THE NUMBERS ARE IN: 2012 CLS63 with tune 11.37 @ 125.1 mph - VIDEO
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 2,895
Likes: 53
From: Maryland
'14 E63S & '14 Audi SQ5
I would imagine that just launching harder with the drag radials would get you around 3.1-3.2s 0-60.
Tom
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 483
Likes: 0
From: Florida
2006 CL65
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 483
Likes: 0
From: Florida
2006 CL65
Actually, most of the things you listed would probably make it harder to drop the 0-60mph times. The bigger turbos, headers (manifolds), and larger throttle body would probably drop the low end torque a bit....the turbos would need to spool up a bit to get to an RPM with similar power. It would make launching a little trickier. You would see more significant differences from those mods in the 1/4 mile trap speed where the better breathing can be fully realized.
I would imagine that just launching harder with the drag radials would get you around 3.1-3.2s 0-60.
Tom
I would imagine that just launching harder with the drag radials would get you around 3.1-3.2s 0-60.
Tom
If you notice in the video, I walked the car out of the hole. I believe with a little harder launch, the low 3 second range 0 - 60 is plausible as are 1.6s in the 60 foot.
I see no reason why these cars won't run 11.0 - 11.1s with a 1.6 60 foot and a sea level DA.
Pretty stout for a heavy CLS with a tune and drag radials.
Last edited by SGC; Oct 22, 2011 at 11:27 AM.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 6,952
Likes: 4
From: Hollywood CA
2011 twin turboed prius
Tom, you're are on the money.
If you notice in the video, I walked the car out of the hole. I believe with a little harder launch, the low 3 second range 0 - 60 is plausible as are 1.6s in the 60 foot.
I see no reason why these cars won't run 11.0 - 11.1s with a 1.6 60 foot and a sea level DA.
Pretty stout for a heavy CLS with a tune and drag radials.
If you notice in the video, I walked the car out of the hole. I believe with a little harder launch, the low 3 second range 0 - 60 is plausible as are 1.6s in the 60 foot.
I see no reason why these cars won't run 11.0 - 11.1s with a 1.6 60 foot and a sea level DA.
Pretty stout for a heavy CLS with a tune and drag radials.
Im still amazed,
did you weigh this car prior to testing?
I am looking for bare bones CLS 63 so I can get the sucker in the 3900 lb range.(with wheels) (battery) (tool removal).
Seems this car could get very heavy with all thy options. That Designo paint , sheesh it can weigh a ton
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 483
Likes: 0
From: Florida
2006 CL65
Im still amazed,
did you weigh this car prior to testing?
I am looking for bare bones CLS 63 so I can get the sucker in the 3900 lb range.(with wheels) (battery) (tool removal).
Seems this car could get very heavy with all thy options. That Designo paint , sheesh it can weigh a ton
did you weigh this car prior to testing?
I am looking for bare bones CLS 63 so I can get the sucker in the 3900 lb range.(with wheels) (battery) (tool removal).
Seems this car could get very heavy with all thy options. That Designo paint , sheesh it can weigh a ton
Junior Member
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
C55
When you get the 2012 AMG E63 biturbo & add the +700hp with RENNtech tune/exhaust/intake/LSD/etc + good tires. And use LC this time, I can imagine a 10sec E class very possible 
