Who came directly from W210?
The only problem I have, I just enjoy driving the W210 so much, I have a really hard time getting rid of it.. It is comfortable and quiet most of the time and can become a beast (albeit a baby one) when you want it to. It has a certain presence on the road and people give you thumbs up almost daily (in Europe).
I test drove one E63S and it felt harsher even in the C mode and the interior (engine) noise was something I didn't expect - it was omnipresent even during slow city driving. I totally loved the performance, that's for sure

However I'm not sure how good is it as a daily driver (let's say you like to make phone calls while driving) compared to the calmer and quieter but still plenty fast E55.
Who of you went from W210 to W212 and how do you find the different character?
I'd welcome some thoughts on this before I pull the trigger..
once you get going i think the massive low down trq from the w212 5.5TT would be a major difference from the w210 n/a motor (was definitely noticeable difference from my n/a w204 motor)
when I want something softer I drive a 2016 m550i or our 2014 Acura mdx
the w210 e55 was my dream car ... amazing vehicle ...
when I want something softer I drive a 2016 m550i or our 2014 Acura mdx
the w210 e55 was my dream car ... amazing vehicle ...
I know E63 is the ultimate package where you get the right engine, right suspension and brakes and no thoughts about "something better"..
There's about a $20k-$30k difference between E63 and CLS500 in Europe.
So why did you decide to go from E550 to E63?
Trending Topics
once you get going i think the massive low down trq from the w212 5.5TT would be a major difference from the w210 n/a motor (was definitely noticeable difference from my n/a w204 motor)
I can live with the lag, knowing that's what it takes to have a strong/performance transmission.
I was also hoping to get the best/smoothest trans with 2015/2016+ E63.
The Best of Mercedes & AMG
I know E63 is the ultimate package where you get the right engine, right suspension and brakes and no thoughts about "something better"..
There's about a $20k-$30k difference between E63 and CLS500 in Europe.
So why did you decide to go from E550 to E63?
google "peterubers mbworld harsh shifting" and you'll find the thread ...if you're bored
the newer command is much nicer but should not be a deal breaker if you find a nice car
I can live with the lag, knowing that's what it takes to have a strong/performance transmission.
.
look at the jerky transmission/ lag thread and you will get an idea of how many people have problems with italso in reality the true 0-60 mph time is more like 4.7 sec when you factor in the 1 sec pause so that's kind of annoying too when you have a 6 figure 600hp car
the lag phenomenon is part of the MCT technology ... it has to engage the wet clutch ... rest assured that if you wanna race someone and brake stall to 2500 and hit it ... you will be pleased
that's the problem with recorded 0-60mph time on our car is most mag's use a rollout , so the time doesnt start until the car moves (say 1 ft)... so technically a race can start (stop light) and other car takes off instantly and records a 3.4 time and meanwhile we are still waiting for trans to respond and finally engages and we go and still get the same 0-60 time.... meanwhile the other car is already at the next stoplight eating a ham sandwich waiting for us to get there, even though we recorded the same 3.4 sec time
the lag in C mode is the worst compared to S or S+. If i'm in C mode at an intersection waiting to turn left I have to manually shift it to 1st gear and tap the gas to ensure its "ready" for when you need to go..
Last edited by jvakos; Apr 7, 2017 at 12:36 PM. Reason: attachment
think of it this way... if you and me are at a stop light and light turns green and you go and hit 0-60 in 3.5 sec instantly and i wait 1 second and then go and do the same 0-60 3.5 sec time, who is ahead at 60 mph?

that's the BS of our "0-60" times, they dont account for the lag
Last edited by gaspam; Apr 7, 2017 at 01:52 PM.
What were here talking about here is a typical stoplight scenario where you don't have the time for all that crap
its when you simply mash on the gas normally after taking foot off the brake as anybody else does.
Even with the lag it has here I didn't think its at 4.7. I thought maybe 3.8-3.9 as butt dyno (at least on a tuned one) seems to feel like it's around 4 seconds to 60.
I wonder if using the "brake hold" feature at a stop would improve it. Gaspam did you ever try it? Don't mash it all the way, I find this makes more lag. Just ease into the throttle then go hard I find it will start moving with less of a lag
and can we get some way of measuring the real 0-60 with the lag BEFORE it actually gets moving, any tool that will take that into account
Last edited by Amg63-; Apr 7, 2017 at 01:55 PM.
from a roll its a different story as i pull on him no problem
from a roll its a different story as i pull on him no problem
sounds like in some cases you still beat him to 60 though as after 40 your ahead.
Wouldnt you based of this that while the car isnt a real 3.3 it could still be doing 3.8-4.0?
im assuming your not doing brake torque in these runs? Just normal mashing?
Which method did you find works best outside of brake torque/RS?
sounds like in some cases you still beat him to 60 though as after 40 your ahead.
Wouldnt you based of this that while the car isnt a real 3.3 it could still be doing 3.8-4.0?
im assuming your not doing brake torque in these runs? Just normal mashing?
Which method did you find works best outside of brake torque/RS?
ive done brake trq and mash it and neither is much better than the other.. RS just sucks so i dont even use it.... doesnt really matter as with 600+awhp we shouldnt have to do some special launch tech to beat a 3.8 sec 350 awhp car
Net net - I'd look at what % of your time you spend on the phone vs just driving. If it's like 90% not on the phone then don't buy a car to make your 10% better. Just my thought because the power and sound will keep you happier whenever a phone isn't involved.
ive done brake trq and mash it and neither is much better than the other.. RS just sucks so i dont even use it.... doesnt really matter as with 600+awhp we shouldnt have to do some special launch tech to beat a 3.8 sec 350 awhp car
I agree this car car shouldn't be anywhere in the 4 second range. I know they are making this a trade off to get the better rolling start performance in exchange as no torque converter gives lower drivetrain losses but I'd rather have a better launch...
hopefully soon someone can figure out a way to minimize the torque limits while still maintaining full reliability of the MCT.







