2024 Mercedes-AMG GT debut at Pebble Beach
#126
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Nov 2018
Posts: 8,736
Received 4,008 Likes
on
2,671 Posts
From: San Francisco Bay Area
2019 C63CS
The following users liked this post:
Wolfman (11-14-2023)
#127
Super Moderator
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 10,132
Received 3,349 Likes
on
2,067 Posts
From: Land of 10,000 lakes
AMG GTC Roadster, E63s Ed.1, M8 Comp. Coupe
#129
Member
That's just sad. My 2016 GT-S has a curb weight of 3677 lbs per a Car and Driver track sheet when they actually measured the same car back in 2015. Front weight came in at 1746 lbs while rear weight was 1931 lbs. That comes out to a 47.5% front weight and a 52.5 % rear weight, making it a true front mid-engine car, providing fabulous traction out of corners. The front to rear weight balance is one of the primary factors making the original car such a great handling car, along with the much lower weight.
New one at 4343 lbs is a whopping 666 lbs heavier than an actual magazine measured weight. That is simply incredible. What a porker vs the original. Anyone trying to track the new car is going to be sad.
New one at 4343 lbs is a whopping 666 lbs heavier than an actual magazine measured weight. That is simply incredible. What a porker vs the original. Anyone trying to track the new car is going to be sad.
The following 3 users liked this post by descartesfool:
#130
My conclusion is that the Gen 2 will be a great car.
However, a completely different GT for a completely different crowd.
I'm sure Mercedes will sell many of these since the target audience is wider than Gen 1's. E/S coupe, M4, M8, 911 (non GT) buyers will love the AWD, 2+2 seating, and luxury focus. I think we (Gen 1 owners) were left out of the equation. Hopefully AMG make the "Racing" trim aimed for us. Unironically the perfect R/Black Series edition will be what the Gen 1 was: RWD, lighter weight, Mid front engine, closer 50/50 weight distribution with rear transaxle, dry sump. I doubt they will go that far.
In an interesting twist, this car seems like a worthy replacement for my 23 C63S coupe lol.
However, a completely different GT for a completely different crowd.
I'm sure Mercedes will sell many of these since the target audience is wider than Gen 1's. E/S coupe, M4, M8, 911 (non GT) buyers will love the AWD, 2+2 seating, and luxury focus. I think we (Gen 1 owners) were left out of the equation. Hopefully AMG make the "Racing" trim aimed for us. Unironically the perfect R/Black Series edition will be what the Gen 1 was: RWD, lighter weight, Mid front engine, closer 50/50 weight distribution with rear transaxle, dry sump. I doubt they will go that far.
In an interesting twist, this car seems like a worthy replacement for my 23 C63S coupe lol.
Last edited by ChargedMB; 11-14-2023 at 04:46 PM.
The following 4 users liked this post by ChargedMB:
#131
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Nov 2018
Posts: 8,736
Received 4,008 Likes
on
2,671 Posts
From: San Francisco Bay Area
2019 C63CS
That's just sad. My 2016 GT-S has a curb weight of 3677 lbs per a Car and Driver track sheet when they actually measured the same car back in 2015. Front weight came in at 1746 lbs while rear weight was 1931 lbs. That comes out to a 47.5% front weight and a 52.5 % rear weight, making it a true front mid-engine car, providing fabulous traction out of corners. The front to rear weight balance is one of the primary factors making the original car such a great handling car, along with the much lower weight.
New one at 4343 lbs is a whopping 666 lbs heavier than an actual magazine measured weight. That is simply incredible. What a porker vs the original. Anyone trying to track the new car is going to be sad.
New one at 4343 lbs is a whopping 666 lbs heavier than an actual magazine measured weight. That is simply incredible. What a porker vs the original. Anyone trying to track the new car is going to be sad.
#132
Super Moderator
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 10,132
Received 3,349 Likes
on
2,067 Posts
From: Land of 10,000 lakes
AMG GTC Roadster, E63s Ed.1, M8 Comp. Coupe
My conclusion is that the Gen 2 will be a great car.
However, a completely different GT for a completely different crowd.
