2017 W213 E63 AMG to have AWD system that can send 100% torque to the rear?
10-26-2016, 01:59 PM
#76
Out Of Control!!
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 11,412
Received 1,886 Likes
on
1,323 Posts
2014 E63S; AMS 100 octane ecu tune; edok tcu tune; BB intakes; dyno tuned
actually i I think that the m157 is an overall stronger and
more powerful motor than the 4.0 TFSI in the rs7.
What I meant by saying e63s is "weaker" is in regards to when both are tuned , that tuners are still not able to remove the torque limits and take full advantage of the m157. For Audi, there is no such problem so they can take full advantage and it can have better ET and trap a bit higher.
But i think if the torque limits can be removed, m157 will trap higher, just not have as good ET because of its inferior AWD system.
It it might not be the only bottle neck but how else do you explain the relatively worse performance for us when we are both running tunes? I think this is the main bottleneck and really hope tuners figure it out soon...
more powerful motor than the 4.0 TFSI in the rs7.
What I meant by saying e63s is "weaker" is in regards to when both are tuned , that tuners are still not able to remove the torque limits and take full advantage of the m157. For Audi, there is no such problem so they can take full advantage and it can have better ET and trap a bit higher.
But i think if the torque limits can be removed, m157 will trap higher, just not have as good ET because of its inferior AWD system.
It it might not be the only bottle neck but how else do you explain the relatively worse performance for us when we are both running tunes? I think this is the main bottleneck and really hope tuners figure it out soon...
10-26-2016, 02:21 PM
#77
MBWorld Fanatic!
I thought the MCT was good for 900wtq? Not sure where I read it maybe I'm wrong. But I think it's for sure good for more than what tunes are giving us right now on the m157
10-27-2016, 01:55 AM
#78
Member
LMAO.... ok now you go punch in 10.85 and what 60ft you get? .....1.51 60ft and 122 mph trap lol.... hmm weird because the AMS e63 that ran 10.85 above has a 1.628 60ft and 129 trap.... see smart guy, calculator bench racing isnt the same as actually going to the track
you are totally clueless.... While i have disagreed with other people in the past on the forum, difference with them is they actually have a clue as to what they are talking about and we just happened to disagree on some finer details.... you on the otherhand have no clue and base your knowledge on magazine articles and Video games.... carry on spanky
you are totally clueless.... While i have disagreed with other people in the past on the forum, difference with them is they actually have a clue as to what they are talking about and we just happened to disagree on some finer details.... you on the otherhand have no clue and base your knowledge on magazine articles and Video games.... carry on spanky
If you punched in 11.5 as I originally, said, you get a 1.6 60' foot. Given that YOU SAID a 1.6 60' foot isn't possible and given that the Motor Trend car ran an 11.5 (so have others), there's your 1.6 60' foot fool.
You like to pass wind from your mouth and have gotten into it with many people on this board. You leave wordy evidence of what a tool bag you are.
I like playing GTA V with real cars instead of generic "look-a-like" cars, so what.
Last edited by proxygeek; 10-27-2016 at 01:57 AM.
10-27-2016, 01:57 AM
#79
Member
you have embarrassed no one but yourself...
here's top 7 RS7's on dragtimes and top7 e63s.... which one has more cars trapping above 130? and yes they are all TUNED because that is what i was talking about... quit posting motortrend and road and track links to STOCK cars when we are not talking STOCK
here's top 7 RS7's on dragtimes and top7 e63s.... which one has more cars trapping above 130? and yes they are all TUNED because that is what i was talking about... quit posting motortrend and road and track links to STOCK cars when we are not talking STOCK
GET A LIFE!!!! Who cares tool bag!
10-27-2016, 02:01 AM
#80
Member
actually i I think that the m157 is an overall stronger and
more powerful motor than the 4.0 TFSI in the rs7.
What I meant by saying e63s is "weaker" is in regards to when both are tuned , that tuners are still not able to remove the torque limits and take full advantage of the m157. For Audi, there is no such problem so they can take full advantage and it can have better ET and trap a bit higher.
But i think if the torque limits can be removed, m157 will trap higher, just not have as good ET because of its inferior AWD system.
It it might not be the only bottle neck but how else do you explain the relatively worse performance for us when we are both running tunes? I think this is the main bottleneck and really hope tuners figure it out soon...
more powerful motor than the 4.0 TFSI in the rs7.
What I meant by saying e63s is "weaker" is in regards to when both are tuned , that tuners are still not able to remove the torque limits and take full advantage of the m157. For Audi, there is no such problem so they can take full advantage and it can have better ET and trap a bit higher.
But i think if the torque limits can be removed, m157 will trap higher, just not have as good ET because of its inferior AWD system.
It it might not be the only bottle neck but how else do you explain the relatively worse performance for us when we are both running tunes? I think this is the main bottleneck and really hope tuners figure it out soon...
Chassis has more to do with the horrendously overrated 60' foot times all of these tools are obsessed with.
I'm happy with a car that runs 11s and has a low 3 second 0-60 time. I'm not concerned with running 10s or even low 11s. To me, an AMS tune to 700 HP is good enough (less with crappy 91 Octane gas I'm sure).
10-27-2016, 02:09 AM
#81
Member
Did you just tell me to go get a 60ft calculator??? Lmfao!!! That's the difference between you and me...you're using a calculator and quoting magazines while I'm basing my information off of experience.
Nope, YOU brought up reflexes, no one else. The rest of us know that reflexes have ZERO to do with any measured performance indicator at the drag strip. As far as tires go, I promise you that I know more about D/Rs and how much benefit they have at the drag strip than you!
Why thank you for the compliment...Yes, I can drive! I have hundreds of time slips in my 55 alone and countless witnesses to prove it. But it's still nice to hear you admit it.
And yes, lol...you found my Instagram page. I'm older than you (which blows your claim to have been racing before I was born out of the water) and still better looking! I don't play video racing games, I actually race. And if you can find that then it shouldn't be that difficult for you to search this forum for my E55 drag racing history.
Nope, YOU brought up reflexes, no one else. The rest of us know that reflexes have ZERO to do with any measured performance indicator at the drag strip. As far as tires go, I promise you that I know more about D/Rs and how much benefit they have at the drag strip than you!
Why thank you for the compliment...Yes, I can drive! I have hundreds of time slips in my 55 alone and countless witnesses to prove it. But it's still nice to hear you admit it.
And yes, lol...you found my Instagram page. I'm older than you (which blows your claim to have been racing before I was born out of the water) and still better looking! I don't play video racing games, I actually race. And if you can find that then it shouldn't be that difficult for you to search this forum for my E55 drag racing history.
You don't even drive an E63 S AMG, you have an older E63 AMG it appears, you don't have a MY2014 - 2016, yet you speak to how these cars launch which is typical of a forum bull*****ter. We've all seen it 1000x before.
I've done a ton of drag racing in my 911 Turbo (a much better car than the E63 S by the way) and about 3 pulls in my E63 S. I know enough from those pulls to know that the car launches hard.
You should try playing some GTA V, great game. I've got the game modded to run actual cars instead of the stupid "look-a-likes" that ship with the game. I have the E63, Porsches, Lambo's, you name it.
You don't race, running a car at a drag strip isn't racing. What a tool.
And, I DID NOT use reflexes in that context. You're just trying to say that I did and that's fine, but that's not what I was saying. I was saying that most of you guys use that as your excuse for running crap ETs.
Last edited by proxygeek; 10-27-2016 at 02:16 AM.
10-27-2016, 02:18 AM
#82
MBWorld Fanatic!
I believe it has to do with the chassis to be honest. Cars with less torque are faster in the 1/4 mile (power to weight).
Chassis has more to do with the horrendously overrated 60' foot times all of these tools are obsessed with.
