When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
All of us who have driven the FL C63s have felt that the power was not the same as the PFL. I noted this in my review HERE and there was talk about this before on overseas forums, now it's confirmed that the FL are fitted with smaller turbos from factory.
Interesting....i have my U.S. spec 2020 s coupe in the shop right now for dyno runs and tune+downpipe. I'll post what it puts down to the wheels before and after.
I wonder what the reasoning for fitting smaller turbos was. Maybe something to do with the new particle filters?
Well according to you the FL was slower in stock form, that’s not true. Two stock C63s’s here in the states in the same dyno dynoed similarly between FL and Pre FL.
If this is confirmed and true then it will probably make a difference when tuning them but then if you’re going to lose the warranty with a tune then why not go with Pure Turbos also at the same time?????
See the response from the same tunning shop regarding stock power. lol. Stop going out of your way to prove your point. You know you want the FL car....😂😂😂😂😂
I must say it is a bit odd that the facelift has been out for quite sometime now being modified and tuned by various companies and this is the first anyone has mentioned of smaller turbos. I suppose it is possible that no one bothered to measure and that no one noticed a difference in the stock power levels and software when tuning the cars. But all in just seems a bit strange.
Turbo size aside, Ive still yet to see anyone claiming the facelift cars make less power with actual data posted to back it up. Personally I wouldn't bother making claims without data as it really doesn't help anything.
I will be posting my stock and tuned whp so we can have some real info based on real numbers not just the butt dyno
This sounds like AMG purposefully downsized then FL C63’s turbos a bit perhaps because when tuning PFL turbos you could easily get power and torque encroaching the E63S, and get the more power/torque than the flagship AMG GTR.
There are a plethora of different sizes turbos for the M176/M177/M178 - maybe AMG yanked the turbos off the non-AMG M176 and made them standard on the FL C63.
From what I can recall off the top of my head, we have
1. PFL C63S turbos (identical to PFL AMG GTS)
2. E63S/S63 twin scroll turbos
3. AMG GTC turbos (slightly larger compressor wheel)
4. AMG GTR turbos (even larger compressor wheels - perhaps larger turbine?)
5. AMG GTR Pro (unconfirmed if the turbos are actually different from the standard GTR)
6. G550 (M176) - I believed these were the same as the PFL C63 turbos, but I’m inclined to think they’re the slightly smaller turbos being used on the FL C63’s
...oh and you can also add whatever is being used on the Aston Martin Vantage (believe these are the PFL C63/AMG GTS turbos).
Last edited by AlexZTuned; May 16, 2020 at 01:57 PM.
This sounds like AMG purposefully downsized then FL C63’s turbos a bit perhaps because when tuning PFL turbos you could easily get power and torque encroaching the E63S, and get the more power/torque than the flagship AMG GTR.
There are a plethora of different sizes turbos for the M176/M177/M178 - maybe AMG yanked the turbos off the non-AMG M176 and made them standard on the FL C63.
From what I can recall off the top of my head, we have
1. PFL C63S turbos (identical to PFL AMG GTS)
2. E63S/S63 twin scroll turbos
3. AMG GTC turbos (slightly larger compressor wheel)
4. AMG GTR turbos (even larger compressor wheels - perhaps larger turbine?)
5. AMG GTR Pro (unconfirmed if the turbos are actually different from the standard GTR)
6. G550 (M176) - I believed these were the same as the PFL C63 turbos, but I’m inclined to think they’re the slightly smaller turbos being used on the FL C63’s
...oh and you can also add whatever is being used on the Aston Martin Vantage (believe these are the PFL C63/AMG GTS turbos).
This sounds like AMG purposefully downsized then FL C63’s turbos a bit perhaps because when tuning PFL turbos you could easily get power and torque encroaching the E63S, and get the more power/torque than the flagship AMG GTR.
There are a plethora of different sizes turbos for the M176/M177/M178 - maybe AMG yanked the turbos off the non-AMG M176 and made them standard on the FL C63.
