Went and saw Dukes of Hazzard with the wife today. Gets the juices flowing, I guess. Then went to lunch at Pappadeaux. 290 just SE of Hollister, for those houston folk out there.

Going out to the 540i in the parking lot. A couple with a kid are in front of us. Guy is huge, wearing some t-shirt with gym logos and MetRX stuff on it. Built. Wife and kid climb into a brand new 745i, silver. The new 745 is OK looking, for a bangle. Husband goes into the <nearly> empty parking lot W of the restaurant, and climbs into his MB, facing us. I have no idea what model car he is driving at this point, beside it being a roadster.

Wife and I get into the 540, head out of the parking lot, turn out onto the service road heading NW towards the Beltway, beating the guy in the MB (wifey still in parking lot, must be straping the kid in) to the service road. As we are leaving the parking lot, he is as well, and I see a V12 badge :help. I get into the left lane on the service road, and floor it. Not even close. I see him in my rearview, and then passenger side, and then wayyyyy in front. Badge says SL 600. I doubt he even payed attention to me. I have never been this embarrased by another car... :(

Wife remarked that she hated the black rims on the MB (aftermarket, powdercoat???), so that is all I got out of this. Starting at 120K? That is crazy. Pay the extra 20k and get the Ford GT!!!

Ouch

need the M5 to play with an SL600. How did that V12 sound when she came screaming by?

Pay the extra 20k and get the Ford GT!!!

Ouch


Your nuts. Il take the sl600 over the GT ANY day. Its a ford man, comone.

And hey, yeah, how did that V12 sound? nuts I bet.

I dont even know if the new M5 will be able to run with an SL600...biturbo V12 right? 600ft/lbs of torque, 500hp...I bet those things are monsters up top. But I think I would piss my pants if I ever run against an SL or CL65...730ft/lbs of torque, upwards of 600hp.

Your nuts. Il take the sl600 over the GT ANY day. Its a ford man, comone.

And hey, yeah, how did that V12 sound? nuts I bet.

Yeah, ask Ferrari how it feels about the blue oval GT...

As for a GT being just being a FORD, so is Aston Martin, Land Rover, Volvo, Jaguar, etc...

Daimler Chrysler is just another big auto maker, none of the craftsmanship we appreciate in our bimmers, right?

The V12? Uhhh, vvvwssshoooshhhh, with some rumble, and some high pitch thrown in there. Didnt sound like yout typical muscle car V8, something different.

:eek: \

u would of had him in twisties. :D

you are so lucky to run with a SL600.
I saw one in sacramento yesturday and I cought up to him on the highway and I got next to him and gave it a few revs and then I looked over to see if he wanted to run. He didn't :mad . I so wanted to get my doors blowen of my him.

SL600 is V12 but not turbo.
The SL65 is V12 bi-turbo, but still SL600 is damn fast




I dont even know if the new M5 will be able to run with an SL600...biturbo V12 right? 600ft/lbs of torque, 500hp...I bet those things are monsters up top. But I think I would piss my pants if I ever run against an SL or CL65...730ft/lbs of torque, upwards of 600hp.

SL600 is V12 but not turbo.
The SL65 is V12 bi-turbo, but still SL600 is damn fast
hmm...I'm pretty sure the new 600's are turbo.

Always nice to get killed by a monster. :D

u would of had him in twisties. :D
wrong.

hmm...I'm pretty sure the new 600's are turbo.
Yes, that's right. The new 600s are biturbos.

damn, wish I would've seen it. I also love your description of you losing.

But I know I'd definately take a Ford GT over any benz. They just looks so damn hot.

The SL 600 is a twin turbo V12 and they are fast as hell. My Father owns a CL55 super charged V8 and that is a monster, 497 horse and 515 PFT. We raced the other day and it was not close, although when we hit a few turns, I made a little ground up. I think the Super charged V8 in the AMG's sound better than the V12's. The impressive part is that these cars (SL600 and CL55) weigh in around 4,600 pounds and still do 0-60 in 4.4, My fathers has been clocked. Need at least the new M5 to hang with one.

Being a lowly east coaster, I would consider it an honor to just see a 600 series MB, let alone one who was willing to show off.
Sometimes ya just gotta mess with the big dogs and take your whipp'n!!

Way to bait em!

You are right,
I was a bit confuse because the new is 5.5L Bi-Turbo.

Well my bad :)


hmm...I'm pretty sure the new 600's are turbo.

Noble death, and BTW, the new 7 series are 750's

theres at least 4 in my hood , come to nyc there everywhere.

Being a lowly east coaster, I would consider it an honor to just see a 600 series MB, let alone one who was willing to show off.
Sometimes ya just gotta mess with the big dogs and take your whipp'n!!

Way to bait em!

it was cause your wife was in the car. ;)

did anyone clarify what chasis sl600 this was? The older sl600's were N/A v12's while the new chasis are the biturbo. There is a huge difference in performance, thats the only reason i ask. The other thing is im surprised you heard anything when he flew by you, those cars are made to be quiet and succeed at doing so quite well. I drove an s600 with the windows down and didnt hear much of anything except the turbo's. Anyway you look at it you ran a straightline roadster monster.

funny you mentioned this because one of my clients took me for a ride in his today :P I happened to take a pic of it. Must be nice being a stock trader lol! This thing was a monster!

did anyone clarify what chasis sl600 this was? The older sl600's were N/A v12's while the new chasis are the biturbo. There is a huge difference in performance, thats the only reason i ask. The other thing is im surprised you heard anything when he flew by you, those cars are made to be quiet and succeed at doing so quite well. I drove an s600 with the windows down and didnt hear much of anything except the turbo's. Anyway you look at it you ran a straightline roadster monster.

Well, it looked pretty similiar to the 2006 on the MB website, except it had black rims, and the top was up. Had the V12 badge on the side, and SL600 on the back. How long has the SL600 been FI?

As for the noise, I never said it was loud, but it had a very distinctive noise. Not like a built V8, something different. Maybe that exhaust being in front of me had something to do with it...

Who knows, maybe he really digged deep and put some 200 dollar magnaflows on that bad boy, you know, to really let her breathe;)

Need at least the new M5 to hang with one.

Or pretty much any 10 year old used Beemer. ;)

-Eff

theres at least 4 in my hood , come to nyc there everywhere.

I saw 3 variations on 55's today alone!

-Eff

have you ever seen the service recals or tsb's on the GT?
its the biggest piece of crap ever man... wonder why no one buys them?

get some balls and get the GT 40, or stop trying to be mr tuff american car guy and get a real exotic.

As for a GT being just being a FORD, so is Aston Martin, Land Rover, Volvo, Jaguar, etc...


