Mercedes Benz says that it's S65 AMG is that fastes four door sedan in the world, with a 0-60 mph time of 4.2 seconds. Is the S65 really the fastest? Mitsubishi's 405hp EVO has a 0-60 time of 3.5 seconds.
I'm confused. who's right?
Many variations on the meaning of "fastest".
Don't let Kayani see this. ^_^
QuoteMany variations on the meaning of "fastest".
Don't let Kayani see this. ^_^
top speed of the evo is 175 i think. dunno top speed of other car. can't be much more.
I doubt the EVO can go 175, that's quite fast. The Benz is probably limited to 155 as per normal Benz cars.
EVO has bad aerodynamics, and is also probably restricted due to gearing.
QuoteI doubt the EVO can go 175, that's quite fast. The Benz is probably limited to 155 as per normal Benz cars.
EVO has bad aerodynamics, and is also probably restricted due to gearing.
from topgear.com: 15/20
# We say: Truly remarkable ability on the road with lots of well-balanced power. But is it worth all the extra cost?
# Price: ?46,999
# On your drive for: ?1,154pcm
# Performance: 0-60mph in 3.5sec,
max speed 175mph, n/a mpg
# Tech: 1997cc 4cyl, 4WD, 405bhp, 355lb ft, n/a kg, n/a CO2
I am quite sure that if the Benz wasnt limited to 155mph, it would be able to go 195.
QuoteI am quite sure that if the Benz wasnt limited to 155mph, it would be able to go 195.
yet it's still restrained, so technically, the evo is the fastest.
jesus... 3.5 seconds to 60! :o carrera GT does 3.3...
and the evo's quite cheap. $57,827.60
Is the 405 hp Evo MR even on the market? Also, I suspect MB's claim was that the S65 AMG is the quickest sedan available, big difference there.
QuoteIs the 405 hp Evo MR even on the market? Also, I suspect MB's claim was that the S65 AMG is the quickest sedan available, big difference there.
in car and driver, it said that mb says that it's the fastest four door ever. and the evo is still quicker.
QuoteQuoteIs the 405 hp Evo MR even on the market? Also, I suspect MB's claim was that the S65 AMG is the quickest sedan available, big difference there.
in car and driver, it said that mb says that it's the fastest four door ever. and the evo is still quicker.
Yes, I understand that, but this is the first time I have ever even heard of a 405 hp Evo. Let me ask again, is it currently for available in the USA?
QuoteQuoteQuoteIs the 405 hp Evo MR even on the market? Also, I suspect MB's claim was that the S65 AMG is the quickest sedan available, big difference there.
in car and driver, it said that mb says that it's the fastest four door ever. and the evo is still quicker.
Yes, I understand that, but this is the first time I have ever even heard of a 405 hp Evo. Let me ask again, is it currently for available in the USA?
I certainly dont think so, and I believe it is only sold in Japan.
QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteIs the 405 hp Evo MR even on the market? Also, I suspect MB's claim was that the S65 AMG is the quickest sedan available, big difference there.
in car and driver, it said that mb says that it's the fastest four door ever. and the evo is still quicker.
Yes, I understand that, but this is the first time I have ever even heard of a 405 hp Evo. Let me ask again, is it currently for available in the USA?
I certainly dont think so, and I believe it is only sold in Japan.
That is what I thought.
It's available in Europe too.
It's called the FQ400
Famous from that Top Gear video where they had a professional racer come in and drive a Mucielago around a race track, then they had one of their editors follow him, and the Lambo couln't pull away, the driver actually spun the car driving so hard trying to pull away.
7339rpms the engine would be turning at 175mph, so I guess it is possible. Just really suprising that a box like that could hit that speed, I d?dn't think it had the gearing to do so.
The definition of fastest is not set in stone. The Mclaren F1 is the fastest car in the world, but its 0-60 time has been surpassed several times now, by production vehicles. But the top speed is still the highest.
I'd love to see the 0-100 times of the two cars as well. AWD sucks power at high speeds.
QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteIs the 405 hp Evo MR even on the market? Also, I suspect MB's claim was that the S65 AMG is the quickest sedan available, big difference there.
in car and driver, it said that mb says that it's the fastest four door ever. and the evo is still quicker.
Yes, I understand that, but this is the first time I have ever even heard of a 405 hp Evo. Let me ask again, is it currently for available in the USA?
I certainly dont think so, and I believe it is only sold in Japan.
That is what I thought.
i SAID that mercedes said that it was the fastest in the WORLD. doofuses.
QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteIs the 405 hp Evo MR even on the market? Also, I suspect MB's claim was that the S65 AMG is the quickest sedan available, big difference there.
in car and driver, it said that mb says that it's the fastest four door ever. and the evo is still quicker.
Yes, I understand that, but this is the first time I have ever even heard of a 405 hp Evo. Let me ask again, is it currently for available in the USA?
I certainly dont think so, and I believe it is only sold in Japan.
That is what I thought.
i SAID that mercedes said that it was the fastest in the WORLD. doofuses.
Ok, and he just asked if the Evo was available in the US. :rolleyes:
QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteIs the 405 hp Evo MR even on the market? Also, I suspect MB's claim was that the S65 AMG is the quickest sedan available, big difference there.
in car and driver, it said that mb says that it's the fastest four door ever. and the evo is still quicker.
Yes, I understand that, but this is the first time I have ever even heard of a 405 hp Evo. Let me ask again, is it currently for available in the USA?
I certainly dont think so, and I believe it is only sold in Japan.
That is what I thought.
i SAID that mercedes said that it was the fastest in the WORLD. doofuses.
Are you refering to when I said that MB probably called the S65 the quickest sedan in the world, not the fastest? In which case, provide me with a quote that says MB said that, otherwise I am 99% sure that I am right.
QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteIs the 405 hp Evo MR even on the market? Also, I suspect MB's claim was that the S65 AMG is the quickest sedan available, big difference there.
in car and driver, it said that mb says that it's the fastest four door ever. and the evo is still quicker.
Yes, I understand that, but this is the first time I have ever even heard of a 405 hp Evo. Let me ask again, is it currently for available in the USA?
I certainly dont think so, and I believe it is only sold in Japan.
That is what I thought.
i SAID that mercedes said that it was the fastest in the WORLD. doofuses.
Are you refering to when I said that MB probably called the S65 the quickest sedan in the world, not the fastest? In which case, provide me with a quote that says MB said that, otherwise I am 99% sure that I am right.
ummm. you got your old C/D mags? look in the April 05 issue with the new 3er on it. on page 43, you'll see the S65 info.
QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteIs the 405 hp Evo MR even on the market? Also, I suspect MB's claim was that the S65 AMG is the quickest sedan available, big difference there.
in car and driver, it said that mb says that it's the fastest four door ever. and the evo is still quicker.
Yes, I understand that, but this is the first time I have ever even heard of a 405 hp Evo. Let me ask again, is it currently for available in the USA?
I certainly dont think so, and I believe it is only sold in Japan.
That is what I thought.
i SAID that mercedes said that it was the fastest in the WORLD. doofuses.
Are you refering to when I said that MB probably called the S65 the quickest sedan in the world, not the fastest? In which case, provide me with a quote that says MB said that, otherwise I am 99% sure that I am right.
ummm. you got your old C/D mags? look in the April 05 issue with the new 3er on it. on page 43, you'll see the S65 info.
Fine, I'll look it up in a few minutes.
fastest, quickest; what is the difference?
Quotefastest, quickest; what is the difference?
quickest is the quickest car to 60 mph, but if a car can get to 60 in 2 seconds and is limited to 100 mph, while another car can get to 60 in 4 seconds but can go 180, then the 100mph car is not the
fastest.
