Why the C43 under performs for its stock output???
Thread Starter
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,490
Likes: 5
From: Dallas, Texas
W203 C55 and SAAB 9-3 2.0T
Why the C43 under performs for its stock output???
So why do our cars not run the times they should for the stock spec they have?
"By far the most powerful car in its class, the C43 AMG can truly be considered a 4-door muscle car. New camshafts and freer-breathing, larger-diameter intake and exhaust systems increase the peak output to 302 horsepower, 27 more than the engine it is based on used in the E430 sedan. A heavier-duty five speed manual transmission is borrowed from the SL500 and used to handle the extra power produced. Although on paper the C43 looks like it should be a sizzling performer, it disappoints both in the 0-60 and 1/4 mile acceleration test, where it trails its two main competitors, the BMW M3 and Audi S4 by at least 0.3 seconds in each test, despite the 52 and 62 horsepower advantage over the S4 and M3, respectively. "
C43 AMG STOCK TIMES:
Curb Weight, lb 3461
0-60 mph, sec 5.8
1/4 mile, sec@mph 14.4@99
600 ft slalom, mph 67.1
60-0 mph, ft 112
Top speed, mph 155
The 07 335i auto runs 0-60 in 5.4
1/4 Mile in 13.7 secs
and this car weights more(+ Almost 300lbs) and has less power.
So I am guessing the only answer in the our tranny/gearing is to blame for most of the trouble. So who here has dropped in a more aggressive differential and seen some gains? What cars did you source the unit from and what were the results??
Ive got to get my car to where its at least as fast as a stock 335i. Just doesnt seem right other wise.
"By far the most powerful car in its class, the C43 AMG can truly be considered a 4-door muscle car. New camshafts and freer-breathing, larger-diameter intake and exhaust systems increase the peak output to 302 horsepower, 27 more than the engine it is based on used in the E430 sedan. A heavier-duty five speed manual transmission is borrowed from the SL500 and used to handle the extra power produced. Although on paper the C43 looks like it should be a sizzling performer, it disappoints both in the 0-60 and 1/4 mile acceleration test, where it trails its two main competitors, the BMW M3 and Audi S4 by at least 0.3 seconds in each test, despite the 52 and 62 horsepower advantage over the S4 and M3, respectively. "
C43 AMG STOCK TIMES:
Curb Weight, lb 3461
0-60 mph, sec 5.8
1/4 mile, sec@mph 14.4@99
600 ft slalom, mph 67.1
60-0 mph, ft 112
Top speed, mph 155
The 07 335i auto runs 0-60 in 5.4
1/4 Mile in 13.7 secs
and this car weights more(+ Almost 300lbs) and has less power.
So I am guessing the only answer in the our tranny/gearing is to blame for most of the trouble. So who here has dropped in a more aggressive differential and seen some gains? What cars did you source the unit from and what were the results??
Ive got to get my car to where its at least as fast as a stock 335i. Just doesnt seem right other wise.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 5,475
Likes: 5
From: City with Tall buildings!
C43/55,2k11 Volvo S60 T6AWD,2k Audi B5 S4,95 Eagle Talon Tsi AWD 500+awhp
Thread Starter
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,490
Likes: 5
From: Dallas, Texas
W203 C55 and SAAB 9-3 2.0T
There's got to be a way with a new rear. My e46 325i with a 3.46 diff vs stock was night and day different. My 325 lost a second in the 1/4 with a 3.46 so I know with a tune, headers, res and 2nd cat delete it should be possible. Cool thing is all these mods will bolt right up to the 5.4 also. No real loss...
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,102
Likes: 1
From: Norcal
43
I don't believe the problem is with the engine. It's with the 722.631 transmission. IIRC the m3 and s4 that they compared with were 6spd manuals.
As a fr layout WITH automatic, you can easily expect max drivetrain loss of 20%. If you don't believe me, take it to a legitimate dynamometer; not that mustang dyno or hub dyno bs. I already had my car on dynolog, and my heart was shattered. but i dont really care anymore, the 43 is quick enough for me.
As a fr layout WITH automatic, you can easily expect max drivetrain loss of 20%. If you don't believe me, take it to a legitimate dynamometer; not that mustang dyno or hub dyno bs. I already had my car on dynolog, and my heart was shattered. but i dont really care anymore, the 43 is quick enough for me.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 5,475
Likes: 5
From: City with Tall buildings!
C43/55,2k11 Volvo S60 T6AWD,2k Audi B5 S4,95 Eagle Talon Tsi AWD 500+awhp
I don't believe the problem is with the engine. It's with the 722.631 transmission. IIRC the m3 and s4 that they compared with were 6spd manuals.
