V12 generally sluggish from idle to 2000 rpms??
Thread Starter
Super Member
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 947
Likes: 131
From: SF Bay Area
2021 E63S Wagon 2019 S63 AMG Coupé 2015 S Coupé Edition 1 1970 Chevelle LS5
V12 generally sluggish from idle to 2000 rpms??
I have not had a chance to test drive a CL600 or other similar beasts. There is not 1 available in the SF bay area. There are 2 in Texas that I am considering, but when a friend who is a forum member who owns a 55 test drove it today he found the CL600 to be slow and unresponsive from stop to around 2000 rpms. Is this normal on the V12 or is he just used to his 55 response?
Or this particular car is a dud?
Or this particular car is a dud?
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 4,057
Likes: 341
From: NJ
2009 SL63 AMG
Did your friend test drive a 600 with the 5.5 Litre BiTurbo motor (2003+) or one with the N/A 5.8 Litre motor (2001-2002)? Since the BiTurbo makes peak torque at a mere 1800 RPMs, it should pull very hard from that point.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 2,566
Likes: 7
'14 ML BT
It was an '05 and it had a significantly slower throttle response (defined as car movement after applying gas) than my '03 CL55.
Would anyone who has driven both cars offer their insight?
I'm not sure it even matters if it's a CL or not. The warehouse guy commented that all the MB V-12's felt like the one we were testing.
Would anyone who has driven both cars offer their insight?
I'm not sure it even matters if it's a CL or not. The warehouse guy commented that all the MB V-12's felt like the one we were testing.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 8,882
Likes: 1,212
From: In my garage
E55, GLS450, GL63, GLE350
The turbocharged cars do not have that instant throttle response as compared to the supercharged models. However, when you are going, the turbos are hard to beat. Not to mention, the 600/65 bi-turbo motors are the easiest to modify for huge gains.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 2,566
Likes: 7
'14 ML BT
Administrator
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 12,263
Likes: 901
From: THE Orange County, California
2024 C8 Z06- 2025 BMW CS- 2022 Porsche 992 GTS
My cars are a little different the ones you mentioned but there is barely a difference at launch between my E55 and CL65. Both are modded though with stage 2 on the 55 and a chip on the 65- I dont feel that sluggish sensation at all in the 65. There must be something wrong with the car IMO.
Trending Topics
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 8,882
Likes: 1,212
From: In my garage
E55, GLS450, GL63, GLE350
Understood, but does it feel dramatically different?
I mean almost like the parking brake is dragging?
I mean almost like the parking brake is dragging?
MB World Stories
The Best of Mercedes & AMG
Manual Mercedes? 6 Times Sindelfingen Let Drivers Have All The Fun
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes SLR McLaren 722 S Is Extremely Rare Example Modified by McLaren
Verdad Gallardo
8 Classic Boxy Mercedes Designs That Have Aged Like Fine Wine
Verdad Gallardo
Flawlessly Restored Mercedes 190E Evo II Heads to Auction
Verdad Gallardo
Electric Mercedes C-Class Unveiled: 11 Things You Need to Know
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes EQS Gets A Major Update: Everything You Need to Know
Verdad Gallardo
5 Underrated Mercedes-Benz Models That Don't Get the Love They Deserve
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes 300D Has Pushed Well Past 1 Million Miles and It Ain't Stopping
Verdad Gallardo
10 Most Reliable Mercedes-Benz Models You Can Buy Used
Verdad Gallardo
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 469
Likes: 3
From: So. Cal
2024 S580 | 2024 Escalade ESV Sport Plat | 2022 X5M Competition
I have driven a 2005 SL55 and our 2007 S600. I do think the S600 feels heavier. The throttle response does feel quite different than the SL55. That being said, I raced my buddy in his SL55 several times, and to 60 or 70mph we were neck and neck every time. Also, we swapped cars to make sure it wasn't the driver. hehe. Another thing I noticed is that the resistance of the accelerator is a lot higher on our 2007 S than it was on our last 2001 S and the SL55 I drove. I'm not sure how much that contributes to the "feeling" of the car being sluggish.
But, to answer your question if the V12tt is slugglish, it's definately not. As soon as you give it gas, it takes off. It basically instantly jumps to at least 2000rpm when you have full torque, so there's no turbo lag.
Perhaps there was something wrong with the one your friend drove. :-p
But, to answer your question if the V12tt is slugglish, it's definately not. As soon as you give it gas, it takes off. It basically instantly jumps to at least 2000rpm when you have full torque, so there's no turbo lag.
Perhaps there was something wrong with the one your friend drove. :-p
Super Member
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 975
Likes: 0
SL65 AMG
My cars are a little different the ones you mentioned but there is barely a difference at launch between my E55 and CL65. Both are modded though with stage 2 on the 55 and a chip on the 65- I dont feel that sluggish sensation at all in the 65. There must be something wrong with the car IMO.
What chip did you use on your cl65 and was the difference as night and day as the k2 or stage two on a 55 motor?
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 2,566
Likes: 7
'14 ML BT
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,278
Likes: 377
From: San Jose area
'19 E63S sedan
S mode starts in first gear; C mode starts in second. If they didn't feel different, something is very wrong. It sounds like you're always starting in second. Perhaps the TCU is screwed up.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 2,566
Likes: 7
'14 ML BT
What I said was no major difference. This not a race launch, just an easy pull away from a traffic light launch. Neither 600 launched the same as my 55.
