I am having a huge debate with somebody I work with over performance of Mercedes AMG cars compared to the M3's and M5's.
I have tried to explain that Mercedes produce some cars that will destroy any BMW.

Please help!!!
I want to print out this at the end of the day, and show him that Mercedes are the best!!!!

Thanks
Oliver

I doubt anyone will question my MBZ loyalty, but one thing: BMW deserves its due and has produced some extremely fast,capable cars. I'm not so sure one brand is "better" than the other, as this is a completely subjective overall statement, but they're quite different. Let's do a few comparos.

The M5's a rocket sled, as is the E55. But the E55 is the more luxurious drive, and the only one available with an autobox. So, it's a lazy man's rocket, if you will, and one that'll trounce its M5 competition unless the M5's piloted by a (near-)pro.

Same thing C36/C43 vs. M3. The MBZ is typically the more luxurious product, but the M is the more driver-oriented machine. That's not necessarily bad, as the C will take less out of you on a long drive. Each and Every Mercedes is a Highway Star, seemingly first and foremost.

Dunno if this'll help you or not, but don't forget the pre-AMG cars; in its day, the 500E sucked the headlights out of the M5 by each and every magazine account. And I'd be more than happy to do a demonstration for ANY M5 wanting a run...thanks Mercedes (& Porsche)

------------------
All the best, Michael
500E
300TE

In general, you're probably wrong. At best, the production AMG cars run even with production M cars in the same class, but generally the M cars are better performers.

AMG cars also always get alot of bad press because they're never available with a manual transmission and they have relatively poor steering response.

Currently, the M5 has a slight edge over the E55 as far as the numbers go, but you could call the two equal. Interestingly, for the first time, journalists prefer the E55 steering over the M5, because the E55 has rack&pinion and the M5 has recirculating ball.

The E36 M3 was always a better car than the C36 and C43 in terms of performance, and that's even the 240hp de-tuned U.S.-spec M3, not the 320hp Euro M3.

The CLK55 is a really awesome machine, but it doesn't have an equivalent M model to compare with until the new M3 arrives. My guess is that the M3 will have equal acceleration but an edge in handling . Not to mention a $20,000 edge in price. However, the CLK55 outperforms any M car available today.

Also, AMG does make some really awesome limited production vehicles in Europe. For example, the 525hp SL73 AMG.

Brian,

In reality, the wrong is talking right. I am with Michael on this one. Apparently, you need a ride in a E55, and especially 500E. You are under-estimated AMG's ability of making fast cars. Sure BMW has an edge over MB for handling, but again, handling is not the sole purpose of a Mercedes. Not many of us "normal" driver can drive stick as fast and as good as the professional drivers doing test for Magazines. A pro behind both M5 and E55 yield a close number(0.1 sec difference)in performance figure, and again like Michael mentioned, E55 is a lazy man's car. It's very apparent which one will edge out when they are in the hand of normal drivers.

Andy Kuo

------------------

• 1992 Mercedes-Benz 400SE
  
• Pearl Grey/Black Leather
  

ICQ#26950002
Mercedes Owners ICQ ActiveList ID#61730549
Mercedes S-Class Page
http://akry.web.com

Yes, I do need a ride in an E55. The closest I've come is some time in a '97 Euro E50 AMG last year.

Oliver did not ask which one was best in the hands of an average driver, and the M5 outperforms the E55 by a small margin in just about any category in the hands of a skilled driver. That's hardly what I would call a car that will "destroy any BMW."

If the question is who makes the better performer, you need to start talking about the CLK55, because it will blow away both the M5 and E55. Like I said, the CLK55 outperforms any M car in production today. It it will "destroy" an M5 or a US-spec E36 M3, but it should run about even with the US-spec E46 M3.

I do not underestimate AMG's ability to make fast cars. In the next year we will see the ~349hp C32 AMG and ~349hp SLK32 AMG from Mercedes. The "official" 0-100kph times for the C32 and SLK32 are 5.2s and 4.9s, respectively, and I know they both will handle better than the E55 and CLK55. However, don't forget that they will see competition from the ~330hp E46 M3 and ~330hp MZ3 from BMW.

BTW, we're talking AMG vs. M, so the E500/500E is irrelevant.

Brian
'99 SLK230 M/T Sport
'02 SLK32 AMG (#1 on my dealer's list)

Hi Oliver,
I saw a test recently between the current mid-size performance sedans. Included, was an AMG C43, a BMW M3, and a twin turbo Audi. While the zero to sixty times are all within a tenth of a second, the 45-70 mph acceleration is twice as fast for the C43 as it is for the other two. Also take into account, that Mercedes are almost always automatic while the Bimmer's they test are always manual. If you put an automatic M3 up against the the C43, it would really get stomped! While the new M3 has 330hp, Mercedes has a new C32 coming out in Europe with 354hp. Bottom line is that Mercedes can beat anyone in the world if they feel so inclined. That's why they dominate Formula 1, have won the 24 hours of Le Mans 98% of the time they have entered the race, had an engine banned from Indy after the 94 season since it dominated so greatly, is the only manufacturer ever to win the Indy with a debute engine design, placed 1-2 (maybe 1,2,&3- I don't remember exactly) in the Le -Mans in the late eighties after being absent from this race since the 1950's! Also, Maurcio Gugelmin in the PACWEST Champ Car w/ Meredes power, still holds the all time fastest qualifying lap in any race in motorsports history 240.942 mph! Let the BMW crowd put that in their pipe and smoke it!
Mercedes isn't aiming at the same market as BMW. They consider luxury just as important as performance, where BMW's place luxury secondary. If youwant to use the ultimate example of a street Mercedes domination, look no further than the CLK-GTR that's selling for street use in Europe. That car has been de-tuned to give 600hp!
Bill

quote:

---

Originally posted by Oliverp:
I am having a huge debate with somebody I work with over performance of Mercedes AMG cars compared to the M3's and M5's.
I have tried to explain that Mercedes produce some cars that will destroy any BMW.

