E63 vs E55 Post Drag Race Perspective
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 303
Likes: 0
From: BEVERLY HILLS
S550
Listen the guy raced E63 and E55 same day same track over and over again the numbers tell. Therefore case close.
Mercedes should put AWD on their cars put a good traction program and wider wheels. I am sure all their cars will fly LOL.
Mercedes should put AWD on their cars put a good traction program and wider wheels. I am sure all their cars will fly LOL.
Member
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 130
Likes: 1
From: Austin, Texas
Since you quoted my comments when you wrote this, I feel compelled to respond in part. Elsewhere, you seem to be confusing the comments of others for mine, so I will not waste time addressing those words.
With the exception of DerekFSU, I think there are few out there who can say they have as actively sought out the answer to this question: "How does the E63 compare to the E55?":
How do I back up that claim?
1. I specifically kept my E55 so I could do some informal testing, before selling it. Its still parked in my driveway. It would have been cheaper to turn it in to the dealer, but I honestly wanted to know how it stacked up to the new car. This kind of testing is not indicative of one who enjoys wearing spectacles the color of rose. I could have been living in the ignorant bliss of my butt dyno this whole time.
2. I did test the 2 cars (informally and unscientifically I fully admit), and wrote up a very detailed summary of my experience, which I posted for all to see and comment on.
3. I actually took my car to the track and raced it all day long stock to stock with E55s, prepared to accept the outcome. This was despite lots of pre-race negativity about all these issues. Has anyone else raced an E63 against E55s on the same track and same day yet?
4. I have tried to read all that has been written on the subject, and posted earlier in the week a German car magazine’s E63 review with the first published ¼ mile time I know of.
These are not the actions of someone interested in a rose colored myopic pro-E63 view, at the expense of the truth.
Here is another cross check on reality: My E63 with its stock tires on this poor track was only .22 seconds slower in the quarter mile than best time for an E55 with drag radials, a K&N snorkel, and a driver 95 pounds lighter than me (Luv ya Jay55!). What does this prove? Nothing for absolute sure, but it gives some good indications that the E63 is at least in the same league as the great E55 in the ¼ mile in these conditions.
You can choose to ignore the facts that those in attendance seem to all agree on, but yesterday at this track, whatever the real HP numbers are, the stock cars we very close.
By the way, you make yourself look less intelligent when you need to call others “idiots”, rather than logically showing them to be so.
With the exception of DerekFSU, I think there are few out there who can say they have as actively sought out the answer to this question: "How does the E63 compare to the E55?":
How do I back up that claim?
1. I specifically kept my E55 so I could do some informal testing, before selling it. Its still parked in my driveway. It would have been cheaper to turn it in to the dealer, but I honestly wanted to know how it stacked up to the new car. This kind of testing is not indicative of one who enjoys wearing spectacles the color of rose. I could have been living in the ignorant bliss of my butt dyno this whole time.
2. I did test the 2 cars (informally and unscientifically I fully admit), and wrote up a very detailed summary of my experience, which I posted for all to see and comment on.
3. I actually took my car to the track and raced it all day long stock to stock with E55s, prepared to accept the outcome. This was despite lots of pre-race negativity about all these issues. Has anyone else raced an E63 against E55s on the same track and same day yet?
4. I have tried to read all that has been written on the subject, and posted earlier in the week a German car magazine’s E63 review with the first published ¼ mile time I know of.
These are not the actions of someone interested in a rose colored myopic pro-E63 view, at the expense of the truth.
Here is another cross check on reality: My E63 with its stock tires on this poor track was only .22 seconds slower in the quarter mile than best time for an E55 with drag radials, a K&N snorkel, and a driver 95 pounds lighter than me (Luv ya Jay55!). What does this prove? Nothing for absolute sure, but it gives some good indications that the E63 is at least in the same league as the great E55 in the ¼ mile in these conditions.
You can choose to ignore the facts that those in attendance seem to all agree on, but yesterday at this track, whatever the real HP numbers are, the stock cars we very close.
By the way, you make yourself look less intelligent when you need to call others “idiots”, rather than logically showing them to be so.
