C63's true top speed
06-23-2009, 09:24 PM
#126
My guess is that its limited to 174ish, but its really just a marketing ploy. I guess they are willing to bet that if you're dumb enough to go that fast on a public road, and on the rare occasion you survive, the risk for law suit is minimal because most idiots will lose it at that speed and die anyways, thus no lawsuit about the "174 mph top speed limiter." And if the limiter kicks in and your pissed, what are you going to do? Sue and admit in open court that you were doing 174 mph on a public road? If you say it was on track, they'll void your warranty for racing the car, so again you lose.
06-23-2009, 09:25 PM
#127
06-23-2009, 09:27 PM
#128
And actually, the next thread will be "will a CF diffuser help me hit 200 mph?" How about carbon mirror covers? Or if I remove the star from the grille to let the motor get more air to breathe?
06-23-2009, 10:18 PM
#129
And, to answer your first post original question:
My guess is that its limited to 174ish, but its really just a marketing ploy. I guess they are willing to bet that if you're dumb enough to go that fast on a public road, and on the rare occasion you survive, the risk for law suit is minimal because most idiots will lose it at that speed and die anyways, thus no lawsuit about the "174 mph top speed limiter." And if the limiter kicks in and your pissed, what are you going to do? Sue and admit in open court that you were doing 174 mph on a public road? If you say it was on track, they'll void your warranty for racing the car, so again you lose.
My guess is that its limited to 174ish, but its really just a marketing ploy. I guess they are willing to bet that if you're dumb enough to go that fast on a public road, and on the rare occasion you survive, the risk for law suit is minimal because most idiots will lose it at that speed and die anyways, thus no lawsuit about the "174 mph top speed limiter." And if the limiter kicks in and your pissed, what are you going to do? Sue and admit in open court that you were doing 174 mph on a public road? If you say it was on track, they'll void your warranty for racing the car, so again you lose.
Again with your head up your ***. AMG puts on sponsored track days where they invite you to come out and track your car. So, I'd love to know how they are going to void your warranty because you too it on the track.
What do you think these cars are designed for?
06-23-2009, 10:30 PM
#130
And this one I really don't get. The C63 is a C-Class with some bells. We'll just call all the goodies "bells." Yet, it keeps getting put up against an M5, M6, Ferrari's, Lambo's, etc? Why? Totally different leagues of cars.
Don't get me wrong, I love the C63. I bought it for a reason. Its a wonderful car. However, its sure as hell not an M5, M6, E63, S63, and sure as hell not a super car.
Why is everyone comparing the C63 against $20K + more $ than the C63? Just because a M6 which costs almost $30K more than the C63 PP can do 194 + MPH doesn't mean the C63 can do it.
Its irrelevant!
Compare it to something in its own class. The closest comparison thus far has been the GTR.
Don't get me wrong, I love the C63. I bought it for a reason. Its a wonderful car. However, its sure as hell not an M5, M6, E63, S63, and sure as hell not a super car.
Why is everyone comparing the C63 against $20K + more $ than the C63? Just because a M6 which costs almost $30K more than the C63 PP can do 194 + MPH doesn't mean the C63 can do it.
Its irrelevant!
Compare it to something in its own class. The closest comparison thus far has been the GTR.Are you ****ed? You think there is more to a M5/M6 and E/S63 then the C, just because its a C class and those other cars cost more to buy? So because the tag on the car is 20k more it MUST be better right? God you have your head is wayyy up your ***. Have you even driven these cars you speak so dearly of?
A CLASS IS PRICE RANGE!@#$% doesn't have jack **** to do with performance!
I want to throw my laptop out the window just reading this ****.
06-23-2009, 10:32 PM
#131
Well, let me tell you a little story... I bought a Ducati 998R back in the day. Ducati called it the "race version" (and still does) of the 998 Superbike. Well, I use to race CCS Formula Extreme. So, anyways, I bought this bike from a local authorized dealer. Had some suspension issues. Specifically, one of the forks fell apart, and I lost it in a corner cause there was fork oil on my tire. Didn't know the fork fell apart.
So, I take it to the dealer, who is also a friend. He's like WTF. He calls Ducati NA. They call back a week later with: "Congrats, its not under warranty because you were racing, and btw, we have now voided your warranty."
BTW, Ducati SPONSORS amature racers. They also do track days. Of course, they call these track days "rider training" so therefore, its not technically voiding your warranty.
