Is MB hurting that bad from Chrysler? - Page 3 - Mercedes-Benz Forum

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #21 of 33 (permalink) Old 08-10-2006, 10:21 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
MarcusF's Avatar
 
Date registered: Apr 2005
Vehicle: 2002 CLK430
Location: Southern California
Posts: 1,681
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Musikmann
Hi again Marcus,

Thanks for another of your thorough explanations that you always take a lot of time to compose and offer here. I'm especially glad to see your comment regarding the 300C vs. E-Class ongoing debate. I've been wondering about that one.

I wanted to ask you: What does RPO stand for please?

Also, you didn't comment on my "Last Chrysler bailout" ramblings. ROTF, I think I know you are old enough to remember the Chrysler Iacocca years
Was that before, during, or after the dreaded "K" cars?

One last thing: I have forgotten that easy (in your head) conversion from liters/cc to cubic inches - do you remember that? Thanks in advance.

Regards,
Dave aka Musikmann
An RPO is a regular production option.

I remember Lee. Thankfully you didn’t ask if I remembered Walter! I remember Lee was at Ford before Chrysler. He was fired at Ford, went to Chrysler, got the federal government to guarantee company loans, and in no time, Chrysler was on it’s feet again. He was there for the K-car years. He had an ad where he used to say, "Buy a car and get a check!"

A liter is 61 cubic inches. Hard to believe Porsche squeezed so much excitement out of less than 150 cubic inches isn't it? I'm speaking of the 72/73 911 with the 2.4
MarcusF is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #22 of 33 (permalink) Old 08-10-2006, 11:32 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
MarcusF's Avatar
 
Date registered: Apr 2005
Vehicle: 2002 CLK430
Location: Southern California
Posts: 1,681
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by chinny4290
And I can 100% guarentee that it does share the same, or is at least based off the W210 Mercedes E-Class Chassis/platform...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chrysler_LX_platform

:-)

I understand and have no doubt that their engines are powerful...but extremely inefficient...again my example with different displacements and different outputs.

Here's another example. A Dodge SRT-10 V10 is an 8.2 liter engine....8200ccs is alot of displacement. Yes it has alot of torque and is a powerful engine. But look at the BMW S85 V10 in the E60 M5 and the E63 M6. It only displaces 5-liters and gives off 507 bhp, which is 7 more horsepower than the Dodge V10 respectively, at almost half the displacement and half the engine size (305 cu in for the S85, 500 cu in for the Dodge). It doesn't help that Dodge also uses 2 valves per cylinder as opposed to 4 valves per cylinder, which better the mixture of fuel, and air for better efficiency. Yea, the S85 doesn't really have as much torque as teh Dodge V10 (383 lb-ft for the S85, 525 lb-ft for the Dodge). But why have all that torque when that torque would be better applied to towing things?

What also doesn't help is America's obsession with the theme: bigger makes things better, which is very false. It's a similar story with Harley Davidson motorcycles.
A wiki is a lousy source of information because anyone can write anything in one. If a rumor is widespread, the wiki regards it as fact. You may as well have sent me to your own personal webpage. In this case, even your own link proves you wrong. Earlier you clearly posted the 300C “shares” it’s chassis with the W210. Then you point me to a link that says the Chrysler LX platform is “based” on a W210. That’s “based” as in a “similar design”, which is exactly what I posted. Am I nit picking? Not really. If two cars share the same chassis, someone could go to a wrecking yard, pull the rear end from one brand, and it’ll work in either car. That won’t come close to working here. A 2001 E430 "shares" it's chassis with a 2002 E430. It doesn't share it's chassis with a 300C.

I’ll make it simple - a chassis consists of the frame, suspension, and steering. Since were taking about unibody cars, the frame doesn’t apply. Lets look at the track. The front track on a W210 is 60.2 inches, while the rear is 59.9. On a 300C, the front track is 63 inches and the rear is 63.1. How is it that a car who’s chassis is “shared” is wider on one vehicle than it is on another? At a minimum, the steering rack would have to be wider, which would make the steering different, which has to mean a different chassis. Look at this - one car has a wider front track width than the rear, the other is set up in the exact opposite. Flip flopping those numbers changes the way a car handles. That’s not done with a shared chassis.

