K-A

Absolutely it is. You know, most people on the Internetz will act as if they're cone twirling and drag racing at every stoplight, yet on the roads, get to wherever they're going, drive just the same as, et al, those in far lesser powered cars. If HP statistics didn't exist, I'd bet people could barely tell differences in car A vs car B on normal commutes.

I just drove a Toyota Corolla as a Rental, and the way I was driving that thing, I couldn't tell you how much HP it had, but it did the job! I was able to have fun with it, and best part is, whatever its HP levels are, they're low enough to keep it "safe while having fun", i.e, I didn't get to triple digit speeds in order to "have fun", that thing felt like it was straining at friggin' 70!

Rewind to last week, I was driving a BMW 535i, and I couldn't really tell if it was that much faster than my E350 during my normal drives. Once I juiced it, it still was hard to gauge (noticeable yes, but I never drive like that so it'd be irrelevant unless on a test drive).... of course, at that point, the speedometer showed speeds gaining higher than what I should have been going at.

Point is, when it comes to driving, unless you're in a competition/sport, or like to be an online braggart, then perception is EVERYTHING, and all that matters.... as is safety toward those around you while you engage in your "rush". This is why I never understood the realistic point of super high HP on public roads.

Sorry for the O/T, and no this isn't designed for anybody in particular (haven't even read the Thread yet).

WEBSRFR

You can't just go by the HP numbers. The weight of the car, transmission, etc., has a lot to do with eventually how fast the car is. The new Audi A6 with a V6 engine generating just about 310 HP can take you to 60 in 5.4 seconds. That's almost current E550 territory. Also look at how Porsche uses horsepower. Their horsepower numbers are relatively low but they are very fast (assuming you don't buy their cheapest models...).

The 0-60 speed of the BMW 550 is about 4.7 seconds and that has been verified in articles I've read and matches the BMW published specs. It is what it is...

http://www.bmwusa.com/Standard/Conte...fications.aspx

The inverse of this is a car like a Rolls Royce or Bentley. I think some of them actually red-line around 4-5K with very powerful engines the point being that they don't ever want the engine to be stressed that hard and want the car to just waft and fly away with effortless power.

It is all about how Mercedes has currently tuned the E550... the 409 HP engine gets to 60 at just about 5.2 seconds, if Mercedes and other road-test articles I've read are to be believed, with their competitors beating that by about half a second... The good news is with the new engine coming up, things will be back to where they should be with the E550 being faster or just as fast as the BMW 550 -- and that is a good thing for all of us

I'm sure few here would argue against more power and a faster acceleration so I hope we can at least all agree that the new engine coming up is faster and better.

And maybe someone will post an article from car and driver with how they managed to get the new engine to 60 in 3 seconds and we can have this conversation all over again

WEBSRFR

I completely agree with you. I have the NA V8 in my car and I know there is no way it is faster than 5 seconds and all published figures my Mercedes points to the fact that the current 409HP engine though delivering more torque and MPGs is only marginally faster by maybe .2 seconds.

When I look at speed like you said what I am interested in is what a normal sane person can expect by pressing the accelerator... I think this is what the manufacturer published specs rightfully disclose. At the end of the day what I want to know is how fast *I* can go in the car, not some racedriver

You also bring up a good point about wear and tear. I once attended a Mercedes event on a closed track when you can drive their cars with a race-car driver giving you advice. So those 30,000 mile tires in your car barely lasts 200-300 miles under the conditions those cars are drive nin. It's amazing what a lot of wear and tear you can put in your car with super aggressive driving techniques.

