http://www.emercedesbenz.com/autos/m...ore-efficient/

Available fall '10. This potentially puts the 2011 S550 engines output higher than that of the current NA S63

Wow!
Who said horsepower war was over?

Darn...I was in the talks of leasing a S550 last night. This new engine might be worth waiting, impressive stuff.

OMG, I NEED ONE NOW!!!!

+1

At 429HP, I don't see how it would replace the S63. I would wait a few years for the problems to be ironed out before jumping on this train ;-)

It's nicer than the old S63 which had peak torque rating of 465 pound-feet at 5,200.

But....

The S63 gets a 5.5 TT, way nicer than the 4.7 powerplant:

The new M157 5.5-liter turbo V-8 beats the 6.2-liter engine's output with 536 horsepower and 590 pound-feet of torque, all while yielding 25 percent better fuel economy, so it will only be hardcore nomenclaturists that bother complaining over the badging. Just think of it as Lexus-like (or BMW-like) badging to match the "virtual" displacement of the car. Despite the less-thirsty attitude, the big sedan is expected to shoot to 60 mph in 4.4-4.5 seconds.

Thanks to its turbocharged power, the new S63's torque curve will be flat from 2,100 rpm through to 4,600 rpm, meaning punchy mid-range acceleration. For those that prefer a bit more bite, the performance package narrows down the peak torque plateau to 2,400-3,600 rpm while providing 563 horsepower and 664 pound-feet of torque.

Key figures for new V8
Output (hp at rpm) 429 at 5250
Torque (lb-ft at rpm) 516 from 1800-3500

S63
Output (hp at rpm) 518 hp at 6800
Torque (lb-ft at rpm) 465 at 5200

The new S550 is going to feel much faster in all round driving than the current Naturally Aspirated 6.3 engine, and at only .9 bars of boost, the new engine has alot of room to get above 518 with little more than an ECU tweak. I am kinda surprised that Mercedes is releasing this loaded gun onto the traditional geriatric S550 crowd. Kind of reminds me of when Toyota went upscale and released the Turbo charged Supra onto the un-suspecting grandmas.

One thing I will say. MB makes some of the most reliable powerplants on the planet. If they are releasing the motor in the flagship, then it is ready for the primetime. Just look at the current 5.5L- it was new for '07 and has proven to be bulletproof. Looking at the torque specs, this car will be pretty close to the S63 in a straight line. I for one will not be wary of an '11 S...

That's the thing. Going from a proven-to-be-bulletproof 5.5L to a completely new TT engine is always a gamble. I realize that MB had thoroughly tested it, but past performance is by no means a guarantee of the future results (especially with the ongoing cost cutting and all). TT itself presents certain challenges with cooling, so some tweaks will definitely happen in the next few MYs. Of course, I'm speaking for myself (who finds very little value in all that extra power to begin with ;-) and in no way discouraging anyone from getting one of these beasts.

Don't forget, MB is one of the best OEM TT outfitters on the planet. If your not interested in the power fine (first you should check your pulse )- but you should be interested in the 20-25% increase in gas mileage that comes with that extra power...

Pretty amazing.

The power of the current 5.5L is just fine for me; I wasn't buying a race car to begin with ;-)

Although it remains to be seen what the actual improvement in gas mileage is, that is probably the last thing I care about.

I'll take an extra 50-100 mile range on a tank of gas. I don't care a great deal about gas mileage as I do going between fill ups (not to say I totally don't care, I do, just not economically). I had a GMC Envoy that would go to fumes after 190 miles, YUK. They put the smallest tank on that thing in '02. I just find fill ups a PITA, and they never happen at a convenient time. I get 325-350 miles to a tank mostly city driving now. If I can get that to 400+ I'll be stoked...

Bummer. Just bought a new 2010.

I totally hear you. However, I am very skeptical about the 22% increase in the *average* fuel economy. It's probably the maximum improvement at some extreme end to make EPA happy.

Considering the engine has a 15% smaller displacement and they are optimizing it with nex gen direct injection and quite a few other fuel saving measures, I don't think it is a huge stretch- we are only talking 4mpg give or take...