Only on paper bud, but not in craftsmanship. Your telling me an Auston Martin is a Ford? wake up.

two words that go good together: Ford-Crapola.

ive been for a ride in my mates SL55 AMG (5.5ltr V8 supercharged-£100,000), words cant describe how this car felt-so fast, neck breaking resposiveness.

Ah well, lets wait till someone posts M6 vs. SL600 in the kill stories ;)

To make the SL 600 louder, you don't need any kind of exhaust to be put on it. All you have to do is chip it to up the psi on those turbos and it sounds like a damn boat next to you, or for the short while it's next to you. An E 39 M5 could hardly keep pace with any new blown or supercharged AMG. THe V8s have 493 hp and 516 tq and the SL/CL 600 have 493 hp and 590 tq. They sound completely different (obviously), but both haul ass like there's no tomorrow. Can't wait to see how the new M5 and M6 compare to those things.

To make the SL 600 louder, you don't need any kind of exhaust to be put on it. All you have to do is chip it to up the psi on those turbos and it sounds like a damn boat next to you, or for the short while it's next to you. An E 39 M5 could hardly keep pace with any new blown or supercharged AMG. THe V8s have 493 hp and 516 tq and the SL/CL 600 have 493 hp and 590 tq. They sound completely different (obviously), but both haul ass like there's no tomorrow. Can't wait to see how the new M5 and M6 compare to those things.
By the time the E60 M5 hits our shores, the new AMG line of N/A engines with 550 hp will be out (or at least soon after). Thats the interesting comparison!

By the time the E60 M5 hits our shores, the new AMG line of N/A engines with 550 hp will be out (or at least soon after). Thats the interesting comparison!

The new 6.3L AMG V8 will make some 500HP (give or take a few), but not 550. It will be a good match for the BMW V10 in HP, but I think it will trump it in the torque department.

Still, the performances should be very similar, since usually AMGs are heavier and the drivetrains are less efficient. Time will tell...

adc
03 330 ZHP

The new 6.3L AMG V8 will make some 500HP (give or take a few), but not 550. It will be a good match for the BMW V10 in HP, but I think it will trump it in the torque department.

Still, the performances should be very similar, since usually AMGs are heavier and the drivetrains are less efficient. Time will tell...

adc
03 330 ZHP
From what I read it will make a MINIMUM of 500hp. Autoweek already tested a current CLK with an engine rated at 580hp. ( No it wasn't the CLK DTM.)

edit: this rating is before FI, AMG evidently is not doing away with TT and SC'ers.

Since you all havn't seen one, prob 2 weeks ago I was going down glades road for those in south florida, and I see a silver SL65 AMG.. i knew what it was so I pushed Sport Mode, and gunned it, so did he... it wasnt even close by a long shot... he just pulled trains on me effortlessly... the car sounded SICK also on full throttle... btw this was an 01 6 speed M3 he embarressed like that :(

I had the honor of getting raped by a lady in a S600 (V12 Twin Turbo).... I cant even explain how it went down.

Her plates said "V12 TT", it was AWESOME. The V12 has an edgy sound to it, like a whine type.

738 ft-lbs torque is just sick

need the M5 to play with an SL600. How did that V12 sound when she came screaming by?


If it's an older SL600, then yes, the M5 can play with it.

But if its the 2003 SL600, it can kill the M5 because of the V12 twin turbo!

738 ft-lbs torque is just sick


That's S65 :D

Since you all havn't seen one, prob 2 weeks ago I was going down glades road for those in south florida, and I see a silver SL65 AMG.. i knew what it was so I pushed Sport Mode, and gunned it, so did he... it wasnt even close by a long shot... he just pulled trains on me effortlessly... the car sounded SICK also on full throttle... btw this was an 01 6 speed M3 he embarressed like that :(


E46 M3 is not exactly the fastest coupe around :D

I think the Super charged V8 in the AMG's sound better than the V12's.
amen. the S/C V8 definitely sounds better than the V12 TT's. and the SL55 weighs 280 lbs less than the 65, making it only 4280 lbs. :rolleyes its hilarious that they're still both pigs though...

Since you all havn't seen one, prob 2 weeks ago I was going down glades road for those in south florida, and I see a silver SL65 AMG.. i knew what it was so I pushed Sport Mode, and gunned it, so did he... it wasnt even close by a long shot... he just pulled trains on me effortlessly... the car sounded SICK also on full throttle... btw this was an 01 6 speed M3 he embarressed like that :(

Hmm, ok..... SL600 = $200,000

M3 = $35,000

Thats not really fair :nono

I'll jump in here. My brother just bought a '99 SL600. He wants to take a shot at my '91 M5 after I break in the engine. I'll have about 350+ hp when my engine is done. How would you guys rate my chances against him? His car does weigh 400 pounds more than mine.

Greg S.

Hmm, ok..... SL600 = $200,000

M3 = $35,000

Thats not really fair :nono

SL600 = $131,675 ...the SL65 is around $240,000

and 01 M3 is not $35,000....it's $55-60k when new.

I'll jump in here. My brother just bought a '99 SL600. He wants to take a shot at my '91 M5 after I break in the engine. I'll have about 350+ hp when my engine is done. How would you guys rate my chances against him? His car does weigh 400 pounds more than mine.

Greg S.

do it...it'll be fun. 99 SL600 weren't that fast.

SL600 = $131,675 ...the SL65 is around $240,000

and 01 M3 is not $35,000....it's $55-60k when new.

actually, SL65 is about 180 ^_^

do it...it'll be fun. 99 SL600 weren't that fast.Yep a 99 E55 would smoke it!

SL600 = $131,675 ...the SL65 is around $240,000

and 01 M3 is not $35,000....it's $55-60k when new.

I was talking in Canadian Funds BTW Sorry, (a new Sl600 here in Canada is like $165,000 new and after all the taxes are applied its close to $200,000. You can find 01 M3's for like 35-40 g's in TO.

Anyway, You get the idea though. Its a bit of an odd comparison.

BTW, nice C32, gotta love the sleeper hey, ;)

Since you all havn't seen one, prob 2 weeks ago I was going down glades road for those in south florida, and I see a silver SL65 AMG.. i knew what it was so I pushed Sport Mode, and gunned it, so did he... it wasnt even close by a long shot... he just pulled trains on me effortlessly... the car sounded SICK also on full throttle... btw this was an 01 6 speed M3 he embarressed like that :(

Am I missing something here, or does the E46 M3 have electronic suspension dampening like the 850i?

Am I missing something here, or does the E46 M3 have electronic suspension dampening like the 850i?
Sport mode controls throtle butterflys for sharper response.