But, YMMV.
06-23-2009, 10:42 PM
#132
Have you ever heard of a BOM? BOM = Bill of Materials.
What you are saying is that an M5, M6, E/s63 costs no more to build than a C63? You are truly smoking some good ****.
There is A LOT more to an M5, M6, E/S63 than there is to a C63 in many ways. First, there is motor. Then, there is drive train. Then, there is suspension, then there is ergonomics, then there is materials.
Do you think that they are just sticking a letter higher up in the alphabet and adding $20K to the sticker or something over at MB?
The technology put into the class of cars you mention, exceeds what is put into a C Class. If you think otherwise, you're mental. A C63 is STILL a C-Class.
And a class price range has a ton to do with performance. No matter which aspect you look at. There is a thing called "platform technology." That means that the entire "C" class shares one platform, "E" shares one, "S" shares one across the entire range of the prefix. There HAS to be a "gap" in performance and price between platforms... otherwise all cars would cost the same.
Sure, some platforms "share" some technologies, but a C Class, C63 or not, has minimal things to do with how an S Class, S63 for example is designed. You aren't comparing apples to apples dude. You're comparing apples to oranges.
Geez... I was laughing one day at a Honda forum where they were comparing Civic Si's to F430's. I thought a MB forum would be more down to earth, but obviously not.
Note to self: Forget the LP640 plans and saving money to get there, I'm just gonna buy a C Class again.
06-23-2009, 10:47 PM
#134
Yes, I have. I"ve owned an M3, and a GT3. I've driven both M5 and M6. My old roommate had an M6 and I drove it for 3 weeks straight while he was in Europe and my car was over the lease miles. I have also driven (test drives, traded cars, short term stuff
LP560
F430
Quattroporte
E63
F360
Z06 <-- cousin is a test engineer at GM R&D.
ZR1 <-- cousin is a test engineer at GM R&D.
Viper (old one, 1995 I think)
Ruf Turbo (over night test drive. Almost bought it but it was used. Got GT3 instead.)
and everything you see in my signature line.
LP560
F430
Quattroporte
E63
F360
Z06 <-- cousin is a test engineer at GM R&D.
ZR1 <-- cousin is a test engineer at GM R&D.
Viper (old one, 1995 I think)
Ruf Turbo (over night test drive. Almost bought it but it was used. Got GT3 instead.)
and everything you see in my signature line.
Last edited by dan30252; 06-23-2009 at 10:50 PM.
06-23-2009, 10:51 PM
#135
If I'm an idiot, what are you? I'm here wasting time intentionally while I listen to a bunch of Dutch people babble on during a conference call.
You, on the other hand, are wasting your free time to call me an idiot?
Who's the idiot? I'm getting paid $400 an hour as a consultant to be on here. Who's paying you?
You, on the other hand, are wasting your free time to call me an idiot?
Who's the idiot? I'm getting paid $400 an hour as a consultant to be on here. Who's paying you?
06-23-2009, 11:20 PM
#136
MBWorld Fanatic!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 3,082
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
R8
And a class price range has a ton to do with performance. No matter which aspect you look at. There is a thing called "platform technology." That means that the entire "C" class shares one platform, "E" shares one, "S" shares one across the entire range of the prefix. There HAS to be a "gap" in performance and price between platforms... otherwise all cars would cost the same.
You talk about the classes of cars and how the difference between them is the gap in "performance and price". What about size? The E-class costs more than the C-class because it performs better? If you measure performance by how many chicks you can squeeze into the back seat of a car, then yes, the E-class performs better, by a thunder thigh or two. Otherwise, you're paying more for a bit more leather, a bit less plastic, and other superficial measurements of superiority. There really isn't a great deal of performance oneupmanship in the bigger platform.
06-23-2009, 11:32 PM
#137
Gee, Dan, for a second there, I thought you were starting to make sense and then you post something like this.
You talk about the classes of cars and how the difference between them is the gap in "performance and price". What about size? The E-class costs more than the C-class because it performs better? If you measure performance by how many chicks you can squeeze into the back seat of a car, then yes, the E-class performs better, by a thunder thigh or two. Otherwise, you're paying more for a bit more leather, a bit less plastic, and other superficial measurements of superiority. There really isn't a great deal of performance oneupmanship in the bigger platform.
