SLR Tiff Needell VIDEO Finally!
its 56mbs, but pretty damn cool, and what a noise inside the car!
Quote:
///AMG Mercedes said:
http://www.gofastvideo.com/gallery/item/predownload/460/1/free-racing-videos/mercedes-slr.html
its 56mbs, but pretty damn cool, and what a noise inside the car!
Quote:
///AMG Mercedes said:
http://www.gofastvideo.com/gallery/item/predownload/460/1/free-racing-videos/mercedes-slr.html
its 56mbs, but pretty damn cool, and what a noise inside the car!
Quote:
///AMG Mercedes said:
I guess he didn't, witnessed by the huge grin on his face of disappointment....
Quote:
///AMG Mercedes said:
I guess he didn't, witnessed by the huge grin on his face of disappointment....
Quote:
///AMG Mercedes said:
What a surprise! An MB not a tracktool. How naive does one have to be?
Repeat after me: All Mercedes Benz cars are biased towards the comfort side in terms of quipment and transmission and engine configuration.
They will NEVER be Porsche's in the same way as Porsche's will NEVER be Mercedes. Simple?
As for the SLR, it is designed to be a comfortable grand tourer, if you throw the SL65 at me, then I'll say yes, good car, cheaper, but isn't it the same as GT2 vs CGT? I'm sure CGT buyers thought GT2 was a viable alternative to the CGT, was it? then you'll say yeah but CGT buyers already have a 911 elsewhere in there garage, well the same can be said of SLR owners and SL's/CL's. Then you'll say yeah but the GT2 and CGT can both handle and do the Ring in under 8 minutes. Thats all well and fine, but to MB owners that doesn't matter, because for them MB has been about comfort, and no car will handle like the CGT and give the same comfort as an S600. There has to be compromises, for Porsche, the design brief from day one is about ultimate feel and laptimes, while for MercedesBenz it is not. there criteria is to make the most comfortable car possible at no expense. AMG's philosophy is to reduce some comfort for "sportiness", as in the sporty "feeling" and not ultimate track superiority. Understand?
The SLR may not be as comfortable as the SL65, because it was designed by McLaren to be a purists car, but since MB conducted heavy research into what their customers wanted, they wanted all the luxury as well. So what you get is satnav/AC/cruise control whatnot and basic conventional suspension. You also get THE most safest car in the world thanks to two nosecones and a handbuilt and supremely powerful AMG engine et al. It may not be a good handler, but its no SL65 as in VERY heavy car that cant handle at all. Its superior to the SL65 in every way apart from ride comfort. Looks is subjective. So you see an amalgamation of two completely different companies produces a car that is half this and half that. The SLR takes the best bits from MB and mixes it with the worst bits of McLaren, as in not enough sound insulation, hard ride. That is, if you look at it from MB's perspective. Which the car should be looked at because its their bucks and their say. you want the SLR to handle like a CGT and have a manual transmission>? You'll never get it.
You want it to handle so you can respect it as a sportscar, well at 1768kgs its only as good as its weight.
If I came into the Porsche forums and started saying because Porsche's don't have distronic and massaging seats there inferior cars, would my comments be legitimate in keeping with the design brief of a Porsche ? NO
Just as in the same way your comments are about it being a lame handler and luxo barge auto trannied, cheating engined odd looking thing. For the record, the CGT looks like an MR2 toyota, latest model IMO. When the car is not designed to be something from day one, why punish it for not being able to do something it was never destined to do? You'll say but the SLR was MB's effort at making a sportscar, IT WASN'T, the CLK-GTR 7.3 V12 was, go drive that if you wnat a sportscar. The SLR was destined to be comfortable GT, capable of going seriously fast when needed, a big SL but slightly lighter. You'll think, who teh hell wants to buy such a thing? Answer, MB owners who can afford to. Or possibly even people put off by the CGT's tricky clutch. Who knows?
