Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What year is your 560SEL?
The comparison I was making was between the '60s Mercedes 300SEL and the '60s full-sized Ford and Chevy.
A '60s 427/425 Impala with 3.07 gears is going to have a faster top speed than 134 mph.
That is kind of a coincidence about the '66 Fairlane GT. One of my car friends used to own a '66 Fairlane 500 with the 390 GT engine and also 3.00 gears. He never did check top speed, but yes it should be 130-135 mph.
560SEL is a 1991. As for the Impala, that was GM's claim. I had a buddy who had a 1963 427 it was a stretch to tach it out with a 4.11 rear end. It is about as aerodynamic as a refrigerator. I doubt you could do it with 3.07.
Fairlane with 3.00 gears was for street racing. Everyone went from a roll to save tires back in the day and the Fairlane would go 60mph in 1st gear. Many a GTO with 4.11 or 4.56 learned that the hard way.
And built like a tank is a marking scheme, a Benz is one of the least reliable cars on the road. You'll be paying more in maintenance than in fuel if you don't have a warranty.
I'm not so sure about that anymore. MB has raised their reliability in recent years, much like Porsche (where they've risen to #1 or 2 on JD Power this year).
My mom has a '10 C-Class and I have an '08 BMW X5. Mine's been in the shop no less than 10 times for various reasons. Her C-Class has been in... never... except for the annual oil changes. And that doesn't look like it's going to change anytime soon. If not for the boring drive, I would be all over an MB next. I bought an extended warranty instead - I'll need it. To further prove my point, I've been a member of both BMW and MB forums the last 4 years and you'll see there are a lot of BMW threads about problems/fixes but few on the MB side.
560SEL is a 1991. As for the Impala, that was GM's claim. I had a buddy who had a 1963 427 it was a stretch to tach it out with a 4.11 rear end. It is about as aerodynamic as a refrigerator. I doubt you could do it with 3.07.
Don't know why you are comparing a 1991 to '60s-era cars. As for the lack of aerodynamics, you would be surprised the top end of some of those '60s cars were. Car & Driver posted an observed 130 mph with a '66 Chevy Caprice with 427/390 hp engine and 2.73 gears. 4.11 gears are not the ones to choose for top speed!
Quote:
Fairlane with 3.00 gears was for street racing. Everyone went from a roll to save tires back in the day and the Fairlane would go 60mph in 1st gear. Many a GTO with 4.11 or 4.56 learned that the hard way.
3.00 gears for street racing? Back in the '60s, most street racers wouldn't even try challenging someone else unless he had at least 3.90 gears. One of my high school friends used to street race his '67 Mustang with a built 351-Cleveland engine. He ran 4.11 gears and told others it had 3.90s.
The Supercars Annual '69 issue got a 5.1 sec 0-60 mph time and ran the 1/4 mile in 13.99 secs 107 mph with 4.33 gears in a Pontiac GTO 400. With a higher axle ratio, the 1/4 mile would be more like 14.5 @ 95-98 mph. This assuming you can get some traction.
Don't know why you are comparing a 1991 to '60s-era cars. As for the lack of aerodynamics, you would be surprised the top end of some of those '60s cars were. Car & Driver posted an observed 130 mph with a '66 Chevy Caprice with 427/390 hp engine and 2.73 gears. 4.11 gears are not the ones to choose for top speed!
I wasn't making that comparison. If you go back and read the thread, you will see that someone claimed the 560SEL as the worlds fastest luxury sedan. I don't know if it is or it isn't. As for the Impala, the 134 was GM's claim for that car, not my opinion.
3.00 gears for street racing? Back in the '60s, most street racers wouldn't even try challenging someone else unless he had at least 3.90 gears. One of my high school friends used to street race his '67 Mustang with a built 351-Cleveland engine. He ran 4.11 gears and told others it had 3.90s.
Back in the 60's I was racing on the street several times a week so I think I know what was needed. I was rarely bested by any GM product.
The Supercars Annual '69 issue got a 5.1 sec 0-60 mph time and ran the 1/4 mile in 13.99 secs 107 mph with 4.33 gears in a Pontiac GTO 400. With a higher axle ratio, the 1/4 mile would be more like 14.5 @ 95-98 mph. This assuming you can get some traction.
GTO's with street tires were a mess, especially with 4.56 gears. A lot of smoke then time to shift. They were remarkably poorly designed cars.
I've got a 2011 C300. I always wanted a Mercedes. It is a nice car. Doesn't handle/steer like a BMW, but also doesn't fall apart like the BMW's I have had. It is very capable. In fact, it is a match for a 3 series in just about every way......only it is very uninvolving to drive. It's like the car says "Yes, I can do everything a BMW can do, but I won't bother you with experiencing the thrill of driving." Mine has the Advanced Agility Package, which gets you paddle shifters, adaptive dampers quicker steering ratio, AMG rims, and sportier throttle response. I CAN'T imagine how boring it would be without this package!
I'm so bored with driving it that I just bought a Mustang GT convertible and only drive the Benz when I don't feel like shifting gears or when I have clients with me and need 4 doors.
