EVO: Mercedes - S65 AMG vs 450 SEL 6.9

[Bruce]

One more set of scans from me tonight, S65 AMG vs 450 SEL 6.9..

 

[dOmInIX]

I've read it few days ago, and watched the video long ago...6.9 SEL was really impressive car in it's time, and it was interesting to see how it was developed! Very nice read!

 

[Mr. M]

I'm surprised the owner of the 450 SEL 6.9 let the journalist play around with his car.

 

[Zafiro]

Acc times seem slow to me. I havent read the article but do they mention something about the acc times for S65?

 

[Mr. M]

S65 SEL 6.9

0-30 2.5 3.1
0-60 5.1 7.9
0-100 10.6 19.7
0-150 25.9 -

They have nothing but praises for the S65's pace and acceleration.

BTW, when reading the article I was really surprised when they said the ESP malfunctioned and the 'electronic sentinel somewhere decided that we'd had our fun and withdrew the ability to select gears manually'. Two problems in one test.

 

[Zafiro]

S65 SEL 6.9

0-30 2.5 3.1
0-60 5.1 7.9
0-100 10.6 19.7
0-150 25.9 -

They have nothing but praises for the S65's pace and acceleration.

BTW, when reading the article I was really surprised when they said the ESP malfunctioned and the 'electronic sentinel somewhere decided that we'd had our fun and withdrew the ability to select gears manually'. Two problems in one test.

well, the S65 is no trackcar. A lot of weight to handle and its obviously not built to be abused around a track. S65 belong on autobahn

 

[Bruce]

BTW, when reading the article I was really surprised when they said the ESP malfunctioned and the 'electronic sentinel somewhere decided that we'd had our fun and withdrew the ability to select gears manually'. Two problems in one test.

I haven't even read this article yet, but that sucks..

 

[Zafiro]

ok, im I the only one thinking the 0-60 and 0-120 time is slow for the S65? It must be traction problems.

 

[Bruce]

ok, im I the only one thinking the 0-60 and 0-120 time is slow for the S65? It must be traction problems.

No, i agree, especially for that 0-60 time. I seem to recall the S65 was capable of under 5 seconds in that category, but as i've said before, EVO's acceleration times are usually slower than other magazines

Road & Track achieved a 0-60 time of 4.0 for the SL65..which has to be said the SL65 is lighter than the S65, but i still think the S65 can achieve better.

 

[Mr. M]

well, the S65 is no trackcar. A lot of weight to handle and its obviously not built to be abused around a track. S65 belong on autobahn

True, but then again, after all the millions of miles of tests and what not I expected everything to be near perfection in the S, whether it is being tortured in the track or cruising in the autobahn.

 

[cawimmer430]

As I am working on something else right now, I have not read the article yet, but I'll just verbally thank you now for this Bruce.

The W116 is my favorite S-Class ever. I just love everything about that car - and the 6.9 is a true legend. Personally, I'd want a 350SE or a 300SD Turbodiesel (we never got that car in Europe), but chalk me up for a 6.9 anytime (provided gas prices are low).

A good Mercedes-Benz salesman friend of mine had one of these as his daily driver in the late 1970s. He said that the 6.9 was the epitome of a sports sedan during that period. It was faster and handled better than some sports cars of the period. On the downside, it was extremely poor with fuel and when it rained, you had to refrain from doing kickdowns because the rear wheels would loose traction with all that torque and the extremely low gearing of the first gear on the 3-speed automatic transmission.

Beautiful car. Give me that over the S65 AMG for posterity's sake.

Check this out: http://www.caranddriver.com/idealbb/view.asp?topicID=66960&forumID=21&search=1&searchstring=

 

[Bruce]

As I am working on something else right now, I have not read the article yet, but I'll just verbally thank you now for this Bruce.

You're welcome

He said that the 6.9 was the epitome of a sports sedan during that period. It was faster and handled better than some sports cars of the period.

I believe this comment, and it did pretty well for a car this old on the Bedford Autodrome

1:43.20 - Mercedes-Benz 450 SEL 6.9
1:43.50 - Ford Focus MK2 1.6

Check this out: http://www.caranddriver.com/idealbb/view.asp?topicID=66960&forumID=21&search=1&searchstring=

Nice link

 

[bmer]

True, but then again, after all the millions of miles of tests and what not I expected everything to be near perfection in the S, whether it is being tortured in the track or cruising in the autobahn.

Well, a car of this size (A8, 7er, S-Class) can never be an ultimate track car.

 

[Zafiro]

I hate to go off-topic but came cross with this article, EVO testing M5 vs Gallardo. Both M5 and Gallardo have better times. Reason for that is probably becuase they dont have traction problem like the S65. 1000nm is twice as much as the M5, if the S65 had better grip it would do better 0-xxx times.
I think S65 is better for rolling starts than starts from standstill.

http://img424.imageshack.us/my.php?image=4zh1.jpg

But I also see the times for both m5 and Gallardo are lower than ususally.

 

[dOmInIX]

In the article they said later that day ESP system on S65 broke down...

 

[cawimmer430]

Overall good review, but EVO just smells of "extreme sports" bias.

 

[Zafiro]

Overall good review, but EVO just smells of "extreme sports" bias.

nothing wrong with that, I like it. Not every carmag can be like AMS or Autobild

 

[cawimmer430]

nothing wrong with that, I like it. Not every carmag can be like AMS or Autobild

Auto Motor und Sport and Autobild are probably some of the least sports biased magazines. AMS pretty much rates cars on what they were designed to do - except sports cars. AMS is famous for complaining about the ride comfort of a Ferrari of BMW M3.