C63 V c32 v ISF Qtr Mile times
#1
MBWorld Fanatic!
Thread Starter
C63 V c32 v ISF Qtr Mile times
I am seeing Qtr times on this forum of 12.4 to the low 13s at the worst for the C32 . I am also seeing trap speeds of 105-112?
The latest test I've seen of the C63 has the Qtr at 12.5 at 114.4. Do you realize that a very well "ripped" C32 is running real close to the C63 in the Qtr? ?? WOW, who would've thought?? I love it. Better than that, the modded C32s are about equal to the $70,000 Lexus ISF. Granted, the ISF is not modded, BUT to run with these guys (C63 and IS-F is awesome!!) Dragtimes has the ISF averaging about 12.8 to 13.2 at an average of about 111, so the C32 (moded) is running right with it. Woo hoo!!! Dragtimes is showing the C63 at 12.3 and 12.5 at 113.00 to 116.00. Again , the C32 is a whisker away from these times!! A stock C32 is equal to or beating the Audi RS 4!1 Eat this TIFOSI!!!!
Some of this info came from the June 2008 RT edition with the Ferrari California on the front where they comparison tested the C63 vs the ISF v the M3 and the Audi RS 4
The latest test I've seen of the C63 has the Qtr at 12.5 at 114.4. Do you realize that a very well "ripped" C32 is running real close to the C63 in the Qtr? ?? WOW, who would've thought?? I love it. Better than that, the modded C32s are about equal to the $70,000 Lexus ISF. Granted, the ISF is not modded, BUT to run with these guys (C63 and IS-F is awesome!!) Dragtimes has the ISF averaging about 12.8 to 13.2 at an average of about 111, so the C32 (moded) is running right with it. Woo hoo!!! Dragtimes is showing the C63 at 12.3 and 12.5 at 113.00 to 116.00. Again , the C32 is a whisker away from these times!! A stock C32 is equal to or beating the Audi RS 4!1 Eat this TIFOSI!!!!
Some of this info came from the June 2008 RT edition with the Ferrari California on the front where they comparison tested the C63 vs the ISF v the M3 and the Audi RS 4
#2
Member
supercharged, thats it!
and only a little bit more as half Cubic capacity
i love this, i drive nearly 8 jears a Golf mark 2 & 1.8T engine -> 320PS, 443MN, 1120 kilo look at -> http://fotoalbum.web.de/gast/fastralf/Rot
an now the "family car" C32
and only a little bit more as half Cubic capacity
i love this, i drive nearly 8 jears a Golf mark 2 & 1.8T engine -> 320PS, 443MN, 1120 kilo look at -> http://fotoalbum.web.de/gast/fastralf/Rot
an now the "family car" C32
Last edited by german32er; 05-27-2008 at 06:24 PM.
#3
MBWorld Fanatic!
Thread Starter
Amazing C32 Timez!!!
[QUOTE=german32er;2847301]supercharged, thats it![B]
and only a little bit more as half Cubic capacity
Good Point, thing is, I don't care how they got there, Just get there!!! For a 3.2 litre engine with a small s/c, the times I am seeing on the forum & Dragtimes are amazing!!
Glenn
and only a little bit more as half Cubic capacity
Good Point, thing is, I don't care how they got there, Just get there!!! For a 3.2 litre engine with a small s/c, the times I am seeing on the forum & Dragtimes are amazing!!
Glenn
#4
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: California, USA
Posts: 9,137
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
4 Posts
E63 P30, CL500 Sport
I am seeing Qtr times on this forum of 12.4 to the low 13s at the worst for the C32 . I am also seeing trap speeds of 105-112?
The latest test I've seen of the C63 has the Qtr at 12.5 at 114.4. Do you realize that a very well "ripped" C32 is running real close to the C63 in the Qtr? ?? WOW, who would've thought?? I love it. Better than that, the modded C32s are about equal to the $70,000 Lexus ISF. Granted, the ISF is not modded, BUT to run with these guys (C63 and IS-F is awesome!!) Dragtimes has the ISF averaging about 12.8 to 13.2 at an average of about 111, so the C32 (moded) is running right with it. Woo hoo!!! Dragtimes is showing the C63 at 12.3 and 12.5 at 113.00 to 116.00. Again , the C32 is a whisker away from these times!! A stock C32 is equal to or beating the Audi RS 4!1 Eat this TIFOSI!!!!
