2005 Mercedes-Benz CL65 AMG
SLR is a WAY WAY WAY Higher Engineered car. And if you think these cars (SL65AMG-SLR) are the same speed, hell no. I have a Vid of tehm both racing, not even close and the handling is not the same. Both cars are Amazing, but the SLR more so......
Originally Posted by TheGVR4kid
No matter what you do to an SL65, it will never have this....
Gross horsepower is one thing, engineering is another...
Gross horsepower is one thing, engineering is another...
Why would I wanna take out the twin-turbo V12 and put in a supercharged V8??
Anyway, that is just my opinion, take it or leave it, doesnt matter to me. I'll happily take an SL65 with tons of Renntech mods and an Evo with all kinds of HKS parts and still have enough money to buy a nice house
Originally Posted by dcorn
Why would I wanna take out the twin-turbo V12 and put in a supercharged V8??
Originally Posted by TheGVR4kid
If all you're noticing in that picture is the type of engine, then you're perfect for boulevard pimp status in an SL65. But anyone serious about performance will admire the 100 years of aquired tech that Benz put all into the SLR.
Originally Posted by TheGVR4kid
If all you're noticing in that picture is the type of engine, then you're perfect for boulevard pimp status in an SL65. But anyone serious about performance will admire the 100 years of aquired tech that Benz put all into the SLR.
All I'm saying is that from the lackluster reviews from magazines that I've heard, it doesnt seem like the SLR is worth the $600k because the amazing performance and speed can be had in other cars for much less (Ferrari F430, Porsche GT2, either Lamborghini) If I had to pick a dream Mercedes, the SLR just wouldn't be it.
Originally Posted by dcorn
All I'm saying is that from the lackluster reviews from magazines that I've heard, it doesnt seem like the SLR is worth the $600k because the amazing performance and speed can be had in other cars for much less (Ferrari F430, Porsche GT2, either Lamborghini) If I had to pick a dream Mercedes, the SLR just wouldn't be it.
Originally Posted by TheGVR4kid
Don't forget, the SLR turned a quicker laptime on TopGear than the Carerra GT.
i gotta see the videos again, cause i thought the SLR ran a 1.20 and the Carerra Gt ran 1.19...
Evolved Member
iTrader: (3)
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,907
Likes: 0
From: dublin, oxford, chillicothe OH
Originally Posted by dcorn
Ok, I see a mid-engine layout with 2 side intercoolers and a traditional rear drive system with rear axles that look way too small to transmit 600 ft-lbs of torque. I kinda thought that mile long front end was to hold the huge engine, but now I can see that the engine is actually very small and Mercedes kinda wasted like 2 feet in that car. But I'm sure you can see all of that quality engineering and over 100 years of heritage in a picture of an engine, transmission and rear axle. I must be missing something.
All I'm saying is that from the lackluster reviews from magazines that I've heard, it doesnt seem like the SLR is worth the $600k because the amazing performance and speed can be had in other cars for much less (Ferrari F430, Porsche GT2, either Lamborghini) If I had to pick a dream Mercedes, the SLR just wouldn't be it.
All I'm saying is that from the lackluster reviews from magazines that I've heard, it doesnt seem like the SLR is worth the $600k because the amazing performance and speed can be had in other cars for much less (Ferrari F430, Porsche GT2, either Lamborghini) If I had to pick a dream Mercedes, the SLR just wouldn't be it.
The car is very well engineered. The whole point of putting the engine back there is to get a 50/50 weight distribution. The whole package being so small saves weight also
Evolving Member
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 353
Likes: 0
From: Nor Cal
A guy i know ran his New AMG SL65 with about 1100 miles he made 8-9 passes with it a few weeks ago @ Sacramento Raceway park.....it ran a best of 11.7 at 127..WOW the crazy MPH tells the tail for a car weighing in @ 4500#'s
GAWD...thats a fast car
GAWD...thats a fast car
