E63 vs E55 Post Drag Race Perspective
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 3,042
Likes: 0
From: So.Ca.
E55
Vegas,Pheonix,Bakersfield,up North also.just has to be made into a weekend deal not a one dayer for some is all.
I don't know grump that would mean absolutely no traction for at least the first 300 ft. I guess it's possible.
Look at jrocket's 113.5mph. If that slip is correct it represents what the average e55 should run trap speed wise. Dragon's K2 car trapped 119 mph a difference of only three mph from his usual 120-121 which i attribute more to the weather conditions. I wonder if we could find out what the adjusted altitude was for late that day.
Look at jrocket's 113.5mph. If that slip is correct it represents what the average e55 should run trap speed wise. Dragon's K2 car trapped 119 mph a difference of only three mph from his usual 120-121 which i attribute more to the weather conditions. I wonder if we could find out what the adjusted altitude was for late that day.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,466
Likes: 10
From: Southern Cali (Ontario)
Am I the only one reading this right? 13.28 sec BEST 1/4mile? What was the worst 1/4? That is W210 territory (I mean it as a compliment to W210 guys!) Most stock W211 E55's do a 1/4 in 12.1-12.5 sec on Contis. Mine does it in 12.35 sec, which is a whole 180 ft or 11 car lengths in front of the E63 on a good day!
No wonder Derek is getting rid of his E63.
Sorry mate, no amount of optimism and encouragement from other Forum members would stop me from a massive attack of "Buyer's Remorse" if I had bought one.
No wonder Derek is getting rid of his E63.
Sorry mate, no amount of optimism and encouragement from other Forum members would stop me from a massive attack of "Buyer's Remorse" if I had bought one.
With all do respect, but you need to look at the whole picture of the number of cars running on that day, not just magazine "CORRECTED" numbers.
Once somebody corrects the numbers.. then feel free to compare
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 6,649
Likes: 207
'03 E55, Range Rover Sport Supercharged, Ducati 748R
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,466
Likes: 10
From: Southern Cali (Ontario)
I was there...
K2 ran mid 12's all day long..
PLEASE EVERYBODY: DON'T COMPARE MAG CORRECTED TIMES TO THIS ONE DAY. JUST LOOK AT THE CARS THAT RAN ON THAT DAY ALONE AND MAKE COMPARISONS.
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 368
Likes: 0
From: Friendswood, TX
'08 CLS63
i'm in houston...any 63 owners here live in the houston area? track rental at HRP is very reasonable. HRP is always prepped good and at sea level...the only variable is weather.
i would enjoy meeting up with other board members with 55's and 63's for a track rental if anybody is up for it?
john
i would enjoy meeting up with other board members with 55's and 63's for a track rental if anybody is up for it?
john
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,466
Likes: 10
From: Southern Cali (Ontario)
Guys, give me a break! Look at your original post to which I responded and show me where is all that info on weather, track prep, humidity etc that keeps appearing all of a sudden from left right and center.
I am just waiting for someone to post a late newsflash that all these cars raced on square wheels
Since by all accounts the E63 is easier to launch than E55 because of its more benign torque curve, it should have been even more superior on a wet track. The fact that in all cases stock E55's prevailed over E63's means that on a dry track E63 would lose by an even bigger margin. That's just physics,
the rest is excuses from a society of mutual admiration. Amen.
I am just waiting for someone to post a late newsflash that all these cars raced on square wheels
Since by all accounts the E63 is easier to launch than E55 because of its more benign torque curve, it should have been even more superior on a wet track. The fact that in all cases stock E55's prevailed over E63's means that on a dry track E63 would lose by an even bigger margin. That's just physics,
the rest is excuses from a society of mutual admiration. Amen.
and M5/6 was not able to break into 12's that should tell you how bad the track was. (M6 did it a few times out of many)
it was not weather.
The track very slippery. I was witness the M5 and M6 spin tires up to 4th gear and same for the e55k cars.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,466
Likes: 10
From: Southern Cali (Ontario)
Now I understand the E55 vs E63 debate much better.
