210 E55 vs. 560sec test drive

[robparker]

Just though I would post this as yesterday I had the oppertunity to drive back to back a 1999 E55 AMG and then a 560sec. I have not driven an e55 before and it was quick, but I did get out feeling a little disapointed if im honest, it was low milage and very well maintained but if I had bought it, I think everyday I would be a little disapointed with its performance for the money I would have paid, maybe I was expecting too much. The 560 on the otherhand, which had 190k miles and was tatty.. I already have a 500sel, but this 560 seemed like a little rocketship, in a straight line it certainly felt as fast at the 55, ok, it doesnt corner as well, but it also sounded better, the power felt so much more raw and instant, anyway, I got out of the 560sec with a big smile and I now know I wouldn't buy an e55, but a 560 anyday.

 

[Alex M Grieve]

Just though I would post this as yesterday I had the opportunity to drive back to back a 1999 E55 AMG and then a 560sec. I already have a 500sel, but this 560 seemed like a little rocket ship, in a straight line it certainly felt as fast at the 55, OK, it doesn't corner as well, but it also sounded better, the power felt so much more raw and instant, anyway, I got out of the 560sec with a big smile and I now know I wouldn't buy an E55, but a 560 any day.

Hi Rob,

An interesting comparison, and probably, on paper at least, a "no brainer" in favour of the E55. But not so? Looking at things like the power to weight ratio in particular, the E55 should be conspicuously quicker. I wonder if smarter gearing helped the SEC?

Just goes to show, you can never write off the older cars. Alternatively, all this progress and how much better off are we?

I remember doing a comparison when I worked in Shell. I contrasted the Mk1 VW Golf GTI (carburrated) with subsequent models.

As the refinements were added, the weight of the car went up at about the same rate as the power improved. Net result was zero change, but the original Mark 1 remained the quicker and more economical car. That's progress!

 

[Blobcat]

Did the 1999 E55 have the supercharger? I thought they weren't fitted until later which would possibly make a difference to the outcome. The sound of the supercharger is very addictive IMHO.

 

[hawk20]

Hi Rob,

An interesting comparison, and probably, on paper at least, a "no brainer" in favour of the E55. But not so? Looking at things like the power to weight ratio in particular, the E55 should be conspicuously quicker. I wonder if smarter gearing helped the SEC?

Just goes to show, you can never write off the older cars. Alternatively, all this progress and how much better off are we?

I remember doing a comparison when I worked in Shell. I contrasted the Mk1 VW Golf GTI (carburrated) with subsequent models.

As the refinements were added, the weight of the car went up at about the same rate as the power improved. Net result was zero change, but the original Mark 1 remained the quicker and more economical car. That's progress!

Not really fair. The later Golfs offer more space. But much more important than that, most of the wieght gain was due to stiffer and stiffer safety requirements in crash tests etc. All cars have gained weight for this reason.

As for an E55 versus the SEC, an officianado may like the subjective feel of the older car over the other but I'll bet a stopwatch would put the E55 a league or two ahead, wouldn't it?

 

[Alex M Grieve]

Not really fair. The later Golfs offer more space.

The particular point of the mechanical improvements (fuel injection, catalytic converter) was to satisfy the environmental lobby. As with other cars, these things added weight and did not help fuel consumption. Did they really help reduce the carbon footprint?

 

[hawk20]

The particular point of the mechanical improvements (fuel injection, catalytic converter) was to satisfy the environmental lobby. As with other cars, these things added weight and did not help fuel consumption. Did they really help reduce the carbon footprint?

I think you miss my main point and leave it out of the quotation.

The main weight gain on Golfs was to meet more and more stringent crash tests.

 

[brandwooddixon]

Perhaps it goes to show that the extra 100bhp and ftlb torque was all soaked up by the extra 500kg in weight.

Mind you, the E55 may have seemed slower just becuase it was quieter.

 

[Alex M Grieve]

I think you miss my main point and leave it out of the quotation.

The main weight gain on Golfs was to meet more and more stringent crash tests.

Chicken, or egg?

 

[robparker]

The e55 was the non-supercharged one, I think the super charged version would be really quick. Anyway, this is of course just opinion, but there wouldnt be much between them atall in a drag race, the e55 would probably just win, but its not the 'big technological advancement' you might expect,, the supercharged version however would probably be something else

 

[simon_wall69]

It would be one sided on a race track but I'd rather be in the w126 - it's got soul.

 

[turbopete]

The particular point of the mechanical improvements (fuel injection, catalytic converter) was to satisfy the environmental lobby. As with other cars, these things added weight and did not help fuel consumption. Did they really help reduce the carbon footprint?

more to the point, the hole in the ozone was said a few years ago to be closing. this was the original theory behind global warming. i believe its a natural cycle of the planet, and nothing to do with our using cars and generating electric etc. its just a ploy to increase taxes. a look in your history books will prove this to be correct. this planet has been through 2 ice ages. given that there were NO HUMANS in existence until long after the first had ended, there could be no forms of pollution other than the planets natural pollutants. if the pollution of humans is the cause of this so called global warming, then just HOW did the planet THAW from the first ice age????

 

[100%Bitch]

I remember doing a comparison when I worked in Shell. I contrasted the Mk1 VW Golf GTI (carburrated) with subsequent models.

I might be being stupid, but how could a Golf GTI have a carburettor?

I thought it was injected, well, mine was.

 

[Alex M Grieve]

I might be being stupid, but how could a Golf GTI have a carburettor?

I thought it was injected, well, mine was.

Picky, yes. Stupid, no.

However - from www.vw-one.co.uk/hello.htm - "But for many, the initials "GTI" will remain synonymous with the Mk1 Golf".

After all that exertion - the defence rests.

 

[roofless]

Picky, yes. Stupid, no.

However - from www.vw-one.co.uk/hello.htm - "But for many, the initials "GTI" will remain synonymous with the Mk1 Golf".

After all that exertion - the defence rests.

a poor defence ECK :lol:

 

[Alex M Grieve]

a poor defence ECK :lol:

I know that, just don't tell her!

Where does a guy have to go to find some controversy around here?