getbitten

I would like to open this up to debate without all the butt seat dyno's, flag waving, nut swinging, amatuer race car riding and "I love my car!" segways.

To date, only Derek and I have dynoed our cars. We posted the results of 380 RWHP and I feel that it is strong enough evidence to question the validity of MB's claim of 507 HP.

History shows that manufacturer's should be and can be held liable to false HP claims. 507 is what was paid for, 507 is what should be delivered.

I hope that other owners will step up and get their car's dyno tested to put this to rest.

zdkdeeier493

I believe I read somewhere that either you or E63AMG have taken this to MB. Has anyone heard back from them yet? I'd like to hear MB's position on these claims.

getbitten

I mentioned it to my dealer and they were going to notify someone about it. I am heading there tomorrow and will follow up.

oblax4

I don't think MB will have any response at all to a couple of guys sending letters about their dyno results. What's needed is a bunch of people with these same results to hire a lawyer and file an action. Then, MB will still not issue a response (because of pending action), but it will get their attention - the threat of a class action lawsuit ought to set them scrambling. Until this happens, don't expect MB to do anything! Time to start speaking to our CLS63 brethren, to see if their dyno results are similar, and, if so, to get them on board with this. Good luck - I wish you success. If all this is true, then MB has a BIG problem on its hands!!

BTW, the spelling is "segue" for future reference.

E63AMG

You gave me a good giggle with your title and your intro to this thread.

My sincere best wishes to you for getting to the bottom of this issue. I would like to know too.

getbitten

absolutley. I didn't want to muddy the water either. Different issues.

getbitten

getbitten

No. Previous recalls disagree with that notion. Mazda and Ford had to recall due to overating HP previously...with the Mustang Cobra, it was a little as 15 HP.

amgme

i think based on the current results that we have seen, the factory HP claims are not truthful. i would want mb to explain why 380rwhp is the correct figure.

getbitten

Hopefully, more dyno runs for comparison will back up what we believe.

WayneE

With just 2 samples, it's tough to say that there is a widespread problem, but it certainly bears more investigation. What has MB said to you about the issue, getbitten?

Have you contacted an attorney? Looked into any contacts with the FTC (I assume they would be the one to hold MB to the fire for falsely advertising HP)?

I'll lay a GW down and say that if you push the issue, MB will just buyback the car. Any takers?

FlyByNight

what are the average STOCK E55 RWHP numbers people constantly get?

MercedesFTW

Doesn't it have to be within a 5% of MB's stated results?

Not that 380 is within that limit, just wonderin.

getbitten

I have a meeting with my dealer in the morning to start.


Loren,

I dynoed 416 RWHP in my 2003 E55 bone stock but to be honest, comparing the two won't prove much other than the E55 is underated from the factory and has no bearing on the E63.

SLK55R

put a thread on CLK and CLS threads ... hopefully this way we get a larger pool of 63 owners dynoing thier cars.

WayneE

Good luck. It sucks that you have to go through this with your new car

getbitten

I'm not sure if there is a standard, accepted variation but 5% variation between cars seems reasonable...though as you stated, at 380, you are seeing a 30% loss through the drivetrain. I honestly would expect similar drivetrain loss that I've seen here at about 15%. That would put the car making about 431 RWHP.

The E55 factory claims 469 HP but it seems to be actually 493 HP, like the S55, SL55 and CL55. At 493 HP and 15% loss, you are looking at 419 RWHP. Sound about right?

I think an SLK55 owner posted with the 7spd auto posted about a 15% loss also.

FlyByNight

Exactly... evidence of a huge swing.

With the E55, HP was understated by some 24 hp by most measures.
With the E63, HP seems to be overstated by nearly 50 hp.

That's a 75 hp swing in horsepower reporting policy by MB, if what you find holds true. The E55 would then serve as an example of how various manufacture claims have been by MB... usually understated...

But with the latest product, its the other way around.

Just a thought... past policy and claims would affect any current litigation, and you have quite a bit of it at your disposal.



Loren

TopGun32

the are in the high 300's...

like 390+/-

and torque is low 400's

this is just "off the top of my head"

MHK

I have a CLS 63 in SoFla area. Anyone know where I can take it to get tested?

getbitten

Trusted tuner in Florida...

http://www.heffnersperformance.com/

getbitten

I've seen lower numbers like that on Mustang Dyno but higher on Dynojet.
Most people use dynojet for comparison.

MidniteBluBenz

they dyno much higher than that. stock E55's put down like 410-415whp & torque is 450+. i was expecting to hear E63's put down something like 425whp and 400wtq.

what do E60 M5's put down ?

wolverine

Some quality dyno runs on an M6:

http://www.m5board.com/vbulletin/sho...538#post847538

Shows 423 rwhp, 315 rwtq

MidniteBluBenz

That sounds about right for an engine said to produce 507hp. 380-390whp is weak. Unless the ecu is programed to hold back for X thousand miles MB is going to have a problem on their hands. It happened to Ford and Mazda and it's the last thing M-B needs right now with them starting to put those quality control issues behind them.