did you see my previous post answering your question ?

 

assuming you've researched so much i really wonder who told you this ?
have a look here first, before giving uninformed advice

http://www.mercedes-amg.com/assets/pdf/en/cars.pdf

 

I wonder why they didn't use the redesigned assembly with the other models, I would assume there must have been fitment issues?
Also were did you read this information from, I'm not doubting you, I would just like to read more about it as well.

Thanks

 

Why is it that the crumple zone on both cars looks identical in the amount of available space then? So there was not fitment issue in the SL and there was in the CLS? Why then would they do this to the ML or the GL class? They seem to have plenty of space for fitment.

I know the EU legislation regarding crumple zone has prompted many changes in the car industry (most notably the bugatti veyron fiasco). But I have NEVER heard of anything regarding MB going from 55 to 63 being attributed to crumple zone. Tell you what man, I will humbly accept your story when I see the source.

Seems like a very unlikely scenario that MB would invest a tremendous amount of research and manufacturing to simply avert a very a simple hood redesign. And it would seem very short sighted of them to not have thought of this when designing the 06 CLS 55 (first year in market) But like I said, show me where you're getting this info and I'll accept it without question.

 

I did a specialization on the European Union and came into contact with the law when it was being discussed.

Anyways regarding the law: Jounral Of comparative European Studies Vol9, 2004

Regarding new supercharger assembly:
http://www.autonews.com/apps/pbcs.dl...078/geneva2006

Regarding future direction of AMG:

http://www.worldcarfans.com/news.cfm...rmance-package

 

open up the two engine bays and then tell me whether they look the same I am not an engineer so dont know why some cars are more suited to get the engine and some arent. If we followed your logic why do we have G55 and SL55 for the 2007 Model year?

Of course the drive for the new engine has been aided by other factors: for example the fact that producing a supercharged engine (above all, one that is REALIABLE for 100000s of miles) in excess of around 530bhp given MB's current production technology, would have resulted in exponentially rising costs.

It had already been decided, even as early as 2005 that all the new cars would be getting the 63 engine, the only reason why the CLS55 AMG emerged for a 1 year run was to ensure that they did not lose sales to its arch-rival the M5.

For more info (especially regarding the decision to develop the 63 engine) please look at an interview by Volker Mornhinweg, head of Mercedes-AMG GmbH. The interview was printed in Mercedes Benz Enthusiast , december 2006, issue. An older interview, with his predecessor is available somewhere on m5board.com !

other links as above post.

P.S. are you still telling me that the 55 engine is the same as the 500 engine?
http://www.mercedes-amg.com/

 

heres more info on the publication. You can order it from the website



they also have the CLS55 and CLS63 shoot-out... guess which one wins

http://www.mercedesenthusiast.co.uk/....cgi?i=0662Dec

 

Intersting turn of conversation here.

The way I understood the new Euro pedestrian regulations is that they applied to brand new cars to be sold in 2006/2007, not existing cars like the SL and G, which is why those models keep the old engine. Now that doesn't explain why the existing CLS55, E55 got the new V8.

From what I've been able to gleam from various sources is that AMG wanted a new engine in which to show their prowess as an top shelf engine builder and to also make a statement that they know how to make better handling cars, hence the switch for the S, CL, E, CLS and upcoming SLK to switch to the new lighter V8. The SL and G more than any other AMG models need the torque of the old 5.5L V8 to move them down the road with authority. Just look at how close the race is between the E/CLS55 and the E/CLS63 models, so you know that the SL/G55 models would definitely be faster than any G or SL63 models Mercedes might have done, they couldn't risk that. So they spent a little money to update the supercharged V8s in those models to comply with upcoming emissions and noise regulations.

What I do know for sure is that small changes to the supercharger assembly in the SL55 didn't make any more space under the hood, yes I've seen both the old and new up close. There is no difference and there is no differences in their hoods either. I remember reading that the CLS in general was rushed into production in order to avoid the new Euro ped regulations, meaning it wasn't designed with ped regs in mind from the get to. Those regs only apply to new cars which is why the S and CL clearly have front ends that look "puffy" with a clear crush space between the top of the engine block an the hood. The SL, G, E, CLS, etc. don't have this no matter which engine is under their hoods. The switch to the 6.2L engine in those models was done for better handling and purer driving experience, not just because of pedestrian regs.

M

 

man do i love coming to this forum and reading, such info .
just want to say thanks for all the info n keep it going . Asking is always good, learning somthing usful that might be very handy one day ;p.
BUt i have a question. Wasnt there a test way back between SL55 and E55 and the E won the race at higher speeds due to low waight n better air dinamics?, n thats why the SL55 got 500hp n the E remained at 467? or is one of the resons?
Think the CL63 has an upded 63 engin to, got something like 525hp insted of the 517 in the CLS. Any one care to shed more info on this ? as i may be wrong
Thanks

 

i had to study the law, and the way it IS. It does not matter when the first year of production of the car is, if it is produced after that date (june 2006) it has to conform to regulation. Handling might have been a consideration, but as i said a multitude of factors helped AMG push on for a new 63 engine. And i have looked at two SL55s (pre and post facelift) and am 100% sure that the placement of the engine varies, unless my eyes are lying to me

 

I'm still not clear on this. It seems to me that any car built before that cutoff date that wasn't being altered in any way wouldn't have to comply? Every single Euroepan car on sale would have to be altered if that weren't the case. It seems that only the newer Mercedes (S, CL, 08' C) really have been designed with this rule in mind. Now the older supercharged cars that got the new 6.2L V8 would comply obviously because supercharger sitting on top fo the block is gone, but what about all the other models that weren't supercharged? Did they comply by default by not having anything on top of their engine blocks? I couldn't tell any difference between the pre and post FL SL55, but I'll look again.

It must be a real ***** to design cars to meet so many regulations all around the world all the while trying to keep it stylish. My hat is off to MB, BMW, Audi and all makes that sells cars in so many different countries around the world.

M

 

http://www.carmagazine.co.uk/new_car_data.php

most EU/UK cars are required to submit cars for NCAP ratings. Only SUVs are exempt for the time being. The vast majority of cars have 3 or above stars on NCAP pedestrian safety. The entire Nissan/Renault/Opel range ar 4 stars. I am yet to see one car that has 5 stars, and only when it has a cushion on the front bonnet

For EU regulation, it does not matter when the car was designed. What matters is when it leaves the factory mate. Same thing for the proposed CO2 limit to come in force by 2011. If it is agreed on, no cars with more then 130g of CO2 emissions/km will be allowed for sale, irregardless of build date etc!

 

Did you make a decision yet on the 55 or 63? (sorry if I missed a post elsewhere). Wondering if the fleet manager really came through on the price of the 63.