605hp from the 63 engine!
#1
Super Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: UG
Posts: 999
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2013 ML63 AMG PP
605hp from the 63 engine!
Okay it might be in the new E63 but at least it looks like it's possible without forced induction. The article is a snippet of the full one on worldcarfans.com
"Under the hood, VÄTH enlarged the cylinder head channels, installed new engine management software, and added new pistons, valves, sport cam shafts, a larger intake, and bigger exhaust valves (all for a whopping €19,635). Thanks to these modifications, the engine produces 605 hp and 690 Nm of torque (an increase of 87 hp and 60 Nm of torque). This allows the V63RS to accelerate from 0 to 100 km/h in 4.1 seconds, before topping out at 340 km/h (211 mph)"
"Under the hood, VÄTH enlarged the cylinder head channels, installed new engine management software, and added new pistons, valves, sport cam shafts, a larger intake, and bigger exhaust valves (all for a whopping €19,635). Thanks to these modifications, the engine produces 605 hp and 690 Nm of torque (an increase of 87 hp and 60 Nm of torque). This allows the V63RS to accelerate from 0 to 100 km/h in 4.1 seconds, before topping out at 340 km/h (211 mph)"
#5
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 2,177
Likes: 0
Received 13 Likes
on
12 Posts
2014 Audi RS7
Okay it might be in the new E63 but at least it looks like it's possible without forced induction. The article is a snippet of the full one on worldcarfans.com
"Under the hood, VÄTH enlarged the cylinder head channels, installed new engine management software, and added new pistons, valves, sport cam shafts, a larger intake, and bigger exhaust valves (all for a whopping €19,635). Thanks to these modifications, the engine produces 605 hp and 690 Nm of torque (an increase of 87 hp and 60 Nm of torque). This allows the V63RS to accelerate from 0 to 100 km/h in 4.1 seconds, before topping out at 340 km/h (211 mph)"
"Under the hood, VÄTH enlarged the cylinder head channels, installed new engine management software, and added new pistons, valves, sport cam shafts, a larger intake, and bigger exhaust valves (all for a whopping €19,635). Thanks to these modifications, the engine produces 605 hp and 690 Nm of torque (an increase of 87 hp and 60 Nm of torque). This allows the V63RS to accelerate from 0 to 100 km/h in 4.1 seconds, before topping out at 340 km/h (211 mph)"
Remember that number is FWHP(BHP) and not RWHP. There are C63's already at the 600FWHP(BHP) and haven't done any motor work. I believe with just bolt ons and cams they are capable of 650 to 700FWHP(BHP). Remember there is about 17-20% drivetrain loss. 605 less 20% is 484rwhp and some have already gone higher than that. These motors ARE monsters!!
Last edited by Dads C63; 01-22-2010 at 02:20 PM.
#6
MBWorld Fanatic!
#7
MBWorld Fanatic!
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Seattle
Posts: 6,736
Received 566 Likes
on
374 Posts
'19 E63S, ‘16 CLS63 RIP, '09 E63 Gone, '06 M5 Gone, '97 Supra TT Gone
Guys,
Remember that number is FWHP and not RWHP. There are C63's already at the 600FWHP and haven't done any motor work. I believe with just bolt ons and cams they are capable of 650 to 700FWHP. Remember there is about 17-20% drivetrain loss. 605 less 20% is 484rwhp and some have already gone higher than that. These motors ARE monsters!!
Remember that number is FWHP and not RWHP. There are C63's already at the 600FWHP and haven't done any motor work. I believe with just bolt ons and cams they are capable of 650 to 700FWHP. Remember there is about 17-20% drivetrain loss. 605 less 20% is 484rwhp and some have already gone higher than that. These motors ARE monsters!!
Vath has completely rebuilt that motor, good luck getting that work done for anything less than $20k. Might as well just get a used 65.
Trending Topics
#8
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 285
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
STS, Tahoe, Suzuki, and C63
What the HELL are you talikng about???? FWHP= FLY WHEEL HORSEPOWER. I would think that someone with 4500 posts and stats in his sig. that state RWHP number would be able to figure that out...... Oh wait nevermind I see what he drives.
#9
MBWorld Fanatic!
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Seattle
Posts: 6,736
Received 566 Likes
on
374 Posts
'19 E63S, ‘16 CLS63 RIP, '09 E63 Gone, '06 M5 Gone, '97 Supra TT Gone
Yeah I drive about $30k more car than you, not even counting the others in my stable. FWHP has always been Front Wheel Horsepower, not sure who you've been talking to. BHP, or Brake Horsepower is the measurement of pure engine horsepower without loss from the drivetrain or accessories.
#10
Super Member
When I first read the post, I thought he meant front wheel as well...
#12
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 285
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
STS, Tahoe, Suzuki, and C63
Ok, so BHP or FWHP either way, you still made the complete DUMB *** assumption that the guy with "one" if not "the" fastest C63's would have actually thought his car is front wheel drive. Way to go you are now my hero.
Last edited by benscott01; 01-22-2010 at 03:07 PM.