THIS IS THE ARGUEMENT. READ IT, ABSORB IT AND QUIT POSTING ABOUT HOW QUICK IT IS (OR NOT) COMPARED TO THE E55! THE QUESTION IS THIS....AND ONLY THIS AT THIS POINT...DOES 380 RWHP EQUATE TO 507 FLYWHEEL HP? THIS IS FACT BASED LOGIC. OPEN YOUR EYES. QUIT MAKING THE TYPICAL WANABEE RACER EXCUSES OF WEATHER, TRACK CONDITIONS, ETC. TO EXPLAIN WHY THE E63 IS REALLY BADASS BUT YOU JUST CAN'T MAKE IT HAPPEN BECAUSE OF X...Y..OR Z....
Member
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 130
Likes: 1
From: Austin, Texas
how about bringing your dyno to the dealer and see what they have to say about it. they might be able to initiate some talks w/ amg, etc and perhaps might get someone to fly down there to investigate. i agree, 380rwhp does not equate to 507 unless there's a load limit or the tranny simply leeches 30%of the engine's power which i find hard to believe.
Rational point that I am persuing on Monday. I have notified the dealer and they are making the appropriate contacts.
Super Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 725
Likes: 1
From: SoCal
05 E55
You are the one that is blind to the only concrete data recorded...and that is 380 RWHP That is what is truly in dispute. The FACT that 380 RWHP does not equate to 507 flywheel HP...This is not about what your view is. You admit that you are NOT a pro drag racer so how can you determine anything. I am posting what is a fact...that in two separate dynos, in two different states with two different E63's that the cars made ~380 RWHP...which does not equate to the 507 flywheel hp that MB advertises.
THIS IS THE ARGUEMENT. READ IT, ABSORB IT AND QUIT POSTING ABOUT HOW QUICK IT IS (OR NOT) COMPARED TO THE E55! THE QUESTION IS THIS....AND ONLY THIS AT THIS POINT...DOES 380 RWHP EQUATE TO 507 FLYWHEEL HP? THIS IS FACT BASED LOGIC. OPEN YOUR EYES. QUIT MAKING THE TYPICAL WANABEE RACER EXCUSES OF WEATHER, TRACK CONDITIONS, ETC. TO EXPLAIN WHY THE E63 IS REALLY BADASS BUT YOU JUST CAN'T MAKE IT HAPPEN BECAUSE OF X...Y..OR Z....
THIS IS THE ARGUEMENT. READ IT, ABSORB IT AND QUIT POSTING ABOUT HOW QUICK IT IS (OR NOT) COMPARED TO THE E55! THE QUESTION IS THIS....AND ONLY THIS AT THIS POINT...DOES 380 RWHP EQUATE TO 507 FLYWHEEL HP? THIS IS FACT BASED LOGIC. OPEN YOUR EYES. QUIT MAKING THE TYPICAL WANABEE RACER EXCUSES OF WEATHER, TRACK CONDITIONS, ETC. TO EXPLAIN WHY THE E63 IS REALLY BADASS BUT YOU JUST CAN'T MAKE IT HAPPEN BECAUSE OF X...Y..OR Z....
You seem tense. Relax. You're right... 380hp doesn't measure up to 507. We get that. Large text and patronizing people will not make that more apparent. Problem is, most people aren't really obsessed with this angle of discovery, YET, as important as it may be. The HP of the car will be a hot topic when you see drastic differences between E55 and E63 at the same track on the same day. That's when people will go, "hey, that gotbiteme guy may have sumptin' there with that HP thing".
In E63AMG's defense, he's assuming you care about the things WE have been talking about for ages now... will the E55 be faster than the E63, are Derek's times legit, etc. His mission is not to butt dyno (or reg dyno) his frickin' E63. His was merely to help verify if it was faster, slower, or the same. That's it.
So stay on target and realize why he's defensive... because he performed about as well as any stock E55 that day, including one with DRs on it. That's all, no big deal... nothing to get all worked up about. He's allowed to defend his new car if he wants...
You guys are discussing two different things. If you feel the need to interpret his relief to discover his car isn't significantly slower than the E55s on this ****ty track on this ****ty day as a sign of insanity, that's your deal. To write "This is not about what your view is." is really overlooking some very basic FACTUAL data yourself... the title of this thread.
I'll wait now for you to read it................ Okay, so, in fact it is indeed about his view & perspective. Go start your own thread if you want to talk about your view and the HP issues... I certainly would.
And don't take the easy blows of saying we're whining about track conditions and weather as a form of excuse. Its a discussion of fact about why 10 f'ing cars had the exact same problems across the board on this track. It really was frustrating as hell.
