AMG Compressor vs STi - Page 2
+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 33

This is a discussion on AMG Compressor vs STi within the Comparison: WRX vs World forums, part of the Community - Meet other Enthusiasts category; Originally posted by smokey Well, if this car does mid 13s in the 1/4 mile and its that easy just ...

  1. #16
    Registered User SGOSWRX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,059
    Originally posted by smokey
    Well, if this car does mid 13s in the 1/4 mile and its that easy just to punch the gas and hit those times...somethings not quite right with the outcome of this race (not calling BS). The dude must have made a slight mistake or something. I'd say if he can hit mid 13s and since its an auto, its going to be more consistent..and the STI in SGOSWRX's sig is hitting low 13s...and he gave the Benz a "1/2 car to 3/4 car lead before I launched" ...know what I mean?

    On the street, things like reaction time means everything. Typically, something like this would lead to a loss IMO. You can't let people launch on you like that man! Also, you typically do this on the street, even when you race 'Vettes and stuff? I don't understand how you do it...give similar cars the jump and then reel them in.

    Yes, I know its a mistake to wait leaving the line. I only do it when I'm not 100% sure the other car is racing. I hate lookind stupid by revving to 5k and dropping the clutch when the other car doesn't even race.

    So I usually rev to about 3-3.5k and wait. As soon as I see that the other car is going for it. I floor the gas and drop the clutch. I do it pretty fast and it usually only cost me about a 1/2 car leaving the line. I can usually make that up by the top of 1st gear.

    If by chance a Vette or 03 Cobra lines up next to me and I know we are going to race for sure. I'm dumping the clutch at 5k as soon as I see the green light.

  2. Remove Advertisements
    ClubWRX.net
    Advertisements
     

  3. #17
    Registered User SGOSWRX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,059
    Originally posted by Carl AMG
    None of the AMG's say Kompressor on the back; it would only be on the sides of the front fenders. Many of the non-AMG cars with a supercharged engine say Kompressor on the back but don't mistake them for a real AMG. Hopefully, we didn't have a C230K coupe posing with AMG badges. The following link may help you identify the car and learn more about AMG:

    http://www.mbusa.com/amg/index.jsp

    This car had the badge AMG and kompressor on the back. That is for sure. I don't know much about AMG's but this car definately had both badges on the car.

    Is it possible they brought it over from Europe. In the area of S.Florida where I live we have a large German population. The neighborhood were I see the car coming from, the house start at $400,000 and up. So I'm sure they have tons of cash.

    I see the car all the time. I'll try to get a picture of the back of it. They will probably think I'm crazy. I'll also make sure I'm not seeing things. I'm sure it had both the AMG and the Kompressor on the back. Those are the only 2 things I remember seeing on the car.
    Last edited by SGOSWRX; 12-12-2003 at 07:37 AM.

  4. #18
    Registered User Mabf355's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Suburban Philadelphia
    Posts
    282
    The CLK55 does not use the Kompressor motor. The Kompressors are strictly supercharged, while the CLK55 is not (including the new one). I know they are very easy to drive fast, especially with all that technology inside their transmissions. All they have to do is push a button and stomp on it. There is no skill involved. I just know this since my cousin is the marketing director for Mercedes Benz USA. Until the SL55 came out I always chose BMW over Benz, just because I like sportier cars. But BMW and Mercedes have changed sides as of late. BMW, since the intro of the new 7 Series have gone more towards the luxury side with their cars, while Mercedes has opened the door to performance, and continues to plan for more power in the future (i.e. SL65 and CL65, and the unreal SLR). Other than the 55's, BMW M still wins my vote mostly because of the manual trans.

    Race one from a roll your toast, but off the line, an STi or heavily modded WRX would definately give them trouble. Just think of it this way, the best drivers in the world along with the biggest car enthusiasts in the world, aren't driving a car with just under 500hp with an auto trans.
    WRX - It's not a rocket. It's a guided missile.

  5. #19
    Registered User FrankW's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Diamond Bar CA
    Posts
    358
    Originally posted by SGOSWRX
    This car had the badge AMG and kompressor on the back. That is for sure. I don't know much about AMG's but this car definately had both badges on the car.

    Is it possible they brought it over from Europe. In the area of S.Florida where I live we have a large German population. The neighborhood were I see the car coming from, the house start at $400,000 and up. So I'm sure they have tons of cash.

