Any thoughts on the Head 2 Head released today?
 

Just watched the Head 2 Head and the E63s got beat my the CTS-V. The review of each car wasn’t very good in my opinion

Link me??

Its through their app. Not sure i can link it without the other user having a subscription

I cannot find it either. But it's odd because Lieberman tends to like the AMGs. He was big fan of the W212 E63 wagon.

Yeah I tried their YT channel and its not posted... yet.

Im ok with whatever they say. I love the car and the numbers dont lie.

Id take anything Motor Trend says about GM cars with a grain of salt. They also said the Camaro SS was superior to the M4 in just about every way. The whole time i was watching the video there was a Chevy ad below it..

Agree completely. They have an American car bias in general too. Misplaced patriotism.

Or properly placed pockets??

Exactly, I don't believe any of their reports at this point. I firmly believe the new E63 AMG will beat the new CTS-V in the quarter mile when each car is driven properly.

Were those steels?

Wasn't the E63S a lot faster than the CTS-V in the Lightning Lap at VIR? Or was that a previous year model CTS-V?

Not that I care really, I own an E63S, am really happy with it, and was never in the market for a GM product.

You can guess which one will have the most rattles in the long term review . . .

I dont think it was alot faster and yes it was the older iteration:

https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.mbw...dfccb089d1.png

No they were the carbon brakes ( launch edition car) I mean I go to big willow quite a bit and those are very very good times 1.29 seconds for a 4500Lb sedan is unreal.

You're right, my aging memory caught me out. Maybe it was wishful thinking, that or I subconsciously added a few seconds for styling that really doesn't suit my taste. ;-)

What tires did both cars have?

https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.mbw...7f02026427.png
https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.mbw...c010cbd503.png

The CTS-V is no slouch. Its much lighter and RWD. Its gonna handle and brake better.

CCBs are an issue in the 2018 E63s wagon... I had my fluid flushed and installed Castrol SRF dot 4 fluid.
I did the CCB brake bedding in and all I can say is they are marginal at best even with the higher temp fluid when hot. If you track this car hard have a good body shop on retainer because you will be going off.

A 603 hp. 4,700lb. whale pulling a 1:29 on Big Willow is pretty damn good. My old 2,200lb. Lotus with 290 hp pulled a 1:27 flat a few years back.

Considering that the CTS-V is lighter, it would make sense why it stops faster. It's just hard to believe that the E63s' brakes are that bad, when my car comes in I'll test it, but that kinda left me in aw a bit. Regardless these aren't track cars, they're road cars meant for you to have fun with.

First, I should preface by saying I haven't seen the comparison so I don't know which tests where done and how they were conducted.

My question is, in a simple straight line stopping test, are the brakes themselves really the limiting factor?

My thinking is this, the brakes should have enough power to stop the rotation of any of the wheels on the car at speed, regardless of whether they are steel or CCB. That is, the brakes of either car are powerful enough to apply the necessary force to lock up the wheel with plenty of force left over. The stopping distance then is related to the management of the friction coefficient between the tire and the road and the inertia of the vehicle, not so much of the brakes themselves.

If the two vehicles have the same size and make of tire, you'd expect the max friction coefficient to be pretty close to the same on both vehicle, but slightly higher on the heavier vehicle to its greater mass and downward force on the tire. If the braking controller is well optimized to keeping the friction coefficient at the maximum then the stopping distance basically boils down to reducing the kinetic energy of the vehicle by applying the maximum braking force over some period of time. The car with the greatest kinetic energy (largest mass if the velocity of the two vehicles are the same) will take the longest to stop.

This is not to say the brakes don't matter. It ignores some elements that would need to be modeled such as are both warm and do both have the same initial bite to bring the braking force to max quickly so as not to lose effective braking time after initial application. And, the other point which I'm really aware of is, how effective are the brakes at dealing with heat buildup and how long can they maintain the ability to apply the maximum force. Will be interested to see the review and see if the braking distances were maintained after the brakes were good and hot.

So, will be interested in how many apples versus oranges there are in the two vehicles and how much in the end the distance can be attributed to the higher weight of the E63S.

From the video the 60-0 braking had the caddy at 99ft and the E63 at 116ft which is a pretty large difference. I have the steel brakes and am interested to know if those are better initially and then the carbons are better just to resist fade.

Anyways according to the video the E63 trounced the CTS in every category from interior, to skidpad, slalom, acceleration, engine note etc. The CTS has a large edge in the braking and the CTS was faster around willow by 0.02 seconds which is nothing.

They decided the winner solely based on track time which makes no sense for A. this kind of car and B. By it being so close anyways.

All I can say is while doing the recommended CCB bedding in process even with the highest boiling point Dot 4 brake fluid you can buy shows that the brakes can not stand up to repeated heavy braking.
Testing on Big Willow is one thing but if they did the test on Button Willow with its tighter course I wouldn't want to be in the car when the brakes fail....

I ordered my car with the CCBs knowing that it is a whale and would need only the best that Mercedes has on the shelf, they need a better shelf to pick from.
My old Audi RS7 never had a brake fade issue in the canyons or did my R8 v10 and 991 Turbo S...

I love the car but the CC brakes are marginal at best and go against the rule, if you add more power ya gotta add more brake.
This car is in need of more brake than any other car I've owned.

Carbon on track should be theoretically better then steel . They will be up to temp so no issue . Actually Carbon gets hotter then steel but dissipates the heat much faster. Carbon is lighter so less un sprung weight.
The problem with the braking could be just the weight difference in the cars .It might be as simple as the carbon brakes were just not bedded in for the track yet . Car maybe didn't have enough miles or maybe it does and its a test car that they didn't follow the right bedding sequence . That will make a big difference.