Street Racing & Kill Stories - 2012 CLS550 vs Charger SRT8

Coming home last night I notice a all matte white 2012 CLS550 behind me coming up fast. So I turn ESP off and wait for him to get even with me he was with a smoking hot chick LOL. Well not surprised he pulls past me and im at his rear bumper so were not even at this point and right when I try to pull up to get an even run he guns it. I got on it about 1 second after him this was from an 80 roll and to my surprise he held me off by about half a car to about 140+. We were glued I wasn't gaining any ground and he wasn't pulling. I know alot about the Mercedes Cars but I went home and googled it and what I found was the 2012 Has a twin turbo 5.5L V8 and it weighs in at about 4200lbs. So no wonder that thing was pulling like crazy up top. The SRT8 has alot of top end but I couldnt gain on him at all. From an even start and a slower roll Im positive I could have held him off by about half a car. Those damn things are impressive to not even be an AMG!!

Cliffs:
Tune, Catback, CAI, Mach 1 Killer, Charger SRT8 got held off by a 2012 CLS550 that got a half a car head start.

This is what it looked like
http://www.autohotest.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/2012-Mercedes-Benz-CLS550-Front-Angle-570x393.jpg

http://autocar-zone.com/images/2012/02/2012-Mercedes-Benz-CLS-Class-CLS550-Engine-Compartment-Image.jpg

Sweet

Definitely feels nice to run next to some high-end cars

I'll just sit by and wait for all the mach1 guys to come on here and say how slow your car is.

Mach 1 would've easily blew right around you two guys.

I vote to rename site mach1dominance.com

Coming home last night I notice a all matte white 2012 CLS550 behind me coming up fast. So I turn ESP off and wait for him to get even with me he was with a smoking hot chick LOL. Well not surprised he pulls past me and im at his rear bumper so were not even at this point and right when I try to pull up to get an even run he guns it. I got on it about 1 second after him this was from an 80 roll and to my surprise he held me off by about half a car to about 140+. We were glued I wasn't gaining any ground and he wasn't pulling. I know alot about the Mercedes Cars but I went home and googled it and what I found was the 2012 Has a twin turbo 5.5L V8 and it weighs in at about 4200lbs. So no wonder that thing was pulling like crazy up top. The SRT8 has alot of top end but I couldnt gain on him at all. From an even start and a slower roll Im positive I could have held him off by about half a car. Those damn things are impressive to not even be an AMG!!

Cliffs:
Tune, Catback, CAI, Mach 1 Killer, Charger SRT8 got held off by a 2012 CLS550 that got a half a car head start.

This is what it looked like
http://www.autohotest.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/2012-Mercedes-Benz-CLS550-Front-Angle-570x393.jpg

http://autocar-zone.com/images/2012/02/2012-Mercedes-Benz-CLS-Class-CLS550-Engine-Compartment-Image.jpg

4.6L twin turbo 402 hp ? Says car runs a 12.8 and it pulled away from you like crazy?
http://www.mbusa.com/mercedes/vehicles/class/features/class-CLS/vehicle-performance

You lied to us! :mad:

And I don't get why you guys hate on Mach 1's. It is clearly a superior car

4.6L twin turbo 402 hp ? Says car runs a 12.8 and it pulled away from you like crazy?
http://www.mbusa.com/mercedes/vehicles/class/features/class-CLS/vehicle-performance

So he either raced the 4.6L 402HP CLS550
or
the 5.5L 518HP CLS63 AMG

Congrats to Mercedes making a twin turbo V8 that produces 402 HP. That's getting up there...

So he either raced the 4.6L 402HP CLS550
or
the 5.5L 518HP CLS63 AMG

Congrats to Mercedes making a twin turbo V8 that produces 402 HP. That's getting up there...

My neighbors dealer has one in stock the turbos aren't meant for performance, for fuel economy. If mercedes wanted to produce power im sure they know how to.


http://www.crankmotoring.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/pagani-zonda-r-111.jpg

So he either raced the 4.6L 402HP CLS550
or
the 5.5L 518HP CLS63 AMG

Congrats to Mercedes making a twin turbo V8 that produces 402 HP. That's getting up there...

Well he said it wasn't a AMG and it was a cls550 :confused:

I can't believe that car held you like that. I have ran a few and it wasn't even a race. Granted they weren't 12' models which raised the HP by 20 over the non-AMG models I ran. But even the 12's the are a low 13 sec car so you should have been able to take it out. I did however run a CLS 63 AMG that was relatively close but I still slowly walked away.