I'm sure Mercedes will sell many of these since the target audience is wider than Gen 1's. E/S coupe, M4, M8, 911 (non GT) buyers will love the AWD, 2+2 seating, and luxury focus. I think we (Gen 1 owners) were left out of the equation. Hopefully AMG make the "Racing" trim aimed for us. Unironically the perfect R/Black Series edition will be what the Gen 1 was: RWD, lighter weight, Mid front engine, closer 50/50 weight distribution with rear transaxle, dry sump. I doubt they will go that far.
In an interesting twist, this car seems like a worthy replacement for my 23 C63S coupe lol.
However, a completely different GT for a completely different crowd.
I'm sure Mercedes will sell many of these since the target audience is wider than Gen 1's. E/S coupe, M4, M8, 911 (non GT) buyers will love the AWD, 2+2 seating, and luxury focus. I think we (Gen 1 owners) were left out of the equation. Hopefully AMG make the "Racing" trim aimed for us. Unironically the perfect R/Black Series edition will be what the Gen 1 was: RWD, lighter weight, Mid front engine, closer 50/50 weight distribution with rear transaxle, dry sump. I doubt they will go that far.
In an interesting twist, this car seems like a worthy replacement for my 23 C63S coupe lol.
But it is actually a very good looking, well driving/sounding car that will fit the desires of many AMG buyers of which most will not care about weight.
Technology cannot undo the laws of physics but can blur them quite well.
The following users liked this post:
ChargedMB (11-14-2023)
#133
Out Of Control!!
Joined: Dec 2019
Posts: 14,853
Received 2,863 Likes
on
2,439 Posts
From: Toronto, Canada
PFL205.064 with M276.823 (Oil pump solenoid defeated)
As I've said earlier, the new GT is more true to its name. It's an actual grand tourer, where the original GT was more of a GT racer. The question is what they gonna do for the successor of the GT R or even the BS. It's gonna have to go on a rapid diet to become a track car. The new GT is much more appealing to me personally as a road car. This is largely why I opted for the 2019 C63S coupe instead. I wanted a GT coupe for the road, not a track car that is ok on the road and turns out most GT customers think like me. AMG said the new GT is the way it is because of customer feedback. Customers wanted an actual useable GT for the road, not a track car.
#134
Member
Agreed. This will not be a track monster ever. Unlikely to even become a Black Series model.
But it is actually a very good looking, well driving/sounding car that will fit the desires of many AMG buyers of which most will not care about weight.
Technology cannot undo the laws of physics but can blur them quite well.
But it is actually a very good looking, well driving/sounding car that will fit the desires of many AMG buyers of which most will not care about weight.
Technology cannot undo the laws of physics but can blur them quite well.
Aston Martin has gone the same direction as Mercedes, with Car and Driver estimating the curb weight of the new DB12 at 4100 lbs (or more).
The last time I was at my Mercedes dealer, he showed me the new 2+2 SL and asked me if I was interested. I said no, not at all. He asked me why and I said it was just overly heavy and I did not consider the new platform to be a sports car. I also told him I have ordered a new Ferrari Roma which I am expecting to arrive this spring. It will make a great companion to my GT-S which I plan on keeping a long time.
#135
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Nov 2018
Posts: 8,736
Received 4,008 Likes
on
2,671 Posts
From: San Francisco Bay Area
2019 C63CS
It turns out that Ferrari actually knows how to make a proper modern 2+2 GT that is not a total porker like the new AMG. The Ferrari Roma has a 612 HP twin-turbo V8, and Sport Auto magazine from France weighed one they tested at 1662 kg, which is 3664 lbs (Ferrari published kerb weight is 1570 kg or 3461 lbs). That measured weight is just 13 lbs under the weight measured by Car and Driver for my GT-S. The Roma is even a bit wider and longer than the GT-S, and it has a proper trunk.
Aston Martin has gone the same direction as Mercedes, with Car and Driver estimating the curb weight of the new DB12 at 4100 lbs (or more).