You talk about the classes of cars and how the difference between them is the gap in "performance and price". What about size? The E-class costs more than the C-class because it performs better? If you measure performance by how many chicks you can squeeze into the back seat of a car, then yes, the E-class performs better, by a thunder thigh or two. Otherwise, you're paying more for a bit more leather, a bit less plastic, and other superficial measurements of superiority. There really isn't a great deal of performance oneupmanship in the bigger platform.
HOWEVER, an M5, M6 is a totally different breed of car, as is an SL63. If you look in this thread, people are comparing performance of an M6 (realistically, a competitor to the SL63) against a C63. M6 starts out at over $100K new. You could option it almost to double the cost of an C63. Even though those options really aren't performance oriented, you are still talking a $30K delta between a base M6 and a full loaded C63.
There has to be more to the car than just some leather trim to make up for $30K and even size. The M6 isn't $30K more in sheet metal and leather. There's a lot more there than that probably in the chassis set up and small bits like that which actually make a difference.
If I were to wager though, I'd bet that the M6 and C63 are probably VERY close in performance outside of handling. 0-60, 0-100, etc. are probably within a second, two tops.
06-23-2009, 11:34 PM
#138
Junior Member
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Chicago, IL/Kiawah Island, SC/Dubai
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2010 Arctic White AMG C63
Wow, I think I said the same exact thing... 2 pages ago.
So according to Dan, since the GTR doesn't cost that much money there must not be alot of R&D behind it. Yet it roasts Dan's beloved Porsche around the Nurgburging. But that must be false, because it doesn't cost as much as the Porsche.
The M5 and M6 aren't really that much better or different than the C63. They have a V10, but the technology of those cars is in some cases not as advanced as the tech in the C63. They can achieve those speeds because they have the power to do so, and maybe slightly better aerodynamics, but not much at all, especially on an M5.
The key to the top speed is power and aerodynamics/drag, you said it yourself. If a car can reach 200mph but is sloppy at that speed does it mean that it's top speed isn't 200mph? No it doesn't. It still reached that speed no matter how unstable it was. So yes, the C63 might be a bit of a handful at 180mph+, but does that mean that it can't go above 180mph? No. Wherever the forces of drag become so high the power of the car can't overcome them is the top speed of the car, whether it is stable or not. Is it a smart idea to try it in an unstable car? No. But neither is going 170mph weaving through traffic on a busy Atlanta road. And by the way. You DID have a choice there. You could have told him to stop, yelled at him, done something, and I dunno if you did or not, but the way you were bragging about it, it didn't sound like that was the case.
Oh and since we are comparing how much money we make and how much education we have, I'll tell you about me. I'm 29 years old and make around $13 million a year. I own my own business and several research centers/nuclear pharmacies around the world, including ones in Germany and the United Arab Emirates. I went to school for 7 years, and graduated near the top of my class at Purdue University, and before that completed my pre-reqs at Notre Dame and achieved my Bachelor of Science there also.
I have owned several supercars, including an Ferrari Enzo. I considered purchasing a Veyron, but while amazing as it is, I would probably kill myself in it. I don't know if I could handle something that fast, 0-60mph-wise. My E92 M3 was my daily driver in the summer and soon a C63 will be, in the winter I drive a X5xdrive35d. Having nice things is nice, but you can't put a price on true happiness. Personally I'm not a very materialistic person, I don't have a billion sq.ft. house, because quite frankly I don't need one, I no longer have a super-expensive, super-fast, super car, because quite frankly I don't need something that will go that fast. I get my jollies off of how fast I can go 0-60mph or whatever the speed limit is, and driving on twisty roads, not going 207mph. It's nice yes, but is it something I can't live without? No.
Mike
So according to Dan, since the GTR doesn't cost that much money there must not be alot of R&D behind it. Yet it roasts Dan's beloved Porsche around the Nurgburging. But that must be false, because it doesn't cost as much as the Porsche.
The M5 and M6 aren't really that much better or different than the C63. They have a V10, but the technology of those cars is in some cases not as advanced as the tech in the C63. They can achieve those speeds because they have the power to do so, and maybe slightly better aerodynamics, but not much at all, especially on an M5.