The point is, and I apologise for the long post, is you are being illogical and inappropriate in suggesting its not a good car on the track. This is an AMG/Mercedes forum for fans of the brand. I umnderstand you're not one of those, and I welcome positive criticism, but negative criticism going against the principles of a brand as a whole is highly questionable, to put it lightly. I realise rennteam is a "sports car" site, but as long as the AMG forum remains, fans of the brand will post in it. (It would be hilarious if the AMG forum closes for good, soon after this post). IMO, rennteam is very Porsche biased, you get a lot of Porsche supremacists, thats fine, thats why you have Nick Berry to point stuff like this out (OT sorry).
hope everyone has a Happy New Year!
regards,
Bilal
Quote:
///AMG Mercedes said:
What a surprise! An MB not a tracktool. How naive does one have to be?
Repeat after me: All Mercedes Benz cars are biased towards the comfort side in terms of quipment and transmission and engine configuration.
They will NEVER be Porsche's in the same way as Porsche's will NEVER be Mercedes. Simple?
As for the SLR, it is designed to be a comfortable grand tourer, if you throw the SL65 at me, then I'll say yes, good car, cheaper, but isn't it the same as GT2 vs CGT? I'm sure CGT buyers thought GT2 was a viable alternative to the CGT, was it? then you'll say yeah but CGT buyers already have a 911 elsewhere in there garage, well the same can be said of SLR owners and SL's/CL's. Then you'll say yeah but the GT2 and CGT can both handle and do the Ring in under 8 minutes. Thats all well and fine, but to MB owners that doesn't matter, because for them MB has been about comfort, and no car will handle like the CGT and give the same comfort as an S600. There has to be compromises, for Porsche, the design brief from day one is about ultimate feel and laptimes, while for MercedesBenz it is not. there criteria is to make the most comfortable car possible at no expense. AMG's philosophy is to reduce some comfort for "sportiness", as in the sporty "feeling" and not ultimate track superiority. Understand?
The SLR may not be as comfortable as the SL65, because it was designed by McLaren to be a purists car, but since MB conducted heavy research into what their customers wanted, they wanted all the luxury as well. So what you get is satnav/AC/cruise control whatnot and basic conventional suspension. You also get THE most safest car in the world thanks to two nosecones and a handbuilt and supremely powerful AMG engine et al. It may not be a good handler, but its no SL65 as in VERY heavy car that cant handle at all. Its superior to the SL65 in every way apart from ride comfort. Looks is subjective. So you see an amalgamation of two completely different companies produces a car that is half this and half that. The SLR takes the best bits from MB and mixes it with the worst bits of McLaren, as in not enough sound insulation, hard ride. That is, if you look at it from MB's perspective. Which the car should be looked at because its their bucks and their say. you want the SLR to handle like a CGT and have a manual transmission>? You'll never get it.
You want it to handle so you can respect it as a sportscar, well at 1768kgs its only as good as its weight.
If I came into the Porsche forums and started saying because Porsche's don't have distronic and massaging seats there inferior cars, would my comments be legitimate in keeping with the design brief of a Porsche ? NO
Just as in the same way your comments are about it being a lame handler and luxo barge auto trannied, cheating engined odd looking thing. For the record, the CGT looks like an MR2 toyota, latest model IMO. When the car is not designed to be something from day one, why punish it for not being able to do something it was never destined to do? You'll say but the SLR was MB's effort at making a sportscar, IT WASN'T, the CLK-GTR 7.3 V12 was, go drive that if you wnat a sportscar. The SLR was destined to be comfortable GT, capable of going seriously fast when needed, a big SL but slightly lighter. You'll think, who teh hell wants to buy such a thing? Answer, MB owners who can afford to. Or possibly even people put off by the CGT's tricky clutch. Who knows?
