NSX versus CLK55 AMG
- Thread starter TURBO2GO
- Start date
Chinonsx02 said:
He was referring to not wanting to launch the car at 6k rpm (ie, clutch dump, excessive slipping, etc)
Ski_Banker said:
You're old fashioned !!! :tongue:
Didn't somebody just recently, in another thread here on prime, say something like "You can strap a turd on a jet engine and it's STILL a POS" ??? :biggrin: :biggrin: :biggrin:
Klayton said:
No, it doesn't. You are talking about the 65 motor. I wrote "600". The 600 motor and the 65 motor are not the same. I was saying there is no need to spend that much to even get a 65. You can get a 600 and with the ECU upgrade it is 625/1000. More than the 65 motor. 1000nm is roughly Its 745 lb/ft of torque.
Klayton said:I'm sorry to say but this is wrong. AMG purposely developed a NA high reving (for an AMG close to 7000rpm is high reving) engine, they are not going to supercharge it. They are following the trend of the M GmBh and Audis S-Line to build high reving NA engines. The AMG63 engine still got that low rev oomph because of its displacement.
Nope.
I didn't say supercharge. I said turbocharge.
The supercharger is no longer practical because of european pedestrian safety standards requiring a low hoodline.
Klayton I am not sure where you are getting your information from.
According to an interview published in Car and Driver magazine with the current head of AMG, it is something they looked into and said is "feasible". The interviewer also noted that the engineer had a big smile on his face, indicating something was up their sleeve.
As for my friend's CLK55, I think its too close to call. I wouldn't say "no" as a definite. We will find out. I will let you know.
Last edited:
Ski_Banker said:
Ditto.
I am one of the few that won't sacrifice daily usability and ownership costs for a sports car. I'll take that over straightline performance.
I've heard CTSC helps your gas mileage? Is that true?
I've done some reading that future supercars will be both of that and will be very gas friendly as well.
I don't mind spending on a car upfront. But the maintenance must be very minimal and predictable.
Anyhow the truth of the matter is the NSX is not going to keep up with newer cars on the market. Question is how much that matters to you?
To me, I don't really care, because I don't intend on going over the speed limit by more than 10 mph over again.
Yesterday driving back from Denver, I got a flashlight flashed in my car to slow down and I was going 85 in a 65, thinking it was still a 75mph speed limit area. Cop was kind enough to just give me a warning.
I don't ever want to get another speeding ticket again as I want my insurance to continuously get cheaper every year with Triple AAA so in the future I can maybe afford to insure an expensive sports car.
Cheers. Check the KLeeman Supercharged C55. That car is crazy. It smokes just about everything.:smile:
TURBO2GO said:
Both the 600 and the 65 are V12TT. :wink:TURBO2GO said:
I didn't get the connection between the CL600 your friend owns and the comment about the MB V12TT. The discussion is about AMGs so I thought you talk about the AMG V12TT. Sorry about the confusion.TURBO2GO said:
Well the 63 AMG engine is the replacement for the supercharged 55 engine.TURBO2GO said:
TURBO2GO said:
Me neither where your comes from.TURBO2GO said:
Greetings
Klayton
Klay, you gotta stop speed reading through my posts bro...:wink:
I already told you my source of info. Can and Driver magazine. I asked for your source, if you have one. If not, I will take that was just your opinion that AMG will never use forced induction on the 63.
The lower hoodline is a safety law in the EU. The uppermost area of the hood, where it meets with the torso of a pedestrian (in an accident) can only be so high. AMG is going away from superchargers because they RAISE the hoodline and MB cannot meet the safety standards. My source of info for this, is MBUSA.
The torque in the 65 engine is not electronicaly limited. There is no way to do that. I am assuming this is not exactly what you meant to say. The TT motor's boost level is very modest in order to keep power in check and increase the life of the trans. The boost is controlled by the ECU.
The AMG 65 motor is using the same turbos as the 600 motor. They just increase displacement from the 600's 5.5 liters to the 65's 6.0 liters. This gives more torque, but the turbos are not sized well for this motor. This is why, on a 600 with an ECU upgrade you go from 498 HP to 625, but on the 65 motor you go from 612 to about 675. Because the turbos cannot keep up. They lose their efficiency. My source for this is talking with the head of technical (cory) at Kleemann USA, and with Hartmut Feyl at Renntech. I have also seen all the dyno charts that indicate what is going on.