I can't believe that car held you like that. I have ran a few and it wasn't even a race. Granted they weren't 12' models which raised the HP by 20 over the non-AMG models I ran. But even the 12's the are a low 13 sec car so you should have been able to take it out. I did however run a CLS 63 AMG that was relatively close but I still slowly walked away.

:confused: 12.0@121 and you walked it? Sorry I call bs http://www.roadandtrack.com/tests/updates/2012-mercedes-benz-cls63-amg

My neighbors dealer has one in stock the turbos aren't meant for performance, for fuel economy. If mercedes wanted to produce power im sure they know how to.



Even so 24mpg isn't all that stunning. The Camaro and Mustang are rated with more horses and the same/better MPG rating. Without the use of turbos.

:confused: 12.0@121 and you walked it? Sorry I call bs http://www.roadandtrack.com/tests/updates/2012-mercedes-benz-cls63-amg

IDK what's so hard to believe. I make more power and have less weight. This was from a roll and it WAS NOT a 2012. It was the previous model. Even at the 12's new 550 hp it is still close to my power but I still weigh less.

VEHICLE TYPE: front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 4-passenger, 4-door sedan

PRICE AS TESTED: $100,805 (base price: $95,575)

ENGINE TYPE: DOHC 32-valve V-8, aluminum block and heads, port fuel injection
Displacement: 379 cu in, 6208cc
Power (SAE net): 507 bhp @ 6800 rpm
Torque (SAE net): 465 lb-ft @ 5200 rpm

TRANSMISSION: 7-speed automatic with manumatic shifting

DIMENSIONS:
Wheelbase: 112.4 in Length: 194.0 in Width: 73.7 in Height: 54.7 in
Curb weight: 4366 lb

C/D TEST RESULTS:
Zero to 60 mph: 4.1 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 9.8 sec
Zero to 150 mph: 23.5 sec
Street start, 5-60 mph: 4.4 sec
Standing ,¼-mile: 12.6 sec @ 114 mph
Top speed (governor limited): 158 mph
Braking, 70-0 mph: 163 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.87 g

IDK what's so hard to believe. I make more power and have less weight. This was from a roll and it WAS NOT a 2012. It was the previous model. Even at the 12's new 550 hp it is still close to my power but I still weigh less.

VEHICLE TYPE: front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 4-passenger, 4-door sedan

PRICE AS TESTED: $100,805 (base price: $95,575)

ENGINE TYPE: DOHC 32-valve V-8, aluminum block and heads, port fuel injection
Displacement: 379 cu in, 6208cc
Power (SAE net): 507 bhp @ 6800 rpm
Torque (SAE net): 465 lb-ft @ 5200 rpm

TRANSMISSION: 7-speed automatic with manumatic shifting

DIMENSIONS:
Wheelbase: 112.4 in Length: 194.0 in Width: 73.7 in Height: 54.7 in
Curb weight: 4366 lb

C/D TEST RESULTS:
Zero to 60 mph: 4.1 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 9.8 sec
Zero to 150 mph: 23.5 sec
Street start, 5-60 mph: 4.4 sec
Standing ,¼-mile: 12.6 sec @ 114 mph
Top speed (governor limited): 158 mph
Braking, 70-0 mph: 163 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.87 g

Ok you didn't say it wasn't a 12 and we was talking about the 12 you just said you ran a AMG version. If it was a 12 trapping 121-122 I don't see you walking it.. What do you trap in the 1/4?

Ok you didn't say it wasn't a 12 and we was talking about the 12 you just said you ran a AMG version. If it was a 12 trapping 121-122 I don't see you walking it.. What do you trap in the 1/4?

I haven't been able to beat by best time which was when I was stock. Now I just spiiiinnnn. Two weeks ago at the track, I literally spun my tires to the threads and had to replace them. My best stock time was 12.85@108.39 with a DA of +1872. Keep in mind that the engine in my car is a crate engine.

I haven't been able to beat by best time which was when I was stock. Now I just spiiiinnnn. Two weeks ago at the track, I literally spun my tires to the threads and had to replace them. My best stock time was 12.85@108.39 with a DA of +1872.

The car you posted traps 114 so I'm assuming you trap faster than 114 to have walked it thats why I'm asking

The car you posted traps 114 so I'm assuming you trap faster than 114 to have walked it thats why I'm asking

I know what they run and I really thought I was about to get embarrassed but that is not what happened. The Merc driver was a good sport about it though and we did talk afterwards. My car is most definitely capable of doing better than what I am able to get out of it since the engine was replaced. I just can't find the proper way to launch. I've all but given up trying to figure out how to launch it. Nothing I do seems to work. I have to get some wider, stickier tires if I want to get traction but at the same time I don't want to spend the $$ on something that I do maybe a couple times a year. I forgot to mention the crate engine before you replied.