The key to the top speed is power and aerodynamics/drag, you said it yourself. If a car can reach 200mph but is sloppy at that speed does it mean that it's top speed isn't 200mph? No it doesn't. It still reached that speed no matter how unstable it was. So yes, the C63 might be a bit of a handful at 180mph+, but does that mean that it can't go above 180mph? No. Wherever the forces of drag become so high the power of the car can't overcome them is the top speed of the car, whether it is stable or not. Is it a smart idea to try it in an unstable car? No. But neither is going 170mph weaving through traffic on a busy Atlanta road. And by the way. You DID have a choice there. You could have told him to stop, yelled at him, done something, and I dunno if you did or not, but the way you were bragging about it, it didn't sound like that was the case.
Oh and since we are comparing how much money we make and how much education we have, I'll tell you about me. I'm 29 years old and make around $13 million a year. I own my own business and several research centers/nuclear pharmacies around the world, including ones in Germany and the United Arab Emirates. I went to school for 7 years, and graduated near the top of my class at Purdue University, and before that completed my pre-reqs at Notre Dame and achieved my Bachelor of Science there also.
I have owned several supercars, including an Ferrari Enzo. I considered purchasing a Veyron, but while amazing as it is, I would probably kill myself in it. I don't know if I could handle something that fast, 0-60mph-wise. My E92 M3 was my daily driver in the summer and soon a C63 will be, in the winter I drive a X5xdrive35d. Having nice things is nice, but you can't put a price on true happiness. Personally I'm not a very materialistic person, I don't have a billion sq.ft. house, because quite frankly I don't need one, I no longer have a super-expensive, super-fast, super car, because quite frankly I don't need something that will go that fast. I get my jollies off of how fast I can go 0-60mph or whatever the speed limit is, and driving on twisty roads, not going 207mph. It's nice yes, but is it something I can't live without? No.
Mike
Last edited by CRAZYC63; 06-23-2009 at 11:38 PM.
06-23-2009, 11:45 PM
#139
Wow, I think I said the same exact thing... 2 pages ago.
So according to Dan, since the GTR doesn't cost that much money there must not be alot of R&D behind it. Yet it roasts Dan's beloved Porsche around the Nurgburging. But that must be false, because it doesn't cost as much as the Porsche.
The M5 and M6 aren't really that much better or different than the C63. They have a V10, but the technology of those cars is in some cases not as advanced as the tech in the C63. They can achieve those speeds because they have the power to do so, and maybe slightly better aerodynamics, but not much at all, especially on an M5.
The key to the top speed is power and aerodynamics/drag, you said it yourself. If a car can reach 200mph but is sloppy at that speed does it mean that it's top speed isn't 200mph? No it doesn't. It still reached that speed no matter how unstable it was. So yes, the C63 might be a bit of a handful at 180mph+, but does that mean that it can't go above 180mph? No. Wherever the forces of drag become so high the power of the car can't overcome them is the top speed of the car, whether it is stable or not. Is it a smart idea to try it in an unstable car? No. But neither is going 170mph weaving through traffic on a busy Atlanta road. And by the way. You DID have a choice there. You could have told him to stop, yelled at him, done something, and I dunno if you did or not, but the way you were bragging about it, it didn't sound like that was the case.
Oh and since we are comparing how much money we make and how much education we have, I'll tell you about me. I'm 29 years old and make around $13 million a year. I own my own business and several research centers/nuclear pharmacies around the world, including ones in Germany and the United Arab Emirates. I went to school for 7 years, and graduated near the top of my class at Purdue University, and before that completed my pre-reqs at Notre Dame and achieved my Bachelor of Science there also.
I have owned several supercars, including an Ferrari Enzo. I considered purchasing a Veyron, but while amazing as it is, I would probably kill myself in it. I don't know if I could handle something that fast, 0-60mph-wise. My E92 M3 was my daily driver in the summer and soon a C63 will be, in the winter I drive a X5xdrive35d. Having nice things is nice, but you can't put a price on true happiness. Personally I'm not a very materialistic person, I don't have a billion sq.ft. house, because quite frankly I don't need one, I no longer have a super-expensive, super-fast, super car, because quite frankly I don't need something that will go that fast. I get my jollies off of how fast I can go 0-60mph or whatever the speed limit is, and driving on twisty roads, not going 207mph. It's nice yes, but is it something I can't live without? No.
Mike
So according to Dan, since the GTR doesn't cost that much money there must not be alot of R&D behind it. Yet it roasts Dan's beloved Porsche around the Nurgburging. But that must be false, because it doesn't cost as much as the Porsche.