    I see the car all the time. I'll try to get a picture of the back of it. They will probably think I'm crazy. I'll also make sure I'm not seeing things. I'm sure it had both the AMG and the Kompressor on the back. Those are the only 2 things I remember seeing on the car.
    well, all the AMGs have their model badge i.e. C32, E55, etc on the left side of the trunk and AMG badge on the right. The kompressor badges are on both side fenders.

    The MBs (in the states) that has the kompressor badge on the right side of the trunk are SLK230 kompressor, C230k sportscoupe (which it's really a hatch back), and the C230k sedan.

    So probably it was one of those three w/ some mods.
    Nothing but good ol' replicas...on my good ol' poser c240

  6. #20
    Registered User silverscooby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Cary, NC
    Posts
    976
    Originally posted by Mabf355
    The CLK55 does not use the Kompressor motor. The Kompressors are strictly supercharged, while the CLK55 is not (including the new one).
    There is no CLK55 that I know of, but I could be wrong.If you mean the CL55, it does in-fact use a supercharger. 5.5L V8 S/C
    2002 WRX 352whp & 341ft-lbs *SOLD*
    12.5@109
    2004 SRT4 449whp & 457ft-lbs
    11.6@125

  7. #21
    Registered User Mabf355's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Suburban Philadelphia
    Posts
    282
    Silver:

    There actually is a CLK55 both in coupe and cabriolet form. It is the only non - supercharged AMG car. I am aware of the CL55, that car shares the 5.5 S/C motor with the SL55 and the S55. The E55, has the same motor with less horsepower. 469 vs. 493. These are all the AMG cars in the USA:
    C32
    SLK32
    E55
    S55
    CL55
    CLK55
    SL55
    ML55 - I am not sure if they still make this POS
    G55 - Another huge waste of money

    I think that is it for the US until the SL and CL 65s come out...
    I might be missing a few however
    WRX - It's not a rocket. It's a guided missile.

  8. #22
    Registered User FrankW's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Diamond Bar CA
    Posts
    358
    Originally posted by Mabf355
    Silver:

    There actually is a CLK55 both in coupe and cabriolet form. It is the only non - supercharged AMG car. I am aware of the CL55, that car shares the 5.5 S/C motor with the SL55 and the S55. The E55, has the same motor with less horsepower. 469 vs. 493. These are all the AMG cars in the USA:
    C32
    SLK32
    E55
    S55
    CL55
    CLK55
    SL55
    ML55 - I am not sure if they still make this POS
    G55 - Another huge waste of money

    I think that is it for the US until the SL and CL 65s come out...
    I might be missing a few however
    good observation, but there's couple correction to be made.

    the first is that new E55 shares the same 5.4 liter supercharged V8 with the SL55, CL55, and S55. The out put of the E55's unit is 467 versus 493 for the SL55/CL55/S55. The CL55/S55's unit has a little more torque than the SL55's unit.

    The new CLK55 uses the same 5.4 liter V8 w/out the supercharger pumping out 360+ hp and around 380 TQ I believe (might be little off on the TQ). There has been CLK55 AMG for the past three years now since the 2001. The 2001-2002 CLK55 AMG was built on the older W208 CLK platform pumping out 349hp and 370 TQ. Most of the CLK55 owner prefer the older car since it's lighter. The new CLK55 isn't really that much a big improvement performance wise over the old other than the obvious new chassi, transmission, and engine. Both old and new CLK55 offered coupe and cabriolet.

    The ML55 was discountinued in 2002. That G55 took it's place. They share the same engine. Different than the 5.4 liter V8 in the AMG sedans. These two suv other than being a AMG torque monster, it's totally waste of money to buy.

    Of course you'll know the C32 and SLK32 shares the same 3.2 liter supercharged V6 puts out 349hp and 332TQ.
    Nothing but good ol' replicas...on my good ol' poser c240

  9. #23
    Registered User silverscooby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Cary, NC
    Posts
    976
    Cool, ya learn something every day!
    2002 WRX 352whp & 341ft-lbs *SOLD*
    12.5@109
    2004 SRT4 449whp & 457ft-lbs
    11.6@125

  10. #24
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    2

    I heart mods

    logically, if you saw Kompressor badging and AMG badging on a 2 door it was probably an SLK 32AMG. My pops had an SLK with the smaller engine and when the top's up (folding hard top) it really does look like a coupe. However, I don't think that there are many AMG models with Kompressors that you would be able to catch. It seems that the STIs biggest advantage against any of those cars would be a good 4wd launch (I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt for your starts), but once the power's actuallly on the ground and the rear tires have hooked up, there's probably not going to be any catching up with the torque of those AMG machines. I don't know the specs of your WRX exactly, but if you were running with a stock SLK32 AMG his curb weight is 3220 and he's pushing 349hp and 332ftlbs (from the mbusa site). Esentially, if you caught up to this guy, it was all your mods because a stock STI shouldn't keep up with an SLK32 and a heavy foot. Nice.

