Will 6.3 engine be faster or slower than 5.4?
05-12-2006, 12:46 AM
#26
Almost a Member!
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
check out this article: http://www.topspeed.com/cars/mercede...mg-ar6838.html
05-12-2006, 06:52 AM
#27
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Dallas TX
Posts: 4,846
Received 290 Likes
on
203 Posts
2013 650i Coupe, 2010 IS250 AWD, 1999 S500
Originally Posted by Bilal
The new AMG V8 is no doubt a monster of an engine, however, its torque curve is, well, "reasonable". The V8's torque curve is lacking at low revs, great at mid revs but then falls at high revs. The M5's curve in comparison is like a straight line, the way that engine maintains its torque is stunning.
To make the most out of the new engine, the 7G has to be tuned LIKE the SMG -->this is simply not the case. The gear ratios are completely out of synch with each other, 1st gear is quick, 2nd is extremely so, whilst 3rd/4th and 5th take you evenly to 160mph. 6th and 7th are pretty much overdrive. The MB engineers may know something we don't with regards to this completely perplexing gear arrangement, but IMO, if I were to do a 7 gear tranny, I would make 1st short, 7th reasonably long and everything in between pretty quick to maximise the torque output with the number of gears on offer. MB have simply not done this. AMG's lack of budget and lack of desire to develop a new transmission perhaps DGS-like is disappointing. I look around and see cars like the 430/new 997T, and of course, the crushing 599GTB and I am disappointed at AMG. Whilst this new engine is a masterpiece of design, it simply doesn't hold the credentials to out-gun the opposition. The lack of an aggressive transmission and lack of power (oh, come on, have you seen how fast the aforementioned cars are!!?) is hugely off-putting.
Another thing, the M5's engine has won international engine of the year award yet again, for the 2nd year running. The V8 achieved 4th best new engine! Of course, the M5's engine sounds like a diesel and only gets interesting above 5000rpms, its ability to sustain torque and its aggressive transmission put it well ahead of the E55 and E63 at high speeds. As a naturally pessimistic fellow, I hope to be pleasantly surprised by this new engine, but until then, I am disappointed.
To make the most out of the new engine, the 7G has to be tuned LIKE the SMG -->this is simply not the case. The gear ratios are completely out of synch with each other, 1st gear is quick, 2nd is extremely so, whilst 3rd/4th and 5th take you evenly to 160mph. 6th and 7th are pretty much overdrive. The MB engineers may know something we don't with regards to this completely perplexing gear arrangement, but IMO, if I were to do a 7 gear tranny, I would make 1st short, 7th reasonably long and everything in between pretty quick to maximise the torque output with the number of gears on offer. MB have simply not done this. AMG's lack of budget and lack of desire to develop a new transmission perhaps DGS-like is disappointing. I look around and see cars like the 430/new 997T, and of course, the crushing 599GTB and I am disappointed at AMG. Whilst this new engine is a masterpiece of design, it simply doesn't hold the credentials to out-gun the opposition. The lack of an aggressive transmission and lack of power (oh, come on, have you seen how fast the aforementioned cars are!!?) is hugely off-putting.
Another thing, the M5's engine has won international engine of the year award yet again, for the 2nd year running. The V8 achieved 4th best new engine! Of course, the M5's engine sounds like a diesel and only gets interesting above 5000rpms, its ability to sustain torque and its aggressive transmission put it well ahead of the E55 and E63 at high speeds. As a naturally pessimistic fellow, I hope to be pleasantly surprised by this new engine, but until then, I am disappointed.
I don't what to say here other than I think you're assuming far too much before anyone has even driven the new 6.2L AMG Mercedes and the Ferrari 599GTB has a V12 with over 600hp and a 250K pricetag to match, and the AMG V8 cars aren't on that level nor are they supposed to be, ditto for the 911 Turbo. Now when AMG turbocharges this engine you'll see either 570hp or 700hp and neither Porsche or Ferrari will have an answer for it. We're talking about an E-Class here not a 911 or Ferrari.
M
05-12-2006, 09:47 AM
#28
Member
Originally Posted by eclou
Think about it this way:
1)Final drive ratio being kept the same, the 7 speed box can cover the spread the 5 speed used to, with shorter gearing designed to let each upshift drop the engine revs into a higher, narrower band over the same course of wheel speed that 5 gears used to.
1)Final drive ratio being kept the same, the 7 speed box can cover the spread the 5 speed used to, with shorter gearing designed to let each upshift drop the engine revs into a higher, narrower band over the same course of wheel speed that 5 gears used to.
2)The 7 speed box can be designed with the same 1st 5 ratios as the 5spd, but with the addition of 2 more overdrive gears. This allows for a much shorter rear diff ratio in the 63 motored car.
Either way, or via a combination of both you can set up the gearing to achieve up to an effective 1.4x multiplier of the resultant wheel torque with respect to keeping the same top speed.
05-12-2006, 10:10 AM
#29
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 280
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by DoctorV8
As I stated previously......You could set it up for 1.4x, 1.7x, 1.01x, or 2x if you wanted.....depending on the actual 6th and 7th gear ratios used....the 1.4 ratio you quoted is an arbitrary number....has nothing to do with the fact that there are 7 vs 5 gear ratios...the same ratio can be achieved with a 6 or 8 spd auto!
05-12-2006, 11:01 AM
#30
Originally Posted by toro4me
OK.
from engine/performance point of view, the ///M and AMG have been 2 different approach to the market.
///M believes in the naturally aspirated route. small block, high red-line, low torque #, high hp obtained by high revving.
AMG uses big block and forced induction, it has MONSTER torque, with low redline low revving.
The result? even-steven. the E46 M3 vs old CLK55, or the E60 M5 vs W211 E55, all pretty much equal in speed.
which car to get, would depend on your preference and driving habit. are you a torque addict? or u prefer high revving N/A.
lots of ppl like the E55 cuz it has gobs of power, and it is relatively easy to modify for more power since its a supercharged engine, unlike those 100hp per liter N/A where it's pretty much tuned to the max and hard to squeeze for more.
now, if the new 63 forgo the old AMG way, the big block with forced induction way, and enters the high revving N/A route, it enters a game where BMW M has been playing well. it will be very difficult to beat the ///M at its own game.
look at the spec:
E63 is V8, M5 is V10.
E63 has a redline prolly somewhere in lo-mid 7000, M5 is 8250.
E63 has 7 sp auto, M5 has 7 sp sequential.
The M5 engine is a better engine without a doubt in my opinion.
from engine/performance point of view, the ///M and AMG have been 2 different approach to the market.
///M believes in the naturally aspirated route. small block, high red-line, low torque #, high hp obtained by high revving.
AMG uses big block and forced induction, it has MONSTER torque, with low redline low revving.
The result? even-steven. the E46 M3 vs old CLK55, or the E60 M5 vs W211 E55, all pretty much equal in speed.
which car to get, would depend on your preference and driving habit. are you a torque addict? or u prefer high revving N/A.
lots of ppl like the E55 cuz it has gobs of power, and it is relatively easy to modify for more power since its a supercharged engine, unlike those 100hp per liter N/A where it's pretty much tuned to the max and hard to squeeze for more.
now, if the new 63 forgo the old AMG way, the big block with forced induction way, and enters the high revving N/A route, it enters a game where BMW M has been playing well. it will be very difficult to beat the ///M at its own game.
look at the spec:
E63 is V8, M5 is V10.
E63 has a redline prolly somewhere in lo-mid 7000, M5 is 8250.
E63 has 7 sp auto, M5 has 7 sp sequential.
The M5 engine is a better engine without a doubt in my opinion.
Ted
Quote:
Brainy, not Brawny
BMW will use technology to boost performance, mpg of next-gen engines
By RICHARD TRUETT | AUTOMOTIVE NEWS
AutoWeek | Published 04/09/06, 10:25 pm et
DETROIT -- The era of making engines bigger is over at BMW.
The German maker of high-performance vehicles will stop making engines bigger to boost performance. Instead, BMW will use turbochargers, more efficient valvetrains and advanced electronics to boost performance while increasing fuel economy.
"The time to increase horsepower by increasing displacement is over," said Klaus Borgmann, senior vice president of powertrain development for BMW, during an interview at the SAE World Congress here last week. "I am very convinced that the time to increase displacement will never come back because increasing displacement automatically increases fuel consumption."
The move is part of a growing industry trend to improve performance without increasing engine size or hurting fuel economy, said Bill Rinna, an analyst with CSM Worldwide, a consulting company in suburban Detroit. "You are seeing a lot more engines with variable valve timing, direct injection and either supercharging or turbocharging," he said.
Rinna said BMW buyers expect safety and technical advances that improve handling and performance, and boost fuel economy through technology.
General Motors and Ford Motor Co. also plan to build smaller but more powerful and fuel-efficient engines. Ford's new 3.5-liter V-6, for example, makes 40 more horsepower than its current 4.0-liter.