QuoteQuotefastest, quickest; what is the difference?
quickest is the quickest car to 60 mph, but if a car can get to 60 in 2 seconds and is limited to 100 mph, while another car can get to 60 in 4 seconds but can go 180, then the 100mph car is not the fastest.
but the evo is the quickest and fastest.
According to a formula I used...the Evo would have to have approximately 540 HP in order to feasibly acheive 195 MPH.
QuoteAccording to a formula I used...the Evo would have to have approximately 540 HP in order to feasibly acheive 195 MPH.
ok B)
QuoteAccording to a formula I used...the Evo would have to have approximately 540 HP in order to feasibly acheive 195 MPH.
what formula?
QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteIs the 405 hp Evo MR even on the market? Also, I suspect MB's claim was that the S65 AMG is the quickest sedan available, big difference there.
in car and driver, it said that mb says that it's the fastest four door ever. and the evo is still quicker.
Yes, I understand that, but this is the first time I have ever even heard of a 405 hp Evo. Let me ask again, is it currently for available in the USA?
I certainly dont think so, and I believe it is only sold in Japan.
That is what I thought.
i SAID that mercedes said that it was the fastest in the WORLD. doofuses.
Are you refering to when I said that MB probably called the S65 the quickest sedan in the world, not the fastest? In which case, provide me with a quote that says MB said that, otherwise I am 99% sure that I am right.
ummm. you got your old C/D mags? look in the April 05 issue with the new 3er on it. on page 43, you'll see the S65 info.
Fine, I'll look it up in a few minutes.
The little paragraph does indeed say fastest. However, it may not be inaccurate. The S65 could be ungoverned as Audi publicly broke the gentlemen's agreement with the introduction of the RS6 Plus and now the RS4.
QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteIs the 405 hp Evo MR even on the market? Also, I suspect MB's claim was that the S65 AMG is the quickest sedan available, big difference there.
in car and driver, it said that mb says that it's the fastest four door ever. and the evo is still quicker.
Yes, I understand that, but this is the first time I have ever even heard of a 405 hp Evo. Let me ask again, is it currently for available in the USA?
I certainly dont think so, and I believe it is only sold in Japan.
That is what I thought.
i SAID that mercedes said that it was the fastest in the WORLD. doofuses.
Are you refering to when I said that MB probably called the S65 the quickest sedan in the world, not the fastest? In which case, provide me with a quote that says MB said that, otherwise I am 99% sure that I am right.
ummm. you got your old C/D mags? look in the April 05 issue with the new 3er on it. on page 43, you'll see the S65 info.
Fine, I'll look it up in a few minutes.
The little paragraph does indeed say fastest. However, it may not be inaccurate. The S65 could be ungoverned as Audi publicly broke the gentlemen's agreement with the introduction of the RS6 Plus and now the RS4.
oh. i didn't know that. then you and MB are probably right. Thanks. :)
QuoteQuoteAccording to a formula I used...the Evo would have to have approximately 540 HP in order to feasibly acheive 195 MPH.
what formula?
A formula someone over at C/D gave me to figure out how much HP is needed to achieve a certain speed...
(Speed You Want to Achieve / Speed the Car can Already Achieve)^3*HP the car already has.
(^3 = to the third power)
So say I want my 405 HP Evo to go 195...
(195 / 175 ) ^3 * 405...you get approx. 540.
QuoteQuoteQuoteAccording to a formula I used...the Evo would have to have approximately 540 HP in order to feasibly acheive 195 MPH.
what formula?
A formula someone over at C/D gave me to figure out how much HP is needed to achieve a certain speed...
(Speed You Want to Achieve / Speed the Car can Already Achieve)^3*HP the car already has.
(^3 = to the third power)
So say I want my 405 HP Evo to go 195...
(195 / 175 ) ^3 * 405...you get approx. 540.
I see you got it all worked out there :praise:
QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteAccording to a formula I used...the Evo would have to have approximately 540 HP in order to feasibly acheive 195 MPH.
what formula?
A formula someone over at C/D gave me to figure out how much HP is needed to achieve a certain speed...