From what I can recall off the top of my head, we have
1. PFL C63S turbos (identical to PFL AMG GTS)
2. E63S/S63 twin scroll turbos
3. AMG GTC turbos (slightly larger compressor wheel)
4. AMG GTR turbos (even larger compressor wheels - perhaps larger turbine?)
5. AMG GTR Pro (unconfirmed if the turbos are actually different from the standard GTR)
6. G550 (M176) - I believed these were the same as the PFL C63 turbos, but I’m inclined to think they’re the slightly smaller turbos being used on the FL C63’s
...oh and you can also add whatever is being used on the Aston Martin Vantage (believe these are the PFL C63/AMG GTS turbos).
Going off renntechs website it looks like the gtc and gtr have the same turbos. Once tuned they make the exact same power.
On another note there is a YouTuber who has done accelaration testing on both the facelift and prefacelift c63s. The 0-200kmh on the PFL was about a half second slower than the facelift at 13.3 vs 12.9 for the new car. Not sure if it was tested in comparable conditions as the videos were posted a year apart. So there is certainly margin for error with variable road/weather but I do think it shows that the facelift cars really are not noticeably slower as a few people have claimed on here.
Going off renntechs website it looks like the gtc and gtr have the same turbos. Once tuned they make the exact same power.
On another note there is a YouTuber who has done accelaration testing on both the facelift and prefacelift c63s. The 0-200kmh on the PFL was about a half second slower than the facelift at 13.3 vs 12.9 for the new car. Not sure if it was tested in comparable conditions as the videos were posted a year apart. So there is certainly margin for error with variable road/weather but I do think it shows that the facelift cars really are not noticeably slower as a few people have claimed on here.
Here’s the thing. Even with pre facelift having a slightly smaller compressor wheel, those turbochargers are well within their efficiency range to make the factory 503 hp/516 ft-lbs. And they have the benefit of a faster 9 speed trans.
I would think it’s only in situations where tuning comes into play would you see a stage 1 facelift C63 make less than a a stage 1 pre facelift C63 purely because the slightly larger compressor wheel makes it more efficient with more boost before effectively becoming a hairdryer.
You really need to compare dyno numbers, dragy times, etc apples to apples on the same day, same conditions, etc. A different in density altitude of 1000 ft is enough to be a few tenths in 60-130 mph and 100-200 kph.
Last edited by AlexZTuned; May 16, 2020 at 06:04 PM.
I'm guessing this is much ado about nothing. The new turbos could be more efficient, and most likely more responsive due to less inertia. As said above, there's no actual evidence that the FL is slower. Actually, most evidence points to the contrary. Even AMG reports 1/10th of second faster 0-60 compared to the PFL. Most people always seem to forget about the transmission. The FL is geared completely different. It has shorter gears down low and makes up for fuel efficiency with the two extra gears. The new transmission also has fewer losses than the 7MCT on PFL and shifts faster. Wheel torque is ultimately the product of engine torque times gear ratio times final drive ratio and whp is wtq times rpm / 5252. The shorter gear ratios of the new transmission produce more wtq in every given gear compared to the longer gear ratios of the PFL.
Here’s the thing. Even with pre facelift having a slightly smaller compressor wheel, those turbochargers are well within their efficiency range to make the factory 503 hp/516 ft-lbs. And they have the benefit of a faster 9 speed trans.
I would think it’s only in situations where tuning comes into play would you see a stage 1 facelift C63 make less than a a stage 1 pre facelift C63 purely because the slightly larger compressor wheel makes it more efficient with more boost before effectively becoming a hairdryer.
You really need to compare dyno numbers, dragy times, etc apples to apples on the same day, same conditions, etc. A different in density altitude of 1000 ft is enough to be a few tenths in 60-130 mph and 100-200 kph.
My main point on the times from 100-200 is that the OP made another post claiming that the facelift was noticeably slower. Of course there is a margin for error given different road conditions during testing. My point was that its close enough in 100-200 times that I highly doubt the facelift is far enough off the performance of the prefacelift to actually be noticeable. And so far the only real evidence I have seen points to the facelift actually being faster. But 1 set of videos taken a year apart is far from a conclusive result.
Seems to be a case of people feeling what they want to feel.
Got to feel for those PFL guys, trying to justify their cheaper purchase, convincing themselves that it's better, only to find it depreciating quicker than a Christmas tree in January. Now it turns out their turbos are old, laggy and inefficient, lifted straight off a 1980s ford Escort.
To be fair I've done the same in the past, bought a 996 turbo, when I should have bought the 997, it doesn't matter how many reviews you read or how many times you justify it on the internet, everytime you sit in it you wish you'd bought the better one.
