Mercedes SLK World banner

1 - 20 of 26 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
806 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
There's a certain silver BMW M5 (E60 model, the V10) that drives by my house every day with his very loud exhaust howling and his SMG transmission blipping downshifts to the stop light. It sounds great, as any high revving V10 should. He also tends to accelerate quickly out of the stop light often chirping his tires into 2nd gear.

The other day, I was driving home and just so happened to pull up behind him at a stop light that leads onto a free way, and I got that feeling that he was going to try to take off. Light goes green, he inches forward then floors it. Tires chirp and he takes off, so naturally, I do too. Even with his slight head start, the SLK55 starts to reel him in before 60-70mph and I have to let off since we were in the same lane.

He sees me catching and slowing down then gives me a thumbs up. Silly M5, don't underestimate the topless Mercedes roadster next time. His car still sounds glorious though, especially being right behind him as he pushes the V10 to the 8k redline.

:)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
166 Posts
A friend has the estate version i think you call them sedans? anyway it is seriously quick and yes very loud you can hear him coming 2 miles away lol,it is a wolf in sheeps clothing ,so very normal until you want some fun and it is a truly great car that has one fault..namely it has a roof!!!!:Beer:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
806 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
Here in the US, we call the Estates "wagons." Sedan for the regular 4 door version with a trunk (boot.) The M5 Estate was never sold here.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
7,812 Posts
Racing on the highway in the UK will get you a serious penalty. Two were jailed recently for killing a young girl while racing each other.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
806 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
You sure he was in "M" mode?
Judging by the way I always see him driving around town, yes.

Also, M mode doesn't make the car faster, just increases throttle sensitivity and tightens up the suspension.

At low speeds, the SLK's torque and gearing beats the M5. At high speeds, the M5's horsepower takes over.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10 Posts
Judging by the way I always see him driving around town, yes.

Also, M mode doesn't make the car faster, just increases throttle sensitivity and tightens up the suspension.

At low speeds, the SLK's torque and gearing beats the M5. At high speeds, the M5's horsepower takes over.
M mode do unlock another 100hp, normally it restrain the output at 400hp.
But you're right, even with m mode on, at low speeds slk definitely has the edge.

I personally hate e60 m5s, because of a punk, high school kid tried to impress my neighbor's daughter by driving one.
He's m5 is matt black with weird stickers filling the rear window, aftermarket exhaust that shakes the ground evertime he took off...errr, I hate that car, so annoying.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
771 Posts
I had an m6 with the same v10 - and that thing would leave an r172 55 for dead in a straight line over any reasonable distance, never mind an R171. The M5 is pretty much identical in performance to the m6.

C & D figures:

R171 55:
0-60mph - 4.3s
0-100mph - 10.3s
1/4: 12.7s @ 111 mph

M6 V10
0-60mph - 4.1s
0-100mph - 8.9s
1/4: 12.4s @ 121 mph

But I can tell you from actually driving it, the difference in the m6 was very noticeable - it was very easy to get into scary fast speeds on a strong overtake in that car. the slk - not so much.

Thats what 500+ bhp and an automated manual transmission banging through the gears will do.

Here's the thing to remember with stories like this - when a lead car lets off the gas, a slower car will catch up. Likewise if both drivers are not 100% committed to the "race".
 

·
aka John
Joined
·
13,012 Posts
I'll post a picture of my neighbors new toy in a couple of hours! :)


I had an m6 with the same v10 - and that thing would leave an r172 55 for dead in a straight line over any reasonable distance, never mind an R171. The M5 is pretty much identical in performance to the m6.

C & D figures:

R171 55:
0-60mph - 4.3s
0-100mph - 10.3s
1/4: 12.7s @ 111 mph

M6 V10
0-60mph - 4.1s
0-100mph - 8.9s
1/4: 12.4s @ 121 mph

But I can tell you from actually driving it, the difference in the m6 was very noticeable - it was very easy to get into scary fast speeds on a strong overtake in that car. the slk - not so much.

Thats what 500+ bhp and an automated manual transmission banging through the gears will do.

Here's the thing to remember with stories like this - when a lead car lets off the gas, a slower car will catch up. Likewise if both drivers are not 100% committed to the "race".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
136 Posts
The other day, I was driving home and just so happened to pull up behind him at a stop light that leads onto a free way, and I got that feeling that he was going to try to take off. Light goes green, he inches forward then floors it. Tires chirp and he takes off, so naturally, I do too. Even with his slight head start, the SLK55 starts to reel him in before 60-70mph and I have to let off since we were in the same lane.
That doesn't surprise me at all. To get car-magazine acceleration out of an e60 M5 you'll need to use launch control, which is a convoluted process in BMWs, and it doesn't sound like it was being used based on your description of his start.

