Ok guys, i know most models share the 5.5L v8, and there is the 493bhp s/c and the 367hp version of it.
i know the S55 will not be the fastest becasue of the weight, obviously not the G55, or ML55, the clk 55 might be but doesnt that only have 367bhp, same with C55. So the CL, SL and E55 are left. I dont thhin kthe CL55 will be agian because of the weight.
so my opinion would be that E55 or SL55 is the fastest.

so which one is it?

 

my guess would be e55, also bcs of the weight

 

^^What he said...

 

the SL is pretty heafty at 4400ish pounds i think, where as the E55 is borderline 4000. Based on that alone, i think the E55 should be faster.

 

damn!!!! the SL is heavier than E55!! that amazes me alot.

 

Mclaren-Mercedes SLR or maybe the CLK-DTM...depending your definition of fastest.

 

Discussed time and time again and will be confirmed in this thread by a 100 other people and me...

The E55 is quicker from 0-300km/r than an SL55 by half a car length. Happy?

Due to the shorter transmission ratio of the SL55, it can keep up with E55 very very closely (car length). But IMo the SL55 is the better overall car.

 

yes i am happy BILAL so thank you for your precious time

 

SLR with 626HPS is the fastest...in European Horsepowers...

0-62 in 3.8

then CLK DTM

586 HPS 0-62 in 3.9...0-200km (0-120+) in 10.9.....

Then E55 and SL55 0-62 in 4.7

then CL55 and S55 in 4.8

then SLK 55 no kompressor 0-62 in 4.9

C55 no kompressor in 5.2

and CLK55 no kompressor in 5.2


then G55 Kompressor in 5.6

and then ML 55 no kompressor in 6.7 secs...

Is it clear

 

E55.

 

what so suprising about that?

I think even the SL500 is heavier than the E55?

 

Isn't it due to the SL class using heavier engine parts and such?

 

I think so but I thought the SL models were always fairly hefty

 

it's the fact that it's a convertible + an automatic hardtop roof.
those automatic hardtops add A LOT of weight, which is why a lot of car companies are so relucdent to adopt them

 

I am actually more curious about how E55 VS CLS55......

 

Actually, the SL55 is 25 pounds heavier than the CL55 ...

 

Can any prove that the E55 is faster than the SL55(from 0-200km/hr)??? All the tests I've seen show that the SL55 is faster. I thought the E55 would be faster because its lighter. Here are some test figures:

0-200km/hr:

SL55:

14.3secs http://www.einszweidrei.de/mer...1.htm Tested by Sport Auto
13.8secs http://www.einszweidrei.de/mer...1.htm Tested by Sport Auto
14.1secs http://www.einszweidrei.de/mer...1.htm Tested by AMS


E55:

14.6secs http://www.einszweidrei.de/mer...1.htm Tested by Sport Auto


Does anyone really have any concrete proof that the E55 is faster??? I'm just curious. Thanks

 

Locally the SL55 is rated at 367Kw Vs 350Kw for E55. The magazines seem to find that the SL55 was quicker. Does the SL55 have a lower drag coefficient because that would help from 100+. As for the 0-300km/h i think that is irelevant because seriously who drives that fast on the road. 0-100, 0-200 and 1/4mi are more relevant.

 

No, no, no.......
you're quoting the MB 'official' times.
MB will acknowledge those are VERY conservative times which can easily be exceeded by most drivers. Read some magazine test times and you'll see the E55 virtually never runs down as low as 4.7.


Also, the SL55 is NOT faster than the E55.
There are many resources you can check for yourself.
I've witnessed a pro driven race between the two, there are a number of people who have owned both, and many print resources conclude the same:

Motor Week: SL 55 4.8 0-60 (doubt it) http://www.mpt.org/motorweek/reviews/rt2214.shtml

Motor Week: E55 4.4 0-60 http://www.mpt.org/motorweek/reviews/rt2247.shtml

Motor Trend: E55: 4.2 SL55: 4.5 http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...112_0309_axes/

Car & Driver: E55: 4.3 SL55: 4.5 (May 2003 and July 2004)

There are many more sources (a minority will list the SL55 faster)

 

Hey...

4.7 is 0-62 times not 0-60....this makes a difference....