motor

lushann · 05-10-2004, 11:04 AM

Last year, I went for the worldwide launch of the SLR in Cape Town, South Africa. I was amazed.
The launch was made more popular by the fact that some moron mistakely crashed his 1990 golf into one of the 8 cars that were brought down. There were 7 silver and one black SLR - he crashed into the black one.

A few days ago, I saw the Enzo Ferrari - it was truly unbelievable.

After having seen both these cars, I can easily say that the SLR cannot compare to the Enzo. The Enzo will beat it hands down in every department.

I thought that I should bring this up because some people think that the SLR is the best car ever created.

RC45 · 05-10-2004, 11:26 AM

UHm - there is not a single regular on the site that would make that claim.

The claim that the SLR is a better performer than the Enzo cannot be made - and we all know that...

yg60m · 05-10-2004, 11:32 AM

They are not really in the same league and don't have the same target

I easily believe you mate and the Enzo is growing more and more in my heart. First, i was disppointed by its look but i am convinced now .

Drive4Ever · 05-10-2004, 11:39 AM

SLR i think is more towards the luxury and enzo is more towards racing

so there are almost no comparsion. SLR can fit 2 golf bags in there, y u need that if its a race car :roll:

jorge · 05-10-2004, 12:59 PM

They are both supercars, but very different ones

Toronto · 05-10-2004, 02:52 PM

I would rather have the SLR in my driveway then the Enzo, just because the enzo is such a wanna be, it wants to be the best, it wants to be the dream car of everyone, but my dream car is the CGT, and SLR wouldn't be a bad daily driver

Drogear · 05-10-2004, 02:54 PM

The Enzo is so much more of a car! The SLR is just a really fast SL in a new body. It is really heavy and not worth the money!

SPEEDKILLAR · 05-10-2004, 03:07 PM

SLR rulez that poor Enzo :x

And I claim that!!!

Erez · 05-10-2004, 07:07 PM

the SLR isn't even close to the enzo in any way! 8) the SLR is just an overpriced CL.. a bit faster.. but nothing more.. looks kinda funny IMO.. like an unfinished concept... and WTF is up with MB.. that much weight IS NOT the way to build a supercar.. for the SL and the CL it ok.. cause you buy them for the lux and sporty.. but on the SLR!? who the fuck will use that as a daily?! MB need to take a good look on their cars.. WAY too much weight... WAY TOO MUCH! would buy the SLR in a million years...

Chaos in 1983! · 05-11-2004, 02:14 AM

just because the enzo is such a wanna be

how is the enzo a WANNA BE?...it's all it was meant to be and even more!...Enzo is THE modern supercar, please don't bring up the McLaren, we all know the answer to that...but that matter aside, the enzo doesn't want to be anything else that it already is....the SLR is just a rebodied SL...I'm sure the SL65 is faster than the SLR...

nejcdolinsek · 05-11-2004, 02:15 AM

I agree. The Enzo is a ultra-fast racing car capable of driving on roads, whle the SLR is an ultra-fast GT.

But in any case, I'd take the Enzo in a heartbeat!!!!

PATo355 · 05-11-2004, 02:49 AM

Bah , you cant beat the Ferrari passion , Mercs and Bmw and all that cars are made with engienering , just that , no passion for the cars , just sell cars and numbers , Ferrari is just about passion , making the best of the best with love , its not just a material thing , it has a magic . So please dont even compare the McLaren ( Merc or Bmw based ) with the Enzo ... the Enzo is in another league , up with the 288gto , f40 . f50 ... up there with the legends , not with just another ultra fast car .

1zippo1 · 05-11-2004, 03:00 AM

Originally Posted by Chaos in 1983!

just because the enzo is such a wanna be

how is the enzo a WANNA BE?...it's all it was meant to be and even more!...Enzo is THE modern supercar, please don't bring up the McLaren, we all know the answer to that...but that matter aside, the enzo doesn't want to be anything else that it already is....the SLR is just a rebodied SL...I'm sure the SL65 is faster than the SLR...

Couldn't resist to join in with the discussion

The SLR is indeed quite a different car then the Enzo. They're both supercars, but the Enzo is a beast that has racetrack written all over it. It is made to go as fast as possible, in a straight line and in corners. Some trackday cars like the Radical or Palmer Jag will screw it on a curvy track. But on some other tracks with long straights, the enzo will probably blast those away. The point I'm trying to make, the Enzo is about as fast as you can get, so a true supercar and certainly a more pure supercar as the SLR.
The SLR is ment to be a cruiser, a very fast one for sure, but still a cruiser. That's why it has an automatique gearbox. You see it doesn't hurt sales, so Mercedes Benz didn't make such a bad move with the SLR. They'll probably make a lot more money out of it then ferrari did with the enzo.

About your SL65 vs SLR claim: don't think that's correct. The SLR may be heavy for a supercar, but it's still a lot lighter then an SL.
I also think (not 100% sure), that the SLR is also quite different from setup then the SL. The engine of the SLR is also in the front, but much more in the middle of the car then with the SL. The SL65 sure is impressive, certainly the torque, but I don't think it's as fast as the SLR.

Some performance figures :
SLR:626hp / 575 lb-ft = 780NM / 3.8 0-60mph / 207 mph top speed / 1768kg
SL65: 612hp / 738 lb-ft = 1000NM / 4.2 0-60mph / 155mph electronically limited / 1950kg

Oh and by the way, to return to the start of this topic, what seems weird to me. So you saw both the SLR & the Enzo. And by seeing it, you knew the Enzo would be better then the SLR? You can hardly see that no?

sau_mathur · 05-11-2004, 05:46 AM

"The Enzo is probably not as elegant or pratical as the Mclaren f1, or not as exotic as the Pagani Zonda...but it does what Ferrari are good at...it goes around racing tracks very very fast." ....Tiff Needell

RC45 · 05-11-2004, 06:04 AM

"The opposite of a correct statement is a false statement. The opposite of a profound truth may well be another profound truth."
- Niels Bohr (1885-1962)