This thread reminds me of when my buddy and I were cruising here in Bridgenorth (A.K.A. boons) and saw a yellow Saleen S7... We were both like "WTS!" and I immediately punched it and came right up to his rear bumper.

I heard his car whine and by the time my slushbox downshifted he was GONE. We tried to keep up w/ him but I let off at around 200km/h fearing a speeding ticket and/or criminal charge, he was out of sight by the time I even got up to speed. Coolest car I've ever seen in my LIFE.

actually, SL65 is about 180 ^_^

oops...remembered it wrong...lol

I was talking in Canadian Funds BTW Sorry, (a new Sl600 here in Canada is like $165,000 new and after all the taxes are applied its close to $200,000. You can find 01 M3's for like 35-40 g's in TO.

Anyway, You get the idea though. Its a bit of an odd comparison.

BTW, nice C32, gotta love the sleeper hey, ;)

now I understand...:) that sounds right.

and thanks thanks :)

saleen S7...american.

earlier in the discussion, some of you all bashing the quality of fords.
they aren't that bad. and when they do break down, at least its (usually) cheap to repair.

I was talking in Canadian Funds BTW Sorry, )

Why do you hate America?

-Eff

Your nuts. Il take the sl600 over the GT ANY day. Its a ford man, comone.

And hey, yeah, how did that V12 sound? nuts I bet.


Umm..I'd say you're nuts. The GT is a supercar, with near race car attributes. The Benz is just a fast highway cruiser. Put some turns in that road and the GT's gonna smoke the Benz. The GT outperforms most other supercars that go for 2-4 times the cost of a GT. Yeah, it's a ford...but I don't think you can really stereotype a super car as "being a Ford".

Umm..I'd say you're nuts. The GT is a supercar, with near race car attributes. The Benz is just a fast highway cruiser. Put some turns in that road and the GT's gonna smoke the Benz. The GT outperforms most other supercars that go for 2-4 times the cost of a GT. Yeah, it's a ford...but I don't think you can really stereotype a super car as "being a Ford".

I'll agree to that :buttrock

but I'll take a DB9 or 996 GT3 before getting a GT.

Umm..I'd say you're nuts. The GT is a supercar, with near race car attributes. The Benz is just a fast highway cruiser. Put some turns in that road and the GT's gonna smoke the Benz. The GT outperforms most other supercars that go for 2-4 times the cost of a GT. Yeah, it's a ford...but I don't think you can really stereotype a super car as "being a Ford".

well an sl600 is a super car.

Why do you hate America?

-Eff


are you beeing for real?

I hope your joking bud :nono

Umm..I'd say you're nuts. The GT is a supercar, with near race car attributes. The Benz is just a fast highway cruiser. Put some turns in that road and the GT's gonna smoke the Benz. The GT outperforms most other supercars that go for 2-4 times the cost of a GT. Yeah, it's a ford...but I don't think you can really stereotype a super car as "being a Ford".


Thats true, it does outperform alot of the supercars out there but:

A) Its Ugly

B) Its got no class

C) I don't care what you say, its still a Ford.


Thats my oppinion anyway.

are you beeing for real?

I hope your joking bud :nonoLOL! I think he's busting your chops! :D

Thats true, it does outperform alot of the supercars out there but:

A) Its Ugly

B) Its got no class

C) I don't care what you say, its still a Ford.


Thats my oppinion anyway.

I wouldn't say it has no class...but the only Ford I'd take is probably this :buttrock :buttrock
http://www.uniqueperformance.com/images/ss-1-lg.jpg

well an sl600 is a super car.Says who!!! :nono You mean an SL65 or an SLR is a supercar bud!

Thats true, it does outperform alot of the supercars out there but:

A) Its Ugly

B) Its got no class

C) I don't care what you say, its still a Ford.


Thats my oppinion anyway.

Ford GT out classes your 540 anyday of the week, bud. And it looks alot better too.

Now, now boys. Lets all cool down. Instead of comparing one of those icky, ugly, no class, blue oval (only on paper) GTs to a certain canadians bimmer, lets instead compare that 540i to all those truely classic canadian cars out there. Ummm, like, lets see, the Zamboni????

I would trade my 540i for a GT, no problem. Hell, I would trade in an M5 for a GT... :buttrock

:drool: SL600 so hawt.. Here is a pic of one of my cousins MANY hawt cars http://www.we-todd-did-racing.com/wetoddimage.wtdr/wODQ0ODAwNnM0MTNkZmQzMXk1NDE%3D.jpg I wish i was him :(

:drool: SL600 so hawt.. Here is a pic of one of my cousins MANY hawt cars http://www.we-todd-did-racing.com/wetoddimage.wtdr/wODQ0ODAwNnM0MTNkZmQzMXk1NDE%3D.jpg I wish i was him :(

you'll have bad taste in rims if you were him... :D

you'll have bad taste in rims if you were him... :D

I'll second that. The car is nice, but I'm going blind from all that ugly chrome. I bet those wheels are 40lbs a piece. :eyecrazy Would look way better with some Lorinser, Kleeman, or BBS wheels for sure.

Thats true, it does outperform alot of the supercars out there but:

A) Its Ugly

B) Its got no class

C) I don't care what you say, its still a Ford.


Thats my oppinion anyway.

A) The GT's body not only pays homage to one of the greatest race cars of all time, but it's very functional in it's aerodynamic design. Besides, can anyone actually say that these cars were made to look good to the masses? I think not. Function over form. It looks mean and eats pavement. It's not supposed to be pretty.

B) It's a race car. You don't drive it to the country club to show off your class. You drive it there to piss everyone off with the noise. :evil2 If you want class, drive a 750Li or a Bently etc..

C) I don't care what you say, you chose "Mclarenbenz" as your user name in a BMW forum and you drive a 540i?!?!!?! :nono You should be ashamed. If you want a "classy" supercar, buy your SLR. Just don't cry me a river when my friends and I rip past in my Ford GT, Porsche GT2, and GT3 that I got cheaper than you "classy" SLR. If you want to spend 400G's get a Carrera GT. The SLR isn't even close to worty of the title "super car". It fits into a totally different category, called super expensive underperfoming waste of money classy old mans pussywagon. Super cars are about performance, not class.

C) "classy" SLR. If you want to spend 400G's get a Carrera GT. The SLR isn't even close to worty of the title "super car". It fits into a totally different category, called super expensive underperfoming waste of money classy old mans pussywagon. Super cars are about performance, not class.I can agree with you on the Ford GT but the SLR is also a nice supercar.How can you say not even close? :confused

I can agree with you on the Ford GT but the SLR is also a nice supercar.How can you say not even close? :confused
I was thinking the same thing.