I have no idea why you brought up the Dodge V10/BMW V10 argument, but here’s a very simple answer: Different applications. I can, and have, turned faster lap times in an M5 than in a Viper. The Viper is quicker in a straight line.

“But why have all that torque when that torque would be better applied to towing things?” There’s an old saying “horsepower sells cars, but torque wins races.” The races in question are quarter mile races.
MarcusF is offline  
post #23 of 33 (permalink) Old 08-11-2006, 12:14 AM
BenzWorld Extremist
 
chinny4290's Avatar
 
Date registered: Aug 2005
Vehicle: '94 E320 Coupe W124 (RIP) - '75 280S W116 - '11 Honda Accord Coupe V6 6-Spd (DD)
Location: Saddle River, Bergen County, New Jersey
Posts: 988
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
ok, I just misused my words.
chinny4290 is offline  
post #24 of 33 (permalink) Old 08-11-2006, 05:14 AM
Lifetime Premium Member
 
Musikmann's Avatar
 
Date registered: May 2006
Vehicle: 2001 E320 - Brilliant Silver/Ash: 107,000+
Location: West Virginia, USA
Posts: 17,193
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Lifetime Premium Member
Arrow MarcusF

Quote:
Originally Posted by MarcusF
An RPO is a regular production option.

I remember Lee. Thankfully you didn’t ask if I remembered Walter! I remember Lee was at Ford before Chrysler. He was fired at Ford, went to Chrysler, got the federal government to guarantee company loans, and in no time, Chrysler was on it’s feet again. He was there for the K-car years. He had an ad where he used to say, "Buy a car and get a check!"

A liter is 61 cubic inches. Hard to believe Porsche squeezed so much excitement out of less than 150 cubic inches isn't it? I'm speaking of the 72/73 911 with the 2.4
Thanks for the RPO explanation.

Yep, that's Lee alright, he was a real dynamo in my opinion. I didn't realize the Fords fired him (thinking that he left voluntarily).

ROTF, Walter who? Now you're really dating yourself

Thanks too for the conversion, all I remembered was that it is simple to apply.

Yes, that is hard to believe, and we both owned those puppies. If I remember, sometime in the early 70s, the 911S peaked at 181HP - before the Turbos were introduced. As you just explaied, it must have been the torque that gave them their balls, and I think I'll have a look for that info. If I remember correctly, the early turbos were only 3.0L.

Regards,
Dave

Mercedes Benz - Das beste oder nichts!

Last edited by Musikmann; 08-11-2006 at 05:58 AM.
Musikmann is offline  
post #25 of 33 (permalink) Old 08-11-2006, 05:51 AM
Lifetime Premium Member
 
Musikmann's Avatar
 
Date registered: May 2006
Vehicle: 2001 E320 - Brilliant Silver/Ash: 107,000+
Location: West Virginia, USA
Posts: 17,193
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Lifetime Premium Member
Thumbs up RE: Vipers

Quote:
Originally Posted by MarcusF
I can, and have, turned faster lap times in an M5 than in a Viper. The Viper is quicker in a straight line.
In either Road & Track or Car & Driver, I saw a comparison between the Viper and some really exotic stuff (not that's it's not, but some model of Ferrari was one of them). That Dodge hung in there with the "big dogs" pretty well.

If memory serves, that particular Ferrari only topped the Viper in the top end, and not by that much. I don't have the magazine to refer to unfortunately, but in 0-60, 1/4 mile, lateral acceleration, et cetera, the Dodge topped the Ferrari and the couple of others.

I'll look for it online, and might copy/paste a portion of it here - I thought there were several good reasons presented to spend $1000s less for a hot car.

Mercedes Benz - Das beste oder nichts!
Musikmann is offline  
post #26 of 33 (permalink) Old 08-11-2006, 08:40 AM
BenzWorld Elite
 
MarcusF's Avatar
 
Date registered: Apr 2005
Vehicle: 2002 CLK430
Location: Southern California
Posts: 1,681
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Musikmann
In either Road & Track or Car & Driver, I saw a comparison between the Viper and some really exotic stuff (not that's it's not, but some model of Ferrari was one of them). That Dodge hung in there with the "big dogs" pretty well.

If memory serves, that particular Ferrari only topped the Viper in the top end, and not by that much. I don't have the magazine to refer to unfortunately, but in 0-60, 1/4 mile, lateral acceleration, et cetera, the Dodge topped the Ferrari and the couple of others.

I'll look for it online, and might copy/paste a portion of it here - I thought there were several good reasons presented to spend $1000s less for a hot car.
The Viper is blisteringly fast, but I really feel uncomfortable in one on a road course. Maybe it's my utter lack of driving ability. Years ago I was at a press event at a track. Chrysler brought a number of Vipers, and a number of other manufacturers brought their cars. On the back straight I had to wave a few cars past because they had caught me in the curves. Nothings worse than being the backmarker who's holding up "testing" because he's in the fastest car down the straights. Let me retract that. Something is worse. That same day, two Vipers left the track backwards. In both cases the drivers (not me) came off the gas when they shouldn't have, and the back end came around. Being a 911 guy, I don't have to tell you - never lift in the curve!

I believe Vipers can hold their own against many others. According to Chrysler, current Vipers top out in the 190 MPH range.
MarcusF is offline  
post #27 of 33 (permalink) Old 08-11-2006, 09:07 AM
BenzWorld Member
 
amcnair's Avatar
 
Date registered: Mar 2006
Vehicle: 1997 E420
Location: Fort Wayne, IN
Posts: 300
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarcusF
The Viper is blisteringly fast, but I really feel uncomfortable in one on a road course. Maybe it's my utter lack of driving ability. Years ago I was at a press event at a track. Chrysler brought a number of Vipers, and a number of other manufacturers brought their cars. On the back straight I had to wave a few cars past because they had caught me in the curves. Nothings worse than being the backmarker who's holding up "testing" because he's in the fastest car down the straights. Let me retract that. Something is worse. That same day, two Vipers left the track backwards. In both cases the drivers (not me) came off the gas when they shouldn't have, and the back end came around. Being a 911 guy, I don't have to tell you - never lift in the curve!

I believe Vipers can hold their own against many others. According to Chrysler, current Vipers top out in the 190 MPH range.
If I recall correctly, a stock Viper was automatically in the SCCA's highest class of modified cars for solo autocross because it was so much faster than everything else when it first came out. I can recall seeing several wide-eyed Viper owners with the car pointed the wrong way and cones flying everywhere when they first came out. Hellaciously fast, but terrifyingly unstable to the uninitiated. Corvette guys that would lose to Vipers at the stoplight ran rings around them at autocross events.

I've never driven a Viper, but I've sat behind the wheel and I immediately felt uncomfortable and out of place. Like the Stealth/3000GT before it, I found the driver position/ergonomics to be atrocious.
amcnair is offline  
post #28 of 33 (permalink) Old 08-11-2006, 09:12 AM
Lifetime Premium Member
 
Musikmann's Avatar
 
Date registered: May 2006
Vehicle: 2001 E320 - Brilliant Silver/Ash: 107,000+
Location: West Virginia, USA
Posts: 17,193
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Lifetime Premium Member
Wink Vipers vs. 911s

Quote:
Originally Posted by MarcusF
The Viper is blisteringly fast, but I really feel uncomfortable in one on a road course. Maybe it's my utter lack of driving ability. Years ago I was at a press event at a track. Chrysler brought a number of Vipers, and a number of other manufacturers brought their cars. On the back straight I had to wave a few cars past because they had caught me in the curves. Nothings worse than being the backmarker who's holding up "testing" because he's in the fastest car down the straights. Let me retract that. Something is worse. That same day, two Vipers left the track backwards. In both cases the drivers (not me) came off the gas when they shouldn't have, and the back end came around. Being a 911 guy, I don't have to tell you - never lift in the curve!

I believe Vipers can hold their own against many others. According to Chrysler, current Vipers top out in the 190 MPH range.
I don't think the explanation is "Maybe it's my utter lack of driving ability" - haha, you weren't one of the guys going off the track!

That's funny you should mention the 911s though. I took a 90 degree turn too fast, fishtailed, and went down a little hill off the road forward. It's been too long ago to be sure, but I think I must have let off in that curve. Fortunately, I came to rest on top of a bush and didn't do that much damage.

Back to what you said earlier too: "The Viper is quicker in a straight line." I think in that test I mentioned, the Viper hit somewhere close to 190 but the Ferrari could make it to 200.

