IS 350 watch out! C350 0-60 in 5.5 seconds! (btw, its a manual)
#18
A seven-speed tranny just might be overkill.....remember, we had a thread and a discussion on that several months ago? If they are going to use 7 speeds, that's a lot of shifting for the tranny, a lot of wear, and more expensive tranny repairs, rebuild, or replacement. Remember?...my take on it was it they are going to use that many gears, they might as well forget stepped gears altogether and develop a CVT ( Continuously Variable Transmission ) that will take the power....something previous CVT's couldn't do.
https://www.clublexus.com/forums/sho...d+transmission
https://www.clublexus.com/forums/sho...d+transmission
Last edited by mmarshall; 10-09-05 at 05:59 PM.
#19
Originally Posted by TheRupp
I'm calling BS too. 268 HP hasn't ever gotten a car to 60 in 5.5, unless using forced induction or something.
#21
Hey Sick thanks for the heads up but you didn't mention which transmission C&D's C350 test car had... The 0-60 acceleration time of 5.5s sounds more like a result of a manual gearbox to me. The C350 Sport comes standard with a 6-speed manual, and optionally a 7-speed auto for $1,410.
#22
Seems like cars like this C350 get lost in the shuffle cause of the 3 series but Lexus or any one else would kill to have the brand recognition and sales of MB. I mean look at the E class - hardly any one ever mentions it but it's the best seller almost every month with usually the highest price in class. And the C class is not exactly a slow seller - model for model it sells as well as the 3 series.
Biker, who wouldn't mind a C350 6MT.
Biker, who wouldn't mind a C350 6MT.
#23
Originally Posted by mmarshall
A seven-speed tranny just might be overkill.....remember, we had a thread and a discussion on that several months ago? If they are going to use 7 speeds, that's a lot of shifting for the tranny, a lot of wear, and more expensive tranny repairs, rebuild, or replacement. Remember?...my take on it was it they are going to use that many gears, they might as well forget stepped gears altogether and develop a CVT ( Continuously Variable Transmission ) that will take the power....something previous CVT's couldn't do.
https://www.clublexus.com/forums/sho...d+transmission
https://www.clublexus.com/forums/sho...d+transmission
#24
Originally Posted by jracerlmn
yeah...but MB is famous for having a ton of torque to get that car moving....
we're talking stump pulling torque
we're talking stump pulling torque
I'm not going to get into a hp vs torque discussion, but I know what you're trying to say about it, and its wrong.
#26
Originally Posted by Bean
stump pulling torque? 258 ftlbs is not stump pulling sir...
I'm not going to get into a hp vs torque discussion, but I know what you're trying to say about it, and its wrong.
I'm not going to get into a hp vs torque discussion, but I know what you're trying to say about it, and its wrong.
i'm talking on their V-8 engines....we're talking extremely high numbers...
anyways, what's wrong about my statement? I thought torque was one of the main factors in getting the car moving? i'm not a physics or engineering major so i wouldn't know, but i thought that maybe torque would be it.
#27
Originally Posted by mmarshall
I know you meant it as a joke, but that is the attitude and reasoning that has led to some of the insane figures of HP and torque we see in cars like the top-level AMG's, the Cadillac Sixteen, and the most insane car of them all...the Bugatti Veyron. Where do we stop? Will we end up fitting NASA-designed rockets on these cars with fuel tanks the size of swimming pools and blast-off HP in the millions?
However let's not forget simple economics at play here. When there is a buyer, a product will be made for that buyer - it's that simple. You may not like it and we all know that kind of power is extremely dangerous in most drivers hands - but the fact of the matter is that if someone can afford to buy any insanely high HP car, a manufacturer will make it.
Let's move on from this topic and stop beating the horse to death about the impracticality of insanely high HP and TQ numbers from MB, BMW, Bugatti, Cadillac etc. It's just tiring reading this over and over again.
#28
Originally Posted by TheRupp
I'm calling BS too. 268 HP hasn't ever gotten a car to 60 in 5.5, unless using forced induction or something.
That didn't make sense
268 HP is 268 HP regardless of whether FI was used to get there or not. And 268 hp will definately get a car to 60 in 5.5 if the car is light enough
#29
Originally Posted by TheRupp
I'm calling BS too. 268 HP hasn't ever gotten a car to 60 in 5.5, unless using forced induction or something.
The Honda S2000 has done 0-60 in 5.5 seconds in a few tests with 240hp but it is very light, same with the Lotus Elise but they are on a different level then small 4 door sports sedans that weigh much more.
#30
Originally Posted by mkorsu
That didn't make sense
268 HP is 268 HP regardless of whether FI was used to get there or not. And 268 hp will definately get a car to 60 in 5.5 if the car is light enough
268 HP is 268 HP regardless of whether FI was used to get there or not. And 268 hp will definately get a car to 60 in 5.5 if the car is light enough
Just didn't add up to me, especially when the 330i can't get below 6 seconds with a manual and the smaller (and probably lighter) 255hp 3.0