As a fr layout, you can easily expect max drivetrain loss of 20%. If you don't believe me, take it to a legitimate dynamometer; not that mustang dyno or hub dyno bs. I already had my car on dynolog, and my heart was shattered. but i dont really care anymore, the 43 is quick enough for me.
As a fr layout, you can easily expect max drivetrain loss of 20%. If you don't believe me, take it to a legitimate dynamometer; not that mustang dyno or hub dyno bs. I already had my car on dynolog, and my heart was shattered. but i dont really care anymore, the 43 is quick enough for me.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,102
Likes: 1
From: Norcal
43
A week or two ago i took on my friend's 08 335i automatic; took off from two digs, and i got him both times. pulled two car lengths from 0-20, and the gap remained until 80 where we shut down. Given, i had a mild launch at 1500rpm each time, he claimed he misshifted the first time and traction kicked in the second, etcetc.
and at the same time i took on another of my friend's 07 335i from a roll at the start of the year; he walked from 40mph til we shut down at 100. no excuses, i lost hard.
But for the sake of argument, if the c43 had a 6spd manual option, i wouldn't be surprised to see it run like a raped ape from the e36 m3 and b5 s4.
Last edited by LawRens; Dec 19, 2010 at 06:45 PM.
Member
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 153
Likes: 7
From: Sunny CA
00 ML55, 00' E55, 03' CLK55
I think it's the same reason they de-tuned the c63. Mb could have easily used the same w210 e55 drivetrain, but then how desirable would the 210 be? It would definitely out run the e55. But that's also part of the marketing decision. Hard to market a more expensive AMG car if it has the same HP as a cheaper model. Maybe not though, just my 2cents.
Trending Topics
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,102
Likes: 1
From: Norcal
43
Deleted my last message, i was dead wrong. the 5.4 n/a V8 DID come out in 1998. It's true, there would be marketing issues. But it would also be because the e36 m3 still used a 3 liter inline 6. Don't you think it would be brutish if Mercedes just tried to shove a vastly large engine of 5.4l v8 to compensate as opposed to the 4.3? No subtlety, no class, which is what MB is aimed for. It would truly be (flame suit on) a German Mustang at that point.
Last edited by LawRens; Dec 19, 2010 at 06:56 PM.
MB World Stories
The Best of Mercedes & AMG
Manual Mercedes? 6 Times Sindelfingen Let Drivers Have All The Fun
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes SLR McLaren 722 S Is Extremely Rare Example Modified by McLaren
Verdad Gallardo
8 Classic Boxy Mercedes Designs That Have Aged Like Fine Wine
Verdad Gallardo
Flawlessly Restored Mercedes 190E Evo II Heads to Auction
Verdad Gallardo
Electric Mercedes C-Class Unveiled: 11 Things You Need to Know
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes EQS Gets A Major Update: Everything You Need to Know
Verdad Gallardo
5 Underrated Mercedes-Benz Models That Don't Get the Love They Deserve
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes 300D Has Pushed Well Past 1 Million Miles and It Ain't Stopping
Verdad Gallardo
10 Most Reliable Mercedes-Benz Models You Can Buy Used
Verdad Gallardo
Member
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 153
Likes: 7
From: Sunny CA
00 ML55, 00' E55, 03' CLK55
Deleted my last message, i was dead wrong. the 5.4 n/a V8 DID come out in 1998. It's true, there would be marketing issues. But it would also be because the e36 m3 still used a 3 liter inline 6. Don't you think it would be brutish if Mercedes just tried to shove a vastly large engine of 5.5l v8 to compensate as opposed to the 4.3? No subtlety, no class, which is what MB is aimed for. It would truly be (flame suit on) a German Mustang at that point.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,102
Likes: 1
From: Norcal
43
But with regards to the w202 AMG, all the power in the engine still wouldn't mean much if it can't get to the floor.
Member
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 153
Likes: 7
From: Sunny CA
00 ML55, 00' E55, 03' CLK55
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 5,475
Likes: 5
From: City with Tall buildings!
C43/55,2k11 Volvo S60 T6AWD,2k Audi B5 S4,95 Eagle Talon Tsi AWD 500+awhp
My w202 puts the power down to the ground quite well. No different than a W208 CLK55 which has wider rear tires. 255's vs 265's.Mb should have put this motor in the W202 when they made the CLK55.
