Took the E63 to the track last night.
Thread Starter
Member
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 104
Likes: 0
From: Toronto Canada
07 SL550 / 07 E63 AMG
Took the E63 to the track last night.
Last night was pretty cool out around 17-18C so, I went to the track and ran some pretty good times. This was not on any drag radials just Continentals275/35/18 rubber.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 6,952
Likes: 4
From: Hollywood CA
2011 twin turboed prius
WOW!!!
you have just run the 2nd fastest uncorrected time in a 63!!!
12.43@114 , just shy of the 12.41@114 run in SACRAMENTO IN June(on BFG)
excellent, how did you launch, what mode were you in and did you happen to WEIGH the car? How much do you weigh, LOL, Tire pressure? spare or no spare? Details please sir
Thread Starter
Member
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 104
Likes: 0
From: Toronto Canada
07 SL550 / 07 E63 AMG
WOW!!!
you have just run the 2nd fastest uncorrected time in a 63!!!
12.43@114 , just shy of the 12.41@114 run in SACRAMENTO IN June(on BFG)
excellent, how did you launch, what mode were you in and did you happen to WEIGH the car? How much do you weigh, LOL, Tire pressure? spare or no spare? Details please sir
you have just run the 2nd fastest uncorrected time in a 63!!!
12.43@114 , just shy of the 12.41@114 run in SACRAMENTO IN June(on BFG)
excellent, how did you launch, what mode were you in and did you happen to WEIGH the car? How much do you weigh, LOL, Tire pressure? spare or no spare? Details please sir
Was the guy in Sacramento was on Drag radials?
Last edited by Sean03S55; Sep 2, 2007 at 02:00 PM.
Thread Starter
Member
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 104
Likes: 0
From: Toronto Canada
07 SL550 / 07 E63 AMG
Trending Topics
MB World Stories
The Best of Mercedes & AMG
7 Craziest Things AMG Gas Ever Built
Verdad Gallardo
New Electric Mercedes-AMG GT 4-Door Coupe Unveiled: 10 Things You Need to Know
Verdad Gallardo
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
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 9,137
Likes: 4
From: California, USA
E63 P30, CL500 Sport
Awsome runs..... 
Hope you go to the track again and try some runs without the spare tire and without charcoal filters. You will soon have the FASTEST un-corrected time E63...
Hope you go to the track again and try some runs without the spare tire and without charcoal filters. You will soon have the FASTEST un-corrected time E63...
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 6,952
Likes: 4
From: Hollywood CA
2011 twin turboed prius
In Sport mode it kept shifting early around 62-6300 rpm from first to second and ran 12.6's for the first two runs. Then I tried manual mode using and managed to hit the shift perfectly with a chirp into second and that was the 12.44. About the launch I just barely feathered the throttle while holding the brake until the last yellow and just smoothly stepped onto it. Tire pressure was normal at around 31 psi (OE Continentals only upsized to 275), I had the spare, and I weigh around 185-190 lbs.
Was the guy in Sacramento was on Drag radials?
Was the guy in Sacramento was on Drag radials?
You did everything right.
Next time you gotta try DYNO mode to alleviate that early shifting, sounds like you have a potential 12.2 in her. Man this is exciting to see an E63 on stock tires run a 12.4 , really nice man. There is .2 room for improvement on your 60 ft and you can do slightly better through the 1/8th mile. So really a 12.2 is right around the corner.
No need to correct as it looks like favorable temps, whats the elevation of the track and whats temp in F, lol
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,461
Likes: 1
From: Baltimore MD
MB, BMW
sweeeeeeeeeeeet!!! on stock contis wow.
ya next time remove everything inside the car, rear seat, headrests, floormats, all the crap in the glove box, spare, etc drain the washer fluid, 1/6 tank gas. u might get teh fastest E63 time evAr!!
ya next time remove everything inside the car, rear seat, headrests, floormats, all the crap in the glove box, spare, etc drain the washer fluid, 1/6 tank gas. u might get teh fastest E63 time evAr!!
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 6,952
Likes: 4
From: Hollywood CA
2011 twin turboed prius
Any idea of the track elevation, is it sea level, I know St Thomas Dragway is in NHRA sector 3 but my DA calculator only does USA tracks BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO. I have the temp and humidity, just need elevation. It looks like this could be the best corrected time and 2nd best uncorrected and best STOCK time Yet.
Let me know if you need any other details on the other guys run, I raced him 2x and he ran a 12.41 and then a 12.46 both @114, so you guys are very close
Let me know if you need any other details on the other guys run, I raced him 2x and he ran a 12.41 and then a 12.46 both @114, so you guys are very close
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 3,042
Likes: 0
From: So.Ca.
E55
Any idea of the track elevation, is it sea level, I know St Thomas Dragway is in NHRA sector 3 but my DA calculator only does USA tracks BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO. I have the temp and humidity, just need elevation. It looks like this could be the best corrected time and 2nd best uncorrected and best STOCK time Yet.
Let me know if you need any other details on the other guys run, I raced him 2x and he ran a 12.41 and then a 12.46 both @114, so you guys are very close
Let me know if you need any other details on the other guys run, I raced him 2x and he ran a 12.41 and then a 12.46 both @114, so you guys are very close
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 1,732
Likes: 1
From: NJ
2005 E55
Very nice run. Those are some great actual numbers.
BTW - I am developing a bit of a concern with the use of the terms "corrected" and "uncorrected" in this context. The implication is that a "corrected" time is, well, right/accurate - and an uncorrected number is somehow wrong or misleading.