Hey,

First let me say you fought a noble battle. And to lose to that car was a honnor so cheer up. Now about the GT 4O. They are cool cars. Body style wise. But they are missing the quality that has been missing from Ford since they started so if you want to sacrifice fast driving for poor quality then Ford is the car maker for you. Now Chrysler is making some sweet rides and they have quality Benz owns them now and I feel they are doing a good job. That crossfire is HOTTTT!!! Also Ford owns LAND ROVER, RANGE ROVER, JAG, ASTON MARTIN, (WHICH NOW LOOK LIKE CRAP) and some others I forget. So Ford is not all that great but so what they make cool looking cars that go fast. Even if they are crapy quailty wise. :buttrock

That is crazy. Pay the extra 20k and get the Ford GT!!!

Huh? Where can you find a new Ford GT for $140K?
Please let me know, as I'm interested in buying...

The largest Ford dealership here in LA (and one of the largest
in the country) is buying them for 40 and 50K over sticker from other dealerships.
Of course, that could very well be just a sales pitch from the last time I was there...

I have never owned an American car. And I'm not American.
But I have no problem buying and driving a Ford GT.
At least they made the effort of running in Formula 1
(can you say the same for Chevy or Dodge or Chrysler?)
And in GT races, spanking Ferrari's ass. Why the hate torwards Ford? :dunno

I was thinking the same thing.


I'll tell you why...because it's too soft. Cars that are 1/4 of the price can outperform it with no problem. Sure it may be fast in a straight line, but throw some turns in or run it at the Nurburgring and it's too outta control for the class that it's in. An M coupe feels more stable than the SLR, and the M's got the rear end jitters when pushed. It just should not be marketed as a supercar. It fits more into the super luxury touring category with the Aston Martins. But at 400k plus, it's a complete waste!

The fact is at a fraction of the cost, a M3 CSL beats the SLR McLaren around the Nurburgring by two seconds at 7:50. Imagine what would happen if you tuned that M3 with just a small protion of the money you saved over the SLR. McLaren should be ashamed to put their name on that car. What a waste of 400+g's. You could buy a M3 CSL, Porsche GT2, E60 M5, and a Turbo Cayenne (for the winter..hehe) for the cost of one SLR. What would you rather have for your money??? Even the E60 M5, a super heavy four door sedan, is only 15 seconds or so behind the SLR. And that's not a lot of time for a production car on a circuit that takes 8 minutes to get around. So if you want to say that the SLR is a sweet ride, I won't argue with that. But don't try to defend it's worth as a "super car". It's just a compete waste of money considering what else is in it's class (ex. porsche carrera GT, ferrari F50/enzo, etc.). And I won't even get started on Benz not offering a Manual Tranny on a "Super car". Ha, what a joke. $400k+ for an automatic supercar with a company that's had more problems than the number of steroids Canseco shot into his ass.

I'll tell you why...because it's too soft. Cars that are 1/4 of the price can outperform it with no problem. Sure it may be fast in a straight line, but throw some turns in or run it at the Nurburgring and it's too outta control for the class that it's in. An M coupe feels more stable than the SLR, and the M's got the rear end jitters when pushed. It just should not be marketed as a supercar. It fits more into the super luxury touring category with the Aston Martins. But at 400k plus, it's a complete waste!

The fact is at a fraction of the cost, a M3 CSL beats the SLR McLaren around the Nurburgring by two seconds at 7:50. Imagine what would happen if you tuned that M3 with just a small protion of the money you saved over the SLR. McLaren should be ashamed to put their name on that car. What a waste of 400+g's. You could buy a M3 CSL, Porsche GT2, E60 M5, and a Turbo Cayenne (for the winter..hehe) for the cost of one SLR. What would you rather have for your money??? Even the E60 M5, a super heavy four door sedan, is only 15 seconds or so behind the SLR. And that's not a lot of time for a production car on a circuit that takes 8 minutes to get around. So if you want to say that the SLR is a sweet ride, I won't argue with that. But don't try to defend it's worth as a "super car". It's just a compete waste of money considering what else is in it's class (ex. porsche carrera GT, ferrari F50/enzo, etc.). And I won't even get started on Benz not offering a Manual Tranny on a "Super car". Ha, what a joke. $400k+ for an automatic supercar with a company that's had more problems than the number of steroids Canseco shot into his ass. :confused :help

:confused :help

???

Strange, I thought anything that can run the "'Ring" in under 8 minutes was in some pretty impressive company.
..."outta control for the class that its in."??? :confused

ford gt is selling for way more then list price the dealership around here has sold two of them. One was for 220,000 i no this because my best friends dad owns the dealership and my other best friend works in the ford department there.

I'll tell you why...because it's too soft. Cars that are 1/4 of the price can outperform it with no problem. Sure it may be fast in a straight line, but throw some turns in or run it at the Nurburgring and it's too outta control for the class that it's in. An M coupe feels more stable than the SLR, and the M's got the rear end jitters when pushed. It just should not be marketed as a supercar. It fits more into the super luxury touring category with the Aston Martins. But at 400k plus, it's a complete waste!

The fact is at a fraction of the cost, a M3 CSL beats the SLR McLaren around the Nurburgring by two seconds at 7:50. Imagine what would happen if you tuned that M3 with just a small protion of the money you saved over the SLR. McLaren should be ashamed to put their name on that car. What a waste of 400+g's. You could buy a M3 CSL, Porsche GT2, E60 M5, and a Turbo Cayenne (for the winter..hehe) for the cost of one SLR. What would you rather have for your money??? Even the E60 M5, a super heavy four door sedan, is only 15 seconds or so behind the SLR. And that's not a lot of time for a production car on a circuit that takes 8 minutes to get around. So if you want to say that the SLR is a sweet ride, I won't argue with that. But don't try to defend it's worth as a "super car". It's just a compete waste of money considering what else is in it's class (ex. porsche carrera GT, ferrari F50/enzo, etc.). And I won't even get started on Benz not offering a Manual Tranny on a "Super car". Ha, what a joke. $400k+ for an automatic supercar with a company that's had more problems than the number of steroids Canseco shot into his ass.

:lol

Amusing post... :rolleyes

What a waste of 400+g's. You could buy a M3 CSL, Porsche GT2, E60 M5, and a Turbo Cayenne (for the winter..hehe) for the cost of one SLR. What would you rather have for your money???

I'm pretty sure most people buying an SLR could easily buy all those other cars as well if they so pleased.

I would buy a donkey and some mcfries.

??? And I won't even get started on Benz not offering a Manual Tranny on a "Super car". Ha, what a joke. $400k+ for an automatic supercar with a company that's had more problems than the number of steroids Canseco shot into his ass. :confused :help I think we can add other German brands to the reliability statement that you're trying to make!Shall we reflect? :rolleyes

Ford GT out classes your 540 anyday of the week, bud. And it looks alot better too.


i didn't realise were comparing a 2002 540 with a Ford GT now, sorry.