Certainly pursue this HP issue... more power to you. But stop bashing the one guy that actually put his car up to public scrutiny in the middle of this controversy by facing off with E55s head on. We all owe him a nod for not only doing it, but for not losing his cool in the face of some pretty lame comments.
I'd be pretty frustrated if I dyno'd 380 in my car, so I completely understand your angle. Maybe you and Derek should check engine sigs and compare.
Maybe E63AMG got a good one, and that's why his tires were spinning down the track, and his time is actually track induced / restricted. Unlikely, but with this whole topic the one thing I've learned is its crazy. Who the F knows. Only further comparisons will tell... This story is ongoing and will get resolved... no amount of capital letters is going to change that.
Loren
Last edited by FlyByNight; Sep 17, 2006 at 04:22 AM.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 2,441
Likes: 0
..
You seem tense. Relax. You're right... 380hp doesn't measure up to 507. We get that. Large text and patronizing people will not make that more apparent. Problem is, most people aren't really obsessed with this angle of discovery, YET, as important as it may be. The HP of the car will be a hot topic when you see drastic differences between E55 and E63 at the same track on the same day. That's when people will go, "hey, that gotbiteme guy may have sumptin' there with that HP thing".
In E63AMG's defense, he's assuming you care about the things WE have been talking about for ages now... will the E55 be faster than the E63, are Derek's times legit, etc. His mission is not to butt dyno (or reg dyno) his frickin' E63. His was merely to help verify if it was faster, slower, or the same. That's it.
So stay on target and realize why he's defensive... because he performed about as well as any stock E55 that day, including one with DRs on it. That's all, no big deal... nothing to get all worked up about. He's allowed to defend his new car if he wants...
You guys are discussing two different things. If you feel the need to interpret his relief to discover his car isn't significantly slower than the E55s on this ****ty track on this ****ty day as a sign of insanity, that's your deal. To write "This is not about what your view is." is really overlooking some very basic FACTUAL data yourself... the title of this thread.
I'll wait now for you to read it................ Okay, so, in fact it is indeed about his view & perspective. Go start your own thread if you want to talk about your view and the HP issues... I certainly would.
And don't take the easy blows of saying we're whining about track conditions and weather as a form of excuse. Its a discussion of fact about why 10 f'ing cars had the exact same problems across the board on this track. It really was frustrating as hell.
Certainly pursue this HP issue... more power to you. But stop bashing the one guy that actually put his car up to public scrutiny in the middle of this controversy by facing off with E55s head on. We all owe him a nod for not only doing it, but for not losing his cool in the face of some pretty lame comments.
I'd be pretty frustrated if I dyno'd 380 in my car, so I completely understand your angle. Maybe you and Derek should check engine sigs and compare. Maybe E63AMG got a good one, and that's why his tires were spinning down the track, and his time is actually track induced / restricted. Unlikely, but with this whole topic the one thing I've learned is its crazy. Who the F knows. Only further comparisons will tell... This story is ongoing and will get resolved... no amount of capital letters is going to change that.
Loren
In E63AMG's defense, he's assuming you care about the things WE have been talking about for ages now... will the E55 be faster than the E63, are Derek's times legit, etc. His mission is not to butt dyno (or reg dyno) his frickin' E63. His was merely to help verify if it was faster, slower, or the same. That's it.
So stay on target and realize why he's defensive... because he performed about as well as any stock E55 that day, including one with DRs on it. That's all, no big deal... nothing to get all worked up about. He's allowed to defend his new car if he wants...
You guys are discussing two different things. If you feel the need to interpret his relief to discover his car isn't significantly slower than the E55s on this ****ty track on this ****ty day as a sign of insanity, that's your deal. To write "This is not about what your view is." is really overlooking some very basic FACTUAL data yourself... the title of this thread.
I'll wait now for you to read it................ Okay, so, in fact it is indeed about his view & perspective. Go start your own thread if you want to talk about your view and the HP issues... I certainly would.
And don't take the easy blows of saying we're whining about track conditions and weather as a form of excuse. Its a discussion of fact about why 10 f'ing cars had the exact same problems across the board on this track. It really was frustrating as hell.
Certainly pursue this HP issue... more power to you. But stop bashing the one guy that actually put his car up to public scrutiny in the middle of this controversy by facing off with E55s head on. We all owe him a nod for not only doing it, but for not losing his cool in the face of some pretty lame comments.
