z3dz (December 31, 1969 at 6:59 pm)

2million dollars for nothing. that good

FioranoJC (December 31, 1969 at 6:59 pm)

Lesson:In Dubai everything can happen. I didn't believed that untill i've been there. It's insane.

hogger129 (December 31, 1969 at 6:59 pm)

Well the Ferrari is a 6.0-liter V12. With 4 more cylinders and higher displacement than the 5.4 V8 in the SLR engine. Then again you have to remember the times from the Mercedes will be a little faster if the engine is in a lighter chassis such as the SLK one here. The only reason I think the Ferrari could take it is because he was only hitting 6k before shifting. That car can do 8500. It would have been much closer had the Enzo been trying.

fx76 (December 31, 1969 at 6:59 pm)

If you look at the performance figures for the Enzo and the SLR i think there pretty much even 0-60 both around 3 sec's and 0-100 is around 7.5 and both will hit over 200mph. But it wouldnt suprise me if the merc engine has more torque which is more important then hp when it comes to a rolling start. your right as well about the ferrari beating it on a track and strip. Nice cars thou lol, beats my focus.

bangonator (December 31, 1969 at 6:59 pm)

But you are presuming that the merc is jus a standard engine, who knows he couldof moded the exhaust or put a different pully on the charger who knows how much power he is pulling, i dont see it being stated that it waas a standard merc. Plus ya the ferrari was short shifting but the merc was killing him from the word go by more then 2000 rpms worth. It was c u ferrari from the word go!!!

bangonator (December 31, 1969 at 6:59 pm)

Who said anything about the merc engine being stock?? For all we know it could be making over 700 hp plus or more quite easily!!!

hogger129 (December 31, 1969 at 6:59 pm)

And I believe it's actually called the C63 AMG not the C65. Still though, the C63 AMG is a damn sweet car. I also think it would have been a better race to pit the Enzo against like a Mercedes CLK AMG. The SLR is kind of a different type of exotic car.

hogger129 (December 31, 1969 at 6:59 pm)

**Ahh, sorry I misread the article. It says 2003 models had 616hp. And the others were bumped up to 626. You're right. But it says maximum output is at 6500 rpm so you would think it couldn't hit more than like 7k rpm. Where the Ferrari could do 8500. Compared to other models, the SLR McLaren isn't that much faster than like the Porsche Carrera GT. Even the Murceilago beat it. I would give it to the Ferrari on the track and on the strip.

hogger129 (December 31, 1969 at 6:59 pm)

*Btw, it's 651hp to be exact on the Enzo. 6.0-liter V12, which should out-torque the 5.4-liter V8 on the Mercedes. The Enzo has a higher redline. The SLR actually makes 617hp. It is supercharged, which helps a little. Stats show that the SLR can do 0-60 in 3.8 seconds. In an SLK body, probably even less. But idk. I still think if the Ferrari guy was trying, he would have won, but not by alot. It would have been extremely close.

hogger129 (December 31, 1969 at 6:59 pm)

The SLR engine is in an SLK though, so the body is smaller and lighter than the SLR. But you're right. This guy in the Ferrari was shortshifting. I know that car will hit 8500 rpm too. It redlines at 8200 rpm. What does the SLR engine redline at? Most likely less. I think those new C65 AMGs are cool.