Mercedes-Benz Forum banner

1 - 20 of 21 Posts

·
Registered
2001 SLK 320 Sport
Joined
·
153 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
my friend has a 1999 Saab 9-3 2.3 convertible and wants to race me. I have declined, knowing that it is dangerous as well as stupid, but i have been researching and have found similar 0-60 acceleration times compared to my 320. Just curious who do you think would win?
 

·
Registered
2001 SLK 320 Sport
Joined
·
153 Posts
Discussion Starter #2
my bad, its acutally a 96 or 97 Saab 900 Se Turbo
 

·
Registered
2003 SLK32 AMG
Joined
·
693 Posts
tell him its a moot point...

and also tell him that an SLK32 AMG will clean his clock! they are so fast everyone knows better that to even try to race them! :)
 

·
Registered
SLK 320 BRABUS Modded
Joined
·
2,398 Posts
Also tell him you have a proper roof, not a car with a tent on top. :D
 

·
Registered
05 E55 AMG
Joined
·
611 Posts
Well the 900SE 2.0T has 185HP and 194ft-lb torque and is 3020lbs in weight. The SLK320 has 215HP and 229ft-lb torque at 3099lbs in weight. So assuming you both are exactly matched in driving abilities and that both are same type of trannie (Stick/auto), the SLK320 will win. If you are auto and he is stick, it'll be practically identical finishes. If he is auto and you stick, you'd win. Again, this is assuming both cars are running in optimum condition with same driving skills. It's not like either of you will be cars apart after making a run either. Have fun, but keep it safe!
 

·
Registered
SLK 320 BRABUS Modded
Joined
·
2,398 Posts

·
Registered
2002 SLK 32 AMG, bone stock. 1987 190E 2.3-16 valve (destroyed). 2005 E320 new toy.
Joined
·
14,926 Posts
If you decide to race this guy, it doesn't have to be as hazardous as you might think. Find a place with little traffic and no cross traffic, measure out a section of about 1/4 mile.
If there are no cross roads, you have increased your safety factor by 100%. Anybody that has been here a while knows I don't condone street racing, but if you pay attention to where you run, and at what time you run, a one shot deal is not likely to hurt or maim anyone.

ALWAYS keep safety in mind.
 

·
Registered
1998 Mercedes SLK 230 Kompressor
Joined
·
333 Posts
Well the 900SE 2.0T has 185HP and 194ft-lb torque and is 3020lbs in weight. The SLK320 has 215HP and 229ft-lb torque at 3099lbs in weight. So assuming you both are exactly matched in driving abilities and that both are same type of trannie (Stick/auto), the SLK320 will win. If you are auto and he is stick, it'll be practically identical finishes. If he is auto and you stick, you'd win. Again, this is assuming both cars are running in optimum condition with same driving skills. It's not like either of you will be cars apart after making a run either. Have fun, but keep it safe!

The Saab is front wheel drive, will that make a difference?

CMount
 

·
Registered
02 - 32 (Stock); 99 SLK230 (RIP); 81 CJ7 (Fully MOD)
Joined
·
399 Posts
Given the 2 are not modified, you'll be OK.
Check & make sure the SLK is in tip top shape (check tire press, oil, etc... etc). Maybe small stuff, but if you want an increase chance of winning... :rolleyes:

If it's a 1/4 mile... drop the top... more traction on the rear :D
 

·
Registered
SLK 320 BRABUS Modded
Joined
·
2,398 Posts
Not sure about the roof down more drag = slower
 

·
Registered
2001 SLK 320 auto, 2006 CLS320 CDi.
Joined
·
420 Posts
Surely it's a joke...a stock Saab 900 turbo takes a over second longer to get to 60 and is over 10mph slower top speed...and that's before you consider the front wheels spinning off the line, the awful torque steer when the turbo cuts in and don't even mention how bad the scuttle shake is! I had a Saab 93 2.0T convertible (about the same power as the 900) for a day and i thought it was a mobile accident waiting to happen...couldnt wait to give it back and it made me appreciate how good the SLK is even more. The head lights were good though.
 

·
Registered
1998 Mercedes SLK 230 Kompressor
Joined
·
333 Posts
Surely it's a joke...a stock Saab 900 turbo takes a over second longer to get to 60 and is over 10mph slower top speed...and that's before you consider the front wheels spinning off the line, the awful torque steer when the turbo cuts in and don't even mention how bad the scuttle shake is! I had a Saab 93 2.0T convertible (about the same power as the 900) for a day and i thought it was a mobile accident waiting to happen...couldnt wait to give it back and it made me appreciate how good the SLK is even more. The head lights were good though.
I have a Saab 93 turbo as my second car:D I use it for work travel (uses very little petrol), it will go off road (but not up steep inclines), has lots of cargo space and has enough torque in third gear to safely overtake tractors pulling trailors on winding roads. It has torque steer, especially in second gear. It's a good all around work car and most important I don't mind if it gets scratched:D
CMount
 

·
Registered
2001 SLK 320 auto, 2006 CLS320 CDi.
Joined
·
420 Posts
CMount - glad that you are happy with your car:thumbsup: maybe i just drove a duffer, but I couldnt get over the torque stear...i am sure you get used to it though.:)

But like I said, the head lights were good...only 1 head light was working and it was still better than my 2 standard SLK lights:(

So, being the man with both cars...which one do you think would win?:D
 
1 - 20 of 21 Posts
Top