Rafal

Nah, let's just lynch it now...who's got the rope?

Rafal

It might be worth asking C32 owners who traded up to C55. I heard that despite two extra cylinders and more cubic inches, C32 was quicker down low
due to its kompressor. Can anybody verify it?

SleeperX

Does anyone recall when the mags began testing the E55? It seems really strange to me that the car will be out in weeks and none of the mags have even tested it. As for tests, I think we can all rely on the DerekFSU tests...

PC Valkyrie

That is not true. Most car mag times showed that the C55 was MARGINALLY faster than the C32 in straightline acceleration tests. The difference was pretty small so that it was not very noticeable for most drivers. But what made the C55 a much better car was that it HANDLED a lot better than the C32. Like the E63, the C55 was the benefit of the "Direct Control" upgrades, which included much stiffer suspension, more direct steering ratio, wider front track, and a revised ESP program.

The C55 is better than the C32 as a overall performance car because it came very close to matching the M3 in terms of track times, NOT because it was significantly faster than the C32 in a straight line. On the Nurburgring, the C55 managed the same 8.22 minutes as the E46 M3. The C32 was much slower at 8.37 minutes (all times published by Sport Auto magazine).

Time will tell as more instrumented tests come out as to whether the E63 will be able to match the M5 in terms of its handling.

Ted Baldwin

.............No disrespect intended. Has somebody actually read any articles or spoken to a German owner of an E63? Discussing this is cool for entartainment but like Derek said, we are just blowing smoke right now. At best the info the discussion is based on is 3rd hand.

Ted

JLP

According to this German magazine the E63 is slower than the E55. Please disregard where this article originated from.

http://www.m5board.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=77008

Beltfed

That article has been posted already and really doesn't make much sense....both of the numbers for the M5 and E63 seem off.

I would take it with a grain of salt.

And if the E63 really is slower than the E55, then mark this day in history that AMG has produced an updated model that is slower than the car it replaced.

amgme

it the latest automobile mag, the 63 engine w/ biturbo will be fitted in the new gullwing mb to produce 750hp. i doubt they will be putting in the future flagship engine into the e amg anytime soon.

stevebez

The 7speed tranny gear ratios are very disappointing to me ... its not a close ratio box at all ... its a 5speed with 2 overdrive gears... I just dont see what they are trying to do with this box... 7th gear is complete waste of time geared to run 249 mph... ??? Sixth is geared to run 222MPH which is even longer than the E55's 5th ...???

In gear speeds compare as follows ...

Beast.............E55...........E63
RPM...............6100.........6800
Fnl Drive.........2.65..........2.82
1st gear.........48.34........41.54
2nd gear........79.25........63.57
3rd gear.......123.09........94.69
4th gear.......173.55.......132.71
5th gear.......209.10.......181.81
6th gear.........-.............221.71
7th gear.........-.............249.05

Also what is a bit of a laugh is the E63 hits 60/62 mph just before it shifts to third - so its 0-62 time will be optimal - the 55's is not so this alone could be where the E63 is getting the claimed better performance in the sprints ... it seems like a marketers gear ratio setup rather than a pure performance car gear ratio setup ... 0-80mph I think the E55 will be quicker, 0-100 will still be ahead and will remain ahead at the qtr mile, and I am not sure which will be quicker to the 155 limiter... the E63's longer 5th may hurt it ...

TopGun32

well... the flagship SLR has the same engine block as the E55, CLS55, CL55, S55 ect...

of course the components are different, and probably has different mechanical pieces, but essentially is the same engine.

I definately can see a low boost TT63 application on the E and CLS.


just my .02$


I do also agree... AMG would be shooting itself on the foot to release a car slower than its predecessor. I'll wait for a North American car review and head to head tests.

amgme

i agree but i think they'll upgrade the 63 engine on the next iteration of the e rather that this generation. also from what i remember the 7 speed tranny can't handle more than 530 or 540? lbs of torque.

bfnnrgn

I've been asked several times to put in an order for an E63 and trade in my E55. I said no thanks before they even finished the sales pitch. Sorry fellas, but I like my torque.

Cylinder Head

iTrader: (1)

Remember that the 55 engine was first released in NA form in the previous generation of Mercs, only to be supercharged in the new body style. As soon as Merc engineers figure out how to hold more torque in a 7 speed transmission, the TT63 will follow. Expect a low-boost, 600 horsepower next gen E-class coming to stealerships near you in '08.

Beltfed

Regardless, whatever they did to the E63.....it would be a stupid financial move to trade in a year old car for an updated model (not a complete redesign).

So those with E55s, why be so concerned with the E63?

Who gives a ****, you have your cars....enjoy them.

Those trying hard to make the E63 sound like a piece of crap. Seriously, it makes it sound like some of you (not all) are trying to justify being happy with the E55.

Even if the E63 is slightly slower, which I can't imagine being the case. There are going to be other improvements that are simply superior to the E55 (plain and simple, its an updated car).

If you don't think that will be the case, you don't have much faith in AMG.

JLP

Sorry but the block is not the same...........the cylinder heads are the same but thats it. They are not essentially the same engine just a FYI.

ima55r2

The e55 is a great car and the E63 will be too. A tenth here or there really doesn't matter 99.9 percent of the time.

A 63tt with another 100hp would be an fun prospect and AMG is working on a stronger 7-speed, but the current 600hp cars are all over $180,000. So what would a low boost E put out and what would you pay for it?

Cylinder Head

iTrader: (1)

Think about how much a 400hp Merc cost in '01, fast forward two years and you could get a 500hp Merc for LESS.

deutscheramg

You should be aware that some germans here, cough cough will/have test drive(n) the E63 eventually/already.

Cylinder Head

iTrader: (1)

Enlighten us then, brother.
My grandparents are from Frankfurt, I'm 1/2 Deutsche.

TopGun32

i beg to differ

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...ren/index.html

same displacement, architecture, same kompressor type, I would qualify that as essentially the same. They both have aluminum blocks and heads. Displacement is the same too.

Different components yes, different compression ratio yes. Different casting of the aluminum?? perhaps. But I never said they were they same engine. They are made by the same people at the same plant with almost the same major components.

Back to my point: Yes AMG will place a low boost TT63 engine, dispite having the "essentially" the same engine in their flagship car.


55k basic specs
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...s_pricing.html

slr basic specs

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...ecs_price.html

In the SLR engine same as a E55: NO ( please don't try to make that point, since its a given)

Cylinder Head

iTrader: (1)

One of the huge things that sets apart the SLR engine from the E55 engine is its intercooler setup. Rather than sandwiching the intercooler between the supercharger and the cylinder head (horrible, horrible idea from a heat efficiency standpoint), the badboys at McClaren went the more difficult route and placed two intercoolers atop the engine and routed the charged gases through them.

JLP

Funny but a close friend is a MB foreman (25 years) and the only certified SLR tech at my home dealer and according to him you are incorrect regardless of what you cut and paste from motortrend.
The motors have different waterjackets, oil passages, stud mounts, crankshafts, pistons,cams, valve springs, valves etc, and the SLR motor was built entirely by AMG unlike the motor in the E55. So if all these things are different how can you claim they are built with "the same major components"??

Also you claim you never said they were the same engine?


"well... the flagship SLR has the same engine block as the E55, CLS55, CL55, S55 ect..."

Your words not mine.