McLaren Mercedes SLR vs BMW M6

Picture of BMW M6
Picture of McLaren Mercedes SLR
Category BMW M6McLaren Mercedes SLR
Engine layout 5.0 l V105.4 l V8
Max power (ps / bhp) 507 / 500626 / 617
Max torque (Nm / lb-ft) 520 / 384780 / 575
Curb weight (kg / lb) 1765 / 38911735 / 3825
Power / tonne (ps / bhp) 287 / 283361 / 356
Average price €114,000€441,000

Acceleration

Speed & distance BMW M6McLaren Mercedes SLR
0 - 50 kph 1.9 s1.8 s
0 - 100 kph 4.2 s3.7 s
0 - 160 kph 8.7 s7.6 s
0 - 200 kph 12.8 s10.7 s
0 - 250 kph 22.4 s18.6 s
0 - 300 kph 51.1 s30.6 s
Est. 200 - 300 kph 37.7 s22.6 s
0 - 60 mph 4.1 s3.5 s
0 - 100 mph 8.7 s7.4 s
0 - 150 mph 19.5 s16.9 s
Est. 1/8 mile 8.7 s @ 98.2 mph8.0 s @ 104.4 mph
1/4 mile 12.4 s @ 121.2 mph11.5 s @ 126.1 mph

General performance

Category BMW M6McLaren Mercedes SLR
Top speed 305 kph (190 mph)334 kph (208 mph)
Est. max acceleration 0.67 g (7 m/s²)0.80 g (8 m/s²)
100 kph - 0 34 m (110 ft)35 m (114 ft)
200 kph - 0 140 m (460 ft)138 m (452 ft)

Summary

Category BMW M6McLaren Mercedes SLR
Track Performance 273300
Straight line speed 12551692
Total 15271992

Verdict

SLR is the fastest by considerable margin.

This comparison has been viewed 143 times.

User avatar
User avatar

hostboy  2m ago

I stand corrected, the SL55 DOES NOT match with the SLR to 300kph. I was informed several times that it was a mistake in AMuS's writing. That "32.5s" print was actually supposed to read 52.5s. And the M6 is just about five seconds away from the SL65 to 300kph.

From what I recall, the SL65 got 31s to 300kph, okay same with the SLR. The SL65 clearly has better aerodynamics than the SLR.

Car & Driver got 12.4 sec @ 121 mph in the M6, 11.6 sec @ 125 mph in the SLR, and 11.9 sec @ 123 mph in the SL65. That's a 0.8s gap along with a 4mph gap between M6 and SLR, and also a 0.5s/2mph gap between M6 and SL65. In addition, the M6 sprinted to 60 mph in 4.1s versus the SLR's 3.6s and the SL65's 3.8s.

C&D used rollout in their testing procedures like usual. They didn't specify how long their 1-foot rollouts took, but I will assume 0.2 sec for the SLR because of its low-end torque curve (and 575 lb-ft of supercharged V8 torque!!) and semi-optimistic weight distribution (51:49), and 0.3 sec for the M6 because of its higher-revving naturally-aspirated V10 and nose-heavy 54:46 weight distribution (worse than its M5 "sibling" which is 50:50). I will also add 0.3s for the SL65, not because of the weight distribution but because it's not as dynamically focused.

4.1+0.3 = 4.4 for BMW E63 M6
3.6+0.2 = 3.8 for Mercedes-McLaren C199 SLR
3.8+0.3 = 4.1 for Mercedes-AMG R230 SL65

4.4/0.9656 = 4.5 for M6
3.8/0.9324 = 4.1 for SLR
4.1/0.9324 = 4.4 for SL65

I used the best case scenario imperial-to-metric translation for the BMW solely because of closer gear ratios from the 7-speed sequential "manual" and quicker shifting times, whereas with the Mercedes twins I only used the worst because of the sluggish 5-speed auto (all three cars reach around 45 mph in first gear, by the way). Hence the bigger gap in the SLR and the SL65.

