Mclaren Mercedes SLR vs Carrera GT

[r1ckst4]

Which one out of the two do u think is a better car? not just by the look but by everything.

i'd say the porsche Carrera GT coz its faster, it's pretty light too... and damn it looks good!

[Spastik_Roach]

No competition. Its the Carrera, it wouldn't matter if it had a 1.6 litre diesel in it, those looks are astonishing. Full stop.

[cuntukimushroom]

id have to say i like the mclaren for looks but the carrera for the ride because i sat in both of them

[r1ckst4]

Originally Posted by cuntukimushroom

id have to say i like the mclaren for looks but the carrera for the ride because i sat in both of them

Damn you!

[bk4uyeah]

the only bad part of the SLR is the automatic trans

[silverhawk]

ive seen both the cars but noone was allowed to sit in them. i did manage to get their bruchures. the CGT costs 1.5 million dhs & the slr is a bit more than that [375,000 euros]. theyre both great cars. the SLR ,as most people think of itas a bigger SL , is amamzing in terms of power & styling plus the doors open in a really nice way. the CGT is great too in terms of interior & exterior styling & power. So for me i guess its a tie.

[Coventrysucks]

You can't really compare them as equals.
If I could have both I would, but if I could only have one, it'd be the SLR.
It is slightly more discreet, more practical and easier to drive and use as an everyday car.

True the Carrera is faster, but unless you do track days every other day, you won't be able to utilise the extra few tenths performance over the SLR.
Also the clutch makes it a dog to drive to the shops, while you're there you can't stop people gawping at you/ dribbling over the car, and when you've finished shopping, there is no where to put it.

Also the SLR sounds fantastic.

[Gnafu the Great]

Definitely the Porsche; it looks better, it's faster, and... IT'S A PORSCHE! I was very disgusted with the SLR McLaren's looks that anything good about it just doesn't redeem it for me .

[Cotterik]

I fell in love with the porsche the first time i saw it. I personally prefer it in red. Its perfect, amazing looks, amazing engine, amazing ride, AMAZING CAR!! The SLR is more like another boring old mercedes with a bad attempt to make it into a supercar, i mean its an automatic for gods sake . I wouldnt even put these in the same class as each other. Anybody who has any knowledge of cars would choose the Carrera GT any day.

[Karrmann]

I say the Mercades.

[Coventrysucks]

Originally Posted by CoTTerik

Anybody who has any knowledge of cars would choose the Carrera GT any day.

Not neccesarily.

It would be nice to be in a position to own either of them, but alas!
The Carrera GT isn't a usable car - its a very expensive trackday special, and good for the occasional hoon, but for general driving it is tricky.

There is a good write up in CAR 502 driving a CGT from Stuttgart > Frankfurt > Cologne > Kassel > Erfurt > Leipzig > Weimar > Nuremberg > Stuttgart, a 31hr drive.

On the unlimited autobahns it is happy to do 200mph, but in the wet "surfboards seem a more attractive option than the 19" Pilot Sport 2 front tyres"

The "sweet spot" is 125mph - 175mph. How many places can you do those speeds, without the risk of a gaol sentance?

It doesn't have practical ground clearance, the car bottoms out over bad high speed bumps, and the clutch is useless at low speeds, especially stop-start traffic. You have to leave the engine at idle and let the torque get the car moving, drop the clutch at 5000rpm, but only if the road is clear, or let the clutch slip at 3000rpm, which will reduce the life significantly, and will probably cost a few limbs to replace.

On a cold/ wet day, the brakes don't work, as they require heat. (Also a lot of GT2 owners have had problems with their PCCB cracking)

The CGT isn't intended as an every day car, but what is the point of spending £330,000 if you hardly ever get to use it?

I don't dislike the CGT, in fact I think it is the best of the current supercars, but I feel that I would get more out of an SLR.

And the SLR sounds fantastic.

Also - regarding the looks of the SLR. I was unsure about the looks initially. In thre pictures I thought that the bonnet was a bit too long, and the tail looked a bit too chunky. Then I saw one in the flesh, up close and personal, not from several feet away behind a cordon. It looks gorgeous.

[Sweeney921]

the carrera, cuz the SLR doesnt have the looks, and it's also very heavy compared to the carrera.

[SL500]

first of all,this is a repost,done it for 100 times

okay,it seems that i must add something here,the top speed of SLR and CGT are the SAME,both 334 km/h,carrera gt isnt FASTER,for example enzo is FASTER than SLR,because its top speed is 350 km/h
and even SLR is QUICKER than CGT,yes quicker,in accelerations
i read them in many car magazines which had tested them
okay,slr is quicker just because it has a 5 speed automatic transmission(be sure it can shift gears faster than you),
the looking of cars depend on the taste,and tastes are different,i personally think slr isnt bueatiful and isnt ugly,anyway my vote goes to SLR in looking.(because it looks like devil! i think it looks so awesome)
in wieght discussion,carrera gt wins,its way lighter than slr,but slr is solid and so safe
interior:slr wins easily,its a luxury super sport,and has the best luxury interior between its rivals(but sporty interior,cgt wins)
engine:i prefer the slr engine,a true v8 engine indeed,awesome sound and powerful,but im not saying that carrera gt's engine is crap,everyone knows that porsche is one of the oldest supercar and supersports car maker.
and price:slr wins again,its cheaper than cgt
overall(winner):neither! just kidding,for above reasons and just because im a huge benz fan id pick the slr

[Sweeney921]

well, due to obvious reasons, the SLR isn't as nimble as the carrera. If i must explain, it has to do with MOMENTUM, so since the carrera weighs less, it is easier for it to change directions, so it does them faster and with less roll. I'de rather have a natural V10 over a supercharged V8, since the engine will last longer (yes, i know the SLR is more powerful by 12hp). I also would prefer the carrera over the SLR because Porsche has WAYYYYY more experience in motorsport, so its design is coming from far more experienced designers.

and for SL500: the SLR actually is faster than the carrera by just 2mph. HOWEVER, the carrera wins in 0-60 by .1 seconds. these facts come straight out of ROAD&TRACK July 2004

that is enough for me to take the carrera over the SLR, and on top of it all, the carrera looks better (just my opinion).

[Coventrysucks]

Originally Posted by Sweeney921

I'de rather have a natural V10 over a supercharged V8, since the engine will last longer

So a highly specialised, high revving V10, initially designed for racing, will last longer than a supercharged Mercedes V8.
How do you figure that one?
Either way, neither engine is going to last a huge ammount of time without a fair bit of fettling from time to time.
Correctly serviced though, they should last for long while.

Originally Posted by Sweeney921

I also would prefer the carrera over the SLR because Porsche has WAYYYYY more experience in motorsport, so its design is coming from far more experienced designers.

I disagree there, Porsche is small fry next to Mercedes.

In the first EVER motor race in 1894, Mercedes cars were placed from 1st to 4th.
They have been at the sharp end of motor sports ever since.

Porsche only came along in 1948, 54 years after mercedes got started.
True, they have been successful, but they don't have more experience.

They tend to be limited to sports cars, GT, the odd bit of rallying and a small smattering of F1 and Indy cars.

Mercedes have done pretty much everything I think, sports cars, GT, Touring cars, F1 (since the 1930s) IRL, Truck racing (as in artic' trucks). I can't think of a rally car off the top of my head, but I am sure they have done.