Some of this info came from the June 2008 RT edition with the Ferrari California on the front where they comparison tested the C63 vs the ISF v the M3 and the Audi RS 4
The latest test I've seen of the C63 has the Qtr at 12.5 at 114.4. Do you realize that a very well "ripped" C32 is running real close to the C63 in the Qtr? ?? WOW, who would've thought?? I love it. Better than that, the modded C32s are about equal to the $70,000 Lexus ISF. Granted, the ISF is not modded, BUT to run with these guys (C63 and IS-F is awesome!!) Dragtimes has the ISF averaging about 12.8 to 13.2 at an average of about 111, so the C32 (moded) is running right with it. Woo hoo!!! Dragtimes is showing the C63 at 12.3 and 12.5 at 113.00 to 116.00. Again , the C32 is a whisker away from these times!! A stock C32 is equal to or beating the Audi RS 4!1 Eat this TIFOSI!!!!
Some of this info came from the June 2008 RT edition with the Ferrari California on the front where they comparison tested the C63 vs the ISF v the M3 and the Audi RS 4
On average, most Stage 2 C32s best out at 12.6 to 12.7, and I think only less than one percent of those heavily modded C32s actually dip into the 12.4 range. The C63, on the other hand, is averaging 12.3 to 12.4 and it's only been out for a couple of months. Give it a year or so for people to learn how to launch it correctly and optimize all its driving techniques, and run it in good weather, and then I'm sure we'll see a couple of sub 12 passes easily.
Of course, once the C63 starts getting modded, the dynamic will really change . Here are some mods for the C63:
Current Mods
==========
- ECU Reprogramming
- Shorty Headers
- Larger Carbon Fiber Air Boxes
Future Mods
==========
- Supercharger (low boost version +3 to +5 psi)
- Supercharger (higher boost version +5 to +9 psi)
- Kleemann Twin Turbo
#5
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Corona, CA
Posts: 5,034
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes
on
6 Posts
03 g35 coupe...........02 c32 Sold
comparing modded to stock isn't really a apples to apples comparison, but i see your point. All the people who bought there c32's used got a good deal performance to dollar wise.
I loved the fact we're starting to see some really aftermarket parts for the c32. We're not going to start seeing real numbers until LET finishes there front mounted turbo kit.
Once that happens we'll start seeing 500whp-600whp c32's. Then it would be limited to how well the tranny will hold up on that much power.
thanks for the numbers.
I loved the fact we're starting to see some really aftermarket parts for the c32. We're not going to start seeing real numbers until LET finishes there front mounted turbo kit.
Once that happens we'll start seeing 500whp-600whp c32's. Then it would be limited to how well the tranny will hold up on that much power.
thanks for the numbers.
#6
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 2,949
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2008 A8L, 2002 996TT X50, 2009 X5
comparing modded to stock isn't really a apples to apples comparison, but i see your point. All the people who bought there c32's used got a good deal performance to dollar wise.
I loved the fact we're starting to see some really aftermarket parts for the c32. We're not going to start seeing real numbers until LET finishes there front mounted turbo kit.
Once that happens we'll start seeing 500whp-600whp c32's. Then it would be limited to how well the tranny will hold up on that much power.
thanks for the numbers.
I loved the fact we're starting to see some really aftermarket parts for the c32. We're not going to start seeing real numbers until LET finishes there front mounted turbo kit.
Once that happens we'll start seeing 500whp-600whp c32's. Then it would be limited to how well the tranny will hold up on that much power.
thanks for the numbers.
Anyone want to confirm if the m112k and m113k transmissions are the same or different?
Trending Topics
#8
MBWorld Fanatic!
