If your parents dropped you on your head, I would understand why you asked this question. To answer this is making me, as well as everybody else reading this stupider. So lets get stupider. clk320 0-60 7.5 seconds g35c 6mt 0-60 5.5 seconds. Do you see how this made us stupider. Now if you would have said a clk55, that would have been a different story.

Life is to short to argue on the Internet!

 

I felt tha same but held it in.... LMAO...

 

Interestingly enough, I saw a CLK320 on the NJ turnpike today. The guy thought he was the king of the road, until I drove up to him on my coupe

 

G35 COUPE TO ME IS LIKE SEEING DOUBLE DD'S, GOD DAMN IT'S GORGEOUS. I APOLOGIZE FOR BEING SO GRAPHIC.

IN-FACT SOME ONE WAS DRIVING A 2002 CLK CONVERTABLE AND PULL UP ALONG SIDE ME AND WAS CHECKING OUT MY G. FOR SOME REASON HE TAKES MORE INTEREST IN OUR G'S.

LET SEE, G'S GOT "SUPER CAR LOOKS, MORE POWER AND ALSO 20G'S LEFT IN THE POCKET. PUT ME DOWN FOR A G PLEASE.

4 PCS AERO KIT, SAT RADIO, PREMIUM PACKAGE, 18" PERFORMANCE PACKAGE.

 

was I justified with my response? Any person should know a heavier car with 60 less hp is going to be slower, right?

Life is to short to argue on the Internet!

 

zorro (member)
07/17/03 06:54 PM

Interestingly enough, I saw a CLK320 on the NJ turnpike today. The guy thought he was the king of the road, until I drove up to him on my coupe
__________________________________________________ _

Hahahahahahaha, that was great!

Ivry 6mt sed
Injen CAI, 22" resonator
8X18 Enkei RPM2 45mm
Kumho MX 245/40
clear corners

 

dgussin1 ()
07/17/03 10:58 PM

was I justified with my response? Any person should know a heavier car with 60 less hp is going to be slower, right?
__________________________________________________ _

If you would have replied with a simple, "Huh, CLK 7.5sec, G35c 5.5sec.

A simple correction was justified, it's not like he was staking a false claim that the CLK was faster. And their was nothing to indicate it wasn't a innocent request. And it's not like theirs been a rash of CLK claims of superiority to grate on you. Hence your reply was not justified.

Ivry 6mt sed
Injen CAI, 22" resonator
8X18 Enkei RPM2 45mm
Kumho MX 245/40
clear corners

 

the clk does 0-60 in 7.5!!! what a joke, a v6 accord can spank it.

 

A few comments on this proposed comparison . . .

1) G35sc v. CLK320: This may be a justified comparison if you take into account an automatic G35. Like it or not folks, they are competitors in the "near luxury" coupe category. Read the car mags and you'll see. I drove the automatic G and although its still quicker than the CLK . . .the parallels between them are plausible. At that point, the G beats the CLK on value, looks, and handling. The CLK, however, is more luxurioius and prestigious.

2) G35sc (auto) v. CLK500: These 2 cars cannot be compared. The CLK 500 has its number in every department with exception to looks. The 500 motor kicks *** . . .the performance is awesome . . .and it even handles well.

3) G35 6MT v. CLK500: Tough comparison: I went for the G. I used to have a CLK430 and that car kicked ***. period. Its only achilles heel was it was heavy so it was not a nimble handler although it was capable once you learned the car's dynamics. The previous generation CLK(430) was great looking, fast and powerful. The looks of the new CLK500, however, has been feminized. The dashboard is ugly and it simply is way too expensive for what you're getting. They're up to almost 60K. The G35 6MT, looks better, is a tick faster, handles better and is about 20K -25K less expensive. Although the G is not as a prestigious as a Benz, it gets more attention because its a great looking car at a great value.

What Infiniti has done with this car should get other car makers to wake up . . .are you listening Benz and BMW?

 

hmmmm I cant see how the G AT and CLK500 cant be compared and the G MT and CLK500 are a tough comparison. They are exacty same except for the tranny, and the at is what? .5 slower in 0-60 ?

my 2c

 

"Powertrains and Performance:
A choice of V6 (3.2-liters, 215 horsepower) or V8 power (5.0-liters, 302 horsepower) is offered to the CLK fancier. According to Mercedes, the CLK500 will hit 60 mph in just 5.7 seconds, and the CLK320 will hit that same velocity in 7.4 seconds. A five-speed automatic gearbox with TouchShift automanual control is the lone transmission fitted to the CLK."

thats from edmunds.com, looks to me like the clk500 is a tad faster than the G at. And thats with a big V8.

 

depends on where you are getting your data . . .

From some sources the G35sc 6MT does 0-60 in 5.5 sec, edging the Benz . . .and likewise some sources say the CLK500 does 0-60 in 6.1 sec.

As to the 6MT vs. 5AT comparison . . . .the manual adds a totally dimension to the car that makes it different in essence to the CLKs. That's why if you are going to compare the G to the CLK, you have to compare the automatic version of the G.

 

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr>

That's why if you are going to compare the G to the CLK, you have to compare the automatic version of the G.

<hr></blockquote>
OR you have to recognize that a 6 speed manual is available in the G35, whereas Mercedes does not offer a manual transmission in any of it's vehicles. Some (myself included) would consider that in itself a major selling point...

2003 G35 Coupe 6MT Leather
Premium, Aero
"There is no spoon"