new 500E article I saw this morning

[captruff]

10 Things Gearheads Forgot About The W124 Mercedes-Benz 500E

The Mercedes-Benz 500E is fast even by modern standards, but back in the '90s, it was the ultimate supercar-slaying sleeper.

www.hotcars.com

Jeff

 

[maw1124]

More about these 120 1995 cars…. Interesting the extra liter of displacement bought 4/10th in the 0-60… I wonder about the 60-120.

maw

 

[gsxr]

That's the most errors I've seen in a single article in quite a while. 15-second quarter mile? 5.5 second 0-60 and 5.1 for the E60 (both numbers are wrong)? Poor sentence structure implying only 120 cars received the facelift along with "better stereos"?

Doesn't seem to be any way to comment nor contact the author, although I'd be surprised if he was willing to update the article with correct info.

 

[gsxr]

I wonder about the 60-120.

maw, based on test data from my cars correlated with the *one* 036 test (Magnum Force) that had 120mph data, here are some rough ballparks for 60-120mph:

W124 E500E = 15.0 seconds
W124 E60 = 12.5 seconds
W210 E60 = 12.0 seconds
W211 E63 AMG, for reference: 9.5 seconds

Numbers don't tell the whole story of course, the biggest difference behind the wheel is the part-throttle mid-range torque. It seems even more going from 5.0-->6.0 than from 4.2-->5.0. For reference, the rated torques for M119 4.2/5.0/6.0 are, rounded up, 300/350/430.

 

[maw1124]

maw, based on test data from my cars correlated with the *one* 036 test (Magnum Force) that had 120mph data, here are some rough ballparks for 60-120mph:

W124 E500E = 15.0 seconds
W124 E60 = 12.5 seconds
W210 E60 = 12.0 seconds
W211 E63 AMG, for reference: 9.5 seconds

Numbers don't tell the whole story of course, the biggest difference behind the wheel is the part-throttle mid-range torque. It seems even more going from 5.0-->6.0 than from 4.2-->5.0. For reference, the rated torques for 4.2/5.0/6.0 are, rounded up, 300/350/430.

Yes, that part… no replacement for displacement.

You evidently caught my sarcasm about the ‘95 cars and the speed differences… I didn’t mention the bad torque number for 6.0L, poor sentence structure or spelling errors… … gotta give the proletariat a break sometimes.

I call for an @gsxr Punch List of article inaccuracies!

Separately, I caught an RSQ8 clowning on an open stretch of summer highway in the S55… had I been thinking I would have checked the 60-120 times. Needless to say, he was surprised at this big old sedan pushing him faster than he was comfortable going.

maw

 

[036]

So 500E goes 60-120 same time as quarter mile- 15 seconds....this is slow

 

[TerryA]

So 500E goes 60-120 same time as quarter mile- 15 seconds....this is slow

I read somewhere that the 1/4 mile time was 14.1 NOT 15.0

lol

 

[036]

14.8-15.
14 ist quite optimistic.

 

[gsxr]

In the 1/4 mile, assuming no wheelspin or ASR engagement, a stock E500E will run low 14's all day long near sea level in cool ambient temps (~70°F), with no passengers or cargo. With the fuel tank on reserve and spare tire removed they can run high 13's. I have stacks of timeslips to prove it, across multiple different 036's.

The USA-spec 034 is capable of running high 14's despite 2.24 gears, the Euro-spec will be quicker (lower ET, same MPH) due to the 2.65 gearing.

 

[szvook]

I’ve ran low 14’s in warm/hot weather and that’s with a spare tire as well as large subwoofer in the trunk. And when I was up against Justin in his 1993 500E (with his car off nitrous), I beat him by a car length. In cool weather (55-60°F), I ran 13.9 and 13.8. All runs were with 245 front tires and 275 rear tires on 17” wheels, with a 1/4 full fuel tank. I never broke 100 mph on any of my runs. All runs were at the Fontana Raceway with an elevation of 1558 feet above sea level.