I'd be pretty frustrated if I dyno'd 380 in my car, so I completely understand your angle. Maybe you and Derek should check engine sigs and compare.
Maybe E63AMG got a good one, and that's why his tires were spinning down the track, and his time is actually track induced / restricted. Unlikely, but with this whole topic the one thing I've learned is its crazy. Who the F knows. Only further comparisons will tell... This story is ongoing and will get resolved... no amount of capital letters is going to change that.Loren
Super Member
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 999
Likes: 0
From: UG
2013 ML63 AMG PP
once again I must ask!
WHO HAS DYNO'ED AN E63 THAT HAS MORE THAN 5,000 MILES ON IT? You can't just dyno a brand new car and take those numbers as final???
If an S550 feels a lot faster after 5,000 miles than when New wouldn't this also apply to an E63??? As they both have the new 4 valve engines and 7-speed autos. Sure the E63 is built by AMG themselves, but hey...doesn't MB 100% own AMG?? YES they do! and wouldn't the AMG personel have access to all MB engine blueprints?? Hell yes! So we should be looking for a higher mileage E63 rather than testing a whole bunch of them with 700 miles to 1,500 miles only, on the clock. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.
Right now we are all comparing well broken in E55s with NOT yet broken in E63s.
If an S550 feels a lot faster after 5,000 miles than when New wouldn't this also apply to an E63??? As they both have the new 4 valve engines and 7-speed autos. Sure the E63 is built by AMG themselves, but hey...doesn't MB 100% own AMG?? YES they do! and wouldn't the AMG personel have access to all MB engine blueprints?? Hell yes! So we should be looking for a higher mileage E63 rather than testing a whole bunch of them with 700 miles to 1,500 miles only, on the clock. Someone correct me if I'm wrong. Right now we are all comparing well broken in E55s with NOT yet broken in E63s.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 3,436
Likes: 6
300ce
WHO HAS DYNO'ED AN E63 THAT HAS MORE THAN 5,000 MILES ON IT? You can't just dyno a brand new car and take those numbers as final??? If an S550 feels a lot faster after 5,000 miles than when New wouldn't this also apply to an E63??? As they both have the new 4 valve engines and 7-speed autos. Sure the E63 is built by AMG themselves, but hey...doesn't MB 100% own AMG?? YES they do! and wouldn't the AMG personel have access to all MB engine blueprints?? Hell yes! So we should be looking for a higher mileage E63 rather than testing a whole bunch of them with 700 miles to 1,500 miles only, on the clock. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.
Right now we are all comparing well broken in E55s with NOT yet broken in E63s.
If an S550 feels a lot faster after 5,000 miles than when New wouldn't this also apply to an E63??? As they both have the new 4 valve engines and 7-speed autos. Sure the E63 is built by AMG themselves, but hey...doesn't MB 100% own AMG?? YES they do! and wouldn't the AMG personel have access to all MB engine blueprints?? Hell yes! So we should be looking for a higher mileage E63 rather than testing a whole bunch of them with 700 miles to 1,500 miles only, on the clock. Someone correct me if I'm wrong. Right now we are all comparing well broken in E55s with NOT yet broken in E63s.
...........what is not getting much press is that post re-call, the stock E55's are also dynoing 370-380RWHP. Here is a link to one. https://mbworld.org/forums/w211-amg/163136-dyno-d-my-beast.html
Ted
Super Member
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 588
Likes: 0
From: Gwinnett County, GA
2005 E55 AMG
...........what is not getting much press is that post re-call, the stock E55's are also dynoing 370-380RWHP. Here is a link to one. https://mbworld.org/forums/showthread.php?t=163136
Ted
Ted
The Atlanta meet should be especially interesting because we'll have both dyno AND track numbers to see. Since there will be AMG folks attending, will it be an eye-opener for them?
Looking for some E63 participation! For registration info see Chappy's post at: https://mbworld.org/forums/events-gatherings/163006-registration-info-atlanta-amg-meet-november-4th-5th.html
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
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 411
Likes: 0
2003 E55 K1
E63 vs. E55
There is more to performance than horsepower. R&D did a test of new SLK 55which had a worse power to weight ratio then previous SLK 55 and the new model smoked the previous one. Yhe reasom, of course, was the new 7 speed tranny. The shape of the power curve also makes a huge difference. I love my E55, even with ECU reflash issues, but my guess is E63 will end up as fast or faster than E55.
