Category: Nissan Forum

Before 1: I think that every G500 is “sufficiently” motorized. It’s not about “stammtischklopperei”, but about academic/technical interest in the topic. Before 2: Like many here, I am a fan of the M113 (in all stages). I know, from my own experience, both the compressor variant (at that time in the SL55 R230), as well as the standard version (also in the SL with 306 hp and in the G with 296 hp). By comparison, I also know one of the predecessors (M119) from a R129 SL 5 00 and also the related M112 from R230 SL 350. Of course, it is clear to me that identical engines in the SL and in the G develop their characteristics completely differently, but in the evaluation of MB engines of this generation(s) my Popo meter is quite trained. Before 3: In the family we have a G500 M113 from 2005 with the 5G automatic. I drive the car myself occasionally and always found that the engine is a top match for the car.Now on the topic: Here in the forum have I read a few weeks ago (doesn’t find the thread anymore) that the G500 with M113 was offered its construction time at the end with a 7G, which would have improved the acceleration value for the regular table print (0-100 km/h) from 10 to 7.x seconds (doesn’t remember the exact value anymore). And in fact the factory specification for the 5G seems to be 9.9 and 10.2 seconds respectively. That surprised me, because the 500 5G feels faster for me: My Popo meter ranks the car about 2 Now I had read in another place rather by chance that the current G500 in the W463A would have a factory specification of 5.9 sec. of 0-100 km/h, but in practice it would take more than 6.x seconds (example). And in fact I had subjectively also taxied the W463A similarly. Another “family car” accelerates in 5.x seconds to 100 km/h and the W463A always came to me “a tick” slower Well… Taking note of all this, I wanted to go back to the topic in the M113-G500. First source was Wikipedia (where else), where the car is given at a flat rate of 7.7 sec. for the sprint (source). In fact, this is more in line with my assessment. But I thought Wikipedia was using the relatively rare 7G as the basis (although there is nothing there). Again Googled and found this page, which documented a 2005 5G G500 on 8.2 sec. (EDIT: MT doesn’t seem to like the link. It’s about the page “automobile-catalog.com”. Still at a loss, I thought: “Help nothing. You have to measure yourself.”. Said, done and landed at every measurement “around the” 8 seconds. Also on YouTube there are videos of G500 M113 5G accelerations, which confirm my suspicion. For example here from a 1998 (!) and here from a 2005er. All of them clearly closer to the 8 second mark, because to the specified almost 10 seconds. h in the 24 years (the video is about a year old) rather have lost power??? I don’t understand why MB missed the M113 5G G500 so “bad” factory specifications, if in practice at that time it should have been more at just under 8 seconds, than at 10. Two seconds are a pretty big difference after all. Or is the fuel so much better, or “more suitable”, for the engine? I can hardly imagine the latter… but there must be some reason. t… (see previous remarks), it’s not a matter of regular table clapping. Anyone who drives a G500 to drive quickly is anyway sitting in the wrong car. I’m more interested in the background of the discrepancy between the specification of the factory and the practice.