Any Thoughts on Renntech ECU-Upgraded SL 65 ?

[thepolarfoxqx]

PersianJ is back to share his nice little pearls of ignorance with us again.

Joy.

The "New" Slk isn't really new in terms of chasis or underpinings. Suspension is something mercedes has never developed much. They came up with their 3 link/5 link layout and it worked pretty well, was versatile, so they didn't mess with it. BMW on the other hand has been far more experimental with their suspension. Given their Z-Axle is the reason they have no interior or trunk space and are heavy, it gives them handling that is fairly incredible.

The SL55 is going to beat everything in its class? Really.

With an automatic transmission and no optional stick shift? That doesn't sound that sporty to me. Furthermore, with that V8 up there, weight distrobution gets tilted very negatively and polar center of inirtia goes to hell. Translation, it understeers. A Z4 doesn't. The Z4 M-Roadster likely will not either, as it retains a 6-cylender powerplant. Furthermore, the new corvette has 400hp, weighs less, costs less, has an available 6spd stick, and has better weight distrobution. Explain to me how SLK55 is best in class.

Explain to me how the old SLK320 beat out a Z3 3.0L. The press doesn't agree with you (atleast not in america), and neither do the numbers. The Z3 3.0 was 10hp more potent, 100 lbs lighter, 3 tenths faster to 60, almost 4 miles an hour faster through the slalom, and 2,000 dollars less. Not to mention that the Z3 outsold the SLK here nearly 2:1

The new SLK350 is powerful, yes. In a straight line, i'd bet money it hauled. That said, the 225hp Z4 has been clocked as fast as 5.3 to 60. No one has a SLK350 being that fast yet, and Z4 is getting 33 more horsepower from it's 3.0L. I'd say Z4 will hold it's own there. Through the curves an SLK350 simply is going to be beat. At over 70mph through the slalom, the number of cars that will keep with a Z4 can be counted on your fingers. The suspension on the "New" SLK is damn near identical to the old one, only the new one is heavier, looks different, and has more power. Slalom speed on SLK350 is 64mph. A 6mph slalom difference is huge. To credit the SLK350, it rides smoother i"m sure, the retractable hardtop is a nice feature, i bet it has nice leg room. I'd also bet it has more responsive, tractable power than even the upgraded 3.0L Z4. That's just the benefit of more power and displacement. That said, standing start, the Z4 still holds it's own.

Style is matter of opinion.

And a 2.5L Z4 completely hoses the 1.8K SLK230.

In terms of build quality, BMW is often ranked amongst the highest cars in north america. Axles on BMWs don't often fall apart. Not even in minnesota, which is as harsh a climate as you'll find a BMW in. The S-Class has been widely criticized for lack of build quality. There are gaps between interior panels, bits aren't always fastened, hinges on trunk lids fail, just odds and ends that SHOULD be solid on the most expensive car in a very up market segment - who sells on safety, prestige and quality. My hopes are, as GIR has said, that the new S will fix all of the quality flaws. I'd bet the new S will be built as well as any car out there, the current one is imperfect.

As for an M5 vs. an S65 in a straight line. It would be a tight, tight race.

Mercedes, whose ratings for their cars are often VERY accurate when tested by the press rates S65 to a 4.2 seccond 0-60. I believe them.

BMW has yet to release their M5 0-60 data.

Let's compare the two though:

S65: 4,700lbs
M5: 3,850lbs

S65: 604hp
M5: 507hp

S65: 7.78 lbs/hp
M5: 7.59 lbs/hp

Notice M5 has a better power/weight ratio.

The M5 also works through a sequential 7 speed, while S65 is bolted to a 5spd traditional automatic, so that benefits that would seem to benefit M5.

I guarantee you that the S65 is much quieter and more pleasant to ride around in. I'm not convinced it's faster. I promise it handles like a school bus in comparison.

Also

S65: $180,000 (check out the MB website, it really does cost that much)
M5 ~$80,000 (the old one was 70k, BMW promised this one would not break 80, i don't know if i believe them, so we'll just say 80 to be safe)

So let's see, I can have two M5's for an S65. Or I could give that 100k of difference to Steve Dinan and see what he could make my M5 do for that much money.

Also, to note. A Dinan S2-M5 E39, which is 4,000lbs and 470hp runs 0-60 in 4.1 secconds, that's faster than a S65.

And while i don't know anyone with a S65, someone on the street my college is on has a CL65, if that does anything for you?

I love how people think mercedes is the greatest carmaker in every way. They aren't. Neither is BMW, or anyone else. They all have things they do well. Mercedes makes fast cars, but BMW makes cars that are made to be sporting first and everything else seccond. Mercedes takes a more well rounded philosophy.

[LateNightCable]

Well, it looks like everything that needs to be said has been said. But the thing that caught my eye was Thunf's comment about BMW axles frequently falling apart, and 3-Series chassis rusting to dangerous levels.