Its not at all about what would happen when some stock 55's and stock 63's go to a track on a specific day and run (the results of which we now have) its about how low a number you can type into a forum thread.
Ok, so your stock 55 can do 12.2 and 117. Thats great. Maybe you should paint it on the side of your car. But the 55's that actually went to the track yesterday were not able to beat the stock 63 by more than .1 and had trap speads that were 1 or 2 mph greater at best. Some of the runs were the same between the 2.
So in reality, the 63 and 55 are very similar, but in fantasy forum land, the 55 is just way faster.
I also love the argument that the 63 was putting down its best time on a poor track, but the 55 was way slower. On a better quality track the 63 would not be helped at all, but the 55's would lose a whole second and gain 7-10 mph.
And your evidence for that is what?
Here is what we know for sure: On Sept 15th on a track in SoCa, the E63 was similar in 1/4mile and trap speed to the E55.
Anything other than that is pure speculation and nothing more.
PT
Its not at all about what would happen when some stock 55's and stock 63's go to a track on a specific day and run (the results of which we now have) its about how low a number you can type into a forum thread.
Ok, so your stock 55 can do 12.2 and 117. Thats great. Maybe you should paint it on the side of your car. But the 55's that actually went to the track yesterday were not able to beat the stock 63 by more than .1 and had trap speads that were 1 or 2 mph greater at best. Some of the runs were the same between the 2.
So in reality, the 63 and 55 are very similar, but in fantasy forum land, the 55 is just way faster.
I also love the argument that the 63 was putting down its best time on a poor track, but the 55 was way slower. On a better quality track the 63 would not be helped at all, but the 55's would lose a whole second and gain 7-10 mph.
And your evidence for that is what?
Here is what we know for sure: On Sept 15th on a track in SoCa, the E63 was similar in 1/4mile and trap speed to the E55.
Anything other than that is pure speculation and nothing more.
PT
I can't even finish this 1st page without responding to the crazy postings.
My GOD!
Its like comparing Barry Bonds to Hank or the Babe... (juice or no juice.. ya da ya da..)
Super Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 725
Likes: 1
From: SoCal
05 E55
I don't know grump that would mean absolutely no traction for at least the first 300 ft. I guess it's possible.
Look at jrocket's 113.5mph. If that slip is correct it represents what the average e55 should run trap speed wise. Dragon's K2 car trapped 119 mph a difference of only three mph from his usual 120-121 which i attribute more to the weather conditions. I wonder if we could find out what the adjusted altitude was for late that day.
Look at jrocket's 113.5mph. If that slip is correct it represents what the average e55 should run trap speed wise. Dragon's K2 car trapped 119 mph a difference of only three mph from his usual 120-121 which i attribute more to the weather conditions. I wonder if we could find out what the adjusted altitude was for late that day.
a) Dragon's 119 times didn't come until very late in the day with drag radials on... before that they were 115-116 as well. He was very smart to cool his car and then go at it, cool it with fans, then go at it.
b) JRocket knows how to launch / drag as well as anyone at the track, at worst. He'd be able to jump into some of the other cars and improve their times as well... earlier he was dead on the 109s as well. In fact, all of his best runs... and Dragons... came between 4 and 5pm when we had all but wrapped it up and it began to cool.
Loren
MB World Stories
The Best of Mercedes & AMG
6 Mercedes Models That Did NOT Age Well (But Are Somehow Still Cool)
Verdad Gallardo
Manual Mercedes? 6 Times Sindelfingen Let Drivers Have All The Fun
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes SLR McLaren 722 S Is Extremely Rare Example Modified by McLaren
Verdad Gallardo
8 Classic Boxy Mercedes Designs That Have Aged Like Fine Wine
Verdad Gallardo
Flawlessly Restored Mercedes 190E Evo II Heads to Auction
Verdad Gallardo
Electric Mercedes C-Class Unveiled: 11 Things You Need to Know
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes EQS Gets A Major Update: Everything You Need to Know
Verdad Gallardo
5 Underrated Mercedes-Benz Models That Don't Get the Love They Deserve
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes 300D Has Pushed Well Past 1 Million Miles and It Ain't Stopping
Verdad Gallardo
Super Member
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 820
Likes: 1
From: La Quinta, CALIF.