The last time I was at my Mercedes dealer, he showed me the new 2+2 SL and asked me if I was interested. I said no, not at all. He asked me why and I said it was just overly heavy and I did not consider the new platform to be a sports car. I also told him I have ordered a new Ferrari Roma which I am expecting to arrive this spring. It will make a great companion to my GT-S which I plan on keeping a long time.
Aston Martin has gone the same direction as Mercedes, with Car and Driver estimating the curb weight of the new DB12 at 4100 lbs (or more).
The last time I was at my Mercedes dealer, he showed me the new 2+2 SL and asked me if I was interested. I said no, not at all. He asked me why and I said it was just overly heavy and I did not consider the new platform to be a sports car. I also told him I have ordered a new Ferrari Roma which I am expecting to arrive this spring. It will make a great companion to my GT-S which I plan on keeping a long time.
Last edited by superswiss; 11-14-2023 at 06:01 PM.
The following users liked this post:
Wolfman (11-14-2023)
#136
MBWorld Fanatic!
Either way it’s prophetic, high HP petro V8s are on short on life…
#137
Member
Couple of thoughts I guess. The Ferrari Roma is at least $100k more than the GT will be. Lightweight materials such as carbon fiber cost money. The Roma also doesn't have the additional weight of an AWD system and it is well known to struggle putting the 612 hp on the road. It's too light in the rear. While I live in a dry climate, so AWD is of little use to me, many GT customers asked for AWD, so they can use the car year-round. The Roma is a dry climate/summer car only. Then there are all the haptic buttons around the steering wheel that are way worse than the ones in recent AMGs and the Infotainment system let's just say has the temperament of an Italian. If I remember correctly, if you wanna use CarPlay you can't have a tach at the same time.
The following users liked this post:
Orcbolg (11-15-2023)
#139
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Nov 2018
Posts: 8,736
Received 4,008 Likes
on
2,671 Posts
From: San Francisco Bay Area
2019 C63CS
I have a Nissan GT-R for an AWD car, which has a snow mode although I have never driven it in the snow. It has actual usable rear seats for small children unlike the ones in the SL I saw which are rather useless, as you would have to cut off your legs to use those. The salesladies at my Mercedes dealer were actually laughing about that for the SL in their showroom when we talked about it. The Nissan GT-R has always been considered a heavy car, but in fact it has a curb weight between 3850 to 3950 lbs depending on the year and model. With the new GT at 4343 lbs, the Nissan weighs between 400 to 500 lbs less. The Nissan has a much larger and more useful trunk than the one in the SL I saw. So how can Mercedes have designed such a heavy car? Agreed it might be a fine GT for those who like that type of car, but I am sad that the AMG guys have lost the soul their fabulous sports car.
EDIT: One thing, though, I just realized we have to factor in. EU weight figures include a 165 lbs driver. US weight figures don't include a driver, although sometimes they do.
Last edited by superswiss; 11-15-2023 at 08:50 AM.
#140
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Oct 2015
Posts: 1,458
Received 868 Likes
on
451 Posts
2023 Urus Performante - 2021 Ferrari Roma - 2017 Ferrari 488 GTB - 2022 GLE 63 S Coupe
Since we are talking a GT car and not a track car. Weight unless extremely heavy proportionately speaking which the GT is not would most likely not be felt by most anyways considering the ethos of a GT car. Of course you'll get a bit less gas mileage but the upside is better crash protection and a more "solid" feeling ride and comfort over the long haul. The AMG GT line with the long bonnet offers superior frontal crash protection which is important to me.
#141
Super Member
Joined: Sep 2017
Posts: 988
Received 680 Likes
on
362 Posts
From: Santa Monica Mountains
2020 GTA; 2022 Audi e-tron GT, 2022 Ford F-150; 1926 Rolls-Royce Springfield 40/50 Playboy roadster
It turns out that Ferrari actually knows how to make a proper modern 2+2 GT that is not a total porker like the new AMG. The Ferrari Roma has a 612 HP twin-turbo V8, and Sport Auto magazine from France weighed one they tested at 1662 kg, which is 3664 lbs (Ferrari published kerb weight is 1570 kg or 3461 lbs). That measured weight is just 13 lbs under the weight measured by Car and Driver for my GT-S. The Roma is even a bit wider and longer than the GT-S, and it has a proper trunk.
