Mercedes SLR 722 edition: Necessary???

RVD · Post by **RVD** » 16 Oct 2006, 15:11

Do you think it's necessary that Mercedes is making a second version of the McLaren, the 722 edition??
I dont think so....its 0.1 seconds faster from 0-60 and will do 338 kmh instead of 337....

http://www.rsportscars.com/eng/cars/mer ... lr_722.asp

T-Shine · Post by **T-Shine** » 16 Oct 2006, 15:30

Of course it is necessary - however faint the performance improvements may be, exclusivity is what the rich want.

Tyrant · Post by **Tyrant** » 16 Oct 2006, 15:35

Who are we to decide about whether it's necessary? I mean, Mercedes is not necessary, because there's BMW. I don't know what's your point here :s.

bashderq · Post by **bashderq** » 16 Oct 2006, 15:52

Wow, thats philosophy right there for you.

Never expected to find it on this site.

PSZeTa · Post by **PSZeTa** » 16 Oct 2006, 16:00

Murcielago LP640, Skyline GTR NÃ¼r..

StreekG · Post by **StreekG** » 16 Oct 2006, 17:03

Tyrant wrote:Who are we to decide about whether it's necessary? I mean, Mercedes is not necessary, because there's BMW. I don't know what's your point here :s.

Thats not a very wise thing to say...
Mercedes have revolutionised the Auto industry throughout its existance from the beginning. What have BMW done? Made the letter M more famous?
BMW is around for the people that can't afford a Mercedes

A comment like that stirs me up a bit, and would many other people as its utter stupidity to say such a thing.

As for the 722, its not a bad idea, the increase in power and speed is rather pointless but hey its gonna sell so no point bitching about that 1 extra km top speed lol.
Wait til you get some goose who buys one and boasts about the incredible power over the original.

Tyrant · Post by **Tyrant** » 16 Oct 2006, 17:27

I'm just saying that in fact every car is not necessary because we can live without them. Don't give me history lessons lol

.

steelsnake00 · Post by **steelsnake00** » 16 Oct 2006, 18:09

StreekG wrote:BMW is around for the people that can't afford a Mercedes

Mercedes haven't even built a car CLOSE to the performance, reliability and good looks of the equivilent BMW in the last 20 years

Which is why very few people buy fast Mercs, and alot buy fast BMW's

C55 vs M3= M3 hands down. Less horsepower, but it isn't nose-heavy, the BM handles much better and it comes with an option to allow you to have something other than a wood interior!

E55 vs M5= Again, BMW all the way. Less horsepower, again, but quicker (longer rev range, more torque), better handling, ect ect.

Oh, and you may say that people who buy BMW can't afford Merc, but alot are more expensive: 3/5 and C/E roughly same price, 7 series more expensive than S-class, X5's more expensive than the ML, 1 series more expensive than A-class (well, you get what you pay for!), smaller engined CLK's cheaper than Z4's/Z4M's... Its just BMW haven't built a supercar in the last few years (M6 aside, which is in a whole different league to any of the AMG Mercedes.

That's before I get onto the subject of Mercedes ABYSMAL reliability.

The best thing, nay, the ONLY good thing about Mercedes these days is Brabus, who incidently still hold the world record for the fastest 4-door at 217mph.

Grez~Supra_RZ-S · Post by **Grez~Supra_RZ-S** » 16 Oct 2006, 18:18

I notice how youre comparing M-powered cars to non-AMG cars.

Tyrant · Post by **Tyrant** » 16 Oct 2006, 18:25

Can we cut the discussion between Mercedes and BMW? It was just a small comparison, didn't mean to start a new discussion haha.

steelsnake00 · Post by **steelsnake00** » 16 Oct 2006, 18:29

Grez~Supra_RZ-S wrote:I notice how youre comparing M-powered cars to non-AMG cars.

Where? The C55 and E55 are same era cars as the M3 and M5, both AMG's (two numbers rather than 3); I was comparing the AMG to the M-power purposefully.

RVD · Post by **RVD** » 16 Oct 2006, 19:38

My point is: Why would they build a 2nd version of a car that is only a little bit faster, but a little more exclusive.......Like a stock SLR isn't exclusive enough....

