Close

    • Tuned W212 E63 AMG facelifted model with 4Matic versus a stock BMW F12 M6 - M6 wins?

      Interesting race here that may have some people scratching their heads. The E63 AMG in the video is claimed to be the facelifted model that now offers optional 4Matic all wheel drive. It is not stated whether it is the standard or S model but considering the video claims the E63 has an aftermarket tune bringing it up to 700+ horsepower the point is irrelevant. The tune is by Gorilla Racing whose tuned cars have been impressive.

      The facelifted E63 AMG and the M5/M6 updated with the Competition Package are basically neck and neck with the edge from a stop going to the E63/CLS63 and the edge from a roll going to the M5/M6. This M6 is not stated to have the Competition Package but that it is shown pulling what is claimed to be a modified E63 raises eyebrows.

      Is a stock M6 beating the new 4Matic AMG from a roll odd? Not at all according to MotorTrend's latest results for the E63 AMG S and the M5 Competition Package. The video shows the AMG winning from a stop exactly as it should. However, if this E63 is tuned how is it losing to a stock M6? It should win decisively.

      The only logical conclusions are either that the car is not tuned or the tune is incredibly weak. Even a decent tune should put the E63 ahead from a roll. Regardless, the M6 shows just how quick it is from a roll even in stock form. Enjoy the video below.



