Crown
Board: AMG Mercedes
Language: English
Region: Worldwide
Close
CloseForum - Thread
Re: sport auto: E55T vs. RS 6 Plus Avant
Quote:
J.Seven said:
Hummmmm .......how can the Audi have more claimed power, less weight and even so, it's slower than the Benz?????
I think those Audi engines need to go the shop for a check up.
J.Seven
Or the Benz engines?
But then there are other factors like aerodynamics, the shape of the torque curves.
Re: sport auto: E55T vs. RS 6 Plus Avant
Quote:
J.Seven said:
Hummmmm .......how can the Audi have more claimed power, less weight and even so, it's slower than the Benz?????
I think those Audi engines need to go the shop for a check up.
J.Seven
Or the Benz engines?
But then there are other factors like aerodynamics, the shape of the torque curves.
Jun 28, 2004 10:04:23 PM
-
Carlos from Spain
- Rennteam Moderator
-
- Loc: Spain. , Spain
- Posts: 20896, Gallery
- Registered on: Feb 9, 2003
- Reply to: fritz
Jun 28, 2004 10:04:23 PM
-
Carlos from Spain
- Rennteam Moderator
-
- Loc: Spain. , Spain
- Posts: 20896, Gallery
- Registered on: Feb 9, 2003
- Reply to: fritz
Re: sport auto: E55T vs. RS 6 Plus Avant
Quote:
RC said:
And a last point: the M5 has a 250 kph limited top speed and due to the fact that BMW really develops their cars only to this speed or slightly over to save part and development cost, it makes it pretty dangerous to remove the limit.
Is this true?
Re: sport auto: E55T vs. RS 6 Plus Avant
Quote:
RC said:
And a last point: the M5 has a 250 kph limited top speed and due to the fact that BMW really develops their cars only to this speed or slightly over to save part and development cost, it makes it pretty dangerous to remove the limit.
Is this true?
Jun 29, 2004 7:12:20 AM
- temm
- Rennteam Master
-
- Loc: Oslo , Norway
- Posts: 4122, Gallery
- Registered on: Jun 24, 2003
-
Reply to:
Carlos from Spain
Re: sport auto: E55T vs. RS 6 Plus Avant
Quote:
carlos fromspain said:
Wonder why they don't make a M5-touring?
I think one of the reasons why they didn't build a E39 M5 Touring was because the rear suspension was different on the Touring compared to the Sedan and not good enough for M-standards.
Since the rear suspension is different on the E60 Touring as well, that might have something to do with it.
Jun 29, 2004 7:12:20 AM
- temm
- Rennteam Master
-
- Loc: Oslo , Norway
- Posts: 4122, Gallery
- Registered on: Jun 24, 2003
-
Reply to:
Carlos from Spain
Re: sport auto: E55T vs. RS 6 Plus Avant
Quote:
carlos fromspain said:
Wonder why they don't make a M5-touring?
I think one of the reasons why they didn't build a E39 M5 Touring was because the rear suspension was different on the Touring compared to the Sedan and not good enough for M-standards.
Since the rear suspension is different on the E60 Touring as well, that might have something to do with it.
Re: sport auto: E55T vs. RS 6 Plus Avant
In terms of image, SUVs are not any better than station wagons or Minivans - the main group of SUV drivers are young wifes with children or businessmen which drive their Cayenne or X5 because it is hip, instead of the 5-series touring or E-class, which any of these people drove just 10 years ago...
I just don't like some geek crash into my car with an SUV - driving these cars doesn't make you a more senseful driver.
RC, I actually have no intention to go 280 kph with an SUV, even if it's a Porsche. Handling and aerodynamics just can't be as good as of a well-engineered limousine/station wagon or even sportscar!
Actually, I doubt the E55's claimed 476 hp - 15 sec. from standstill to 200kph is quite a figure for a 2ton stw...!
Greetings from Duesseldorf!
I just don't like some geek crash into my car with an SUV - driving these cars doesn't make you a more senseful driver.
