E60 M5 Headers and tune VS C63 Headers and tune
#1
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C63 , M5 , M3
E60 M5 Headers and tune VS C63 Headers and tune
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZuK8d...ature=youtu.be
rolling 110 km/h to 300km/h
C63 2009 MODS :
MPH LT headers
castles sec 1 with X pip
Eurocharged tune
Eurocharged pulley
E60 M5 2008 mods :
Evolve Alpha N tune stage 3
Ess SMG software
Agency power headers
Afe super stock intake
RPI pulley
Hamann sec 1 with high flow cats
Super Sprint X pipe
Oem sec 3
rolling 110 km/h to 300km/h
C63 2009 MODS :
MPH LT headers
castles sec 1 with X pip
Eurocharged tune
Eurocharged pulley
E60 M5 2008 mods :
Evolve Alpha N tune stage 3
Ess SMG software
Agency power headers
Afe super stock intake
RPI pulley
Hamann sec 1 with high flow cats
Super Sprint X pipe
Oem sec 3
Last edited by talol85; 04-21-2014 at 05:05 PM.
#2
MBWorld Fanatic!
It was a good race, the mighty V10 in the E60 M5 is a marvel, has a tremendous amount of top end power (as such most N/A M cars). Must of sounded killer in person.
For fairly straight forward bolt on's these cars get stupid fast.
For fairly straight forward bolt on's these cars get stupid fast.
#7
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Desert
Posts: 3,443
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
02 CLK 55 AMG,09 C63 loaded with P30
X2 on that
The c63 had EC tune and it's not very aggressive like few other tuners .
Take a look at this video u will see what I mean.
C63 OE-tuned vs C63 Eurocharged tuned - YouTube
The c63 had EC tune and it's not very aggressive like few other tuners .
Take a look at this video u will see what I mean.
C63 OE-tuned vs C63 Eurocharged tuned - YouTube
Trending Topics
#8
Member
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Jersey
Posts: 141
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C63 Coupe
You have eurocharged or oetune?
I'm still debating on what to go with.. Buddy of mine had oe and loved it also heard that it is the most aggressive .. BUT not hearing good things about there customer service lately ..
I'm still debating on what to go with.. Buddy of mine had oe and loved it also heard that it is the most aggressive .. BUT not hearing good things about there customer service lately ..
#9
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Ashburn, VA
Posts: 252
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C63 ///AMG P30
Customer service with OE is great . Hearing is one thing. Just got their tune with fast everything . Quick responses. Even at night. Love mine. Had CEL with other tune. Nothing on this
Last edited by estrellajon; 04-16-2014 at 09:09 PM.
#10
Member
the M5 guy drives like a douche...
well infact, the two that are both racing, are pretty dumb, just my two cents...
Back to the topic... that C63 shift timing seems a bit off...?
well infact, the two that are both racing, are pretty dumb, just my two cents...
Back to the topic... that C63 shift timing seems a bit off...?
#11
Senior Member
#12
Senior Member
Hmmm, kind of expected that but the C63 put up a good fight IMO. Took a while for that V10 to pull
#13
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Bahrain
Posts: 2,554
Received 161 Likes
on
130 Posts
R129 SL55 AMG & W208 CLK55 AMG
No matter what some of you fanboys might think, but there is no Naturally Aspirated C63 out here that can hold on to dear life against an E60 M5 ( especially a modded one with long tubes ) over 100mph.
NO CHANCE!
NO CHANCE!
#14
power is similar (10% less stock, likely less with the mods)
the C63 has more torque (15% more at peak, even greater with mods, 5 l vs 6.2 23% more displacement)
and the C63 weighs less (about 100 lb depending on source)
do the math
a few stock numbers (averaged from a few sources)
M5
0-150 22.2 (as high as 23.4, low 20.7)
0-100 9.3 (as low as 9.2)
100-150 12.9
C63 (base 451 HP)
0-150 22.5 (as high as 22.9, low 21.9)
0-100 9.3 (as low as 9.2)
100-150 13.2
not a huge delta
Last edited by Ingenieur; 04-18-2014 at 12:06 PM.
#15
MBWorld Fanatic!
I owned an E63 M6 next to my CLK63 and can give you a first hand experience … as soon as the V10 goes into 4th gear, it will start walking a 63.
#16
I owned an e60 M5 and can say with 100% certainty the difference is not substantial
another perspective
100-150 mph
speed delta 73 ft/sec
avg speed 37 ft/sec over the race
avg speed 125 mpg ~ 183 ft/sec
lets give the m5 a 0.8 sec 100-150 advantage, that's on the high side
so it would pull out ~ 0.8 sec x 37 ft/sec lead ~ 30 ft, 2 car lengths
time 100-150 ~ 9.3 sec or 9.3 sec x 183 ft/sec = 1700 ft travelled
30 ft over 1700 feet is 1.7%
nothing, inconsequenial, meaningless in the context of 4 door street cars
the M5 cost ~35-40% more to boot
in this case from 60-180 mph the m5 pulled out 3-4 car lengths in ~ 1 mile
Last edited by Ingenieur; 04-18-2014 at 01:24 PM.
#17
MBWorld Fanatic!