The only thing that holds this particular comparison back from being "direct" is obviously the starting price point. I was actually very surprised to see an SLR Roadster last week, but I have realized that the SLR isn't much more of a supercar than the M6.

Afterall, the SLR is based on the SL500 (not the SL55, because it hardly had anything to do with AMG other than the powertrain) with a much more cosmetic design, much sexier styling, and much better handling. The same exact thing can be said about the M6 being based on the 645i, but the M6 used a completely different engine.

Like I said, the SL55, SL600, SL65 really are not competitors to the M6. Back then, AMG wasn't the track- or sport-focused division like it is now. Nowadays it can rival M, but the SL55, SL600 and SL65 (and their "bigger" CL equivalents) were much more comparable dynamically to the Alpina B6 and Bentley Continental GT.

 

User avatar

hostboy wants to add some more  2m ago

211mph top speed for M6 (340kph) vs 208mph for SLR (334kph)

The BMW was underrated for insurance reasons. The factory 500hp rating is incorrect. With its factory compression ratio of 12.0:1 and a bore and stroke of 92mm x 75.2mm, it was producing more like 530rwhp@8000rpm (or 590chp). Naturally aspirated though.

The Mercedes was not underrated (unlike most other Benzes), and it had much bulkier aero (and for a supposed "sports car", frontal area). It had a compression ratio of only 8.8:1, but it had a boost pressure of 0.9bar (13psi), allowing it to make as much as 560rwhp@6500rpm (that's 620chp).

In reality the two cars are only 30bhp apart.

///M6
0-100kph in 4.5s and vmax 340kph = 0-200kph in 13.2s and 0-300kph in 38.9s
SLR McLaren
0-100kph in 4.1s and vmax 334kph = 0-200kph in 12.3s and 0-300kph in 36.8s
SL65 /////AMG
0-100kph in 4.4s and vmax 348kph = 0-200kph in 12.6s and 0-300kph in 36.3s

The SLR and SL65 are equally fast aside from the aero allowing to the SL65 to reach a higher top speed. The M6 is barely slower. And yes these are results on normal asphalt (but with prepped tires), not downhill like how some "crazy" mags test them.


User avatar

Corvolet3  2m ago

See, that's one of the main reasons I research my stats myself instead of relying on every single source I find or every acceleration video on YouTube. Mistakes are prone to happen, even to the best of us. And that way you can be easier to call a source out for being too slow or too fast


User avatar

hostboy  2m ago @hostboy wants to add some more

I forgot to menton that if you look at the SL65 AMG it had a compression ratio of 9.0:1, which is higher than that of the SLR McLaren, but only "just" so. 1.5bar of boost pressure and a bore and stroke of 82.6x93(mm) all enable it to produce 660hp@5800rpm.

660hp is crankshaft power. Technically it's 515rwhp (rounded to the nearest 5) but the "traditional" 5-speed auto isn't as efficient as the one in either its SLR sibling (Speedshift baby!!) or especially the one in the M6 (which is a sequential manual).

The SL65 produces even less power than the M6 to the wheels, but at least it has all the torque to make up for its "lost" power. The SL65 Black Series makes 590rwhp, but only 665hp (rounded to the nearest 5) @ the same 5800rpm, but the Black Series also makes 735hp @ 6425rpm.


User avatar

hostboy  3m ago

The results are much closer than I expected! 0-150mph times only 2.6s apart?! That's insane for a supposed "non-supercar" BMW of 2005!

SL65 AMG was in the 18.x range if I recall correctly, the SL55/600, and CL-anything could absolutely not touch the M6. The dynamics of the M6 were closer to those of the SLR's; SL and CL AMGs were more like Alpina B6.


User avatar

hostboy  8m ago

The M6 has a higher top speed though, 211 mph delimited. But to be fair, the SL600 and the SL65 AMG both have a higher top speed than the SLR as well.

The SL55 and the SLR pretty much match well in 0-186(mph) timing and in top speed.


User avatar

SILVANUS  12y ago

MCLAREN SLR IS THE BEST CAR IN THE WORLD