e55 vs c63
05-30-2008, 04:36 PM
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 251
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
05 e55
e55 vs c63
Who do you guys think has the advantage? My bro just took delivery of his 08 c63 yesterday and gave me a ride in it. I feel like my car is faster but maybe its just me. Who do you guys think will win in 0-60? 0-100? 0-150? 
05-30-2008, 05:55 PM
#4
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: California, USA
Posts: 9,137
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
4 Posts
E63 P30, CL500 Sport
The C63 has the exact same engine as in the E63 and S63 but detuned from 520 hp to 451 hp. So for now, I think you should be able to walk the C63 easily. However, many of the tuning companies are working on an ECU tune that will bring the C63 up from 450 hp to 520 hp, and some are saying maybe even 550 hp. That's a +100 hp from just an ECU tune 
. Of course, a couple of years down the road, you'll see the superchargers, turbo chargers, NOS, and other extreme tuning come into play 
but until then, I don't see a stock C63 walking a stock E55.
. Of course, a couple of years down the road, you'll see the superchargers, turbo chargers, NOS, and other extreme tuning come into play but until then, I don't see a stock C63 walking a stock E55.
05-30-2008, 06:17 PM
#5
Super Member
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 560
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C43, SLK32, CLK63 Black Series
There is a lot of talk of this yet no dyno proof. The one guy who said that he had Renntech do his car never produced a dyno that I am aware of and still hasn't. Here is the thread: https://mbworld.org/forums/c63-amg-w204/243116-going-do-baseline-dyno-run-today-then-renntech-ecu.html.
I find people who don't get the results they want tend to be dyno shy.
I think there is more to do than just an ECU tune. Sure the C63 can get to 550 but it will take a lot more than just a tune.
I find people who don't get the results they want tend to be dyno shy.
I think there is more to do than just an ECU tune. Sure the C63 can get to 550 but it will take a lot more than just a tune.
The C63 has the exact same engine as in the E63 and S63 but detuned from 520 hp to 451 hp. So for now, I think you should be able to walk the C63 easily. However, many of the tuning companies are working on an ECU tune that will bring the C63 up from 450 hp to 520 hp, and some are saying maybe even 550 hp. That's a +100 hp from just an ECU tune . Of course, a couple of years down the road, you'll see the superchargers, turbo chargers, NOS, and other extreme tuning come into play but until then, I don't see a stock C63 walking a stock E55.
. Of course, a couple of years down the road, you'll see the superchargers, turbo chargers, NOS, and other extreme tuning come into play but until then, I don't see a stock C63 walking a stock E55.
05-30-2008, 06:46 PM
#6
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 251
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
05 e55
Im waiting for him to break it in a little then were gona go at it. My other brother has a cls 63 and were gona try to do some highway rolls and see what the results are. I think il take both of them up to abt 130 then theyl reel in.
Trending Topics
05-30-2008, 07:48 PM
#8
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: SoCal
Posts: 1,351
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C63S coupe, X5M
We should set up a mini Chicago meet this summer 
05-31-2008, 01:27 AM
#11
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Kuwait City, Kuwait
Posts: 1,437
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
G55 & SLK55
I am not sure but its just an estimate if you drag race given that the C63 has lower torque and weight than the E55 it could win the race upto 100mph and then the E55 might be 2-3 cars back and starts pulling in which the supercharger takes the way.
The similar thing happened between me and a friends CLS55 AMG and that time the weather was cold as I am sure the CLS was in its full potential. I got the lead upto 100mph and then the CLS is gaining on me. The race was basically a drag race.
The similar thing happened between me and a friends CLS55 AMG and that time the weather was cold as I am sure the CLS was in its full potential. I got the lead upto 100mph and then the CLS is gaining on me. The race was basically a drag race.
05-31-2008, 01:30 AM
#12
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 251
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
05 e55
05-31-2008, 08:51 AM
#14
Junior Member
Join Date: May 2008
Location: naples florida
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
E55
C63 has no chance I have seen one race an M5. The M5 pulled by at least 7 or 8 cars. From 0-75 it was a good race but after that it was done.
05-31-2008, 12:06 PM
#15
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Daytona, Florida
Posts: 1,517
Likes: 0
Received 9 Likes
on
6 Posts
SL600
When the E63 came out, everybody was saying the same thing. It was a slow pig and just wouldn't go fast. They were getting walked all over the place by E39 M5's, etc. But now, even the bone stock ones have loosened up to where they're down in the 12s.
So I would say it's way too early to write the C63 off yet. It's much lighter than the E63, which after getting broken in turned out to be a strong performer. The C63 has the same motor and weighs less. It's not rocket science that it should be faster eventually.
I also don't think Mercedes' claims of "de-tuning" are anything more than marketing hype designed to avoid the possibility of steering E63 buyers into buying the cheaper E63. The E55's were allegedly 469hp instead of the 500 or so that the same engine produces in CL and S class applications, for the same marketing reasons. However, the dyno comparisons of S55's and E55's proved they are exactly the same...and I bet the same thing is happening with the C63 vs. E63 numbers.