Regards,
Musikmann

Mercedes Benz - Das beste oder nichts!

Last edited by Musikmann; 08-11-2006 at 09:28 AM. Reason: change
Musikmann is offline  
post #29 of 33 (permalink) Old 08-11-2006, 09:27 AM
Lifetime Premium Member
 
Musikmann's Avatar
 
Date registered: May 2006
Vehicle: 2001 E320 - Brilliant Silver/Ash: 107,000+
Location: West Virginia, USA
Posts: 17,193
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Lifetime Premium Member
Cool

Quote:
Originally Posted by amcnair
If I recall correctly, a stock Viper was automatically in the SCCA's highest class of modified cars for solo autocross because it was so much faster than everything else when it first came out. I can recall seeing several wide-eyed Viper owners with the car pointed the wrong way and cones flying everywhere when they first came out. Hellaciously fast, but terrifyingly unstable to the uninitiated. Corvette guys that would lose to Vipers at the stoplight ran rings around them at autocross events.

I've never driven a Viper, but I've sat behind the wheel and I immediately felt uncomfortable and out of place. Like the Stealth/3000GT before it, I found the driver position/ergonomics to be atrocious.
Hmm, Corvettes sound pretty stable in autocross events - I didn't realize they handled that well.

I've never driven any of those, Vipers, or the Stealth/3000GTs but I'd like to sometime. I didn't know the last two were that cramped - I'm 6'1".

Believe it or not, I always had enough leg and head room in those '70s era 911s I had.

Mercedes Benz - Das beste oder nichts!
Musikmann is offline  
post #30 of 33 (permalink) Old 08-11-2006, 11:03 AM
BenzWorld Member
 
amcnair's Avatar
 
Date registered: Mar 2006
Vehicle: 1997 E420
Location: Fort Wayne, IN
Posts: 300
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Musikmann
Hmm, Corvettes sound pretty stable in autocross events - I didn't realize they handled that well.

I've never driven any of those, Vipers, or the Stealth/3000GTs but I'd like to sometime. I didn't know the last two were that cramped - I'm 6'1".

Believe it or not, I always had enough leg and head room in those '70s era 911s I had.
Vettes (I'm talking about post-1985 here.) are probably the most user-friendly bang for the buck out there. Compared to European sports cars they aren't very sophisticated and their interiors are god-awful, but they are very easy to drive very fast.

I'm 6'2" and I could not find a comfortable driving position in a 3000GT. I was involved in the press rollout of the short-lived Subaru SVX back in the early '90s. We drove a 300Z, a 3000GT and the SVX on an autocross course, then they sprayed the course with water & dishsoap and we drove them again. The point was to demonstrate the SVX's ability to handle slick surfaces. I came away from the comparison hating the 3000GT, liking the SVX, and loving the 300Z. I was so uncomfortable in the 3000GT that I didn't even enjoy flinging it around, which is unusual for me. And it was front-wheel drive, which didn't help.
amcnair is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

  Mercedes-Benz Forum > General Mercedes-Benz Forums > General Mercedes-Benz

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Mercedes-Benz Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in











  • Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
     
    Thread Tools
    Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
    Email this Page Email this Page
    Display Modes
    Linear Mode Linear Mode



    Similar Threads
    Topic Author Forum Replies Last Post
    I think the new W221 looks more like a Chrysler MB190E2.6 W221 S-Class 7 03-12-2006 01:48 PM
    Bad climate control switch or bad vacuum switchover valve jwht W201 190-Class 0 10-13-2004 10:21 PM
    Chrysler SLK?! Joel in KC R170 SLK-Class 8 09-11-2002 05:01 AM
    New Chrysler Coupe.... Qui R170 SLK-Class 2 02-19-2002 02:32 AM
    MB Chrysler results Max (Athens-GR) R170 SLK-Class 0 07-20-2001 03:04 AM

    Posting Rules  
    You may post new threads
    You may post replies
    You may not post attachments
    You may not edit your posts

    BB code is On
    Smilies are On
    [IMG] code is On
    HTML code is Off
    Trackbacks are On
    Pingbacks are On
    Refbacks are On

     

    Title goes here

    close
    video goes here
    description goes here. Read Full Story
    For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome