Shank - don't tell me the floor in your garage is marble or travertine. If you do, I'm gonna have to come over there and whallop you bad. Then I'll steal your cars!!

 

So very true. It's very unfortunate that cars today have to make up for their weight problems w/more hp.

 

Shank,

(Sorry for the thread-jacking, but I thought this might be interesting to others )

Now that you have had your SL600, how do you like it compared to the SL55? Does the SL600 have noticably more torque? (Before Rennteching...) Does the tranny shift slower? Is there anything you miss about the 55? I have an SL600 on order, but I thought the 55 was funner (better sound, firmer ride, steering wheel shifter buttons).

 

the problem with the SL65 amg is it's 0-60 time is not worth the 135k price tag. the same company makes a sedan 60k cheaper that puts up a 60 time of 4.6 (compared to the SL's time of 4.5) and these crazy numbers of 714 lb/ft and something like 660 hp is nothing if u don't make use of it. C'mon Merc., a 6 litre biturbo V12, ****ing use the power! and by the way, their "supercar" the Slr McLaren, where is the ****ing six speed?! Honestly, an automatic McLaren?!?!?! Road and Track are comparing it to the Enzo, which has a 0-60 time of 3.28, while the SLR has an estimated time of 3.8, someone please, why does mb think they can stroll into the supercar class with an automatic?

 

Automatics close the gap really fast when boost is concerned. Look at Supras and such, the autos become faster than the 6 speeds simply because the auto can hold the boost better than the stick. The E55AMG is a fast SOB rated at 476HP/500+lb ft. Have you guys seen the vids of it constantly beating on a 453rwhp modded 03' Cobra? BTW: That's auto too. That being said, the comparison between the SL65AMG and the Enzo is absurd, they're completely different cars for completely different buyers.

LEMAR

 

I believe he is comparing the Enzo to the SLR, both of which I'm not a fan.

 

Some clarification:

The SL65 numbers were already posted by me, 612hp / 737 tq. These numbers are from the CL65 but the SL65 is as good as confirmed.

With cars like these and with this much power 0-60 times really no longer matter. You can reduce the length of the first gear but what is that point if you're already spinning the tires in the first 3 gears. At least look at 0-100 times when looking at cars with this much power. There are 996TT spinning all 4 wheels here and that is with beefy tires. Never mind a front engine, rear wheel drive car with stock rubber.

Also the AMG cars will always have a sportier look, firmer ride, more sporty feel, and overall aggresive ride just because that is what AMG does to the cars. The sl55 and 65 will always remain sportier, even when compared to the sl600

Lastly, the slr should have had the amg 65 engine, and the new 7 speed tranny that is soon to come out. If you take a look at the sl55 and the slr you will see MANY MANY similarities. Even in the interior, basic engine etc... This is, in my opinion, where MB went wrong. They could have debued (sic) the transmission on the car, maybe even had made it a manual, shaved another 300 pounds (at least of the slr) and tuned the 65 engine. Then it would have been something to reckon with. It still is, but it just can't compete with the ultra exotics (enzo, carrera gt)


That amazing thing though that no one can argue is the sheer strength of the new MBs. There is a guy that ran 12s (or maybe even 11s) in his chipped S600. That's no spelling mistake. Thats a 4 door luxury sedan weighing in at more than 4000 pounds. And that car is pretty much stock. That, to me, is damn impressive.

 

moooooooo

 

That was Ben Treynor, with a Maybach ECU. He ran 11.7 on drag radials.