IS-F vs. C63 AMG
09-10-07, 12:15 PM
#31
Pole Position
09-10-07, 02:06 PM
#32
Driver
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Texas
Posts: 174
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
09-10-07, 04:09 PM
#33
Rookie
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location:
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
09-12-07, 08:44 PM
#36
Lexus Test Driver
If you put the cars you mentioned side by side and test, only then you can compare them properly in 0-60 and 1/4 mile or handling (IS350 vs 335i TT, www.edmunds.com anyone???)
This influences the numbers since it does not take the consistency into account. i.e. An E46 M3 has ALWAYS run 4.8 secs with a proper launch in every test and on a freak run by Car and Driver magazine where they got 4.5 secs (which is not typical of the E46) so it is safe to say it will run an average 4.8 secs 8/10 times while an IS350 will average 5.1 - 5.6 secs in the 0-60 and possibly on the one perfect run will hit 4.9 seconds.
Last edited by 05RollaXRS; 09-12-07 at 08:51 PM.
09-12-07, 10:21 PM
#37
Driver School Candidate
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: CA
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This influences the numbers since it does not take the consistency into account. i.e. An E46 M3 has ALWAYS run 4.8 secs with a proper launch in every test and on a freak run by Car and Driver magazine where they got 4.5 secs (which is not typical of the E46) so it is safe to say it will run an average 4.8 secs 8/10 times while an IS350 will average 5.1 - 5.6 secs in the 0-60 and possibly on the one perfect run will hit 4.9 seconds.[/QUOTE]
I agree that an M3 will run 4.8 second 8 out of 10 times but I also believe my stock IS (sports) can run 5.1 second 8 out of 10 times (I also think 4.9 seconds is a little bit unusual number like other C&D tests). Without ANY doubt, M3 is faster than IS, but definitely, IS350 is not a 5.6 second (in "average" sense) class car. I believe that you can simply feel it once you drive it.
I agree that an M3 will run 4.8 second 8 out of 10 times but I also believe my stock IS (sports) can run 5.1 second 8 out of 10 times (I also think 4.9 seconds is a little bit unusual number like other C&D tests). Without ANY doubt, M3 is faster than IS, but definitely, IS350 is not a 5.6 second (in "average" sense) class car. I believe that you can simply feel it once you drive it.
09-17-07, 12:24 AM
#39
Lexus Test Driver
Guys, i have a really hard time believing the times of the 350, does anyone have stock timeslips that they can evident?
With so much biase views out there it's really hard to know.
I used to think a good indicator use to estimate/judge times is the power to weight ratio. I mean i would find it hard to believe that a car weighing more then another but has same power can go faster then the lighter weighed one. I know power is one thing and torque is another but we are talking about 0-60.
With so much biase views out there it's really hard to know.
I used to think a good indicator use to estimate/judge times is the power to weight ratio. I mean i would find it hard to believe that a car weighing more then another but has same power can go faster then the lighter weighed one. I know power is one thing and torque is another but we are talking about 0-60.
09-17-07, 03:06 PM
#40
Tech Info Resource
iTrader: (2)
Guys, i have a really hard time believing the times of the 350, does anyone have stock timeslips that they can evident?
With so much biase views out there it's really hard to know.
I used to think a good indicator use to estimate/judge times is the power to weight ratio. I mean i would find it hard to believe that a car weighing more then another but has same power can go faster then the lighter weighed one. I know power is one thing and torque is another but we are talking about 0-60.
With so much biase views out there it's really hard to know.
I used to think a good indicator use to estimate/judge times is the power to weight ratio. I mean i would find it hard to believe that a car weighing more then another but has same power can go faster then the lighter weighed one. I know power is one thing and torque is another but we are talking about 0-60.
09-17-07, 09:07 PM
#41
Rookie
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Southern Cal
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Guys what other cars do you think will hang/burn the IS-F? I have the C63/E63/CLS63 right there with it...i also got the RS4/E92 M3 with it. What other cars are close? (i konw the 997's, C6's, can burn it but i mean in the sedan catagory)
09-19-07, 05:20 AM
#42
Lexus Test Driver
No matter what traction you have (and traction is somewhat about the ability to put power to the paws and not give wheelspin), if the car is heavy it aint gonna beat a car that is light, comparatively speaking.
09-21-07, 11:36 AM
#45
Pole Position
i am gona get he c63, over isf just cuz i personally think c63 looks hotter saving my $$
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