The M5 and M6 aren't really that much better or different than the C63. They have a V10, but the technology of those cars is in some cases not as advanced as the tech in the C63. They can achieve those speeds because they have the power to do so, and maybe slightly better aerodynamics, but not much at all, especially on an M5.
The key to the top speed is power and aerodynamics/drag, you said it yourself. If a car can reach 200mph but is sloppy at that speed does it mean that it's top speed isn't 200mph? No it doesn't. It still reached that speed no matter how unstable it was. So yes, the C63 might be a bit of a handful at 180mph+, but does that mean that it can't go above 180mph? No. Wherever the forces of drag become so high the power of the car can't overcome them is the top speed of the car, whether it is stable or not. Is it a smart idea to try it in an unstable car? No. But neither is going 170mph weaving through traffic on a busy Atlanta road. And by the way. You DID have a choice there. You could have told him to stop, yelled at him, done something, and I dunno if you did or not, but the way you were bragging about it, it didn't sound like that was the case.
Oh and since we are comparing how much money we make and how much education we have, I'll tell you about me. I'm 29 years old and make around $13 million a year. I own my own business and several research centers/nuclear pharmacies around the world, including ones in Germany and the United Arab Emirates. I went to school for 7 years, and graduated near the top of my class at Purdue University, and before that completed my pre-reqs at Notre Dame and achieved my Bachelor of Science there also.
I have owned several supercars, including an Ferrari Enzo. I considered purchasing a Veyron, but while amazing as it is, I would probably kill myself in it. I don't know if I could handle something that fast, 0-60mph-wise. My E92 M3 was my daily driver in the summer and soon a C63 will be, in the winter I drive a X5xdrive35d. Having nice things is nice, but you can't put a price on true happiness. Personally I'm not a very materialistic person, I don't have a billion sq.ft. house, because quite frankly I don't need one, I no longer have a super-expensive, super-fast, super car, because quite frankly I don't need something that will go that fast. I get my jollies off of how fast I can go 0-60mph or whatever the speed limit is, and driving on twisty roads, not going 207mph. It's nice yes, but is it something I can't live without? No.
Mike
The C63 is a total brick at really high speeds. I highlighted why I don't think you could ever break over let's say 185 even on a good day. You said it perfectly. The resistance vs. HP ratio's don't add up. The car is not aerodynamic enough to break past the resistance of the wind. And even if it does, there is too much lift there which will put you out of control at best.
On the rest of the crap, irrelevant. I was wasting time and being an *** because my serious face goes away when someone tells me a C class is going to break "200+ MPH."
06-23-2009, 11:48 PM
#141
MBWorld Fanatic!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 3,082
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
R8
Yeah, see now we finally have somewhat of a logical post. Now I gotta put on my serious face.
The C63 is a total brick at really high speeds. I highlighted why I don't think you could ever break over let's say 185 even on a good day. You said it perfectly. The resistance vs. HP ratio's don't add up. The car is not aerodynamic enough to break past the resistance of the wind. And even if it does, there is too much lift there which will put you out of control at best.
On the rest of the crap, irrelevant. I was wasting time and being an *** because my serious face goes away when someone tells me a C class is going to break "200+ MPH."
The C63 is a total brick at really high speeds. I highlighted why I don't think you could ever break over let's say 185 even on a good day. You said it perfectly. The resistance vs. HP ratio's don't add up. The car is not aerodynamic enough to break past the resistance of the wind. And even if it does, there is too much lift there which will put you out of control at best.
On the rest of the crap, irrelevant. I was wasting time and being an *** because my serious face goes away when someone tells me a C class is going to break "200+ MPH."
06-23-2009, 11:52 PM
#142
Hell, I opted for a C63. I went in with plans on getting a loaded E63. Salesman said "you seriously should drive the C63, its fun." Took it home later that day. It's a fun car. That's all that matters.
06-23-2009, 11:54 PM
#143
06-23-2009, 11:59 PM
#144
Its funny how much this thread reminds me of the Porsche ceramic brakes discussion I had with a factory test driver. Being in ATL (Porsche NA HQ) and having a friend that works there, I got to meet a test driver, a real factory test driver from Germany. Had the ceramic brakes discussion with him. His verdict was its a total waste of $ unless you plan on tracking the car, and even then unless you REALLY can turn some fast lap times, you don't need them. Told me to put my $ in suspension and worry about going faster rather than trying to slow down a car more capable than I am as a driver.