BTW, its SL600 VS Ford GT,

Not $hit a Ford GT is better than a 2002 540i,

Nice try at a cheap shot pal.

A)

C) I don't care what you say, you chose "Mclarenbenz" as your user name in a BMW forum and you drive a 540i?!?!!?! :nono You should be ashamed. If you want a "classy" supercar, buy your SLR. Just don't cry me a river when my friends and I rip past in my Ford GT, Porsche GT2, and GT3 that I got cheaper than you "classy" SLR. If you want to spend 400G's get a Carrera GT. The SLR isn't even close to worty of the title "super car". It fits into a totally different category, called super expensive underperfoming waste of money classy old mans pussywagon. Super cars are about performance, not class.

A) I can pick what ever name I choose,

B) "Mclarenbenz" has been my online name for over 4 years now. I chose that name because Ive been a Mclaren Fan for over 10 years now, and i've really enjoyed Mercedes's parternship to my favorite Formula 1 team.

c) What does my user name have to do with this conversation.

and

D) IL STILL TAKE AN SL600 OVER THAT UGLY FORD ANY DAY!!! :redspot

I'll tell you why...because it's too soft. Cars that are 1/4 of the price can outperform it with no problem. Sure it may be fast in a straight line, but throw some turns in or run it at the Nurburgring and it's too outta control for the class that it's in. An M coupe feels more stable than the SLR, and the M's got the rear end jitters when pushed. It just should not be marketed as a supercar. It fits more into the super luxury touring category with the Aston Martins. But at 400k plus, it's a complete waste!

The fact is at a fraction of the cost, a M3 CSL beats the SLR McLaren around the Nurburgring by two seconds at 7:50. Imagine what would happen if you tuned that M3 with just a small protion of the money you saved over the SLR. McLaren should be ashamed to put their name on that car. What a waste of 400+g's. You could buy a M3 CSL, Porsche GT2, E60 M5, and a Turbo Cayenne (for the winter..hehe) for the cost of one SLR. What would you rather have for your money??? Even the E60 M5, a super heavy four door sedan, is only 15 seconds or so behind the SLR. And that's not a lot of time for a production car on a circuit that takes 8 minutes to get around. So if you want to say that the SLR is a sweet ride, I won't argue with that. But don't try to defend it's worth as a "super car". It's just a compete waste of money considering what else is in it's class (ex. porsche carrera GT, ferrari F50/enzo, etc.). And I won't even get started on Benz not offering a Manual Tranny on a "Super car". Ha, what a joke. $400k+ for an automatic supercar with a company that's had more problems than the number of steroids Canseco shot into his ass.


You make some nice points,

the SLR does not impress me at all. It should at least come in a 6 speed manual, as so should the E60 M5.

what a dissapointment.

E60 m5 will be offered as a 6-spd. When the Americans scream, cry and stomp our feet, we get what we want.

E60 m5 will be offered as a 6-spd. When the Americans scream, cry and stomp our feet, we get what we want.


Will it? I hope so.

I'll tell you why...because it's too soft. Cars that are 1/4 of the price can outperform it with no problem. Sure it may be fast in a straight line, but throw some turns in or run it at the Nurburgring and it's too outta control for the class that it's in. An M coupe feels more stable than the SLR, and the M's got the rear end jitters when pushed. It just should not be marketed as a supercar. It fits more into the super luxury touring category with the Aston Martins. But at 400k plus, it's a complete waste!

The fact is at a fraction of the cost, a M3 CSL beats the SLR McLaren around the Nurburgring by two seconds at 7:50. Imagine what would happen if you tuned that M3 with just a small protion of the money you saved over the SLR. McLaren should be ashamed to put their name on that car. What a waste of 400+g's. You could buy a M3 CSL, Porsche GT2, E60 M5, and a Turbo Cayenne (for the winter..hehe) for the cost of one SLR. What would you rather have for your money??? Even the E60 M5, a super heavy four door sedan, is only 15 seconds or so behind the SLR. And that's not a lot of time for a production car on a circuit that takes 8 minutes to get around. So if you want to say that the SLR is a sweet ride, I won't argue with that. But don't try to defend it's worth as a "super car". It's just a compete waste of money considering what else is in it's class (ex. porsche carrera GT, ferrari F50/enzo, etc.). And I won't even get started on Benz not offering a Manual Tranny on a "Super car". Ha, what a joke. $400k+ for an automatic supercar with a company that's had more problems than the number of steroids Canseco shot into his ass.

not denying the SLR time because that's what sport auto ran when they tested the car.

BUT here are some facts i found over the net. The SLR is capable of 7:40 lap on Nurburgring.

Nordschleife exluding GP track 20.6 kms:
7:01 --- 176.152 km/h -- Manthey Porsche GT3 race car, 493 hp (2004), >>> http://www.manthey-motors.de/nextsh...spdf.asp?id=217
7:10 --- 173.100 km/h -- BMW M3 GTR, 450 PS/1350 kg, Jörg Müller (practice 24hrs race 2003)
7:12 --- 173.600 km/h – Radical SR3 Turbo race car, 320 PS/500 kgs (test drive 07/2003)
7:12.25 173.500 km/h – Schnitzer BMW M3 GTR, Dirk Müller, 24 hrs practice 2002
7:18.01 169.311 km/h -- Donkervoort D8 RS, 370 PS/670 kg, M. Düchting, sport auto 12/2004, http://speed.supercars.net/PitLane?...2&tID=13957
7:19 --- 168.929 km/h -- Radical SR3 Turbo (2003), >>> http://www.radicalmotorsport.com/ne...liefe/index.php

7:20* -- 168.545 km/h -- Opel Astra DTM V8 Coupe, 500hp, set-up for 24hrs race (sport auto 2003) *estimated
7:21 --- 168.163 km/h -- Blitz Supra, 650 PS (Autocar magazine 1997)
7:25 --- 168.651 km/h -- Alzen Motorsport Porsche 996, 24hrs race, Uwe Alzen
7:28 --- 166.652 km/h -- Porsche Carrera GT, Walther Röhrl,(Autobild July 2004)

7:32.44 163.911 km/h -- Porsche Carrera GT, definitive time Horst Von Saurma (sport auto 01/2004)
7:32.52 163.882 km/h -- Gemballa Porsche GTR 600 EVO, Wolfgang Kaufmann (sport auto 2001) >>> http://www.gemballa.com/news/gtr6002.html
7:36 --- 162.631 km/h -- AC-Schnitzer M3 CLS II E36, 350 hp, Michelin Sport Cup R , Mattias Ekblom
7:36 --- 162.631 km/h -- Porsche Carrera GT, factory test driver Walther Röhrl (2002)
7:39 --- 161.575 km/h – Koenigsegg CCR, 806 PS/1180 kg, >>> http://www.koenigsegg.com/news/arti...=&type=news