Do folks in your neck of the woods park their BMWs' in a rain forest? If it is at all true, this would be more the owner's fault for letting it get that way. Every car contains metal, and under crappy circumstances, it's going to rust. And your friend " out-revved " a Z4 in 3rd? Seeing as the car in question has 6 forward gears, I'd say maybe your friend just can't shift.

[Thunf]

Originally Posted by LateNightCable Well, it looks like everything that needs to be said has been said. But the thing that caught my eye was Thunf's comment about BMW axles frequently falling apart, and 3-Series chassis rusting to dangerous levels. Do folks in your neck of the woods park their BMWs' in a rain forest? If it is at all true, this would be more the owner's fault for letting it get that way. Every car contains metal, and under crappy circumstances, it's going to rust. And your friend " out-revved " a Z4 in 3rd? Seeing as the car in question has 6 forward gears, I'd say maybe your friend just can't shift.

First of all rainforests doesn't belong up here. Thing is that bigger main roads are salted during the winters here. That makes the freezing point go down making the roads wet instead of ice slippery. Salt isn't the only thing they put on the road. Sand is a good way preventing people to fall and cars sliding towards a ditch. When sand and salt is blasted towards the chassis that make rust a fact, some other carmakers have better protection against this - there is a mass of some kind that doesn't fall but isn't firm eighter on the underside. A wet icy road without salt or sand it's totally impossible to be able to stand still, you fall - when you brake on such road it feels as you are accelerating.

[thepolarfoxqx]

believe it or not, i come from a place that might just be colder than most of finland. I know about salting roads and winter driving. It doesn't change the fact that washing your car, keeping up with dings in the paint, just common sense maintainance will keep things under control. BMW's have fairly impressive corosion warrantees, so i'm guessing they do something about the corosion

[Thunf]

Originally Posted by thepolarfoxqx believe it or not, i come from a place that might just be colder than most of finland. I know about salting roads and winter driving. It doesn't change the fact that washing your car, keeping up with dings in the paint, just common sense maintainance will keep things under control. BMW's have fairly impressive corosion warrantees, so i'm guessing they do something about the corosion

I know! It's just that someone is trying to look for bad sides of the Mercedes and don't see much good in them. I love those cars, as a car you want to travel in. Tell me who's gonna win a S500 or a S65? Allot of power doesn't force you to compare what happens in curves. It's a big luxury car and you are certainly able to go fast enough in corners. I've traveled across the scandinavia several times and when I'm coming home I feel relaxed and wanting to travel even further next time. I find bad sides of any car just like some others. Trying to put a big Merc on tvisties is like having a bull running against a big cat. They aren't designed for track purposes, I like them as they are. PERIOD. I also like BMWs but I'm able to put them in the shadow if needed...

[thepolarfoxqx]

I will give one thing to mercedes.

While their cars are not good in snow and ice, they are still far better than BMW's cars (atleast their RWD cars).

[Thunf]

Originally Posted by thepolarfoxqx I will give one thing to mercedes. While their cars are not good in snow and ice, they are still far better than BMW's cars (atleast their RWD cars).

Heating and ventilation is better, the E39 windows seemed to mist fast when cold in comparison to an E class. That BMW E39 was very fun to drive in the winter, even with traction control. It had no DSC but only enginecut, I think it was fine as that! Certainly DSC and ESP prevents accidents in the winter, statistics says that. I'm pretty sure my friend who once had a E39 wasn't driving very good. He crashed the back of the car 3 times and the whole side once. It is fun to slide but he don't seem to realise that the rear of the car can go too far making it impossible to save. DSC prevents that.
I also read about something I've never even knew about: both Mercedes and BMW have a differential that when making the rear spin fast, the wheel with traction helps even if the other wheel has no traction. I noticed this clearly some time ago! This was a C class from 97 but I read about it in a comparison test.

[LateNightCable]

That's strange, because in the 90's, BMW heavily advertised their pride in how their car's handled under snowy and slippery conditions, and still do. But then BMW's system I believe activates only the front breaks, while Mercedes-Benz's system "ESP", involves all four.

MB has always been very heavy on safety, it's always been one of their primary selling points, so that explains the greater development of their system. But I equip snow tires to my 740 in the winter and with Dynamic Stability Control, and near 50/50 weight distribution, I think it feels fine.

[thepolarfoxqx]

a BMW can be driven safely in poor conditions, I haven't gotten stuck once, but you have to be good. 50:50 is nice, so is the electric nanny, the suspension is not terribly giving, like any sports car, so it puts more impact pressure on the tires, which simply can't grip. I put deep all seasons on my bimmer in winter, it seems to work ok, but RWD volvos, mercedes, and even lincolns and fords were far better. In the category of worse, RWD Jaguars, ford mustangs, camaros, and the like. It's very tricky though. You have to be all over it at all times, it will slip out from you on the littlest things. It's just not forgiving in snow.