2009 C63 Black on Black
How can you say the following?
Ok, my point was that people by the 55 or the 63 for more than kjust their acceleration, so you were agreeing with me with your first comment.
As far as a car that looks as good, has the same build quality, better breaking, better handling, faster at highway speeds, etc can you post an example? (and I mean a single car, not one car that is faster, one that has better brakes..)
My point was that if you are going to judge a car on a single value (1/4 mile time) then the 55 is not really that great. If you are talking about luxury sedans that are amazing cars all around (brakes, acceleration, handling, interior, exterior, build quality, comfort etc etc) the E63 is an improvement over the already outstanding 55, and all we MAY have had to sacrifice is .2 or .3 seconds on a 1/4 mile track.
Now I am not defending MB if the car really is not making the 507 they quoted. If the car makes 450 at the flywheel then they are liers and I would be pissed. I am not sure we have "proof" of this yet...
PT
As far as a car that looks as good, has the same build quality, better breaking, better handling, faster at highway speeds, etc can you post an example? (and I mean a single car, not one car that is faster, one that has better brakes..)
My point was that if you are going to judge a car on a single value (1/4 mile time) then the 55 is not really that great. If you are talking about luxury sedans that are amazing cars all around (brakes, acceleration, handling, interior, exterior, build quality, comfort etc etc) the E63 is an improvement over the already outstanding 55, and all we MAY have had to sacrifice is .2 or .3 seconds on a 1/4 mile track.
Now I am not defending MB if the car really is not making the 507 they quoted. If the car makes 450 at the flywheel then they are liers and I would be pissed. I am not sure we have "proof" of this yet...
PT
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 2,441
Likes: 0
..
Here is a video of the M5 running. You'll hear the car squealing all the way through 1st gear and all of 2nd. The M5 supposedly has less torque than the 55k's and is equipped with an LSD. It ran 13.2@112 on that pass (late afternoon pass). This should give you an idea of what the track was like.
Right click, save target as http://iiilgsrlll.com/video/fontana_09152006/m5_1.wmv
Right click, save target as http://iiilgsrlll.com/video/fontana_09152006/m5_1.wmv
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 3,042
Likes: 0
From: So.Ca.
E55
Here is a video of the M5 running. You'll hear the car squealing all the way through 1st gear and all of 2nd. The M5 supposedly has less torque than the 55k's and is equipped with an LSD. It ran 13.2@112 on that pass (late afternoon pass). This should give you an idea of what the track was like.
That was Jay55's second pass ever drivng the M5 correct?
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 2,441
Likes: 0
..
Out Of Control!!
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 13,394
Likes: 6
From: San Diego
2015 S212
[quote=Jay55 was stock but on Drag radials.Not trying to down play or be rude here,cause I met Jay and think he's a cool dude,but with better driving technique he could have been in the 12.8? or so.[/quote]
OWNED!!!
OWNED!!!
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 3,042
Likes: 0
From: So.Ca.
E55
Ahhh c'mon Jangy,dont bust my chops on that one. I talked to Jay quite a bit that day and he can drive well.He knows what I was referring too,it was just a matter of launch technique is all.Out of all the cars jays hooked the best on drag radials.
You should have been there Jangy...I know,ya ya ya.
I talked to Jay quite a bit that day and he can drive well.He knows what I was referring too,it was just a matter of launch technique is all.Out of all the cars jays hooked the best on drag radials.You should have been there Jangy...I know,ya ya ya.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 6,649
Likes: 207
'03 E55, Range Rover Sport Supercharged, Ducati 748R
speaking of launch techniques...what seems to be the best? dyno mode, esp off, esp on, manual or sport mode, which suspension setting, load the tc???
give me the scoop for street tires and dr's.
give me the scoop for street tires and dr's.