Borgmann outlined several ways BMW will boost fuel economy starting this fall.
BMW is spreading its Valvetronic system, which varies the duration and lift of the intake valves to maximize fuel economy, emissions and performance, to the 2007 Mini Cooper. The sporty S version of the British-made hatchback will use a turbocharger, instead of the supercharger in the current model, and have direct fuel injection, Borgmann said, for about a 10 percent fuel economy gain over the 2006 car. Instead of bigger engines, he said, turbochargers will be used on other BMWs to improve performance.
In 2007, European BMWs will be equipped with a stop-start feature that turns off the gasoline or diesel engine when the car comes to a stop. The engine restarts immediately when the driver lifts his or her foot off the brake pedal. Borgmann said the feature is being evaluated for North America. Stop-start may not be suitable for hot climates, he said, because the air conditioning compressor stops working when the engine is off. The stop-start system will use a specially modified starter, instead of a belt alternator system, and a heavier-duty battery. The Mini Cooper also will have the stop-start system.
>> A new alternator management system BMW calls Brake Energy Recuperation makes more efficient use of the car's charging system. The goal is to capture some of the energy normally lost when a car is braking. Borgmann said the system keeps the battery charged at 80 percent to reduce the load, or drag, that the alternator places on the engine while the vehicle is cruising. When the driver applies the brakes, a sensor commands the alternator to produce a short blast of electricity to bring the battery up to a 90 percent charge. When the driver accelerates, the alternator is allowed to spin freely so no drag is placed on the engine. BMW will begin installing the Brake Energy Recuperation systems in 2007 on European market vehicles, along with stop-start.
>> Hybrids: In 2009, BMW will use a version of GM's Two-Mode heavy-duty rear-wheel-drive transmission that enables large cars and rwd SUVs to get an estimated 25 percent fuel economy improvement in city and highway driving. GM, which developed the transmission, is selling it to BMW and DaimlerChrysler.
BMW has not said which of its vehicles will get the Two Mode transmission. About 60 BMW engineers are working alongside GM and DaimlerChrysler engineers in Troy, Mich., to adapt the GM transmission to the BMW engine.
The fuel economy gains from the stop-start and Brake Energy Recuperation systems are borne out of some of the first technical ideas to come from BMW's Department of Energy Management, a special team of 100 engineers that BMW formed in 2003.
"BER, together with the stop-start system, it's about an 8 percent fuel economy improvement, depending on the driving cycle," Borgmann said. "That's about half the value of a hybrid system with very simple systems. We will introduce this in Europe in a broad range of cars because it is not so expensive," he said.
BMW is also looking at ways to capture energy wasted in the exhaust system to create steam to reduce the load on the engine.
"The outcome of the thinking of Energy Management is how can we deal with all the energy flows in the car and what can we do so that the customer has the most benefit," Borgmann said.
Several BMW cars in the United States are considered gas guzzlers and are subject to a special tax by the government.
"The BMW brand is not known to be very fuel efficient," Borgmann said. "It is important for BMW to be good there as well."
05-12-2006, 12:12 PM
#31
Super Member
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 834
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mercedes-Benz A170 CDI
Germancar1
To be honest Sir, the official DCX 0-124mph figure of 15.1 seconds for the CLS63 didn't look too promising to me!
The current E55 beat the pants off the 996 T and the 360, just because these two have moved the game on, does that mean we don't compete with them anymore??!
I have no doubt AMG will pull off a 700bhp V12 Quad Turbo beast, but think rationally here, the last thing you want is a ballistic missile with the current drivetrain and wheel setup. We need to get performance conventionally, not by slapping any old turbos on anything we can get our hands on. My disappointment stems from the fact that this engine (6.3) coupled with a ferocious DSG would have eaten the M5, but did we go down that road?
The current E55 beat the pants off the 996 T and the 360, just because these two have moved the game on, does that mean we don't compete with them anymore??!
I have no doubt AMG will pull off a 700bhp V12 Quad Turbo beast, but think rationally here, the last thing you want is a ballistic missile with the current drivetrain and wheel setup. We need to get performance conventionally, not by slapping any old turbos on anything we can get our hands on. My disappointment stems from the fact that this engine (6.3) coupled with a ferocious DSG would have eaten the M5, but did we go down that road?
