SolidGranite

This may be true. However, that C32 was a brand new offering from MB while this '02 E55 was on it's last leg dating back to '99. So you can't compare the two.

Fikse

yes, but for that one year.... they did...

anyways, I sure hope they do.... I'll be in line for a CXX AMG with 4XX HP running low 12's.......

RawAMGpower

Heck it might have a shot at high 11's

cntlaw

I need some expert advice now . What do I do ? I love my C55 AMG so much and it is only 14 month old. There were so little problems with it. Transport Dept Laws here do not permit engine mods without getting their approval i.e. can't do a legal mod or void the warranty too. It seems new cars now is getting new and more power..do I have to kill myself ? And, I can't even think about selling my car because I learned from this group that I must love my car for life and should not care which new car gets what new power; and I should not even complain even my window wiper is not working under black rain, nor I should make noise if only my car were towed to garage and not having a car for a week. I need some expert advice now . What do I do ? I love my C55 AMG so much.
Oh yes... remember, it does n't matter what cars get what power, you should buy a new C55 now and pay 30K to mod it to 600hp - so everything will be alright.

C43AMG

Move to the USA and kiss your laws and restrictions goodbye !

cntlaw

There is definitely a long queue of foreign people outside your big country door , each with 80K in their wallet - $60K is for paying a C55 $20K is for the mod. While I am lucky eough to discover people down this group are so supportive, instead, I would beg them to pray for me because in two years time , CNTLAW is driving the slowest Mercedes Benz in MBWORLD.ORG

RawAMGpower

It's alright if you upgrade to a C63 or E63 when they come out. No one is going to bash you. Hell that's what I'm planning to do. People just don't want to hear you telling them the C55 they have is a slow POS so sell it now while you can. It's a good car stop being so depressed with it. Beside why do you need so much power you don't even track your car and the current C55 is faster then 95% if not more of the cars you'll encounter on the road. You talk like Honda is now putting more power in there civic's then mercedes is putting in the C55.

cntlaw

You make some points here. Guess we don't need to go back to the basic arugment that how fast one can drive to qualify ownerships of fastest cars. Each individual loves a car in some ways and that does not have to explain to people who never thought supercars are justified.

Countries have plenty of unlimited speed highways, tracks, private legal racing events; do we believe everyone lives there are driving a 300hp car ? That comes to the basic that you have got to have the car first!

Here a $110K C55, 367hp 52kg torque , under most of our road situations , the fuel pedal wont need to reach half of its way ! With AMGs, Ferrari, Porsche, we here will spend most of our times on the brake pedals.
True, what is the point? And the answer is simply that '5%' counts.

We have strange road conditions here. Any roads without a traffic light within a kilometre are already qualified as "highways" ! Most of the times, they are jammed with either extremely slow or crazy speeding trucks.
(I lost to a Type-R few hrs back ; and I smoked a 911 Turbo last weekend, and this morning almost got hit by a van who decided to cut into the slow lane and I was too fast to stuck into his way). We have our own worlds for a little fun racings with our supercars in this jammed city here. We all know we are having fun.

RawAMGpower, I read that Barbaus CLS V12 has 720hp; you better make sure before you drop your check for a E63.
Have a nice day.!

rockgt302

CNTlaw you aren't a manic depressive are you?

RawAMGpower

CNTlaw actually I changed my mind about getting a C63 or E63. Even if MB Bi-turbo's them they will still be just too slow. The V12 CLS you suggest still to slow. So I've decided to invest about 2 million or so and have a 3000hp funny car built just for me. 0-60 in 0.5 quarter mile in 4.5 seconds at 300 mph. Who could touch that? No one that's right. I will be king of the road and laugh at all who challenge me and will not have to give a **** about what any auto maker will be putting out.

I think you have this fantasy about having the fastest car on the road. Truth is just cause someone has a faster car on paper doesn't mean they'll be faster then you in it. Remember a drivers ability is the most important factor over any cars power.

MCOUPIN

werd! Your depression about your C55 is pathetic. I tell you what, sell your and end the agony so we don't have to hear about it!

Do I sometimes want a better car? yes Are there better cars out there? yes Will better cars come along? yes

Grow up and stop sh**ing on our/YOUR car!

cntlaw

Wow !! Look like I am the center of finger pointings again (for what I said or for who I am ?). Hey I did n't start this C63 450hp thread , com'on give me a break.

cldriver

I'll believe the C63 when I see it. nuf said.

ProjectC55

OT for this statement here. What kind of equation are you using for HP/Liter? Back in the early to mid 80's the 5.0L mustang put out 175-225hp. I don't understand what space and weight has to do with HP based on your statement!

IdriveFast

well engines should be more effecient today than they were in the 80's.

i think its a waste of space because 6.3 liters could be put to much better use than just 400 hp. it seems like a waste. if it was only going to be 400hp, why not have a smaller engine than 6.3 liters

ProjectC55

Because MB has always used displacement to create HP and TQ vs BMW. That's always been MB's way. 6.3L just means plenty of potential awaiting,I just don't understand the term 400 hp out of a 6.3L motor is a "waste of space".In that case Chrystler must be killin it creating only 427hp out of it's Hemi SRT 6.1L motor.
400 hp and up is plenty of descent minimal hp for a 6.3L motor. Funny thing is the 3.0L supra TT motor makes 320 hp and MB uses 5.5L to make 42 more hp.Not only that BMW uses 4.8L(M5) to make 400hp.Mmmmmm smaller displacement.AMG sure does "Waste alot of space".

My point is that displacement does not always have anything to do with HP but it definitely effects TQ. The 6.3 could have 400hp but I bet you it would have a nice amt of TQ.