#13
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 2,177
Likes: 0
Received 13 Likes
on
12 Posts
2014 Audi RS7
Sincity, can I ask you an honest question? Why does the BMW group feel like the M3 is a faster and better car? I looked on dragtimes.com and none are below 11.41 and the quickest 60-130 on sixspeedonline.com (with the exception of 5.83 - RaceMX-M3 / Turbocharged E46 M3 / 1-shift) is 8.59. Both cars are equally fast when modified as much. Why does the M3 or M5 crowd feel like they need to come over here and tell us how slow we are?? I dont troll over on the M3post and tell them how their cars perform. Both cars are great cars and I like them both. Why can't we race and get along? There will always be a car faster than our own. Racing is fun and both cars run well.
#15
MBWorld Fanatic!
Sincity, can I ask you an honest question? Why does the BMW group feel like the M3 is a faster and better car? I looked on dragtimes.com and none are below 11.41 and the quickest 60-130 on sixspeedonline.com (with the exception of 5.83 - RaceMX-M3 / Turbocharged E46 M3 / 1-shift) is 8.59. Both cars are equally fast when modified as much. Why does the M3 or M5 crowd feel like they need to come over here and tell us how slow we are?? I dont troll over on the M3post and tell them how their cars perform. Both cars are great cars and I like them both. Why can't we race and get along? There will always be a car faster than our own. Racing is fun and both cars run well.
#16
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 2,177
Likes: 0
Received 13 Likes
on
12 Posts
2014 Audi RS7
They are also comparing a "supercharged" version to our N/A version. Whats up with that? I guess when the cams and stroker kit come out we will be more competitive.
Last edited by Dads C63; 01-22-2010 at 03:57 PM.
#17
MBWorld Fanatic!
Ok. Let's cut the cowl, extend the front rails, widen the aprons and stuff a S65 motor into a C63. We'll go back to AMG roots and call it the "Hammer III" (that is if you consider the 190e AMG conversion as Hammer II). Talk about leveling the playing field.
Last edited by Sincity; 01-22-2010 at 03:31 PM.
#18
MBWorld Fanatic!
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Seattle
Posts: 6,736
Received 566 Likes
on
374 Posts
'19 E63S, ‘16 CLS63 RIP, '09 E63 Gone, '06 M5 Gone, '97 Supra TT Gone
You're really not getting anywhere with this one.
#19
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: California, USA
Posts: 9,137
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
4 Posts
E63 P30, CL500 Sport
Assuming an 18% drivetrain loss, 605 hp would equate roughly to 496 wheel hp, which is not much at all for all the work done by VATH There are at least a couple of members on this board who reached numbers that were very close to those numbers with less intrusive mods. Jrcart hit 502 rwhp after his first round of upgrades at Evosport.
#20
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 285
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
STS, Tahoe, Suzuki, and C63
No, you were poking your nose into a conversation that had nothng to do with you or your "stable", by nit-picking someones use of an acronym that as you and "others" have pointed out as being ENTIRELY INCORRECT. If it was so hard to understand, I'm more than certain you never would have understood it either. Maybe one day we will all have cars cool enough to hang with the big boys over in the bimmer world..... until then, we'l just keep out running them.
#21
MBWorld Fanatic!
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Seattle
Posts: 6,736
Received 566 Likes
on
374 Posts
'19 E63S, ‘16 CLS63 RIP, '09 E63 Gone, '06 M5 Gone, '97 Supra TT Gone
No, you were poking your nose into a conversation that had nothng to do with you or your "stable", by nit-picking someones use of an acronym that as you and "others" have pointed out as being ENTIRELY INCORRECT. If it was so hard to understand, I'm more than certain you never would have understood it either. Maybe one day we will all have cars cool enough to hang with the big boys over in the bimmer world..... until then, we'l just keep out running them.
Stop trying to make this a BMW vs. Benz thing. I've been a member of this forum far longer than you, and have always been a fan of benzes. The C63 crowd here regularly makes fools of themselves and this FWHP debacle has been no exception.
#22
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 2,177
Likes: 0
Received 13 Likes
on
12 Posts
2014 Audi RS7
Wouldnt racing my little C63 against your 790 RWHP Supra be like bringing a knife to a gun fight?
Guys, we all understand the misinterpretation with the FWHP and BHP. Lets move on. The original topic was 605hp and we've covered that.
Guys, we all understand the misinterpretation with the FWHP and BHP. Lets move on. The original topic was 605hp and we've covered that.
#23
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 285
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
STS, Tahoe, Suzuki, and C63
Stock for stock, you're not outrunning my M5. Second of all, if you really want to race, I can just bring out my rice burner and you can watch all seven hundred and ninety RWHP explode to the ground. The M5 gets me to and from work every day, and to dinner on the weekends.
Stop trying to make this a BMW vs. Benz thing. I've been a member of this forum far longer than you, and have always been a fan of benzes. The C63 crowd here regularly makes fools of themselves and this FWHP debacle has been no exception.
Stop trying to make this a BMW vs. Benz thing. I've been a member of this forum far longer than you, and have always been a fan of benzes. The C63 crowd here regularly makes fools of themselves and this FWHP debacle has been no exception.
I'm truly impressed with you being a member of an internet forum longer than me..... Once again has nothing to do with the topic. So anytime you want to run your "Pork Eating Crusader" we'll be ready
#24
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 285
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
STS, Tahoe, Suzuki, and C63
I don't know, you still have to put that 790 RWHP to the ground..... Good luck.
#25
Super Member
The AMG guys in Affalterbach have extracted over 700HP at the crank out of the M156 6.2l, without F/I. Learned that firsthand on my visit there in September.