Anyone in or near Santa Barbara wanna put this trolling loser in his place?
https://mbworld.org/forums/showthrea...1&postcount=44

 

You are truely pathetic Improviz the Clown, You even tried to get me in trouble w/mods didn't work did it loser??
Thanks for the advertising I'll gladly take on an beat SLK55 by 1-2 lengths or more.
Boy I really hit your nerves to get you this worked up! Get a life and a new 209 loser! ps.. Say hi to your mum for me next time you pick 'er up from the Trailer Park!

 

Ricker...check out track-challenge.com SLK55vsC6 Manual

SLK55 vs C6m
0-100kmh 4.8v5.2
0-200kmh 16.8v16.8
0-200-0 22.0v22.0

Pretty damn close...anything less than a dig to 124mph and the slk will lead...and will keep that car length lead++.

 

Sounds kool lets run'em pm me

 

if we can figure a time and place that works tha would be cool! No cares on who wins just fun pitting two totally different cars with totally differnt ways of arriving at similar straight line performance!!

BTW your pm is full... b

 

I'm cleaning it out right now bro! sounds like a good time to me....
You've got mail!

 

I wouldn't class somebody with 1500+ posts on this forum as a troll. I suspect stock for stock a race between a C6 and 55 will come down to how well the drivers get the start......

Falco...... if you guys do meet up for a friendly challenge let us know the result...... standing start I'd put my money on the 55...... rolling start maybe the C6?

 

Thanks man I'm not trolling, I just disagreed w/Improviz on his kills & he flat-out lost it

I love AMG'S Mercedes, Just want some friendly races that's all.....

 

does anybody know what an SLK55 runs in the 1/4 mile???

 

TheRicker jumped into a thread on the CLK55 AMG forum and started trolling. The thread in question is still there, entitled Anyone Race The Following Vehicles?, and immediately accused another poster, and later me, of being liars. He then started bragging about how his C6 auto would beat a CLK55 by "BUSLENGTHS" as he put it (yes, he even capitalized it). The C6 was not among the cars listed. If that's not trolling, what is??

And he's done this in other threads as well; look at his posting history and check out his recent posts in the kill stories forum. He's clearly got some sort of inferiority complex about owning a Chevy, and wants to put all of the owners of "mighty benzes" (as he called them in another post) in our places.

But back to the thread. I checked, and the four-speed auto vettes (which is what he's got) are NOT as fast as the C6 manual 6's. The gearing of the four-speed auto 'vette is *far* less agressive than not only the six-speed 'vette, and of both the CLK55 and SLK55, to the point where the CLK55's torque multiplication was 150% of the four speed auto Corvette's in the higher gears. Just by simply multiplying each of the gear ratios of his car by his max torque (which he can't even get in the lower gears thanks to the dumb torque management system--more on that in a moment) showed that the torque of the wheels of a CLK55 would be far, far higher--and even more so for an SLK55 AMG!!

You see, the four-speed auto 'vettes have two fewer gears, *far* less agressive gearing, and a nice "feature" generously provided by chevrolet: some sort of bizarre "torque management system" (not the same as traction control, btw), which limits the max amount of torque the car can get under hard acceleration in the lower gears. (You can read about it here, in this post), presumably because GM can't manage to put an auto strong enough to handle the engine's max torque into their flagship sports car. You can also read a corvette owner commenting in the thread that "That may explain a lot of these 107 mph trap speeds at the track". The Jaguars also have this "feature", one reason why their 4000 pound/400 horse sedan traps at 104 while 4000 pound/400 horse M5's trap at 108-109.

When I produced magazine test articles showing that the four speed auto was slower, he said they're junk and called me a "magazine racer", then turned around and quoted magazine articles for the six-speed. When I pointed out that in fact I'd been drag racing for over 20 years and asked him to present a single timeslip, he could not, because he's never even been to a strip.

He quoted one 1/4 mile run by a corvette owner owner, which turned out to have been done with a modded car, not "bone stock" as he claimed. He said that this was "real world data", as opposed to magazine tests, which he seems to feel are all fraudulent--except, of course, when he chooses to cite them. When I, in response, produced a compilation from the same forum of the ten fastest ETs, done by ten different owners of STOCK four-speed auto vettes, and their trap speeds, which averaged out to 108 mph, he basically started calling a liar and names, because at that point the weight of the data clearly showed that there was no way he'd pull any currently-produced AMG by "BUSLENGTHS", if at all, unless he's very heavily modded, in which case it's a worthless comparison.

He also told several outright lies about me in the thread, which I documented in the thread as well, and accused me of lying. When I challenged him to produce one, he could not, so he simply said that I'd "lied about all of my kill stories", which would be rather difficult for him to know given that he was present at none of them, and that I'd lied about my car's weight, another lie: I gave one figure for my car's weight and stuck to it throughout the thread.

I invite everyone to look at the thread, , see the evidence I presented, and his reactions, and see a) who was trolling, and b) how TheRicker quickly resorted to name calling, smears, and outright lies once he realized that the facts were not on his side.

