why? are you trying to discurage people from buying any Benz? its just that i dont see how else that relates to this.

 

Sorry, that was in response to AMGBENZ's question above.

 

Too bad in the US we really can't go that fast on the highways.
Only use for a fast car is track, and well the SL/S/CL65s aren't track cars.

 

It's all because of the name. You get the top of the top AND it's got an AMG badge on it. Hey, if it says AMG it must be fast right?

Edit: After the SL55 there's very little way to put more power and still be usable. The SL600 just smokes the entire time but still keeps similair times to the SL55.

 

You get a 600 not for what it does but for what you can modify it for.(no comparison with 55)

 

My SL55 will happily light up the rears if I take off the traction control which means even with this car, the performance is often being limited by what it can put down on the road. Increasing the power and especially the torque just makes it more likely the traction control will intervene more often and the more often it does, the less driveable the car becomes.

The architecture of the SL is wrong to put more power down. For that, you need more weight over the driven wheels by using mid/rear engine (F360/911), putting the gearbox over them (trans-axle like the Porsche 928 or the new Ferrari Scaglietti) or else 4 wheel drive (Gallardo/Veyron).

True, the SLR uses the same architecture as the SL but the engine in the SLR is moved back to shift the weight balance and results in an absurdly small cabin for the size of car. Oh, and the critical reaction to the SLR has been far from ecstatic. How Mercedes think they are going to sell 500 of the things a year after the initial rush, I have no idea.

All of which makes the SL65 irrelevant in my book, especially in countries where top speed is not usable.

 

Top Speed may not be usable but neither is it usable in your SL55, I think your still has the 155mph limiter?

If the 65's are pointless, then even the 600's/55's are too. None of the 55K cars handle like 911's on the track, and neither is track performance relevant to any people who drive real cars on real roads. The 65 cars have too much power and since powerful cars need strengthened components, a further 200kgs has been added on top of the 600's weight. And like my earlier statement about the 55's handling, anyone who intends to track ANY of the 65 cars is an idiot. The 65 cars are too damn heavy, and sending 1000nm to similar wheels as those on the 55's is idiocy in itself.

And if people think the 65 cars are more faster than the 55's 0-60, no way pal. True 0-100mph to anyspeed, they will annihilate the 55's, but how often do you go autobahn kill hunting? To fully exploit the performance of the 65 cars, and their extra 30K GBP worth over the 55's., you first need wider rubber, and a 186mph limiter, then you will feel you have got your money's worth...


For whats its worth, IMO I think buying a 65 right now is pointless, they are not that much more faster than teh 55's to merit their extra price. Wait until this time next year, when you'll probably get your hands on a 700bhp version of these cars, hopefully with no extra weight, THEN you will feel a difference...

but with 1200Nm going to the same wheels, probably even at lower revs, you're not doing yourself any favours...


Bottom line: Sure the 65's are more faster than the 55's, but if the 55's have traction problems as everyone in snowy/rainy places knows, even with ESP on, thenw what the hell are you paying extra for? An extra 100bhp? wait til next year, we're going to get 700bhp, then they'll be worth their price...and trust me, the 65 engine is ALREADY capable of outputting 700bhp, just ask AMG

 

In my experience the SL55 is certainly traction-limited in first gear and still accelerates like a rocket in second. My one disappointment with the performance of the car – and it’s very minor; the performance overall is excellent – was the loss of that “shot out of a gun” feeling in the lower part of third gear. I always thought the spacing between second and third (2.19/1.41 = 1.55) was too wide, while the spacing between fourth and fifth (1.00/0.83 = 1.20) was too narrow. In any case, performance in third is no where near traction limited going straight on a dry road. And unfortunately third gear, between roughly 70 and 120 MPH, is exactly where I can have the most fun on the freeway commuting to and from the office, passing cars with an obnoxious rush of pure acceleration. As a result, I don’t think the greater torque of the SL600 I have on order is excessive, nor will it be wasted. Renntech mods will make the car even better in this regard, and the SL65 would be even better than that.

To put this into numbers, the SL600 has rated peak torque 14% higher than the SL55 (590/516) which is partly offset by a taller final drive (2.65/2.82) yielding 7% more thrust to the rear wheels, assuming proportional transmission losses and assuming the same weight and that third gear acceleration begins just around the peak of the torque curve, which is approximately correct. Add the 80 extra pound feet Treynor got from Renntech mods to his S600 and you have (670/516)(2.65/2.82) = 22% more thrust in third gear. An SL65 with 1000nm or 738 lb-ft would give you 34% more thrust. Is this power usable? Certainly: second gear in an SL55 gives you 55% more torque to the rear wheels than third gear. The car has no trouble handling second gear on a dry road in a straight line. Hence what the SL65 gives you is near second gear acceleration at third gear speeds, which sounds pretty desirable to me. Of course the Renntech SL600 gets you 1.22/1.34 = 91% of the way there so that seems to be the optimal value/performance point relative to the SL65.

 

Don't forget weight issues. The SL600 is stronger than the SL55 at any speed due to the fact that both cars weighly roughly the same. Some people have also noted that the 600's are putting out significantly mroe Hp than the 55's.

Add another 200kgs to an SL600, and you'll see the performance advantage OVERALL isn't that much (55s vs. 65s).

IMO, wait for a 700bhp version...

 

posting a deposit or two today (hopefully)

 

I love this concept of 120 mph on the freeways of Boston. My experience is that they are choked, the surfaces are terrible and there's too many police with nothing better to do than pull you over. 120 mph is like a red-rag to a bull. Maybe things have changed since I was last there...