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 300
Likes: 0
From: Earth
There is more to performance than horsepower. R&D did a test of new SLK 55which had a worse power to weight ratio then previous SLK 55 and the new model smoked the previous one. Yhe reasom, of course, was the new 7 speed tranny. The shape of the power curve also makes a huge difference. I love my E55, even with ECU reflash issues, but my guess is E63 will end up as fast or faster than E55.
My guess is that what was said by the AMG spokesman while narrating the video will pan out: that the E55 will be a 2 - 3 tenths faster in the quarter mile in good conditions with similar driver skill. I suspect it will be easier to consistently get good times with the E63 while the E55 will have more variation.
Last edited by E63AMG; Sep 17, 2006 at 09:54 AM.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,634
Likes: 14
From: Houston, Texas - USA
2009 C63 AMG
What's funny is that when the E55 first came out, there was no disputing its power. Now the 63 is out and there is all kinds of debate. Where there is smoke there is fire. MB just f'd up and are trying to hide it. The 55's are just untouchable, and MB should go back to supercharging.
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 300
Likes: 0
From: Earth
getbitten, you seem to be lost. You need to go here:
Angry Dyno-Obsessed Posters Completely Ignoring the Topic & Using the Max. Font Size
https://mbworld.org/forums/showthrea...35#post1758535
Angry Dyno-Obsessed Posters Completely Ignoring the Topic & Using the Max. Font Size
https://mbworld.org/forums/showthrea...35#post1758535
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 6,649
Likes: 207
'03 E55, Range Rover Sport Supercharged, Ducati 748R
from now on, any time anyone races or dynos an e55 they should list year and if the reflash has been performed. otherwise the numbers do NOT tell anything and the case is NOT closed. according to the information we're seeing regarding dyno and track numbers, the e63 is neck-and-neck with relfashed '03-'04 e55's where those e55's used to crush what's being posted now.
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 438
Likes: 0
I'd be pretty frustrated if I dyno'd 380 in my car, so I completely understand your angle. Maybe you and Derek should check engine sigs and compare.
Maybe E63AMG got a good one, and that's why his tires were spinning down the track, and his time is actually track induced / restricted. Unlikely, but with this whole topic the one thing I've learned is its crazy. Who the F knows. Only further comparisons will tell... This story is ongoing and will get resolved... no amount of capital letters is going to change that.Loren
Do not forget frustrated owners of refleshed E55 's on this forum. If true and proved-- all the 380rwhp E63's and reflashed E55's should get together and present united case to MBUSA.
Member
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 130
Likes: 1
From: Austin, Texas
I'll try to address all the concerns posted since my last post...
For the font obsessed: I only used caps and bold in reponse so many on this board's ridiculous sidestepping of the issue of the lack of horsepower.
For those who live in MB Bliss:
I am actually fine with the car making less horsepower...it just has to be disclosed before a purchase.
I am not mad at MB for making an less powerful car, I'm just angry that I've been lied to.
I'm sorry that no one here can look past their lovefest of MB and see that when you advertise and use as a selling tool, anything that can help sell the car, it has to be there...whether it is horsepower, 4 wheels, sunroof, etc...it doesn't matter.
This is no different than if I found out that the "loaded" car I paid for was missing 4 options that sold me on buying the car...and these four options not only were not put on the car I bought, but actually never existed in the first place.
Everytime it is brought up, it seems there are so many ready to jump to the defense of MB saying how **gush** awesome the car is. What the hell does this have to do with the horsepower I paid for and didn't receive?
How does how the car makes you feel or even your buttseat dyno compare to my and Derek's actual dyno pulls?..Hell Derek ran a terrible time in his car in good weather and my understanding is that he is a good driver.
Face the facts. The car is not making advertised power. If you are ok with getting punked out and mislead that is fine. I am not.
And as for breaking it in...that is ridiculous. I dyno tested my E55 with only 700 miles on it and made 416 RWHP. That theory is dead.
For the font obsessed: I only used caps and bold in reponse so many on this board's ridiculous sidestepping of the issue of the lack of horsepower.
For those who live in MB Bliss:
I am actually fine with the car making less horsepower...it just has to be disclosed before a purchase.
I am not mad at MB for making an less powerful car, I'm just angry that I've been lied to.
