Quote:
|
Originally Posted by TORQUE-DEMON
Well, when you have 700+ ft-Lbs of torque at around 2000 RPM all the way up, does the weight REALY matter?
BTW SL doesn't weigh allot less then a CL.
About your last thoughts, well you should consider price !!!
I BET the cobra stops, and has better lateral GRIP, than the MBZ !
Handling??? when was the last time you drove a MBZ >? they are supple, and refined, yes, but not performance oriented ! they roll and dive too much, specially with the Airmatic DC. BMW are different, they usually handle well, and are definitely performance oriented.
FORD GT = LEGEND, no need for any other comment !
We’ll see who is talking about the CL65 - 40 years from now !
Jeremy Clarkson, who is EXTREEMLY biased against anything German, dumped his Ferrari for an SL55, what does that tell you about the MBZ, must be a nice car then ????
well he just dumped the SL for a Ford GT. In his review he said that he got the photographer to drive it so he can admire its behind !  |
Hmmm.....so he could admire the behind. That's cute. Anyway, I was expecting some Ford fanatic to chime in with his or her 2 cents. Look, I wasn't trying to bash the Cobra in any way. Like I said in my previous post, I have respect for Cobras. I like the way they look, sound and drive. But for you to say that Mercedes isn't performance oriented is just absolutely ABSURD!! 0-60 in 4.2 seconds, yeah that's pretty slow huh? It's still a few ticks faster than a stock Cobra (not to mention it weighs 800lbs. more than a Cobra, and yes, the SL does weigh less than a CL by some 200lbs.). The Merc rockets past the 1/4 mile marker in just around 12 seconds, and once more magazines get a hold of one, I'm sure they'll be turning in high 11s. Roll & dive?! Are you thinking of a huge 420SEL from 1991?! With the new SLs MB has reduced body roll by 68% compared with models from a year or two prior thanks to independent 4-link, active electrohydraulic with load-dependent spring rates,gas-charged shocks, coil springs and level control in front and the same with a 5-link for the rear suspension. In addition there is an ABC switch on the console that allows the driver to reduce roll by 95% (also the ride height is adjustable). I'm pretty sure that translates to some pretty damn good performance figures. Ask anyone, Cobras have never been known to be "handling" cars. All hats off to the snakes in a straight line, but handling is just not one of the Cobra's fortes. How about braking? Well, the MB has AMG-enhanced compound brakes, 15.4" front discs with AMG 8-piston calipers, 13.7"" rear discs with AMG 4-piston calipers. Being about 800lbs heavier than a Cobra, it still stops a few feet shorter in a 60-0. What Mercedes does is balance luxury and performance.
My point is this: Sure, with the money I could spend on a SL65, I could build 10 different cars (i.e. hondas with type R swaps, GTIs with turbos, big block domestics) that would smoke both cars in that video. The bottomline is that you can't dis an SL by saying it's not a performance vehicle. I didn't say that Cobras were slow (we all know they're not). I understand the ridiculous margin between the prices of both cars. My response was from a strictly performance point of view.