Member
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 125
Likes: 0
From: Nashville, TN
2009 SL63 AMG, sliver
How can you state the following? - the E63 is an improvement over the E55 and has better brakes, acceleration, handling, interior, exterior, build quality, comfort etc etc,??? Just for your edification, the E55 has great brakes, Equal or better acceleration, interior equal to the E63, the E55 Exterior is equal to the E63, Build quality is the same as the E63, Comfort (is this a smooth & linear crowd thing?)?? You have nothing to base this rationalization! I feel the E63 is a great car but this ranting of the superiority of the E63 borders on hallucinations period!! Accept the fact that the E63 is very little improved over the E55 and really directed at the "Smooth & Linear crowd". Also note that after ordering an E63 18 months ago and after the test drive I felt it was very little improved over my 2003 W211 E55 and decided to get another E55 as a statement after 3 years of driving the E55 and seeing very little advantage in the E63. Just my opinion, you are entitled to yours but back it up with facts and experience not unfounded bias or sales hype from MBZ to move the newest and latest! Peace to you if you want it if not then I'm ok with that too and will respond!
Handling (or cornering)+accleration+braking = speed on a road coarse. For just 1/4 mile you don't need anything but power and traction. AMG has stated that the E63 is 3-4 seconds faster than the 55 on a road coase, therefore its overall ability in all catagories is better then the 55 (even though the 55's straight line acceleration is a bit faster).
Now don't tell me that AMG is lying about the road results because all the 55er's on this forum jumped on that thread (where AMG's comments about the 55 being a bit faster then the 63) and said "there it is proof that the 55 is faster". You can't use what he said about the 55 being faster against the 63 and then discount what he said about the 63 on a road course.
As far as interior and exterior, that is a matter of taste. I happen to like my 63, and it has some features (paddle shifters, max cool to name 2) that seem like an improvement.
PT
Member
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 130
Likes: 1
From: Austin, Texas
380 RWHP...
That is for the blind.
That is what the E63 makes.
Remove the issue of bad drivers, bad track and all the other excuses.
Would a mathemetician or engineer correctly and honestly explain how 380 RWHP equates to 507 HP in the E63.
That is what I paid for, that is what I want.
You really shouldn't bring the m5/m6 into it either as the car reportedly makes about 500 HP and about 100 lbs. less torque and runs similar or better numbers!
That is for the blind.
That is what the E63 makes.
Remove the issue of bad drivers, bad track and all the other excuses.
Would a mathemetician or engineer correctly and honestly explain how 380 RWHP equates to 507 HP in the E63.
That is what I paid for, that is what I want.
You really shouldn't bring the m5/m6 into it either as the car reportedly makes about 500 HP and about 100 lbs. less torque and runs similar or better numbers!
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,034
Likes: 20
From: Toronto
MY17 E43 Matte Selenite/Macchiato Beige, MY16 GLE350d Tenorite/Crystal Grey, MY17 B250
After looking through Mad's pics - am I crazy, or was that E55 sitting on its rotors? Whats up with that??
Member
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 130
Likes: 1
From: Austin, Texas
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,406
Likes: 1
From: Mia
2005 E 55
380 RWHP...
That is for the blind.
That is what the E63 makes.
Remove the issue of bad drivers, bad track and all the other excuses.
Would a mathemetician or engineer correctly and honestly explain how 380 RWHP equates to 507 HP in the E63.
That is what I paid for, that is what I want.
You really shouldn't bring the m5/m6 into it either as the car reportedly makes about 500 HP and about 100 lbs. less torque and runs similar or better numbers!
That is for the blind.
That is what the E63 makes.
Remove the issue of bad drivers, bad track and all the other excuses.
Would a mathemetician or engineer correctly and honestly explain how 380 RWHP equates to 507 HP in the E63.
That is what I paid for, that is what I want.
You really shouldn't bring the m5/m6 into it either as the car reportedly makes about 500 HP and about 100 lbs. less torque and runs similar or better numbers!
It doesn't because it's making a lot less. In my estimation about 30 to 40 less.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 3,042
Likes: 0
From: So.Ca.
E55
Just curious if your were going to pursue some action with MB over the HP ratings or not is all.I already had a 63 on order that I turned down once I found the right equiped 55 for sale.The 55 is a no brainer for me due to it being Super Charged,that was my main buying decision.