So what? It's still a beautiful car that drives just as well and comes with an extremely reliable engine. If you had waited another year for the new engine, you'd be again upset in 2012-2013 when W222 is announced. Wait for the new engine to be field tested/re-vamped and jump in on the restyled S Class in 2014. There's always going to be something better down the line, it does not mean you can't enjoy what you have now.

Yeah, it's less displacement but Turbo. The mileage will fluctuate depending on the driving style (i.e. how often it's engaged). For instance, 750's NA 4.8L engine was replaced with a TT 4.4L engine but the highway mileage actually went down from 25 to 22. Despite this forum's common belief that MB is the only company that can make a good engine, I think BMW would take advantage of the latest and greatest fuel savings technologies in their flagship engine as well ;-)

Read the fine print.

"In conjunction with start/stop technology, shift point adjustment and specific friction-reducing measures, improvements in day-to-day fuel consumption by more than 20 percent are possible."

You want to pay $100K for a car that shuts itself off at a light, then restarts? Not me, I don't care how well it works. There are so many stop signs and lights in the NYC metro area, you'll need a new starter motor every year. What happens in the summer, is the AC compressor electrically operated? Or do you start to sweat at every stoplight when the engine shuts down?

If start/stop makes it to the US, forget it as far as I am concerned. Maybe that is just a euro feature, maybe not. But it won't sell in the US market. They would be better off ditching that and figuring out how to make the car 300 pounds lighter to make up the MPG difference. Or, cut the power output of the engine to allow for more MPG. A small segment of the buyers of this car want more power on the "basic" S - the power junkies can move into the AMG versions, where was their marketing survey that told them the current buyers were screaming for 429HP instead of 382?

Should be interesting to see how it plays out - those first test drives with customers, when the engine shuts off at the first traffic light, you'll have alot of people saying "what the hell just happened" to the salesman.

I cant wait for start/ stop, dead quiet at a light is awesome. It's the only feature I like about hybrids. And no, AC does not stop, every manufacturer is moving to electrically run compressors and accessories. If you want to stay away from the feature, buy the last available year car w/o it, because nearly every car made in the next 6-7 years is guaranteed to have it. Hopefully you can keep that vehicle in good enough shape for the rest of your driving life.

And when the competition is moving to 400+ hp, you stay competitive. When you can achieve that with an additional 22% fuel economy, you have a flagship that is easier on CAFE and still ROCKS....

Plenty of cars won't use it - it adds only a fraction to the EPA city loop test, nothing to the highway mileage rating. And the complexity is significant - in addition to a starter motor that has to now have a 100x MTBF over the current ones (for anyone who lives in a metro area that has alot of lights), you need all kinds of crank angle sensors to figure out which piston to light up first on the restart. And how large are the batteries in this car to run the AC compressor plus all the other pumps that move off the engine drive to the electrical system? It's one thing to do this in a hybrid - you already have a huge battery plant on board, but what about on a "normal" car? These cars are going to need 2 batteries - to constantly restart the engine, run the pumps, run the compressor.

Forget it.

S-Class since '07 remains ~5yrs ahead of comps in tech yet anecdotally seems more reliable than any car on planet today despite being world's highest-tech car

On AMG PL, many screamed at AMG about the idiocy of Start/Stop on new 63 motor this Fall, esp in combination with a poss buggy MCT gearbox (which can mysteriously freeze at speed like many of these new funky gearboxes)

AMG indicated it's a feature that can be programmed "off" at delivery

MPG gimmicks are for some theoretic use, like cruising at 70MPH...and are stuff of commie EU, rather silly in any capitalist's commuter car

Have always gotten 1-2MPG more in my 65 than in prior CL63 in same driving...wimpy motors often struggle more and slurp more fuel esp in tq intensive driving which is often seen on urban/suburban fwys (where most S-Classes commute daily in US)

Wow, this is really something. We definitely need this new engine now!

Start/Stop feature is annoying but I bet you will forget it if sitting inside with the windows up.