C63's true top speed
06-22-2009, 03:31 PM
#76
[quote=alumar;3587177]Speed at which you start wondering "i wonder if a tire explodes, what is my course of action" 170+
[quote]
I think this one is funny. But, I'd say there is no appropriate course of action in any car if you blow a tire at 170 or above 100 for that matter other than pray, and pray hard.
[quote]
I think this one is funny. But, I'd say there is no appropriate course of action in any car if you blow a tire at 170 or above 100 for that matter other than pray, and pray hard.
06-22-2009, 03:47 PM
#77
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: N.Jersey and New York, stationed in Germany
Posts: 1,291
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
W164 ML500,SMART For two,1994 C280(5speed manual) 1999 C230k station wagon
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jg8taxxrCZg
That guy hit 320km/h which is about 198mph and the camera appeared stable. Many owners of AMG vehicles in Germany, routinely hit up to 300km/h and beyond, on de-limited AMGs. One of the main reasons Mercedes-Benzes have had a great reputation world wide was because of durability and one of the main reasons they are so durable is because the Germans built them to be able to handle high speeds for pro-longed periods of time. They basically looked at their roads/autobahns and built accordingly. This means a stronger chassis, stronger drivetrain components, etc.
I would agree that a 'supercar' is set up to handle crazy speeds but in many ways the C63 AMG is a 'supercar'. It operates on a whole different plane from the C350 or even an S500/550 for that matter. At the extreme speeds like the 200mph you talk about there is no car that will safely handle an abrupt change of direction without feeling very unsafe or killing its occupants. It's just some cars can handle it a wee bit better than others.
The C63 chassis has been modified by AMG for better low and high speed handling. It even has a whole new front axle, courtesy of the CLK Black series. 200mph is a bit more of the norm these days. If you want to talk extremes then 250mph is the benchmark thanks to the Bugatti Veyron. I would be more afraid of lift at 200mph than chassis shake! Don't want a gentle bump on a long corner sending you airborne!
Personally, I would not want to be travelling at such speeds for a long period of time. Hell, even doing about 130mph can be nerve racking on not so smooth road.
That guy hit 320km/h which is about 198mph and the camera appeared stable. Many owners of AMG vehicles in Germany, routinely hit up to 300km/h and beyond, on de-limited AMGs. One of the main reasons Mercedes-Benzes have had a great reputation world wide was because of durability and one of the main reasons they are so durable is because the Germans built them to be able to handle high speeds for pro-longed periods of time. They basically looked at their roads/autobahns and built accordingly. This means a stronger chassis, stronger drivetrain components, etc.
I would agree that a 'supercar' is set up to handle crazy speeds but in many ways the C63 AMG is a 'supercar'. It operates on a whole different plane from the C350 or even an S500/550 for that matter. At the extreme speeds like the 200mph you talk about there is no car that will safely handle an abrupt change of direction without feeling very unsafe or killing its occupants. It's just some cars can handle it a wee bit better than others.
The C63 chassis has been modified by AMG for better low and high speed handling. It even has a whole new front axle, courtesy of the CLK Black series. 200mph is a bit more of the norm these days. If you want to talk extremes then 250mph is the benchmark thanks to the Bugatti Veyron. I would be more afraid of lift at 200mph than chassis shake! Don't want a gentle bump on a long corner sending you airborne!
Personally, I would not want to be travelling at such speeds for a long period of time. Hell, even doing about 130mph can be nerve racking on not so smooth road.
MB has always been at or around the top for high speed testing at Nardo.Some of the test drivers also reported that the MB sedans actualy held the road and handled better than the smaller,lighter sports cars that vibrated and felt light while the MB sedans were firm and stable. MB would never produce a car that could not easily handle its speed and power (saftey first). That goes for the C,E,S and Maybach (all sedans).MB has never been given a fair shake on its products. Drive 3,4,5 hundred thousand km and they still handle like day one.Do that to some of these other "supercars" and you will see which one is more capable and better built.