RC, I actually have no intention to go 280 kph with an SUV, even if it's a Porsche. Handling and aerodynamics just can't be as good as of a well-engineered limousine/station wagon or even sportscar!
Actually, I doubt the E55's claimed 476 hp - 15 sec. from standstill to 200kph is quite a figure for a 2ton stw...!
Greetings from Duesseldorf!
Re: sport auto: E55T vs. RS 6 Plus Avant
In terms of image, SUVs are not any better than station wagons or Minivans - the main group of SUV drivers are young wifes with children or businessmen which drive their Cayenne or X5 because it is hip, instead of the 5-series touring or E-class, which any of these people drove just 10 years ago...
I just don't like some geek crash into my car with an SUV - driving these cars doesn't make you a more senseful driver.
RC, I actually have no intention to go 280 kph with an SUV, even if it's a Porsche. Handling and aerodynamics just can't be as good as of a well-engineered limousine/station wagon or even sportscar!
Actually, I doubt the E55's claimed 476 hp - 15 sec. from standstill to 200kph is quite a figure for a 2ton stw...!
Greetings from Duesseldorf!
I just don't like some geek crash into my car with an SUV - driving these cars doesn't make you a more senseful driver.
RC, I actually have no intention to go 280 kph with an SUV, even if it's a Porsche. Handling and aerodynamics just can't be as good as of a well-engineered limousine/station wagon or even sportscar!
Actually, I doubt the E55's claimed 476 hp - 15 sec. from standstill to 200kph is quite a figure for a 2ton stw...!
Greetings from Duesseldorf!
Jul 4, 2004 3:22:35 PM
- fritz
- Rennteam VIP
-
- Loc: BaWü , Germany
- Posts: 10248, Gallery
- Registered on: Jul 23, 2003
-
Reply to:
Carlos from Spain
Re: sport auto: E55T vs. RS 6 Plus Avant
Quote:
carlos fromspain said:
and the RS6 is a "permanent" 50-50 split AWD with its Torsen system which should give quite a bit more drivetrain powerloss to the wheels through the increased friction I would think too, no?
In the twisties maybe, but I wouldn't have expected any disadvantages due to AWD in a straight line (acceleration runs and top speed).
Jul 4, 2004 3:22:35 PM
- fritz
- Rennteam VIP
-
- Loc: BaWü , Germany
- Posts: 10248, Gallery
- Registered on: Jul 23, 2003
-
Reply to:
Carlos from Spain
Re: sport auto: E55T vs. RS 6 Plus Avant
Quote:
carlos fromspain said:
and the RS6 is a "permanent" 50-50 split AWD with its Torsen system which should give quite a bit more drivetrain powerloss to the wheels through the increased friction I would think too, no?
In the twisties maybe, but I wouldn't have expected any disadvantages due to AWD in a straight line (acceleration runs and top speed).
Re: sport auto: E55T vs. RS 6 Plus Avant
The 0-200kph time for the 996 turbo is (according to SportAuto) 14.6 sec. How can a station wagon, carrying 500 kg more weight, with larger frontal area and a 5-speed automatic be almost as fast as a sportscar with 6-speed manual - 56 hp and 140 Nm of torque are not a sufficient answer to me...!
Some guys might remember the AMS article about the high-speed testing in Nardo - the SL55 was fastest from 0-300 despite "only" 476 hp at that time - they raised the official figures to 500 hp pretty shortly afterwards though I heard some people assume that there was no difference to the engine done at all and that there is no difference in the engines for the particular model ranges (E-class and the higher priced AMG-models). I haven't driven the car so I can only rely on numbers!
The differences in acceleration between the saloon and station wagon of the E-class used to be quite obvious in the past so I am pretty sure that the E-class station wagon has quite an aerodynamic disadvantage over the saloon - something I don't see in this numbers.
The RS6's numbers seem to be quite alright - they were backed up by different mags. Some of the V8-powered AWD Audis have very tall gearing, or in other words, the 4th and 5th gear are quite tall to improve gas mileage - on the other hands, in conjunction with an AWD system it doesn't improve acceleration. Different aim, different result.