Last edited by ProjectC55; Dec 19, 2010 at 08:34 PM.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,102
Likes: 1
From: Norcal
43
Better than a 6 speed manual? I'm not talking about tires. I'm talking about the transmission. It's a given that automatic transmissions have far greater drivetrain loss than manual transmissions, hence that being what i mean when i say "putting power to the ground." And yes, i will say it now, especially in today's standards, the 722.631 is THE weakest part of the C43. It is known to fail and it has significant drivetrain loss.
Last edited by LawRens; Dec 19, 2010 at 09:23 PM.
Thread Starter
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,490
Likes: 5
From: Dallas, Texas
W203 C55 and SAAB 9-3 2.0T
There is no doubt in my mind that our cars could out run the M3 and S4 of its day with no issues with a proper LSD/Rear diff ratio. I don't need my car to be at 2500rpm at 70mph... I would be just fine with it sitting at 2700-2800rpm at the same speed and close the gap in 1/4 mile times vs other cars with the same specs... I know this can be done, we just have to find a higher ratio rear end that will fit this car... Now, where are my gear heads?? I know this is possible and maybe its wont cost us 1K like every other minimal mod does for this car. And I have to agree that if this car had a 6spd manual that it would totally run head to head with a 335i. Why wouldn't it? The twin turbo six loses steam after about 110mph anyway. NOT SAYING THIS CAR IS FASTER OR BETTER!!!!! SO DONT START!!!! I KNOW YOU CAN MOD THEM AND THEY ARE AMAZING!! SO BMW BOYS STAY AWAY!!!
Better than a 6 speed manual? I'm not talking about tires. I'm talking about the transmission. It's a given that automatic transmissions have far greater drivetrain loss than manual transmissions, hence that being what i mean when i say "putting power to the ground." And yes, i will say it now, especially in today's standards, the 722.631 is THE weakest part of the C43. It is known to fail and it has significant drivetrain loss.
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 370
Likes: 0
From: Lebanon
1995 C 36 AMG; 1992 W124 300E (M103 Ex Mosselman TT KIT) was 320hp @10psi now stock :(
just to give u an idea guys not one us spec m3 e36 bmw we did dyno here with the 3.2L produced less than 260hp at the fly wheel give it 15% loss and that means its making 220 hp on the wheels, almost what the 43 puts but since the BMW has shorter gearing and way less weight it will pull on the V8 merc.
For some reason our cars are heavy i had my car weighed in at 2 places and both times it came up over 1660 kg with me in it.
For some reason our cars are heavy i had my car weighed in at 2 places and both times it came up over 1660 kg with me in it.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 3,152
Likes: 0
From: murfreesboro,tn
2003 porsche 996 turbo
Better than a 6 speed manual? I'm not talking about tires. I'm talking about the transmission. It's a given that automatic transmissions have far greater drivetrain loss than manual transmissions, hence that being what i mean when i say "putting power to the ground." And yes, i will say it now, especially in today's standards, the 722.631 is THE weakest part of the C43. It is known to fail and it has significant drivetrain loss.
bring the them m cars also. i love me some bimmer for lunch!
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,064
Likes: 1
From: Canada
C55 AMG, 135i, 911 GT3, GLE43 AMG
I also think the transmission is at least part of the problem. In the W203 C-AMG cars, the Speedshift AMG 5 speed transmission had torque converter lock-up even in first gear, meaning much less power-loss through the transmission. Shift speeds were obviously increased as well compared to the W202 transmissions.
Did the 5 speed automatic transmission in the C43 have torque converter lock-up?.......and if so, starting in which gear?
Did the 5 speed automatic transmission in the C43 have torque converter lock-up?.......and if so, starting in which gear?
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 2,494
Likes: 17
From: REHOBOTH BEACH DE
88-300CE TWIN TURBO, 99-C43, 05-G55K, 71-280SL, 94-E320 CAB, 08 CLK63 BLACK SERIES
I don't believe the problem is with the engine. It's with the 722.631 transmission. IIRC the m3 and s4 that they compared with were 6spd manuals.
As a fr layout WITH automatic, you can easily expect max drivetrain loss of 20%. If you don't believe me, take it to a legitimate dynamometer; not that mustang dyno or hub dyno bs. I already had my car on dynolog, and my heart was shattered. but i dont really care anymore, the 43 is quick enough for me.
As a fr layout WITH automatic, you can easily expect max drivetrain loss of 20%. If you don't believe me, take it to a legitimate dynamometer; not that mustang dyno or hub dyno bs. I already had my car on dynolog, and my heart was shattered. but i dont really care anymore, the 43 is quick enough for me.