MY last car was a Mercedes CL600. I know this car and MB/AMG's lineup very well.
I already told you my source of info. Can and Driver magazine. I asked for your source, if you have one. If not, I will take that was just your opinion that AMG will never use forced induction on the 63.
The lower hoodline is a safety law in the EU. The uppermost area of the hood, where it meets with the torso of a pedestrian (in an accident) can only be so high. AMG is going away from superchargers because they RAISE the hoodline and MB cannot meet the safety standards. My source of info for this, is MBUSA.
The torque in the 65 engine is not electronicaly limited. There is no way to do that. I am assuming this is not exactly what you meant to say. The TT motor's boost level is very modest in order to keep power in check and increase the life of the trans. The boost is controlled by the ECU.
The AMG 65 motor is using the same turbos as the 600 motor. They just increase displacement from the 600's 5.5 liters to the 65's 6.0 liters. This gives more torque, but the turbos are not sized well for this motor. This is why, on a 600 with an ECU upgrade you go from 498 HP to 625, but on the 65 motor you go from 612 to about 675. Because the turbos cannot keep up. They lose their efficiency. My source for this is talking with the head of technical (cory) at Kleemann USA, and with Hartmut Feyl at Renntech. I have also seen all the dyno charts that indicate what is going on.
MY last car was a Mercedes CL600. I know this car and MB/AMG's lineup very well.
Klayton said:
I thought it was the CL65 that was V12tt and the CL600 was V12 Na??
smoore said:I thought it was the CL65 that was V12tt and the CL600 was V12 Na??
2000-2002 S/CL 600's were V12 NA. (362 HP)
2003-2006 S/CL 600's are V12, twin turbo. (498 HP)
2001-2002 CL 55's were NA V8's. (347 HP)
2003-2006 CL 55's were supercharged (Kompressor) V8's. (498 HP)
CL65 and SL65 are AMG variants of the V12 "600" cars. They are increased displacement engines from the 600's 5.5 liters, to the 65's 6.0 liters. (612 HP)
The new AMG cars with the disgnation "63" are NA V8's that produce just over 500 HP in the new S/CL/SL, and will have be slightly detuned in the CLK's and CLS's.
The CLS, the new darling of MB, is raking in the most profits of any model for MB. It is essentialy an E class chassis, in a sleek body. It is however, priced very close to the S/CL and well above the E.
TURBO2GO said:
ahh ha i guess you do learn something new everyday. remind me to stay away from the newer cl600's then. so wht your saying is all the newer cl600's are the same as the older cl65's so does that mean there are no longer a benz as a cl65 being made anymore but it is now named the cl600?
smoore said:
There are no "older" CL65's. CL/SL65 came out in 2005. The 600 is one model, the 65 is another. They are both current. 600 is MB, 65 is the AMG version.
Just like 500 is a V8 MB, and 55 is the AMG version. V12's, (starting with a 6) are all turbo, 55's are supercharged, 500's are all NA.
Both the CL/SL 55AMG and the CL/SL 600 are rated at 498 HP. But... I would be much more afraid of the 600 if I were you... It is much faster.
TURBO2GO said:There are no "older" CL65's. CL/SL65 came out in 2005. The 600 is one model, the 65 is another. They are both current. 600 is MB, 65 is the AMG version.
Just like 500 is a V8 MB, and 55 is the AMG version. V12's, (starting with a 6) are all turbo, 55's are supercharged, 500's are all NA.
Both the CL/SL 55AMG and the CL/SL 600 are rated at 498 HP. But... I would be much more afraid of the 600 if I were you... It is much faster.
so whats the difference between a 2005 cl65 and a 2005 cl600?
:redface: o.k. now i get it thank for clarifing that:redface:TURBO2GO said:AGAIN?!
OK... :smile:
CL600 5.5 liter twin turbo V12 mercedes benz. 498 HP stock. $130-140K.
CL65 6.0 liter twin turbo V12 by AMG (modified CL600). 612 HP stock. $185K.
Destroyed a Silver CL 65 yesterday 0-80/85. Didn't want to go any faster as the limit was 45, but I would have been futher ahead still. He actually ran up on me first in casual traffic. At next light, I lined up behind him and simply walked around him after he took off....He shyed/stayed behind for half a mile before turning off. I usually don't go looking for kills.
