sound 8

I have finally realised what my 231 SL63 is all about, and why I prefer
the 230 SL65 on occasions. Without doubt driving flat out in manual mode
with a tweaked engine is fantastic speed wise. However it doesn't drive slow
or cruise like a SL65. You feel all the bumps, and you can feel the engine
straining to go, doesn't like changing into 6 or 7 when cruising at 60.
The 65 on the other hand cruises beautifully ,is very comfortable, and
tweaked is very fast in a straight line, gearbox lets it down.
Look wise the 230 with the right wheels steal it for me, the 63 more track
car looking. Mercedes has tried IMO to take some market from Porsche,
maybe Ferrari , whilst trying to appeal to Jaguar customers.
But have they succeeded.

JumpinJim

They sure did. I had a 230 SL55 and SL65. I'll take a 231 SL63 any day of the week. The 231 chassis is more competent than the 230 in every way. My 231 SL63 dynod just as powerful as my 230 SL65 and weighs a lot less so the 230 65 has no advantage in power or speed.

sound 8

As I said, when it comes to performance the 231 63 wins hands down.
But can it cruise in comfort like a 230 65.

Exotic-metal55

The Torque number of the SL65 is what shines when comparing power of a 63 and v12 65.

JumpinJim

The difference isn't as big as you would think. The 5.5tt in the SL63 is very underrated on paper. HP wise the 63 with the PP makes more HP than the 65 and torque is only off by about 40. The 63 is 250 lbs lighter as well. If performance is what you're after then the 65 is not what you want. Unless you just want to say you have a V12 there really isn't point to the 65 anymore. That will probably change when they retire the 5.5tt and switch to the 4.0tt for the "63" models. But for now the 65 is outclassed.

Thericker

Forget magazine data ie dif in weight etc the 65 is highly underrated esp in TQ, the TQ is a good 100+ rwt HIGHER in 65 vs 63 when both are BONE STOCK (the weight dif is negated w/65 tq advantage) 65 on drag tires run high 10's to 10.79 ecu only @ 127-129+mph depending on weather & track etc the heavier older 65 is still faster w/only ecu & drag tires, no light skinnys either..

After 65 adds catless dwn pipes & basic boltons the rwtq goes to nearly 800 @ wheels
1 dragtimes ecu/airbox drags 10.8x full weight
http://www.dragtimes.com/Mercedes-Be...lip-23713.html

Stock 2013 sl63tt dyno & 1/4 http://www.dragtimes.com/Mercedes-Be...lip-25677.html
518 rwhp 541 rwt http://www.dragtimes.com/2013-Merced...phs-25677.html

Vs stock 65 dyno
490 rwhp 673 rwtq (133 more rwt STOCK than 63)
http://www.dragtimes.com/2006-Merced...phs-12160.html
Add tunes ONLY stage 1 564 rwp 791 rwt add ANY more BASIC mods the tq is 800+ & rwp 630-670+
http://www.dragtimes.com/2006-Merced...phs-22552.html

Hardly obsolete/outclassed lol.. But guys like you have to make yourselves feel superior justifying latest models whatever..
Add heavier previous facelift cl65 tune & drag tires only from our very own Racehorse 10.7x @ 127
https://www.dragtimes.com/Mercedes-B...lip-25092.html

JumpinJim

I'm not going by mags. I'm going by having owned both cars. Dynod them both. Dragraced them both.


That 2013 SL 63 timeslip is actually my car. My SL65 is here:
http://www.dragtimes.com/Mercedes-Be...lip-16004.html


These were both done in summer and it's quite hot in TX so everything will be slower. The SL65 dynod at 523 rwhp for reference. The SL63 was faster and quicker and mine is not PP. It's also a heck of a lot lighter. On the track scale the SL63 was 4235 lbs vs 4630 for the SL65 both with a 1/8 tank of gas and me in it. The 231 SL65 is a bit lighter, but still 250lb heavier than the 63.


The PP SL63 puts down right at 540 hp to the wheels. With a tune only the 5.5tt will do 620 rwhp and 720 rwtq. I know we want to think the 65 is top dog, but they made the new 5.5tt so good that the old v12 is just a dinosaur. Plus it's lighter and you don't have to worry about replacing coil packs all the time. Sorry guys, but there's no benefit the 65 anymore. It's simply outclassed.

Thericker

So tune only 65 can make nearly 800 rwt vs tuned 63, pp pkg is negated after both non or pp equiped 63's run tunes, & they make 720 rwt vs 65 tuned 800 rwt.

Add catless dwn pipes/full exhaust/HE/cai/race tune the 65 makes 650-690 rwhp w/800+ rwt.. Ya clearly an obsolete dinosaur that runs hi 10's all day long w/ecu only.. Ya we should just dump all theses relics in Labrea Tar pits asap...

PS depending on dyno used bone stk 65's make 500-520 rwhp STOCK, I didn't cherry pick the highest dynos like you've done trying to enhance your points..