IdriveFast

well 425hp out of a 6.1liter is closer to 450hp out of the 6.3liter i posted than it is to the original 400hp. also, if they made it rev lower to achieve 400hp and increase torque, i think the performance would be too similar to that of the 510hp 6.3 liter. So i do not think they would do that.

the 510hp 6.3 is highly tuned. 400hp out of a 6.3 isnt highly tuned and is wasteful considering they can get 510 hp out of the same engine. I suspect the C-AMG engine also be highly tuned. But they cannot achieve that with only 400hp out of 6.3. I dont expect them to achieve 100hp/liter or even anything close to it. but 400hp out of 6.3 just sounds unacceptable considering they can get 510hp out of it.

Why waste the potential? Why not just make the engine small and as highly tuned as its 6.3 liter brother to achieve 400hp instead of detuning it? Thats why i think its a waste of space?

edit: im thinking the next c-amg engine will be 5.x liters. maybe 5.2 or 5.4. If they were only going to acheve 400 or 425hp out of a the 6.3 why did they even bother making a new engine? They could have just enlarged the current 5.4 liter and get 425 hp like what brabus does with its 6.1. If the nxt c-amg is a dohc 4 valve. It defintely wont be 6.3 liters for 400 hp or even 425hp

SolidGranite

Has anyone considered the possibility of FI for the new C-AMG??

IdriveFast

i think it would be cheaper for mercedes to just make all the AMG engines in the same way for now (N/A) until they decide to introduce a biturbo version of the 6.3 or whatever engine for they're higher models

SolidGranite

If they are going to offer a biturbo for the 6.3 then they have A LOT of transmission work to do. I read the 7-speed cannot handle anymore than 520hp or somewhere close to that...

Heck, even the engine on the SL65 was <de-tuned> because the 5-speed couldn't handle the full potential.

ProjectC55

MB just has thru history always since I can think of had a thing with displacement and tq since it built it's v8's and 6 cylinder motors.they simply love displacement because it also requires less energy and parts to make so much hp and TQ.With a BMW smaller displacement and big hp with low tq means less reliable motor in my opinion.You have to wind the hell out of the motor.High rpm potential,and low gearing in the differential.All BMW.More moving parts.High wear!E46 M3 S54motor less reliable.

IdriveFast

yes but my point is that even AMG, which i love dont get me wrong, has standards of how much horse power they need to achieve with however many liters they have.

400hp - 425hp will not be a 6.3liter dohc 4valve. id put money on it.

edit: why would they waste a 6.3 liter dohc 4valve design on just 400 or 425 hp? they could have achieved the exact same figures or more with the sohc 3valve design if they bored the engine to 6.1 or 6.3 liters

AWDman

ok my recent car and driver mentioned the new s CLASS (500) as having a 5.5L v8 but now with dohc and 32v and making 380hp.
(EDIT to note as this was mentioned above by PC Valkyrie, i'm old news)

so i guess that's the evolution of the sohc 3v as we know it...now being dropped into the c class amg......

good call idrivefast. seems you were on the money. this might mean that there could be a limited production c class with the 6.2l 32v v8??? i wonder.??? for 80 grand maybe?..amg built c coupes in past with the c32 s/c mill on special order....germany only

keep the thread going but pl keep the personal BS off.....

ProjectC55

Well that's like asking why would Chevy use a 7.0L motor to power the 500hp Z06 when they could achieve the same bhp#'s with a 5.7L.There's got to be some kinda logical engineering reason and from what I see the motor will last longer,make TQ and won't have to have as many moving parts as BMW's(M5) 5.0 L V10(500bhp) or Audi's (RS6)5.5LV10(505bhp).Displacement is MB's tix as well as Chevy's. To achieve the hp levels with lower disp the other manufacturers are adding an extra piston ,rod,and longer crankshaft.We do it with displacement.It's really not a waste.

IdriveFast

i think comparing the LS7 to the LS6/1 is a little different than than comparing the sohc 3valve to the dohc 4valve, but anyways

"There's got to be some kinda logical engineering reason and from what I see the motor will last longer, make TQ and won't have to have as many moving parts"

what are you talking about? from what I can tell, the new DOHC 4valve amg is far more complex than the sohc 3valve. our sohc engines dont even have vvti or anything like it. in terms of moving parts the current sohc engines are far simpler.

i understand that AMG's method of hp has always been displacement. but i think you're misunderstanding me.

Im not disagreeing with AMG's approach. i think a semi high revving big displacement motor is perfect. its the perfect compromise between the torque of a big block and the flexibility of a high revving motor.

even though amg's method is displacement over revs, the new technology they add to engine still serves the purpose of achieving more hp/liter (among other things).

400hp out of 6.3 liters out of a dohc 4valve motor (compared to the 362hp out of a 5.4 liter sohc 3valve) is jus terrible. 400hp out of 6.3 liters would be as if all the new technology they added amounted to nothing. what was all the effort for if they could achieve the same hp/liter with the sohc 3valve?
thats why 400hp/liter out of 6.3 liters would be a waste of space.

you mentioned the hemi motor earlier...yes im aware that the 6.1 hemi achieves 425hp out of 6.1 liters. so what? is that supposed to be good enough for AMG???a car that people are paying tens of thousands of dollars more for?

i know i read somewhere that the new AMG engine is AMG's own and that it shares no parts in common with other mercedes engines. HOWEVER im going to go out on a limb and say that this statement was made before the 5.4 liter engines used in the new S500 went into production. AMG's 6.3 liter engine is likely based on the 5.4. the 5.4 already achieves 380 or so hp. and thats not even an AMG engine. your telling me that AMG will go through the effort of boring the engine from 5.4 liters to 6.3 liters while settling for only a 20 or so hp increase?? again, waste of space.