05-12-2006, 03:08 PM
#32
Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: New York, Shanghai, Hongkong, Bangkok, Penang
Posts: 150
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
honduh, bimmer, bEnz, ferrari and etc
Originally Posted by Ted Baldwin
..............You may wish to read this below. One year ago, your assertion that BMW believes in NA would have been correct...........but not anymore. BMW now to use turbos and s/c's.
i assume it is referring to the new 6 cyl turbo engine in the upcoming 335?
remember, i said the ///M cars, i did not say BMW in general.
i don't think bmw will force induction on a ///M cars anytime soon, if ever.
05-12-2006, 03:14 PM
#33
Originally Posted by toro4me
I did not read the quoted artical, cuz its way too long.
i assume it is referring to the new 6 cyl turbo engine in the upcoming 335?
remember, i said the ///M cars, i did not say BMW in general.
i don't think bmw will force induction on a ///M cars anytime soon, if ever.
i assume it is referring to the new 6 cyl turbo engine in the upcoming 335?
remember, i said the ///M cars, i did not say BMW in general.
i don't think bmw will force induction on a ///M cars anytime soon, if ever.
"The time to increase horsepower by increasing displacement is over," said Klaus Borgmann, senior vice president of powertrain development for BMW, during an interview at the SAE World Congress here last week. "I am very convinced that the time to increase displacement will never come back because increasing displacement automatically increases fuel consumption."
Ted
05-12-2006, 09:32 PM
#34
Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: New York, Shanghai, Hongkong, Bangkok, Penang
Posts: 150
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
honduh, bimmer, bEnz, ferrari and etc
Originally Posted by Ted Baldwin
..............you may wish to read the entire article because you are misinformed. Below is a quote from the article you may wish to become aware of.
Ted
Ted
to me, it only means he thinks car maker should no longer use bigger and bigger displacement in the vehicles to make more power.
that does not mean forced induction is the only solution.
hp can be obtained by making it rev higher.
05-12-2006, 09:54 PM
#35
Originally Posted by toro4me
I failed to see that paragraph indicates BMW is going forced induction on M cars??
to me, it only means he thinks car maker should no longer use bigger and bigger displacement in the vehicles to make more power.
that does not mean forced induction is the only solution.
hp can be obtained by making it rev higher.
to me, it only means he thinks car maker should no longer use bigger and bigger displacement in the vehicles to make more power.
that does not mean forced induction is the only solution.
hp can be obtained by making it rev higher.
.............ok, if that is what you understood from the quote then, no problem. I did not know that the M cars are no longer BMW's.
Ted
05-12-2006, 11:07 PM
#36
Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: New York, Shanghai, Hongkong, Bangkok, Penang
Posts: 150
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
honduh, bimmer, bEnz, ferrari and etc
Originally Posted by Ted Baldwin
.............ok, if that is what you understood from the quote then, no problem. I did not know that the M cars are no longer BMW's.
Ted
Ted
i said myself that i knew bmw is got a turbo 6 cyl in the new 335.
but my discussion is on M vs. AMG, not non-M, the non-M is not a high revving 100hp/L engine. to me non-M 6 cyl engine is no more attractive than the 6 cyl in a Nissan, i can care less about that.
any in any case, the quoted paragraph does not translate into bmw is going forced induction.
05-13-2006, 12:13 AM
#37
MBWorld Fanatic!
BMW has been making turbo engines for a long time.My father had a 745 turbo back in the day.They have been making turbo D's for a while also.
Ted you mis understood what BMW is doing with the new turbo 6's
They can not make anymore power staying NA on there regular 3 series with out using there M power engines or upping the displacment.They needed somthing to bridge the gap between the new m3 and the old one and not use an M power engine.The next m3 will have about 420hp and the nearest none M is like 260,the 330.That is a huge difference so they just turbo'd a basic inline 6 to bridge the gap and make 300 hp and keep the people with the e46 M power engines happy.
BMW M will never use a turbo in there cars.They are a whole different division that builds High revving NA race engines.
the next m3 will be an NA engine and so wont the next M5
Ted you mis understood what BMW is doing with the new turbo 6's
They can not make anymore power staying NA on there regular 3 series with out using there M power engines or upping the displacment.They needed somthing to bridge the gap between the new m3 and the old one and not use an M power engine.The next m3 will have about 420hp and the nearest none M is like 260,the 330.That is a huge difference so they just turbo'd a basic inline 6 to bridge the gap and make 300 hp and keep the people with the e46 M power engines happy.