And even if they did manage to de-tune it, getting the ECU done will fix that immediately for almost no money, at which point it's a no-brainer that the C63 will outperform the E63 because of the weight difference. Personally, I think the C63 is going to be a very strong performer when they get broken in.
05-31-2008, 01:10 PM
#16
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Salt Lake City (but not Morm)
Posts: 7,092
Likes: 0
Received 12 Likes
on
10 Posts
2003 E55 & 2014 GL550
What I really wanna see are some 40mph up over 100mph runs.
That would be kinda interesting. 6.3 is strong from a roll. Lighter car with slightly less hp VS heavier car with 50more hp.
GET VIDS!!! I wanna see!!!
That would be kinda interesting. 6.3 is strong from a roll. Lighter car with slightly less hp VS heavier car with 50more hp.
GET VIDS!!! I wanna see!!!
05-31-2008, 03:35 PM
#17
Junior Member
Join Date: May 2008
Location: naples florida
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
E55
The thing with the 63's is, they tend to get a lot faster after the first 5k miles or so.
When the E63 came out, everybody was saying the same thing. It was a slow pig and just wouldn't go fast. They were getting walked all over the place by E39 M5's, etc. But now, even the bone stock ones have loosened up to where they're down in the 12s.
So I would say it's way too early to write the C63 off yet. It's much lighter than the E63, which after getting broken in turned out to be a strong performer. The C63 has the same motor and weighs less. It's not rocket science that it should be faster eventually.
I also don't think Mercedes' claims of "de-tuning" are anything more than marketing hype designed to avoid the possibility of steering E63 buyers into buying the cheaper E63. The E55's were allegedly 469hp instead of the 500 or so that the same engine produces in CL and S class applications, for the same marketing reasons. However, the dyno comparisons of S55's and E55's proved they are exactly the same...and I bet the same thing is happening with the C63 vs. E63 numbers.
And even if they did manage to de-tune it, getting the ECU done will fix that immediately for almost no money, at which point it's a no-brainer that the C63 will outperform the E63 because of the weight difference. Personally, I think the C63 is going to be a very strong performer when they get broken in.
When the E63 came out, everybody was saying the same thing. It was a slow pig and just wouldn't go fast. They were getting walked all over the place by E39 M5's, etc. But now, even the bone stock ones have loosened up to where they're down in the 12s.
So I would say it's way too early to write the C63 off yet. It's much lighter than the E63, which after getting broken in turned out to be a strong performer. The C63 has the same motor and weighs less. It's not rocket science that it should be faster eventually.
I also don't think Mercedes' claims of "de-tuning" are anything more than marketing hype designed to avoid the possibility of steering E63 buyers into buying the cheaper E63. The E55's were allegedly 469hp instead of the 500 or so that the same engine produces in CL and S class applications, for the same marketing reasons. However, the dyno comparisons of S55's and E55's proved they are exactly the same...and I bet the same thing is happening with the C63 vs. E63 numbers.
And even if they did manage to de-tune it, getting the ECU done will fix that immediately for almost no money, at which point it's a no-brainer that the C63 will outperform the E63 because of the weight difference. Personally, I think the C63 is going to be a very strong performer when they get broken in.
http://www.dragtimes.com/Mercedes-Be...lip-15204.html
http://www.dragtimes.com/Mercedes-Be...lip-11853.html
Or maybe they didn't:
http://www.dragtimes.com/Mercedes-Be...slip-9842.html
Last edited by blacke55101; 05-31-2008 at 03:38 PM.
05-31-2008, 04:36 PM
#18
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: orange county NY
Posts: 1,323
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
'05 C55(sold)'05 E55(sold)'06 911C4S(sold)'06 ML350 '06 CLS55(sold),buncha slo bikes
It's detuned as a result of room inside the engine compartment,not as a marketing ploy
P.S.- Comparing dyno sheets from different machines,done on different days&with different operators is moot.There are WAAY too many variables to throw the outcome
P.S.- Comparing dyno sheets from different machines,done on different days&with different operators is moot.There are WAAY too many variables to throw the outcome
Last edited by oldgixxer; 05-31-2008 at 04:40 PM.
05-31-2008, 05:05 PM
#19
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
Surprised nobody brought this up yet. Cramming a 6.2 liter lump into a C-Class makes for some difficult header design. I don't think an ECU tune cuts the mustard in this case, you're going to need to do headers and an ECU.
05-31-2008, 05:19 PM
#20
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: OC, SoCal
Posts: 2,318
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
08 S65, 06 M3 CS(stick), 02 BMW X5 4.6iS, 07 R1 Raven, 08 F-450 4x4, 08 CooperS JCW
I thought Vadim said it was juts ECU and exhaust robbing it of the other 50hp? I might be wrong though
06-01-2008, 12:28 AM
#22
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Daytona, Florida
Posts: 1,517
Likes: 0
Received 9 Likes
on
6 Posts
SL600
I would bet it's the exact same setup, except for marketing hype or, maybe, different ECU programming. I really doubt there are very many differences between the E63 and the C63, if for no other reason than that would cost them more money.