      This article was originally published in forum thread: Tuned W212 E63 AMG facelifted model with 4Matic versus a stock BMW F12 M6 - M6 wins? started by Sticky View original post
      Comments 22 Comments
      1. BlackJetE90OC's Avatar
        BlackJetE90OC -
        Not sure what to think of new E63 4matics with tunes now. After reading in that other thread tuners are having problems with torque limiters built into the Power Take Off units.
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by BlackJetE90OC Click here to enlarge
        Not sure what to think of new E63 4matics with tunes now. After reading in that other thread tuners are having problems with torque limiters built into the Power Take Off units.
        That's something they'll get around eventually but I think the 700 hp claim in this video is a load of donkey crap.
      1. Vasily1's Avatar
        Vasily1 -
        This is a car of my friend. It was the first tune hence unstable with a good pull for the first 2 gears. It is not 700hp at all. Now he's got a further upgrade. He did not measure it on dyno any way. I don't know why they wrote on Dragtimes.ru info re 700hp. My car is "S" version as basis and has got full SS exhaust + tune + moded turbos (journal bearings). I haven't measured it either, however on the Moscow Unlim 500+ training day (13 October 2013) managed to do a standing mile in 27,9 sec. at 298 km/h with a 1/4 in 11,1 sec at 205 km/h. The temperature in Moscow was +8/+10 and the tarmac was cold. I think high 10 are feasible. Anyway my tune is still intermediate since starting from 3rd gear the car stops to pull as required. When i have my car measured on dyno will paste the results.
      1. ezec63's Avatar
        ezec63 -
        @Sticky like I said in the other thread they are having issues tuning the 4matic because of the torque limiters in the PTU. And that's big names liked renntech and weistec so some bs shop "gorilla racing" is def not getting around that before them. How does the motortrend article prove that the m5 is faster than the E63 S? The trap speed was .4 faster how does that prove it's faster that's a minuscule difference and the E 63 didn't have the Carbon Ceramic brakes that the m5 had so that will def make up that .4 probably more. Don't know how you came to that conclusion
      1. BlackJetE90OC's Avatar
        BlackJetE90OC -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by ezec63 Click here to enlarge
        The trap speed was .4 faster how does that prove it's faster that's a minuscule difference and the E 63 didn't have the Carbon Ceramic brakes that the m5 had so that will def make up that .4 probably more. Don't know how you came to that conclusion
        Didn't even notice the E63 didn't have carbon ceramics. Those are good for up to 40-50lbs weight loss.
      1. ezec63's Avatar
        ezec63 -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by BlackJetE90OC Click here to enlarge
        Didn't even notice the E63 didn't have carbon ceramics. Those are good for up to 40-50lbs weight loss.
        @BlackJetE90OC Yupp exactly ! And 40+ pounds of unsprung / rotational mass is a huge difference so that .4 mph that's already negligible would be equalled and honestly most likely surpassed. Let's just call a spade a spade
      1. ezec63's Avatar
        ezec63 -
        I took off 38 pounds of rotational mass when I went from my stock brakes to girodisc 2 piece rotors. The car was def faster accelerating from any speed and the handling was an even bigger difference the turn in was sharper and it felt more agile during quick left right moves
      1. BlackJetE90OC's Avatar
        BlackJetE90OC -
        If I remember correctly the BMW carbon ceramics are worth 19kg (~42lbs).
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by ezec63 Click here to enlarge
        @Sticky like I said in the other thread they are having issues tuning the 4matic because of the torque limiters in the PTU. And that's big names liked renntech and weistec so some bs shop "gorilla racing" is def not getting around that before them. How does the motortrend article prove that the m5 is faster than the E63 S? The trap speed was .4 faster how does that prove it's faster that's a minuscule difference and the E 63 didn't have the Carbon Ceramic brakes that the m5 had so that will def make up that .4 probably more. Don't know how you came to that conclusion
        It doesn't matter if the difference is minuscule what we have seen from the M5/M6 is that on the top end it's stronger than the E63. If it's pulling harder at the 1/4 it's pulling harder and half a mile per hour is enough of a difference to show the M5/M6 has the edge from a roll. The cars are close to begin with but each has its advantage, clearly.
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by ezec63 Click here to enlarge
        @BlackJetE90OC Yupp exactly ! And 40+ pounds of unsprung / rotational mass is a huge difference so that .4 mph that's already negligible would be equalled and honestly most likely surpassed. Let's just call a spade a spade
        That's like saying difference rubber for the M5 wouldn't produce a different ET or trap too though. I think it's clear that the dct and rear wheel drive favor roll on races.
      1. ezec63's Avatar
        ezec63 -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
        It doesn't matter if the difference is minuscule what we have seen from the M5/M6 is that on the top end it's stronger than the E63. If it's pulling harder at the 1/4 it's pulling harder and half a mile per hour is enough of a difference to show the M5/M6 has the edge from a roll. The cars are close to begin with but each has its advantage, clearly.
        How doesn't it matter if its minuscule ? Were talking about over 120 mph traps less than half a mph is NOTHING you can run the same car twice and have a bigger variation than .4 mph plus i have mentioned many times the aerodynamics of the E63 is much better than the F10 m5 the .cd is a lot lower so when going above these trap speeds the more powerful better aero car should have the advantage. I guess well have to see more real world results i don't trust one video from siberia to be the end all be all
      1. ezec63's Avatar
        ezec63 -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
        That's like saying difference rubber for the M5 wouldn't produce a different ET or trap too though. I think it's clear that the dct and rear wheel drive favor roll on races.
        No thats not like saying that. The E63 has the CC brakes available as an option and with them on with 40 pounds less rotational mass all its numbers would've been better. Theres no doubt rear wheel drive and dct are better for roll racing but is it enough to overcome 40whp and better aero? Guess well see

        Its a factory option that was not added to the e63 but was to the m5 its not some aftermarket retro fit
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by ezec63 Click here to enlarge
        How doesn't it matter if its minuscule ? Were talking about over 120 mph traps less than half a mph is NOTHING you can run the same car twice and have a bigger variation than .4 mph plus i have mentioned many times the aerodynamics of the E63 is much better than the F10 m5 the .cd is a lot lower so when going above these trap speeds the more powerful better aero car should have the advantage. I guess well have to see more real world results i don't trust one video from siberia to be the end all be all
        Half a mile per hour is close but it's still a half mile per hour. The cars are supposed to be close. The M5 traps higher and so it is the faster car there is no debate that is what the numbers say.

        Trap speed is trap speed just because cars are close does not mean one does edge the other and the data all points to the M5 edging the E63 from a roll and all videos we have seen thus far agree with this. The data supports the conclusion whether the difference is large or not in your opinion.
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by ezec63 Click here to enlarge
        No thats not like saying that. The E63 has the CC brakes available as an option and with them on with 40 pounds less rotational mass all its numbers would've been better. Theres no doubt rear wheel drive and dct are better for roll racing but is it enough to overcome 40whp and better aero? Guess well see
        Difference run conditions may produce different results but I think anyone can realistically look at the drivetrain of both cars and see which one is favored in roll on races and which one is favored from a stop.

