Mercedes = Pure crap

[V4junkie]

http://autos.yahoo.com/newcars/future_cars/mercedes_benz_slr_stirling_moss_2010.html

2010 Mercedes-Benz SLR Stirling Moss

On Sale:

June 2009

Expected Pricing:

$1,000,000

Intrigued by the Mercedes-Benz SLR Stirling Moss? You can't buy one unless you already own one of the other SLR models, even if you have a spare $1,000,000 burning a hole in your pocket.

The SLR Stirling Moss is the last in a line of big, mega-performance Mercedes SLR sports cars developed with the McLaren Formula One race team and first introduced in 2004. Exactly 75 copies of the SLR Stirling Moss will be built between June and December 2009, when all SLR production ceases.

This SLR is a tribute to renowned British race driver Stirling Moss, who famously won the 1955 Mille Miglia race in Italy in the original Mercedes 300 SLR, in what remains a record time. Yet the SLR Stirling Moss is as much a reward for loyal Mercedes customers. Only those who have purchased previous SLR models (for a minimum of $495,000) will be offered a chance to buy the new SLR Stirling Moss.

The Stirling Moss is what's known as a speedster, though it is almost deliberately cartoon-ish in its exaggerated, arrow-shaped styling. Speedsters typically dispense with most of the windscreen, and with the roof entirely. The Stirling Moss will be equipped with two wind deflectors, less than an inch in height, strategically shaped to direct airflow away from its occupants' faces. It will also come with hard tonneau covers that can be placed over the cockpit opening or stored in the trunk. That for the passenger side can be used when the car is driven, though of course the driver's side tonneau can be installed only when the car is parked.

The Stirling Moss body and chassis are fashioned almost entirely from carbon fiber, which is formed in large ovens at extreme temperatures. Carbon fiber is much lighter than most metals, yet it's incredibly stiff, and it offers outstanding crash protection properties. The car is sculpted with a long hood, short rear overhang and functioning air scoops inside the bars that provide rollover protection. Its high, deep side skirts require side doors that swing upward in front, rather than outward like the typical car door.

Inside, the SLR Stirling Moss is an exercise in minimalism. Most of the exposed surfaces are polished carbon fiber, with a bit of aluminum trim and rugged leather on the seats. Those seats adjust manually, to forgo the weight added by electric motors, and there is no radio, telephone or phone interface included. Each car will have an aluminum plaque engraved with its number and Stirling Moss's autograph, next to the gear selector on the console.

Under its long, arrowhead hood, the SLR Stirling Moss has a supercharged, 5.5-liter V8 hand built by Mercedes' AMG performance division. The engine generates 650 horsepower and about 605 pound-feet of torque. Power flows to the rear wheels through a heavy-duty five-speed automatic transmission that can be shifted manually.

So equipped, the SLR squirts from a stop to 60 mph in about 3.2 seconds, with an unrestricted top speed of 217 mph. Of course, a driver shouldn't expect more than about 12 mpg traveling at a snail-like 75 mph.

Buyers who haven't purchased one of the 1500 SLRs already produced won't have a shot at the Stirling Moss; those who do have a chance to buy one may have to go to Europe to do so. It isn't clear at this point whether Mercedes will be able to certify the Stirling Moss for sale in North America without modifying the tiny wind deflectors, and it has no intention of doing so. The SLR Stirling Moss has already been priced at 750,000 Euros. At current exchange rates, that translates to slightly more than $1 million.

Hmm, ugly, probably handles terribly, and 12mpg? Idiots. Stop slapping superchargers on everything and learn to build a motor!

[max power]

Looks like the batmobile.

[shittygsxr]

it looked good at the autoshow, and the carbon in the interior looked very sexy.

[siggywiggy]

did they copy the 60's vette style with a little shelby gt look?

Edited May 29, 2009 by siggywiggy

[siggywiggy]

[jbot]

you guys are kidding, right?

[V4junkie]

Looks more like a Panoz to me

[magley64]

"ooh, we're exclusive, you can't buy this one unles you already own another one" copycat pre-req as the ferrari enzo....bullshit

[V4junkie]

Fine with me, only die-hard MB faithful would fork out that much $$$ for this turd.

Mercedes finally made a car that can hit 0-60 as quick as the now ancient Mclaren F1 (Powered by an NA BMW motor kekeke), except this one has no roof and needs FI to make the same power. Still a FAIL imho, the <100k Atom is better in every way.

I don't like MB, sorry for the

[jarvismb]

ok, i'll save the long winded explanation, so I made a quick picture to say my piece here. To say adding a SC to everything is lame is uneducated. I realize this is just one guys option, but I took theory of ICs in college too, and this is what I've taken from my reading.....

