2005 Kleemann CLS50K S8

[Fire It Up]

http://www.fast-autos.net/kleemann/kleemanncls50k.html

[TBR]

Nice though I imagine it is pretty pricey.  

[R33 GT-R]

The CLS, mmmmm.

[Fire It Up]

They messed up the rear with that spoiler. (No pun intended)

[BMWDave]

I like it a lot :)

[Run Away]

Okay, I was a bit iffy on the looks of the CLS before, but with that front air-dam and the deep-dish rims, DAMN!

[Raghavan]

4.6 sec is too slow.

[BMWDave]

4.6 sec is too slow.

another idiotic comment from the peanut gallery?

[Raghavan]

4.6 sec is too slow.

another idiotic comment from the peanut gallery?

shut up moron. you don't even know why i said it. it's a reasonable statement.

[BMWDave]

4.6 sec is too slow.

another idiotic comment from the peanut gallery?

shut up moron. you don't even know why i said it. it's a reasonable statement.

Why dont you explain yourself and I might understand you a bit more?

[Raghavan]

4.6 sec is too slow.

another idiotic comment from the peanut gallery?

shut up moron. you don't even know why i said it. it's a reasonable statement.

Why dont you explain yourself and I might understand you a bit more?

cos if you think about it, the E55 AMG has 129 hp less, yet does 0-60 in 4.2 sec. now i know that the CLS is heavier (a bit), but with that much more hp, i expected more like 3.9 - 4 seconds, and it has the 7 speed auto, which i thought helps acceleration.

[BMWDave]

4.6 sec is too slow.

another idiotic comment from the peanut gallery?

shut up moron. you don't even know why i said it. it's a reasonable statement.

Why dont you explain yourself and I might understand you a bit more?

cos if you think about it, the E55 AMG has 129 hp less, yet does 0-60 in 4.2 sec. now i know that the CLS is heavier (a bit), but with that much more hp, i expected more like 3.9 - 4 seconds, and it has the 7 speed auto, which i thought helps acceleration.

You could have said that all in your first post...but you didnt explain yourself, so I had to take your comment at face value.

The CLS55 gets to sixty in 4.7 seconds.  And I'm sure that these numbers are conservative estimates being that no magazines or such have tested the car.

[Raghavan]

4.6 sec is too slow.

another idiotic comment from the peanut gallery?

shut up moron. you don't even know why i said it. it's a reasonable statement.

Why dont you explain yourself and I might understand you a bit more?

cos if you think about it, the E55 AMG has 129 hp less, yet does 0-60 in 4.2 sec. now i know that the CLS is heavier (a bit), but with that much more hp, i expected more like 3.9 - 4 seconds, and it has the 7 speed auto, which i thought helps acceleration.

You could have said that all in your first post...but you didnt explain yourself, so I had to take your comment at face value.

The CLS55 gets to sixty in 4.7 seconds.  And I'm sure that these numbers are conservative estimates being that no magazines or such have tested the car.

i would thing and hope it'd be more like 4.1 sec.

[BMWDave]

Like I said, the numbers are probably conservative.

[Fire It Up]

Whatsa peanut gallery?

[Tom]

If you want to measure brute speed a 1/4 mile test would be more appropriate.  0-60 is not a favorable test for heavier cars and could be misleading in this situation.  Just someting to think about  

[Tom]

Whatsa peanut gallery?

The drunk guys sitting on stools eating nuts so they get tricked into thrist and buy more rounds.

[Colonel Cadillac]

That is one of the best looking benz's that have been "visually upgraded" by an outside company. It looks really good!

I imagine that they have a hard time getting grip on the take-off.

[Raza]

They need Viper like tires at the back.  300+ width!

[BMWDave]

That is one of the best looking benz's that have been "visually upgraded" by an outside company. It looks really good!

I imagine that they have a hard time getting grip on the take-off.

I agree.  I think this looks great...and the CLS is already a great looking car to begin with.