I'm happy with a car that runs 11s and has a low 3 second 0-60 time. I'm not concerned with running 10s or even low 11s. To me, an AMS tune to 700 HP is good enough (less with crappy 91 Octane gas I'm sure).
Chassis has more to do with the horrendously overrated 60' foot times all of these tools are obsessed with.
I'm happy with a car that runs 11s and has a low 3 second 0-60 time. I'm not concerned with running 10s or even low 11s. To me, an AMS tune to 700 HP is good enough (less with crappy 91 Octane gas I'm sure).
and does trap speed indicate only horsepower or also an indication of low end torque power?
10-27-2016, 02:25 AM
#83
MBWorld Fanatic!
You're a joke is what you are. You ain't nothing. Your photos show why you compensate so hard.
You don't even drive an E63 S AMG, you have an older E63 AMG it appears, you don't have a MY2014 - 2016, yet you speak to how these cars launch which is typical of a forum bull*****ter. We've all seen it 1000x before.
I've done a ton of drag racing in my 911 Turbo (a much better car than the E63 S by the way) and about 3 pulls in my E63 S. I know enough from those pulls to know that the car launches hard.
You should try playing some GTA V, great game.
You don't race, running a car at a drag strip isn't racing. What a tool.
You don't even drive an E63 S AMG, you have an older E63 AMG it appears, you don't have a MY2014 - 2016, yet you speak to how these cars launch which is typical of a forum bull*****ter. We've all seen it 1000x before.
I've done a ton of drag racing in my 911 Turbo (a much better car than the E63 S by the way) and about 3 pulls in my E63 S. I know enough from those pulls to know that the car launches hard.
You should try playing some GTA V, great game.
You don't race, running a car at a drag strip isn't racing. What a tool.
So as soon as you realize that I've run down the 1/4mile more times than you've logged hours on your video games you're going to try to say drag racing isn't racing? I bet you're scrambling for another calculator or magazine article to support that claim too!
Honestly, if you think this car launches hard, either you've never been in a car that actually launches hard or you simply can't drive. My money is on the latter which is likely why you need the AWD. I CHOSE the RWD model for a reason and that has been documented here for some time. And in case you do find some BMW article that says real racing requires turns, I can promise you that I have more laps around road courses on two wheels than you have in your cars.
10-27-2016, 04:13 AM
#84
Member
Poor baby lol.
So as soon as you realize that I've run down the 1/4mile more times than you've logged hours on your video games you're going to try to say drag racing isn't racing? I bet you're scrambling for another calculator or magazine article to support that claim too!
Honestly, if you think this car launches hard, either you've never been in a car that actually launches hard or you simply can't drive. My money is on the latter which is likely why you need the AWD. I CHOSE the RWD model for a reason and that has been documented here for some time. And in case you do find some BMW article that says real racing requires turns, I can promise you that I have more laps around road courses on two wheels than you have in your cars.
So as soon as you realize that I've run down the 1/4mile more times than you've logged hours on your video games you're going to try to say drag racing isn't racing? I bet you're scrambling for another calculator or magazine article to support that claim too!
Honestly, if you think this car launches hard, either you've never been in a car that actually launches hard or you simply can't drive. My money is on the latter which is likely why you need the AWD. I CHOSE the RWD model for a reason and that has been documented here for some time. And in case you do find some BMW article that says real racing requires turns, I can promise you that I have more laps around road courses on two wheels than you have in your cars.
Blah blah blah... big ****ing deal.
911 Turbos launch hard, so don't tell me what it's like to launch hard when you have an engine stuffed behind the rear wheels. My 996 Turbo could be downright scary.
You bought the car you did because you couldn't afford an E63 S, LOL.
Go waddle to your car monkey man
10-27-2016, 04:17 AM
#85
Member
That was supposed to say THERE ARE cars with less torque that run faster 1/4 mile times.
Torque = Acceleration (with the right gearing) and gets you out of the hole. It's all about getting power to the ground.