 

I leave home a little after 5 AM (and return similarly early) in order to beat the traffic. The afternoon run is fairly congested but early morning is pretty much wide open. Boston drivers, who are typically among the worst in the nation in my opinion, tend to drive very fast when opportunity presents itself. I suppose it’s the release of pent up frustration. 90 MPH is the left lane of 128 or 495 at off hours is not uncommon. These days I stay with traffic except for short bursts for a few seconds. Thanks to the state’s recent fiscal deficit, the roads are now more heavily patrolled than before and I am somewhat more careful about the speed laws. Also, I90 (the Mass. Turnpike) has always been heavily patrolled by unmarked cars because there is a separate enforcement authority for that road, the Turnpike Authority. It’s best not to go over 80 there. Between four and eight years ago I used to live in Rockport, a seaside community 40 miles from Boston at the far end of Route 128. That road is difficult to patrol because the divided highway winds through forest with unbroken guardrails most of the way. In fact during those years I never once fell afoul of the police zooming in at 5:30 AM for the first 15 miles or so of 128. Perhaps the police changed shifts at 5:30. When it was not pitch dark or raining, my old Blue R129 would average speeds on that stretch that were probably pretty similar to what would be typical in Germany. I would slow down to 80 or 85 for the rest of the trip. Ah, those were the days! My highest momentary peak was 145 at the bottom of a hill with the top and windows down and no wind deflector. It was interesting because of how different that felt from more a sedate speed of say 130. In any case that’s all in the past! Not only do I live 15 miles closer in, but the development of the North Shore suburbs has put more traffic on the roads in the early morning. I never have achieved my lifetime goal of exceeding the speed limit by 100 MPH. The best I’ve ever managed was that 145, and 130 driving down the slope of the empty center span of the Tobin Bridge similarly early in the morning. The posted speed limit at the time was 35, although it has since been changed to 45. Again (just in case Big Brother is out there) these are adventures from my impetuous youth (when I was only 40) which are not going to be repeated in my current sober old age.

 

my dealership tech friends have said that it's impossible to benefit significantly from the immense torque of the 12K engines.

the engines do overwhelm the cars. accordingly, the throttle has to be feathered in to avoid continual spin control.

compare two 65s with weight distribution and all else but weight being equal, and it's a good bet that (to a point) the heavier of the two will fare better off the line.

remove spin control, and both will smoke with relatively light throttle-in.

the best way to transmit all that torque to the pavement is via four wheels. properly engineered, handling should improve as well.

just my $.02.

 

Gentlement: I have the solution

Get ready for it; the SL65 4Matic!

Sadly, this may be the only way to get that, the SL600 and the SL55 off the line flooring it for the fastest times.

Edit: For the gentleman that said people buy the SL600 for what modification limit it has over the SL55, that is utterly false, only a small amount (yes all three of you guys) would do that The consumer of these kind of cars doesn't know the difference between any of this crap. All they see is V8 vs V12, and that's almost (to them) nothing of a difference. Mercedes quotes both vehicles with the same horsepower (493) and that is the common view to what sells cars.

 

Sorry, but I disagree. A V12 is considerably smoother than a V8 in it's acceleration. That is probably why Ferrari stayed with a V12 as long as they could.

 

stricks, with what do you disagree?

regarding 12 v 8, please don't discount the exoticism of the 12 and the exciting halo it places over an "exotic" car.

supermodel v mundane model?

 

sillydriver... 100 mph over the speed limit, I can see where you get your name from!

Most of the time here, speed limits are being reduced, not increased. There's a trend of imposing 50 limits where previously they were 60 and so on, all in the name of road safety. Soon, they'll figure out that if there's a blanket 0mph speed limit, no one will die on the roads...

The problem with the idea of a V12 4-matic is finding room for the front differential, plus the added weight.

 

IMO, the best reasons to sell the 65s are:

1. to trump the theoretical numbers of competitors' car, and

2. to give ego-driven drivers additional bragging rights.

but that's just my opinion.

 

It is impossible to have a 4Matic version with such a large engine.

HWA has tried to develop an S55 AMG 4Matic. They maxium the could use was a 380 hp engine. Everything stronger than that, ripped the ***** apart.

 

I don't get all this speculation. I have an 03 E55. This car , if anything, should have the worst traction of the V8 Kompressor cars. It hooks up fine. Sure, it will easily spin the tires in the first half of first, but after that it gets traction. Part of the problem is that we are still in the middle of winter. Wait until spring or summer. You will see alot more traction. I also have a Corvette with 600HP. In the summer it hooks up in second (45-50 mph) and that is a manual car. I think that this car will get traction in second gear at full throttle, and that the electronics will help it to pull from the 55 cars in the higher end of first. So yeah, from a stop light if you just mash the gas on both the 65 won't be any faster, but if you are going more than 30, I bet the 65 will pull away.

 

I agree with BlockTrader the HP & TQ are not that important at this level from a stop but at 40, 50, 100MPH and lay into the throttle on a straight or comming out of a corner and SL65 AMG will shine with that extra extra pull into the tripple digits.

Anyone that has driven the SL55 on a big track would agree that more power is not needed but would still be used to bring lap times down if long straights are in the track.


AMGBENZ
2003 SL55 AMG

 

I agree with blocktrader too. It's a matter of which gear you are in and the gear ratios in question. The numbers are in my earlier post.

 

I meant the 4Matic in a joking way! Sorry if it sounded as if I was serious!

 

Just Ordered SL65 AMG

Anymore info available on the up-coming SL65 AMG...
Or, where can I find info about the SL65?

I'm #2 at my dealer {Delivery Oct - Dec 2004}

Will sell my 2004 SL55 AMG if anyone is interested....

All the best....

"Bear"
________________

 

The 65 promisses to be a great car. I love my SL55....and I am #2 on the list at my dealer for the 65....

but I think that I'll keep the 55 if anyone is interested in my spot...email me.