7:40* -- 161.217 km/h – Corvette Z06, 505 PS/ 1419.7 kg (estimated), Jan Magnusen (AutoBild 7/2005) http://www.supercars.net/PitLane?vi...0&tID=44953
7:40* -- 161.217 km/h -- Porsche Carrera GT, *cold and partially wet track (sport auto 12/2003)
7:40 --- 161.217 km/h -- Porsche GT3 RS, stock but Pirelli P Zero Corsa, Mattias Ekblom (ams)
7:40 --- 161.217 km/h -- Mercedes Benz McLaren SLR, Klaus Ludwig (Autobild 07/2004)
7:41 --- 160.868 km/h – Manthey Porsche GT3 M410, 413hp (AutoBild 07/2004) >>> http://www.manthey-motors.de/nextsh...spdf.asp?id=217
7:42 --- 160.519 km/h -- Mosler MT900S Photon, Joao Barbosa, 2004 (according to dailysportscar.net)
7:42 --- 160.519 km/h -- Radical 1500 SR3, 230 PS/510 kg (2002)
7:43 --- 160.173 km/h -- TechArt Porsche GT Street, 620 PS/1453 kg, (sport auto 08/2002)
7:43 --- 160.173 km/h -- Porsche 996 GT3 RS, factory test driver Walter Röhrl (MOTOR Magazine)
7:43.5 - 160,000 km/h -- Lamborghini Murcielago (Autocar magazine 2002)
7:44 --- 159.828 km/h -- Pagani Zonda C12 S, 580 PS/1820 kg (sport auto 07/2002)
7:45 --- 159.484 km/h -- Gemballa Porsche GTR 600, 600hp (2000)
7:45* -- 159.484 km/h -- McLaren F1, *estimated lap time from a video available at >>> www.pistonheads.tv
7:46 --- 159.142 km/h -- Porsche 996 GT2, 462 PS/1450 kg (sport auto 06/2001)
7:46 --- 159.142 km/h -- Jaguar XJ220, John Walton (EVO magzine 07/200), >>> http://www.jwhubbers.nl/ring/docs/evo-0007-7.jpg
7:46 --- 159.142 km/h -- SHK Porsche 993 GT2, 652hp (sport auto 1999)
7:47 --- 158.801 km/h -- Porsche 996 GT3 RS, 381hp (sport auto 03/2004)
7.49 --- 158.124 km/h -- Porsche GT3, 392hp (AutoBild 2004) http://www.autobild.de/tuning/testb...artikel_seite=4
7:49 --- 158.124 km/h -- Porsche 996 GT3 Cup, 360 PS/1207 kg (sport auto 02/1999)
7:49.72 157.885 km/h -- Honda RC30, Helmut Daehne 1993 (moto bike)

7:50 --- 157.787 km/h -- BMW E46 M3 CSL (sport auto 08/2003)
7:50 --- 157.787 km/h -- Blitz Supra, 750hp, Herbert Schürg (1997)
7:50 --- 157.787 km/h -- Lamborghini Murcielago, 462 PS/1450 kg (sport auto 06/2002)
7:50 --- 157.787 km/h – Westfield Super 7 with Hayabusa engine, >>> http://nurburgring.free.fr/Vids/Bre...vx504_1_350.avi
7:52 --- 157.119 km/h – BMW M5 (E60), 507 PS/1844 kg, >>> http://www.rhein-main.net/sixcms/de...topic_id=731907
7:52 --- 157.119 km/h -- Gemballa Porsche 911 Le Mans (sport auto 1995)
7:52 --- 157.119 km/h -- Lamborghini Gallardo E-Gear (sport auto 12/2003)
7:52 --- 157.119 km/h -- Mercedes Benz SLR McLaren (sport auto 06/2004)
7:54 --- 156.456 km/h – Mercedes CLK DTM AMG, 582bPS/1678kg, (sport auto 03/2005), >>> http://speed.supercars.net/PitLane?...2&tID=27415
7:54 --- 156.456 km/h -- Porsche 996 GT3 (sport auto 06/2003)
7:55 --- 156.126 km/h -- Caterham R500 Superlight, Robert Nearn (EVO magazine 07/2000)
7:56 --- 155.798 km/h -- Ferrari 360 Challenge Stradale, 425 PS/1387 kg (sport auto 02/2004)
7:56 --- 155.798 km/h -- Porsche 996 Turbo, 420 PS/1569 kg (sport auto 06/2000)
7:56 --- 155.798 km/h -- Chevrolet Corvette C6 (company test driver Dave Hill)
7:57 --- 155.472 km/h -- Lotec Porsche 993 Turbo, 600PS/1558 kg (sport auto 05/1998)
7:59 --- 154.822 km/h -- Porsche 997 Carrera S, PASM setting “Performance”, (Walter Röhrl WHEELS 06/ 2004)
7:59 --- 154.822 km/h -- Nissan Skyline R33 GT-R, Dirk Schoymans (Autocar magazine 1997)

Wow. I think the real value of the above post shows that the M3 GTR and the 'Vette are real steals, cost per performance. Next time someone on this board in their 97 328i races and loses to a Z06 and says "i woulda had 'em in the twisties" needs to :nono

You make some nice points,

the SLR does not impress me at all. It should at least come in a 6 speed manual, as so should the E60 M5.

what a dissapointment.I agree with you but I did'nt want to say anything! ;) However rumor has it that they will eventually put a six speed manual in the M5.Will it? I hope so.It will eventually but the argument still stands that a six speed manual is not available now!

not denying the SLR time because that's what sport auto ran when they tested the car.

BUT here are some facts i found over the net. The SLR is capable of 7:40 lap on Nurburgring.Pretty damn good for an auto as well! ;)

Your nuts. Il take the sl600 over the GT ANY day. Its a ford man, comone.

And hey, yeah, how did that V12 sound? nuts I bet.
+1

You make some nice points,

the SLR does not impress me at all. It should at least come in a 6 speed manual, as so should the E60 M5.

what a dissapointment.
there's a reason the slr mclaren doesnt come in a 6 speed, the same reason most of the amg's are only auto also. After living with 5 benzes and enjoying the luxury of every single one of them, its seeming that mercedes is now offering speed basically as an incentive, the auto is to keep the same luxury in the sports cars as in the s class. Plus i think the slr has the 7 speed auto which is the fastest shifting auto in the world right now.

there's a reason the slr mclaren doesnt come in a 6 speed, the same reason most of the amg's are only auto also. After living with 5 benzes and enjoying the luxury of every single one of them, its seeming that mercedes is now offering speed basically as an incentive, the auto is to keep the same luxury in the sports cars as in the s class. Plus i think the slr has the 7 speed auto which is the fastest shifting auto in the world right now.