I wasn't making that comparison. If you go back and read the thread, you will see that someone claimed the 560SEL as the worlds fastest luxury sedan. I don't know if it is or it isn't. As for the Impala, the 134 was GM's claim for that car, not my opinion.
Actually, you were replying to me when you said your 560SEL will do 154 mph. Regarding GM's claim, it would, of course, depend on the axle ratio and what options it had.
Quote:
Back in the 60's I was racing on the street several times a week so I think I know what was needed. I was rarely bested by any GM product.
Good. If if you raced backed in the '60s, then you know that all things being equal, a Fairlane with a 4.11 axle ratio would be faster in a drag race than one with 3.00 gears.
Quote:
GTO's with street tires were a mess, especially with 4.56 gears. A lot of smoke then time to shift. They were remarkably poorly designed cars.
Street tires sure were a mess. That's why the street racers would "walk it off the line." Once rolling, the 4.56 gears were a big help. I wouldn't say they were poorly designed... tires were the limiting factor, but that was true with most other '60s muscle cars, too.
I'm not so sure about the "fastest sedan in the world" claim. I do know you could buy a 4-door '66-'69 Chevy Impala with 427/425 hp engine and 3.07:1 gears.
I'm not sure, but I think a Ford Galaxie from the same era could be had in a 4-door with 427 engine and 3.00:1 axle ratio.
Both of the above cars should be capable of 140 mph or more.
I've had my American spec 1991 420 SEL up to 132 (about as fast as it would go, could maybe squeeze out 135 with enough room), and that car was down almost 100HP to a Euro Spec 1986 560 SEL, which would likely do 155+.
Remember, it wasn't just power, it was aerodynamics, weight and transmissions that allowed speeds that high.
Don't know why you are comparing a 1991 to '60s-era cars. As for the lack of aerodynamics, you would be surprised the top end of some of those '60s cars were. Car & Driver posted an observed 130 mph with a '66 Chevy Caprice with 427/390 hp engine and 2.73 gears. 4.11 gears are not the ones to choose for top speed!
3.00 gears for street racing? Back in the '60s, most street racers wouldn't even try challenging someone else unless he had at least 3.90 gears. One of my high school friends used to street race his '67 Mustang with a built 351-Cleveland engine. He ran 4.11 gears and told others it had 3.90s.
The Supercars Annual '69 issue got a 5.1 sec 0-60 mph time and ran the 1/4 mile in 13.99 secs 107 mph with 4.33 gears in a Pontiac GTO 400. With a higher axle ratio, the 1/4 mile would be more like 14.5 @ 95-98 mph. This assuming you can get some traction.
As I specified in my post, many of the sedans posted the current record at the time for the fastest production sedan. I do believe the 6.3 300 SEL probably claimed that record during that time frame, which was followed by the 6.9 450 SEL in the 70s (claiming the record at that time), followed by the 1986 560 SEL. I have no idea if the S600 claimed the title at any point, but perhaps the current S65 AMG does? It's electronically limited to 186 (which can be removed) and has a bi-turbo 6 liter V-12 making over 600 HP and limited to 738 ft-lbs of torque (which had to be limited because they don't make any transmission that can handle that ).
I've got a 2011 C300. I always wanted a Mercedes. It is a nice car. Doesn't handle/steer like a BMW, but also doesn't fall apart like the BMW's I have had. It is very capable. In fact, it is a match for a 3 series in just about every way......only it is very uninvolving to drive. It's like the car says "Yes, I can do everything a BMW can do, but I won't bother you with experiencing the thrill of driving." Mine has the Advanced Agility Package, which gets you paddle shifters, adaptive dampers quicker steering ratio, AMG rims, and sportier throttle response. I CAN'T imagine how boring it would be without this package!
I'm so bored with driving it that I just bought a Mustang GT convertible and only drive the Benz when I don't feel like shifting gears or when I have clients with me and need 4 doors.
Should have got the C63.. it's known as a the M3 killer.
The Gelandewagen is a different animal and has been the european Hummer for 40 years. This vehicle was not originally designed for soccer moms like the ML & GL class were.
And to be honest, I had no idea the GLK was built in Germany, but I would venture a guess that the reason it is is because it is on the shared C-Class platform, where as the GL and ML are "independent" or shared platforms with chrysler.
The Gelandewagen should not even be mentioned in the same breath as the glorified minivans that make up the ML & GL line. The only thing superior to that is a Unimog!
The R-Class is a minivan-esque Mercedes, whereas the ML and GL are crossovers built for a specific market. Mercedes cannot stay in business without building vehicles that compete with Lexus, no matter what one may think of the vehicles. Of those I have known who own/owned MLs and GLs, the vast majority are principally driven by females, much like the Lexus RX and Cadillac SRX with which the ML competes, but I cannot think of one who is lacking in intellectual capacity as was stated earlier in the condemnation of the ML and GL. Without those vehicles, designed primarily for women with children, Mercedes would have a gap between the E-Class wagon and the G-class, giving market share to Lexus, Cadillac, and Acura.
__________________
All the world's a stage, and all the men and women merely players: they have their exits and their entrances; and one man in his time plays many parts, his acts being seven ages.
~William Shakespeare (As You Like It Act II, Scene VII)
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