Yet... on my recent ordered car, I still bought them, only because its a resale feature. lol Everyone gets ceramics on a GT3 regardless if you need them or not. That's the only real reason Porsche even offers them.
Yet... on my recent ordered car, I still bought them, only because its a resale feature. lol Everyone gets ceramics on a GT3 regardless if you need them or not. That's the only real reason Porsche even offers them.
06-24-2009, 04:35 AM
#146
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 1,477
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SL600
If I'm an idiot, what are you? I'm here wasting time intentionally while I listen to a bunch of Dutch people babble on during a conference call.
You, on the other hand, are wasting your free time to call me an idiot?
Who's the idiot? I'm getting paid $400 an hour as a consultant to be on here. Who's paying you?
You, on the other hand, are wasting your free time to call me an idiot?
Who's the idiot? I'm getting paid $400 an hour as a consultant to be on here. Who's paying you?
Your an idiot (regardless of monetary standings)-- when you get your foot out of your mouth, and your head out of your *** I might consider thinking otherwise.
06-24-2009, 08:32 AM
#147
Super Member
Exceeded theoretical limits = unknown variable added, correct? Find the variable, and you'll know what allowed you to exceed the limits. THAT is the hard part.
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.
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.
Also, you say your degree is in applied mathematics, which actually makes you unqualified to say that the top speed of the vehicle is the point in which you get scared...you would need a degree in applied psychology to make that statement.
And, btw, just because you think that the chassis of a vehicle has a direct relation to the drag does not make it correct. You are proving my theory...a little bit of knowledge is a very dangerous thing.
$$$ of a car doesn't have too much to do with the performance of a vehicle. Please do not let your theory that $$$=performance restrict you from seeing the big picture.
There are numerous "bricks" in the drag racing world that reach 200mph regularly...with enough power it is possible.
06-24-2009, 11:48 AM
#148
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 2,177
Likes: 0
Received 13 Likes
on
12 Posts
2014 Audi RS7
Dan,
Hate to disappoint you but the car WILL run 200mph. Its already been 193+ with just shorty headers and a tune, stock suspension, wheels and tires. With some suspension adjustments, long tube headers, and aftermarket wheels it will reach 200+mph. The car was rock solid at that speed and if you don't believe me ask the Porsche Carrera GT that was with me and the other group behind us. Don't under estimate this little monster. We are setting the car up now to make the One Mile Run.
We MUST be careful racing and driving but don't beat on the car because its a "C" class. It will run with some of the best exotics out there.
Hate to disappoint you but the car WILL run 200mph. Its already been 193+ with just shorty headers and a tune, stock suspension, wheels and tires. With some suspension adjustments, long tube headers, and aftermarket wheels it will reach 200+mph. The car was rock solid at that speed and if you don't believe me ask the Porsche Carrera GT that was with me and the other group behind us. Don't under estimate this little monster. We are setting the car up now to make the One Mile Run.
We MUST be careful racing and driving but don't beat on the car because its a "C" class. It will run with some of the best exotics out there.
06-24-2009, 12:10 PM
#149
Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 216
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
09 C63 steel grey
damnit! got sucked in again!
The C63 is not a C350 chassis with bolt on mods - I'll even save you the trouble of googling it.
Motor Trend
First Drive: 2008 Mercedes-Benz C63 AMG
July 09, 2007
By Frank Markus
"This is the first AMG product to be designed from its computer-conception for extreme performance. Its predecessors (like most AMG models) are essentially tuner specials, with bolted-on performance. This time, practically everything forward of the firewall (except for the two energy-absorbing frame-rail stubs) is unique to AMG. The front track is 1.4-inches wider, standard 18-inch wheels permit larger knuckles, and a new engine cradle accommodates longer diagonal links that completely change the geometry. A lower roll center, for example, helps the car corner flatter while preserving ride quality with an anti-roll bar that's only 0.04-inch thicker. New ball bearings offer twice the rigidity of the stock front-axle bearings. Camber increases from 0.5 to 1.4 degrees and caster is reduced by 15 degrees. The steering ratio tightens from 14.5:1 to 13.5:1, and there are new bearings atop the struts. The effect of all this front-end work is vastly improved steering feel and agility with reduced understeer.
