callmiro

Buddy....trust me.....my insults are far from subtle.

You speak like everything thing is a matter of fact and an absolute. I tend to come from a mindset that the AMG engineers are far more talented then your limitations.

I'm just giving you an alternate view that refutes your matter of fact point.

You sound like the same guys who a year ago said that there is no way the 5.5 TT would never have a good exhaust note cuz turbo cars can never sound as good as NA cars. And we all know how good the M157s now sound.

Or the guys who claimed a year ago, that there is no way you can put a supercharged on the 6.2 because the engine and tranny can't handle it. We all know how the engineers at Weistec have now proved them wrong too.

I'm just being open minded about the future of the AMG C's, but if you can't see that from my posts, then you can just su<k it

But you can keep talkin about the good 'ol days

gthal

I guess you answered my initial question... you are just always grumpy.

I speak as though everything is "fact?" Read my initial post again.... seems to me I started by saying "I believe..."

You are just giving me an alternative view? If that were the case, I have no issue. It's the attitude and "subtle" insults that I was commenting on.

Yeah, the 5.5TT sounds good... many would say not as good as the C63 but that's just an opinion (waiting for the pending insult).

I don't know where I wasn't being open minded... I was simply expressing my "opinion" (based on my use of the word "believe") that even your almighty AMG engineers cannot make a smaller engine sound just like a bigger one. I have heard the 5.5TT and other FI engines and none sound as good to me as a large displacement V8 (just my opinion Mr. Callmiro). If that offended your sensitivities that I suggested a 4.0 TT would sound different than the 6.2 NA, that's your issue. I also suggested it would sound good... just different... so I'm not even sure why you are bothered in the first place.

Your attitude isn't justified here. No one was being offensive to you, no one insulted you. Hey, maybe that's not your intention and you just can't get across any emotion in text other than annoyance and maybe your "subtle" insults aren't intended to be insults? Anyway, no sense in continuing this... not worth it. From now on, just tell the rest of us what opinion you are happy with and we will just keep the conversation to that. We wouldn't want to offend your sensitivities or have an opinion that varies from yours.

P.S. I can "just su<k it?" Really? How old are you?

Guilty

Callimaro, the M157 sounds okay, nothing extraordinary. Nowhere near the M156.

gthal

I agree with this opinion however I would say the M157 sounds excellent and not just OK. However, it is a different sound than the M156 and I personally prefer the throatier and deeper (that was my perspective) sound of the M156.

Ahmed

Same here, I'm happy I have the last of the NA engines!

I would have kept my M5 as well but unfortunately it was totalled!

melmanc55

Quote:

3.8L Twin Turbo in the McLaren 12C...the thing sounds like war

+1 Heard one in person. It put my C63 with a tune to shame in the sound dept. Video doesn't do it justice.

otakki

I think this comes from another similar thread where I simply referred to the new C AMG as the C45 using the possible new engine displacement. Likewise, the current E and CLS with the M157 should just be called E55/CLS55.

Anyway, even if not as nice as the M156, M157 still sounds better than the F10 M5. Hopefully, AMG will continue the tradition of tuning the exhaust system to create natural sounds rather than using the speakers as BMW is doing.

pushemekuratz

Why are people comparing a McLaren with a flat plane crank to a amg c class?? The next gen c will sound nothing like the mclaren or the current c63.

callmiro

No one was comparing the McLaren to the C. The McLaren came up as an example of a smaller displacement (3.8) Twin Turbo V8 with a great exhaust note.

The single plane crank contributes to a more mechanical noise coming from the engine bay, but the exhaust can still be tuned to preference. That's why a 12C sounds so different from a 458.

DuaneC63

My guess this is true. The entire engine displacement notation being part of the model has been throw out the window. Just drove a SL63 that had a 5.5TT in it. It doesn't displace 6.3 liters, it doesn't make 630hp. Just call it what it is a SL55Turbo...It's worked for Porsche for years

GrnLantern

Yup, after all, the M156 engine never even displaced 6.3L. It displaces 6208cc. So, you're absolutely right. In fact, it's named 6.3 merely as a throwback to the M100 engine.

ATL_MB

I'm guessing it will be a "C55" again. The "45" name is already taken by the 2.0L DI turbo I-4 (350 HP!) in the A45.

GrnLantern

Don't be surprised if it remains C63.

Maverick1975

Agreed, the current car is a C63 and doesn't even have a 6.3 engine so it's not like there is no precedent.

JumpinJim

The famous 55 series was actually a 5.4l with or without supercharger.
The 65 is a 6.0l
The 63 can be a 6.2l or a 5.5l tt
45 is a 2.0l
550 is now a 4.6l tt
etc

The naming convention has never made much sense. They can call it whatever they want. Maybe they should just stop with the meaningless numbers and do it like BMW, Audi, etc do it.

jvanbrecht

Yeah.. last I checked.. BMW did the same thing as MB.. BMW 330 is a # series with a 3L V6, 528 is a 5 series with a 2.8L V6 etc etc...

ZephyrAMG

I think we are definitely messing with the wrong bear cave when it comes to Callmiro...He is almost 99% responsible for providing this forum with new images, updates, trends and the latest and greatest news. He not only was one of the first M156 owners in the forum but also has driven a majority of the cars even discussed....from the e63 to the CLS 63.

Its hard to provide concrete comparisons when nothing is out yet and changes are not a for sure thing. The comparisons he provides are to give us an IDEA of what is out there and what is to come. For this, the information and relativity is justified. I for one pay attention to it and appreciate it.

I personally can relate a more "tangible" comparison rather than just talk. The images and video provided from Callmiro help in this sense. I think that dismissing these camparisons, regardless of how "apples and oranges" it may be, is just our loss in helping us to know what to expect and look for...

Also, everyone on this forum has their own personality. Veterans stop with the pleasantries and the flowering of their comments. Also their responses just get to the point and end the emotional fluff...