Aston Martin has gone the same direction as Mercedes, with Car and Driver estimating the curb weight of the new DB12 at 4100 lbs (or more).
The last time I was at my Mercedes dealer, he showed me the new 2+2 SL and asked me if I was interested. I said no, not at all. He asked me why and I said it was just overly heavy and I did not consider the new platform to be a sports car. I also told him I have ordered a new Ferrari Roma which I am expecting to arrive this spring. It will make a great companion to my GT-S which I plan on keeping a long time.
Aston Martin has gone the same direction as Mercedes, with Car and Driver estimating the curb weight of the new DB12 at 4100 lbs (or more).
The last time I was at my Mercedes dealer, he showed me the new 2+2 SL and asked me if I was interested. I said no, not at all. He asked me why and I said it was just overly heavy and I did not consider the new platform to be a sports car. I also told him I have ordered a new Ferrari Roma which I am expecting to arrive this spring. It will make a great companion to my GT-S which I plan on keeping a long time.
A few changes are all that were needed to make it the perfect grand touring car: A more supple suspension. A rear camera displaying on the rear view mirror. And HUD.
Instead, the powers that be turned it into another overladen pig, needing near miraculous electronic wizardry to make it feel like it "only" weighs 3900 lbs. But physics cannot be fooled at the limits.
(BMW seems to be following Mercedes, but trying to outdo the Stuttgart cars in the ugly department. At that BMW is succeeding.)
#142
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Oct 2015
Posts: 1,458
Received 868 Likes
on
451 Posts
2023 Urus Performante - 2021 Ferrari Roma - 2017 Ferrari 488 GTB - 2022 GLE 63 S Coupe
The other manufacturer who knows how to make appropriately weighted cars is Mercedes Benz. Exhibit A: The AMG GT and variants, circa 2014-2023.
A few changes are all that were needed to make it the perfect grand touring car: A more supple suspension. A rear camera displaying on the rear view mirror. And HUD.
Instead, the powers that be turned it into another overladen pig, needing near miraculous electronic wizardry to make it feel like it "only" weighs 3900 lbs. But physics cannot be fooled at the limits.
(BMW seems to be following Mercedes, but trying to outdo the Stuttgart cars in the ugly department. At that BMW is succeeding.)
A few changes are all that were needed to make it the perfect grand touring car: A more supple suspension. A rear camera displaying on the rear view mirror. And HUD.
Instead, the powers that be turned it into another overladen pig, needing near miraculous electronic wizardry to make it feel like it "only" weighs 3900 lbs. But physics cannot be fooled at the limits.
(BMW seems to be following Mercedes, but trying to outdo the Stuttgart cars in the ugly department. At that BMW is succeeding.)
The following 2 users liked this post by benzbell:
Hetzle (11-15-2023),
MalibuScott (11-15-2023)
#143
I have a Nissan GT-R for an AWD car, which has a snow mode although I have never driven it in the snow. It has actual usable rear seats for small children unlike the ones in the SL I saw which are rather useless, as you would have to cut off your legs to use those. The salesladies at my Mercedes dealer were actually laughing about that for the SL in their showroom when we talked about it. The Nissan GT-R has always been considered a heavy car, but in fact it has a curb weight between 3850 to 3950 lbs depending on the year and model. With the new GT at 4343 lbs, the Nissan weighs between 400 to 500 lbs less. The Nissan has a much larger and more useful trunk than the one in the SL I saw. So how can Mercedes have designed such a heavy car? Agreed it might be a fine GT for those who like that type of car, but I am sad that the AMG guys have lost the soul their fabulous sports car.
I don't need to drive these cars at their limits, to feel the differences in weight, I can easily feel the difference just screwing around on twisty back roads. A 4k+ pound sports car will almost certainly never occupy a spot in my garage.
