rarfinancial

Hey , so any news on this Supercharger project for the
63's Was it all just a mith? Any pix of work in progress
Will it be the fastest 63? What hp can we see , what 1/4 mile times Trap times? WHAT, WHAT, WHAT Give us something

jrcart

I doubt it's going to be the fastest 63

I am starting to think that the VRP supercharger for the 63 and the CLK 63 Cabrio /Black Series conversion are mythical as well. They have been talking about both those cars for at least 7-8 months now. They are both big projects, but 8 months??? Maybe Santa and the Easter Bunny will be driving them this year LOL!

vrus

One thing I don't do is... mythical.

Sometimes projects get held back or delayed for many different reasons.

This particular project is still moving forward but since its not the only thing we are working on, and since the body work took alot longer than expected, the performance aspect of the build was delayed also.

I'll post as many updates as I can.. See the CLK63 Cabriolet thread for updated pics.

jrcart

I was joking about mythical...I was very excited about the cabrio to Black Series conversion, I thought it was one of the coolest projects I have seen in a very long time. I can't wait to see the finished product.

alphanumeric

what kind of comp ratio does the 63's have?

LZH

I think it's like 11:1...way to high for FI...prob need lower compression pistons. It's a cool project for sure....but I think a TT would be better and you wouldn't have to make a totally new intake...

lexaltezza

Any progress?

MB_Forever

I heard the project was abandoned

Vadim @ FD

Still in progress.

MB_Forever

Vadim, are you still planning to develop the 2 stages or just one? Also, any word yet if the hood will need modification for the supercharger on E-Class vs CLS-Class?

Vadim @ FD

Right now one Stage at at time.

I looks like it will clear the hood at this time.

mthis

[QUOTE=jrcart;3097682]I doubt it's going to be the fastest 63 QUOTE]



jim keep up the good work on your car man. i cant wait to see you hit 10's its just going to set the bar higher for me

LZH

Did you have to make a new intake ?

blackbenzz

11:1 is way to high for FI? Ever seen a kleemann supercharged SLK55 or C55? I'm 10.5:1 and it seems to run fine. Lower compression with a head gasket if you want. Isn't the 63 higher than 11:1 though?

rarfinancial

It's more like 13:1 ,,,,,,,, would love to see a charger on a 63 some day..

blackbenzz

Yes, I just found it funny that the owner of a 63 doesn't even know the compression ratio of his own engine yet wants to give his opinion on everything

jangy

The opinion isn't his anyways and I am sure he will continue to mild out as the word continues to get around. I'd agree that lower compression would be better for full boost, but it would be nice to see a 63 running ~4 added psi. I think it would be up there with the modded 55k cars...

URnext

Typical

hooleyboy

its more like 11.3 to 1 C/R

amg guy

iTrader: (1)

Bore x Stroke: 4.02 x 3.72 Inches
Compression Ratio: 11.3:1
Displacement: 379 Ci / 6208 Cc
Final Drive Ratio: 2.82:1
Gross Vehicle Weight Ratio: Not Listed
Horsepower: 507 HP @ 6,800 RPM
Torque: 465 Pounds Per Foot @ 5,200 RPM

For a normally aspirated 379 CI pump gas deal 507hp is awesome. Unlikely the 63 uses forged pistons, previous NA 55 amgs used Hypereutectic pistons. I think with about one point less compression and 8 lbs of boost this thing would be a monster!! 600Hp+ and 600Tq+

rarfinancial

no it's 19:4 ratio jk

here you go:
102.2 mm bore, 94.6 mm stroke, 11.3 compression ratio, double overhead cam, variable valve timing/camshaft and four valves per cylinder

I have been ready to do a supercharged 63 for almost two years now even spent over 4k and many hours trying to get it done I have a picture of my car with a supercharger placed on my car with the intake removed

amg guy

iTrader: (1)

LOL....

LZH

OK - here you go again - you and your friend Ahmad really both need to STFU. First of all you idiots are months late as I posted that back in Oct of last year. Second, if you READ what I wrote I said:

It's pretty clear that I didn't make a definitive statement regarding the compression ratio of the 63 motor, yet prefaced it with "I THINK". In other words...."it's right around there..."

Now we have this post with the factory specs on the 63 motor:

Seems I was only a tad bit off when I said "I think it's like 11:1". You two little punks need to get a life and do a bit a research yourselves before opening your pie holes - especially you, Ahmad. For someone who wants the atmosphere to improve around here, you sure seem to be asking for trouble.

blackbenzz

1) WRONG 2) WRONG 3) WRONG 4) Correct 5) Quite possibly 6) WRONG

No need to argue, your posts speak for themselves. Try to keep it civil and not start insulting and name calling just because you were wrong. It doesn't change the fact.

LZH

Try to keep it civil ???? Bite me, Ahmad. Yes, I was wrong - do you feel better now ? I'm not the one follwing you around picking apart everything you say....especially on posts from months ago. Seems you are the one with a bone to pick. I thought I was pretty clear when I initially said, "I THINK its LIKE 11:1"
Pardon me for not being more accurate. But, the simple fact is that I was damn close to the factory spec in my initial statement. Nice try though.

Your continued efforts to discredit me only show that my initial posts to you (regarding your sore loser attitude after running JRcart) hit home and you still haven't gotten over it. Quite funny actually. I mean you've even gone so far as to quote me in your sig line when in fact, you no longer hold the fastest CLK record !!! Comical is an understatement. YOUR posts also speak for themselves, and its pretty clear from your participation in this thread that you are in fact a sore loser and are holding a grudge after I simply pointed out the truth regarding you being unprepared at the starting line. Next time make sure to have your helmet on before you get to the burnout area, retard. LOL