C63 AMG (W204) 2008 - 2015
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by:

605hp from the 63 engine!

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Rate Thread
 
Old 01-22-2010, 04:10 AM
  #1  
GMW
Super Member
Thread Starter
 
GMW's Avatar
 
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)"
Old 01-22-2010, 06:50 AM
  #2  
Senior Member
 
patboyy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 494
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
C63 AMG
yeah, VATH is doing a great job, dnt know whether it is available for C63
Old 01-22-2010, 07:29 AM
  #3  
Member
 
white_beast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Kingdom Of Bahrain
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
C63 AMG
Yeah we definitly needed for our light weight beast!!
Old 01-22-2010, 09:35 AM
  #4  
Senior Member
 
c63canada's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 393
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
c63 amg
the body shop manager at my MB dealer is into old school hot rods.

He thinks the 63 engine can go to 800hp
Old 01-22-2010, 11:52 AM
  #5  
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
Dads C63's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 2,177
Likes: 0
Received 13 Likes on 12 Posts
2014 Audi RS7
Originally Posted by GMW
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)"
Guys,
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.
Old 01-22-2010, 12:59 PM
  #6  
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
Sincity's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Vegas and Vancouver, BC
Posts: 5,978
Received 16 Likes on 14 Posts
.
Originally Posted by Dads C63
These motors ARE monsters!!
Some folk(s) over at m3post would probably disagree with that. Sorry....couldn't resist.
Old 01-22-2010, 01:24 PM
  #7  
MBWorld Fanatic!
iTrader: (1)
 
Cylinder Head's Avatar
 
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
Originally Posted by Dads C63
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!!
What the hell are you talking about FWHP... FRONT WHEEL HORSEPOWER???? These are not Front Wheel Drive cars!!

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.
Old 01-22-2010, 01:37 PM
  #8  
Senior Member
 
benscott01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 285
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
STS, Tahoe, Suzuki, and C63
Originally Posted by Cylinder Head
What the hell are you talking about FWHP... FRONT WHEEL HORSEPOWER???? These are not Front Wheel Drive cars!!

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.

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.
Old 01-22-2010, 01:55 PM
  #9  
MBWorld Fanatic!
iTrader: (1)
 
Cylinder Head's Avatar
 
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
Originally Posted by benscott01
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.
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.
Old 01-22-2010, 02:03 PM
  #10  
cdd
Super Member
 
cdd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Philly
Posts: 685
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
N/A
Originally Posted by Cylinder Head
What the hell are you talking about FWHP... FRONT WHEEL HORSEPOWER???? These are not Front Wheel Drive cars!!

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.
I think that one could safely infer that he meant flywheel (bhp) from the context, but CH is definitely right on this one.

When I first read the post, I thought he meant front wheel as well...
Old 01-22-2010, 02:09 PM
  #11  
MBWorld Fanatic!
iTrader: (1)
 
Cylinder Head's Avatar
 
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
Originally Posted by Dads C63
Did you really ask this question? I even explained the drive train loss in power.
Yes you did while using an entirely improper acronym in the process. Flywheel horsepower is BHP, now you know.
Old 01-22-2010, 03:02 PM
  #12  
Senior Member
 
benscott01's Avatar
 
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.
Old 01-22-2010, 03:05 PM
  #13  
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
Dads C63's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 2,177
Likes: 0
Received 13 Likes on 12 Posts
2014 Audi RS7
Originally Posted by Sincity
Some folk(s) over at m3post would probably disagree with that. Sorry....couldn't resist.
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.
Old 01-22-2010, 03:07 PM
  #14  
Former Vendor of MBWorld
 
AMS Performance's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,935
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
AMG
Crank HP is easiest
Old 01-22-2010, 03:15 PM
  #15  
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
Sincity's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Vegas and Vancouver, BC
Posts: 5,978
Received 16 Likes on 14 Posts
.
Originally Posted by Dads C63
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.
I wholeheartedly agree with you. Both cars are great, and I too, wished that a mod from another forum did not do what he did.
Old 01-22-2010, 03:20 PM
  #16  
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
Dads C63's Avatar
 
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.
Old 01-22-2010, 03:21 PM
  #17  
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
Sincity's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Vegas and Vancouver, BC
Posts: 5,978
Received 16 Likes on 14 Posts
.
Originally Posted by Dads C63
They are also comparing a "supercharged" version to our N/A version. Whats up with that? When the cams and stroker kit come out I think they will disappear off this forum.
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.
Old 01-22-2010, 03:39 PM
  #18  
MBWorld Fanatic!
iTrader: (1)
 
Cylinder Head's Avatar
 
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
Originally Posted by benscott01
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.
No, I didn't, dip*****. I was pointing out the fact that the acronym in usage was ENTIRELY INCORRECT, as others have also said.

You're really not getting anywhere with this one.
Old 01-22-2010, 03:41 PM
  #19  
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
MB_Forever's Avatar
 
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.
Old 01-22-2010, 03:51 PM
  #20  
Senior Member
 
benscott01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 285
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
STS, Tahoe, Suzuki, and C63
Originally Posted by Cylinder Head
No, I didn't, dip*****. I was pointing out the fact that the acronym in usage was ENTIRELY INCORRECT, as others have also said.

You're really not getting anywhere with this one.
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.
Old 01-22-2010, 04:03 PM
  #21  
MBWorld Fanatic!
iTrader: (1)
 
Cylinder Head's Avatar
 
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
Originally Posted by benscott01
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.
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.
Old 01-22-2010, 04:33 PM
  #22  
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
Dads C63's Avatar
 
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.
Old 01-22-2010, 04:42 PM
  #23  
Senior Member
 
benscott01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 285
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
STS, Tahoe, Suzuki, and C63
Originally Posted by Cylinder Head
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.
First of all, once again nothing to do with the current topic "605hp from the 63 engine". We are clearly not talking about stock cars. And second of all, if i wanted to see your (and every other turbo-charged, NOS injected, highly over modded RICE BURNER explode to the ground, I'd run down to the local drag strip and watch just as many not explode to the ground, just plain explode internally and blow the motors....

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
Old 01-22-2010, 04:43 PM
  #24  
Senior Member
 
benscott01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 285
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
STS, Tahoe, Suzuki, and C63
Originally Posted by Dads C63
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.
I don't know, you still have to put that 790 RWHP to the ground..... Good luck.
Old 01-22-2010, 04:48 PM
  #25  
Super Member
 
Hans Delbruck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Surf City, USA
Posts: 655
Received 4 Likes on 2 Posts
What I like!
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.


You have already rated this thread Rating: Thread Rating: 0 votes,  average.

Quick Reply: 605hp from the 63 engine!



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:04 AM.