But the dirty little secret about that car is that it's pretty much an under-performer in general. Autobild did a track shootout of all the BMW M-cars including pigs like the M3 convertible, X6M and X5M. Based on Sachsenring Track lap-times, guess where the e60 M5 came in?

DFL.

http://www.m3post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=628566

I had an m6 with the same v10 - and that thing would leave an r172 55 for dead in a straight line over any reasonable distance, never mind an R171. The M5 is pretty much identical in performance to the m6.

C & D figures:

R171 55:
0-60mph - 4.3s
0-100mph - 10.3s
1/4: 12.7s @ 111 mph

M6 V10
0-60mph - 4.1s
0-100mph - 8.9s
1/4: 12.4s @ 121 mph

Here's the thing to remember with stories like this - when a lead car lets off the gas, a slower car will catch up. Likewise if both drivers are not 100% committed to the "race".
I'd say an even more important thing to remember when comparing car performance is to compare convertibles to convertibles, and no V10 M6 convertible has ever put down those times. It's also well known that the V10 M6 coupe is a better performer than the M5 - holding true in their current iterations as well.

Times for the e60 M5, which is the car in question, are readily available at C & D.

e60 SMG w/launch control:
0-60mph - 4.2s
0-100mph - 9.4s
1/4: 12.5s @ 118 mph

e60 6-speed:
0-60mph - 4.7s
0-100mph - 10.3s
1/4: 13s @ 114 mph

R171 55:
0-60mph - 4.3s
0-100mph - 10.3s
1/4: 12.7s @ 111 mph

R172 55:
0-60mph - 4.1s
0-100mph - 9.5s
1/4: 12.5s @ 116 mph
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
771 Posts
That doesn't surprise me at all. To get car-magazine acceleration out of an e60 M5 you'll need to use launch control, which is a convoluted process in BMWs, and it doesn't sound like it was being used based on your description of his start.
Magazines use whatever technique they can to lay down the best times - I doubt the slk times were done in the manner that most people drive their own cars. So if we're comparing like-with-like, then we need magazine style starts for both, with equally committed drivers.

How many times have you had someone in an obviously lesser-powered car rag the living daylights out of it to keep up with your 55 when you've just been driving it normally (ie not racing, but still driving it in a way most would consider to be "fast") - and you know that in their mind they've just written a "car killer" story.

But the dirty little secret about that car is that it's pretty much an under-performer in general. Autobild did a track shootout of all the BMW M-cars including pigs like the M3 convertible, X6M and X5M. Based on Sachsenring Track lap-times, guess where the e60 M5 came in?
not sure how this is relevant to a discussion about a race with the r171, but the m5 came out in 2005 and the other cars in that test are current models with all the advances like DCT that 8 years brings.

I'd say an even more important thing to remember when comparing car performance is to compare convertibles to convertibles,
Obviously there isn't an m5 convertible - and the original post was about an r171 55 vs an e60 m5.

Times for the e60 M5, which is the car in question, are readily available at C & D.
I did try to search c&d for the e60 in their instrumented test, but it only brought up the latest v8 model for me, hence using the m6.

The m5 figures you posted are clearly still faster than the r171 - making the original story not really reflective of the reality of a 500bhp car with a sequential manual box going up against a 360bhp car with a torque converter auto.
 

·
aka John
Joined
·
13,012 Posts
Just to go more off topic RandomBloke - Supercar or not, it's stunning in matte blue, and probably just a hair faster than the M5! ;-)



Magazines use whatever technique they can to lay down the best times - I doubt the slk times were done in the manner that most people drive their own cars. So if we're comparing like-with-like, then we need magazine style starts for both, with equally committed drivers.

How many times have you had someone in an obviously lesser-powered car rag the living daylights out of it to keep up with your 55 when you've just been driving it normally (ie not racing, but still driving it in a way most would consider to be "fast") - and you know that in their mind they've just written a "car killer" story.



not sure how this is relevant to a discussion about a race with the r171, but the m5 came out in 2005 and the other cars in that test are current models with all the advances like DCT that 8 years brings.



Obviously there isn't an m5 convertible - and the original post was about an r171 55 vs an e60 m5.



I did try to search c&d for the e60 in their instrumented test, but it only brought up the latest v8 model for me, hence using the m6.

The m5 figures you posted are clearly still faster than the r171 - making the original story not really reflective of the reality of a 500bhp car with a sequential manual box going up against a 360bhp car with a torque converter auto.
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
500 Posts
I had an m6 with the same v10 - and that thing would leave an r172 55 for dead in a straight line over any reasonable distance, never mind an R171. The M5 is pretty much identical in performance to the m6.