Even so 24mpg isn't all that stunning. The Camaro and Mustang are rated with more horses and the same/better MPG rating. Without the use of turbos.

25mpg on the highway and 17 in the city for a 4k+lb auto car is AWESOME.

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/noframes/31572.shtml


My car gets 15 in the city and it weighs almost 1000lbs less and its an M6.

Why you're comparing your mustang to a Mercedes is beyond me.

I once ran into a CLS 350 AMG who was a bit cocky from a stoplight. After having smoked the jesus out of him from a dig... He wouldn't look my way. It said AMG on the back... which is what originally convinced me it might be worth running when I pulled up next to it and he revved it.

Went home, researched it (as I normally do when I don't know wtf car it was) and came to realize that the CLS 350 AMG is some sub 300hp car that was basically badged up and overpriced from the dealer. The package was some sort of "AMG Sport" package that included some carpeting, spoiler, rims, and some other crap. Meh.

Guess its not all in the badging sometimes. I used to get alot of runs in my old V6 CTS... and now in the V, its rare I can get anything to run. I can't even convince my friend with the Evo X to run me from a 60 run. We ran 2 40 runs a few days back with me pulling hard in 2nd, and him missing 3rd. His 3rd gear syncro on his transmission is GONE. Its going to be put under warranty. I'm hoping to have some vids up within 2 weeks.

I've been contemplating a good debadging. LOL

Now before this becomes a Mach vs SRT8 thing... I believe that cars can be fast... with and without badging.

Ok Mach guys, feel free to come in and tell us how you smoked the jesus out of C63 AMGs on rolls and SRT8 Jeeps from a dig.

Niterider, just a question. When are you going to do headers, or some more complex modifications? Not too familiar with mopar aftermarket..

Niterider, just a question. When are you going to do headers, or some more complex modifications? Not too familiar with mopar aftermarket..

He would do better spending $1500 elsewhere. These engines dont benefit that much from long tubes until you get into at least cammed territory. Even then I would question if the gains are worth the price. I have a mild cam and if i could go back i probably wouldnt have did the headers. The stock shorties are pretty damn good.

Now when talking h/c and big cubes thats when headers are worth their price on these things...

Gotcha

25mpg on the highway and 17 in the city for a 4k+lb auto car is AWESOME.

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/noframes/31572.shtml


My car gets 15 in the city and it weighs almost 1000lbs less and its an M6.

Why you're comparing your mustang to a Mercedes is beyond me.
I'm not comparing my Mustang. I'm comparing the current model Camaro and Mustang to the current model Merc. And the reason I was doing so is because this is a racing forum not who has the most luxury. I was just saying that I thought the Merc would have either more power or better economy.

4.6L twin turbo 402 hp ? Says car runs a 12.8 and it pulled away from you like crazy?
http://www.mbusa.com/mercedes/vehicles/class/features/class-CLS/vehicle-performance

thats my bad I was thinking of the CLS63 its a 4.6L twin turbo and guys have been running 12.6's with them stock. But only 402hp out of a twin turbo v8 is low maybe its detuned badly.

:confused: 12.0@121 and you walked it? Sorry I call bs http://www.roadandtrack.com/tests/updates/2012-mercedes-benz-cls63-amg

the previous CLS63 was a mid to high 12 second car.

this model

http://www.carwallpapers.ru/wp/mercedes-benz/cls/2008-cls63-amg/Mercedes-Benz-CLS63-AMG-2008.jpg

I'm not comparing my Mustang. I'm comparing the current model Camaro and Mustang to the current model Merc. And the reason I was doing so is because this is a racing forum not who has the most luxury. I was just saying that I thought the Merc would have either more power or better economy.

Like you said yourself, its a luxury car. Just because they have turbos in it does not mean its a race car. Volvo wagons have a turbo...

He would do better spending $1500 elsewhere

Elsewhere like where? I have a friend interested in a Charger SRT8 6.1

Elsewhere like where? I have a friend interested in a Charger SRT8 6.1

A Cam package is $1500 installed here in Cali at a few local hemi shops.

A Cam package is $1500 installed here in Cali at a few local hemi shops.

Nice. My buddy just has a Magnum SXT now but now that he is graduated and has a full time "big boy job" position, he wants to sell the Magnum for a Charger SRT-8 6.1