  11. #25
    Registered User hatchy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    California
    Posts
    255
    My wife drives a C32 and I drive a STI. I have to launch the car, she just has to mash the gas. I usually win. :-)

    I make 280whp, she is completely stock.

  12. #26
    Registered User FrankW's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Diamond Bar CA
    Posts
    358
    Originally posted by hatchy
    My wife drives a C32 and I drive a STI. I have to launch the car, she just has to mash the gas. I usually win. :-)

    I make 280whp, she is completely stock.
    so ur's modded? u should go dyno ur C32 I've seen C32 dyno range from 275-290... it's really f-ed up, but it's still a great car to drive...
    Nothing but good ol' replicas...on my good ol' poser c240

  13. #27
    Registered User Carl AMG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Fairfax, VA
    Posts
    262
    Originally posted by FrankW
    so ur's modded? u should go dyno ur C32 I've seen C32 dyno range from 275-290... it's really f-ed up, but it's still a great car to drive...
    Frank...I think your numbers are on California cars on 91 octane. My C32 dyno'd 308 SAE hp at Autothority in March 2003 stock except for the 93 octane setting and K&N air filters. In addition, Norm C32 dyno'd 305 SAE hp six weeks ago or so.

    You shouldn't be concerned about the range of dyno readings. It has more to do with the different dynos, different days, different dyno operators than it does differences in the real power output of the engines.
    2003 Subaru WRX Sedan 5 spd.
    Platinum Silver, TurboXS Stage 3 and lots of other goodies. See profile.

    2002 Mercedes Benz C32 AMG

    2005 Lotus Elise on order

  14. #28
    Registered User hatchy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    California
    Posts
    255
    Yeah, just TBE, intake and fmic. No tuning, all stock ECU, so I am probably 20whp less then what I should be making.

    Carl, is the Elise that is coming in April a 2005? I am seriously thinking about getting one, too.

  15. #29
    Registered User Carl AMG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Fairfax, VA
    Posts
    262
    Originally posted by hatchy

    Carl, is the Elise that is coming in April a 2005? I am seriously thinking about getting one, too.
    Yes, it's the federal version of the Elise and the first ones should start showing up in April, May or June depending on who you listen to. If you're interested I suggest you put down a deposit to get on the list at your dealer. There's a lot of people on the list already and it will only snowball once the car is introduced at the Los Angeles auto show in a few weeks.

    Here's the very recent Autoweek article on the car:

    http://www.autoweek.com/cat_content...._code=05420546
    2003 Subaru WRX Sedan 5 spd.
    Platinum Silver, TurboXS Stage 3 and lots of other goodies. See profile.

    2002 Mercedes Benz C32 AMG

    2005 Lotus Elise on order

  16. #30
    Registered User FrankW's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Diamond Bar CA
    Posts
    358
    Originally posted by Carl AMG
    Frank...I think your numbers are on California cars on 91 octane. My C32 dyno'd 308 SAE hp at Autothority in March 2003 stock except for the 93 octane setting and K&N air filters. In addition, Norm C32 dyno'd 305 SAE hp six weeks ago or so.

    You shouldn't be concerned about the range of dyno readings. It has more to do with the different dynos, different days, different dyno operators than it does differences in the real power output of the engines.
    very true...91 octane CA gas sucks....

    I've seen one gas station has 100 octane fuel for like 5 bucks a gallon...hmm...maybe I should fill that once a while... ....jk
    Nothing but good ol' replicas...on my good ol' poser c240

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Quick Reply Quick Reply

Register Now

Please enter the name by which you would like to log-in and be known on this site.
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.

Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Please enter a valid email address for yourself. We strongly suggest that you stay away from using aol, yahoo, msn, and hotmail accounts. Sometimes the mail server blocks the emails from our server. As a result you will not receive any notifications including the confirmation email.

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.


Posting Permissions

  • You may post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •