Just courious who is faster stock?

 

Mag racing leads me to believe that the E55 is faster, time and time again. Real world may tell different, but I doubt it.

 

E55 has the same engine no? And it's got less weight?

 

sl has more rated HP, better aero and a better rear gear ratio....so there are it's plus's and minus's.

 

I have both cars... The SL55 is about 150 pounds heavier and (while it may be hard to believe) the E55 has a lower coefficient of drag... MB states the SL55 has a little more horsepower and though 4 out of 5 E55 owners have told me that the HP of the E55 is understated, I personally have built that into the wishful thinking catagory (as 4 out of 5 SL55 owners swear the car makes over 500HP as well). MB's website has them dead even to 60MPH at 4.5 seconds. My experience is that the SL55 sounds faster, and the E55 feels quicker - and that both cars kick *** and take coats...

~ Ian

 

It's already been proven by various sources that all the 55 Kompressor engined cars are dynoing the very similar numbers around 420rwhp. These are hard numbers and not wishful thinking.

 

Actually, E55 has better aero (long wheel base, better roofline and trunk) and less weight. SL55 has better gearing, larger tires and, supposedly more flow-through exhaust (certainly makes a lot more noise to satisfy the marketing deparment), which, again supposedly, translates into 24 extra HP. Both cars are conservatively rated 0-62mph / 100kph 4.7 sec,
or 0-60mph 4.5 sec.

My stock + K&N E55 has been clocked 0-100kph @ 4.60sec.

 

I've heard the argument that MB understates the horsepower of the E55 so not to infringe on the SL55 and CL55... though I've never read that in any major publication nor from MB, and I strongly question to what end? Marketing move? Heck, the E55's competition comes from the likes of Audi, BMW, etc... not the SL or the CL. Hard for me to buy into MB understating HP in any scenario. It's simply not condusive to selling more cars and capturing a bigger piece of the market segment.

RE: "proven by various sources". Maybe I'm wrong, but I'd be one to assume that the hard numbers you mention are from unaudited third parties... I for one take them with a grain of salt and would be hard pressed to call that proven by any real means.

Kleemann and other tuners promote the fact that their exhaust systems adds more HP over the stock. Well since the exhausts are certainly different between the SL55 and the E55, might that equate to a HP difference? Are the ECU's programmed identically? We're only talking 24HP here (+/- 5%).

~ Ian

 

so wich one is faster?

 

In a straight line, neither. It depends on a driver and a particular car, just like with all the E55's mentioned here.
Around a circuit, according to motor magazine writers, SL55 has the edge, partly due to its ABC suspension.

 

Why would MB admit to understating its power? Just because they don't admit it, doesn't mean its not true. There is very much marketing driven. The thinking behind it is that since the E55 is much less expensive than the S, CL and SL's they would naturally want to rate the more expensive cars higher. Also, the real mystery is that while the HP numbers are different, why would the torque rating be the same?
Also, what do you mean by unaudited? The numbers I'm talking about are from various different sources, so why would one of these have any reason to claim differently? I've yet to personally witness a dyno run, but I've spoken to a couple of reputable TX tuners who have dynoed these cars with similar results, not to mention what folks have posted on these boards.
Why not have a buddy of yours drive one of your cars while you race him in the other? That would be pretty sweet.

 

Like I said...I've heard all the arguments. I just don't see the business/marketing upside of understating power...

Right now it's mere speculation that MB would understate the actual horsepower in some type of 'bow-down' to its more expensive models - speculation that makes very little business sense. Horsepower sells cars - period. Why would MB or any other automobile maker handcuff itself like this? Does anyone think BMW will understate the new M5's HP because it makes more than the new V12 760i? The 7 series is it's flagship model and the 760iL it's most expensive car.

Also, what I mean when I say unaudited is that I'd like to see a neutral third party (Motortrend? Car and Driver?) conduct a statistically significant comparison. It doesn't matter how reputable a tuner is... HP (like 1/4 mile and 0-60 track times) is subject to too MANY variables on a dyno to make for any real comparison.

I do know insurance companies base part of their rates on the reported HP of the car (one of many variables they build into their actuary diligence). Do you think for a moment that they would be OK w/ a manufacturer understating (or overstating) HP? Mazda recently overstated the HP of the RX-8 on launch and was severly chastized by the automotive industry at large. Don't you think that one of the major car mags would have said, "Mercedes has made a error in stating the E55's HP...".

Regarding a race... YES... might be fun. But I promise you whichever car I was in would lose. I'll only push the car so much before better judgement enters my head and I slow down. I'm probably the reason you'll read kill stories on the 350Z and M3 boards how they downed a SL55!

I love my E55... I personally think it's a little quicker than the SL... regardless of it's HP. =)

~ Ian

 

Ian - unfortunately, more likely that not, they understated the E55 for the given reasons. It would cost them MORE to make changes to the engine over just keeping it the same. Most tuners make parts for all 55 motors alike.. Many people have dynod independently, more trustworthy that C&D and those other useless chaps.

Its not a bad thing - both cars are great. And just cause you dont see it doesnt make it so. And yes, car mags have stated that the HP ratings are "probably more similar to the SL55" - I'll try and dig back for you if you want.

Car companies are very careful not to bite into existing sales. The fact is that is the same engine, and given the same driver and ideal conditions, the E is marginally faster, probably close enough to call even.

 

I just don't see how the EXACT same motor can put out different numbers unless one or the other is restricted in some way.. Isn't it the exact same motor they put in the SL, CL, E, S? only difference is different chassis and other minor things but overall it's the same motor under the hood isn't it?

 

E55 HP lowered due to the fact, that at the time when SL55 was introduced in Europe, it came out with 476HP...then they introduced E55 with the same Power...

Mercedes acknowledged that E55 was faster then SL55 especially after 100...and for marketing reasons they increased SL55 HP to 500, so it could at least keep up with E55, cause SL55 at that time was Mercedes performance flagship (55 Kompressor engine was 1st introduced in SL), obviously they would not make a car which has same engine and costs quite a bit more , to be slower then sport sedan...

In our days Mercedes rates their output E55 476Hp and SL55 500HP, but due to the fact that SL is a heavier car and has bigger tyres (bigger diameter) E55 is still faster to 200km (124) and even more faster to 300km...

I am not talking about the fact that stock delimited SL55 is actually faster 0-300km then Murceliago, the higher the speed the more Lost by 4wd...

I think the difference in the power SL55 and E55 is in ECU and exhaust system...May be IAN can tell us, if he has had a look underneath of both, is there any difference exhaust systems...May be SL55 has only 2 set of CAT's and bigger diameter downpipes??? or something else...anyone knows for sure???

 

Look at the 1/4 mile trap speeds, the E55 is faster - NO QUESTION about it. HP figures, 0-60 estimates, all that is rubbish.

1 car that traps at 115mph consistently, versus 1 car that traps at 112mph, will just about EVERY time pull on the slower trapping car when lined up on the highway.

-m

 

Hi Bob...How you doin man??? I took my beast in for service and had an M for the day. Everytime I stepped on the gas I was like, "Man, poor Bob, this must be killing him."

Dude, you gotta come back home....at least get a used 0355 or something..they are down to like 65-70KUS. I did see some other posts where you were asking....so I know it's running through you mind.

Don't mean to be a negative influence on your fam....if you don't have the cash....don't do it right now. Believe me....we ALL know what that's like.

Just wanted to say hi and that we miss the vids.....but we know they'll come again soon...no biggee.

 

You're the second person to tell me just because I don't see it doesn't make it a fact... well that statement cuts both ways. Just because people "think" this is MB's strategy... doesn't make it so either.

One thing not to forget is the cars have different exhausts. Ever hear a SL55 next to a E55? They sound like two different animals... From air-intake to the tip of the exhaust, the cars are not exactly the same. Also, if tuners can increase HP by re-mapping the ECU, then it goes to say it can be set to limit HP.

Yes, car companies are worried about biting into existing sales... however... that's more focused on launching new versions of the same car. If MB was so concenred about this why introduce the CLS which will certainly cut into both E and S class sales. Also, the SL and CL are totally different cars than the E... and if you're going to lose sales, it's far better to lose it to another model you sell than to a competitor.

MB does state that they're equally as quick to 60mph. Are they not worried about losing sales because of that? What's the reason behind BMW not understating the 545's HP which is rated the same as the 745. Were they not concerned about losing sales? I'm sorry - regardless of the actual HP... but the business logic explaining the supposed understatement is flawed.

Don't get me wrong. It's my feeling that the E55 is a faster car even if it has equal or less HP...

~ Ian

 

The E is more aerodynmaic and it's lighter... so yes, I don't think anyone would be suprised it's faster.

~ Ian

 

Same motor yes... different exhausts and the ECU is probably mapped different as well. Exhausts will slightly effect HP and if ECU tuning can raise HP, it certainly can limit it...

~ Ian

 

Comparing BMW's philosophy to MB's is apples and oranges. One company's business logic is vastly different from the other. Just look at the difference between BMW's and MB's product lines!
It looks like you're the Lone Ranger on this topic. There's just too many tuners and third parties who have come along to prove the fact the engine output is consistent across all the product lines. We're not debating whether all the exhaust, etc. components are identical, just that the power output is the same. While you're waiting for the gospels of Motor Trend and Car & Driver to prove it, many people have already done it, regardless of who you "believe".

 

Definitely comes down 2 the driver! Friend of mine has a '04 SL55. We had the opportunity 2 run them on a local expressway at 4AM, and with ESP dis-engaged....I beat him by 1/2 a car length. So an educated driver will be the main factor in the outcome!

 

I don't think I'm alone on the topic... and while I don't consider MT or C&D the gospel, they do carry more weight w/ me than many of the guys who post on the internet as well as the tuners out there (not referring to you - you always have good posts)... Even if the HP is the same... the bottom line is people are just guessing why MB would do such a thing. Personally I don't see the business logic and have yet to hear a compelling argument towards that end. If MB is worried about diluting S, SL, and CL sales, 1. they shouldn't have introduced the CLS and 2. they're worrying about the wrong things - if I'm the product manager I'm worried about losing sales to BMW and Audi, and marketing accordingly (showing the higher HP for the E55 would make it sell better v. the M5 no?). Here's a twist... ever think that both cars are at 476HP and they're over stating the SL55?

~ Ian

PS: It's all good. No ill will here... I own both cars. Maybe I should dyno them both?

 

Can I add one more to the mix? How would a stock SLK55 do against the E55 and SL55 in 0-60? Car and Driver had it at 4.3 sec.

JS

 

It weighs 650lbs less than E55 (!!!), so even though it's rated 0.2 sec slower 0-60, and lacks the Kompressor, I wouldn't be surprised if it managed low 4's in capable hands and ideal conditions. Think W210 E55 without the fat...