SLS AMG Gullwing (C197, R197) 2010 - 2014

SLS/R197/C197 AMG: Porsche 911 vs. SLS -- a fair comparison??

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Rate Thread
 
Old 10-24-2010, 10:01 PM
  #1  
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
carsnob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 329
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
2007 S 600 / '06 911 Porsche C4S cab
Porsche 911 vs. SLS -- a fair comparison??

Many people would say that a 911 C4S is the ultimate sports car for handling and "feeling" like a true sports car. To me an SL 550 is like a mini S class not really a "sports car".
But -- is the SLS really better than a 911? Of course there is no cabriolet and it looks like there's a big blind spot. I drive an S 600 and a 911 and wonder how happy SLS owners are.
Any SLS owners previously drive a 911?
Old 10-25-2010, 01:13 AM
  #2  
WSH
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
WSH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: CA
Posts: 1,271
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
2010 CL65
Have owned various new 997S, 997TT, 996TTS in past...and very familiar w/997GT2 and 997TTS on public rds

Own SLS and '10 CL65 (and eagerly await Nov build '11 CL65)

IMO, VWs are great in steering precision and PCCB pedal feel on a smooth, dry track but lacking in tq, lack of turbo lag (in 997TTS/GT2), modern gearboxes, chassis stability on fast urban fwys or mtn twisties, and pathetically lack visceral, inspiring exhaust notes at any speed (GT2 sounds like a $200K+ Prius Turbo)

Would argue SLS is world's most enjoyable mtn twisties car today, but inferior to '10 CL65 on fast fwys (lack of tq and slightly weaker high-speed stability) and urban commuting (jerky DCT box, though otherwise a very comfortable, daily-useable car, even on steep CA hills/garage ramps)...and vastly superior to any VW or Fiat in similar use

Definition of a "sports car" or "GT car" is fairly meaningless, archaic and subjective in era of 600hp+/700+lb-ft, latest-tech 5000lb cars (Aren't lil M3 Cabs ~4500lbs these days? Aren't 458 Cabs going to weigh ~3700lbs, despite zero safety structures/tech and dubious fuel tanks??) enjoyed as daily commuter cars in CA, where one has nr-perfect yr-round weather, unusually fast urban fwys and mtn twisties nr where those who can afford such cars live/work....who the hell in CA who owns SLS and CL65 actually drives btwn SF and BH (the mythical "GT" nonsense)...or visits a track in Podunk (Laguna and Infineon are in Podunk w/zero competent healthcare if one is involved in a crash)???
Old 10-25-2010, 08:07 AM
  #3  
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
juicee63's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Hollywood CA
Posts: 6,950
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
2007 CLS63 030
Originally Posted by WSH
Have owned various new 997S, 997TT, 996TTS in past...and very familiar w/997GT2 and 997TTS on public rds

Own SLS and '10 CL65 (and eagerly await Nov build '11 CL65)

IMO, VWs are great in steering precision and PCCB pedal feel on a smooth, dry track but lacking in tq, lack of turbo lag (in 997TTS/GT2), modern gearboxes, chassis stability on fast urban fwys or mtn twisties, and pathetically lack visceral, inspiring exhaust notes at any speed (GT2 sounds like a $200K+ Prius Turbo)

Would argue SLS is world's most enjoyable mtn twisties car today, but inferior to '10 CL65 on fast fwys (lack of tq and slightly weaker high-speed stability) and urban commuting (jerky DCT box, though otherwise a very comfortable, daily-useable car, even on steep CA hills/garage ramps)...and vastly superior to any VW or Fiat in similar use

Definition of a "sports car" or "GT car" is fairly meaningless, archaic and subjective in era of 600hp+/700+lb-ft, latest-tech 5000lb cars (Aren't lil M3 Cabs ~4500lbs these days? Aren't 458 Cabs going to weigh ~3700lbs, despite zero safety structures/tech and dubious fuel tanks??) enjoyed as daily commuter cars in CA, where one has nr-perfect yr-round weather, unusually fast urban fwys and mtn twisties nr where those who can afford such cars live/work....who the hell in CA who owns SLS and CL65 actually drives btwn SF and BH (the mythical "GT" nonsense)...or visits a track in Podunk (Laguna and Infineon are in Podunk w/zero competent healthcare if one is involved in a crash)???

You are suggesting a CL65 out accelerates an SLS?
Old 10-25-2010, 08:17 AM
  #4  
Zod
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
Zod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Kuwait
Posts: 2,597
Received 19 Likes on 16 Posts
CLS55 2006, CLS 63S 2015
Originally Posted by juicee63
You are suggesting a CL65 out accelerates an SLS?
Juciy i know u love the 63 engine...but

this just goes to show you its just not up there
http://www.youtube.com/user/buzaidGT#p/u/4/qwIaYc4QSz0

I raced that same Scud & beat it....am not stock no, but i am not an SLS either!!!!
Old 10-26-2010, 09:28 PM
  #5  
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
juicee63's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Hollywood CA
Posts: 6,950
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
2007 CLS63 030
Originally Posted by Zod
Juciy i know u love the 63 engine...but

this just goes to show you its just not up there
http://www.youtube.com/user/buzaidGT#p/u/4/qwIaYc4QSz0

