When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
New E63 gets worse MPG than outgoing model that has a bigger engine!!
Not that I have ever cared about mpg but automakers are always trying to shove it down our throat and constantly tell us that’s why they have to down size engines.(and emissions) the old e63 with that glorious m157 5.5L v8, that sounded amazing and was extremly powerful with a large displacement v8 got rated for 16 MPG city and 24 highway. The new one with a 1.5l smaller engine and more boost and Cylinder deactivation and a microphone under the hood that plays the cars sound inside( look it up, the engine is that lousey it doesn’t even sound like an amg) only gets 15 MPG city and 22 highway.😅. I guess that’s the best or nothing for you in 2017!
Seriously if you want real power ya gotta use fuel.
I got 8 mpg in the canyons when on the loud peddle and 23 mpg on the hwy going home... Ya gotta pay to play.
I've put about 700 miles on mine...average between 8 and 12 mpg. On my FBO, tuned, 2014, I averaged between 10 and 12mpg. I'm still playing with this new car, so I'm sure it'll end up closer to 10/12 mpg when I settle it down a bit.
I too was a little surprised the fuel economy was not better with the cylinder deactivation and the glide mode and 9 speed trans. But in really thinking about it, this car stuck is pushing much more power than the old 157's stock. To do this it must have larger valves, bigger ports, etc. I'm pretty sure. Anyhow, when the car is driven the way a lot of people drive a car like this it all become irrelevant because any car is gonna get crappy gas mileage going fast unless it's a Tesla or something.
Not that I have ever cared about mpg but automakers are always trying to shove it down our throat and constantly tell us that’s why they have to down size engines.(and emissions) the old e63 with that glorious m157 5.5L v8, that sounded amazing and was extremly powerful with a large displacement v8 got rated for 16 MPG city and 24 highway. The new one with a 1.5l smaller engine and more boost and Cylinder deactivation and a microphone under the hood that plays the cars sound inside( look it up, the engine is that lousey it doesn’t even sound like an amg) only gets 15 MPG city and 22 highway.��. I guess that’s the best or nothing for you in 2017!.
Sign of the times. It's not automakers but environmental regulations across the globe that require engines to change. Just like pedestrian safety requirements that changed the exterior designs of cars. Which isn't really a bad thing IMO.
The M177 engine is smaller but much more powerful than the M157. It more or less starts where a M157 ends in terms of power. I personally doubt it...
Re. the sound; I appreciate some factual info from you. All I have read is some comment in C&D which has no verification
Sign of the times. It's not automakers but environmental regulations across the globe that require engines to change. Just like pedestrian safety requirements that changed the exterior designs of cars. Which isn't really a bad thing IMO.
The M177 engine is smaller but much more powerful than the M157. It more or less starts where a M157 ends in terms of power. I personally doubt it...
Re. the sound; I appreciate some factual info from you. All I have read is some comment in C&D which has no verification
yes but it’s less displacement with more boost. So it’s all on the turbos. Pushing close to 22 psi of boost from the factory. The old m157 was a relatively large displacement v8 that probabaly produced close to 430 hp just by it’s self with no turbos. In my opinion it leads to a more linear power band not to mention its one of the best sounding turbo engines out there. And yes the CD article is my only source but it comes straight from the MB representive. I tend to believe it too,
Seriously if you want real power ya gotta use fuel.
I got 8 mpg in the canyons when on the loud peddle and 23 mpg on the hwy going home... Ya gotta pay to play.
ohh I no that, but my whole issue is the official rating is worse than the outgoing one and the engine is way smaller. Like it can’t even get better mpg under perfect conditions
Also to add, pulled the fuse for sound and there was zero noticeable difference in cabin sound from the exhaust. So unless my ears are deceiving me, or there is a stand alone amplifier connected to the speakers - these cars DONT play fake exhaust sounds through speakers./
yes but it’s less displacement with more boost. So it’s all on the turbos. Pushing close to 22 psi of boost from the factory. The old m157 was a relatively large displacement v8 that probabaly produced close to 430 hp just by it’s self with no turbos. In my opinion it leads to a more linear power band not to mention its one of the best sounding turbo engines out there. And yes the CD article is my only source but it comes straight from the MB representive. I tend to believe it too,
I tend not to believe C&D on this one. Standard fare with BMW but that would be a bigger deal for a 63 model. None of the German car mags reported on this and those guys are all over synthesized or amplified sound on a sports car. Be nice to hear an official AMG statement on this but until then it's likely questionable.