(please excuse the lame drawing, but I have MS paint, and I'm prepared to use it)

EDIT: any of you MEs out there feel free to expand on/fix any of my calcs.....

[jarvismb]

ok, I just read over that and I sound like a dick. I'm just saying I like SC and TC stuff because in terms of pure engineering it's a very clever way to get more work out of your heat engine without making the combustion chamber any bigger. There are trade-offs, as there are with anything, but I just like them and think if they're done right, they're a beautiful piece of work.

[V4junkie]

I agree FI is the cheapest way to make a motor fast. Definitely not debating that, it's ingenious and it works. However, there are companies like BMW that do all kinds of excellent R&D work to make engines that are 100hp per litre without FI. Whereas MB has an AMG division that puts a SC on it and then bumps up the price what, $30k? For $1mil I would expect some R&D.

Edit: P.S. I don't take offense to your input, you are countering my opinions with calculations lol

[jarvismb]

And I can totally see what you're saying, and you make a very valid point. I guess in this case, I also have to realize that this car isn't a cool Million for the engine. It's a nice fast touch, but you're paying for a step past the VIP velvet....

[wrillo]

And I can totally see what you're saying, and you make a very valid point. I guess in this case, I also have to realize that this car isn't a cool Million for the engine. It's a nice fast touch, but you're paying for a step past the VIP velvet....

agreed. yes, its high performance, but it cost $500,000 to put a merc emblem that big on the front of the car

[V4junkie]

It just seems to me that as car companies go with MB $ for $ you aren't getting much for your money.

As a side note, it would be awesome to have a car that could make you do this:

Edited May 29, 2009 by V4junkie

[magley64]

As a side note, it would be awesome to have a car that could make you do this:

my bike would easily make me do that if i didn't wear a helmet...

Edited May 29, 2009 by magley64

[V4junkie]

"Car" Magley, I said "Car"! God, when are you going to start reading things before you post?

[wrillo]

"Car" Magley, I said "Car"! God, when are you going to start reading things before you post?

[V4junkie]

Haha, glad you didn't post the 1 pack. It's like a flood over here!

[jarvismb]

Haha, glad you didn't post the 1 pack. It's like a flood over here!

:lol:

[Kip Drordy]

did they copy the 60's vette style with a little shelby gt look?

It's a throwback to the 1955 mercedes benz 300 slr

google it

"ooh, we're exclusive, you can't buy this one unles you already own another one" copycat pre-req as the ferrari enzo....bullshit

So what? They'd be bought regardless so you might as well make the faithful customers happy.

Fine with me, only die-hard MB faithful would fork out that much $$$ for this turd.

Mercedes finally made a car that can hit 0-60 as quick as the now ancient Mclaren F1 (Powered by an NA BMW motor kekeke), except this one has no roof and needs FI to make the same power. Still a FAIL imho, the <100k Atom is better in every way.

I don't like MB, sorry for the

The F1 and Ariel Atom are racecars in every aspect, this is really more of a showpiece/GT than anything else. And for the record the Atom out performs almost every production car to date (with exception to top speed)

With regards this engine vs. the M3 V8. Do you get that to get the 100HP/liter in the M3 they had to sacrifice massive amounts of torque. 420 hp / 295 lb-ft vs 600 hp / 605 lb-ft. AMG engines are handbuilt, I can't say the same for BMW's. Even the McLaren F1 needed 6+ liters of V12 to produce ~600hp but only had ~480lb-ft torque.

So it depends on what kind of power you're looking for. For track use the high strung, high reving M3 is perfect. For brutal, reliable power for long comfortable trips, a supercharger is where it's at.

O yea. 14mpg city and 20mpg highway isn't exactly stellar for the M3.

Edited May 29, 2009 by Kip Drordy

[magley64]

"Car" Magley, I said "Car"! God, when are you going to start reading things before you post?

I read fine, but who cares how many wheels it has? honestly? I don't want a car like that...

Cars are for riding in comfort when the weather sucks, or you can't ride for whatever reason. That's why I drive a Caddi:D

[V4junkie]

Aaaand I've been out keyboard warriored

Handbuilt means what? Is that better?

[magley64]

Handbuilt means what? Is that better?

it means someone got paid a lot more to assemble your engine...

[Kip Drordy]

Handbuilt means what? Is that better?

Not necessarily, but but it adds to cost and shows a level of craftsmanship and attention to detail that people are willing to pay a premium for. So in this case, yes.

I'll throw it back at you though:

A Honda Civic isn't handbuilt, makes 100hp/liter and will probably last 10x longer than the M3's or the AMG, does that mean it's superior?