Since there's lacking data on any fast new sl63tt 1/4 data compare CLS 63 tt Renntech ECU race tune/Down Pipes/full renntech exhaust/renntech heat exchanger/Gilken LSD/drag tires & super lightweight skinny wheels/tires & ALL those mods only runs 10.79???
http://www.dragtimes.com/Mercedes-Be...lip-24569.html

Vs heavy *** 4600 lb cl65 ONLY running drag tires & ECU tune runs same 10.79 ya clearly see your points lol
Light skinny frnts add 2-3 mph in trap & knock ET off by 2 tenths easily..
https://www.dragtimes.com/Mercedes-B...lip-25092.html

ttboost

It's probably fair to say that they are both comparable in performance stock, with the V12TT taking the edge WITH MODS, with the obvious size advantage. And OBVIOUSLY a newer car is a nicer car with newer technology, etc...it just seems MB struck a balance between efficiency and performance. Still love my V12TT though...and it WILL go quicker at the track...even though it is a sled...

sound 8

I have been lucky enough to have owned both, but forget all those figures,
the 65 can be tweaked BUT the gearbox let's it down, It will over ride any
command you give it, as well as not kicking down if it's too near the red line.
Basically it's just an automatic. This is where the 63 is more exciting.

BUT BUT no one has answered my question, which one looks best, 20" rims
on the 65 , and which one cruises the best, speed wise it's old technology
versus new.

Ekselent

Even if the V12 was slower.. no way I'm gone buy car with V8. The sound is so much better at V12.
I have not heard the Mercedes V8 engine sound but I have heard BMW M5F10 V8 engine and that sound is like a Subaru Impreza…. sorry…. for me it's enough with an V12TT engine and old slow gearbox.. it's a cruiser car

JumpinJim

Hard to cherry pick dynos and data of my own cars. But whatever. A tuned, dp, exhaust 5.5tt etc will make just as much if not more HP than the equivalent 65. 5.5tt also has many readily available turbo upgrades if you want to really push it past 700+ rwhp.

The SL is ~200 lbs lighter than the CLS and will be faster so not a good comparison. P.S. I had a tuned CLS63 too. Tune only SL63 will easily run 10s as well. You act as if TQ is a king maker, but it's not. Too much is quite bad as all that gives is wheelspin and adds nothing to the top end.

I've had both engines, tuned both, even put a trunk reservoir in the SL65, been there done that. AMS will be tuning my SL63 in the coming weeks. The 65 was great back in the day, but it had it's day and it's done. They need a new one. It's not that the 65 is bad, but they made the new 5.5tt too good. The 63 comes out ligher, better balanced, with a better transmission, and an equally good if not better powerplant, and costs a whole lot less. The 65 is an old 3 valve per cylinder design compared to the newer more advanced DFI engines. It's ancient and outdated by todays standards. Even the 5.5tt is getting old. BMW is getting just as much power out of their little 4.4tt as the old 65 not to mention Audis 4.0tt. Technology moves forward. It's the way of things. You can cling to the 65 if you want, but you're doing yourself a disservice by discounting the newer, better options. You might like what you find. The dealership I got my 63 from has a nearly identical 231 65 that's been sitting on the showroom floor for almost an entire year. They've offered to swap out my 63 for a song, but I've no interest in it as it really would be a downgrade.

Thericker

I have zero problem w/newer tech 63tt platform & will buy a cls63 1 day.. You've continually downgraded the older v12tt stating it's an out classed slower dinosaur, I've just been pointing out how inaccurate & baseless your skewed thoughts/posts are..

You're simply spewing senseless false krap trying to make yourself feel superior to rest of us lol whatever helps you sleep at night pal

Since there's lacking data on any fast new sl63tt 1/4 data compare CLS 63 tt Renntech ECU race tune/Down Pipes/full renntech exhaust/renntech heat exchanger/Gilken LSD/drag tires & super lightweight skinny wheels/tires & ALL those mods only runs 10.79???
http://www.dragtimes.com/Mercedes-Be...lip-24569.html

Vs heavy *** 4600 lb cl65 ONLY running drag tires & ECU tune runs same 10.79 ya clearly see your points lol Light skinny frnts add 2-3 mph in trap & knock ET off by 2 tenths..
https://www.dragtimes.com/Mercedes-B...lip-25092.html

Your sl63 stats.. DIMENSIONS:Wheelbase:*101.8 in*Length:182.4 inWidth:*73.9 in*Height:*51.2 inCurb weight:*4150 lb (C/D

Now 2013 e63 tt.. It weighs 102 lbs LESS Measurements Base Curb Weight (lbs): 4048
Renntech tune ONLY http://www.dragtimes.com/Mercedes-Be...lip-24080.html
Big hint it's NOT running 10.79..

All these cars have good/bad points, all that giant v12 tt torque = great 60' times, but I guess you missed that when you were busy spewing.. The inaccuracies you keep spewing are dumbfounding, Torque is the amount of “turning power” you have. Well, what can this do to a car? The answer is, cause it to accelerate! Torque can tell you a lot about how fast the car can accelerate. Especially w/correct gearing etc..