Shouldn't we really call times "actual" when they are the actual times, and "altitude-adjusted" when the actual time is adjusted by way of a calculation?
Not trying to get under anyone's skin, but the terms are being used so frequently on this board now that it made sense to me at least to raise it now.
BTW - I am developing a bit of a concern with the use of the terms "corrected" and "uncorrected" in this context. The implication is that a "corrected" time is, well, right/accurate - and an uncorrected number is somehow wrong or misleading.
Shouldn't we really call times "actual" when they are the actual times, and "altitude-adjusted" when the actual time is adjusted by way of a calculation?
Not trying to get under anyone's skin, but the terms are being used so frequently on this board now that it made sense to me at least to raise it now.
Last edited by enzom; Sep 4, 2007 at 12:26 PM.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,406
Likes: 1
From: Mia
2005 E 55
Very nice run. Those are some great actual numbers.
BTW - I am developing a bit of a concern with the use of the terms "corrected" and "uncorrected" in this context. The implication is that a "corrected" time is, well, right/accurate - and an uncorrected number is somehow wrong or misleading.
Shouldn't we really call times "actual" when they are the actual times, and "altitude-adjusted" when the actual time is adjusted by way of a calculation?
Not trying to get under anyone's skin, but the terms are being used so frequently on this board now that it made sense to me at least to raise it now.
BTW - I am developing a bit of a concern with the use of the terms "corrected" and "uncorrected" in this context. The implication is that a "corrected" time is, well, right/accurate - and an uncorrected number is somehow wrong or misleading.
Shouldn't we really call times "actual" when they are the actual times, and "altitude-adjusted" when the actual time is adjusted by way of a calculation?
Not trying to get under anyone's skin, but the terms are being used so frequently on this board now that it made sense to me at least to raise it now.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 6,952
Likes: 4
From: Hollywood CA
2011 twin turboed prius
Very nice run. Those are some great actual numbers.
BTW - I am developing a bit of a concern with the use of the terms "corrected" and "uncorrected" in this context. The implication is that a "corrected" time is, well, right/accurate - and an uncorrected number is somehow wrong or misleading.
Shouldn't we really call times "actual" when they are the actual times, and "altitude-adjusted" when the actual time is adjusted by way of a calculation?
Not trying to get under anyone's skin, but the terms are being used so frequently on this board now that it made sense to me at least to raise it now.
BTW - I am developing a bit of a concern with the use of the terms "corrected" and "uncorrected" in this context. The implication is that a "corrected" time is, well, right/accurate - and an uncorrected number is somehow wrong or misleading.
Shouldn't we really call times "actual" when they are the actual times, and "altitude-adjusted" when the actual time is adjusted by way of a calculation?
Not trying to get under anyone's skin, but the terms are being used so frequently on this board now that it made sense to me at least to raise it now.
Altitude of a track is a constant and a non-variable. Temperature, humidity and Barometric pressure is what we need to bring to a constant.
Not correcting leads to highly inaccurate comparisons, actually comparison that cannot and should not ever be made.
Only way to compare cars from across the USA is to correct each and every slip to SAE standard.
If I do not correct Seans time I will not be able to compare it to Toms time. They are within 2/100ths and likely corrected will not change that but if Seans run was at a 1000 ft plus DA , it is the fastest run in a 63. The corrected number is what the car would run if the cars were side by side on the same day on the same track.
Last edited by juicee63; Sep 4, 2007 at 03:30 PM.
Former Vendor of MBWorld
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 2,513
Likes: 0
From: In a box
W211 E55
)
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 6,952
Likes: 4
From: Hollywood CA
2011 twin turboed prius
Its just a comparison, so will run, should run , may run, that is moot. Its all numbers not actual runs on a track it is for information purposes only.
I would rather you list in your sig the corrected time under actual. Hardly anyone knows what DA is or what it translates to.
Now that you list it to me your 12.2@114 is more impressive than I previously thought!!
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 1,732
Likes: 1
From: NJ
2005 E55
Altitude of a track is a constant and a non-variable. Temperature, humidity and Barometric pressure is what we need to bring to a constant.
Not correcting leads to highly inaccurate comparisons, actually comparison that cannot and should not ever be made.
Only way to compare cars from across the USA is to correct each and every slip to SAE standard.
If I do not correct Seans time I will not be able to compare it to Toms time. They are within 2/100ths and likely corrected will not change that but if Seans run was at a 1000 ft plus DA , it is the fastest run in a 63. The corrected number is what the car would run if the cars were side by side on the same day on the same track.
Not correcting leads to highly inaccurate comparisons, actually comparison that cannot and should not ever be made.
Only way to compare cars from across the USA is to correct each and every slip to SAE standard.
If I do not correct Seans time I will not be able to compare it to Toms time. They are within 2/100ths and likely corrected will not change that but if Seans run was at a 1000 ft plus DA , it is the fastest run in a 63. The corrected number is what the car would run if the cars were side by side on the same day on the same track.
There is nothing highly "inaccurate" about comparing time slips - which are exact to the 100th of a second. Nothing at all. Everyone understands that cars run differently under different conditions at different (and even the same) tracks. If I run a 12.25 on an 80 degree day, I am not going to try to "correct" it to an 11.85. It ran what it ran on that given day at that particularly track. Those of us that are racers understand that times will vary from track to track.
Some tracks are "faster" than others. Some days are colder than others, and the same car makes more power than it did the day before. That's racing.
I appreciate that these comparisons are "fun". But the point here is that to use the term "corrected" when the time can't possibly be precise is just not "right" in my book. It sends the wrong message, IMO.