        Sure the E63 could improve with carbon ceramic brakes but that doesn't change the fact its drivetrain saps more power and the M5 revs higher meaning it breathes a little better up top which favors roll on races.

        I stand by the distinction that the E63 is favored from a stop and the M5 from a roll and the M6 is DECISIVELY favored from a roll.
      1. Vasily1's Avatar
        Vasily1 -
        Well, i wouldn't call Gorilla racing a "bs shop" since they proved their experience in M157 platform in real life. For example on a last training day of Moscow Unlim 500+ (13.10.2013) they trapped standing mile with a record for GT class (322 km/h). And by the way they first made st.3 on a new E63 AMG S 4matik and proved it on a standing mile. None of the americans has done it yet (i mean Renntech, Weistec and AMS). I am thinking of AMS/Renntech as an alternative (as they both have turbine modifications on the basis of ball bearings unlike my current journal bearings) since i kept my original turbines and have ordered a spare ECU. But as i understand AMS has only now got its test mule E63 4matik and will come up with results a bit later. No news from Renntech re tests of their best stage on 4matik.
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Vasily1 Click here to enlarge
        Well, i wouldn't call Gorilla racing a "bs shop" since they proved their experience in M157 platform in real life. For example on a last training day of Moscow Unlim 500+ (13.10.2013) they trapped standing mile with a record for GT class (322 km/h). And by the way they first made st.3 on a new E63 AMG S 4matik and proved it on a standing mile. None of the americans has done it yet (i mean Renntech, Weistec and AMS). I am thinking of AMS/Renntech as an alternative (as they both have turbine modifications on the basis of ball bearings unlike my current journal bearings) since i kept my original turbines and have ordered a spare ECU. But as i understand AMS has only now got its test mule E63 4matik and will come up with results a bit later. No news from Renntech re tests of their best stage on 4matik.
        I don't know if anyone is calling BS on them as much as the 700 hp figure.
      1. BlackJetE90OC's Avatar
        BlackJetE90OC -
        Stock for stock BMW does seem to be pushing the little 4.4L a lot harder.

        My gut feeling 5 years from now, when tuning/modding has matured for both cars. The E63 will be the quicker and faster car. DCT is not enough to make up for over 1 liter displacement advantage.
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by BlackJetE90OC Click here to enlarge
        DCT is not enough to make up for over 1 liter displacement advantage.
        Tell that to GTR's. Tell that to my M3.

        The M5 revs higher too.

        We're talking about twin turbo V8's here. It comes down to who fits the biggest turbos on there. Trust me the M157 is a tight fit that is why you haven't seen aftermarket manifolds and big turbos yet people are still playing with the factory housings.
      1. ezec63's Avatar
        ezec63 -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
        Difference run conditions may produce different results but I think anyone can realistically look at the drivetrain of both cars and see which one is favored in roll on races and which one is favored from a stop.

        Sure the E63 could improve with carbon ceramic brakes but that doesn't change the fact its drivetrain saps more power and the M5 revs higher meaning it breathes a little better up top which favors roll on races.

        I stand by the distinction that the E63 is favored from a stop and the M5 from a roll and the M6 is DECISIVELY favored from a roll.
        And the SL 63 PP is decisively favored from a roll. And even further when modified
        one member has both the m5 and non PP SL63 and they both run the same times with the Sl having slightly better ET same traps (121+). So the PP Will be considerably faster
      1. ezec63's Avatar
        ezec63 -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
        Tell that to GTR's. Tell that to my M3.

        The M5 revs higher too.

        We're talking about twin turbo V8's here. It comes down to who fits the biggest turbos on there. Trust me the M157 is a tight fit that is why you haven't seen aftermarket manifolds and big turbos yet people are still playing with the factory housings.
        You can't compare everything with a DCT / small displacement to the GTR the gtr is simply on another level that none of these cars will touch