(Speed You Want to Achieve / Speed the Car can Already Achieve)^3*HP the car already has.
(^3 = to the third power)
So say I want my 405 HP Evo to go 195...
(195 / 175 ) ^3 * 405...you get approx. 540.
I see you got it all worked out there :praise:
:P :P :praise:
QuoteQuoteQuoteAccording to a formula I used...the Evo would have to have approximately 540 HP in order to feasibly acheive 195 MPH.
what formula?
A formula someone over at C/D gave me to figure out how much HP is needed to achieve a certain speed...
(Speed You Want to Achieve / Speed the Car can Already Achieve)^3*HP the car already has.
(^3 = to the third power)
So say I want my 405 HP Evo to go 195...
(195 / 175 ) ^3 * 405...you get approx. 540.
cool....
QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteAccording to a formula I used...the Evo would have to have approximately 540 HP in order to feasibly acheive 195 MPH.
what formula?
A formula someone over at C/D gave me to figure out how much HP is needed to achieve a certain speed...
(Speed You Want to Achieve / Speed the Car can Already Achieve)^3*HP the car already has.
(^3 = to the third power)
So say I want my 405 HP Evo to go 195...
(195 / 175 ) ^3 * 405...you get approx. 540.
cool....
Yeah..it's a little complicated but just plug in the numbers and I'm guessing it should be accurate...I saved it (with a bunch of other cool car things) in a Word document so I can access it whenever I need it...it comes in handy for things like this. :praise:
That formula can't always work. It doesn't take into account mass, frontal area, cD, downforce, or anything like that. Nor does it factor in the higher drivetrain loss of AWD drive cars such as the Mitsu Evo.
QuoteThat formula can't always work. It doesn't take into account mass, frontal area, cD, downforce, or anything like that. Nor does it factor in the higher drivetrain loss of AWD drive cars such as the Mitsu Evo.
Yes, I know...but it is somewhat accurate...if only there was a formula similar to it that included coefficient drag...that would make it even more accurate.
But...I think the formula doesn't need that because the guy that gave it to me said that for all cars the speed goes up with the cube of the HP or something like that...I'll see if I can ask him about it...
QuoteQuoteThat formula can't always work. It doesn't take into account mass, frontal area, cD, downforce, or anything like that. Nor does it factor in the higher drivetrain loss of AWD drive cars such as the Mitsu Evo.
Yes, I know...but it is somewhat accurate...if only there was a formula similar to it that included coefficient drag...that would make it even more accurate.
But...I think the formula doesn't need that because the guy that gave it to me said that for all cars the speed goes up with the cube of the HP or something like that...I'll see if I can ask him about it...
He is wrong, there is a lot more too determining top speed than power.
QuoteQuoteQuoteThat formula can't always work. It doesn't take into account mass, frontal area, cD, downforce, or anything like that. Nor does it factor in the higher drivetrain loss of AWD drive cars such as the Mitsu Evo.
Yes, I know...but it is somewhat accurate...if only there was a formula similar to it that included coefficient drag...that would make it even more accurate.
But...I think the formula doesn't need that because the guy that gave it to me said that for all cars the speed goes up with the cube of the HP or something like that...I'll see if I can ask him about it...
He is wrong, there is a lot more too determining top speed than power.
Well...someone needs to come up with a (gigantic) formula that factors in everything.
QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteThat formula can't always work. It doesn't take into account mass, frontal area, cD, downforce, or anything like that. Nor does it factor in the higher drivetrain loss of AWD drive cars such as the Mitsu Evo.
Yes, I know...but it is somewhat accurate...if only there was a formula similar to it that included coefficient drag...that would make it even more accurate.
But...I think the formula doesn't need that because the guy that gave it to me said that for all cars the speed goes up with the cube of the HP or something like that...I'll see if I can ask him about it...
He is wrong, there is a lot more too determining top speed than power.
Well...someone needs to come up with a (gigantic) formula that factors in everything.
I'll call some physicists that will take into account the weight, mass, cD, and power loss.
QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteThat formula can't always work. It doesn't take into account mass, frontal area, cD, downforce, or anything like that. Nor does it factor in the higher drivetrain loss of AWD drive cars such as the Mitsu Evo.
Yes, I know...but it is somewhat accurate...if only there was a formula similar to it that included coefficient drag...that would make it even more accurate.
But...I think the formula doesn't need that because the guy that gave it to me said that for all cars the speed goes up with the cube of the HP or something like that...I'll see if I can ask him about it...
He is wrong, there is a lot more too determining top speed than power.
Well...someone needs to come up with a (gigantic) formula that factors in everything.
I'll call some physicists that will take into account the weight, mass, cD, and power loss.
That would be a very big formula...if you have to factor in all those things and more... :o :rockon:
QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteThat formula can't always work. It doesn't take into account mass, frontal area, cD, downforce, or anything like that. Nor does it factor in the higher drivetrain loss of AWD drive cars such as the Mitsu Evo.
Yes, I know...but it is somewhat accurate...if only there was a formula similar to it that included coefficient drag...that would make it even more accurate.
But...I think the formula doesn't need that because the guy that gave it to me said that for all cars the speed goes up with the cube of the HP or something like that...I'll see if I can ask him about it...
He is wrong, there is a lot more too determining top speed than power.
Well...someone needs to come up with a (gigantic) formula that factors in everything.
I am sure something like that has been created by someone, but it would be hell trying to actually use it.
QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteThat formula can't always work. It doesn't take into account mass, frontal area, cD, downforce, or anything like that. Nor does it factor in the higher drivetrain loss of AWD drive cars such as the Mitsu Evo.
Yes, I know...but it is somewhat accurate...if only there was a formula similar to it that included coefficient drag...that would make it even more accurate.
But...I think the formula doesn't need that because the guy that gave it to me said that for all cars the speed goes up with the cube of the HP or something like that...I'll see if I can ask him about it...
He is wrong, there is a lot more too determining top speed than power.
Well...someone needs to come up with a (gigantic) formula that factors in everything.
I'll call some physicists that will take into account the weight, mass, cD, and power loss.
That would be a very big formula...if you have to factor in all those things and more... :o :rockon:
I hate to use video games, but I will...
my 2600 pound Skyline has over 700HP but struggles to hit 200 whereas my heavier M5 has less than 600HP and runs easily past 200 on the straight at the Ring. Why is that? Drivetrain loss. At high speeds, AWD cars make less power to the wheels.
QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteThat formula can't always work. It doesn't take into account mass, frontal area, cD, downforce, or anything like that. Nor does it factor in the higher drivetrain loss of AWD drive cars such as the Mitsu Evo.
Yes, I know...but it is somewhat accurate...if only there was a formula similar to it that included coefficient drag...that would make it even more accurate.
But...I think the formula doesn't need that because the guy that gave it to me said that for all cars the speed goes up with the cube of the HP or something like that...I'll see if I can ask him about it...
He is wrong, there is a lot more too determining top speed than power.
Well...someone needs to come up with a (gigantic) formula that factors in everything.
I'll call some physicists that will take into account the weight, mass, cD, and power loss.
That would be a very big formula...if you have to factor in all those things and more... :o :rockon:
I hate to use video games, but I will...
my 2600 pound Skyline has over 700HP but struggles to hit 200 whereas my heavier M5 has less than 600HP and runs easily past 200 on the straight at the Ring. Why is that? Drivetrain loss. At high speeds, AWD cars make less power to the wheels.
Yeah...what's your point? lol Aerodynamics, tire friction, gearing restriction, and engine speed also determine top speed...it's pretty much neverending.
QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteThat formula can't always work. It doesn't take into account mass, frontal area, cD, downforce, or anything like that. Nor does it factor in the higher drivetrain loss of AWD drive cars such as the Mitsu Evo.
Yes, I know...but it is somewhat accurate...if only there was a formula similar to it that included coefficient drag...that would make it even more accurate.
