E63 better than E55?

Regards!
Regards!

I am saying neither actually. If you are asking for my opinion, I think people put way too much emphasis on DA as opposed to pure altitude.
Should I assume that your data is factually correct - DA measured from the same hand held weather station at the track? Or are they from websites taking data away from the track? If you run on a 90 degree humid day, it goes without saying that you will be slow. And there is a pretty big difference between running with a 1,000 DA at 10% humidity and a 1,000 DA at 90% humidity. So comparing just DA's doesn't tell the whole story. If the track prep is like running on ice, of course your e/t's will stink. There are so many variables involved. Headwind? Tailwind? Sun heating up the track?
When we looked it up, we got 3 different results? Some websites listed it as -920 ft while others listed it at -1200 ft while others even listed it as low as -1400 ft. Then some people said it was only -700 ft while others said more like -900 ft

1. Internal variations. These engines are hand-built so no two are 100% the same.
2. External variations. If you put different tires on your car, your hp will change by a few hp. Also, things like humidity and temperatures will affect power. Altitude makes a huge difference, if an E63 in Miami makes about 500hp, the same car will make around 480hp in Denver.
If I were to guess based on current dyno's and 1/4 mile times, the mean hp level for any 63 car is around 500hp, with a standard deviation of about 15-20hp.
P.S. And C63 is insanely fast, didn't you read C&D review? It did 0-60 in 3.9 seconds.
Last edited by Addicted2Speed; Feb 8, 2008 at 07:47 PM.

My last time at Atco, the DA was (I recall, but need to check) at one point minus 1,200. I ran an 11.835 (or .855) at 118.26. At the same track with a DA of +780, and an almost identical 60' time, I ran 11.901 @ 117.23. You are looking at a DA spread of nearly 2,000 ft.
At Fontana, the track is at 1200 ft elevation. But everytime we head out there, the DA is different. One time it was 1400 ft while other times it was 3200 ft. This reflected on our times tremendously.
Last edited by MB_Forever; Feb 8, 2008 at 07:58 PM.
I am saying neither actually. If you are asking for my opinion, I think people put way too much emphasis on DA as opposed to pure altitude.
Should I assume that your data is factually correct - DA measured from the same hand held weather station at the track? Or are they from websites taking data away from the track? If you run on a 90 degree humid day, it goes without saying that you will be slow. And there is a pretty big difference between running with a 1,000 DA at 10% humidity and a 1,000 DA at 90% humidity. So comparing just DA's doesn't tell the whole story. If the track prep is like running on ice, of course your e/t's will stink. There are so many variables involved. Headwind? Tailwind? Sun heating up the track?
My last time at Atco, the DA was (I recall, but need to check) at one point minus 1,200. I ran an 11.835 (or .855) at 118.26. At the same track with a DA of +780, and an almost identical 60' time, I ran 11.901 @ 117.23. You are looking at a DA spread of nearly 2,000 ft., but my e/t and trap were fairly close. Same track, same hand held weather station.
Enzom you are such a great driver and your car is very consistant. Your ET was likely hurt by a slightly slower 60ft time. I do not remember what it was but I dont think it was 1.70's . Had you had a 1.66-1.70 60ft you would have smashed your best trap and ET, I think the wind also affected the cars significantly. Since you shared the track with two 63's it is worth noting that all the cars faced the same condition so comparison between the 55 and 63 same day same track is what is necessary rather than discussion of DA. I no longer post correction as I simply use it as a tool to pick the best day to run.
Our day at SAC was -200 and on a 2.05 60 ft I trapped 115 and ran a 12.47, had I had traction and hit 1.85 60 ft its a 12.1 run but I failed. what you guys had told me RANG TRUE , "TRACK PREP" or too cold a track produce crappy times, yep , I listen to you and others , I have learned , it is not all DA, but you should take a reading and it should NEVER be at the inlet to the motor as RANGER does, this is completely inaccurate. The reading should be taken out of the wind and away from the staging lane, it should not be tainted by , rubber burning, exhaust, gusts,direct sun,away from the body. I dont have a clue why Ranger holds it at the inlet but nobody but him does this.
Last edited by juicee63; Feb 8, 2008 at 09:21 PM.
The Best of Mercedes & AMG
You can have the same DA but be racing with 20 degree higher temps or 50% higher humidity. The DA doesn't change your times - it is the conditions that went into calculating a DA that make the impact.
Would I prefer to run at -1,000 DA vs. +5,000? Of course, - 1000. Who wouldn't? But I know from what I have experienced that a spread of even 2000 ft does not mean the end of the world if the temps are cool and the track is sticky.
I don't know why the cars on the east coast seem to put up quicker times than those from the west, but the reason is not the DA. Even with equal DA's, we seem to be quicker out here. I think it is because of other factors - not the least of which is pure altitude. And west coast track owners suck at track prep.
The weather will never change the fact that Fontana is 1200 ft above sea level. That right there - pure altitude - is not great for racing.
The weather will never change the fact that Fontana is 1200 ft above sea level. That right there - pure altitude - is not great for racing.
Furthermore, DA takes into account temperature, humidity, and other weather conditions; it is not just altitude. So if the temperature is 95, the DA will be higher than when the temperature is at 45. The higher the temperatures, humidity, and other weather conditions, the higher the DA will get. The equation actually takes multiple weather factors as input parameters. All I was trying to point out was that DA does affect the runs based on what we have tested first hand here in the west coast: same track, same cars, same drivers, same time of day, same track prep, even same 60' times (at least on my car), etc...... except we had different temperature and humidity, which raised the DA significantly. Our cars did run slower in higher DA.
I know DA is not everything, as the launch can vary, the track prep can vary, wind, even the driver's response to the car, etc.... are all elements that will have an impact on times.
Enzom is there room for a CLS 63??
You may reply when a E63 makes a 10.745@132.210 pass
Thanks to Rflow
Hey Barry Bonds hit a lot more home runs when he was on the JUICE also.

Your E55 will never run a 10.745 stock. E55 is a machine of greatness but simply put the 63 is the newer better looking car,bottom line. And to all of you out there who are calling me out for a race, come out to Queens NY and meet me on Francis Lewis Blvd, I will not hesitate to go head to head. Bring your cameras also so you can record the beautiful E63 badge while your behind me.

Your E55 will never run a 10.745 stock. E55 is a machine of greatness but simply put the 63 is the newer better looking car,bottom line. And to all of you out there who are calling me out for a race, come out to Queens NY and meet me on Francis Lewis Blvd, I will not hesitate to go head to head. Bring your cameras also so you can record the beautiful E63 badge while your behind me.
We have spots available for the Atco rental on March 10th. You are welcome to join us.

Your E55 will never run a 10.745 stock. E55 is a machine of greatness but simply put the 63 is the newer better looking car,bottom line. And to all of you out there who are calling me out for a race, come out to Queens NY and meet me on Francis Lewis Blvd, I will not hesitate to go head to head. Bring your cameras also so you can record the beautiful E63 badge while your behind me.
Atco is in New Jersey, it is a fast track and you would be joining the very best! Sign up NOW