AMS makes great power & their upgraded turbo pkg on the lighter e63 should run mid 10's but... Only matches a 10 yr old dinosaur v12 cl65 down the 1/4 @ 10.78
http://www.dragtimes.com/Mercedes-Be...lip-25643.html

IngenereAMG

These are all great cars. They are fast and fairly competent for what they are. But at 4200 and 4600 pounds, they really aren't track cars, and its funny to hear people talk about their weight.

I've always been pleasantly surprised by how good my SL55 is on road course or a windy road, but if you really want a great track car, the answer is not one of these cars.

ttboost

Yep..at 4700lbs, you're not gonna scare anyone, but it is funny to pull up to the ticket booth, at the track, to pick up your 10sec time slip and put the top down for the return road...

IngenereAMG

I have to agree with you. These cars are very special and great all 'rounders.

As you I own Veloce Performance tuning, so we have 'enhanced' our share of these cars, and every time I do a before/after drive, I am always amazed at what they are capable of.

AMG-Driver

Stock the 65 has more HP-Power than the 63, even if 63 is with PP.

MB knows how much they rate their cars. If you dyno them seriously, you get nearly the same numbers like from MB. This is my experience. Only very few cars differ from the factory rating and I have seen less and also more HP on some cars.

The 63 is the more modern car in my opinion. But I would not give up the smooth, silky and effortless V12. No way...

If I had too much money I would buy the SL65 R231. I haven't driven a new SL65 yet and they are very rare, but I hope it is also as comfortable and smooth, as the SL65 R230.

Phantastic cars, but all of them way to heavy for racing. So I would not give up the comfort for a harsh ride.

@Sound8
How satisfied are you with the steering in the new R231 SL63? Do you get a good feedback from the electric power steering? I drove some new Benzes and to me the steering felt quite "synthetic". I am not really sure if the new parametric power steerings give enough "feedback", especially when you drive in very fast corners. But maybe it is a matter of taste.

rune solem

The first rule before bashing on another car is to atleast have tried it first.

I think the people here agree that a bmw V8 is much more boring than our V8's.
I on the another hand thinks a v12 sounds to civilized, I want to hear each sylinders firing instead, but everyone has different taste so....

And what's this negative comment??

If you are so in love with the small displacement engines why don't you buy one of those, and we'll see what you think after a while.

I would bet that you will be coming back for a real engine, not these eco friendly ****ty things.

Yes, there's no problem getting huge power out of a small engine, we have also been seeing that from the 2.0 liter amg engine, but would you buy one?

Isn't one of the BIG reasons we love our cars BECAUSE of the engine size?

Size matters, that's the hole point!

There's no replacement for displacement when it comes to sound.

Just look at BMW's M5 and M6 with it's artificial sound in the cabin, what's that?

A joke?

Who here will buy an amg engine even if it has 550hp from a twin turbo 3.8, like the GTR?. The sound is rubbish!

If you don't understand this, i'm wondering in your real interest in AMG engines.

sound 8

It's amazing, all I asked was the SL63 bi TT as good cruising as the 230 SL65
and it turns out with posts completely missing the point.
Let's get one thing straight, both 63 and 65 are very quick machines but
which looks the best and cruises the best. For outright performance , cornering, gear change, exhaust it has to be the 63, but for looks, class,
comfort it has got to be the 65.
I have already posted about the electric steering, and I do not like it.
It feels like there is lots of play, and when you are driving fast it doesn't fill
you with confidence. especially on long fast bends.

Ekselent

old school mercedes vs new school mercedes.. .

http://www.video.az/en/video/41799/m...g-black-series

V12TTenthusiast

I love the V12s but if I get a V8 GT car I'm kinda leaning to the Ferrari California, if I wanted a hard top, If I didn't care (Which I wouldn't since I have my SL65) I'm thinking SLS AMG last I looked on those prices, it looks like I might buy one by the end of the year

Thericker

How can the ole' Dinosaur do this???



















































































Meanwhile back @ JumpinJimbo's cubicle...

Ekselent

I now…. V12 TT and old school gearbox…. thats the secret
and the Tooooooorgue… old school engine and Tooooorgue.
If you look closely the SLS stamp on the gas pedal a little bit earlier than the SL65. It's took a short time when the turbos start to spooling up and after that it eat up the SLS pretty easy… Honestly I'm a little surprised because I have heard/read so much regarding new gearboxes and how good they are and so on… but here we can see the truth….

NikolaosPsarros

I have one 2002 c32 amg w 50k , and my supercharger having this noise like in this video from YouTube , 3 mechanics 3 different opinions first to replace the all spcgr and pulleys for 4500$ second to change the inside BS part for 1300$ minimum and a third just waiting ,what did you think I can do ? car in excellent condition except this issue , no personal experience with garage and hand work at cars , thanks

sound 8

Ha Ha Ha that certainly brought the party to a close.
As I was saying....


sorry you need a new supercharger.... manners