But...I think the formula doesn't need that because the guy that gave it to me said that for all cars the speed goes up with the cube of the HP or something like that...I'll see if I can ask him about it...
He is wrong, there is a lot more too determining top speed than power.
Well...someone needs to come up with a (gigantic) formula that factors in everything.
I'll call some physicists that will take into account the weight, mass, cD, and power loss.
That would be a very big formula...if you have to factor in all those things and more... :o :rockon:
I hate to use video games, but I will...
my 2600 pound Skyline has over 700HP but struggles to hit 200 whereas my heavier M5 has less than 600HP and runs easily past 200 on the straight at the Ring. Why is that? Drivetrain loss. At high speeds, AWD cars make less power to the wheels.
Yeah...what's your point? lol Aerodynamics, tire friction, gearing restriction, and engine speed also determine top speed...it's pretty much neverending.
The gearing had nothing to do with it in that situation. My point was that the Skyline's AWD, much like the Evolution's would keep it from achieving the same top speed as a comparable 2WD car.
QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteThat formula can't always work. It doesn't take into account mass, frontal area, cD, downforce, or anything like that. Nor does it factor in the higher drivetrain loss of AWD drive cars such as the Mitsu Evo.
Yes, I know...but it is somewhat accurate...if only there was a formula similar to it that included coefficient drag...that would make it even more accurate.
But...I think the formula doesn't need that because the guy that gave it to me said that for all cars the speed goes up with the cube of the HP or something like that...I'll see if I can ask him about it...
He is wrong, there is a lot more too determining top speed than power.
Well...someone needs to come up with a (gigantic) formula that factors in everything.
I'll call some physicists that will take into account the weight, mass, cD, and power loss.
That would be a very big formula...if you have to factor in all those things and more... :o :rockon:
I hate to use video games, but I will...
my 2600 pound Skyline has over 700HP but struggles to hit 200 whereas my heavier M5 has less than 600HP and runs easily past 200 on the straight at the Ring. Why is that? Drivetrain loss. At high speeds, AWD cars make less power to the wheels.
Yeah...what's your point? lol Aerodynamics, tire friction, gearing restriction, and engine speed also determine top speed...it's pretty much neverending.
The gearing had nothing to do with it in that situation. My point was that the Skyline's AWD, much like the Evolution's would keep it from achieving the same top speed as a comparable 2WD car.
Ohhh ok. Yeah...complicated stuff...would be one heck of a complicated formula...I bet there's one out there somewhere...GOOGLE! :praise:
QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteThat formula can't always work. It doesn't take into account mass, frontal area, cD, downforce, or anything like that. Nor does it factor in the higher drivetrain loss of AWD drive cars such as the Mitsu Evo.
Yes, I know...but it is somewhat accurate...if only there was a formula similar to it that included coefficient drag...that would make it even more accurate.
But...I think the formula doesn't need that because the guy that gave it to me said that for all cars the speed goes up with the cube of the HP or something like that...I'll see if I can ask him about it...
He is wrong, there is a lot more too determining top speed than power.
Well...someone needs to come up with a (gigantic) formula that factors in everything.
I'll call some physicists that will take into account the weight, mass, cD, and power loss.
That would be a very big formula...if you have to factor in all those things and more... :o :rockon:
I hate to use video games, but I will...
my 2600 pound Skyline has over 700HP but struggles to hit 200 whereas my heavier M5 has less than 600HP and runs easily past 200 on the straight at the Ring. Why is that? Drivetrain loss. At high speeds, AWD cars make less power to the wheels.
Yeah...what's your point? lol Aerodynamics, tire friction, gearing restriction, and engine speed also determine top speed...it's pretty much neverending.
The gearing had nothing to do with it in that situation. My point was that the Skyline's AWD, much like the Evolution's would keep it from achieving the same top speed as a comparable 2WD car.
Actually, it does. If the gearing had been lower you might have been able to get a little more top speed out of it.