|
300C SRT-8 1/4 miles
|
Well, not that impressive for 425hp but the car is pretty damn heavy. The launches didn't seem all that good. I guess its impressive for a 4 door sedan. It got killed in the first race against that 5.0 mustang (I think). What the hell did it race in the second one? It sounded awful and went awful.
|
You gotta keep in mind that the car is 4,350 lbs .... probably the fastest production NA 4 door sedan that weighs that much .... Another guy ran a 12.9 with the summer tires ....
Especially, running on 20's with all season tires ...... The mustang, was a highly modified track car ........ I can't even remember what the other car was ... I love the car .... I've yet to go back to the track with my computer chip and exhaust ... we'll see what it does .... |
A large rebodied Benz... as if we needed another one? ;)
|
Quote:
How many "production NA 4 door saloons that weighs 2000kg" are there? |
Narrowed it down ??
Ok .. just leave it as a Production, Naturally Aspirated 4 Door sedan ....... forget it's sheer weight, the fact that it rolls on 20's or that is has 4 season tires ..... how many na sedans touch that ? 12's in the quarter ?? I don't know of one ...... anywhere ..... Oh, and for the mods, I'm not "trolling" members here posted a link to my website, of my car going down the track, surely it is OK to post my thought or opinion as well ..... This site seems to be a pretty cool mixture of things .... kudos .... |
Quote:
Later on I guess we can add all the "63" Merc models and the upcoming Audi RS6. Why the fixation with NA? Isn't the output/weight more interesting? BTW: this car didn't run 12:s it ran 13:s. Basic rule for this forum is proof or STFU so "what another guy ran" is irrelevant.. |
Maybe ....
But I didn't spend over $85k on the car either ...... You named 1 ..... and even it doesn't really seem all that impressive .... Here is Car and Driver's excerpt : 2006 BMW M5 Vehicle type: front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door sedan Estimated base price: $90,000 Engine type: DOHC 40-valve V-10, aluminum block and heads, port fuel injection Displacement: 305 cu in, 4999cc Power (SAE net): 500 bhp @ 7750 rpm Torque (SAE net): 384 lb-ft @ 6100 rpm ----- HMMM ... A Little Short in this department ..... -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Transmission: 7-speed manual with automated shifting and clutch Wheelbase: 113.7 in Length/width/height: 191.1/72.7/57.8 in Curb weight: 4050 lb Manufacturer's performance ratings: Zero to 62 mph: 4.7 sec Top speed (governor limited): 155 mph Projected fuel economy (mfr's est): European urban cycle: 10 mpg extra-urban cycle: 23 mpg combined: 16 mpg The Chrysler : ENGINE Type: V-8, iron block and aluminum heads Bore x stroke: 4.06 x 3.58 in, 103.0 x 90.9mm Displacement: 370 cu in, 6059cc Compression ratio: 10.3:1 Fuel-delivery system: port injection Valve gear: pushrods, 2 valves per cylinder, hydraulic lifters Power (SAE net): 425 bhp @ 6200 rpm Torque (SAE net): 420 lb-ft @ 4800 rpm Redline: 6400 rpm C/D TEST RESULTS ACCELERATION Seconds Zero to 30 mph: 1.9 40 mph: 2.7 50 mph: 3.6 60 mph: 4.7 - ----- Very Similar to the all powerful M5 ???? 70 mph: 5.9 80 mph: 7.4 90 mph: 9.2 100 mph: 11.2 110 mph: 13.3 120 mph: 15.9 130 mph: 20.0 140 mph: 24.7 150 mph: 30.7 Street start, 5-60 mph: 4.9 Top-gear acceleration, 30-50 mph: 2.7 50-70 mph: 3.0 Standing 1/4-mile: 13.2 sec @ 109 mph Top speed (redline limited): 173 mph Obviously, the M5 would kill the SRT8 on a track, as the SRT really wasn't meant to be king of the hill on every type of track ..... I'm not saying that .... I don't even think there is an official magazine test of the new M5 yet .... I'm sure it will be a very nice car just the same .... |
Jeez Murphy ..... I'm not bashing your car .. .why do you seem to be taking this personally ?
And thanks for the STFU .... Here, for your reading pleasure.... I've been on web forums plenty .... http://www.300cforums.com/forums/sho...1&page=1&pp=10 Here is the post of his time slip in case you want to start arguing that too .... http://img217.imageshack.us/img217/6...9run3lw.th.jpg |
1, the CTS-V is more than a match, and 2, shouldn't the car be called "Canadian"? ;)
Oh - and please post the large images as thumbnail links. |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
BTW there are alot of test of the E60 M5. And who takes car & driver seriously? |
I almost bought a CTS-V, when I was impatiently waiting for the SRT-8, but for one, the pricing was almost $10,000 more ... and two, the interior is very small .... almost no rear seat, much like my 2004 Subaru STi ..... (I have a 7 year old who wouldn't fit when in her booster seat)
As for the image, it isn't even hosted here, it is a link to an image on someone else's website .... (anotherwords, I didn't upload it here or anything, so does it matter?) I'd be curious is they throw the new C6's Z06 Engine in a CTS-v .. that would kick ass .... |
The RS4 is not NA ..... that's why I didn't even consider it .... if you include turbo'd or supercharged cars, there are a few more .....
I'm sure the SRT-8 with a turbo or supercharger would kick ass too .... |
Quote:
For every $50K CTS-V, you can find a $40K or lower one to match ;) - apply the same logic to the SRT-8 and suddenly it's a $25K after 12 months. Unless of course you have to have it first and it has to be new. :P I took my 7 year old on a CTS-V test drive and she loved it - then again she has about 20,000 co-pilot miles in a Z06 so her only complaint was how slow it was :P Quote:
This is why normally we will save-as and then upload to http://imageshack.us and post the thumbnail. Just for ease of browsing for others. Quote:
|
So where's this mysterious road test of the E60 M5 that shows it beats a car half of it's price in a straight line ?
|
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:11 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.