02Drunkenup

Don't take the official stats from the manufacturers.. especially when you consider that both BMW and MB have been underrating their motors, these included. I'm willing to bet that the E550 gets the same ECU mapping as the "more powerful" SL/S/CL and that the platform makes even more than 429 HP. IIRC Motortrend routinely has the fastest numbers of the auto publications, insideline usually has the slowest. How did they get 4.3? Maybe they had better drivers, better driving surfaces but their faster numbers are consistent between their different tests, BUT note that heavier RWD CLS550's tested by both C&D and Motortrend gave 0-60 times at 4.2 and 4.3 seconds respectively. C&D got 4.8 out of the 550i, and the 550i is trapping later and slower than the MB 550 variants. In its current form the E550 is faster, period. If MB is actually going to be moving to a single-turbo for the next MY (would like to know where this rumor is coming from) it certainly isn't for a lack of power...

WEBSRFR

If you actually think the 20 HP increase of the engine can make a 5.2 second car do 4.3 seconds, defying all published sources I consider reliable, I really have nothing more to add to this conversation, other than to say good for you if you can get that

Based on this logic, the AMGs must be yielding sub 3 second acceleration to 60

K-A

Lots of times incremental HP gains will yield more than logical performance gains. If it's the exact same motor with 20 HP unleashed by ways of modding, or freeing up some air here or there, it's far less likely, but an all new motor, with boost now, totally different efficiency factors in terms of how it gets its power to the ground, different TQ and TQ/HP curves, different gearing, etc. sometimes it's very likely.

02Drunkenup

that's because it isn't a 20 HP increase....
? are you not getting it? What sources do you consider reliable? The manufacturer that doesn't want to cannibalize sales or independent third party results? reference here: http://news.renntechmercedes.com/wp-..._flyer_001.jpg
The M273 V8 made 382 HP and 391 Ft Lb and AFAIK is not underrated, but if you take the dyno graphs for the new M278 and recalculate the approximate 18% power loss back into the equation you get somewhere more like 450-460 horsepower and A LOT of torque. This makes for nearly 80 HP and 100-130 pounds more torque (available earlier and for longer) over the outgoing motor. That's more torque and power not too far off from the outgoing 63 AMG models that got to sixty in the very low four second range. Maybe the M273 E550 doesn't actually do a 5.2 0-60 either, C&D got 4.6, maybe you're just incapable of reproducing that time.

rear wheel drive ZR1's are difficult to hit sixty in the advertised 3.2 seconds... the new biturbo AMG's have all the power in the world but it will do little to overcome all the weight and traction issues.

brauhaus313

Others have tried to explain, but the man is insistent on sticking by peak hp numbers and marketing. Maybe he's never seen a dyno graph before?

K-A

Apparently test results from the new SL, with the same engine as the E550, are showing times similar to the outgoing N/A AMG "63" cars as well.

brauhaus313

What's interesting is that the old NA SL63 made 518hp to the incoming turbo SL550's 429hp. So much for peak hp numbers.

Dema

I drove CTS-V which claimed to be 0-60 3.7s, but somehow I didn't feel much performance boost comparing to 135 claimed to be 0-60 as 4.7s. But certainly CTS-V has much better passing power on high speeds that I consider more important that just dumb 0-60 numbers.

W210

Indeed, this SL550 went 0-60 at 4.4 too:

http://blogs.insideline.com/straight...nvertible.html

brauhaus313

Wow, .94g on the skidpad. Impressive.

Notwithstanding my disdain for what I perceive as marketing over-hype from MB, the company appears to be making some serious strides in performance.

WEBSRFR

This is not the current E550 engine by the way. This is the NEW E550 engine we are about to get with 429 HP and this is what I've been trying to say all along... that this level of performance you mention is the reason they are ditching the current E550 engine for the new one.

mambrose23

No, WEB, its the same M278 twin turbo motor, just tuned (and that's even debatable) differently in the SL than the E class and CLS. It's also identical to the current S and CL tuning. (429/516) It is simply new to the SL in the 2013 model since it ran the N/A through last year. The "new" motor you keep describing may come in a year or two and have a single turbo if are to believe what we read.

brauhaus313

Your deductive powers are astonishing. So in your mind, an extra 20 peak hp of the current E550 over the last NA V8 wouldn't be able to propel the current E550 into the low to mid 4 second range, but an extra 27 peak hp of the same engine in the SL550 somehow magically puts it rightfully in the mid 4 second range in a car that weighs about as much as the E550 and only RWD?