06-22-2009, 04:10 PM
#78
Super Member
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Troy, IL (near St. Louis, MO)
Posts: 725
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
1 Post
2019 E63s AMG
[QUOTE=dan30252;3587563][quote=alumar;3587177]Speed at which you start wondering "i wonder if a tire explodes, what is my course of action" 170+
I think this one is funny. But, I'd say there is no appropriate course of action in any car if you blow a tire at 170 or above 100 for that matter other than pray, and pray hard.
Well i can tell you from experience; a double figure 8 off a runway in a C class is quite an event.
May of 2006 I attended a multi-event car competition named Winged Warrior. In this we had to perform various runs in drag racing, autocross, road course, high speed slalom, skid pad and 0 to 100mph to 0.
In the 0 to 100 to 0, we were on a large airport runway, my second attempt I decided to turn off the ESP stability control to get a better launch and reduce my time, my idea was once i started going i would re-engage for the brake portion...
Well, i forgot, the moment I stepped on the brakes (to the floor from 101mph) the back end came around immediately, causing the car to spin 2 times off the runway, into the grass, between (2) 18" metal runway lights....
Needless to say, the largest clincher event of my life, i though for sure the car was going to flip... but luckily did not, just two wonderful long skid marks making a long double figure 8 off the runway into the grass.
I pleaded for weeks for a video, if someone got one... still nothing posted. Since that event, i make sure everything i do is video taped...that is one for the ages.
I think this one is funny. But, I'd say there is no appropriate course of action in any car if you blow a tire at 170 or above 100 for that matter other than pray, and pray hard.
May of 2006 I attended a multi-event car competition named Winged Warrior. In this we had to perform various runs in drag racing, autocross, road course, high speed slalom, skid pad and 0 to 100mph to 0.
In the 0 to 100 to 0, we were on a large airport runway, my second attempt I decided to turn off the ESP stability control to get a better launch and reduce my time, my idea was once i started going i would re-engage for the brake portion...
Well, i forgot, the moment I stepped on the brakes (to the floor from 101mph) the back end came around immediately, causing the car to spin 2 times off the runway, into the grass, between (2) 18" metal runway lights....
Needless to say, the largest clincher event of my life, i though for sure the car was going to flip... but luckily did not, just two wonderful long skid marks making a long double figure 8 off the runway into the grass.
I pleaded for weeks for a video, if someone got one... still nothing posted. Since that event, i make sure everything i do is video taped...that is one for the ages.
Last edited by alumar; 06-22-2009 at 04:13 PM.
06-22-2009, 04:30 PM
#79
MBWorld Fanatic!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 3,082
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
R8
Four pages in and we're still no where closer to answering the original question which is what would a stock C63 be capable of, top-speed wise, if it were completely delimited and whether the reported top speed of 174 mph in the Performance Package-equipped cars is really still a "limited" top speed.
Anybody?
Anybody?
06-22-2009, 04:39 PM
#80
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: N.Jersey and New York, stationed in Germany
Posts: 1,291
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
W164 ML500,SMART For two,1994 C280(5speed manual) 1999 C230k station wagon
Four pages in and we're still no where closer to answering the original question which is what would a stock C63 be capable of, top-speed wise, if it were completely delimited and whether the reported top speed of 174 mph in the Performance Package-equipped cars is really still a "limited" top speed.
Anybody?
Anybody?
06-22-2009, 05:29 PM
#84
MBWorld Fanatic!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 3,082
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
R8
06-22-2009, 06:32 PM
#85
Super Member
I don't know if this will help, or if it's already been posted. But, assuming a 25" tall tire, 2.85 gear ratio, and a 6800 rpm redline here are the top speeds for 4th through 7th gears...it's up to you to have the power to redline them...lol.
4th (1.37:1) - 129 mph
5th (1.00:1) - 177 mph
6th (0.82:1) - 216 mph
7th (0.73:1) - 243 mph
And...just for a reference, if you had the power to push 6th gear to 6000 rpm you'd be doing 191 mph, but 5000 rpm in 6th would only get you 159 mph.
