Driving at speeds 2

[whestworld]

continuing that whole conversation but side stepping a bit....

why are car manufacturers plowing more money on research into developing higher BHP vehicles. New models are not about slowing the car down but seeing just how much power you mcan get out of the engine.
I personally think 300bhp is alot and certainly enough for overtaking and having a bit of 'fun'.

I see there are others out there that are pretty 'straight' when it comes to speed limits...doing 50mph in a 50 and sticking to the national speed limit when required. I take it then that you would not look at cars with 120bhp+ if you had to buy a new vehicle.

Personally I would love a new E55 even a CLK55 or even a Brabus. WHY?

 

[wallingd]

Had an idea this morning: why can't vehicles just have a speedometer that goes up to 70mph?

On the point of power I am having trouble w/ the 63 AMG - 510 for the bigger models and 481 detune for the others. Surely that gives no real-world difference... I appreciate it's just marketing but it doesn't rest easy on the mind somehow.

 

[sagalout]

Part of its car park envy I suppose. How many people would buy a 150bhp Mercedes if a similalry priced BMW had 250bph? So each manufacturer has to keep up - like the arms race!

Personally I'm 'fairly' happy with my 135bhp (ish) C200. I think I'd be a bit happier with an extra 30bhp or so, but I tend to drive my cars fairly gently, only really breaking speed limits on the motorway, where I tend to criuise at about 85. I think thats because I like fast bikes though for fun, and no car I've ever driven has come close to the grin factor of something like a Fireblade, so I just dont even try in a car. Obviously a 5.5 ltr AMG model would be amazing, but I still cant see it being any more fun than a bike, and the running costs certainly wouldnt be much fun at all

 

[R2D2]

The old Scottish expression "Enoughs as good as a feast" comes to mind. Maff's CL65AMG with 739bhp is an awsome car with a nigh on 200mph top speed and 0-60 in 4 seconds. I'm glad it was invented, I'm glad I've had a go in it but even if I could afford it I wouldnt buy it.

I wouldnt buy it because:
I would lose my licence in a week!
I dont need to go THAT quick.

but with total respect to Maff and others who make their own choices with there own money, I'm not sure I regard a car as important enough to tie up that amount of capital in. I'm also not sure I like what driving a 200mph car says to others about your own image, your attitude to others, the environment and a host of other softy feely things.

The threshold for these issues will be different for every one of us. I drive a
C180k which I regard as smart, safe, fast enough etc BUT. one of my clients said to me "well thats 335k you wont see again"- now we know it cost no where near that much but he saw the car and its badge image and drew his own conclusions.

On half a day a week I do a free financial counselling program to those in need in my area. I met a guy the other week whose disposable income for food/clothing and transport is £30 per week. I was So glad my relatively little/cheapish C180 was out of sight as I felt uncomfortable with the gulf between us economically.

Driving a fast/expensive car is about lots of things. Style, Image, safety, self esteem, success, status position, fun, speed and genuine interest in the technical side of motoring. Most of us don't what to carve up the world,or rub peoples noses, or endanger life we just want to enjoy ourselves.

We are complex people with complex and contary views, most the time we have our sensible hats on but sometimes 500bhp isnt enough and we have the need, the need for speed!

 

[Dieter]

Hi,

It's all about choice isn't it?

Why does anyone need a Mercedes/BMW etc?. A mondeo/vectra, for example, will get you from a to b just as well.

Whilst I tend to agree the 'race' for greater BHP is futile if there wasn't a market......

Perhaps a better race would be power v mpg e.g. (diesel)hybrid engines (CF Lexus etc.).

As for the eco 'bit...well the more you burn the more tax you pay and until they put up cheap air fares proportionately will it make any real differences.

Perhaps one day car engines will be removed and be replaced by (a) horse(s) (Oh! we've been there, haven't we?).

Cheers,

 

[pammy]

Perhaps one day car engines will be removed and be replaced by (a) horse(s) (Oh! we've been there, haven't we?).

lol - and at least the by-product was organic and very popular in certain circles

 

[blassberg]

trouble is you need more power and/or torque to overtake the faster cars.

 

[Muller]

wow how did he get his cl65 to 739 bhp?

 

[Mambo]

wow how did he get his cl65 to 739 bhp?

As far as I can remember it was remapped by DMS, remember these cars come with 612bhp as standard so to get to 740 bhp, or a 20% increase, is no problem with a remap

 

[Muller]

blimey that thing must fly, especially at low RPM's, i bet it sounds lovely to

 

[BTB 500]

When did it go up to 739 bhp? 685 mentioned here:

http://www.mbclub.co.uk/forums/showpost.php?p=231006&postcount=25

 

[DieselE]

continuing that whole conversation but side stepping a bit....

why are car manufacturers plowing more money on research into developing higher BHP vehicles. New models are not about slowing the car down but seeing just how much power you mcan get out of the engine.
I personally think 300bhp is alot and certainly enough for overtaking and having a bit of 'fun'.

I see there are others out there that are pretty 'straight' when it comes to speed limits...doing 50mph in a 50 and sticking to the national speed limit when required. I take it then that you would not look at cars with 120bhp+ if you had to buy a new vehicle.

Personally I would love a new E55 even a CLK55 or even a Brabus. WHY?

I didn't go too far over the 120 bhp when buying mine (204 bhp). Mind you the 369 lb ft of torque makes a difference.

 

[R2D2]

I think Maff had the remap and the car delimited,electronically lowered, not sure about a new aibbox as well. Maffs car is as fast a car as I will go in

 

[blassberg]

and blue smoke out the back....

 

[anarchy-inc]

Had an idea this morning: why can't vehicles just have a speedometer that goes up to 70mph?

You're too late. They had that terrible idea in the US many years ago but it was 85 not 70. I even had a car with a digital dash (85 Buick Somerset) and when I reached 85, it flashed at me. Thankfully they have removed that restriction and speedo limits are back in control of the suto makers.

 

[Dave Lewis]

Why does anyone need a Mercedes/BMW etc?. A mondeo/vectra, for example, will get you from a to b just as well.

Not really. The reason I drive a 124 estate is that I need a large, reliable, comfortable, well built car that will take myself plus equipment long distances safely, and will last me a good few years. I've tried Granadas, Volvos, etc and they don't deliver. Nothing drives or feels quite like a 124. If it had a Skoda badge on the front, I'd still have it.
The 136 bhp I have is adequate for level cruising, but not enough when fully loaded in hilly or mountainous country. What I'd really like is loads of torque.

 

[219]

Had an idea this morning: why can't vehicles just have a speedometer that goes up to 70mph?

US spec cars had that years ago when their blanket 55mph limit came in .

What strikes me as equally silly is when you get a base model car which will do not much over 100 and it has a speedo reading up to 160 .

The speedo should match the car's capabilities .

I remember the speedo on my old 280E used to read to 145 but , given a long enough run on the motorway (Ahem) Autobahn , you could bury the needle against the end stop and still pick up a bit more speed Those were the days.