BMW M will never use a turbo in there cars.They are a whole different division that builds High revving NA race engines.
the next m3 will be an NA engine and so wont the next M5
05-13-2006, 03:01 AM
#38
Originally Posted by skratch77
BMW has been making turbo engines for a long time.My father had a 745 turbo back in the day.They have been making turbo D's for a while also.
Ted you mis understood what BMW is doing with the new turbo 6's
They can not make anymore power staying NA on there regular 3 series with out using there M power engines or upping the displacment.They needed somthing to bridge the gap between the new m3 and the old one and not use an M power engine.The next m3 will have about 420hp and the nearest none M is like 260,the 330.That is a huge difference so they just turbo'd a basic inline 6 to bridge the gap and make 300 hp and keep the people with the e46 M power engines happy.
BMW M will never use a turbo in there cars.They are a whole different division that builds High revving NA race engines.
the next m3 will be an NA engine and so wont the next M5
Ted you mis understood what BMW is doing with the new turbo 6's
They can not make anymore power staying NA on there regular 3 series with out using there M power engines or upping the displacment.They needed somthing to bridge the gap between the new m3 and the old one and not use an M power engine.The next m3 will have about 420hp and the nearest none M is like 260,the 330.That is a huge difference so they just turbo'd a basic inline 6 to bridge the gap and make 300 hp and keep the people with the e46 M power engines happy.
BMW M will never use a turbo in there cars.They are a whole different division that builds High revving NA race engines.
the next m3 will be an NA engine and so wont the next M5
Ted
05-13-2006, 01:12 PM
#39
MBWorld Fanatic!
we will wait and see but I dont see BMW M making a turbo engine.They will just increase diplacment on there M engines.
The next m3 wont be here for another 2-2.5 years,they havnt even said anything about it yet.They are still building e46 M3s
the next M5 could be a 6l v10 and make 600 hp and the next m3 could be a 5l v8 with 500hp
that press release is for the regular BMW engines and mentions nothing about there M plants
The next m3 wont be here for another 2-2.5 years,they havnt even said anything about it yet.They are still building e46 M3s
the next M5 could be a 6l v10 and make 600 hp and the next m3 could be a 5l v8 with 500hp
that press release is for the regular BMW engines and mentions nothing about there M plants
05-13-2006, 07:19 PM
#40
Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Churchville, Md
Posts: 232
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2005 E55, 1959 220s Cabriolet, some other stuff too...
The e55 Kompressor is clearly the car to have until the the turbo e63 is available. You guys that are running out to spend 90k on a new e63 have more money than brains. 
05-13-2006, 10:26 PM
#41
Almost a Member!
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Topaz Blue M3.....to upcoming E63
Originally Posted by abalto
The e55 Kompressor is clearly the car to have until the the turbo e63 is available. You guys that are running out to spend 90k on a new e63 have more money than brains.
I don't think you can make that kind of statement without actually knowing anything about the 63s. EVERYTHING so far is speculation. I find it funny that people can bash a car they have never seen in action. Give it some time.... Some of us, who don't have an E55 also really enjoy what the E63 has to offer.
05-14-2006, 12:05 AM
#42
Member
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Chandler, Arizona
Posts: 216
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2006 E55
I was told yesterday at the AMG Challenge by the AMG product manager that the E63 will be 2-3 tenths faster than the E55 zero to 60MPH. I will believe it when I see it but he sounded pretty convincing. His name was Rob Allen and was extremely knowledgeable and open to any and all questions.
05-14-2006, 12:26 AM
#43
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: 2000 ft over the Fl coast in a B-17
Posts: 5,812
Received 246 Likes
on
179 Posts
Originally Posted by JJIII55
I was told yesterday at the AMG Challenge by the AMG product manager that the E63 will be 2-3 tenths faster than the E55 zero to 60MPH. I will believe it when I see it but he sounded pretty convincing. His name was Rob Allen and was extremely knowledgeable and open to any and all questions.
05-14-2006, 02:15 AM
#44
Junior Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
M5
Originally Posted by skratch77
BMW has been making turbo engines for a long time.My father had a 745 turbo back in the day.They have been making turbo D's for a while also.
Ted you mis understood what BMW is doing with the new turbo 6's
They can not make anymore power staying NA on there regular 3 series with out using there M power engines or upping the displacment.They needed somthing to bridge the gap between the new m3 and the old one and not use an M power engine.The next m3 will have about 420hp and the nearest none M is like 260,the 330.That is a huge difference so they just turbo'd a basic inline 6 to bridge the gap and make 300 hp and keep the people with the e46 M power engines happy.
