Talk:Mercedes-Benz SLR McLaren

message: The Bugatti Veyron has a semi-automatic transmission which can be set to fully automatic, and it can reach its top speed in automatic, so yeah go figure カラム 05:33, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fastest automatic claim 

message: Im changing the "Competitor" part. The Ferrari Enzo seems much more suitable as a comparison than the F430. nihil 02:40, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Ferrari Enzo ahahah way faster than Mclaren, no comparison, hell the new nissan GT-R beats the Mclaren saw it at www.CARversation.com  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.4.115.213 (talk) 05:57, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Competitor 

message: "...most modern cars, have DOHC and 4 valves per cylinder."  Is this true now for most cars, or just most peformance cars? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.218.135.62 (talk) 02:47, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Answer to the second line: I would say that a majority of modern engines use a twin cam 16v setup, however I have no sources to back this up! A quick point about the grammar in this article, does anyone else think it reads in a rather stilted and grammatically awkward fashion? Maybe I am being over sensitive to these things. TiHead 15:17, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Most modern cars 

message: What does this mean, re: the supercharger: "It is mounted between the two engine banks and uses 120bhp at maximum capacity"
: That it enables the engine to generate 120 bhp more than it could without it? Or that its parasitic load on the engine draw 120bhp? It sounds like a heck of a lot if its the latter and I'd have to imagine that it contributes at least twice that back if it were the case.--Hooperbloob 20:17, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  The latter- yes, it is a big one... --TediousFellow 08:47, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  The load on the engine is 120 bhp at the supercharger's top output. This was mentioned on Top Gear, but I'm unsure of the episode so I can't really add  a refrence ~~  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.77.128.175 (talk) 21:46, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Supercharger 

message: I don't think the critism of the car is particulary fair. Also please cite sources. Someone wrote car critics think the car is a waste of money. Which critics? Some applaud it. Also someone else has noted that the car is heavy. All supercars are currently around this weight. Whoever wrote this please fix it up. If it stays without citation for too long I will remove these comments that do not have justification. Hobo 05:07, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't know how to write my own "blog" or anything, but yes this article, I think, is seriously biased and needs to be cleaned up - And I don't even like the SLR. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.87.79.171 (talk) 22:45, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

text: I have rectified the problem above Hobo 07:53, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticism 

message: I like this car, if fact i like all cars, but could you make an addition to this article?
Would it be possible to include any power/torque output graphs to the article or is that a breech of copyright?
many thanks 
wouse101 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.3.201.199 (talk) 15:23, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Addition 

message: There is a discussion of having a list like the one on this one deleted, well I am totally up for it. Well it currently under discussion here. Willirennen 20.51 2 December 2006
:As a result of this and other famous owners list being vandalised on a regular basis (as in people adding random names on the list to make it appear as if they have own one), I will be deleting this list within next week as very typically, people with money are very likely to own one which makes the list rather pointless and it seem to take up much of the page. If anybody objects to this, feel free to discuss it here. Willirennen 17:48, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I agree that the list is probably not appropriate. OhNoitsJamie Talk 17:53, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'm on the fence, but I disagree with unilaterally blanking sections without more discussions first.  Sorry, but I would like to restore it until there is a more global solution, or at least more discussion on here.  It is kind of interesting information, if though a bit tabloidish. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.106.191.100 (talk) 06:09, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  At the very least, any unsourced entries should be removed. I'm still of the opinion that the list is not appropriate here. Maybe if it had a very limited production, but 3500 units is more than many other contemporary supercars (Enzo Ferrari has 400 units, about 300 for Bugatti Veyron, 1500 for Porsche Carrera GT, etc.). OhNoitsJamie Talk 15:27, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Famous owners list 

message: The photo which was uploaded earlier today, claiming to show a 722 parked in CA: are we sure that it's a 722? To me it appears to be a normal SLR coupe with black-painted wheels... —Preceding unsigned comment added by TediousFellow (talk • contribs) 21:37, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Good eyes. It does look like a normal SLR with black wheels. It doesn't look it has the 722 badge on the front fender (looks like the normal McLaren badge there) and I believe the white part of the tial lights are smoked for the 722. Amldgc 00:49, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  new slr 722 parked photo 

message: The GBP/USD exchange rate is around 1 GBP = $1.35, which is probably correct for EUR/USD, but GBP to USD is around 2.00. So either the  GBP currency symbol is incorrect or the car's USD price is $600,000.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Futatorius (talk • contribs) 05:28, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The UK list price is actually £333,000 now. The price has gone up but amazingly they do it on personal contract for just over £6000 per month. I can't find the page on the MB web site with this info on it but I was looking at it last week.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.195.183.162 (talk) 07:36, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Exchange Rate 

message: An anonymous user added the Mustang Saleen as a supercar. As this isn't a well known car and it doesn't have an article, I don't think it makes the article easier to understand. I've removed it.
Calamarain (talk) 11:43, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mustang Saleen 

message: Why is the SLR so heavy? Does anyone know?... would be a nice Info for the article.
merci  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.35.189.102 (talk) 01:10, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Oktoberfest, but they're cutting back so.... No really, supercars each have a different philosophy, the Ferrari F40 was minimalist and spartan of the most basic luxury features, the Bugatti Veyron is, like the SLR, more appointed with creature comforts.  Perhaps the lightweight is desired by some as more tossable while others may find the chassis too jittery or busy and prefer the SLR. Each camp has supporters. I don't think it's out of line with the heft of the Lambo Murcielago, is it? If you had to focus on an explanation and you were selling the thing I'd focus on MB's well earned repute for safety and say the supercar I'd like to be in if I were Eddie Griffith would be the SLR.  Hehe.... Batvette (talk) 12:28, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Weight 

message: MacLaren site (givenas a ref on the main page) indicate a 'Maximmum deceleration of 1.3g, so breaking from 339 km/h to 0 would take at least 7.22 seconds and 332 meters (excluding any reaction time and assuming a constant 'maximum' deceleration of 12.74 ms^-2 (1.3g)
This is way off the claimed 0.82 second to go from 210 mph to 0 !!!! (that would required about 10g of deceleration.. If that were being true, breaking with this car whitout a harness would mean certain death, and with a harness would mean serious injury)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.173.34.18 (talk) 19:18, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Breaking perf 

message: I'm of a mind that the claim which already was tagged with citation needed, "one of the safest and most luxurious in its class" should not even appear here. Mfr's sales brochures are riddled with such tripe, and whether it is true or not really can't be determined. It would have possible relevance in a section with press quotes but it seems strictly POV as it sits.  Any seconds? Batvette (talk) 07:33, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I second. It has no informative value ('one of' is very vague), and is not backed-up by any objective data -> marketing. Shmget (talk) 03:16, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I second as well. Especially given the discussions had over the categorising of cars, using the word supercar. δ²(Talk to me!) 03:29, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

text: Agree, that doesn't follow a neutral point of view. swaq 15:16, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Remove vague claim

message: I'm not exactly sure what the previous discussion involving TG was about, but I have to suggest something. Looking over the Aston DB9, it has a TG section just describing what happened in the race with a few quotes. Unbiased as far as I could see. Can someone please write the same for the SLR? Just providing an outline of what happened (quoting Jezza like on the DB9 page). I would, but can't remember where they started and where they had to end.
A section would be nice, not every car features in such a race! A Prodigy (talk) 20:00, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure if it warrants being in the article. Personally I don't care either way, but other editors might not think it meets notability standards. As far as the race goes, it started in London and ended in Oslo. sdgjake (talk) 20:17, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Top Gear 

message: This section has one reference, which is in German. I'm not 100% up on WP policy, but shouldn't an article on the English WP have English references? Also, some rather odd claims are made . . . No roof or windows? So it's a 700 horsepower go-kart?
And how ca a car with no roof have gullwing doors? Where do they attach?
I really yhink this section should be removed unless it can be made to make sense and/or unless a good reference is found.
74.77.128.175 (talk)  —Preceding undated comment was added at 21:50, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure what the policy is either. Just Google "Mercedes-Benz SLR McLaren Speedster" and you'll find lots of English-language sources now too. Just pick and choose the one you prefer to back this up. They all include pictures too so you'll be able to get an idea of the door construction. The Seventh Taylor (talk) 23:47, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Speedster Section 

message: The image :Image:Mercedes-Benz 300 SLR.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here.  In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page.  Please check
:* That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
:* That this article is linked to from the image description page.
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --05:15, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Image copyright problem with Image:Mercedes-Benz 300 SLR.jpg

message: The last production of Mercedes-Benz SLR is in 2009, not 2008. I have fixed the mistake.  CHJL  Discuss 12:40, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Last production 

message: Gordon Murray, the guy behind the McLaren F1 and the LCC Rocket, headed the development. Shouldn't that be mentioned in the article?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:197:200:AE5B:5DF8:8A06:1C16:DF6F (talk) 18:09, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gordon Murray?

message: I don't know what it means ... "Mid 2015 across the automotive community, the Mercedes-Benz SLR McLaren has been issues at a hyper mid-class report under the MRS."
It sounds like the random text you sometimes find in spam emails.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 185.17.207.46 (talk) 11:20, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Weird sentence in the first paragraph 

message: The SLR was a joint project between Mercedes AMG and McLaren, whereas the SLS AMG was a project of the AMG division of Mercedes alone. There was no McLaren involvement. Mercedes actually said that the SLS was the spiritual successor to the SL Gullwing, not the SLR.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 185.17.207.46 (talk) 11:24, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrong claim about it being succeeded by the SLS AMG 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Mercedes-Benz SLR McLaren. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.mclarenautomotive.com/cars/slr_introduction.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 20:35, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Mercedes-Benz SLR McLaren. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110716092244/http://www.slr-uk.com/range_performance.php?model=slr to http://www.slr-uk.com/range_performance.php?model=slr
*Added  tag to http://www.caranddriver.com/content/download/99780/1294937/version/1/file/CD01_SLR.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131109150352/http://www.datsc.com/blog/2013/08/02/mercedes-benz-slr-mclaren/ to http://www.datsc.com/blog/2013/08/02/mercedes-benz-slr-mclaren/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090721052726/http://www.roadandtrack.com/assets/download/0507_slr_data_panel.pdf to http://www.roadandtrack.com/assets/download/0507_slr_data_panel.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:48, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (January 2018)