E63 better than E55?
02-08-2008, 06:46 PM
#126
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: California, USA
Posts: 9,137
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
4 Posts
E63 P30, CL500 Sport
AlbertM: Were not trying to challenge you but make you aware of the dyno numbers that we have on our E55's and E63's. I know that you are new here but at least look at the almost 5 years of data from countless dyno runs on both E55's and E63's. On my dyno on my stock E55 I put out 427hp to the rear wheels. This is well in line with the countless other dynos that have been done on healthy stock e55's. This equates to over 500hp at the crank using a 15% driveline loss. Please accept our factual conclusions as we respect you and your curiousity into this. My dyno number jumped to 485hp at the wheels after the 80mm TB upgrade and VRUS shorty headers. that equates to over 560HP at the crank. Everybody who has made these type of mods has seen similar results. Please enjoy your E63 since it is a great car and is capable of great/good numbers at the track. Enjoy my friend!
02-08-2008, 06:48 PM
#127
Super Member
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: La Quinta, CALIF.
Posts: 820
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
2009 C63 Black on Black
Class Warfare!
Regards!
02-08-2008, 06:59 PM
#128
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Long Island
Posts: 380
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
E63 AMG 2010, Black, Pano, P2
AlbertM: We all think and righfully so, that MB has decided to have the upper echelon cars using the same motor to have higher HP numbers. It is blatantly obvious from the upcoming C63 @ 450Hp vs. E63 @ 507Hp, then you move on up to the S63 and SL63 @ 518 or something like that. All from the same idential motor. Now I know that ECU tunes and exhaust systems can have a major impact here but it really is a marketing thing to rate each of these cars/engines on their appropriate pecking space on the money tree.
Regards!
Regards!
02-08-2008, 07:08 PM
#129
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: California, USA
Posts: 9,137
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
4 Posts
E63 P30, CL500 Sport
OK, so what is the real world rating of the 63 motor? Is it 450? 507 or they all really 518? Does anyone know? I understand why a car maker would take an existing engine, detune it and put it in a lower end model, but we are not talking about detuning here. We are talking here that the same HP producing engine is in all models. Which means that C63 would produce as much as 518HP -- that would make it insanely fast.
02-08-2008, 07:19 PM
#130
MBWorld Fanatic!
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.
When we ran at 3000 ft DA here in California, almost every stock E55 and E63 were 13.0 to 13.2 seconds, then using the same cars and same drivers and same track but at lower DA (1800 ft), these cars dropped to 12.4 to 12.5 seconds. Then at 1400 DA, the cars dropped to 12.30 seconds, then at 500 DA the cars dropped to 12.20 seconds, etc....
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?
What was the DA this last time out? [QUOTE
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
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
02-08-2008, 07:42 PM
#131
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Miami, FL
Posts: 1,049
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Lotus Elise SLK55
OK, so what is the real world rating of the 63 motor? Is it 450? 507 or they all really 518? Does anyone know? I understand why a car maker would take an existing engine, detune it and put it in a lower end model, but we are not talking about detuning here. We are talking here that the same HP producing engine is in all models. Which means that C63 would produce as much as 518HP -- that would make it insanely fast.
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; 02-08-2008 at 07:47 PM.
02-08-2008, 07:56 PM
#132
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: California, USA
Posts: 9,137
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
4 Posts
E63 P30, CL500 Sport
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.
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; 02-08-2008 at 07:58 PM.
02-08-2008, 09:19 PM
#133
MBWorld Fanatic!
You were making an inaccurate factual statement. That's my beef.
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.
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; 02-08-2008 at 09:21 PM.
02-08-2008, 10:25 PM
#134
MBWorld Fanatic!
The point I am trying to make on the DA is that it only tells part of the story. It is not the single most important factor in determining why a run was slower or faster. And the DA, without knowing more, is not all that helpful. I can run at the track with a DA of 1000 ft. in the summer or 1000 ft in the winter and the temp will play a much greater factor (obviously) than the DA. And, as you would expect, the car will be faster in the winter.
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.
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.
02-08-2008, 10:37 PM
#135
MBWorld Fanatic!
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.
02-08-2008, 11:03 PM
#137
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: California, USA
Posts: 9,137
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
4 Posts
E63 P30, CL500 Sport
And I do not begin to disagree that you had varying times. But IMO, the better comparison is to compare temps, humidity and 60' times. If you are running on an 85 degree day vs. a 50 degree day, I don't care what the DA is. You will be slower in 85 degrees. Like I said in my prior post, I have seen similar DA's in very different conditions. It doesn't mean my runs will be the same. And I have run very similar times even with a wide range of DA's.
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.
02-09-2008, 01:52 AM
#141
Super Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: MARYLAND
Posts: 680
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
14-F Sport, 07-CLS63 2003-HUMMER 2004-Suburban 2008-MAX 2005-YZF R1
Look Guys all of you just head over here to Maryland. We can head over to MIR and rent the track out and settle it. I'm putting my money on the 55 even tho I own the 63. Now from a 80+mph roll the 55 better be modded or the 63 gonna shine for sure!
02-09-2008, 02:35 AM
#142
MBWorld Fanatic!
Enzom is there room for a CLS 63??
02-09-2008, 02:39 AM
#143
MBWorld Fanatic!
02-11-2008, 04:20 AM
#145
Senior Member
You 63 guys are funny, you come here to the board that is home to the fastest E55s on earth and post in an argumentative tone. Why don't you have any respect? There is so much you can learn here. But you post like you are here to teach us how fast your 63s are. Generally speaking most all the 55 posters here have modded their cars to levels far above that of a 63 and the stock 55. We really have passed over the factory and magazines numbers so they no longer apply. Please don't turn this board in to a ()#$%^^%$^$^#BMWM3 &^$$%^(&() kiddie fight board. We respect your 63s, we love Juciee, Old jixxer, trez, buckeyewalt, MB Fanatic because they bring positive input and insight in to what works. There are thousands of E55 posts here that directly apply to 63s too, like Brians Qualif install. So try not to waste too much time, trying to set us straight on who's fastest, we already know.
You may reply when a E63 makes a 10.745@132.210 pass
Thanks to Rflow
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.
02-11-2008, 09:10 AM
#146
MBWorld Fanatic!
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.
02-11-2008, 09:23 AM
#147
MBWorld Fanatic!
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Seattle
Posts: 6,727
Received 559 Likes
on
369 Posts
'19 E63S, ‘16 CLS63 RIP, '09 E63 Gone, '06 M5 Gone, '97 Supra TT Gone
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.
02-11-2008, 10:14 AM
#148
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Caribbean/Florida/Colorado
Posts: 3,642
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes
on
11 Posts
E-ZGO 53hp., 1999 E 430 sport, 2004 E 55, 2008 Tahoe LTZ on 24"s
02-12-2008, 02:55 AM
#149
Senior Member
02-12-2008, 03:48 AM
#150
MBWorld Fanatic!
Atco is in New Jersey, it is a fast track and you would be joining the very best! Sign up NOW