Also to add, pulled the fuse for sound and there was zero noticeable difference in cabin sound from the exhaust. So unless my ears are deceiving me, or there is a stand alone amplifier connected to the speakers - these cars DONT play fake exhaust sounds through speakers./
Not fake but there’s a microphone in the engine bay playing the sound threw the speakers!
You are comparing the W212 E63 numbers against the W213 E63S.
Also as stated - the W213 now has cylinder deactivation that reduces the fuel consumption and emissions by 17%.
Microphone aside - if there is no power to the amplifier then how can it play sound through the speakers?
Originally Posted by Mr-AMG
Not fake but there’s a microphone in the engine bay playing the sound threw the speakers!
You are comparing the W212 E63 numbers against the W213 E63S.
Also as stated - the W213 now has cylinder deactivation that reduces the fuel consumption and emissions by 17%.
Microphone aside - if there is no power to the amplifier then how can it play sound through the speakers?
fake implies that the sound is totally made up. If there is a microphone under the hood then it’s real but being pipped in threw the speakers . And no they where both non s models. The mpg is still not better tho
The E63 has not been launched in the USA, so there is no numbers out for it yet.
I just shared to you that I went out this morning and pulled fuses to disable the amplifier in the car and I heard Zero difference in the inside cabin.
Originally Posted by Mr-AMG
fake implies that the sound is totally made up. If there is a microphone under the hood then it’s real but being pipped in threw the speakers . And no they where both non s models. The mpg is still not better tho
Here is the Official UK Government tested Rule numbers for the cars.
They show a much larger difference than US, could be due to our stricter emission laws.
Here is the Official UK Government tested Rule numbers for the cars.
They show a much larger difference than US, could be due to our stricter emission laws.
Interesting that they list the car as getting 31MPG Average
How is there such a large discrepancy vs the 22MPG they list in the US?
This is their breakdown of the tests. Urban cycle - the urban test cycle is carried out in a laboratory at an ambient temperature of 20°C to 30°C on a rolling road from a cold start where the engine has not run for several hours. The cycle consists of a series of accelerations, steady speeds, decelerations and idling. Maximum speed is 31 mph (50 km/h), average speed 12 mph (19 km/h) and the distance covered is 2.5 miles (4 km).
Extra-urban cycle - this cycle is conducted immediately following the urban cycle and consists of roughly half steady speed driving and the remainder accelerations, decelerations, and some idling. Maximum speed is 75 mph (120 km/h), average speed is 39 mph (63 km/h) and the distance covered is 4.3 miles (7 km).
Combined fuel consumption figure - the combined figure presented is for the urban and the extra-urban cycle together. It is therefore an average of the two parts of the test, weighted by the distances covered in each part.
Interesting that they list the car as getting 31MPG Average
How is there such a large discrepancy vs the 22MPG they list in the US?
This is their breakdown of the tests. Urban cycle - the urban test cycle is carried out in a laboratory at an ambient temperature of 20°C to 30°C on a rolling road from a cold start where the engine has not run for several hours. The cycle consists of a series of accelerations, steady speeds, decelerations and idling. Maximum speed is 31 mph (50 km/h), average speed 12 mph (19 km/h) and the distance covered is 2.5 miles (4 km).
Extra-urban cycle - this cycle is conducted immediately following the urban cycle and consists of roughly half steady speed driving and the remainder accelerations, decelerations, and some idling. Maximum speed is 75 mph (120 km/h), average speed is 39 mph (63 km/h) and the distance covered is 4.3 miles (7 km).
Combined fuel consumption figure - the combined figure presented is for the urban and the extra-urban cycle together. It is therefore an average of the two parts of the test, weighted by the distances covered in each part.
lol that’s what I mean, euro cycle is very lienent. 31 mpg, lol never gonna happen
12-17-2017, 05:59 AM
