2015 CLS63 AMG-S vs 2015 E63 AMG-S
 

We took both cars out on the highway, hit it side by side 4 times from 45 to 60 MPH to 120-140 mph. The CLS would pull ahead a half a car on the jump and then slowly increase the distance. This particular CLS63 AMG-S is faster than the E63 without a doubt. I was surprised as they have the same motor. I didn't expect that much of a difference.

Both drivers were holding the downshift paddle and punching it on go. Both cars are bone stock and within 1500 miles of each other, both cars had about 1/2 tank of gas and 1 driver on board.

fun, fun, fun...

Drag coefficient maybe?

Bring this topic back. I remember seeing videos where cls63 is pulling on f10 m5s while the e63 couldnt. It really seems like the cls has a better top end. Would drag coefficient really make that difference? Its not like one is a supercar and other is a sedan..

If I recall, the original CLS lost to the W211 in almost all races simply because of a slightly increased weight. If the new CLS is beating the AWD W212 AMG, that's impressive.

The current CLS uses quite a bit of aluminum to reduce weight. Not sure what these two cars weigh in comparison but given equal power the car that weighs less will have an advantage.

this makes no sense to me, the e63 is 50-100kg lighter and e chassis has better aerodynamics with cd of .25 vs .26 for cls.

trap speeds are also about the same for both when stock and tuned.

How is the cls63 pulling on an e63 from a roll by 1+ car lengths? I honestly just don't get how it's possible.

one possibility, did the cls63 here have carbon ceramic brakes/forged amg wheels whereas the e63 had the standard brakes/amg wheels?

that would be some major weight savings on rotational mass that would make all the difference in any type of drag race between those two.

the difference should not be so drastic as they are both about same power to weight ratio.

Only other thing I can think of besides the weight savings of CCB or forged wheels on cls is that maybe it was a NON S E vs ClS63 S. Are you sure the E had the S package on it?

one more thing could be, is the aero dynamic in CLS has better ventilation and bigger hood space, causing for cooler IATs which will cause to keeping power up better than E

Are they geared the same?

were you racing and e63 or e63S?

i checked into this and the CD rating for e63 is 0.25 vs 0.26 for cls, so e63 has better aero.

also, already on the first run before either car had a chance to get warmed up, cls pulled right away on the E, doesn't make sense why.

The advantage of cls is maybe it has less frontal drag area, but it still shouldn't be making that much difference. Some people here (wolves.creed) are saying cls is .5-1 second faster from 100-200km/h.

I just dont see how it has anything to give it an advantage, let alone a massive one like some are saying.

E is usually lighter by 50-100kg, and has a better coefficient of drag.

Maybe the cls offsets that advantage with less frontal drag area, but still should end up being equal at best. I still think despite this, E should have the advantage here.

also, trap speeds in the quarter mile with equal power/mods on both cls/e are pretty much identical making this increasingly difficult to understand.

from what I have researched both have final drive of 2.85 on 4matic models.

Never underestimate the power of the PRD. :rolf:

But in all honesty, I'd chalk it up to power draw (AC on or off, etc), tire pressures, driver & cargo weight. Small differences, extrapolated over those distances add up.

PRD lol. Probably had to call the plumber for that to win an E.

IATs, knock retard, injector deposits, condition of plugs, so many possible variables. Hard to know based on a single example

Or do one run and let the E get a slight jump instead for once lol.

Or because not all cars come from the factory with identical power output or "as advertised" output.

I bet you could get the same result with identical E63S models or CLS63S models in that they are the exact same car and one pulls on the other.

Combine that with what RobCL said and it is certainly plausible. Everyone wants to compare cars as though they operate in a vacuum.

i agree with this and used to think that's all it was, but take a quick look here in this thread at post #81 by wolves.

https://mbworld.org/forums/w212-amg/645441-e63-amg-biturbo-crushes-1-4-mile-4.html

Of course this is just his word of mouth so who knows...

its definitely possible CLS has some kind of aero advantage but we need more data and a larger sample size to be sure of any difference in speed. IMO the E is lighter and should therefore always have the upper hand regardless of all these anecdotal "reports" we keep seeing here.

2015 cls63s come with a updated mct transmission,shifts way quicker and manual mode is super responsive vs e class which has the old one

Well that settles it. The CLS is the better car. 😈

Quick . Defend your car !!

So if both got the same update then its not because of a faster transmission shifting on the CLS63.

Again, my guess is that its because of the frontal drag area being less on the CLS. This is most likely helping it push through a little stronger at higher speeds than the E63.

I don’t think the CLS aerodynamic plays a factor here unless they’re both pulling top end races, both cars are pretty much the same. What I’m thinking is it’s a drivers race and the CLS driver always got the hit.

But on the other hand, stock F10 M5 vs stock F06 M6 GC and the M6 takes it by 1.5 - 2 car gap. Also knowing the fact that the M6 GC is heavier and yes they’re both rated same HP/TQ on the paper. To make it short, they’ve been sandbagging power on the heavier platform such as M6 and CLS63.

the m6GC is actually heavier than the m5, but in the case of the cls if being compared to e63 with pano roof, which is most of them, the cls63 comes out being lighter, and as the roof is lower it does make sense that it has lower frontal drag area. It’s pretty stupid how the m6GC has a carbon roof yet still manages to be heavier than the m5

Even when both are tuned to same power levels the 100-200km/h times have proven to be lower on the cls than the E. there was a thread on here where a group tried it and was about half second quicker in the cls63.

Nice AMG.

Picture #3... What is the rectangle in the grille above the AMG Logo? (There's one on each corner of the grille - pic #7)

I thought that Distronic relied only on the electronics within the Tristar?