enzom

You really need to look at the torque curve before making any judgment. If the car has 460 lb/ft of torque from 2,500 rpm through 5,000 rpm and then jumps up to 465 at 5,200 rpm, it is much better than a car that only has 300 lb/ft at the lower rpms. It is not the peak so much as the torque under the curve.

cte430

Enzom, I agree 100% with you. I'm praying AMG adds a little "M" to the pot and stirs it up. There was a thread a few days back asking if I'd pay $120 for some 600 plus HP AMG car. I wouldn't. But, I would if it had 500 HP, and had the steering response of the M5, and would allow for a vastly different suspension setup via airmatic. That's right, I want it all. High HP, torque, great handling (when I want it) and as comfortable as my E currently is (when I want it) LOL.

pas

I agree with you, but...

I don't think that a car with a torque peak at 5200 rpm will have 400+ lb/ft available around the 2000-2500 range. I think the best thing about the E55 is having 516 lb/ft of torque at 2500 rpm. For everyday driving thats what puts a smile on your face. The E63 might end up being a "faster" car when you look at 0-60 or 1/4 mile times but in the everyday real world I think it will be much like the M cars, if your not revving it its not making much power. I hope AMG proves me wrong but as we all know on a NA engine you usually can't have tons of low end torque and tons of hp at high rpm. Believe me if the E63 has the low end of the 55 and the kind of top end the M5 has I'll be in line with the rest of you to get one.

Improviz

Well, it definitely won't have the off-idle grunt of the s/c motors, but it is making 362 lb-ft at 2,000, up to 405 at 3,000, which would put it in the league as the previous-gen N/A 5.5L cars--actually a bit faster given the seven-speed's more agressive gearing--and then from there, it'd just fly.

But it'll definitely have more grunt than an M5's motor down low...hell, at 2,000 rpm, it's making nearly as much as the M5 makes at its peak (only 18 or so lb-ft less), so out-grunting it down low won't be a problem!

pas

I didn't know you had seen an actual dyno for the 63. That makes me feel a little better but it seems like a let down compared to what we have now. Hopefully Kleeman will come out with a SC kit for it.

Improviz

Oh, these aren't from a dyno plot; they're from AMG directly...Edmunds.com has these numbers, along with a horsepower/torque vs rpm plot, in the article about this motor they ran a month or two ago....

But yeah, it won't kick you in the back down low like the s/c 5.5L, although it will definitely pull hard, and even harder up high. I'm very curious to see actual performance numbers; if the ones we've seen for the ML63 are any indication, the E63 will be screamin' quick with that seven speed, especially in triple digit category!

E55 KEV

Those ML63 numbers does not mean the E63 will be faster. The E55 wagon shows better numbers due the extra weight over the drive wheels. Traction from AWD may have something to do with it? Chrysler just dropped their 6.1 liter with 420HP into the Jeep Grand Cherokee with AWD and it is quicker/faster than the lighter 300C SRT8 and Charger SRT8 with 425HP and RWD?

from www.autoconnection.com:

"Jeep Prices Porsche-Slaying SRT8 Grand Cherokee

The new Jeep Grand Cherokee SRT8 will cost about half as much as the Porsche Cayenne Turbo it beats in a 0-60 run, the Chrysler Group said in a release on Thursday. The new HEMI-powered SUV will sport a base price tag of $39,995 when it goes on sale in January. The SRT8 version of Jeep's perennially popular sport-ute will outpace the Porsche Cayenne Turbo and BMW X5, Jeep promises. Outfitted with the 420-hp, 6.1-liter HEMI V-8, the SRT8 will gun to 60 mph in less than five seconds, making it the second-fastest Chrysler Group vehicle after the Dodge Viper. Along with an upgraded four-wheel-drive system and the HEMI engine, the SRT8 gets stability control recalibrated specifically for this application, Brembo brakes, a more refined interior and options like DVD navigation and Sirius satellite radio."

Nickerz

Wow! These SUV's that are coming out are getting faster than some of the sporty cars available. So the ricers now have new competition - Soccer Moms! We'll be seeing soccer moms flashing their hazards after they do a fly-by - lol!

PowerChaser

The E63 should be faster than the M5 .

video : http://www.rcpics.net/view_single.php?medid=70303

According to this video the M5 is not much faster than the E55 , I also doubt the 4 seconds difference to 150 MPH.

If anyone is interested here's another video of an M5 racing a 550M and a 911 Turbo :

http://www.rcpics.net/view_single.php?medid=70305

So the E63 should also be faster than the 550M and the 911 Turbo.

Bilal

The standing KM time of the ML63 just shows the astronomical grunt of the 63 motor at high revs thanks to its immensely high (for MB) final drive ratio fo 3.45. This equates to stupendous torque multiplication from the 7 G Tronic of an already high torque engine. The result is mouthwatering to say the least

No more supercharger whining at low speeds, no more difference in sound when idle or moving, no more power losses due to supercharger failings, no more filling up for gas every 150 miles........etc.

Before we all "diss" this new engine, lets just wait for its performance in a regular Mercedes, THEN you can all say "I told you so...no torque dumbass"

E55_POWER

I think it's really pointless to compare what a "future" car will do based on car A beating car B, but A is not much faster than car C and Car C should be slower than future car.

There are going to be lots of factors involved, and the most educated comparions will come when the car is actually here and we see it in action.