You can go here to input your own data to see what you can do... http://www.wallaceracing.com/calcmph.php
4th (1.37:1) - 129 mph
5th (1.00:1) - 177 mph
6th (0.82:1) - 216 mph
7th (0.73:1) - 243 mph
And...just for a reference, if you had the power to push 6th gear to 6000 rpm you'd be doing 191 mph, but 5000 rpm in 6th would only get you 159 mph.
You can go here to input your own data to see what you can do... http://www.wallaceracing.com/calcmph.php
06-22-2009, 06:50 PM
#86
MBWorld Fanatic!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 3,082
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
R8
I don't know if this will help, or if it's already been posted. But, assuming a 25" tall tire, 2.85 gear ratio, and a 6800 rpm redline here are the top speeds for 4th through 7th gears...it's up to you to have the power to redline them...lol.
4th (1.37:1) - 129 mph
5th (1.00:1) - 177 mph
6th (0.82:1) - 216 mph
7th (0.73:1) - 243 mph
And...just for a reference, if you had the power to push 6th gear to 6000 rpm you'd be doing 191 mph, but 5000 rpm in 6th would only get you 159 mph.
You can go here to input your own data to see what you can do... http://www.wallaceracing.com/calcmph.php
4th (1.37:1) - 129 mph
5th (1.00:1) - 177 mph
6th (0.82:1) - 216 mph
7th (0.73:1) - 243 mph
And...just for a reference, if you had the power to push 6th gear to 6000 rpm you'd be doing 191 mph, but 5000 rpm in 6th would only get you 159 mph.
You can go here to input your own data to see what you can do... http://www.wallaceracing.com/calcmph.php
Thanks.
06-23-2009, 06:56 PM
#89
Exactly what I said. The actual top speed you can achieve is whatever you're dumb enough to try. There is no correct answer.
"7th (0.73:1) - 243 mph" = mechanically impossible (and way out there. The car will fall apart or lift off the ground, literally. Its a heavy, boxy, C-Class. Its not a super car, nor is it aerodynamic enough to even consider that type of speed within even close to reason. My personal opinion based on the logic of lack of chassis support, limits the reasonable DRIVABLE top speed at somewhere around 170 for non-PP cars, and 180 for PP cars. The drag coefficient of this car at 243 mph is probably as high as a box truck doing 70.
Since, you can't reasonable argue theory on the internet and get everyone to understand what you are trying to point out, you're better off just saying "good luck with that."
Of course, some may argue otherwise, and my answer is good luck with that. There's always some dumb *** trying to figure out how to make a Honda Civic do 200 mph too. You usually see his obituary and say "wasn't that the guy...."
"7th (0.73:1) - 243 mph" = mechanically impossible (and way out there. The car will fall apart or lift off the ground, literally. Its a heavy, boxy, C-Class. Its not a super car, nor is it aerodynamic enough to even consider that type of speed within even close to reason. My personal opinion based on the logic of lack of chassis support, limits the reasonable DRIVABLE top speed at somewhere around 170 for non-PP cars, and 180 for PP cars. The drag coefficient of this car at 243 mph is probably as high as a box truck doing 70.
Since, you can't reasonable argue theory on the internet and get everyone to understand what you are trying to point out, you're better off just saying "good luck with that."
Of course, some may argue otherwise, and my answer is good luck with that. There's always some dumb *** trying to figure out how to make a Honda Civic do 200 mph too. You usually see his obituary and say "wasn't that the guy...."
06-23-2009, 07:13 PM
#91
Super Member
Exactly what I said. The actual top speed you can achieve is whatever you're dumb enough to try. There is no correct answer.