Thread Starter
Of course, once the C63 starts getting modded, the dynamic will really change . Here are some mods for the C63:
Current Mods
==========
Current Mods
==========
* ECU Reprogramming
* Shorty Headers
* Larger Carbon Fiber Air Boxes
The mods above are expected to raise the hp output from 451 to 560 hp
I doubt that headers, a flash air box are going to give it another 109 HP? I can see a supercharger doing that and more, BUT not those above???
Current Mods
==========
- [*]
- [*]
- [*]
Current Mods
==========
* ECU Reprogramming
* Shorty Headers
* Larger Carbon Fiber Air Boxes
The mods above are expected to raise the hp output from 451 to 560 hp
I doubt that headers, a flash air box are going to give it another 109 HP? I can see a supercharger doing that and more, BUT not those above???
#9
MBWorld Fanatic!
Thread Starter
You CAN when you've sunk 65-70 into a new C63 and only 20 into an 04 C32?? Why not??? Once LET comes out with the TT C32, I think the C63, as great as it is, will be a glimmer in the rearview!! Can't take that away from a great car for even greater money $$$.
#10
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Corona, CA
Posts: 5,034
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes
on
6 Posts
03 g35 coupe...........02 c32 Sold
I believe I've seen it posted that the C32 tranny is the same as the S/C'ed E55 tranny - which has had somewhere in the ballpark of 700 hp thrown at it I believe (whether or not any reinforcements were added, I am not sure).
Anyone want to confirm if the m112k and m113k transmissions are the same or different?
Anyone want to confirm if the m112k and m113k transmissions are the same or different?
#11
Super Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Miami, FL
Posts: 594
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
1991 Toyota MR2, 2002 C32 AMG
Now that we're talking about modified vs. stock lets not forget C55's.... Just because they aren't force inducted doesn't mean it hinders their capacity to make power. Look at C55asleep?.....
#13
MBWorld Fanatic!
On average, most Stage 2 C32s best out at 12.6 to 12.7, and I think only less than one percent of those heavily modded C32s actually dip into the 12.4 range. The C63, on the other hand, is averaging 12.3 to 12.4 and it's only been out for a couple of months. Give it a year or so for people to learn how to launch it correctly and optimize all its driving techniques, and run it in good weather, and then I'm sure we'll see a couple of sub 12 passes easily.
Only the very fastest C32's are running with a STOCK C63. Lets not confuse the issue as they are probably not broken in yet, nor do we know the calibar of driver in the C63's. I like that we are close, but even a modded 32 is going to loose my friends.
See yeah
#14
MBworld Guru
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Diamond Bar, CA
Posts: 22,007
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes
on
6 Posts
white and whiter
makes me feel better about my 6 year old car...yes. do i really care there are other NEW cars that are faster...not really.
just today I did a short canyon run. that's all i care about now...driving to put a smile on my face.
just today I did a short canyon run. that's all i care about now...driving to put a smile on my face.
#15
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 2,949
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2008 A8L, 2002 996TT X50, 2009 X5
Of course, once the C63 starts getting modded, the dynamic will really change . Here are some mods for the C63:
Current Mods
==========
Current Mods
==========
* ECU Reprogramming
* Shorty Headers
* Larger Carbon Fiber Air Boxes
The mods above are expected to raise the hp output from 451 to 560 hp
I doubt that headers, a flash air box are going to give it another 109 HP? I can see a supercharger doing that and more, BUT not those above???
Current Mods
==========
- [*]
- [*]
- [*]
Current Mods
==========
* ECU Reprogramming
* Shorty Headers
* Larger Carbon Fiber Air Boxes
The mods above are expected to raise the hp output from 451 to 560 hp
I doubt that headers, a flash air box are going to give it another 109 HP? I can see a supercharger doing that and more, BUT not those above???