SLR has 5 spd auto, but it also shifts even faster than the AMG speedshift.

there's a reason the slr mclaren doesnt come in a 6 speed, the same reason most of the amg's are only auto also. After living with 5 benzes and enjoying the luxury of every single one of them, its seeming that mercedes is now offering speed basically as an incentive, the auto is to keep the same luxury in the sports cars as in the s class. Plus i think the slr has the 7 speed auto which is the fastest shifting auto in the world right now.

Thats all true but, its trully too bad were moving away from the good ol Clutch and Gear feel of driving a car.

Thats all true but, its trully too bad were moving away from the good ol Clutch and Gear feel of driving a car.
tis a shame indeed. :(

there's a reason the slr mclaren doesnt come in a 6 speed, the same reason most of the amg's are only auto also. After living with 5 benzes and enjoying the luxury of every single one of them, its seeming that mercedes is now offering speed basically as an incentive, the auto is to keep the same luxury in the sports cars as in the s class. Plus i think the slr has the 7 speed auto which is the fastest shifting auto in the world right now.

I'd like to see some credible documentation stating that the SLR's 7 speed shifts faster than a SMG, and especially the ferrari F1 gearbox's. And if it's true that the SLR's 7 speed is faster than those two, I'm sure it's not the fastest in the world. Formula cars have to be the "fastest in the world". But I'm sure your talking about factory production tranny's.

Actually, according to FrankW above, the E60 M5 is just as fast around the ring as the SLR :buttrock

Strange, I thought anything that can run the "'Ring" in under 8 minutes was in some pretty impressive company.
..."outta control for the class that its in."??? :confused

It's still 30-40 seconds off the pace compared to the Carrera GT, more impressive is that the M3 GTR's are faster than the Carrera Gt

Those are modded *race* cars though, as the Carrera GT's time is still the fastest of all the produced non race cars

Actually, according to FrankW above, the E60 M5 is just as fast around the ring as the SLR :buttrock
No, actually, according to FrankWs post, the SLR is 12 sec faster than the E60 M5.

It's still 30-40 seconds off the pace compared to the Carrera GT, more impressive is that the M3 GTR's are faster than the Carrera Gt
According to FrankWs post the Carrera GT is 12sec faster than the SLR, not 30-40sec.

The M3 GTR is a pure race car and the Carrera GT is a production car, so I don't see how that's so impressive.

No, actually, according to FrankWs post, the SLR is 12 sec faster than the E60 M5.


According to FrankWs post the Carrera GT is 12sec faster than the SLR, not 30-40sec.

The M3 GTR is a pure race car and the Carrera GT is a production car, so I don't see how that's so impressive.7:10=BMW GTR
7:28=Carrera GT
7:40 MB McLaren SLR
7:52 BMW M5


differences are 30 & 12 secs + & - ! With the faster cars ,one is a full race car the other is a much lighter production car!Fred's right! All four of these vehicles are still extremely fast.Especially the Automatic one :devillook

As far OT as this thread has become I think we all can agree that any car lapping the 'Ring under 7:50 is a serious performance car.
I'm all for a good discussion about a disagreement, but we seem to be spliting hairs here now. :help

Hey dont feel bad, nice kill story, I seen a CL600 walk away from a M5 and a twin turbo supra, lol he said u lost cause ur wife was in the car. :lol

SLR has 5 spd auto, but it also shifts even faster than the AMG speedshift.
really?? wow my mistake, i was almost positive it had the 7 speed, guess i missed that when i read about it. But to be honest, that car does 0-60 in around 4 seconds, wouldnt it be hard to shift in a car like that, especially a 6 speed cuz you'd have to shift more often. To me shifting would slow down that 4 seconds, just cuz a human cant shift as fast as a computer can.

I'd like to see some credible documentation stating that the SLR's 7 speed shifts faster than a SMG, and especially the ferrari F1 gearbox's. And if it's true that the SLR's 7 speed is faster than those two, I'm sure it's not the fastest in the world. Formula cars have to be the "fastest in the world". But I'm sure your talking about factory production tranny's.
I said auto, fastest shifting AUTO in the world. SMG=Sequential Manual Gearbox so that one gets ruled out. The Ferarri f1 is also stick, and im like 99% positive that all f1 cars are stick also. Now yeah it is true that a clutchless manual CAN not wil but CAN shift fastert than an auto, But no clutch manual is going to shift faster than the Mclaren SLR's tranny and MB's 7 speed auto. Its physically impossible we dont move fast enough. Not you wont gain speed faster cuz thats a given in any stick, proper shift timing, better speed increase, but you wont shift the tranny faster. And BTW guys the SL is my dream car so if you notice me being slightly biased towards MB here, that's why hehe. I kno a lot about the SL so dont get me started. BUt anyway nice kill story. The 540 is fast but it wont compare to the 600's v12.

The Ferarri f1 is also stick, and im like 99% positive that all f1 cars are stick also.No I believe F1 cars have the sequential shifter paddles on the steering wheel.No clutch and stick shift in the sense of what we are used to in our street cars.

really?? wow my mistake, i was almost positive it had the 7 speed, guess i missed that when i read about it. But to be honest, that car does 0-60 in around 4 seconds, wouldnt it be hard to shift in a car like that, especially a 6 speed cuz you'd have to shift more often. To me shifting would slow down that 4 seconds, just cuz a human cant shift as fast as a computer can.
How about the Ford GT with a 0-60 time of 3.3 sec with a standard clutch/shifter? While your logic holds some merit, your not taking into account gearing. The Ford GT reaches 60 mph while still in first gear. While a change of gear would definetly add a few tenths, any accomplished driver could do it with their eyes closed.

Well you don't really need your eyes to shift from 1st to 2nd or to hear/feel rpms.... ;)

I said auto, fastest shifting AUTO in the world. SMG=Sequential Manual Gearbox so that one gets ruled out. The Ferarri f1 is also stick, and im like 99% positive that all f1 cars are stick also. Now yeah it is true that a clutchless manual CAN not wil but CAN shift fastert than an auto, But no clutch manual is going to shift faster than the Mclaren SLR's tranny and MB's 7 speed auto. Its physically impossible we dont move fast enough. Not you wont gain speed faster cuz thats a given in any stick, proper shift timing, better speed increase, but you wont shift the tranny faster. And BTW guys the SL is my dream car so if you notice me being slightly biased towards MB here, that's why hehe. I kno a lot about the SL so dont get me started. BUt anyway nice kill story. The 540 is fast but it wont compare to the 600's v12.


totally wrong all F1 cars have been SMG for many many years now. No clutch, no shifter, only paddles behind the steering wheel. Most F1 driver's also only use the paddles to shift up, all of the downshifting is done automatically by the car.

