NSX versus CLK55 AMG

[TURBO2GO]

My friend has a 2002 (non supercharged) Mercedes CLK55 AMG. I believe it is around 360 HP. Its stock... he keeps asking if my NSX is faster through the 1/4 or slower... I don't really know.

So we talked about going to a remote parking lot or abandoned strip and finding out. FYI the supercharger is not in my car yet. I want to document my 1-2 cold shift problem to Acura before install. He pretty much knows he will lose once the SC is installed. But what about stock? what is your best guess... should be fairly close, right? I am not going to rev my engine to 6K and drop the clutch nor power shift. Not there to prove anything. We are friends, just curious.

 

[VBNSX]

http://www.albeedigital.com/supercoupe/articles/0-60times.html

supposedly it'll run around a 13.6 ish. This website is off though. I know that a 91 is not a mere 14.4.. at NOPI i ran a 13.7 and my engine is stock.

Anywho, it'll be close, may come down to driver but the clk55 probably pushes more torque and will probably take you in the 0-60

x

 

[Hapa88]

Its got about 350HP and weighs about 3500lbs if its the coupe version. 1/4 mile times seem to be in the mid 13s and if you're not going to try (i.e. not powershift, not launch), he'll probably beat you since his is an automatic and all he does is press down the gas an go. Otherwise it might be pretty close.

 

[TURBO2GO]

OK then... that will let him feel good until I get the SC installed. Let him feel like the king for another couple o' weeks. :biggrin:

 

[Chinonsx02]

you should be able to take him, launch at 4000 and shift at 7300 and u should beat him because i beat my friends 03 m3 with my 02 nsx

 

[TURBO2GO]

why 7300?

 

[gtr]

My friend has a 2002 (non supercharged) Mercedes CLK55 AMG. I believe it is around 360 HP.

The 02 is actually 342hp. The 03 rounder ones have 362hp. I currently own both cars and feel from a roll the NSX will lose. For the actual quarter mile I haven't tested at the track yet but the outcome will probably be about the same depending on the traction and driver.

 

[Klayton]

Is it the W208 or W209? Change was 3/2002.

Nevertheless both of them are stock faster in the straight than a stock 2005 NSX. Numbers for the W209 in germany are 367hp 0-100km/h 5,4 secs. I don't got the exact data of the 2005 NSX in mind, 280hp and 5,7 0-100km/h?
I'm only interested in NA1 NSXs.

Looking forward for the CLK63, I was not able to drive one yet but 481hp in the CLK should be fun.

 

[TURBO2GO]

Is it the W208 or W209? Change was 3/2002.

Nevertheless both of them are stock faster in the straight than a stock 2005 NSX. Numbers for the W209 in germany are 367hp 0-100km/h 5,4 secs. I don't got the exact data of the 2005 NSX in mind, 280hp and 5,7 0-100km/h?
I'm only interested in NA1 NSXs.

Looking forward for the CLK63, I was not able to drive one yet but 481hp in the CLK should be fun.

Its a W208. I have to say, I just don't think the CLK is that fun. Even with a 1000 HP. Its too remote and disconnected compared to an NSX. Its a nice car... but a totally different thing than the NSX.

 

[ediddynsx]

Our cars don't have a chance unless its supercharged or Turboed.

E55 AMG is almost 500hp stock..... thats like a fully built nsx there....

 

[TURBO2GO]

Our cars don't have a chance unless its supercharged or Turboed.

E55 AMG is almost 500hp stock..... thats like a fully built nsx there....

Dude, I think you may need to work less... You OK? :smile:

I said CLK... w208... 360 HP... I mentioned specificaly "not supercharged"... when did I or anyone else talk about a supercharged E55?

 

[Ski_Banker]

A little off topic, but... I just hate seeing this kind of thing (not the thread :wink: ). A Mercedes 2-dr sedan that can keep up with or beat a dedicated sportscar. Not just because the NSX has lagged in power - things wouldn't be much different with a P-car or even F-car (430 would be decidedly faster, but you get the point). It's like, we can dump a powerful engine in any sedan, and then use electronics to improve handling even if the car weighs 4500 lbs. What's the point? Imagine a 500hp turbocharged Acura RL with SH-AWD and good tires. It would smoke almost anything, straighline or on a track! But is that a sportscar??