By the way, the E55 is heavier than the RS6, contrary to one comment made. Low-end torque and weight don't play any significant role in high-speed acceleration, in short words only aerodynamics and hp do! In this case, the RS6 and E55 should have a quite similiar starting point!
Some guys might remember the AMS article about the high-speed testing in Nardo - the SL55 was fastest from 0-300 despite "only" 476 hp at that time - they raised the official figures to 500 hp pretty shortly afterwards though I heard some people assume that there was no difference to the engine done at all and that there is no difference in the engines for the particular model ranges (E-class and the higher priced AMG-models). I haven't driven the car so I can only rely on numbers!
The differences in acceleration between the saloon and station wagon of the E-class used to be quite obvious in the past so I am pretty sure that the E-class station wagon has quite an aerodynamic disadvantage over the saloon - something I don't see in this numbers.
The RS6's numbers seem to be quite alright - they were backed up by different mags. Some of the V8-powered AWD Audis have very tall gearing, or in other words, the 4th and 5th gear are quite tall to improve gas mileage - on the other hands, in conjunction with an AWD system it doesn't improve acceleration. Different aim, different result.
By the way, the E55 is heavier than the RS6, contrary to one comment made. Low-end torque and weight don't play any significant role in high-speed acceleration, in short words only aerodynamics and hp do! In this case, the RS6 and E55 should have a quite similiar starting point!
Re: sport auto: E55T vs. RS 6 Plus Avant
The 0-200kph time for the 996 turbo is (according to SportAuto) 14.6 sec. How can a station wagon, carrying 500 kg more weight, with larger frontal area and a 5-speed automatic be almost as fast as a sportscar with 6-speed manual - 56 hp and 140 Nm of torque are not a sufficient answer to me...!
Some guys might remember the AMS article about the high-speed testing in Nardo - the SL55 was fastest from 0-300 despite "only" 476 hp at that time - they raised the official figures to 500 hp pretty shortly afterwards though I heard some people assume that there was no difference to the engine done at all and that there is no difference in the engines for the particular model ranges (E-class and the higher priced AMG-models). I haven't driven the car so I can only rely on numbers!
The differences in acceleration between the saloon and station wagon of the E-class used to be quite obvious in the past so I am pretty sure that the E-class station wagon has quite an aerodynamic disadvantage over the saloon - something I don't see in this numbers.
The RS6's numbers seem to be quite alright - they were backed up by different mags. Some of the V8-powered AWD Audis have very tall gearing, or in other words, the 4th and 5th gear are quite tall to improve gas mileage - on the other hands, in conjunction with an AWD system it doesn't improve acceleration. Different aim, different result.
By the way, the E55 is heavier than the RS6, contrary to one comment made. Low-end torque and weight don't play any significant role in high-speed acceleration, in short words only aerodynamics and hp do! In this case, the RS6 and E55 should have a quite similiar starting point!
Some guys might remember the AMS article about the high-speed testing in Nardo - the SL55 was fastest from 0-300 despite "only" 476 hp at that time - they raised the official figures to 500 hp pretty shortly afterwards though I heard some people assume that there was no difference to the engine done at all and that there is no difference in the engines for the particular model ranges (E-class and the higher priced AMG-models). I haven't driven the car so I can only rely on numbers!
The differences in acceleration between the saloon and station wagon of the E-class used to be quite obvious in the past so I am pretty sure that the E-class station wagon has quite an aerodynamic disadvantage over the saloon - something I don't see in this numbers.
The RS6's numbers seem to be quite alright - they were backed up by different mags. Some of the V8-powered AWD Audis have very tall gearing, or in other words, the 4th and 5th gear are quite tall to improve gas mileage - on the other hands, in conjunction with an AWD system it doesn't improve acceleration. Different aim, different result.
By the way, the E55 is heavier than the RS6, contrary to one comment made. Low-end torque and weight don't play any significant role in high-speed acceleration, in short words only aerodynamics and hp do! In this case, the RS6 and E55 should have a quite similiar starting point!