Got to feel for those PFL guys, trying to justify their cheaper purchase, convincing themselves that it's better, only to find it depreciating quicker than a Christmas tree in January. Now it turns out their turbos are old, laggy and inefficient, lifted straight off a 1980s ford Escort.
To be fair I've done the same in the past, bought a 996 turbo, when I should have bought the 997, it doesn't matter how many reviews you read or how many times you justify it on the internet, everytime you sit in it you wish you'd bought the better one.
Hahaha
In some cases is the other way around, bought the FL and went back to PFL, many of us did it and so that we can fairly compare it.
Got to feel for those PFL guys, trying to justify their cheaper purchase, convincing themselves that it's better, only to find it depreciating quicker than a Christmas tree in January. Now it turns out their turbos are old, laggy and inefficient, lifted straight off a 1980s ford Escort.
To be fair I've done the same in the past, bought a 996 turbo, when I should have bought the 997, it doesn't matter how many reviews you read or how many times you justify it on the internet, everytime you sit in it you wish you'd bought the better one.
You know how they say ignorance is bliss? The stock Borg Warner turbos (at least the PFL) use billet machined compressor wheels just like what you see in the aftermarket. As far as we know, they only change has been the bar for FL cars to make power when tuned on their stock turbos. Smaller wheels = less efficiency =
less power when requesting boost levels above stock. Running a tune made for a PFL will likely be straining for FL turbos and be even farther out of their efficiency range when pushed.
Now if it turns out the the center cartridge and the internals of the FL have been upgraded from a journal bearing to ball bearing, that would make a discernible difference in how the turbo responds and performs.
I can guarantee you the FL and PFL turbos are using the same exact technology, the difference being compressor size. Both are standard journal bearing BW’s with billet machines compressor wheels as standard. Spool up and lag is not going to be noticeable with a 1-2mm smaller compressor wheel.
Here’s a pic I took of the the 1980’s turbo technology in my PFL C63S - completely stock:
Got to feel for those PFL guys, trying to justify their cheaper purchase, convincing themselves that it's better, only to find it depreciating quicker than a Christmas tree in January. Now it turns out their turbos are old, laggy and inefficient, lifted straight off a 1980s ford Escort.
To be fair I've done the same in the past, bought a 996 turbo, when I should have bought the 997, it doesn't matter how many reviews you read or how many times you justify it on the internet, everytime you sit in it you wish you'd bought the better one.
You’re assuming everyone who has a PFL bought it second hand because it’s cheaper? I bought my Coupe brand new, did Euro delivery (which doesn’t even exist anymore), and had the experience of a lifetime. I can tell you the 89k sticker on my own build/spec was not a whole lot cheaper than FL cars (though I negotiated a bit over 12% off and this was in the first batch of Coupes to roll out of the factory for the US.
Also, your 911 analogy doesn’t make sense. You’re comparing one generation vs a new generation. We’re taking about a facelift update. When the W206 comes out, then fair game to compare that to the latest and greatest the W205 has to offer (FL).
I kind of like this FL vs PFL rivalry. Definitely a divided camp here. I hate the digital screens in the FL and prefer classic analog. I’ll take a Rolex or IWC over over and Apple Watch any day. But I looove my 2mm larger turbos fitted with 1980’s technology! Really gotta wait for those huge PFL turbos to spool up! 😉
I kind of like this FL vs PFL rivalry. Definitely a divided camp here. I hate the digital screens in the FL and prefer classic analog. I’ll take a Rolex or IWC over over and Apple Watch any day. But I looove my 2mm larger turbos fitted with 1980’s technology! Really gotta wait for those huge PFL turbos to spool up! 😉
Seriously though, with all the new tech in the FL, maybe the reason you guys are slower is because the average owner can’t figure out how to disable the new complicated traction control. Hey, look I can say dumb things about FL cars too! I heard the FL turbochargers have 2020 turbo tech pulled from a Mercedes F1 car, complete with inconel and titanium wheels 👍
Last edited by AlexZTuned; May 17, 2020 at 08:15 AM.
Smaller wheels = less efficiency =
less power when requesting boost levels above stock.
Spool up and lag is not going to be noticeable with a 1-2mm smaller compressor wheel.