The following users liked this post:
ChargedMB (11-28-2023)
#144
Junior Member
I have a Nissan GT-R for an AWD car, which has a snow mode although I have never driven it in the snow. It has actual usable rear seats for small children unlike the ones in the SL I saw which are rather useless, as you would have to cut off your legs to use those. The salesladies at my Mercedes dealer were actually laughing about that for the SL in their showroom when we talked about it. The Nissan GT-R has always been considered a heavy car, but in fact it has a curb weight between 3850 to 3950 lbs depending on the year and model. With the new GT at 4343 lbs, the Nissan weighs between 400 to 500 lbs less. The Nissan has a much larger and more useful trunk than the one in the SL I saw. So how can Mercedes have designed such a heavy car? Agreed it might be a fine GT for those who like that type of car, but I am sad that the AMG guys have lost the soul their fabulous sports car.
Last edited by kcirm; 12-08-2023 at 06:16 PM. Reason: Typos
The following 2 users liked this post by kcirm:
California John (12-08-2023),
js_cls (12-07-2023)
#145
Out Of Control!!
Joined: Dec 2019
Posts: 14,853
Received 2,863 Likes
on
2,439 Posts
From: Toronto, Canada
PFL205.064 with M276.823 (Oil pump solenoid defeated)
I've actually been pleasantly surprised by the backseat of the SL. I've had around 7 guest sit in the back seat since I've owned it. The high of the guest ranged from 5'2 to 6'1. The 6'1 person was I colleague I was driving back from the bar. With the top down & and the 6'3 person in front of him with knees almost touching the dashboard, he rated his comfort 4/10. The 5'2 person was actually behind me as we were four and she rated her comfort at a 6/10 for a 20 minute drive with the top down. I've recently driven a 5'4 person with the top-up (winter time), with a 5'6 person in front passenger and about 14 birthday balloons crammed on the read driver side, she was that she was completely fine. Of course, she has to have her legs in a V, but she was at a solid 7/10. As she said "wouldn't want to do a road trip to [city that is 3 hours a way], but my legs have some space and my head doesn't touch the ceiling. My back is very straight up though". This was after a 30-minute drive. I'd like to not everyone I drove in a "compromised position" which is the rear and/or front seats jacked up (including myself) are under 30. Maybe as age goes up, the tolerance for discomfort would go down. Ultimately, I can 100% say that these seats are highly useful in a pickle and are useable to move along people. Generally, the most uncomfortable person when they are all used is actually myself, where I would rate driving the car with the seat jacked up to make space for my passenger a good 3/10 (I am 5"11). Once again, I'm way closer to being 20 than 30, so my body can handle it better I assume.
Reason why I don't set high expectations anymore with stuff like this , if we come in with low expectations at least we can be more impressed about something when it exceeds our expectations than get disappointed as a result of having high expectations. Same applies to dealerships (in my experience).
The following users liked this post:
kcirm (12-08-2023)
#146
Junior Member
The GT 63 S E Performance wasn't good at launch which I sort of get it since it was the first time they did anything like that, then the S 63 E Performance came out and once reviewers had time with it, they really like how much more refined the powertrain is. Same idea for the C 63 S E Performance, reviewers are praising it works much better in the GLC 63 S than the sedan. The sedan was hated for the weight, how the transmission, the E Performance system, the engine all speak different languages... (Well, let's just ignore the 4 vs 8 cylinder for the sake of this discussion...) I am hoping and I think it is likely that the new GT E Performance is what is so called the third times a charm where it is a highly refined machine.
1. If you remember the OG videos on pre-release SL, Mercedes had a video with the barebones SL chassis where they talked about its design and composition/ One thing they used is this "modular" design that they had to make to take into account expansion into the E Performance world. As far as I am aware, this is the ONLY chassis Mercedes purpose-built to be a hybrid. The C class is derived from the old generation with a few upgrades, the GT4DR chassis is the GT4DR chassis and the S class chassis is actually similar to to the gens. In addition to chassis, the C Class, GT4DR and S Class run on MRA II, MRA I and MRA Large respectively. Even the SUVs are on MHA. Only the SL and the new GT are modern cars that will stick to the MSA architecture. With this we have a significant chance of seeing a better application of the powertrain. Possibly less weight gain than in the other cars as well.