I'm sorry that no one here can look past their lovefest of MB and see that when you advertise and use as a selling tool, anything that can help sell the car, it has to be there...whether it is horsepower, 4 wheels, sunroof, etc...it doesn't matter.
This is no different than if I found out that the "loaded" car I paid for was missing 4 options that sold me on buying the car...and these four options not only were not put on the car I bought, but actually never existed in the first place.
Everytime it is brought up, it seems there are so many ready to jump to the defense of MB saying how **gush** awesome the car is. What the hell does this have to do with the horsepower I paid for and didn't receive?
How does how the car makes you feel or even your buttseat dyno compare to my and Derek's actual dyno pulls?..Hell Derek ran a terrible time in his car in good weather and my understanding is that he is a good driver.
Face the facts. The car is not making advertised power. If you are ok with getting punked out and mislead that is fine. I am not.
And as for breaking it in...that is ridiculous. I dyno tested my E55 with only 700 miles on it and made 416 RWHP. That theory is dead.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 3,042
Likes: 0
From: So.Ca.
E55
I'll try to address all the concerns posted since my last post...
For the font obsessed: I only used caps and bold in reponse so many on this board's ridiculous sidestepping of the issue of the lack of horsepower.
For those who live in MB Bliss:
I am actually fine with the car making less horsepower...it just has to be disclosed before a purchase.
I am not mad at MB for making an less powerful car, I'm just angry that I've been lied to.
I'm sorry that no one here can look past their lovefest of MB and see that when you advertise and use as a selling tool, anything that can help sell the car, it has to be there...whether it is horsepower, 4 wheels, sunroof, etc...it doesn't matter.
This is no different than if I found out that the "loaded" car I paid for was missing 4 options that sold me on buying the car...and these four options not only were not put on the car I bought, but actually never existed in the first place.
Everytime it is brought up, it seems there are so many ready to jump to the defense of MB saying how **gush** awesome the car is. What the hell does this have to do with the horsepower I paid for and didn't receive?
How does how the car makes you feel or even your buttseat dyno compare to my and Derek's actual dyno pulls?..Hell Derek ran a terrible time in his car in good weather and my understanding is that he is a good driver.
Face the facts. The car is not making advertised power. If you are ok with getting punked out and mislead that is fine. I am not.
And as for breaking it in...that is ridiculous. I dyno tested my E55 with only 700 miles on it and made 416 RWHP. That theory is dead.
For the font obsessed: I only used caps and bold in reponse so many on this board's ridiculous sidestepping of the issue of the lack of horsepower.
For those who live in MB Bliss:
I am actually fine with the car making less horsepower...it just has to be disclosed before a purchase.
I am not mad at MB for making an less powerful car, I'm just angry that I've been lied to.
I'm sorry that no one here can look past their lovefest of MB and see that when you advertise and use as a selling tool, anything that can help sell the car, it has to be there...whether it is horsepower, 4 wheels, sunroof, etc...it doesn't matter.
This is no different than if I found out that the "loaded" car I paid for was missing 4 options that sold me on buying the car...and these four options not only were not put on the car I bought, but actually never existed in the first place.
Everytime it is brought up, it seems there are so many ready to jump to the defense of MB saying how **gush** awesome the car is. What the hell does this have to do with the horsepower I paid for and didn't receive?
How does how the car makes you feel or even your buttseat dyno compare to my and Derek's actual dyno pulls?..Hell Derek ran a terrible time in his car in good weather and my understanding is that he is a good driver.
Face the facts. The car is not making advertised power. If you are ok with getting punked out and mislead that is fine. I am not.
And as for breaking it in...that is ridiculous. I dyno tested my E55 with only 700 miles on it and made 416 RWHP. That theory is dead.
Your complaint is you are missing 50hp when the car is on the dyno.You have been lied to and want answers! I would be also if I had bought a 63 and had similar results,so that leaves you with a few options.
1.Sell your car
2.Take car back and put up a strong front to MB about it
3.Sell your computer
The large fonts,jumping into threads and using your dyno numbers for talk against a complete different topic isn't doing you any good here,we are aware of the low dyno numbers.
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 303
Likes: 0
From: BEVERLY HILLS
S550
Those that are not happy about E63 just stick to E55. Plenty are floating around.
Those that want an E63 and hesitate on getting it. Just wait alittle longer see what happens or go test drive one, if you like the test drive buy it, if you don't then don't get it.
