Vic55

I would guess that launching this car with the power Karl has is the major contributor. Most daily driving will be rolling mashes and this has much less wear and tear on the drive train system. I thinkn SGC blew some axles on his Renntech car too but any car is prone to such failure with the dramatic tq increases coupled with hard standstill blasts that occur over and over.

Karl901

SGC did snap rear drive axle s on a CLS 63, with ECU tune, tranny upgrade, intercooler upgrade, 100LSD, down pipes with 200 cell cats,with drag radials.
I did about 25 runs before axle snapped, 20 under 11.10 sec.
I do not know when I will go to the strip again. But not with out new air intake, larger splines on axles, new tune.

Karl901

JumpinJim

Just a thought, but is there no way for tuners to put a tq limit in there, a la the 65s? All this tq is frankly excessive and serves no purpose other than to shread tires, break stuff, and generaly make the car harder to drive.

Karl901

I think the TQ is the point, otherwise I might as well drive a Prius.

JumpinJim

There's a huge difference between 100 crank tq and 700 wheel tq. One is anemic and the other is too much of a good thing. 550 wheel torque limit would be more than enough and keep the car drivable on street tires, not to mention more reliable. Since the TC is now managed by clutch slip all that extra wheelspin from excessive tq will lead to premature clutch wear. Can't see any real positives to having too much tq.

AMG E Power

the hugh TQ is the reason these big sedans can walk cars weighing 1000lbs less

JumpinJim

Except M5s with way less TQ that always walk us.

NickE63

Ain't no M5 walking me! That has been proven multiple times already! Previous Generations models yes not in the current line up

NickE63

I'm talking tuned vs tuned never went stock vs stock if I had to guess the M5 has the upper edge slightly