"7th (0.73:1) - 243 mph" = mechanically impossible (and way out there. The car will fall apart or lift off the ground, literally. Its a heavy, boxy, C-Class. Its not a super car, nor is it aerodynamic enough to even consider that type of speed within even close to reason. My personal opinion based on the logic of lack of chassis support, limits the reasonable DRIVABLE top speed at somewhere around 170 for non-PP cars, and 180 for PP cars. The drag coefficient of this car at 243 mph is probably as high as a box truck doing 70.
Since, you can't reasonable argue theory on the internet and get everyone to understand what you are trying to point out, you're better off just saying "good luck with that."
Of course, some may argue otherwise, and my answer is good luck with that. There's always some dumb *** trying to figure out how to make a Honda Civic do 200 mph too. You usually see his obituary and say "wasn't that the guy...."
"7th (0.73:1) - 243 mph" = mechanically impossible (and way out there. The car will fall apart or lift off the ground, literally. Its a heavy, boxy, C-Class. Its not a super car, nor is it aerodynamic enough to even consider that type of speed within even close to reason. My personal opinion based on the logic of lack of chassis support, limits the reasonable DRIVABLE top speed at somewhere around 170 for non-PP cars, and 180 for PP cars. The drag coefficient of this car at 243 mph is probably as high as a box truck doing 70.
Since, you can't reasonable argue theory on the internet and get everyone to understand what you are trying to point out, you're better off just saying "good luck with that."
Of course, some may argue otherwise, and my answer is good luck with that. There's always some dumb *** trying to figure out how to make a Honda Civic do 200 mph too. You usually see his obituary and say "wasn't that the guy...."
Second, you are wrong to an extent. The theoretical top speed of 243 is based solely on math. It does not take into account the limits of machine's drivetrain or it's aero. I agree, and even said that the car wouldn't do 243, but it is GEARED as such. My point was...quite simply, IF you had the power to spin the engine to 6800 rpm in 7th gear that would be your speed. And yes...with enough power that is possible. It is highly unlikely anyone will ever get that much power out of it...but that doesn't change mathematic principle behind it.
A word of advice for you: When you find yourself in a hole, the first thing to do is stop digging.
Last edited by FormulaZR; 06-23-2009 at 07:20 PM.
06-23-2009, 07:15 PM
#92
MBWorld Fanatic!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 3,082
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
R8
06-23-2009, 07:22 PM
#93
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: OC, SoCal
Posts: 2,318
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
08 S65, 06 M3 CS(stick), 02 BMW X5 4.6iS, 07 R1 Raven, 08 F-450 4x4, 08 CooperS JCW
My guess is the c63 could still get up very high....likely 190-195mph
Drag (wind in simple speak, Dan) is the limiting factor...
06-23-2009, 07:24 PM
#94
First, I'd like to start of by saying: yes it does have a top speed and no it isn't determined by how fast you want to go. For instance, my Hayabusa is capable of 212 mph with me on it doing all I can...that's it, no more than that. If I wanted it go go 230 it just can't...and if you get scared at 180, doesn't matter, it will still do 212.
Second, you are wrong to an extent. The theoretical top speed of 243 is based solely on math. It does not take into account the limits of machine's drivetrain or it's aero. I agree, and even said that the car wouldn't do 243, but it is GEARED as such. My point was...quite simply, IF you had the power to spin the engine to 6800 rpm in 7th gear that would be your speed. And yes...with enough power that is possible. It is highly unlikely anyone will ever get that much power out of it...but that doesn't change mathematic principle behind it.
A word of advice for you: When you find yourself in a hole, the first thing to do is stop digging.
Second, you are wrong to an extent. The theoretical top speed of 243 is based solely on math. It does not take into account the limits of machine's drivetrain or it's aero. I agree, and even said that the car wouldn't do 243, but it is GEARED as such. My point was...quite simply, IF you had the power to spin the engine to 6800 rpm in 7th gear that would be your speed. And yes...with enough power that is possible. It is highly unlikely anyone will ever get that much power out of it...but that doesn't change mathematic principle behind it.
A word of advice for you: When you find yourself in a hole, the first thing to do is stop digging.
