SL/R230: Performance Test SL600 (VIDEO)
06-03-2006, 02:50 PM
#26
Super Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 513
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
anyone tried sticking their arm out the window driving 200mph? I'd be curious as to see if that'd actually break someones arm.. maybe it's a safety reason for mercedes.. being a convertible and all..
i've done it at 100.. and it isn't the most pleasurable feeling...
i've done it at 100.. and it isn't the most pleasurable feeling...
06-03-2006, 10:09 PM
#27
MBWorld Fanatic!
Originally Posted by RENNtech-er
The R230 SL600 is (733 - 600) feet ahead of the R129 at the end of 10 seconds = 133 feet
It would be great fun to race off the line and witness the inevitable thrashing in person.
06-03-2006, 10:18 PM
#28
Super Member
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Bethesda,Md.
Posts: 746
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bentley Arnage Red Label
Originally Posted by RENNtech-er
velocity (v) = acceleration (a) multiplied (x) by time (t)
hence, a = v/t
For the R230 SL600 at 100 mph (which = 146.7 feet per second), we have
a = 146.7 fps/10 seconds = 14.67 ft/sec. squared
Now, distance (d) = a/2 x t squared
For the SL600, d at 100 mph = 14.67/2 x 10 squared = 733 feet
For the R129, a at 82 mph = 120 fps/10 sec = 12 ft/sec. squared
d at 82 mph = 12/2 x 10 squared = 600 feet
The R230 SL600 is (733 - 600) feet ahead of the R129 at the end of 10 seconds = 133 feet
I think! My BS in Physics was 37 years ago.
hence, a = v/t
For the R230 SL600 at 100 mph (which = 146.7 feet per second), we have
a = 146.7 fps/10 seconds = 14.67 ft/sec. squared
Now, distance (d) = a/2 x t squared
For the SL600, d at 100 mph = 14.67/2 x 10 squared = 733 feet
For the R129, a at 82 mph = 120 fps/10 sec = 12 ft/sec. squared
d at 82 mph = 12/2 x 10 squared = 600 feet
The R230 SL600 is (733 - 600) feet ahead of the R129 at the end of 10 seconds = 133 feet
I think! My BS in Physics was 37 years ago.
I am impressed!
06-06-2006, 02:22 AM
#30
Junior Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
06 Z06
Originally Posted by Improviz
Neither an M3 cab nor an F355 cab will hit 60 in 4.5. M3 cabs are in the low 5's, and the F355 Spyders were tested from 4.9 (Motor Trend) to 5.3 (Road & Track) 0-60.
06-06-2006, 03:34 PM
#31
Member
I'm looking at the March 2004 short review that Car & Driver did on an SL600. They measured 0-60 in 3.6 seconds and the 1/4 mile in 11.9 seconds. The reviewer Tony Swan's response was "O-my-gawd!" You can look the review up by doing a search for SL600 on their web site.
Remember, they do acceleration runs on a very high traction surface and correct the results for temperature and altitude. Plus, all the magazines don't start timing the run until the car has gone 12 inches. Just like the NHRA.
Still that's amazing for a car that they weighed at 4501 pounds when full of fluids.
Remember, they do acceleration runs on a very high traction surface and correct the results for temperature and altitude. Plus, all the magazines don't start timing the run until the car has gone 12 inches. Just like the NHRA.
Still that's amazing for a car that they weighed at 4501 pounds when full of fluids.
06-06-2006, 11:50 PM
#32
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,679
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CLS55 AMG
Originally Posted by 355Spider
I think most mags get mid to high 4s for M3s.
Originally Posted by 355Spider
The cabs are probaly low 5s like you say. There's little or no difference between 355 spiders and cabs though. They weigh almost exactly the same. The SL600 is still alot faster though. I recently learned about quick though when I picked up my new Z06.
But that Z06, yeah, that's a beast! Insane car...I drove a C6 the other day, and came away very impressed...handles fantastically, and yet the ride (and this was a Z51, mind you) is excellent, better than my car I'm sad to say.