If you follow the CLK63BS sub-forum, you'll see jrcart's car, which evosport has tuned up over 500 rwhp with just ECU, slight intake mods, and long-tube headers - since it's the exact same engine, the same *should be* possible with the C63... time will tell
#16
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: MILFORD,CT
Posts: 1,067
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
4 Posts
E36M3 race car/Ferrari F355 GTS/1973 Mini 1275GT/Fiat Abarth/ML63/SLK55
c32 and e55 both share same tranny. i forget the designation # but do know it's rated to handle 750 ft lb torque (don't get confused with hp). the 7 gtronic is not as strong and could not be used in the amg 65 range and 600 v12 TT cars.
i consider the robustness of the tranny one of the major strong points of the c32. that and 22+ mpg hiway.
saw a c63 in person at lime rock on monday didn't like it. car will age quickly.
i consider the robustness of the tranny one of the major strong points of the c32. that and 22+ mpg hiway.
saw a c63 in person at lime rock on monday didn't like it. car will age quickly.
#17
With LETs 185mm pulley and LET custom tune we have seen a virtually stock C32 do safely low 12.4s(loungn14) unless the wires, pheumonic spacers and heat exchanger added to it...regardless thats fabulous and with stock intake. I can imagine with Quaife LSD and headers also cams and bigger feul injectors what the bar will be raised to imagine adding NOS to the equation?
#18
SPONSOR
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Houston/ Austin /Toronto / UAE / Minneapolis / Orlando /Cincinnati
Posts: 5,459
Received 149 Likes
on
109 Posts
Eurocharged Performance ML63 and TT lambo
Good point vic...
This thread is interesting. I don't really think its fair comparing apples to oranges, but it is nice to know that I could run with a C63 without looking bad..
Cams and fuel might be on my list of things to come...but as far as the funny gas...I dont think I will go down that path. I worry about engine issues with that. (even though jerry is running nicely with it)
This thread is interesting. I don't really think its fair comparing apples to oranges, but it is nice to know that I could run with a C63 without looking bad..
Cams and fuel might be on my list of things to come...but as far as the funny gas...I dont think I will go down that path. I worry about engine issues with that. (even though jerry is running nicely with it)
#19
MBWorld Fanatic!
#20
MBWorld Fanatic!
Wow...using your logic maybe I can buy a C36 and TT it for way less than the price of C32 and your mods....and look at you in my rearview mirror....
See how ridiculous you sound.....
Tom
#21
MBWorld Fanatic!
c32 and e55 both share same tranny. i forget the designation # but do know it's rated to handle 750 ft lb torque (don't get confused with hp). the 7 gtronic is not as strong and could not be used in the amg 65 range and 600 v12 TT cars.
i consider the robustness of the tranny one of the major strong points of the c32. that and 22+ mpg hiway.
saw a c63 in person at lime rock on monday didn't like it. car will age quickly.
i consider the robustness of the tranny one of the major strong points of the c32. that and 22+ mpg hiway.
saw a c63 in person at lime rock on monday didn't like it. car will age quickly.
Here is a link to Kleemann's website detailing the ratings (in case you thought I was making this stuff up ).
http://www.kleemann.dk/site/Main/faq
Tom
Last edited by TMC M5; 05-28-2008 at 05:55 PM.
#22
MBWorld Fanatic!
I am seeing Qtr times on this forum of 12.4 to the low 13s at the worst for the C32 . I am also seeing trap speeds of 105-112?
The latest test I've seen of the C63 has the Qtr at 12.5 at 114.4. Do you realize that a very well "ripped" C32 is running real close to the C63 in the Qtr? ?? WOW, who would've thought?? I love it. Better than that, the modded C32s are about equal to the $70,000 Lexus ISF. Granted, the ISF is not modded, BUT to run with these guys (C63 and IS-F is awesome!!) Dragtimes has the ISF averaging about 12.8 to 13.2 at an average of about 111, so the C32 (moded) is running right with it. Woo hoo!!! Dragtimes is showing the C63 at 12.3 and 12.5 at 113.00 to 116.00. Again , the C32 is a whisker away from these times!! A stock C32 is equal to or beating the Audi RS 4!1 Eat this TIFOSI!!!!