The point is, and I apologise for the long post, is you are being illogical and inappropriate in suggesting its not a good car on the track. This is an AMG/Mercedes forum for fans of the brand. I umnderstand you're not one of those, and I welcome positive criticism, but negative criticism going against the principles of a brand as a whole is highly questionable, to put it lightly. I realise rennteam is a "sports car" site, but as long as the AMG forum remains, fans of the brand will post in it. (It would be hilarious if the AMG forum closes for good, soon after this post). IMO, rennteam is very Porsche biased, you get a lot of Porsche supremacists, thats fine, thats why you have Nick Berry to point stuff like this out (OT sorry).
hope everyone has a Happy New Year!
regards,
Bilal
Quote:
///AMG Mercedes said:
That review you posted basically contradicts EVERY review of the SLR and CGT. The nervousness is due to the ultra-hard suspension and 2.7 turn steering. The reviewer is clearly biased to the CGT. How come Mr. Clarkson picked the SLR over the CGT? I'm sure the SLR was giving Clarkson a car which as described by you is practically undriveable.
What a credible review!
And Its not like I'm saying its a perfect car but what that magazine has done is taken the irks and amplified them by the CGT's redline.
When one review contraditcs every other review of a particular you have to question its credibility. But lets not argue about which magazine is better otherwise we'd be nothing but a pair of magazine racers.
The SLR like I said is an amalgamation of two comepletely different companies, it was basically a complete mix and match, mixing the best bits of MB and worst bits of McLaren.
Ever driven a W124 500E?
And so the debate goes on....
Quote:
///AMG Mercedes said:
That review you posted basically contradicts EVERY review of the SLR and CGT. The nervousness is due to the ultra-hard suspension and 2.7 turn steering. The reviewer is clearly biased to the CGT. How come Mr. Clarkson picked the SLR over the CGT? I'm sure the SLR was giving Clarkson a car which as described by you is practically undriveable.
What a credible review!
And Its not like I'm saying its a perfect car but what that magazine has done is taken the irks and amplified them by the CGT's redline.
When one review contraditcs every other review of a particular you have to question its credibility. But lets not argue about which magazine is better otherwise we'd be nothing but a pair of magazine racers.
The SLR like I said is an amalgamation of two comepletely different companies, it was basically a complete mix and match, mixing the best bits of MB and worst bits of McLaren.
Ever driven a W124 500E?
And so the debate goes on....
Quote:
Moogle said:
ive yet to drive a nercedes mclaren SLR, but from what i've heard , the car has a jekyl and hyde personality. on one hand it is a great GT, on the other hand, it is supposed to be an uncompromising sports car...
in the end, in my mind at least, it can't compare to the more focused models produced by F and P, i'm sure it appeals to some people
Quote:
Moogle said:
ive yet to drive a nercedes mclaren SLR, but from what i've heard , the car has a jekyl and hyde personality. on one hand it is a great GT, on the other hand, it is supposed to be an uncompromising sports car...
in the end, in my mind at least, it can't compare to the more focused models produced by F and P, i'm sure it appeals to some people
Quote:
ben, lj said However, there are few who can test the 'performance' of a car like Tiff.
Quote:
ben, lj said However, there are few who can test the 'performance' of a car like Tiff.
Quote:
///AMG Mercedes said:Quote:
ben, lj said However, there are few who can test the 'performance' of a car like Tiff.
You're forgetting the track-obsessed CGT buying public
The only reason I ask, is the 500E was made by Porsche and Mercedes, maybe then you could comment on that car with regards to two completely different companies collaborating to make a car.....
Quote:
///AMG Mercedes said:Quote:
ben, lj said However, there are few who can test the 'performance' of a car like Tiff.
You're forgetting the track-obsessed CGT buying public
The only reason I ask, is the 500E was made by Porsche and Mercedes, maybe then you could comment on that car with regards to two completely different companies collaborating to make a car.....
Quote:
///AMG Mercedes said:
So couldn't the failure of the SLR be attributed to Mclaren's inadequacy at working with MB?
Alss employing coulthard and chris goodwin as test drivers?
Quote:
///AMG Mercedes said:
So couldn't the failure of the SLR be attributed to Mclaren's inadequacy at working with MB?
Alss employing coulthard and chris goodwin as test drivers?