IMO mercedes did something desperate, so that people wouldn't forget the SLR

PSZeTa · Post by **PSZeTa** » 16 Oct 2006, 20:41

Wouldn't forget the SLR? Now you're just bullcrapping. It's a special edition to celebrate something from the past.

steelsnake00 wrote:Mercedes haven't even built a car CLOSE to the performance, reliability and good looks of the equivilent BMW in the last 20 years
Which is why very few people buy fast Mercs, and alot buy fast BMW's
C55 vs M3= M3 hands down. Less horsepower, but it isn't nose-heavy, the BM handles much better and it comes with an option to allow you to have something other than a wood interior!
E55 vs M5= Again, BMW all the way. Less horsepower, again, but quicker (longer rev range, more torque), better handling, ect ect.

BMW and Mercedes-Benz are comparable when it comes brand popularity. The thing is, their cars are COMPLETELY different to start with. The people they sell their cars to has the same thing. People driving Mercedes are usually on the older side, while BMW drivers are on the younger side.

The M3 is more comparable to the CLK, even though it's the E-Class' 3-door version. The M3 and the CLK55 AMG have roughly the same straight line performance.

E55 is out too, E63 is in. Roughly the same straight line performance as the M5. More torque than the M5.

They do not corner as well as the BMWs. I guess that's why you favor them?

steelsnake00 wrote:Oh, and you may say that people who buy BMW can't afford Merc, but alot are more expensive: 3/5 and C/E roughly same price, 7 series more expensive than S-class, X5's more expensive than the ML, 1 series more expensive than A-class (well, you get what you pay for!), smaller engined CLK's cheaper than Z4's/Z4M's... Its just BMW haven't built a supercar in the last few years (M6 aside, which is in a whole different league to any of the AMG Mercedes.

Have you even checked the prices before started typing that up? Mercedes-Benz has ALWAYS been more expensive than BMW, MUCH more in some cases. I didn't even start talking about the S65 AMG yet. M-Class and X5 are comparable in price, though I'm talking about base price here, not other options.

Problems that Mercedes-Benz has are usually electronic failures or malfunctions. Not even that strange considering the amount of electronic devices in their cars.

steelsnake00 · Post by **steelsnake00** » 16 Oct 2006, 21:05

The reason I buy BM is because they handle better, look better and ride better, and I find them more suited to my form of comfort. I was talking base price; comparing a facelift 7 series to the equivilent base-price'd Merc, the BM is roughtly similar to slightly more. 7-series aside, the Mercs do tend to be slightly more expensive.
E63 engine is roughly similar power outputs to the 5.0 V10, but over a much shorter rev range; explining the higher torque. Alot of the AMG engines tend to be lower revving but slightly torquier than the BMW equivilent.

PSZeTa wrote: Problems that Mercedes-Benz has are usually electronic failures or malfunctions. Not even that strange considering the amount of electronic devices in their cars.

Electronic damping aside, there is very little difference in terms of electronic gagetry between the two brands.

darknight788 · Post by **darknight788** » 16 Oct 2006, 22:25

about electrnics for a quick sec. bmw has the worst IMO with their I-drive that is obviously a failure and every review of a I-drive equipped car complains about it

now about the SLR 722 edition i say if it is in the name of horsepower and speed then do it

steelsnake00 · Post by **steelsnake00** » 16 Oct 2006, 22:53

darknight788 wrote:about electrnics for a quick sec. bmw has the worst IMO with their I-drive that is obviously a failure and every review of a I-drive equipped car complains about it

now about the SLR 722 edition i say if it is in the name of horsepower and speed then do it

I think you misunderstood. I-drive is an interface that people hate, because it takes time to do menial things such as changing the preset radio stations and DSG thresholds. It works incredibly well, its just the useless motoring journalists are too inbred and too stupid to get used to it.
Whereas Mercades electrics actually fail.

darknight788 · Post by **darknight788** » 16 Oct 2006, 22:57

yea thats what i mean you have to go through so many menus ( i hear ) to change the radio station or something that is why it has gotten poor reviews

2furio · Post by **2furio** » 16 Oct 2006, 23:08

StreekG wrote:BMW is around for the people that can't afford a Mercedes

A comment like that stirs ME up A LOT and many people would say it is utterly stupid to say such a thing.

As for the "exclusive" 722 Edition. Bad move on Mercedes' part. All they did is stick a classic name on a new car and voila...it's special. Pathetic. Plus, I never had a thing for the SLR. And don't get me started on the quality of Mercedes-Benz cars because lately, the interior in most Benz cars is complete shiznit and a disgrace to the brand.