2. Time. We've seen test mules of the SL 63 E Performance for over a year now, and a GT 63 E Performance Concept (more like a prototype) was openly showed back in September. We know Mercedes is taking their time with this one, because frankly, they don't have to rush. The SL was already a great car but now the GT simply quicks butt. If they take their time to make a great "third time's the charm" we're in for a good time.
The ideal would be a mix of a lot of things. Considering this was a 260KG add-on to the GT4DR, if we could see a curb weight decrease of the GT of 100 KG+, a possible decrease of the hybrid system due to better integration (lets say 20KG), pump a set of CCB which are 50KG lighter if I recall, you could be looking at getting a 200HP+ HP for something like 90 KG of penalty. This would be around 2050KG. Add a quick tune (we've seen the SL go from 585 to 721 HP with a stage 1), and we're looking at 980HP. Although still heavy, considering how excellently the GT drives this would be a pretty clean combination
#147
Out Of Control!!
Joined: Dec 2019
Posts: 14,853
Received 2,863 Likes
on
2,439 Posts
From: Toronto, Canada
PFL205.064 with M276.823 (Oil pump solenoid defeated)
Absolutely! When doing a lot of digging, the GT 63 E has two things going for it
1. If you remember the OG videos on pre-release SL, Mercedes had a video with the barebones SL chassis where they talked about its design and composition/ One thing they used is this "modular" design that they had to make to take into account expansion into the E Performance world. As far as I am aware, this is the ONLY chassis Mercedes purpose-built to be a hybrid. The C class is derived from the old generation with a few upgrades, the GT4DR chassis is the GT4DR chassis and the S class chassis is actually similar to to the gens. In addition to chassis, the C Class, GT4DR and S Class run on MRA II, MRA I and MRA Large respectively. Even the SUVs are on MHA. Only the SL and the new GT are modern cars that will stick to the MSA architecture. With this we have a significant chance of seeing a better application of the powertrain. Possibly less weight gain than in the other cars as well.
2. Time. We've seen test mules of the SL 63 E Performance for over a year now, and a GT 63 E Performance Concept (more like a prototype) was openly showed back in September. We know Mercedes is taking their time with this one, because frankly, they don't have to rush. The SL was already a great car but now the GT simply quicks butt. If they take their time to make a great "third time's the charm" we're in for a good time.
The ideal would be a mix of a lot of things. Considering this was a 260KG add-on to the GT4DR, if we could see a curb weight decrease of the GT of 100 KG+, a possible decrease of the hybrid system due to better integration (lets say 20KG), pump a set of CCB which are 50KG lighter if I recall, you could be looking at getting a 200HP+ HP for something like 90 KG of penalty. This would be around 2050KG. Add a quick tune (we've seen the SL go from 585 to 721 HP with a stage 1), and we're looking at 980HP. Although still heavy, considering how excellently the GT drives this would be a pretty clean combination
1. If you remember the OG videos on pre-release SL, Mercedes had a video with the barebones SL chassis where they talked about its design and composition/ One thing they used is this "modular" design that they had to make to take into account expansion into the E Performance world. As far as I am aware, this is the ONLY chassis Mercedes purpose-built to be a hybrid. The C class is derived from the old generation with a few upgrades, the GT4DR chassis is the GT4DR chassis and the S class chassis is actually similar to to the gens. In addition to chassis, the C Class, GT4DR and S Class run on MRA II, MRA I and MRA Large respectively. Even the SUVs are on MHA. Only the SL and the new GT are modern cars that will stick to the MSA architecture. With this we have a significant chance of seeing a better application of the powertrain. Possibly less weight gain than in the other cars as well.
2. Time. We've seen test mules of the SL 63 E Performance for over a year now, and a GT 63 E Performance Concept (more like a prototype) was openly showed back in September. We know Mercedes is taking their time with this one, because frankly, they don't have to rush. The SL was already a great car but now the GT simply quicks butt. If they take their time to make a great "third time's the charm" we're in for a good time.
