Why is m5 faster that e63s
Go and test drive both of them and decide what you like, and remember most of the time spent in a car is not 0-60, 80-120, etc. Some of the most fun to drive cars in the world are not necessarily the fastest, and vice versa IMO--ie a top fuel dragster.
http://www.motortrend.com/cars/bmw/m...ck-comparison/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merced...c_transmission




in EPC & many sites says, (2.65:1)..?!?!?!
http://www.sangeraparts.com/mercedes...=difrntal-assy
,,ZAYED,,
I feel your discussion is going in circles but am curious to find out when you decide what you're going to buy and what stat puts you over the edge
Last edited by PeterUbers; Jul 15, 2016 at 05:18 PM.
in EPC & many sites says, (2.65:1)..?!?!?!
http://www.sangeraparts.com/mercedes...=difrntal-assy
,,ZAYED,,
... i think you are talking about the rear diff ratio and i was referring to final drive ratio.... yes the rear diff is a 2.65:1... and final drive ratio is 3.06:1
The Best of Mercedes & AMG
final drive ratio is not the same as rear diff ratio.... final drive ratio is derived from rear diff ratio and other variables
fwiw mercedes also has final drive ratio as 3.06:1
http://www.mbusa.com/mercedes/vehicl...999&year1=2016
http://www.daimler-financialservices..._65_AMG_en.pdf (page 26 - this one s63 but uses same gearing/tranny/diff)
Last edited by gaspam; Jul 15, 2016 at 08:30 PM.
BMW M6 F12 vs. Mercedes AMG E63 S 4Matic - ROLL RACE - YouTube
http://www.dragtimes.com/2013-BMW-M5-Specs-25676.html
I know you love your E63 (I love mine too), but don't let that blind you to the fact that M5 is a very fast car at speed and at least the E63's equal.
, I bow out now.And please spare me the "With drop in filters and mufflers I ran a..." crap. For $3000 I can buy an AMS tune for my 2016 E63 S which is completely stock otherwise and pull 700 CHP. So what...Let's talk stock to stock.
1. E63 S have run 11.6 TOTALLY STOCK without launch control.
2. The E63 has a much better 0-60 and a faster 1/4 mile. This is what 98% of performance car buyers want. The other 2% are trackers and could care less.
I like the M5, it's a very nice car, but don't let your RWD tail happy beast trick you into believing that just because you can feel more power that it's faster.
The M5 and E63 AMG NON-S are comparable, but not the S.
This article is an excellent article and these guys can drive so I believe what they're saying.
http://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars...-65-7-roa0314/
Read what they had to say about the M5 Comp Package, it STILL wasn't as fast as the E63 S. The M5 was voted #1 mostly because the cats who wrote the article like RWD cars and the challenge and fun they bring to the advanced driver. I disagree. If anything I would have given the #1 spot to the Audi RS7, E63 S #2, and M5 CP for #3.
I love how everyone questions MB engineers and assumes and trashes the MCT but isn't smart enough to reckon that MB already thought about using DCT and passed on it for the E63 S. MCT is just another way of building a DCT, it is multi-clutch and does dual clutch shift. I think it's more accurate to say that MCT isn't as precise as a proper DCT, but most DCTs are not necessarily "Better". The numbers don't lie and MB put downs "Nutty" numbers with the MCT so I look at that more than anything else.
An MB mechanic told me that MCT IS DUAL CLUTCH SHIFTING while admitting it's not a DCT. He said the bottom line is that one gear is released while the other is grabbed simultaneously. If MB can build a PDK rival, look the F out. They will set world records if they can get it into an E63 S in the future. They will break every stigma about what a supercar should look like.
Last edited by proxygeek; Jul 16, 2016 at 04:09 AM.
final drive ratio is not the same as rear diff ratio.... final drive ratio is derived from rear diff ratio and other variables
fwiw mercedes also has final drive ratio as 3.06:1
http://www.mbusa.com/mercedes/vehicl...999&year1=2016
http://www.daimler-financialservices..._65_AMG_en.pdf (page 26 - this one s63 but uses same gearing/tranny/diff)
So which gear ratio will result in a final ratio of 3.06 may I ask? IE which trans gear can you multiply by 2.65 axle ratio to get 3.06 final ratio?