Mustang dyno is a load dyno and is considered one of the most accurate "real world" dyno's...
Far from BS which is what the typical inertia dyno reads...
Senior Member
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 369
Likes: 5
22 X3, 21 330e, 97 M3, 97 C36 (sold), but on the hunt for a clean, low-mile C43!
Are you not happy with the C43's performance? I couldn't be happier with my C36 (other than for crappy gas mileage)! I recently yanked a hopped-up S2000 from a dig all the way to at least 80 mph (don't get all worked up now Saab! 
). Similar results with an E39 540i (but much closer) and an older E400(!).
). Similar results with an E39 540i (but much closer) and an older E400(!).
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 4,437
Likes: 43
From: PDX
1999 C43, 2008 P30 E63, 2014 SQ5, 2024 Model Y Performance
Are you not happy with the C43's performance? I couldn't be happier with my C36 (other than for crappy gas mileage)! I recently yanked a hopped-up S2000 from a dig all the way to at least 80 mph (don't get all worked up now Saab! ). Similar results with an E39 540i (but much closer) and an older E400(!).
). Similar results with an E39 540i (but much closer) and an older E400(!). To avoid a billion page argument I will not mention the 335I
Thread Starter
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,490
Likes: 5
From: Dallas, Texas
W203 C55 and SAAB 9-3 2.0T
I have both a 1998 C43 blk on blk Auto and a 1997 E36 M3 Blk on blk auto sitting in my garage. All I need is another set of feet to end this argument. The C43 is faster, period. I drive both of them at least once a day and I can say with out a doubt my C43 would walk my M3 in every gear. The M3 is a much better around town car though, and the gas mileage is almost twice that of my C43 but in a str8 line, thats not even a drivers race.
Thread Starter
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,490
Likes: 5
From: Dallas, Texas
W203 C55 and SAAB 9-3 2.0T
I have yet to be bested in my C43 (I did get SMOKED by a GTR but everyone involved KNEW that was coming)... I have taken a 350Z as well as a bunch of "suped" up hondas, turbo SAAB's, and turbo Volvo's, although I do steer clear of the E46, E90, etc... M3's.
To avoid a billion page argument I will not mention the 335I
To avoid a billion page argument I will not mention the 335I
Banned
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 0
Likes: 36
our cars are now 11-12 jeers ouuld!
for that age it's still got some great original performance.
improvements can be dunne, yes.
a c43 still smokes alot of cars today but not all cars with a cool engine.
an MB has always been heavy, but that's for quality I tink.
this is only a straght forward driven car on German Autobahns, you want a car with a catlike performance get a ricer.
any car is a compromise.
having 306 hp is cool in a smaller car, an AMG streetcar was never a race car.
only a fancy driven muscle car with lots of power.
for that age it's still got some great original performance.
improvements can be dunne, yes.
a c43 still smokes alot of cars today but not all cars with a cool engine.
an MB has always been heavy, but that's for quality I tink.
this is only a straght forward driven car on German Autobahns, you want a car with a catlike performance get a ricer.
any car is a compromise.
having 306 hp is cool in a smaller car, an AMG streetcar was never a race car.
only a fancy driven muscle car with lots of power.
Thread Starter
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,490
Likes: 5
From: Dallas, Texas
W203 C55 and SAAB 9-3 2.0T
I couldn't agree more, however, it really pi$$es me off that 90% on the cars today with the same power output and might even weight a bit more, are putting down better numbers than our cars... I know this can be fixed with a higher ratio diff but I dont know where to even start looking for a new pumpkin that will fit? Ive heard the 190e LSD can be fitted, does it also have better gearing too or is it the same?
our cars are now 11-12 jeers ouuld!
for that age it's still got some great original performance.
improvements can be dunne, yes.
a c43 still smokes alot of cars today but not all cars with a cool engine.
an MB has always been heavy, but that's for quality I tink.
this is only a straght forward driven car on German Autobahns, you want a car with a catlike performance get a ricer.
any car is a compromise.
having 306 hp is cool in a smaller car, an AMG streetcar was never a race car.
only a fancy driven muscle car with lots of power.
for that age it's still got some great original performance.
improvements can be dunne, yes.
a c43 still smokes alot of cars today but not all cars with a cool engine.
an MB has always been heavy, but that's for quality I tink.
this is only a straght forward driven car on German Autobahns, you want a car with a catlike performance get a ricer.
any car is a compromise.
having 306 hp is cool in a smaller car, an AMG streetcar was never a race car.
only a fancy driven muscle car with lots of power.