10-27-2016, 11:16 AM
#86
MBWorld Fanatic!
You're all talk.
Blah blah blah... big ****ing deal.
911 Turbos launch hard, so don't tell me what it's like to launch hard when you have an engine stuffed behind the rear wheels. My 996 Turbo could be downright scary.
You bought the car you did because you couldn't afford an E63 S, LOL.
Go waddle to your car monkey man
Blah blah blah... big ****ing deal.
911 Turbos launch hard, so don't tell me what it's like to launch hard when you have an engine stuffed behind the rear wheels. My 996 Turbo could be downright scary.
You bought the car you did because you couldn't afford an E63 S, LOL.
Go waddle to your car monkey man
Yep, 911s can launch hard but like I said, my money is on the fact that you can't drive!!! Post up some timeslips (and proof their yours) of your launches in your Pcar or your E63 with your 60ft times. You show me something better than the 1.6 that you think is so easy and I'll buy you a redbull so you can stay up all night and play more video games!
Now let's see who's all talk...
Last edited by chiromikey; 10-27-2016 at 11:19 AM.
The following users liked this post:
gaspam (10-27-2016)
10-27-2016, 11:56 AM
#87
MBWorld Fanatic!
We both know you don't have any timeslips, especially showing a hard launch 60ft time. Let's just agree to disagree. You can be happy with the 0-60 times all the publications praise and I'll keep complaining about the fact that my old E55 launches better on street tires than these new AWD E63s do.
If you still have some more insults just pm me and get them off your chest so we can give the rest around here a break. Take care buddy
If you still have some more insults just pm me and get them off your chest so we can give the rest around here a break. Take care buddy
10-27-2016, 12:16 PM
#88
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: miami / delray beach
Posts: 2,841
Received 201 Likes
on
154 Posts
2014 E63s amg 4matic, 2009 C63, 2006 E55 AMG , 2001.5 AUDI S4 stg 3+ w/meth
You're a complete joke.
If you punched in 11.5 as I originally, said, you get a 1.6 60' foot. Given that YOU SAID a 1.6 60' foot isn't possible and given that the Motor Trend car ran an 11.5 (so have others), there's your 1.6 60' foot fool.
You like to pass wind from your mouth and have gotten into it with many people on this board. You leave wordy evidence of what a tool bag you are.
I like playing GTA V with real cars instead of generic "look-a-like" cars, so what.
If you punched in 11.5 as I originally, said, you get a 1.6 60' foot. Given that YOU SAID a 1.6 60' foot isn't possible and given that the Motor Trend car ran an 11.5 (so have others), there's your 1.6 60' foot fool.
You like to pass wind from your mouth and have gotten into it with many people on this board. You leave wordy evidence of what a tool bag you are.
I like playing GTA V with real cars instead of generic "look-a-like" cars, so what.
all you do is talk with no evidence... all the rest of us have real world experience
so until you show us a timeslip of e63 with ~11.5 1/4 and 1.6 60ft, you are wrong and all talk
show us the timeslip bench racer
Last edited by gaspam; 10-27-2016 at 12:30 PM.
10-27-2016, 12:25 PM
#89
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: miami / delray beach
Posts: 2,841
Received 201 Likes
on
154 Posts
2014 E63s amg 4matic, 2009 C63, 2006 E55 AMG , 2001.5 AUDI S4 stg 3+ w/meth
i will post the facts again to show how stupid and clueless you are.... now go back to your video games and pretend you are real racing
Last edited by gaspam; 10-27-2016 at 12:29 PM.
10-28-2016, 04:49 PM
#92
Member
yeah them facts are something you dont like to deal in .... no stretching of the truth here.. those are actual results with ACTUAL TIMESLIPS! something you cant provide... Im sorry the results dont fit your narrative, but they are the facts
i will post the facts again to show how stupid and clueless you are.... now go back to your video games and pretend you are real racing
i will post the facts again to show how stupid and clueless you are.... now go back to your video games and pretend you are real racing
Any moron can steal any posted time slips that are about accurate for a car and claim them as their own!!
