AMGe55

I'm not sure if MB understates the HP of the E55 or not but they also state 0-60 of 4.5 seconds. Car and Driver and other testers have gotten 0-60 times of 4.2 secs.

Mattar

I think the SL, CL, and S55 has an additional intercooler that the E55 doesn’t have

Hammer Down

Ok, I guess I will add my .02, Ok now that we all know that the E is lighter and we all know that the torque ratings are the same. We also know that both vehicles dyno with the same results. Now with all that being said the SL has a 2.85 gearing and the E has 2.62 gearing. Here comes the "million dollar answer" the SL has 90mm exhaust (3.5inch) and the E has 70mm exhaust (2.75 inch). They are both beautiful cars that perform very well.

Mr. Vanos

Part of the reason MB states less hp for the E/CLS55 is pure marketing (think about the price differential between the 2 and how that would effect sales if numbers showed an E-Class outperforming the common man's (read: those that cannot afford an SLR) flagship SL if someone was after power). However, the E55 does have some restrictions which effects its power rating versus an SL55. These restrictions include pinched intake hoses to restrict air flow which are easily mitigated (I don't believe there is anything in the DME to alter power). Other items include exhaust differences (the SL55 does sound sweet..but remember 3" tube isn't necessarily always better than 2.75" tubing), but that's more chassis specific as is the gearing. Of all the E55s we have dyno tested (and there's been a lot), they all make the same, if not more power, than the SL55 when the intake restrictions are removed (even with restrictions, they are making more power than MB claims). So with that being said, even if 2 cars make the same power on dyno, it doesn't mean the car with more power is faster as there are other variables that cannot be accounted for on a dyno such as gearing, weights, CoD, etc. But still, all things being equal from a driver's standpoint, my money is on the E55 and I have actually dragged stock E55 vs SL55 in several runs and E55 had the edge...albeit a very little edge.

Rafal

AMEN!

Jim Brady

I owned both the 04 E55 and 03 SL55 and ran against my wife's SL dozen of times. After the E55 was broken in it didn't matter who drove, it was quicker. My theory is that the SL has a lower axel ratio and leaves the line harder but the traction control intervenes and kills the launch. The E55's longer wheel base and 2:62 axel isn't a dramatic as the SL55 but hooks up better. Oh ya, my SL with pano roof weighed 250lbs more than the E55.
You might get one or two quicker laps on a road course with the SL, but in a 30 minute session the E will edge it out.

IanSL55

Regardless of the actual horsepower... the assumption that it's a marketing ploy makes very little business/marketing sense. More HP is just another arrow in the quiver for MB as it positions the E class vs. it's rivals at BMW, Audi, etc.

It's pretty much common knowledge that the E55 has been the performance king of MB up until the introduction of the 65's (and the SLR). So I don't see how it would effect sales numbers. What I do know is that they'd get much more in terms of market share from their competitors than they might lose...

Understating performance and HP is never in the best interest of selling cars... Once I get my SL55 back from the shop I'll answer my own questions by running both of them back to back on the same dyno. Maybe I'll be presently suprised...

~ Ian

Mr. Vanos

Actually, it makes perfect sense. This is not the first time car companies have done this...it's just market positioning. Porsche did it with the 996TT X50, BMW did it with the S54-powered M-Roadster, etc. Let's see, buy this $120,000 SL or the E which costs $40,000 less which has the same power and is faster? For me, I think the SL500 is overpriced for what you get, much less the SL55. So, here's one customer that would buy an E55 instead of an SL55 and still have enough money for a few mods and we'll throw in a WRX or Evo to boot (but that's just me). I'm not saying it's 100% marketing nor did I say it was some "ploy" but my opinion is that there is marketing reasons behind it. Why else underpower the car if you don't have to? Besides, consistent dyno numbers tell the same story. MB knows that even with "469hp", they'd still be the segment leader for some time. Don't be surprised if we soon hear "In automotive news, Mercedes-Benz bumps horsepower on its E55 AMG to 496, up 30 from last year."