Ferrari was also the first manufacturer to bring F1 paddle-shifting (which BMW/Merc copied and calls SMG) to the consumer market. 1995 Ferrari 355 F1 was the first car to have this (wrought with problems, but regardless they were the first).

How about the Ford GT with a 0-60 time of 3.3 sec with a standard clutch/shifter? While your logic holds some merit, your not taking into account gearing. The Ford GT reaches 60 mph while still in first gear. While a change of gear would definetly add a few tenths, any accomplished driver could do it with their eyes closed.
that is also true, but when i said that the f1 cars were stick, i just meant no auto, i wasnt sure if they were clutch or smg, and shifting with your eyes closed wont speed up ur shifting, i didnt mean waiting to see when you can shift, i meant the movement of ur foot on the clutch, the pulling back or pushing forward of the shift knob, and then stepping on the gas again to fully change ur gear, that would take longer than an auto, but yeah if the gearing is right then it doesnt matter, cuz ur rite i wasnt thinking aobut gearing, but if proper you can get to 60 in first gear.
and btw rmani, mercedes doesnt use smg, all of their manuals are clutch, and their paddle shifting is auto assisted and you can choose to shift or keep it in auto. Correct me if im wrong but BMW's smg you have to shift right, you cant set it to auto like tiptronic and those things? Cuz i know they offer that in the m3.

F1 Cars only use a Clutch to get the car in geer, its all Paddle SMG style after that.

bmw smg has fully automatic mode as well as paddle-shift mode. Ferrari F1 has the same thing.

Audi's dual clutch DSG now beats all!! :D

You guys...all SMG and F1 style tranny's have a clutch. A clutch is not the same thing as a clutch pedal. Just because there's not a pedal there, doesn't mean there isn't a clutch. You'd have some serious issues if your gearbox didn't have a clutch. And again, let's specify that we are talking about production tranny's. Tranny's used in F1 cars and other pro racers likely cost more for the tranny than you whole car does.

totally wrong all F1 cars have been SMG for many many years now. No clutch, no shifter, only paddles behind the steering wheel. Most F1 driver's also only use the paddles to shift up, all of the downshifting is done automatically by the car.

Ferrari was also the first manufacturer to bring F1 paddle-shifting (which BMW/Merc copied and calls SMG) to the consumer market. 1995 Ferrari 355 F1 was the first car to have this (wrought with problems, but regardless they were the first).

are you sure on that? i am pretty damn sure F1 cars do have clutches.. and i thought most F1 drivers only use those paddles to shift DOWN, not up. i mean, these cars practically RIP through lower gears.

are you sure on that? i am pretty damn sure F1 cars do have clutches.. and i thought most F1 drivers only use those paddles to shift DOWN, not up. i mean, these cars practically RIP through lower gears.
F1 programs the car to shift for them, based on tracks, but they can manually control the shifts up OR down. I had an extensive talk with my friends dad (who raced, and has driven F1 cars) and was just very knowledable about that. He said they could program the whole thing, and the car would auto shift when they came up on turns. But the driver could manually shift anyways, in case they had to compensate for something.

F1 programs the car to shift for them, based on tracks, but they can manually control the shifts up OR down. I had an extensive talk with my friends dad (who raced, and has driven F1 cars) and was just very knowledable about that. He said they could program the whole thing, and the car would auto shift when they came up on turns. But the driver could manually shift anyways, in case they had to compensate for something.

I believe there is more to it then the car just shifting itself. There are too many variables to factor in that a computer cannot compensate for. IE: track conditions, the apex the driver is taking, etc. The car probably upshifts automatically when it hits redline, and downshifts appropriately to keep the engine in the best area of the power band but it would have to be triggered by the driver braking. But again, if the track is wet you don't want the car abruptly downshifting into 3rd from 5th coming hot into a corner. You'd slide right off the track. Also, I've seen F1/indy cars with both paddle shifters and a shifter lever to the right of the driver. The driver has the option depending on the situation, but obviously keeping your hands on the steering wheel is the ideal position.

And once again, Sequential gearboxes do have a clutch. It just doesn't have a clutch pedal. A clutch lives inside the gearbox, a clutch pedal lives in the drivers footwell.

I believe there is more to it then the car just shifting itself. There are too many variables to factor in that a computer cannot compensate for. IE: track conditions, the apex the driver is taking, etc. The car probably upshifts automatically when it hits redline, and downshifts appropriately to keep the engine in the best area of the power band but it would have to be triggered by the driver braking. But again, if the track is wet you don't want the car abruptly downshifting into 3rd from 5th coming hot into a corner. You'd slide right off the track. Also, I've seen F1/indy cars with both paddle shifters and a shifter lever to the right of the driver. The driver has the option depending on the situation, but obviously keeping your hands on the steering wheel is the ideal position.

And once again, Sequential gearboxes do have a clutch. It just doesn't have a clutch pedal. A clutch lives inside the gearbox, a clutch pedal lives in the drivers footwell.
I dunno about hte rest of the guys, but I knew there was still a clutch, just no pedal.

But I mean, there is still more to driving hte car, I mean they are taking turns well above 100mph. But they can program like the whole track in there. I wanna say my friends dad said they use it more for upshifting rather than downshifting, but that conversation was so long ago. I'll ask my friend (who was there) and see if he can remember.

As Giderdone says, an F1 car has a clutch paddle but on the steering wheel, and only used to get the car in gear and keep it in gear. Plain and Simple, no clutch peddle by the feet.

Let me find one of my pics I had of an F1 cockpit showing what im talking about, (have it on a CD somewhere)

Also, the car upshifts it self because it does it at the optimum level, and optimum revs (as it is set up by the team for certain races, or can be adjusted by the driver incase he wan't to conserve fuel and what not) but the driver downshifts on his own.

I have many videos ilustrating this.

Thats what I know anyway. :buttrock

I dont even know if the new M5 will be able to run with an SL600...biturbo V12 right? 600ft/lbs of torque, 500hp...I bet those things are monsters up top. But I think I would piss my pants if I ever run against an SL or CL65...730ft/lbs of torque, upwards of 600hp.


well, it surely cant run with an SL65 - http://forums.bimmerforums.com/forum/showthread.php?t=403883