jgajito

I was at Powertrain Dynamics in Huntington Beach, the other week having a friend Dyno a '69 GTO. On the rack we see an E63!!!, So I'm gawking, ooh, ahh... my buddy is an M5 fan, BMW all the way, although his daily driver is a R500. So he's talking smack, that's a piece of ****, the E63 is garbage, my M5 will smoke that...yada, yada, yada...

With just a little aftermarket bolt-on mods... the E63 Dyno's 424 RWHP...

WTF?!!! Somebody please tell me that car was not what it was and that some monkey re-badged it!!!

MJ1133

55>63

jgajito

So why all the hype around the "E63"?

Sunny55

cuz its an all new AMG made motor.....supposed to be the first they (AMG) designed and build without mercedes. And its NA. But it doesn't impress me at all.

like MJ1133 said 55>63

MiamiAMG

Why are you posting this here?

1985mb

This OP is a weird one

https://mbworld.org/forums/off-topic/198257-rant-arrogant-forum-members-ones-you.html

MiamiAMG

Oh yeahhhh, i remember him.

sirsomo

What does 424 rwhp equate to at the flywheel? Im not sure of the drivetrain loss, but I don't think those are that bad of numbers.

whoover

At 18% loss, it's 517 HP. It's rated at 507.

chutia

WTF, dude?? right or wrong, how does this belong here???

Vadim @ FD

Car was stock.

That's where I got baseline. The owner is an old friend of mine.

sack5000

63>55 get the math right.........

jangy

We gotta have a drive off. Was the day at the drag strip just an anomoly?

ItalianStallion

I doubt his M5 dynos any higher...plus, what kind of E class other than a 63 or 55 could be anywhere near 424rwhp? That's a lot of power. Maybe you and your buddy don't understand that dynos read horsepower at the wheels? Otherwise, thats a pretty damn good number for a 63.

juicee63

That is A GREAT # for a 63. Nice #, why on earth would you bash the output of an engine with a 424 to the wheels?

absent

Why the complaint about 424 hp at the wheels?
Excellent number as far as I'm concerned,translating to a nice margin over 500 at the crank.
My old E55 ('03) had only 398hp at the wheels.
Is someone here confused and does not know the difference between wheel and crank horspower?

StevesAMG

424 sounds pretty accurate to me.....It is slightly low as i get 500 crank HP using an 18% drivetrain loss...However that can be attributed to many things....i.e. car needs to break in, temp was warm....dyno reads slightly low....


If it bothers the owner that much I will gladly trade you for my 55 :-)

juicee63

I thought 424 at the wheels was over 500 at the crank? 18% DT
.18*507=91.26
424+91.26=515.26

StevesAMG

I just calculated it differently..424*1.18=500.32....i don't think you can use the 91 # as that is 18% of 507 which is the # we are trying to verify. So i think all you can use is the 424, and assume an 18% loss, so 18% of 424=76.32....76.32+424=500.32...

I don't know though, either way it is in the ballpark

Vadim @ FD

Car made 417 RWHP.

424 was HP spike during shift.

417/0.83 = 502HP. It is rated at 507 HP.

ROCKETW19

vadim you have a dyno in your shop? alsp is that a real picture of you shop in your sig? just being nosey

Vadim @ FD

Not yet, I have a Superflow 4WD going in early next year.

I use my friend's Dynojet 248 meantime.

BlownV8

Because the person making the negative remark is completely clueless concerning chassis dyno numbers.

Vic55

Yeah thats his shop pic ... except its cleaner in person.

deaguero

Stock E55 (mine) 427 RWHP > than E63

With vrus TB and shorty headers now = 484 RWHP now that definitely is better than the 6.2