Nobody is pushing you to dig yourself into a hole.

W210

Yes, that's what I thought as well. We'll see, I ordered one to replace the GLK, should be able to confirm how fast it is in a week or so.

When I took the demo out for an overnight test-drive, it didn't wow me though, very smooth and linear acceleration but it's not as explosive as the W210 E55, W211 E55, or W211 E63 I had before.

I guess partly it's AWD (no traction control issue) and the car is just so well insulated. Will be fun to do an uphill race to compare to my buddy's 996 GT3 or E46 M3.

WEBSRFR

Look if you want to believe that the current E550 is as fast as an AMG with 4.3 seconds from 0-60, good for you! Buy an E550, put an AMG sticker on the car and pretend it is an E63 because after all you believe it can do 0-60 in 4.3 just like an E63

Go back and read what I said without dragging holes out of la-la-land to push people into. I never said that with the SL550 engine the E550 can do 4.3 seconds. Compared to the previous NA engine with 382 HP, the SL550 engine would yield a net increase in about 20HP (current E550) + 27 (new engine) for a total net of Approx 50 horsepower. With that increase the car that used to get to 60 in about 5.2 seconds will be able to do that in about 4.7, putting it in BMW 550 territory. That's all I've said and I stand behind what I said.

If you still want to believe the current E550 can do 60 in 4.3 seconds, how wonderful for you! You can save a lot of money over an AMG and still have a car just as fast

brauhaus313

Is that all you've said? Haha, I like your fighting spirit, sticking to your guns. Too bad you're wrong.

Dema

From this forum another thread, you need to tune your car to go really fast
https://mbworld.org/features/benzins...&utm_campaign=

RJC

The difference in 0-60 would be more attributed to the increase in torque from the NA version and in the new SL's case it's the massive 516 lb ft

Busta Riles

The 2012 Biturbo is at least 0.5 seconds faster 0-60 than the 2011.

I currently own both cars. The new engine makes me hate the old one. The extra torque (443 vs. 391) makes a huge difference from light to light. I sold my E55 AMG to buy this 2012 E550 because it was so impressive.

Anyone who hasn't driven both extensively really has no idea.

W210

Yes, MotorTrend tested the 2013 SL550 and 0-60 4 seconds too.

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...a_s/specs.html

Perhaps the engine is under-rated. Had a little run with an older V10 M6 and had no problem beating him 0-50, well largely because it was raining..

Johnny Rad

Did Merc ever publish an official 1/4mi time for the '12 E550 be it 4Matic, RWD, Coupe or Sedan? I've looked high and low, but my google-fu is admittedly still a work in progress.

As we know all too well, C&D continues to test the "smaller" of the two 402hp 4.6/4.7L Biturbo V8 M278 motors in the E and CLS in the mid-4's to 60 and 12.8-13.0 to the 1/4.


> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

2014 E550 4Matic sedan @ 4.3s and 12.8s; 4400lbs (Jun '12):

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...an-test-review

2012 CLS550 RWD sedan @ 4.2s and 12.8s; 4100lbs (Jul '11):

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...50-test-review

2014 E550 4Matic sedan @ 4.5s and 13.0s; 4400lbs (Feb '14):

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...ic-test-review

Johnny Rad

Cross-posting more info on the curiously rated output of the M278 powerplant:

RENNtech is again showing us that our W212 M278 is underrated. The factory rating is 402/443, but RENNtech says it's really 435/508.

The "bigger" M278 is rated by the factory at 449/516, but RENNtech counters that it's really 469/563.

https://mbworld.org/forums/e-class-w...w-heights.html