Call me old fashioned, but I guess I just like my sportscars being sportscars, and my women in the..........passenger seat. :tongue: :biggrin:

 

[ediddynsx]

Dude, I think you may need to work less... You OK? :smile:

I said CLK... w208... 360 HP... I mentioned specificaly "not supercharged"... when did I or anyone else talk about a supercharged E55?

I know you are....my point is that any AMG benzo is fast as hell.....the only car that we probably can sort of keep up with is the c and maybe clk class amgs.....anything higher forget about it.......unless we have F/I.......I love our cars and people are right........ anyone can dump a crazy motor in a sedan and make it fast but its not a NSX. :smile:

I need to turbo my car :biggrin:

 

[nsxsupra]

Since the CLK55 owner offered the chance to run. A nice friendly test run wouldn't hurt, win or lose doesn't matter. This is the only way to find out, let us know the results. I think it will be a very close match up.

The W208 CLK55 is actually not much or any slower than the W209 CLK55, it only weight 3485lbs vs the heavier W209 CLK55 with minimal power increase.

The power weight ratio is very similar, the CLK55 does have 376lb feet of torque at 3000rpm. NSX got 224lbs-feet of torque. Isn't torque a bit over rated compare to HP? Its nice to be able to step on the gas and get slammed into the seat, no doubt, but isn't HP more of a indication of how fast the car can accelerate

The newer AMG cars are simply unreal, the AMG really took the HP war to another level. If I ever add another car next to the NSX, I want something fast like that and effortless from the start.

 

[TURBO2GO]

A little off topic, but... I just hate seeing this kind of thing (not the thread :wink: ). A Mercedes 2-dr sedan that can keep up with or beat a dedicated sportscar. Not just because the NSX has lagged in power - things wouldn't be much different with a P-car or even F-car (430 would be decidedly faster, but you get the point). It's like, we can dump a powerful engine in any sedan, and then use electronics to improve handling even if the car weighs 4500 lbs. What's the point? Imagine a 500hp turbocharged Acura RL with SH-AWD and good tires. It would smoke almost anything, straighline or on a track! But is that a sportscar??

Call me old fashioned, but I guess I just like my sportscars being sportscars, and my women in the..........passenger seat. :tongue: :biggrin:

I remember specificaly after getting out of my CL600 and driving my freind's CLK55 that I felt it was noisy, unrefined, and rough. Lots of NVH. "Not in the same category at all" I thought to myself. Now after the NSX, I feel its somewhat disconnected, the steering is vague, the brakes are spongy, and the engine is torquey. but... surprisingly smooth! :smile: It definitely is all relative.

 

[TURBO2GO]

but isn't HP more of a indication of how fast the car can accelerate .

Horsepower is Torque X RPM.

The newer AMG cars are simply unreal, the AMG really took the HP war to another level. If I ever add another car next to the NSX, I want something fast like that and effortless from the start.

Yeah with a simple Mod the MB V12TT engine can easily put out over 625HP... 1000 newton meters of torque, I believe that translates to over 700 lb/ft... and the acceleration is INSANE... I know... but its still so quiet and serene that unless you look at the speedo, you'd never guess you are going that fast. I know that sounds cool, and in a way it is, but its not very fun.

Its a great way to pass a car on the highway without any drama whatsoever. My friend going to the track with his CL600 was running low 11's with stock tires. These MB's will embarass a Murcielago in a straight line. Now the AMG63 motor has over 500 HP NA, and they are talking about turbocharging it. I wonder if I can stuff that into my NSX. :biggrin:

 

[Chinonsx02]

when i said to shift at 7300 is because u said u did not want to go more than 6000 rpm i think u should be able to take him , because u said his was a normal aspirated 5.5 v8 his car is heavy if u can shift at 7900 would be perfect .your chances are better go for it and tell us what happend.