06-01-2008, 05:35 PM
#23
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: South Florida
Posts: 1,662
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
STS,FGT,12C,P85D,M4
They don't get faster after 5k miles, just more of them on the road and at the track over time, allowing for more experience and better times with the cars....
the C63's are indeed producing less power compared to the other 63's, they are making in the 380 range, while the others are making in the 410's....
the C63's are indeed producing less power compared to the other 63's, they are making in the 380 range, while the others are making in the 410's....
The thing with the 63's is, they tend to get a lot faster after the first 5k miles or so.
When the E63 came out, everybody was saying the same thing. It was a slow pig and just wouldn't go fast. They were getting walked all over the place by E39 M5's, etc. But now, even the bone stock ones have loosened up to where they're down in the 12s.
So I would say it's way too early to write the C63 off yet. It's much lighter than the E63, which after getting broken in turned out to be a strong performer. The C63 has the same motor and weighs less. It's not rocket science that it should be faster eventually.
I also don't think Mercedes' claims of "de-tuning" are anything more than marketing hype designed to avoid the possibility of steering E63 buyers into buying the cheaper E63. The E55's were allegedly 469hp instead of the 500 or so that the same engine produces in CL and S class applications, for the same marketing reasons. However, the dyno comparisons of S55's and E55's proved they are exactly the same...and I bet the same thing is happening with the C63 vs. E63 numbers.
And even if they did manage to de-tune it, getting the ECU done will fix that immediately for almost no money, at which point it's a no-brainer that the C63 will outperform the E63 because of the weight difference. Personally, I think the C63 is going to be a very strong performer when they get broken in.
When the E63 came out, everybody was saying the same thing. It was a slow pig and just wouldn't go fast. They were getting walked all over the place by E39 M5's, etc. But now, even the bone stock ones have loosened up to where they're down in the 12s.
So I would say it's way too early to write the C63 off yet. It's much lighter than the E63, which after getting broken in turned out to be a strong performer. The C63 has the same motor and weighs less. It's not rocket science that it should be faster eventually.
I also don't think Mercedes' claims of "de-tuning" are anything more than marketing hype designed to avoid the possibility of steering E63 buyers into buying the cheaper E63. The E55's were allegedly 469hp instead of the 500 or so that the same engine produces in CL and S class applications, for the same marketing reasons. However, the dyno comparisons of S55's and E55's proved they are exactly the same...and I bet the same thing is happening with the C63 vs. E63 numbers.
And even if they did manage to de-tune it, getting the ECU done will fix that immediately for almost no money, at which point it's a no-brainer that the C63 will outperform the E63 because of the weight difference. Personally, I think the C63 is going to be a very strong performer when they get broken in.
06-01-2008, 05:45 PM
#24
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Daytona, Florida
Posts: 1,517
Likes: 0
Received 9 Likes
on
6 Posts
SL600
They don't get faster after 5k miles, just more of them on the road and at the track over time, allowing for more experience and better times with the cars....
the C63's are indeed producing less power compared to the other 63's, they are making in the 380 range, while the others are making in the 410's....
the C63's are indeed producing less power compared to the other 63's, they are making in the 380 range, while the others are making in the 410's....
Ditto on the dyno numbers...the early figures for the 63 were pathetic, but they increased with time and break-in. And I'm not talking about 500 different cars under different circumstances, I am talking about (in a lot of cases) comparisons of the same car on the same dyno under similar conditions, without anything changing except time and mileage. Do a search for some of the larger threads about it. One of them was titled something like "Where are my missing ponies?", and there were a lot of others...
06-01-2008, 06:03 PM
#25
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: OC, SoCal
Posts: 2,318
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
08 S65, 06 M3 CS(stick), 02 BMW X5 4.6iS, 07 R1 Raven, 08 F-450 4x4, 08 CooperS JCW
Well I don't have an E63 myself, so I can't say firsthand, but there were a pile of people on here who tracked the E63 when they first got it, and then again later, and the car definitely picked up some speed as it broke in. There is actually a suspicion floating around that the car was de-tuned during its break-in period, though I don't know if anybody ever confirmed that.
Ditto on the dyno numbers...the early figures for the 63 were pathetic, but they increased with time and break-in. And I'm not talking about 500 different cars under different circumstances, I am talking about (in a lot of cases) comparisons of the same car on the same dyno under similar conditions, without anything changing except time and mileage. Do a search for some of the larger threads about it. One of them was titled something like "Where are my missing ponies?", and there were a lot of others...
Ditto on the dyno numbers...the early figures for the 63 were pathetic, but they increased with time and break-in. And I'm not talking about 500 different cars under different circumstances, I am talking about (in a lot of cases) comparisons of the same car on the same dyno under similar conditions, without anything changing except time and mileage. Do a search for some of the larger threads about it. One of them was titled something like "Where are my missing ponies?", and there were a lot of others...