Simple as that. Who cares where the horse power is as long as it is going as it is what you like.
Those that want an E63 and hesitate on getting it. Just wait alittle longer see what happens or go test drive one, if you like the test drive buy it, if you don't then don't get it.
Simple as that. Who cares where the horse power is as long as it is going as it is what you like.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 6,061
Likes: 326
From: 2000 ft over the FL coast in a B-17
Various
There is more to performance than horsepower. R&D did a test of new SLK 55which had a worse power to weight ratio then previous SLK 55 and the new model smoked the previous one. Yhe reasom, of course, was the new 7 speed tranny. The shape of the power curve also makes a huge difference. I love my E55, even with ECU reflash issues, but my guess is E63 will end up as fast or faster than E55.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 1,287
Likes: 0
From: school west coast-Summer Internships Va and Bmore
E55 (for sale if the right offer comes along)...too many others to list
This is hilarious to me! I did have the dyno's along with other people from this forum and none of you guys wanted to believe me. Now after the recent drags and dyno's you guys have come to the same conclusion? My tuner was able reset my ECU, but I am still missing 15hp. You hear guys on this board talking about Cory still working on their ECU. I can tell you that there are a handful of guys that Cory is still working on the ECU. Most of you guys are too shy or don't have the guts to come forward. I did talk to MBUSA.
Member
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 125
Likes: 0
From: Nashville, TN
2009 SL63 AMG, sliver
Why is it that because the 55K dyno'ed well with 700 miles on it that this PROVES that a totally different 6.3L NA engine with a totally different trany does not need to be broken in. Does it not seem possible that a totally different engines might have different break-in requirements?
Can you explain this logic please?
PT
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 3,042
Likes: 0
From: So.Ca.
E55
This is hilarious to me! I did have the dyno's along with other people from this forum and none of you guys wanted to believe me. Now after the recent drags and dyno's you guys have come to the same conclusion? My tuner was able reset my ECU, but I am still missing 15hp. You hear guys on this board talking about Cory still working on their ECU. I can tell you that there are a handful of guys that Cory is still working on the ECU. Most of you guys are too shy or don't have the guts to come forward. I did talk to MBUSA.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 6,649
Likes: 207
'03 E55, Range Rover Sport Supercharged, Ducati 748R
I am confused still. Is it your contension that all engines where 5.5l or 6.3l, N?A or supercharged, gas, desiel or powered by a hampster on a wheel, are identical?
Why is it that because the 55K dyno'ed well with 700 miles on it that this PROVES that a totally different 6.3L NA engine with a totally different trany does not need to be broken in. Does it not seem possible that a totally different engines might have different break-in requirements?
Can you explain this logic please?
PT
Why is it that because the 55K dyno'ed well with 700 miles on it that this PROVES that a totally different 6.3L NA engine with a totally different trany does not need to be broken in. Does it not seem possible that a totally different engines might have different break-in requirements?
Can you explain this logic please?
PT
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 3,042
Likes: 0
From: So.Ca.
E55
I am confused still. Is it your contension that all engines where 5.5l or 6.3l, N?A or supercharged, gas, desiel or powered by a hampster on a wheel, are identical?
Why is it that because the 55K dyno'ed well with 700 miles on it that this PROVES that a totally different 6.3L NA engine with a totally different trany does not need to be broken in. Does it not seem possible that a totally different engines might have different break-in requirements?
Can you explain this logic please?
PT
Why is it that because the 55K dyno'ed well with 700 miles on it that this PROVES that a totally different 6.3L NA engine with a totally different trany does not need to be broken in. Does it not seem possible that a totally different engines might have different break-in requirements?
Can you explain this logic please?
PT
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 6,649
Likes: 207
'03 E55, Range Rover Sport Supercharged, Ducati 748R
Whats your point? Your tuner can do what nobody else can? Shy,guts....what does that have to do with anything? You went too MB and got what in return? A car with no warranty? I thought you had a different scenario than all the others,now your saying you had the exact same problem that others are talking about but your the only person to get things taken care of?
hell, i posted info on how i got my e55 fixed after the reflash issue and hardly anyone even commented or cared. it's their car and if they don't mind mb taking 60-75hp out of the car that they paid for that's fine, but at that point they deserve it if they're not willing to do anything imNSho.
Last edited by chiromikey; Sep 17, 2006 at 04:18 PM.