BMW M will never use a turbo in there cars.They are a whole different division that builds High revving NA race engines.
the next m3 will be an NA engine and so wont the next M5
Ted you mis understood what BMW is doing with the new turbo 6's
They can not make anymore power staying NA on there regular 3 series with out using there M power engines or upping the displacment.They needed somthing to bridge the gap between the new m3 and the old one and not use an M power engine.The next m3 will have about 420hp and the nearest none M is like 260,the 330.That is a huge difference so they just turbo'd a basic inline 6 to bridge the gap and make 300 hp and keep the people with the e46 M power engines happy.
BMW M will never use a turbo in there cars.They are a whole different division that builds High revving NA race engines.
the next m3 will be an NA engine and so wont the next M5
05-14-2006, 11:51 AM
#45
Super Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 504
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by istewart
I don't think you can make that kind of statement without actually knowing anything about the 63s. EVERYTHING so far is speculation. I find it funny that people can bash a car they have never seen in action. Give it some time.... Some of us, who don't have an E55 also really enjoy what the E63 has to offer.
I believe that based on the power to weight ratio and 7 speed tranny,its will outrun,both the E55and the M5,on top end,but in the quarter mile we will have to wait and see.
05-14-2006, 12:48 PM
#46
Almost a Member!
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Topaz Blue M3.....to upcoming E63
Well, if you consider that the M5 was BMWs answer to the E55 (which it was as the previous M5 was vastly underpowered for todays rocket ship wars) in the arena of power and speed, then the E63 may very well be a step up. An MB car is not deisgned for the same thing as an M, never was, never will be, period... I drive an M3 and have used it as my daily driver for the last 3 years. I have had enough of the jarring ride, noise and shakes. The current M5 is not much better from a daily commute standpoint. Sure they are fabulous when blasting down the road at >70 mph and carving corners, which I will miss, but they could be better under normal driving conditions. I was planning on getting an M5 and would have already done so if there weren't as many problems. Besides it looks absolutely AWFUL, IMHO.
The E63 promises to be a little faster, as comfortable, and that much closer to the M5 in handling. It promises to be BETTER than the E55. How then can you say we are wasting our money? Not everyone needs to mod their car. I personally plan on getting a ZO6 or used 997 TT in a year or two to provide the driving excitement. The E therefore is the best option I have for a daily driver ( as you see is the general trend here).
The E63 promises to be a little faster, as comfortable, and that much closer to the M5 in handling. It promises to be BETTER than the E55. How then can you say we are wasting our money? Not everyone needs to mod their car. I personally plan on getting a ZO6 or used 997 TT in a year or two to provide the driving excitement. The E therefore is the best option I have for a daily driver ( as you see is the general trend here).
05-14-2006, 12:52 PM
#47
Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Churchville, Md
Posts: 232
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2005 E55, 1959 220s Cabriolet, some other stuff too...
Originally Posted by jamusa
I believe that that is a fair statement to make; if you are looking at it from a performance standpoint.If the E63 is MB answer to BMW"s M5,then its not good enough.........we are better off with the E55,because it is a lot easier to mod,and we can easily extract more power.
I believe that based on the power to weight ratio and 7 speed tranny,its will outrun,both the E55and the M5,on top end,but in the quarter mile we will have to wait and see.
I believe that based on the power to weight ratio and 7 speed tranny,its will outrun,both the E55and the M5,on top end,but in the quarter mile we will have to wait and see.
Need a 7 speed tranny? Need to have a 2007 vehicle? Need to have the supposed latest and greatest? Go and run to the dealer and spend your $90,000.00 dollars.
For the same money you can buy a left over 2005 and do a stage 2 kit and it will walk an M5 or E63 every day of the week.
Torque is the name of the game. We can all argue about how the higher HP/higher RPM motors run better at over 150mph, but how practical is that? How often does anyone do that? For practical applications the game is really 0-100mph.
Also, I have a 993tt and have had it for over 3 years. It is a great car, but I actually have just as much fun driving my e55. My twin turbo sits more than my e55.
Last edited by abalto; 05-14-2006 at 01:09 PM.
05-14-2006, 12:59 PM
#48
Almost a Member!
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Topaz Blue M3.....to upcoming E63
I am sure that the tuners will figure out some means of increasing the power to these engines. The ZO6 is NA, large displacement engine and there are mods there. Besides a twin turbo of the 6.3 will be in the works. I am sure that Evosport, Kleeman and RennTech will be working on something. Of course that may mean modification of the 7spd to handle more torque, but time will tell.....