Re: sport auto: E55T vs. RS 6 Plus Avant
Quote:
Ferdie said:
Some guys might remember the AMS article about the high-speed testing in Nardo - the SL55 was fastest from 0-300 despite "only" 476 hp at that time - they raised the official figures to 500 hp pretty shortly afterwards though I heard some people assume that there was no difference to the engine done at all and that there is no difference in the engines for the particular model ranges (E-class and the higher priced AMG-models). I haven't driven the car so I can only rely on numbers!
No other SL55/E55 has reproduced the acceleration of the Nardo-SL55 ever since, not even closely. Even the SLR is slower
So rest assured that the Nardo-SL55 had a very special engine installed...
Re: sport auto: E55T vs. RS 6 Plus Avant
Quote:
Ferdie said:
Some guys might remember the AMS article about the high-speed testing in Nardo - the SL55 was fastest from 0-300 despite "only" 476 hp at that time - they raised the official figures to 500 hp pretty shortly afterwards though I heard some people assume that there was no difference to the engine done at all and that there is no difference in the engines for the particular model ranges (E-class and the higher priced AMG-models). I haven't driven the car so I can only rely on numbers!
No other SL55/E55 has reproduced the acceleration of the Nardo-SL55 ever since, not even closely. Even the SLR is slower
So rest assured that the Nardo-SL55 had a very special engine installed...
Re: sport auto: E55T vs. RS 6 Plus Avant
The Nardo SL55 had the prototype SLR engine in it with 626hp. The reason it out accelerated cars like the CGT and SLR is due to its low aero co-efficient. It is unbelievable how a 2 ton car with the same hp as lower weight cars can out accelerate them just by aerodynamics. Of course downforce is required at speed to increase adhesion and stability but an MKB SL55 with 620hp at 115K GBP is very tempting, 0-300 in 32 says it all..... 
Re: sport auto: E55T vs. RS 6 Plus Avant
The Nardo SL55 had the prototype SLR engine in it with 626hp. The reason it out accelerated cars like the CGT and SLR is due to its low aero co-efficient. It is unbelievable how a 2 ton car with the same hp as lower weight cars can out accelerate them just by aerodynamics. Of course downforce is required at speed to increase adhesion and stability but an MKB SL55 with 620hp at 115K GBP is very tempting, 0-300 in 32 says it all.....
And AMG might even sue you for saying this... 
Re: sport auto: E55T vs. RS 6 Plus Avant
You'd be surprised, some of their members are regular visitors here, and they tell me some answers when I ask questions here...
Of course I'd never dare post anything like this on their forum....
FOR THOSE WHO DON'T BELIEVE ME:
For ther German speaking users....
download this....
http://www.kunzi.info/Auto/berechnung-fahrleistung-amg.zip
and type 626PS where it states Hp for the SL55, and see the 0-300km/hr time, what is the value? @32.5@
Of course I'd never dare post anything like this on their forum....
FOR THOSE WHO DON'T BELIEVE ME:
For ther German speaking users....
download this....
http://www.kunzi.info/Auto/berechnung-fahrleistung-amg.zip
and type 626PS where it states Hp for the SL55, and see the 0-300km/hr time, what is the value? @32.5@
Re: sport auto: E55T vs. RS 6 Plus Avant
You'd be surprised, some of their members are regular visitors here, and they tell me some answers when I ask questions here...
Of course I'd never dare post anything like this on their forum....
FOR THOSE WHO DON'T BELIEVE ME:
For ther German speaking users....
download this....
http://www.kunzi.info/Auto/berechnung-fahrleistung-amg.zip
and type 626PS where it states Hp for the SL55, and see the 0-300km/hr time, what is the value? @32.5@
Of course I'd never dare post anything like this on their forum....
FOR THOSE WHO DON'T BELIEVE ME:
For ther German speaking users....
download this....
http://www.kunzi.info/Auto/berechnung-fahrleistung-amg.zip
and type 626PS where it states Hp for the SL55, and see the 0-300km/hr time, what is the value? @32.5@
Forum
About Rennteam | Help | Terms of use | Privacy Policy | Support | Contact | Imprint | Archive
Powered by
Community
and