I raced that same Scud & beat it....am not stock no, but i am not an SLS either!!!!
Perhaps the driver needs a lesson. The SLS will dominate a stock CL 65 , it is 1500 less pounds and has 30 less hp , comon..

http://www.m5board.com/vbulletin/gtb...s-sls-amg.html

Obviously your car is modded, the stock SLS will trap 126 mph and there is no possibility of this in a stock CLS 55 or CL 65. Sorry folks this NA car will out accelerate a CL 65 or SL 65 or even the new S63. POWER TO WEIGHT is great in the SLS

Last edited by juicee63; 10-26-2010 at 09:34 PM.
Old 10-27-2010, 01:43 PM
  #6  
Zod
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
Zod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Kuwait
Posts: 2,597
Received 19 Likes on 16 Posts
CLS55 2006, CLS 63S 2015
Originally Posted by juicee63
Perhaps the driver needs a lesson. The SLS will dominate a stock CL 65 , it is 1500 less pounds and has 30 less hp , comon..

http://www.m5board.com/vbulletin/gtb...s-sls-amg.html

Obviously your car is modded, the stock SLS will trap 126 mph and there is no possibility of this in a stock CLS 55 or CL 65. Sorry folks this NA car will out accelerate a CL 65 or SL 65 or even the new S63. POWER TO WEIGHT is great in the SLS
Like i said i was shocked my self, in both races the SLS did not look like it was pulling one bit..

on the other hand the cali is no where near as fast as a scud....i don't even think the cali is even faster then a normal f430 for that mater...so nto sure why u show me this vid

and if your going to show me race times done by a mag this is all u will get with a serious group of people that race cars.

i want to see more SLS data though...as am not convinced it is that slow...

and the SL65 we have here (modded) also beats the same scud
Old 10-27-2010, 04:59 PM
  #7  
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
transferred's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: OC, SoCal
Posts: 2,318
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
08 S65, 06 M3 CS(stick), 02 BMW X5 4.6iS, 07 R1 Raven, 08 F-450 4x4, 08 CooperS JCW
The SLS does have the ultimate 6.2, far more power and rebuilt internals over the version in the E/S/CL and CLK black series...I also think it would edge my 65, the weight deficit is a big one...

now if you wanna talk about speed, the same Scuderia that beat the SLS getting absolutely WALKED bus lengths by a 997 turbo with the pdk tranny....
http://www.youtube.com/user/buzaidGT#p/u/3/ja0qHcinrjQ
Old 10-29-2010, 04:30 AM
  #8  
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
juicee63's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Hollywood CA
Posts: 6,950
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
2007 CLS63 030
Originally Posted by Zod
Like i said i was shocked my self, in both races the SLS did not look like it was pulling one bit..

on the other hand the cali is no where near as fast as a scud....i don't even think the cali is even faster then a normal f430 for that mater...so nto sure why u show me this vid

and if your going to show me race times done by a mag this is all u will get with a serious group of people that race cars.

i want to see more SLS data though...as am not convinced it is that slow...

and the SL65 we have here (modded) also beats the same scud
The SLS tested by Gustav, was said to be " THE FASTEST MERCEDES HE HAS EVER TESTED" The SLS is faster than a 599, it is definately faster than a CL 65.

As noted in several threads here , the SLS is not just pretty it is a performer. This car would destroy your examples around a track and it is HALF the price of the F cars

Here it is destroying your beloved Lamborghini errr I mean Audi
http://www.************/car-videos-10...udi-R8-V10.htm

Last edited by juicee63; 10-29-2010 at 04:33 AM.
Old 10-29-2010, 10:05 AM
  #9  
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
absent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Kenilworth, il usa
Posts: 2,924
Received 378 Likes on 244 Posts
'22 Alpina B7,'21 G63 Renntech obviously (wife), Wrangler(kids)
It is a fact it is quicker then the 599 but what is even more interesting,while it is way behind the 458 in speeds up to 120mph,it catches it (and overtakes) by 150mph.
A bit academic at these speeds,netherless very telling....
Old 11-09-2010, 10:02 AM
  #10  
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
norb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Houston, Texas - USA
Posts: 1,634
Received 14 Likes on 13 Posts
2009 C63 AMG
Originally Posted by WSH
IMO, VWs are great in steering precision and PCCB pedal feel on a smooth, dry track but lacking in tq, lack of turbo lag (in 997TTS/GT2), modern gearboxes, chassis stability on fast urban fwys or mtn twisties, and pathetically lack visceral, inspiring exhaust notes at any speed (GT2 sounds like a $200K+ Prius Turbo)
You mean a 7 speed Porsche PDK isn't a modern gearbox? Compared to the automatic derived MB gearbox?

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 


You have already rated this thread Rating: Thread Rating: 0 votes,  average.

Quick Reply: SLS/R197/C197 AMG: Porsche 911 vs. SLS -- a fair comparison??



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:18 PM.