Jakpro1

Which basically should be E63 numbers.....4.5.

What are the E55 0-60 numbers from the factory.....wasn't it 4.5 as well.

So we should be close.....of course modding still seems really hard, let's hope when we throw on larger exhaust and ECU it adds that 80 or so horse that AMG was claiming on the orange tester.

What are the 0-60 numbers on the M5 again.

wnycec

M5 - 0-6 in 4.1

http://www.roadandtrack.com/article....rticle_id=3173
Below taken from website above...
Surprisingly, neither car feels as fast as their identical 4.1-second 0-60-mph times indicate, at least in real-world driving. Which is strange, because 4.1 is fast. Really fast. Faster than a Ferrari 612 Scaglietti, every Aston Martin and the Bentley Continental GT. Equally impressive are quarter-mile times of 12.4 sec. (the few cars barely quicker include supercars such as the Ferrari F430, Lamborghini Gallardo and Murciélago and the Ford GT), the lighter — by 265 lb. — M6 showing a higher trap speed of 118.1 mph versus the M5's 115.8. Of note, we used BMW's Formula 1-like launch control mode (which won't be available in the U.S.) to achieve our best times; after you initiate the system, all that's required is to keep your foot to the floor — the computer manages wheelspin. But it's only good for a couple of launches before the clutch heats up and the system automatically shuts down.

Jakpro1

Yeah, we'll have to see what the mags rate the 63's at.

BMW homepage has it at 4.5.

So according to factories.....they are pretty close. AMG has the advantage from the dig with the torque of course.....

Wonder what the heck they are doing on the E63....talking about holding out on us. They know......they know it's much less torque and they are keeping it secret til last minute...to prevent backlash.

JamE55

Wondering what the "K" boys have in store for 6.3...

Jakpro1

Gosh I hope it's a BIG FAT BLOWER!!!

Twin turbs would be really $$$ right??

jangy

Since we can pick and choose which M5 numbers to post, a lower claim for the '05 E55 is actually 4.2. So, does that mean I have the fastest car out there?

Not fair to compare mag to mag tests. They can't launch an E like it needs to get that low number. The M5 is just a punch and go. Hell, even my wife can launch that thing! The trick with those is in the overall drive around a track or from A to B. More involved than the E and can be fun. Let's just be fair.

absent

It should not be a problem to put in it a turbo or supercharger but I'm concerned about durability of the new 7 speed tranny in such case.
Afraid the new found torque would just bust it up ,leaving me with a nice bill to pay.

regor60

don't you have this backwards ?

JamE55

I'm sure that will be taken into consideration as well as everything else if and when they do make a blower for that engine.I'd guesstimate blower since it's probably cheaper than going twin.

Speed Thrills

I would think the new 63 will be rather expensive to mod and not nearly as reliable as the multi stage mods for the 55. I am still very impressed with the price/perfomance I got out of my K1 mod and would think you couldnt touch a gain like that on a 63 car for less than double the price. Time will tell.

jangy

No I don't. Maybe you didn't get my point. The E excels from a dead stop and in a straight line. As such, getting a good launch is CRITICAL!

The M5 is more of a sports car and the actual art of driving comes into play. The launch on them is easier due to less trq and added hardware. You point and shoot. there is no game to it as with the E. Instead, the M5 can put up some pretty nice numbers around a road course IF DRIVEN PROPERLY.

Is that backwards? If you thnk it is, look at ANY and ALL past comparisons between BMW and Mercedes. This is pretty common knowledge.

Air Marshall Eldritch

Jak, the AMG engineer told us the 6.3 was able to put out something like 1100nm of torque, but that they had to de-tune it to around 700 as not to eat the transmission. Now I dont recall the conversion from nm to ft-lbs, but I'm sure many can chime in.

Air Marshall Eldritch

To add to that...

AMG said it was moving in the direction of turbo only, mainly because the hood has to be as low as possible so as not kill so many European pedestrians.

I guess drivers over there are more prone to plowing down people walking in the street, hence the new laws.

Jakpro1

Hey, they just zipped it by us but I think this is the debut of the new high performace 7 G Tronic tranny. Hoping this is the one Cory at Klee was telling me about....should be bullet proof. If not, he said it is going to be already near the limit of what it can handle.....you know what that means.

Modding = roasted tranny after tranny.

Keep fingers crossed.

BoBcanada

But this new 6.3 engine is good to about 600hp so i heard! I guess with straight exhaust, headers some ECU tuning we can see around 540-560 hp?

Grumpy666

This is highly unlikely. The 6.3 liter engine has a static compression ratio of 11.3:1. Without different pistons, boost would be severely limited by high cylinder pressure. Mods for this engine will probably be limited to headers, ECU, or TB. However, the best 1/4-mile time improvement could come from a higher-stall torque converter (somewhere in the 2500-3000 RPM range) - that is, assuming someone offers one for the new 7-speed tranny.

Marcus Frost

I've said it 1000 times - you guys who keep "hoping" for Kleemann to answer your 6.3L prayers are setting yourself up for major disappointment...

I do think F/I is possible at extremely low boost levels (w/ 11.3:1 compression, probably 5psi) - but there are other issues - mainly the drivetrain, that may add cost as well.

No question Kleemann will have something, but at what point does getting 100hp more out of the 6.3 really justify the total pricetag of the car + the kit, especially since aftermarket kits are worth jack **** when it comes to resale?

I'd be looking at an '06 55K car if possible...

-m

BoBcanada

E55 that is?

Marcus Frost

No, not just an E. Any Kompressor AMG that isn't getting a facelift along with the 6.3... I'd take a W211 55K, C219 55K, etc over the same chassis with the 6.3 any day.

-m

Evolution Marine

Marcus Frost & Grumpy666 - You guys hit the nail on the head. The new 63 Motor after market support will be centered around Exhaust, Headers, ECU Programming, and for those Die-Hards, Cams. No boost oriented aftermarket systems will be offered IMO.

The existing 55K Motor will still rule in the Aftermarket tuning arena, and will remain the HP & Torque King of all AMG V8 Motors. That is until the AMG Turbo Version of the 63 Motor comes out. - Bob

merc655

Transmission- the current 5spd auto in the E55 is unbeatable, realistically. I mean, they have been using the same tranny for I don't even know how long, and its the same basic tranny in the SLR even, if I believe correctly, and as in the 65s. This thing will not be outdone, even though it is only a 5 speed.

Engine- With an 11.3:1 compression ratio, you aren't looking at a lot of room for FI. You will maybe be able to run a 5-6psi blower on it and get some gains, nothing quite as much as the gains with the current 55K engines though. These current engines are so much more mod-friendly and capable that the new one just won't compare until Mercedes realeases something new for them.

I think if you want a car to mod and make a crazy fast BEAST, get a 06 55K car. You can't really beat the mod-ability and the dependability IMO. If you want the latest and greatest, which I am sure these cars are going to be awesome, get the new 63s.
my .02

siswati

one of my recent posts on the CLS55 forum regarding the new AMG 63 engine..........

"I, for one, am not sure that the NA engine will give us as much as we already have with the 55K engine, and I certainly hope that it doesnt go the route of the M5 where it takes more than a 1/4 mile and 120mph to catch an engine that was released 3 years ago in 2003.

I dont want to sound like a broken record, but the idea of winding out an M5 type NA motor to 5500-8500 to have fun with it just doesnt seem like fun to me. I've mentioned the M5 owner's dilemma - to show that you have a faster car than the CLS/E55 you have to risk your license and possible jail time.

For the CLS/E55 owner he dominates the M5 every day in regular every day acceleration (not handling or anything else), and this is becoming a major thorn in the side of the M5 owners, as those who frequent their board will attest. To have waited so long for their supercar (and I am a BMW fan as well) only to have it be overshadowed by the 3 year old MB 55k engine in anything under 100 mph is a difficult pill for them to swallow.

Yes I live in Florida where there are ZERO twisties so I will never be able to appreciate or have fun with the M5 chassis, so the CLS/E55's are a better bet for me than the M5.

So unless the CLS/E63 NA engine is a killer off the line, its not gonna work for me or for a bunch of people who enjoy the grunt of a stock 55k motor (and of course for those who want to mod, well the 55k is a simple one to tweak as we all know).

And a request to all of you MB AMG fans out there, please dont overhype this new engine the way I believe Gustav did with the M5 - I feel he created expectations that the car just could not deliver on.

And as we all know in terms of creating an exceptional first time user experience, it is critical to under-sell and over-deliver; so lets keep it that way and maybe this new engine will surprise us all and kick some *** when it arrives.

jcjmw

Those times are for European verisons which has the full Launch Control. But, US versions of the M5 have crippled lanuch control. The US versions of the M5 are about 4.5

Frank Wiesmann

Remember that this is the number for 0-100 km/h (62 miles per hour), not to 60 mph. The figure for the current CLS 55 AMG and E55 AMG to 100 km/h was 4.7 seconds.

zdkdeeier493

This is very well said and you have a very good point. The current 55K owners are obviously the target market for this new engine and the current generation AMG's are known for their low-end torque. I really don't see how AMG could realistically produce an engine with a lesser low-end output just to match or outperform the M5 at higher speeds. The avid AMG'er (if I may coin the term) is well aware of the fact that he or she will not be able to outperform an M BMW in the twisties and is therefore content with his or her straight line performance. Now, not to say that pinning your head back while doing 120 isn't a great feeling, but we can do that now anyway. There is no reason to sacrifice the beloved low-end power just for some top-end gains. The FI engines provide that power all along the torque curve. Hopefully AMG has followed this same reasoning, and if not, they better have a damn good excuse.