E63AMG

I tried to do that, but it didn’t really settle the issue. See: https://mbworld.org/forums/w211-amg/161712-confirmed-e63-faster-than-e55.html

Almost a month has gone by since I created that thread. Here are my updated comments and perspectives on this topic.
1. The races my buddy and I ran were not full ¼ miles, so my anecdotal evidence should not be used to make an accurate determination one way or the other on which is faster in the ¼ mile. Because of the better E63 launches, I still think the E63 would have won in the ¼ mile race if we went the whole distance on that day.
2. When the races were run, I felt that launch technique was not that important with the E55. With good traction, I thought you could stomp on it and let the ESP do the rest to a good time. I have changed my opinion on this. I believe that an experienced E55 driver can get significantly better times with the proper launch techniques. Both cars were launched that way (stomp with ESP on), but I think the E55 suffered more for the use of this technique.
3. At the time of these races, I was unaware of the ECU reflash issue. I did subsequently reflash my E55 and noticed (with my butt dyno) no difference. I don’t think it was an issue in the outcome of our races.
4. I have seen no definitive evidence to show which car is faster 0-60. Based on some very preliminary GTech Pro testing I have done, I believe the factory told the truth in its 4.3 second claim for the E63. With my non-dragstrip-calibrated GTech Pro, I have beaten 4.3 seconds. (Take it for what its worth). That does not mean its faster than the E55 when it does the perfect launch.
5. Pretty much all evidence coming in after my races has pointed in the other direction, at least in the ¼ mile. It seems pretty likely the E55 is slightly faster than the E63, at least in the ¼ mile, when properly launched.

Beowulf

We have both dyno and track events scheduled at the Atlanta AMG Meet - plenty of opportunities to add more data points to the 63 vs. 55K comparison.

SolidGranite

Good info guys. Thanks.

JJIII55

I also tested my '06 E55 on a DynoDynamics machine and it came out with 387.1 rwhp. My car has always been bone stock and the numbers are non-adjusted. Just another number on the same machine. It was done in Scottsdale, AZ on 11/29/05.

Fast55

In other words, the 63 does not make more power than a 55K motor, in fact, it makes a little less. Again, AMG is full of ***** about the HP ratings of the 2 motors.

Heisenberg

My stock CLS55 was about 372hp / 455tq on the Dyno Dynamics in Scottsdale, AZ in July of 2006, also without any adjustments. [Given these numbers, peak HP may have been negatively affected by pulled timing with the crappy summer fuel and/or high ambient temps -- done in the winter it probably would have been right around 387rwhp].

The tuner suggested a 1.26 conversion to crank numbers, which probably consists of 1.23 for the accepted drivetrain loss, plus another ~ 2.5% to account for the typically lower readings of this Dyno Dynamics machine. With that 1.26x conversion, the 372hp = 469hp at crank which is the car's spec. My car already had the new ECU software loaded as it was built in 12/05 so I would not expect it to surpass the factory spec like earlier 55K models routine did.

Regardless it seems the 63 is not living up to the factory spec of 507HP unless the new drivetrain is much more parasitic than the old one, which is very unlikely. Using my tuners conversion factor for the Dyno Dynamics, 366.4rwhp x 1.26 = 462HP at crank.

462HP versus 469HP (55K cars with latest ECU software) are very close, and the 1/4 mile times obtained thus far support this. With HP numbers this close, other factors like weight of the driver and gas and quality of launch will determine the winner every time.

paul928

Ekovalsky, I wonder about the conversion to crank multipliers. I had my CLS 55 dyno'd in Hayward, CA (Dynojet Research) in January 2006 before and after a Kleemann Stage 1 installation (pulley & ECU). The "before" hp & tq were 402 & 432, respectively; the"afters" were 430 & 484, respectively. A 402 converts to 506 hp before installation and 430 to 541 after, which seem too high. The same is true of the torque numbers

Heisenberg

The 1.26 conversion my tuner suggested is specifically for his Dyno Dynamics 450 Lowboy AWD dynometer, to give crank numbers comparable to a Dynojet.

Since your tuner used a Dynojet, 1.23 conversion (18.7% powertrain loss) for crank should probably be used -- at least this is what Renntech suggests for the 55K cars with 5sp box. Using your wheel numbers of 402/432, crank figures would be 493hp/531tq "before" and 529hp/595tq "after".

Regarding mods, as long as the "before" and "after" runs were performed on the same machine, your realized gains should be accurate.

paul928

Thanks for the information. I still wonder if the formula is correct. It still seems too high. (I knew my car was fast off the line, especially since it also has a Kleemann Limited slip, but not THAT fast.) I think that I will check with Cory from Kleemann tomorrow on the ratio. Thanks, again

paul928

Thanks for the information. I still wonder if the formula is correct. It still seems too high. (I knew my car was fast off the line, especially since it also has a Kleemann Limited slip, but not THAT fast.) I think that I will check with Cory from Kleemann tomorrow on the ratio. Thanks, again

paul928

Thanks for the information. I still wonder if the formula is correct. It still seems too high. (I knew my car was fast off the line, especially since it also has a Kleemann Limited slip, but not THAT fast.) I think that I will check with Cory from Kleemann tomorrow on the ratio. Thanks, again

terrence

I was interested to see if I wanted to get a new E63 to replace my 55. Drove an E63 at dealer. My "butt" dyno tells me my K1 is WAY faster than the E63. Even my buddy's stock E55 feels noticeably quickly than the E63 I drove. Glad I decided to get my E55 with the foresight that I would not like the 63 engine better. Very happy with my decision.

E63's are sitting at dealer's lots everywhere. As some members have posted, they are at $5K off "buy-it-now" on Ebay with some members being offered below invoice to buy them. Sounds like a lot of AMG buyers are sharing similar revelations.

OUTLAW///M3 SMG

I have dynoed cars on a dyno dynamics before. as well dyno jet, and dyna pak. Now my question is why are you multiplying 1.15 to your numbers? Last time I checked I saw a 10hp gain from dd to dj. I dont think you will see those numbers on a dj. It would be nice. But I still think it will be well below 400whp.

OUTLAW///M3 SMG

I have dynoed cars on a dyno dynamics before. as well dyno jet, and dyna pak. Now my question is why are you multiplying 1.15 to your numbers? Last time I checked I saw a 10hp gain from dd to dj. I dont think you will see those numbers on a dj. It would be nice. But I still think it will be well below 400whp.

Im also curious why the dyno operator shut it down before redline? I thought it was 7000rpm? Maybe higher? I usually let it bounce off it once to get a clear picture of the entire powerband.