Post by **TheStig** » 17 Oct 2006, 01:09

steelsnake00 you are telling that the M6 is a superfast car? common it gets it's Bum kicked by even a 911 Carerra . wich has almost 140 bhp less. instead of 501.

It is a pretty nice car, It might have a big engine with quiet alot horsepower, but it is using a big and heavy body, yeah they used a CF roof and stuff like that, but it is still a heavy car.

Not so long ago they tested the M6 together with the Carerra S and the Aston Martin V8 on the Ilse of Man at Top Gear and the 911 was on a short track 6 seconds faster then the M6 and AMV8 (they both did it in the same time. 1.35 seconds) and then 6 seconds is pretty fast.

I'm not saying the M6 is a bad car. but I would not call it superfast.
I do like the M6 as a car, would love the see it in Carbon for instance.

darknight788 · Post by **darknight788** » 17 Oct 2006, 01:26

there are ALOT of cars that would pwn a M6 in speed, since for some stupid reason the " smart" engineers thought it would be neat to govern the M6 to 155 TS. c'mon BMW grannies arent buying these cars rich people that want to go fast as in 190 ~ mph fast. heck a chrysler 300 SRT-8 would beat the M6 in a speed race with its ungoverned TS of 177 mph

Post by **TheStig** » 17 Oct 2006, 01:31

All german cars have a topspeed of 250 kmh.
It's a gentlemans agreement between the carmakers.
It has to to with highway safety, since you can go as fast as you want on some german Autobagns, they restricted the german cars to keep them within a safe limit, if not mistaken most porsches are also limited, I know for sure that BMW, Mercedes and audi limit their cars.
only the very exclusive cars like the SLR and the Carerra GT are not limited.

steelsnake00 · Post by **steelsnake00** » 17 Oct 2006, 01:39

Like darknight has mentioend, the only reason that the M6 doesn't top 200 is because BMW, Audi and Mercedes are in a gentlemans agreement to do so (only broken for building of supercars; the Audi R8 and Mercedes SLR). The M6 is a Grand Tourer, rather than a supercar or sports car.
Porsches are not limited by the agreement.
I never said the M6 was a supercar, I said it was the closest thing that BMW had built to a supercar in recent years

StreekG · Post by **StreekG** » 17 Oct 2006, 01:40

PSZeTa wrote: E55 is out too, E63 is in. Roughly the same straight line performance as the M5. More torque than the M5.

They do not corner as well as the BMWs. I guess that's why you favor them?

I read a review comparing the E63, M5 and Audi S6(they should've used an RS6 though), and the M5 came last, E63 dominated both cars in terms of performance, and the paddle shift scored it extra points too, i might be able to find it again if i look hard enough.

True the BMW attract more of a younger audience, mainly because BMWs are more of a drivers car, half of them out there are manuals, and ofcourse they are lighter and have a more sporty feel, but they are rather bland cars i reckon.
I think the only factor that affects the audience really is the transmission, most people see it as boring that most Mercs are autos.
Thats where older Mercs are the best, the quality on old Mercs is unmatched and are built like tanks with indestructible engines and a lot of older Mercs came in manual tranmissions.

2furio: yeah i thought it would stir someobody up, its moreso a comment i use about Saabs (somebody told me once, that Saabs are the poor mans Mercedes), coz i don't hate BMW, just a fellow european car maker.

2furio · Post by **2furio** » 17 Oct 2006, 01:48

TheStig wrote:if not mistaken most porsches are also limited, I know for sure that BMW, Mercedes and audi limit their cars.

Easily fixed:
1. Hammer the chip which limits the speed or
2. Pour some water of it...nothing works better together than water and electric circuits

Driv2Slow · Post by **Driv2Slow** » 17 Oct 2006, 02:07

RVD wrote:Do you think it's necessary that Mercedes is making a second version of the McLaren, the 722 edition??
I dont think so....its 0.1 seconds faster from 0-60 and will do 338 kmh instead of 337....

http://www.rsportscars.com/eng/cars/mer ... lr_722.asp

coool!!1

NFSUnlimited.net

Mercedes SLR 722 edition: Necessary???

Do you think it's necessary that Mercedes is making a second version of the McLaren, the 722 edition??

Mercedes SLR 722 edition: Necessary???

Re: Mercedes SLR 722 edition: Necessary???