What rivals? Since its introduction (going on 3rd model year now) the E55 has had no real rivals. I agree with your arrows in the quiver comment, so why not go all the way and post it at 496?

Well actually, from a marketing standpoint, I would say that unless you know otherwise, common knowlege of the general public (that's not us folks!) would view the SL55 as the big dog which is exactly how MB has marketed it. Besides, if it were "common" knowledge as you say, we really wouldn't be having this thread discussion

The E55/SL55 combo has been out for a couple years longer than the 65s, so there's 2 years of pre-65 sales for you. Still, I don't believe the majority of 55 customers are necessarily ones who are also contemplating a 65, much less an SLR.

Again, I'm not necessarily saying it's all understated (I think part of it is), but that they've physically modified components on the car to reduce the car's hp for a reason (we know this, we've seen this, we've tested this). Don't you find it odd that there is a minimum $40,000 price differential between the 55 cars that are rated at 469 (E/CLS...we're leaving the G out of this which has a minimum $20,000 price differential) and the flagship 55 cars at 496 (S/CL/SL)? Unless someone tells me something more convincing, I'm sticking with my original speculation.

Great! Keep us posted.

IanSL55

Well thought out reply Vanos!

Well, if it's MB's marketing plan i think it's a **** poor one. The E and the SL are very different cars marketed at different segments, but I can respect the argument that it gives MB wiggle-room in the coming years to "up" the performance of the E55.

I also agree with you on the SL500 being over priced, but the SL55 is a lot of car for the money particularly when you start comparing it to the cost of it's big brother (SL65).

Potential rivals (grin)? It's really this point that I fail to understand. If this is really a marketing ploy, then MB is sending a very mixed message. On one hand, they're concluding that HP sets cars apart (SL55 at 496 and the E55 at 469), yet wouldn't increased stated HP also set them furthur apart from the competition? The logic of this conclusion cuts for and against them at the same time - that's rather strange.

Perhaps I'm jaded reading too much in these forums! I can tell you that I bought my SL55 last November knowing that the E55 had slightly better performance. When I picked up the E55 this past March it was because I wanted a 4 door race horse and my love for the engine led me straight to the W211.

I agree with you here. The choice for me was the SL600 or the SL55. The SL65 was a near exotic as far as I was concerned, and simply not worth the ~$60,000 premium over the SL55. IMHO, price has really put the 65's in a different class.

I agree with you. Obviously the engines leave a lot of room for increased performance. I'd more quickly buy into the argument that MB de-tunes the E55 for marketing reasons if the car is actually making closer to 469 than 496 that people have been saying. And in typing that just now, I had the funny notion that it may have all been a typo (469/496) that someone in MB made in '03 which stuck! "Whoops, that should have been 496HP for the E55 not 469HP... oh well... nobody will notice the difference anyway..."

I will...!

~ Ian

Mr. Vanos

I agree they are different cars with different segments. To be honest, I don't think their real motivations were an attempt to not lose an SL sale to the E-Class, but rather (and in even more vain) to make the SL55 customer who just shelled out $120,000+ on the flagship SL (at the time and in the 55 category today) feel they are king of the hill, and not second-class to the $40,000 less expensive 4-door, 5-passenger family car

Hahaha! I had thought about that as well. Coincidence that the 2 digits interchange? When you're scanning the numbers, it certainly would be an innocent mistake to think they were all the same. Man, and to think someone gets paid big $$$ to come up with this stuff. I'm in the wrong business!

E55 RUSS

Didnt I said about all this...

No reason to make SL55 previous Mercs performance flagship slower then E55 to 0-62...those a figures most commonly quoted and most of petential customers look at...500Hp E55 would be 0.1 sec faster then SL55...

Guys are you sure then SL has 90mm down pipes...sounds too big...backpressure is important....If yes, then no wonder why is sound so MEAN...

Why None of you E55 owners try 90mm pipes on E55...

So its ECU, down pipes and coller male extra 24 HP fo SL55...