I don't know what 'walking' means, I deal in quantifiable numbers
I owned an e60 M5 and can say with 100% certainty the difference is not substantial
another perspective
100-150 mph
speed delta 73 ft/sec
avg speed 37 ft/sec over the race
avg speed 125 mpg ~ 183 ft/sec
lets give the m5 a 0.8 sec 100-150 advantage, that's on the high side
so it would pull out ~ 0.8 sec x 37 ft/sec lead ~ 30 ft, 2 car lengths
time 100-150 ~ 9.3 sec or 9.3 sec x 183 ft/sec = 1700 ft travelled
30 ft over 1700 feet is 1.7%
nothing, inconsequenial, meaningless in the context of 4 door street cars
the M5 cost ~35-40% more to boot
I owned an e60 M5 and can say with 100% certainty the difference is not substantial
another perspective
100-150 mph
speed delta 73 ft/sec
avg speed 37 ft/sec over the race
avg speed 125 mpg ~ 183 ft/sec
lets give the m5 a 0.8 sec 100-150 advantage, that's on the high side
so it would pull out ~ 0.8 sec x 37 ft/sec lead ~ 30 ft, 2 car lengths
time 100-150 ~ 9.3 sec or 9.3 sec x 183 ft/sec = 1700 ft travelled
30 ft over 1700 feet is 1.7%
nothing, inconsequenial, meaningless in the context of 4 door street cars
the M5 cost ~35-40% more to boot
I can back up my "talk" … can you?
#18
before my C63
I'm not one to take pictures of cars or me riding bikes to pose for others, to attempt to get them to form some sort of 'cool' opinion
I give you facts
magazine times
physics
and a video showing 4 car legths from 65 to 185 or so
you give me 'feelings', hogwash and wives tales
our educational system has failed us
I'm sure you are acustomed to 'backing up' or retreating
and define 'walking' in terms of mph delat and car lengths
100-150 mph race = x car legths
Last edited by Ingenieur; 04-18-2014 at 01:43 PM.
#19
MBWorld Fanatic!
before my C63
I'm not one to take pictures of cars or me riding bikes to pose for others, to attempt to get them to form some sort of 'cool' opinion
I give you facts
magazine times
physics
and a video showing 4 car legths from 65 to 185 or so
you give me 'feelings', hogwash and wives tales
our educational system has failed us
I'm sure you are acustomed to 'backing up' or retreating
I'm not one to take pictures of cars or me riding bikes to pose for others, to attempt to get them to form some sort of 'cool' opinion
I give you facts
magazine times
physics
and a video showing 4 car legths from 65 to 185 or so
you give me 'feelings', hogwash and wives tales
our educational system has failed us
I'm sure you are acustomed to 'backing up' or retreating
Let's go, enough talking … show me!
#20
a picture of a stationary car will not prove anything, the numbers and physics don't lie...
you are the one running at the mouth
I give you facts you do not respond to
because you can't
enough of your babble, define 'walking'
100-150 mph race
how many car lengths?
1, 5, 10???
if 'walking' means gradually easing out a 4 car length advantage over 1 mile and 25 sec+, yes it 'walked' it, lol
Last edited by Ingenieur; 04-18-2014 at 01:48 PM.
#21
M5 E60
auto zeitung 26/2004
0 - 100 km/h 4,4 s
0 - 200 km/h 13,9 s
sport auto 12/2004
0 - 100 km/h 4,5 s
0 - 200 km/h 13,8 s
sport auto 11/2005
0 - 100 km/h 4,4 s
0 - 200 km/h 14,1 s
Autobild 2005
0 - 100 km/h 4,7 s
0 - 200 km/h 13,5 s
Car&Driver 2005
0-60 mph 4.2
0-100 mph 9.4
0-150 mph 20.7
Road&Track 2005
0-60 mph 4.1
0-120 mph 13.3
find similar tests results for the C63 and get back to me
auto zeitung 26/2004
0 - 100 km/h 4,4 s
0 - 200 km/h 13,9 s
sport auto 12/2004
0 - 100 km/h 4,5 s
0 - 200 km/h 13,8 s
sport auto 11/2005
0 - 100 km/h 4,4 s
0 - 200 km/h 14,1 s
Autobild 2005
0 - 100 km/h 4,7 s
0 - 200 km/h 13,5 s
Car&Driver 2005
0-60 mph 4.2
0-100 mph 9.4
0-150 mph 20.7
Road&Track 2005
0-60 mph 4.1
0-120 mph 13.3
find similar tests results for the C63 and get back to me
#23
'Ring
Same driver
Same weather
Similar tires
Both 8:13
On a high speed high power 100 mph avg track
People make it sound like it is an order of magnitude difference
It is a few percent at most
Far lower than the price differential
How often do you street race to 150?
These are STREET cars not boy racers, lol
Honest to gawd there should be a test before you are allowed to own a machine like these
Weed out the knuckleheads
Same driver
Same weather
Similar tires
Both 8:13
On a high speed high power 100 mph avg track
People make it sound like it is an order of magnitude difference
It is a few percent at most
Far lower than the price differential
How often do you street race to 150?
These are STREET cars not boy racers, lol
Honest to gawd there should be a test before you are allowed to own a machine like these
Weed out the knuckleheads
#24
O really now? My car is naturally aspirated with MBH headers, x pipe, full agency power exhaust, Gruppe M CF intake scoops, renntech airbox & renntech 82mm throttle bodies as well as recently installed weistec Valve Body/ TCU upgrade. Also car is getting panoramic roof replaced with custom carbon fiber roof in the next 3 weeks and I have some friends with FBO Alpha-N m5's ill be sure to post up the videos for you
#25
& For any of you guys wondering about the CF roof i will post a full writeup about my source and installation technique to help who ever is interested just as I did for my black series oil/trans cooler conversion.