YOU ARE A KH!!!!!!!! LMAO
10-28-2016, 04:50 PM
#93
Member
show us the 11.5 time slip with 60ft of 1.60... until then you're calculator is wrong
all you do is talk with no evidence... all the rest of us have real world experience
so until you show us a timeslip of e63 with ~11.5 1/4 and 1.6 60ft, you are wrong and all talk show us the timeslip bench racer
all you do is talk with no evidence... all the rest of us have real world experience
so until you show us a timeslip of e63 with ~11.5 1/4 and 1.6 60ft, you are wrong and all talk
show us the timeslip bench racerThere are so many posted around the web, anyone can steal them and claim them as their own, LOL.
You're a fool
10-28-2016, 04:57 PM
#94
Member
We both know you don't have any timeslips, especially showing a hard launch 60ft time. Let's just agree to disagree. You can be happy with the 0-60 times all the publications praise and I'll keep complaining about the fact that my old E55 launches better on street tires than these new AWD E63s do.
If you still have some more insults just pm me and get them off your chest so we can give the rest around here a break. Take care buddy
If you still have some more insults just pm me and get them off your chest so we can give the rest around here a break. Take care buddy
TIME SLIPS PROVE ZERO.
Let's just agree you have NO EXPERIENCE with the E63 S, you are a know it all, you think you're something special which it goes without saying you're not, and you think you're a "Toughie", LOL.
I have refrained from insulting you, so toughen up tough guy. I could make you cry.
I have nothing more to say to you than I already have.
10-28-2016, 05:03 PM
#95
Member
996...where's the 997? Lol, look who's talking about what people can't afford!!
Yep, 911s can launch hard but like I said, my money is on the fact that you can't drive!!! Post up some timeslips (and proof their yours) of your launches in your Pcar or your E63 with your 60ft times. You show me something better than the 1.6 that you think is so easy and I'll buy you a redbull so you can stay up all night and play more video games!
Now let's see who's all talk...
Yep, 911s can launch hard but like I said, my money is on the fact that you can't drive!!! Post up some timeslips (and proof their yours) of your launches in your Pcar or your E63 with your 60ft times. You show me something better than the 1.6 that you think is so easy and I'll buy you a redbull so you can stay up all night and play more video games!
Now let's see who's all talk...
It's funny you mention the 997, my next 911 will either be a 997 or 991 Turbo S or GT3.
It's OK if you can't afford an E63 S, but don't hate on those who can.
10-28-2016, 05:04 PM
#97
Member
10-28-2016, 06:15 PM
#98
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: miami / delray beach
Posts: 2,841
Received 201 Likes
on
154 Posts
2014 E63s amg 4matic, 2009 C63, 2006 E55 AMG , 2001.5 AUDI S4 stg 3+ w/meth
seriously, go away, you are clueless
Last edited by gaspam; 10-28-2016 at 06:28 PM.
10-29-2016, 07:12 PM
#99
you are clueless, its pretty entertaining though... read my post again, you must of mentioned the word "TUNED" and yes TUNED RS7 and TUNED M5s trap 131-133 pretty frequently.... TUNED E63s do not... end of story
btw, no ones is debating AWD vs RWD M5's so kinda pointless statement...
btw, no ones is debating AWD vs RWD M5's so kinda pointless statement...
10-29-2016, 07:43 PM
#100
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: miami / delray beach
Posts: 2,841
Received 201 Likes
on
154 Posts
2014 E63s amg 4matic, 2009 C63, 2006 E55 AMG , 2001.5 AUDI S4 stg 3+ w/meth
as I said before our cars don't launch hard that's why they don't do good quarter-mile times. On the street when you're cruising along next to an RS7 and both mash the pedal while crusing on the highway is a different story Where the E 63 more than holds its own
context kponti ... that's part you leave out
Last edited by gaspam; 10-29-2016 at 09:43 PM.
