ABC sport modes, I have driven a S600 and S65, and neither felt that much more flat than my airmatic 500 in sports 2 (which I practically never use). I must have mistaken the ABC raise button (with two lights) with the sport button.
All in all, Im a tool guy, and I try to pick the best tool for a job. For mountain carving and real hard driving, I would drive a porsche. For straight line blasts, my mustang does pretty well. And for a comfortable ride to work or nights out at nice restaurants, the S-Class fits perfectly.
Also, to me, chassis is just what the suspension attaches to, not the suspension itself. Either way, I don't disagree that the suspension is of good design.
Surprisingly, the magnetic equipped vettes ride very nicely for what they are.
While we disagree on this point, Im certainly glad that you and I can discuss the points in a respectful manner.
cheers!
Last edited by Quadcammer; Mar 22, 2009 at 09:52 AM.
Super Member
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 888
Likes: 2
From: Paradise (a.k.a. Austin, TX)
'09 S63 AMG
I think you're right that it handles well for a big saloon, but as you've noted several times, it is not a sports car, and thats really my point.
Rolling like a Schooner was in reference to the 140 in the video posted.
As to the ABC sport modes, I have driven a S600 and S65, and neither felt that much more flat than my airmatic 500 in sports 2 (which I practically never use). I must have mistaken the ABC raise button (with two lights) with the sport button.
All in all, Im a tool guy, and I try to pick the best tool for a job. For mountain carving and real hard driving, I would drive a porsche. For straight line blasts, my mustang does pretty well. And for a comfortable ride to work or nights out at nice restaurants, the S-Class fits perfectly.
Also, to me, chassis is just what the suspension attaches to, not the suspension itself. Either way, I don't disagree that the suspension is of good design.
Surprisingly, the magnetic equipped vettes ride very nicely for what they are.
While we disagree on this point, Im certainly glad that you and I can discuss the points in a respectful manner.
cheers!
Rolling like a Schooner was in reference to the 140 in the video posted.
As to the ABC sport modes, I have driven a S600 and S65, and neither felt that much more flat than my airmatic 500 in sports 2 (which I practically never use). I must have mistaken the ABC raise button (with two lights) with the sport button.
All in all, Im a tool guy, and I try to pick the best tool for a job. For mountain carving and real hard driving, I would drive a porsche. For straight line blasts, my mustang does pretty well. And for a comfortable ride to work or nights out at nice restaurants, the S-Class fits perfectly.
Also, to me, chassis is just what the suspension attaches to, not the suspension itself. Either way, I don't disagree that the suspension is of good design.
Surprisingly, the magnetic equipped vettes ride very nicely for what they are.
While we disagree on this point, Im certainly glad that you and I can discuss the points in a respectful manner.
cheers!
I've driven Jags, Quattroporte and the Lexus LS450 - neither come close to the S class AMG sedans as far as cornering, handling, acceleration and braking. In fact, other than the 750i, the Lexus came the closest to the S63 in handling, braking and cornering. The rotors on the AMG sedans are almost as big as the wheels in diameter!
Last edited by AustinGuy; Mar 24, 2009 at 04:12 PM.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,008
Likes: 58
From: Poconos, Pennsylvania
Protecting the Earth from the Scum of the Universe
Oliverk,
I still chuckle at your responce to WSH's post.
Do I sense hostile feelings here?
. It is not worth having a heart attack. Oh, well, Men and their Automobiles.
You said, that you test drove Airmatic and ABC and you see little difference. Maybe to you the difference is miniscule, to me the difference is huge. ABC in my opinion is the most under rated and under advertised feature on the car (silly MB).
With winter tires (Pirelli SotoZero) and nice winter in Pennsylvania, I had no problems at all.
Sorry to say it but Airmatic to me feels like riding a wheel barrow (gross exagerration of course
) comparing to ABC.
So far I have 33k miles on my CL600 and no problems whatsoever.
On the issue of "girlie brakes" - I agree with you. But that's WSH
. "Love him or hate him" approach.
Mark.
I still chuckle at your responce to WSH's post.
Do I sense hostile feelings here?
. It is not worth having a heart attack. Oh, well, Men and their Automobiles.You said, that you test drove Airmatic and ABC and you see little difference. Maybe to you the difference is miniscule, to me the difference is huge. ABC in my opinion is the most under rated and under advertised feature on the car (silly MB).
With winter tires (Pirelli SotoZero) and nice winter in Pennsylvania, I had no problems at all.
Sorry to say it but Airmatic to me feels like riding a wheel barrow (gross exagerration of course
) comparing to ABC.So far I have 33k miles on my CL600 and no problems whatsoever.
On the issue of "girlie brakes" - I agree with you. But that's WSH
. "Love him or hate him" approach.Mark.
Last edited by Red Marko; Mar 26, 2009 at 10:06 AM.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,101
Likes: 9
Interesting discussion in this thread. Some people have a more sensitive "seat of the pants" than others do. So for some people AWD doesn't affect the balance of a car, while for others it will.
I'd personally miss it. I enjoy feeling subtle changes in the chassis' attitude with slight adjustments to the throttle--don't have to be pushing the car all that hard to feel it. I can't remember if I've driven a Mercedes sedan with 4Matic. But with most AWD systems you lose much of this sensitivity.
I'd personally miss it. I enjoy feeling subtle changes in the chassis' attitude with slight adjustments to the throttle--don't have to be pushing the car all that hard to feel it. I can't remember if I've driven a Mercedes sedan with 4Matic. But with most AWD systems you lose much of this sensitivity.
Thread Starter
Member
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 200
Likes: 2
From: Vancouver BC Canada
'95 S500 '93 500 SEL
Interesting discussion in this thread. Some people have a more sensitive "seat of the pants" than others do. So for some people AWD doesn't affect the balance of a car, while for others it will.
I'd personally miss it. I enjoy feeling subtle changes in the chassis' attitude with slight adjustments to the throttle--don't have to be pushing the car all that hard to feel it. I can't remember if I've driven a Mercedes sedan with 4Matic. But with most AWD systems you lose much of this sensitivity.
I'd personally miss it. I enjoy feeling subtle changes in the chassis' attitude with slight adjustments to the throttle--don't have to be pushing the car all that hard to feel it. I can't remember if I've driven a Mercedes sedan with 4Matic. But with most AWD systems you lose much of this sensitivity.