Second, you're "math principal" is worthless and pointless. See, my degree is in APPLIED mathematics. That means I actually do utilize the "real life" part of the equation. And "real life" tells you that "it ain't gonna work."
06-23-2009, 07:26 PM
#95
06-23-2009, 07:28 PM
#96
The stock(delimited only) M5 does 205mph. These are BMWs official drag limited results verified by private owners...but the M5 does have a functional rear diffuser so it's more planted than the AMGs...
My guess is the c63 could still get up very high....likely 190-195mph
Drag (wind in simple speak, Dan) is the limiting factor...
My guess is the c63 could still get up very high....likely 190-195mph
Drag (wind in simple speak, Dan) is the limiting factor...
190-195 only if the wind is blowing hard enough to help push you along and give you that extra 10 mph of speed.
Agreed on the rear diffuser.
06-23-2009, 07:32 PM
#97
Super Member
First, change your sprocket to a taller one on the bike, may be gearing in the tranny also. Then, put on a bigger windscreen to make sure you can actually tuck behind it and not get blown off, literally.
Second, you're "math principal" is worthless and pointless. See, my degree is in APPLIED mathematics. That means I actually do utilize the "real life" part of the equation. And "real life" tells you that "it ain't gonna work."
Second, you're "math principal" is worthless and pointless. See, my degree is in APPLIED mathematics. That means I actually do utilize the "real life" part of the equation. And "real life" tells you that "it ain't gonna work."
Second, I fly experimental aircraft and an quite familiar with figuring my theoretical top speed based on RPM and pitch. Most of the time I am well under theoretical due to drag...but twice I have managed to exceed it...doesn't get much more "real world" than that.
Third, I don't know why you skip over this every time...but my point in my original post was only what the car was geared to do...NOT what it was capable of. Just because you do not have the testicular fortitude to push the limits doesn't mean that others don't.
06-23-2009, 07:33 PM
#98
Top Speeds:
Buggati Veyron: 253 MPH
C63 AMG: Whatever you're dumb enough to try over 155 mph no PP, 174 no PP. MB isn't going to tell you because they don't want to be liable over those numbers.
Difference?
THE BUGATTI WAS MADE TO DO 253 MPH and that is why it costs a lot more than a $70K C63.
Buggati Veyron: 253 MPH
C63 AMG: Whatever you're dumb enough to try over 155 mph no PP, 174 no PP. MB isn't going to tell you because they don't want to be liable over those numbers.
Difference?
THE BUGATTI WAS MADE TO DO 253 MPH and that is why it costs a lot more than a $70K C63.
06-23-2009, 07:35 PM
#99
No, changing either sprocket will not help at the power level I am at and my windscreen is the best available for my application.
Second, I fly experimental aircraft and an quite familiar with figuring my theoretical top speed based on RPM and pitch. Most of the time I am well under theoretical due to drag...but twice I have managed to exceed it.
Third, I don't know why you skip over this every time...but my point in my original post was only what the car was geared to do...NOT what it was capable of.
Second, I fly experimental aircraft and an quite familiar with figuring my theoretical top speed based on RPM and pitch. Most of the time I am well under theoretical due to drag...but twice I have managed to exceed it.
Third, I don't know why you skip over this every time...but my point in my original post was only what the car was geared to do...NOT what it was capable of.
Sweet. I design code hopping algorithms for cell phone modulation so nobody can copy you're cell phone or eve's drop.
Sorry, I"m completely stupified by this thread, so any logic you try to use and this point it totally useless.
Last edited by dan30252; 06-23-2009 at 07:37 PM.
06-23-2009, 07:48 PM
#100
MBWorld Fanatic!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 3,082
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
R8
What's to stop someone from doing that with a lesser car? Are you saying there are no drivers in the world who are skilled enough to drive the C63 AMG in a straight line long enough to determine the car's top speed without killing him/herself?
Do Corollas have a top speed? Do Civics? Aren't they scientifically measured, or did the factory driver just chicken out at 127 mph?