Super Member
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 980
Likes: 0
From: Boston, MA
My ex-cars: 03 E55,04 C32, 05 C55 ,03 E320
I know what you are talking about...I test drove both 2003 cl600 and a 2003 s600....both feels a bit sluggish from initial rpm to 2000...or was it 1800rpm...its different from the kompressor engines with instant throttle when I drove my gf's 05 e55 and my c32. I believe its the turbo lag on the 600s despite even with two turbos...but come on ...do you always drive below 1800 rpm..its kinda hard to keep it below 1800rpm when cruising..and also u don't need that much hp when parking =0...nevertheless ...the 600's twin turbos are still very intoxicating and if u accelerate normally...u won't feel the initial sluggish at all....
Super Member
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 514
Likes: 0
From: Chicago
CL65
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 2,566
Likes: 7
'14 ML BT
Member
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Seems as someone addressed this before as programming. The 600 being the top model (that is not AMG) it is likely to be purchased by many for prestige that may not appreciate or even ever use the power. This demographic would prize smoothness over crisp throttle response and considering the massive power of the engine MB probably reduced the throttle response for these driving conditions... to avoid unexpected acceleration!
The AMG buyer would be different and expect faster response. Seems the AMG65 owners have no such complaint. Seems that cars with modified ECU's do not have a problem either.
The AMG buyer would be different and expect faster response. Seems the AMG65 owners have no such complaint. Seems that cars with modified ECU's do not have a problem either.
Super Member
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 881
Likes: 54
From: Mechanicsville, VA
'09 CLK550, '18 AMG GTR, '06 C55 AMG, '25 GLS450, 09 E63
I currently own an '03 S600 and it definitely feels different from the start due to a looser torque converter. The E55 feels like instant throttle response in comparison. Once you get used to the feel of the V12 TT cars you only have to push the gas a little further to get the throttle response feeling you are used to. Once you step back in to a car with a "tight" torque converter you will snap your neck a few times until you get your right foot dialed back.
Member
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 224
Likes: 0
From: Cary, IL
2003 CL55 Kompressor Horizon Blue Metallic
Please, everyone, think through the definition of a loose and tight torque convertor.
The flash stall on a 55K is ~2600 - right at the start of the torque peak. The 55K torque convertor is criminally loose ... obscenely loose. I state this as somewhat of a warning to those of us over 50K miles.
///MB just has indicated above that the flash of the 600 is ~2000 - right at the torque peak.
I've driven an SL600, it definitely has a tighter torque convertor than a 55K. By a huge margin.
The 55K's snap because they have a looser torque convertor ... all things being equal, a looser torque convertor has more torque mutliplication.
If the 55K torque convertor was put in a 600, the lock up clutch in the torque convertor would burn out in probably 2000 miles. The 600 would flash to a stall speed of easily 3000 RPM at roll-on and there would be a delta RPM at the lock up clutch engagement of easily over 2000 RPM.
I will throw out there that a lock up clutch that is sticking (which does happen on our MB's) will make the car dog off the line.
Last edited by mclarenm8d; Feb 1, 2007 at 10:04 PM.
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 385
Likes: 1
From: Palm Beach Gardens, Fla.
2004 E55
My cars are a little different the ones you mentioned but there is barely a difference at launch between my E55 and CL65. Both are modded though with stage 2 on the 55 and a chip on the 65- I dont feel that sluggish sensation at all in the 65. There must be something wrong with the car IMO.
I'm seriously looking @ a CL65 but am very satisfied with the performance of my E55. (11.67@ 123) As far as straightline performance comparisons - can you give a few qualities of each car. I realize the 65 is built to a higher quality - I'm more interested in the "driving experience".
Your input appreciated. Thanks
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,278
Likes: 377
From: San Jose area
'19 E63S sedan
Vic:
I'm seriously looking @ a CL65 but am very satisfied with the performance of my E55. (11.67@ 123) As far as straightline performance comparisons - can you give a few qualities of each car. I realize the 65 is built to a higher quality - I'm more interested in the "driving experience".
Your input appreciated. Thanks
I'm seriously looking @ a CL65 but am very satisfied with the performance of my E55. (11.67@ 123) As far as straightline performance comparisons - can you give a few qualities of each car. I realize the 65 is built to a higher quality - I'm more interested in the "driving experience".
Your input appreciated. Thanks
I also find the traction much better in my S65 than E55s or even my older S55. They've made incremental improvements to the setup over the years (mine is a W220) that really help with launch. A little bit of restraint in first is all you need in most situations. The newer AMG S transmission program (upshift at redline) is great. Downshift to 1 at idle (one tap) and once you're rolling just floor it. The transmission takes care of the shifting and the tires stick. No drama.
The only negative WRT an E55 (or especially an E63) is handling. While this big car is more agile than it has any right to be, it's impossible to have that heavy an engine in the front and hide the resulting understeer.
Banned
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 988
Likes: 0
From: West Los Angeles
Cobra/E55
Junior Member
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
From: Somerset UK
CL65 AMG W216, Bentley Continetal R Le mans, Bentley Turbo RT, BMW 735 i, CL65 AMG w215
Not sure how to describe this but my 65 in slow moving traffic (25 mph) is a constant up and down shift with resultant snatching ..feels like drive shaft coupling split but have checked both front and rear. Could this be a problem with the centre grooved ball coupling or perhaps the transmission ECU ? local AMG tech reckons it's the rear subframe front mounts need replacing but I checked them with a 24 inch pry bar and there's barely 2 mm movement, certainly don't appear to be shot. One ***** told me I need a new diff ...at 44000 miles? I don't think so !
I'm thinking maybe the torque converter is backing off pressure and then the gears are changing up as its changing down.
Hard to describe but it's like a 1960s pickup with too much load carried....kind of jerky but obviously only at low speeds.
Any ideas guys?
I'm thinking maybe the torque converter is backing off pressure and then the gears are changing up as its changing down.
Hard to describe but it's like a 1960s pickup with too much load carried....kind of jerky but obviously only at low speeds.
Any ideas guys?