Yes the wagon has a more aggressive rear diff ratio of 3.06 but nowhere in this thread have I seen references to a wagon. I have only seen sedans that are still 2.65. Stop using round about arguments to bolster your erroneous post.
And since we are quoting magazines, let me also add that Edmunds has the final ratio of the E63s at 3.42
I love how everyone questions MB engineers and assumes and trashes the MCT but isn't smart enough to reckon that MB already thought about using DCT and passed on it for the E63 S. MCT is just another way of building a DCT, it is multi-clutch and does dual clutch shift. I think it's more accurate to say that MCT isn't as precise as a proper DCT, but most DCTs are not necessarily "Better". The numbers don't lie and MB put downs "Nutty" numbers with the MCT so I look at that more than anything else.
An MB mechanic told me that MCT IS DUAL CLUTCH SHIFTING while admitting it's not a DCT. He said the bottom line is that one gear is released while the other is grabbed simultaneously. If MB can build a PDK rival, look the F out. They will set world records if they can get it into an E63 S in the future. They will break every stigma about what a supercar should look like.
MB only passed on the DCT because it would not hold the torque of the M157. Haven't you noticed that they use a DCT in the SLS/AMG GT/and a few other that are either NA or 4.0l tt? What do these all have in common? Lower levels of torque compared to the M157
Last edited by kponti; Jul 16, 2016 at 08:48 AM.
, I bow out now.And please spare me the "With drop in filters and mufflers I ran a..." crap. For $3000 I can buy an AMS tune for my 2016 E63 S which is completely stock otherwise and pull 700 CHP. So what...Let's talk stock to stock.
1. E63 S have run 11.6 TOTALLY STOCK without launch control.
2. The E63 has a much better 0-60 and a faster 1/4 mile. This is what 98% of performance car buyers want. The other 2% are trackers and could care less.
I like the M5, it's a very nice car, but don't let your RWD tail happy beast trick you into believing that just because you can feel more power that it's faster.
The M5 and E63 AMG NON-S are comparable, but not the S.
This article is an excellent article and these guys can drive so I believe what they're saying.
http://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars...-65-7-roa0314/
Read what they had to say about the M5 Comp Package, it STILL wasn't as fast as the E63 S. The M5 was voted #1 mostly because the cats who wrote the article like RWD cars and the challenge and fun they bring to the advanced driver. I disagree. If anything I would have given the #1 spot to the Audi RS7, E63 S #2, and M5 CP for #3.
My point about the drop-in filters and mufflers was to point out how lightly modded the car was. It was full disclosure. So anyone with 1/2 a brain would be able to say "oh the car was very close to stock and not tuned...and the mods likely had a minimal affect on the results".
Last edited by TMC M5; Jul 16, 2016 at 10:21 AM.
MB only passed on the DCT because it would not hold the torque of the M157. Haven't you noticed that they use a DCT in the SLS/AMG GT/and a few other that are either NA or 4.0l tt? What do these all have in common? Lower levels of torque compared to the M157

http://www.mbscottsdale.com/blog/201...-transmission/
MB only passed on the DCT because it would not hold the torque of the M157. Haven't you noticed that they use a DCT in the SLS/AMG GT/and a few other that are either NA or 4.0l tt? What do these all have in common? Lower levels of torque compared to the M157

There are 1500 HP Porsche 911 Turbos running around on PDK so I don't believe it's purely a torque problem.
, I bow out now.And please spare me the "With drop in filters and mufflers I ran a..." crap. For $3000 I can buy an AMS tune for my 2016 E63 S which is completely stock otherwise and pull 700 CHP. So what...Let's talk stock to stock.
1. E63 S have run 11.6 TOTALLY STOCK without launch control.
2. The E63 has a much better 0-60 and a faster 1/4 mile. [B]This is what 98% of performance car buyers want. The other 2% are trackers and could care less.[B]
I like the M5, it's a very nice car, but don't let your RWD tail happy beast trick you into believing that just because you can feel more power that it's faster.
The M5 and E63 AMG NON-S are comparable, but not the S.
This article is an excellent article and these guys can drive so I believe what they're saying.
http://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars...-65-7-roa0314/
Read what they had to say about the M5 Comp Package, it STILL wasn't as fast as the E63 S. The M5 was voted #1 mostly because the cats who wrote the article like RWD cars and the challenge and fun they bring to the advanced driver. I disagree. If anything I would have given the #1 spot to the Audi RS7, E63 S #2, and M5 CP for #3.
Also i think you misunderstood what he was saying..
And 3, you are wrong about most people caring about 1/4 mile. Obviously this thread was about roll racing to begin with right?
Last edited by notatroll; Jul 16, 2016 at 07:09 PM.
My point about the drop-in filters and mufflers was to point out how lightly modded the car was. It was full disclosure. So anyone with 1/2 a brain would be able to say "oh the car was very close to stock and not tuned...and the mods likely had a minimal affect on the results".
I got your "Light mods and the car will run this" BS and you really didn't make much of a point.
So go hump your F10 M5 and dream it's faster than the E63 S, in reality it's not and it's indisputable.