It's funny how you disregard certain characteristics to suit your narrative. Crack on.😅😅👍
Seriously though, turbo tech does move on quickly and it tends to move forwards, albeit incrementally, if you look at the dustbin lid sized turbos from the 80s you will obviously notice today's turbos are smaller and more efficient. A step change along the line is what you're seeing. I know it's difficult to accept, but bigger isn't always better.
Even billet wheels have moved on with more efficient designs and aero.
I'm not sure i would compare the old analog gauge cluster to a Rolex or IWC....its just old technology, Nothing special about it.
That being said my 2020 does not have the digital gauge cluster. For some strange reason this one was ordered with out it??? Really the only option I wish I could change I hated the analog gauge cluster on my 18 GTC roadster too... felt out of place in a 170,000 dollar car when my 2018 E class had a full digital set up for less than half the price.
For me digital dashboard plus the new steering wheel is a HUGE improvement. But to each their own.
It's funny how you disregard certain characteristics to suit your narrative. Crack on.😅😅👍
Seriously though, turbo tech does move on quickly and it tends to move forwards, albeit incrementally, if you look at the dustbin lid sized turbos from the 80s you will obviously notice today's turbos are smaller and more efficient. A step change along the line is what you're seeing. I know it's difficult to accept, but bigger isn't always better.
Even billet wheels have moved on with more efficient designs and aero.
Funny how you genuinely think Borg Warner introduced new turbo tech into already existing OEM parts to improve performance. If anything, they’ve reduced costs, improved reliability, and safety (burst containment) - so please, show me something that demonstrates
how the 2mm smaller FL turbos are better for performance and us enthusiasts?
Have you measured boost threshold and boost lag between the two? Have you torn down each turbo and compared all the components to confirm your theory that these are “next gen” turbos? The only reason for downsizing a turbo is to increase response, but you’re sacrificing power when you tune and increase the boost.
So I’ll take the extra 2mm and the 20-30 HP more I can get on my tuned PFL. For the folks staying stock, you won’t notice anything different. The 9 speed transmission is by far the largest change in driving characteristics for the FL.
And my analogy was more so about analog versus digital. Brands aside, there’s something beautiful about physical gauges with sweeping hands. Digital has its place, but at the end of the day, it’s a LCD screen - there’s no hardware between one in a Kia and one in an AMG aside from software implementation and UI skin.
Funny how you genuinely think Borg Warner introduced new turbo tech into already existing OEM parts to improve performance. If anything, they’ve reduced costs, improved reliability, and safety (burst containment) - so please, show me something that demonstrates
how the 2mm smaller FL turbos are better for performance and us enthusiasts?
Have you measured boost threshold and boost lag between the two? Have you torn down each turbo and compared all the components to confirm your theory that these are “next gen” turbos? The only reason for downsizing a turbo is to increase response, but you’re sacrificing power when you tune and increase the boost.
So I’ll take the extra 2mm and the 20-30 HP more I can get on my tuned PFL. For the folks staying stock, you won’t notice anything different. The 9 speed transmission is by far the largest change in driving characteristics for the FL.
And my analogy was more so about analog versus digital. Brands aside, there’s something beautiful about physical gauges with sweeping hands. Digital has its place, but at the end of the day, it’s a LCD screen - there’s no hardware between one in a Kia and one in an AMG aside from software implementation and UI skin.
Wait so have you torn down both turbos?? If so it would be helpful if you could post pictures comparing the two. Still doesn't seem to be a solid answer on what exactly the differences are (if any) one shop in Australia making a facebook post with 2 pictures really isn't enough to get a clear answer here. Have you compared dynos of the same tune on FL and PFL cars on the same dyno to confirm 20-30hp drops? It would be nice if you could share your data with the group!
Also there's nothing different about AMG analog gauge clusters other than appearance as well....at the end of the day its just personal preference.
Mercedes SLR McLaren 722 S Is Extremely Rare Example Modified by McLaren
Slideshow: A one-of-one U.S.-spec Mercedes-Benz SLR McLaren Roadster became even rarer after a factory-backed transformation at McLaren's headquarters.
😒 CONFIRMED: FACELIFT C63S HAVE SMALLER TURBOS
I hated the analog gauge cluster on my 18 GTC roadster too... felt out of place in a 170,000 dollar car when my 2018 E class had a full digital set up for less than half the price. 