So, the bottom line ls:

1) magazine articles featuring instrumented, scientifically conducted acceleration runs, are "junk"--unless they are cited by TheRicker, in which case they are The Gold Standard;

2) actual 1/4 mile runs by modified corvettes cited by TheRicker are "real world data", while the ten fastest actual 1/4 mile runs by stock four-speed auto corvettes cited by someone else are not "real world data";

3) if you disagree with 1) and 2) above, and present any facts to support your argument, you are a "magazine racer" who "lives in a fantasy world", a "nerd", and an "egghead";

4) If you present no facts, you are the Way, the Truth, and the Light, the Beacon of Truth, and The Gold Standard--so long as your name is TheRicker.

Any questions?

As to you, thericker: I've done all of the debating with you that I intend to do, and I have no intent to stoop to your level nor waste any more time presenting factual arguments only to have you respond with lies and third grade insults. If you've got a timeslip or a video to prove that you can beat a CLK55 AMG by "buslengths", let's see it; otherwise, you've got nothing to produce except the word of a demonstrated liar and extreme hypocrite. Nor will I respond to your little PM harrassment campaign, either. I now return you to your regularly scheduled rant, insult-and-smear, and duck, dodge 'n' weave from the facts campaign.

More than 'nuff said. Over and out.

 

hey improviz, do me a favor and try and see if you can advertise my thread https://mbworld.org/forums/showthrea...39#post1654639

 

AMG auto tranny vs chevy auto tranny....this is like Tyson vs Spinks.

The auto vette will get smoked by an slk55, and a manual vette without a hell of a driver will too...a great driver will make it interesting.

 

OK maybe just a little bit of trolling going on there it made a good read!

 

You'll soon find out me an Falco are racing soooon

 

Improviz, You think by writing these history book sized posts you win? No one wants to/or reads your never ending blowhard speaches shut it
PS Improviz wrote in his lists he beat a C6 4/4 races pleaaazzzeee wake up not gonna happen in your 208 buddy.

 

hey Thericker, just for the record i've ran a 05 C55 with intake and a chip on the highway from 60-140 and won by a car length im only a 2.73 geared LS1

 

....l rest my case!

 

Ahh that's a C5 right?? LS1 = C5 LS2 = C6


PS Sorry Dip**** Improv! give up guy

 

No, no, you're a liar....you should have won by BUSLENGTHS; thus spaketh The Lord, err, I mean, TheRicker...um, err, this isn't "real world" experience!! Um, ah, you're a magazine racer who's living in a fantasy land!! (btw, sarcasm here is NOT directed at you, vette )

I rest my case, again. No way will a C6 four-speed AUTO pull a CLK55 by BUSLENGTHS, end of story.

 

You really are stupid aren't you Improv? C5's have 50 less hp to begin with & you'll soon see I've spoken to AMG_55 were due to race next week he also has mods intake/k&n's exhaust, You keep your nerdy lil eyes glued to this site guy soon, very soon numb nutz


Intake & A Chip on the C5 is not going to give you anywhere near 50 crank hp, & more importantly 50 more Torque, maybe 20 HP tops & 15 Torque. No offense Vette, thanks for proving my point further though.

 

i said the C55 has an intake and chip. i have intake and exhaust on my C5

 

yes

 

....and he's run 13.0 @ 109 in the heat of summer. Just to refresh your memory (and really, to kind of show everyone on this forum what I'm talking about, since I know you'll either say it's not "real world", or spin/avoid it in some other fashion), here is the "real world data" (well, to everyone but you) from the Corvette forum for the FASTEST C6 four-speed auto corvettes on the forum:

http://forums.corvetteforum.com/show...&postcount=696

Here are the "Showroom Stock" numbers for the four-speed autos:
12.56 @ 112.00 - Orange C6 - 05 Z51 A4
12.71 @ 111.00 - Demented - 05 Z51 A4
12.74 @ 108.67 - Shooter 49 - 05 A4 3.15
12.83 @ 109.44 - Tommy D - 05 A4 3.15
12.97 @ 108.00 - Ginny C6 - 05 F55 A4
12.98 @ 108.00 - Tampa Vet - 05 A4 3.15
13.26 @ 105.30 - Joeking - 05 Z51 A4
13.62 @ 106.18 - Rich28 - 05 Z51 A4

Also note that when Edmunds.com tested the C6 four speed auto, their BEST RUN trapped at (drumroll, please) 109 mph.

So, his trap speed is higher than all but two of the FASTEST four-speed automatic corvettes. And trap speed is the speed to which a car will accelerate at the end of a 1/4 mile. Now, this might be a difficult concept, but in order for a car to defeat another car by BUSLENGTHS, it has to trap a whole lot faster than the slower car.

And yet here we see that a corvette which trapped at 109 pulled ONE LENGTH on a C55, which runs the same as a CLK55, in a 60-140 run.

Meaning that even ***IF*** you are trapping, say, about 3-4 mph faster than the fastest car on that list (which, alas, we cannot know, because you, the Great Racer, have never been to a 1/4 mile track), you STILL won't leave a C55, and therefore a CLK55 which traps at the same speed, by BUSLENGTHS. You'd have to be trapping at 117-118 mph to do that.

Now, all: watch thericker's response. In another post, he used the same logic, i.e. that if he beat car X by two lengths, and car x beat car y by two lengths, then he would beat car y by five lengths.

But I guarantee you, while that logic is iron-clad in his mind, he'll attack and dismiss this logic.

 

Ahh that proves my point EVEN MORE thanks man The Tune/chip gives way more hp than catback= maybe 5 rwhp thanks apreciate the help man what colors your C5

 

its black and yours?