C & D figures:

R171 55:
0-60mph - 4.3s
0-100mph - 10.3s
1/4: 12.7s @ 111 mph

M6 V10
0-60mph - 4.1s
0-100mph - 8.9s
1/4: 12.4s @ 121 mph

But I can tell you from actually driving it, the difference in the m6 was very noticeable - it was very easy to get into scary fast speeds on a strong overtake in that car. the slk - not so much.

Thats what 500+ bhp and an automated manual transmission banging through the gears will do.

Here's the thing to remember with stories like this - when a lead car lets off the gas, a slower car will catch up. Likewise if both drivers are not 100% committed to the "race".


Totally agreed. I lost to both coworker M5 and M6. Both M5 and M6 pulled away easily from 120 mph. The M6 is even faster at that speed.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
771 Posts
The other thing with the m6 was how well it insulated the driver from the speed.

My wife gets twitchy as a passenger when I'm really giving it the beans, but she went a lot faster in the m6 than I think she realises. I certainly couldn't get close to those speeds in the slk without her being all too aware of it. It would be very easy to find yourself in jail-time territory in that car without realising it.

The slk is the other way - it feels like it's going faster than it is to me compared to other cars I've had.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
806 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
Wow this is an old post I made... Comparing magazine figures is meaningless. Conditions from day to day can change the numbers. Differences in cars can change the numbers. My car has an xpipe and secondary cat delete with eurocharged dyno tune. It also has much grippier tires than stock which would allow a much better start. We never reached anything past 75mph getting on the freeway. With the M5's power, he may have pulled away if we kept going.

With an open exhaust like he has, you can tell when he lets off the gas in the M5. The car is LOUD on throttle. I've since met the guy in a parking lot and his car is a 6 speed, which allows for some deviation because of shift speed. It wasnt an SMG car.

In the end, this isn't really a kill story since I never claimed it was a race. It was just a spirited drive onto the freeway from a slow rolling start.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
136 Posts
Magazines use whatever technique they can to lay down the best times - I doubt the slk times were done in the manner that most people drive their own cars. So if we're comparing like-with-like, then we need magazine style starts for both, with equally committed drivers.
My original statement was that it was unsurprising to me to find that the SLK55 had no trouble keeping up with the M5. But yes, a 5-60 time would seem a better metric for comparison between the two cars in the situation OP describes.
Both cars put down identical 4.6 second 5-60 times.
How many times have you had someone in an obviously lesser-powered car rag the living daylights out of it to keep up with your 55 when you've just been driving it normally (ie not racing, but still driving it in a way most would consider to be "fast") - and you know that in their mind they've just written a "car killer" story.
Agreed, this is common.
Obviously there isn't an m5 convertible - and the original post was about an r171 55 vs an e60 m5.
Right, I’m not sure why you introduced the E63 M6 coupe into the conversation either.
Wow this is an old post I made.
Yeah, there’s been a lot of that lately. People not checking the expiration date on some of these threads before opening.

Comparing magazine figures is meaningless.

Magazine figures serve a purpose in that they introduce some objectivity, particularly when they’re from the same source. Given that he was driving the 6-speed, it turns out that on-paper you were driving the faster car :0

Leave the E60 M5s alone and pick on someone your own speed ! :D
 

·
AND MABEL
Joined
·
14,033 Posts
Originally Posted by MarkR171
Wow this is an old post I made.
Yeah, there’s been a lot of that lately. People not checking the expiration date on some of these threads before opening.

Do old threads expire?

Reopening this one has certainly sparked some fresh debate. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
136 Posts
Originally Posted by MarkR171
Wow this is an old post I made.
Yeah, there’s been a lot of that lately. People not checking the expiration date on some of these threads before opening.

Do old threads expire?

Reopening this one has certainly sparked some fresh debate. :)
Sure it's subjective, but we could probably better employ our time than debating the street-cred of a car that wasn't involved with but similar to a car that was in a race that wasn't really a race that happened thousands of miles away from where most of us live approximately 18 months ago.

Maybe we shoulda let that sleeping dog lie. I'm pretty sure Mom would not be proud if she saw me wasting my time with these shenanigans and if I'd checked the expiration date on this package I may not have.

Some threads definitely do, for example where someone is asking a question with an implied time-boxed answer. This one stunk like Camembert after it was recently re-opened and I examined its contents.

http://www.slkworld.com/slk-r172-general-discussion/34847-slk-172-250-too-powerful-beginner-driver-3.html#post1130193
 
1 - 20 of 26 Posts
Top