 

[johnny010]

Call me old fashioned, but I guess I just like my sportscars being sportscars, and my women in the..........passenger seat. :tongue: :biggrin:

Most intelligent thing you have ever written. :biggrin:


and TURBO - Did I miss your problem with the 1 to 2 shift? What is up with that?

 

[TURBO2GO]

Most intelligent thing you have ever written. :biggrin:


and TURBO - Did I miss your problem with the 1 to 2 shift? What is up with that?

1-2 shift is notchy when cold. Its a prevelant problem many have on their newer NSX's. Trying to document the problem so that when it gets worse, they won't say "well there is your problem, the supercharger. No warranty".

 

[MvM]

A little off topic, but... I just hate seeing this kind of thing (not the thread :wink: ). A Mercedes 2-dr sedan that can keep up with or beat a dedicated sportscar. Not just because the NSX has lagged in power - things wouldn't be much different with a P-car or even F-car (430 would be decidedly faster, but you get the point). It's like, we can dump a powerful engine in any sedan, and then use electronics to improve handling even if the car weighs 4500 lbs. What's the point? Imagine a 500hp turbocharged Acura RL with SH-AWD and good tires. It would smoke almost anything, straighline or on a track! But is that a sportscar??

Call me old fashioned, but I guess I just like my sportscars being sportscars, and my women in the..........passenger seat. :tongue: :biggrin:

I agree with you on this.

I can understand the car manufactures whishing to improve their image by building a top-of-the-line higher/high performing car for every model they have. Usually, the do it by dumping the largest engine that will fit into the engine compartment et voila - another super hatchback/sedan/MPV/SUV.

It is relatively cheap way of building a fast, sometimes very fast and sometimes scary fast car but it is definately NOT a way to design a Sports Car.

For me, a sportscar has to Look like a sportscar, feel like a sportscar and be able to drive and handle like a sportscar without the need for ESP, EBA, adaptive this/that or other kinds of electronics.

Don't get me wrong, a lot of this electronics stuff is of course great to improve safety and handling for every car. But my point is that some of these high-peformance sedans simply NEED this stuff to be able to handle right. Disable all that stuff on that Benz and I wonder what would be left of the 'great' handling of that car. It would still be fast in a straight line of course but what would happen on the first corner ??

 

[jond]

You should be able to take it in the 1/4. Not sure about 0-60

 

[Klayton]

Yeah with a simple Mod the MB V12TT engine can easily put out over 625HP... 1000 newton meters of torque,

It already puts out 612hp stock and over 1000nm of torque, torque is electronicly limited. :smile:

Now the AMG63 motor has over 500 HP NA, and they are talking about turbocharging it. I wonder if I can stuff that into my NSX. :biggrin:

I'm sorry to say but this is wrong. AMG purposely developed a NA high reving (for an AMG close to 7000rpm is high reving ) engine, they are not going to supercharge it. They are following the trend of the M GmBh and Audis S-Line to build high reving NA engines. The AMG63 engine still got that low rev oomph because of its displacement.

You should be able to take it in the 1/4. Not sure about 0-60

Nope.

 

[|Adeel]

Man I want a AMG too... The concept of wolf in sheeps clothing is so cool...

 

[Klayton]

Man I want a AMG too... The concept of wolf in sheeps clothing is so cool...

Well the new AMGs don't realy hide their wolf.. even the small SLK55 got the four fat exhaust pipes. The last understatement AMG realy is the CLK63 Cab, it got a normal exhaust and not as much airodynomic changes to the normal CLK Cab. Go for it, and don't forget to visit me after you bought it.

Greetings
Klayton

 

[|Adeel]

Well the new AMGs don't realy hide their wolf.. even the small SLK55 got the four fat exhaust pipes. The last understatement AMG realy is the CLK63 Cab, it got a normal exhaust and not as much airodynomic changes to the normal CLK Cab. Go for it, and don't forget to visit me after you bought it.

Greetings
Klayton

The only AMG I can think myself actually buying in the future is the CLS55AMG. And it won't happen in a decade or so But then again, I'm a little more BMW M person






Edit; Sorry off topic!