The ideal would be a mix of a lot of things. Considering this was a 260KG add-on to the GT4DR, if we could see a curb weight decrease of the GT of 100 KG+, a possible decrease of the hybrid system due to better integration (lets say 20KG), pump a set of CCB which are 50KG lighter if I recall, you could be looking at getting a 200HP+ HP for something like 90 KG of penalty. This would be around 2050KG. Add a quick tune (we've seen the SL go from 585 to 721 HP with a stage 1), and we're looking at 980HP. Although still heavy, considering how excellently the GT drives this would be a pretty clean combination
#148
Junior Member
Although I'd have to double check, it seems the weight gain is 450lb fully fueled. That's already 200lb better than GT63e, so it seems that Mercedes was indeed not bluffing when they talked about their improvements to the chassis and platform.
If you add the 100lbs saved from CCB, you'd be looking at around 330lb added The ideal add on would be 200lb with CCB, so there's a little work to be done here if they want to make it work for the GT. But honestly, 153lb doesn't sound too far off.
Some chassis change here, some carbon fiber there, some sound detening removed here, some newer lighter mbux computer here, some lighter AMG sport seats there...who knows.
If they can get this to be real, they might as well make it a GTR with the M178 instead of the M177. Higher HP to get it to that 900HP mark, lower center of gravity (+ battery pack at the back giving it some more back balance), dry sum, slightly higher rpm. I'm wet dreaming at this point
We'll see how things pan out but that "poor man's SF90" proposition is looking alive for now.
#149
Out Of Control!!
Joined: Dec 2019
Posts: 14,853
Received 2,863 Likes
on
2,439 Posts
From: Toronto, Canada
PFL205.064 with M276.823 (Oil pump solenoid defeated)
There seems to be some traction on this topic. Mercedes just unveiled their SL63 E performance.
Although I'd have to double check, it seems the weight gain is 450lb fully fueled. That's already 200lb better than GT63e, so it seems that Mercedes was indeed not bluffing when they talked about their improvements to the chassis and platform.
If you add the 100lbs saved from CCB, you'd be looking at around 330lb added The ideal add on would be 200lb with CCB, so there's a little work to be done here if they want to make it work for the GT. But honestly, 153lb doesn't sound too far off.
Some chassis change here, some carbon fiber there, some sound detening removed here, some newer lighter mbux computer here, some lighter AMG sport seats there...who knows.
If they can get this to be real, they might as well make it a GTR with the M178 instead of the M177. Higher HP to get it to that 900HP mark, lower center of gravity (+ battery pack at the back giving it some more back balance), dry sum, slightly higher rpm. I'm wet dreaming at this point
We'll see how things pan out but that "poor man's SF90" proposition is looking alive for now.
Although I'd have to double check, it seems the weight gain is 450lb fully fueled. That's already 200lb better than GT63e, so it seems that Mercedes was indeed not bluffing when they talked about their improvements to the chassis and platform.
If you add the 100lbs saved from CCB, you'd be looking at around 330lb added The ideal add on would be 200lb with CCB, so there's a little work to be done here if they want to make it work for the GT. But honestly, 153lb doesn't sound too far off.
Some chassis change here, some carbon fiber there, some sound detening removed here, some newer lighter mbux computer here, some lighter AMG sport seats there...who knows.
If they can get this to be real, they might as well make it a GTR with the M178 instead of the M177. Higher HP to get it to that 900HP mark, lower center of gravity (+ battery pack at the back giving it some more back balance), dry sum, slightly higher rpm. I'm wet dreaming at this point
We'll see how things pan out but that "poor man's SF90" proposition is looking alive for now.
#150
Super Member
Joined: Sep 2017
Posts: 988
Received 680 Likes
on
362 Posts
From: Santa Monica Mountains
2020 GTA; 2022 Audi e-tron GT, 2022 Ford F-150; 1926 Rolls-Royce Springfield 40/50 Playboy roadster
Extra weight is extra weight, no matter how well you package it. The battery pack weight may lower the center of gravity, but extra weight will still be felt in cornering.
As I have long commented, you can't fool or repeal the laws of physics.
As I have long commented, you can't fool or repeal the laws of physics.