Please help!!!
I want to print out this at the end of the day, and show him that Mercedes are the best!!!!

Thanks
Oliver

---

Thanks guys! And a big thanks to Bill!!!

Anyway, performance or no performance, Mercedes are the best whatever!

Oliver

we will see how the M5 and CLK55 compare, at least with 2 non-pro drivers. my partner has the M5, i expect to get the 55 in nov. i challenged him to 2 days at the track that includes a 1.5mi banked oval, road course, and drag strip. we will record times and take pictures. i dont know about the 55 blowing the M5 away. the M5 is an awesome machine. the 55 should handle better and accelerate better; we will see! i really would like to cause alot of emotional pain for him by beating him everywhere. he likes to brag about all of the cars he has embarassed. my guess is that the 55 will prevail, but not by a large margin...

Well call me abnormal, but I prefer an autobox, with a decent suspension, and gobs of torque. So those criteria will steer me away from any M products (except for the z3 my wife wants. (no 1.8L in there )

Regarding the comment about MBZ dominating CART with a engine that was banned, you must realize that they exploited a loophole that let them run much more boost from the V6 block. (hence more power) so it wasn't so much technical capability in engine design, as it was crafty rule exploitation, (yes their design was better than the buick v6, the buick v6 was why the loophole existed) so I've been led to believe.

Now my friend in Europe has two 500e's for sale.

Regards

Russ

My recollection was that the MB Indy engine that was banned was a pushrod V-8, not a V-6. It was a pretty clever exploitation of the rules that allowed pushrod engines more boost. Tracy was cracking 250+ in a straight line at Michigan during testing.

Unless there have been some changes since I read about the Mercedes CART/Formel Einz engine since I read about it several years ago. The engine was paid for by Mercedes, but built by Lotus. The only relationship that this engine has to anything Mercedes is that the same company financed it's development.

As a true Mercedes enthusiast, it pains me to point this out.

Have a nice day,

------------------
Larry Bible
'01 C Class, Six Speed
'84 Euro 240D, 523K miles
'88 300E 5 Speed
'81 300D Daughter's Car
Over 800,000 miles in
Mercedes automobiles

The Mercedes 500I CART powerplant of 1994 took advantage of USAC's Rule 115-D:
"Turbocharged four cycle single non-overhead camshaft (camshaft in block) engines with pushrod operated valve mechanisms, two valves per cylinder, will be limited to a maximum piston displacement of 209.3 cubic inches (3430 cc) and a maximum of 8 cylinders."
Built by Ilmor Racing engines, financed by Roger Penske--and subsequently by Mercedes--the engine put out a corrected 1024 hp and 557 lbs-ft of torque. It weighed 273 lbs (without turbo). More information can be found in Ludvigsen's spectacular book "Mercedes-Benz: Quicksilver Century 1894-1995.

So was the buick v6 the motivation for this rule that allowed pushrod motors to run higher boost? Was there another pr v8 besides the merc that was that small? I was under the impression that most others were running ohc v8s becase the v6 block wasn't competitive anylonger, so they allowed it (or types like it small pr v's) to run more boost, so the poorer teams could be more competitive with the ohc v8's???

Was I mislead?

Thanks

The short answer is that the stock block rule had been there quite some time with no serious engines being built, though Smokey Yunick (the guy that built the 7/8 scale Chevelle for NASCAR) did build a sleeved-down (or destroked) small block Chevy at one point. Buick rolled into the fray in the mid to late 80's, producing prodigious horsepower but scattering pieces all about the Speedway, as they blew left and right. Buick lobbied USAC for a teeny change to the rule so they could use aftermarket blocks with a little extra beef in the right places. USAC, being the bastions of fairness (chuckle), changed the rule to one which didn't really require a stock block, but you did have to have pushrods and two valves per cylinder. After all, who would be crazy enough to build a motor *just* for Indianapolis?? And , as they say, the rest is history...

Wouldn't it be interesting if this motor showed up in the Grand American Series? If they can adapt the Cosworth Indycar motor, why not this one? Think an enterprising young soul could talk the Grand Am (or the ALMS) organizers to let this one into the fray?

------------------
'93 500E
'88 Tyrrell/Cosworth DFZ 017
'95 Ducati 916
'00 Ducati MH900e

I just spent a few days with my brother-in - law , a BMW dealer who drives a 92 m5. Having been in the left and right seats of this for a few days I can categorically say I am glad I found my 500e first. Although the 500 has not quite the off the line speed it more than matches the M5 in mid and top line performance. Control, comfort and handling are in my opinion, better.
Again , I agree that the two cars are built with different philosophies and you have to decide where you want to be in relation to this.
John