Some of this info came from the June 2008 RT edition with the Ferrari California on the front where they comparison tested the C63 vs the ISF v the M3 and the Audi RS 4
The latest test I've seen of the C63 has the Qtr at 12.5 at 114.4. Do you realize that a very well "ripped" C32 is running real close to the C63 in the Qtr? ?? WOW, who would've thought?? I love it. Better than that, the modded C32s are about equal to the $70,000 Lexus ISF. Granted, the ISF is not modded, BUT to run with these guys (C63 and IS-F is awesome!!) Dragtimes has the ISF averaging about 12.8 to 13.2 at an average of about 111, so the C32 (moded) is running right with it. Woo hoo!!! Dragtimes is showing the C63 at 12.3 and 12.5 at 113.00 to 116.00. Again , the C32 is a whisker away from these times!! A stock C32 is equal to or beating the Audi RS 4!1 Eat this TIFOSI!!!!
Some of this info came from the June 2008 RT edition with the Ferrari California on the front where they comparison tested the C63 vs the ISF v the M3 and the Audi RS 4
Two huge holes in your argument....the best C32 runs are on drag radials and run by people on good tracks. If an E63 can run 11's bone stock....the C63 can run 11's bone stock. The C63 will run well into the 11's with drag radials. Before you declare victory (or an enthusiastic tie)...why don't you wait for the car to be delivered and actually run at a track ...not some magazine. Otherwise, it is apples to oranges....
Tom
Last edited by TMC M5; 05-28-2008 at 06:01 PM.
#23
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: MILFORD,CT
Posts: 1,067
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
4 Posts
E36M3 race car/Ferrari F355 GTS/1973 Mini 1275GT/Fiat Abarth/ML63/SLK55
The C32 and E55 tranny is not exactly the same as the V12TT tranny's. The E55K uses the W5A900 -rated at 900Nm (664lbs-ft of TQ). The 600/65's use the W5A1000 - rated at 1000Nm (738lbs-ft of TQ). The C/SLK55 uses the W5A580 which is rated at 580Nm (428lbs-ft of TQ). I would imagine the C32 uses the same as the C55.
Here is a link to Kleemann's website detailing the ratings (in case you thought I was making this stuff up ).
http://www.kleemann.dk/site/Main/faq
Tom
Here is a link to Kleemann's website detailing the ratings (in case you thought I was making this stuff up ).
http://www.kleemann.dk/site/Main/faq
Tom
#24
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 2,949
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2008 A8L, 2002 996TT X50, 2009 X5
The C32 and E55 tranny is not exactly the same as the V12TT tranny's. The E55K uses the W5A900 -rated at 900Nm (664lbs-ft of TQ). The 600/65's use the W5A1000 - rated at 1000Nm (738lbs-ft of TQ). The C/SLK55 uses the W5A580 which is rated at 580Nm (428lbs-ft of TQ). I would imagine the C32 uses the same as the C55.
Here is a link to Kleemann's website detailing the ratings (in case you thought I was making this stuff up ).
http://www.kleemann.dk/site/Main/faq
Tom
Here is a link to Kleemann's website detailing the ratings (in case you thought I was making this stuff up ).
http://www.kleemann.dk/site/Main/faq
Tom
However, your educated guess on the C32 tranny doesn't fit with what many others have posted, which is that the E55 tranny and the C32 tranny are one and the same. Then again, I just thought of something - the E55 from the same years as the C32 was a N/A E55, not the E55K. Did the N/A E55 and the S/C'd E55 share the same tranny, or was the later, more powerful car's tranny upgraded?
#25
MBWorld Fanatic!
Excellent info!
However, your educated guess on the C32 tranny doesn't fit with what many others have posted, which is that the E55 tranny and the C32 tranny are one and the same. Then again, I just thought of something - the E55 from the same years as the C32 was a N/A E55, not the E55K. Did the N/A E55 and the S/C'd E55 share the same tranny, or was the later, more powerful car's tranny upgraded?
However, your educated guess on the C32 tranny doesn't fit with what many others have posted, which is that the E55 tranny and the C32 tranny are one and the same. Then again, I just thought of something - the E55 from the same years as the C32 was a N/A E55, not the E55K. Did the N/A E55 and the S/C'd E55 share the same tranny, or was the later, more powerful car's tranny upgraded?
Tom