With respect to the Porsche vs AMG shootout I offer the following reality check. While the factory figures may confirm the quicker acceleration capabilities of the Porsche, keep in mind that these figures are generated with highly skilled drivers at the helm and represent the best case scenario. In the real world, we are not all expert drivers. I'd be willing to bet that an average driver on the automatic Benz could routinely best an average driver on a manually shifted Porsche. Put another way, in the real world, the tiny acceleration advantage enjoyed by the Porsche can easily be lost in the hands of a less than skilled driver.
Having read the original reviewer's reply I can understand why their E55 may have been faster than a 911 Turbo (albeit in a straight line).
It has been modified!
And it is conceded that (as per another comment) a driver of average skill will do better in an auto.
But lets change the scenario to make it more comparable...
Bring along a Tiptronic 911 Turbo. Chipping it through a respectable tuner will see 0-100km runs below 4 seconds (even faster than one of those overpriced power hungry SL65s).
But more importantly -- even without modifying it -- will an E55 be able to keep up with the 911 Turbo on a reasonably twisty road or track? No?
What about performance in the wet? No?
Comparing oranges with oranges, the 911 Turbo will eat the E55 for breakfast every time.
Would love to know how the chap above deems the E55 "inferior" to the SL, just like that, with no explanation given. Nonsense I say. The E55 is the ultimate all-rounder, as real-world quick as any supercar. And I'm sorry, but comparing dragstrip 0-60mph times and niggling over tenths of a second is the sign of someone who has never driven what they're talking about. Such differences are not differences at all.
The E55 is big, quiet, smooth, automatic, and capable of carrying five adults plus their luggage at extreme speeds. I would suggest that rather than referring to glorified lad's mags like Evo, you peruse a few alternatives such as Autocar which will echo pretty much everything I've said. Motoring is not about screeching away from the traffic lights.
Then again, if all you're looking for in a car is the ability to hit 60mph 0.003 seconds ahead of everyone else, perhaps the Porsche Turbo is ideal. Then again, you might want to try the Mitsubishi FQ...
I am in the market for a new performance/luxury car and have recently test driven the E55 as well as the new (non-turbo) Porsche 911 (997) that has been released.
My priority is performance, although as I will be using it every day, it has to be comfortable as well.
The E55 and 911 cost similar money (the 911 Turbo costs significantly more).
Having driven both, I can make the following objective comments:
1. The Merc is a (slightly) faster "dragster" than the (unblown) 911. But in real life, you won't notice it that much. Both cars have massive, effortless overtaking reserves. Both make a nice (different) sound too.
2. The Merc is far more practical (and luxurious) with much more room (the 911s seats are near useless).
3. Both cars are well engineered with have gadgets/technlogy in abundance.
4. However, the 911 still seems to be the best all round performance car. The 911 sounds, handles and drives like a supercar, whereas the E55 still feels like it's a refined luxury car first and foremost.
No matter what, both are fantastic cars. However, I'm going to postpone my decision until I have a proper look at the new M5 (which I'm hoping may offer the best of both worlds).
Interesting read. I for one, would enjoy all the cars noted above. Of course, each one for a slightly different character.
As I read the beginning post, about an individuals E55 AMG besting his friends 911 turbo, I took it as that one specific example. Fun, between two friends.
All the following data comparisons , and entertaining banter were interesting, but had no merit concerning the context of the starting post. Which, laid no claim to being any type of valid "test".
OK... I have to admit, I enjoyed reading them.