The 6.2-liter V-8 weighs about 70 pounds more than the E350's V-6, and it's about four inches longer, but by moving it two inches closer to the firewall, weight distribution remains at a respectable 54/46 front/rear. An all-new front end stretches the nose 3.4 inches. Power output is dialed back to 450 horses and 443 pound-feet-enough to vanquish the M3 without crowding AMG's pricier 63 models. Coaxing the CLK63 Black's 500 horses and 473 pound-feet out of this setup will be child's play for the aftermarket, if AMG doesn't offer power-spiffs of its own. A Performance Package will include a mechanical limited-slip differential (offering 30 percent lockup under power, 10 percent or less on overrun), and compound steel brake rotors with aluminum centers (for vastly improved fade resistance and slightly lower weight). Springs and dampers are stiffened by 10 and 15 percent respectively, and the speed governor is raised to 174 mph."
ok! breaking free!
The C63 is not a C350 chassis with bolt on mods - I'll even save you the trouble of googling it.
Motor Trend
First Drive: 2008 Mercedes-Benz C63 AMG
July 09, 2007
By Frank Markus
"This is the first AMG product to be designed from its computer-conception for extreme performance. Its predecessors (like most AMG models) are essentially tuner specials, with bolted-on performance. This time, practically everything forward of the firewall (except for the two energy-absorbing frame-rail stubs) is unique to AMG. The front track is 1.4-inches wider, standard 18-inch wheels permit larger knuckles, and a new engine cradle accommodates longer diagonal links that completely change the geometry. A lower roll center, for example, helps the car corner flatter while preserving ride quality with an anti-roll bar that's only 0.04-inch thicker. New ball bearings offer twice the rigidity of the stock front-axle bearings. Camber increases from 0.5 to 1.4 degrees and caster is reduced by 15 degrees. The steering ratio tightens from 14.5:1 to 13.5:1, and there are new bearings atop the struts. The effect of all this front-end work is vastly improved steering feel and agility with reduced understeer.
The 6.2-liter V-8 weighs about 70 pounds more than the E350's V-6, and it's about four inches longer, but by moving it two inches closer to the firewall, weight distribution remains at a respectable 54/46 front/rear. An all-new front end stretches the nose 3.4 inches. Power output is dialed back to 450 horses and 443 pound-feet-enough to vanquish the M3 without crowding AMG's pricier 63 models. Coaxing the CLK63 Black's 500 horses and 473 pound-feet out of this setup will be child's play for the aftermarket, if AMG doesn't offer power-spiffs of its own. A Performance Package will include a mechanical limited-slip differential (offering 30 percent lockup under power, 10 percent or less on overrun), and compound steel brake rotors with aluminum centers (for vastly improved fade resistance and slightly lower weight). Springs and dampers are stiffened by 10 and 15 percent respectively, and the speed governor is raised to 174 mph."
ok! breaking free!
Last edited by tyanger; 06-24-2009 at 12:17 PM.
06-24-2009, 12:14 PM
#150
MBWorld Fanatic!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 3,082
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
R8
Dan,
Hate to disappoint you but the car WILL run 200mph. Its already been 193+ with just shorty headers and a tune, stock suspension, wheels and tires. With some suspension adjustments, long tube headers, and aftermarket wheels it will reach 200+mph. The car was rock solid at that speed and if you don't believe me ask the Porsche Carrera GT that was with me and the other group behind us. Don't under estimate this little monster. We are setting the car up now to make the One Mile Run.
We MUST be careful racing and driving but don't beat on the car because its a "C" class. It will run with some of the best exotics out there.
Hate to disappoint you but the car WILL run 200mph. Its already been 193+ with just shorty headers and a tune, stock suspension, wheels and tires. With some suspension adjustments, long tube headers, and aftermarket wheels it will reach 200+mph. The car was rock solid at that speed and if you don't believe me ask the Porsche Carrera GT that was with me and the other group behind us. Don't under estimate this little monster. We are setting the car up now to make the One Mile Run.
We MUST be careful racing and driving but don't beat on the car because its a "C" class. It will run with some of the best exotics out there.
Just out of curiosity, what happened as you hit 193 mph? Did the car just refuse to go any faster? Did you lift off the throttle? Did you run out of road? Could the car have gone faster if you had stayed your course?
