Video 350SDL topping out. A must see! - Page 2 - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

Diesel Giant · #16 01-28-2006, 08:21 PM

Not talking on the legal issues. Those cars are designed to be driven hard and for many miles on the highway. That little run probably freshened up your combustion chamber, blowing out power robbing carbon.

Nothin like a little Itanian tune up.

DslBnz · #17 01-28-2006, 08:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JimmyL

Not sure why we all needed to know that.......

BTW, you did endanger yourself.

You're right. Holding the camera while driving at those speeds was actually quite dangerous. I wasn't endangering others, however.

Why I responded about the member I chose to ignore was because this was not his first lashing. See one of the more recently locked oil threads.

10,000 mile oil change

Maybe I am a bit self-indulgent, too.

JimmyL · #18 01-28-2006, 09:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DslBnz

You're right. Holding the camera while driving at those speeds was actually quite dangerous. I wasn't endangering others, however.

Why I responded about the member I chose to ignore was because this was not his first lashing. See one of the more recently locked oil threads.

10,000 mile oil change

Maybe I am a bit self-indulgent, too.

Ya know, even though I was giving you a bit of a hard time, you handled it with class and courtesy. I respect that! Nice job.
Now slow down......

t walgamuth · #19 01-28-2006, 09:51 PM

if the conditions are right, i say go for it.

that includes a stretch of road where you dont risk other folks.

tom w

DieselAddict · #20 01-28-2006, 09:58 PM

Speed limits exist because a lot of people don't know how to drive and don't have any common sense. Under certain conditions it is safe to drive 120 mph or more. I hope you were keeping an eye on the road, not the camera.

I don't think the autobahns in Germany experience any more accidents than US freeways. Anyone care to verify that?

t walgamuth · #21 01-28-2006, 10:23 PM

an article at least 10 years ago that said that their accidents per mile traveled was slightly (statistically insignificant) lower than our interstates. i dont know how ours has changed in that time but i bet it has gone up. we have a lot more traffic than ten years ago. germany prob does too.

i remember when the interstates were first built, back in the sixties and seventies. sometimes you couldnt see another car in either direction. try to find that now. and there are probably 20 times more semis than back then.

it is a good thing that the cars are so much safer now.

if you lower the speed limit, by the way, it increases the traffic on the road cause it takes everyone longer to get there.

tom w

Brian Carlton · #22 01-28-2006, 10:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by t walgamuth

if you lower the speed limit, by the way, it increases the traffic on the road cause it takes everyone longer to get there.

tom w

I think about this frequently.

Statements by the general public imply that the local freeways have bumper to bumper traffic because there are "too many cars" on the road today.

But, when the traffic is moving at 10 mph on average, the capacity of the road, in vehicles per hour, is 22% of the capacity of the road if all vehicles were travelling at 45 mph. But, for some reason, the road generally doesn't back up for 50 miles when heavy traffic occurs.

So, I conclude that the traffic jams are created by the idiots on the road who can't maintain a steady speed in dense traffic and have to go 65mph when the road will only tolerate 45 mph........or........conversely........smack the brakes at every opportunity when someone comes within 60 feet of their front bumper.

I can't understand why the government doesn't make any attempt to educate the average moron to the facts of "traffic". Surely they can't be that dense that it won't sink in........at least a bit.

raMBow · #23 01-28-2006, 10:53 PM

Two thoughts, well three.

1. The government has been educating the public, where do you think the moron's are coming from?

2. The problem with common sense is that it is not that common.

3. Personally I liked the video and I was teaching a defensive driving course to ambulance drivers Wednesday.

pawoSD · #24 01-28-2006, 10:59 PM

Why is the redline on the 350 engine 4350rpm? Is it that low on the 3.0L 603? My dad rev's his 617 to 5k all the time when flying around town or merging onto the freeway, I do it occassionally, but I like to usually keep it to 4,800 or less. (Paranoia) I did recently try out a 2nd gear haul like Brandon did in his video, I went about 7-8mph over the max shift dots for 2nd, probably about 5200-5300rpm? It was roarin' Felt like it could have easily gone higher too (was still pulling when I let off) Scary stuff...those 5k+ rpm ranges...

Brian Carlton · #25 01-28-2006, 11:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pawoSD

Why is the redline on the 350 engine 4350rpm? Is it that low on the 3.0L 603? My dad rev's his 617 to 5k all the time when flying around town or merging onto the freeway, I do it occassionally, but I like to usually keep it to 4,800 or less. (Paranoia) I did recently try out a 2nd gear haul like Brandon did in his video, I went about 7-8mph over the max shift dots for 2nd, probably about 5200-5300rpm? It was roarin' Felt like it could have easily gone higher too (was still pulling when I let off) Scary stuff...those 5k+ rpm ranges...

The quoted maximum horsepower for the 603.961 is at 4800 rpm. In theory, if you rev it beyond this speed, your elapsed times will increase.........so there is no logic to it. I'm not sure I firmly believe the 4800 rpm figure as these engines seem to be able to pull well over 5K.

Now, the 617 is a different story. It's rated at maximum horsepower at 4400 rpm and I find it hard to believe that the engine can put out much torque above 4800 rpm. With the lack of a crossflow head, it can't breathe all that well. Brandon has routinely taken it well above 5000 rpm, but, I'm skeptical that it provides him with any advantages.