Regards,
Danny
Regards,
Danny
TURBO2GO I don't know what you want to tell me by listing all the displacements of the 600 and 65 engines.. but:
You asked for my 'source of information' concerning the 63 engine and that it will not get any FI. First of all the displacement of 6,3 liter is not chosen per accident, the first successful AMG was a 300 SEL 6,3 tuned by AMG for touring car sport. It was NA. It got a displacement of 6,8 at the end but that doesn't matter. Second the V8 63 engine puts out over 500hp NA, you can see what a FI V8 does in the SLR. They already got an engine for the insane, the 65. Third, the engine is already placed in about 5 AMG models, there will be no change for the next couple of years. Fourth, that's what AMG and Mercs press releases say concerning the 63 engine. Fifth, that's what two friends of mine I used to go to school with told me about the new AMG engine generation, they both work for AMG in Affalterbach.
Of course there is the possibility of turbo/supercharging the 63, but as long as the 65 keeps on beeing AMG top engine and going into the S/SL/CL it won't happen. Also, but that's only my opinion, I don't think the well-heeled AMG V12 clientele would be satisfied with a V8. There's something about V12 and its.. can I say.. charisma?
I never heard of that EU guide line that doesn't allow superchargers anymore because it would rise the hood. But if that's what Merc USA is telling you it sure is right.
You wrote about the 65 and ECU upgrade. You talked to Kleemann USA and they told you an ECU upgrade on the 65 doesn't allow over 675 because the turbos can't keep up with? That's interesting. The Kleemann CL65 puts out 739hp and 1300nm with an ECU upgrade of the 6,0 V12TT.
I never owned an AMG or a top end Merc like the CL600. That doesn't stop me from having knowledge about the Merc and AMG car lineup.
This offtopic AMG discussion got a bit out of hand, sorry for that.
Greetings
Klayton
Edit: lowellhigh79: Are you sure it was a CL65? They usually don't get 'destroyed' by any other car, especially on the straight.
You asked for my 'source of information' concerning the 63 engine and that it will not get any FI. First of all the displacement of 6,3 liter is not chosen per accident, the first successful AMG was a 300 SEL 6,3 tuned by AMG for touring car sport. It was NA. It got a displacement of 6,8 at the end but that doesn't matter. Second the V8 63 engine puts out over 500hp NA, you can see what a FI V8 does in the SLR. They already got an engine for the insane, the 65. Third, the engine is already placed in about 5 AMG models, there will be no change for the next couple of years. Fourth, that's what AMG and Mercs press releases say concerning the 63 engine. Fifth, that's what two friends of mine I used to go to school with told me about the new AMG engine generation, they both work for AMG in Affalterbach.
Of course there is the possibility of turbo/supercharging the 63, but as long as the 65 keeps on beeing AMG top engine and going into the S/SL/CL it won't happen. Also, but that's only my opinion, I don't think the well-heeled AMG V12 clientele would be satisfied with a V8. There's something about V12 and its.. can I say.. charisma?
I never heard of that EU guide line that doesn't allow superchargers anymore because it would rise the hood.
But if that's what Merc USA is telling you it sure is right.You wrote about the 65 and ECU upgrade. You talked to Kleemann USA and they told you an ECU upgrade on the 65 doesn't allow over 675 because the turbos can't keep up with? That's interesting. The Kleemann CL65 puts out 739hp and 1300nm with an ECU upgrade of the 6,0 V12TT.
I never owned an AMG or a top end Merc like the CL600. That doesn't stop me from having knowledge about the Merc and AMG car lineup.
This offtopic AMG discussion got a bit out of hand, sorry for that.
Greetings
Klayton
Edit: lowellhigh79: Are you sure it was a CL65? They usually don't get 'destroyed' by any other car, especially on the straight.
Last edited:
Klayton said:Edit: lowellhigh79: Are you sure it was a CL65? They usually don't get 'destroyed' by any other car, especially on the straight.
Definitely, it had the CL65 and AMG logos right in front of me when I lined up behind him. There are lots of fast cars here in Vegas, especially S/SL/CL 55's, 600's, and 65's. By the way, my car only weighs 2800# and puts out 677 rwhp (although I had it at the 580 rwhp setting- fights for traction all the time).
Regards,
Danny
lowellhigh79 said:
lowell I want to point out, that in the last 2 years I have seen plenty more "fake" 65's than real ones. Because the differences are subtle, many badge their cars, change wheels, etc... there are a lot of posers out there. A CL65 will run 11 something second 1/4's.... not doubting your story at all, I don't even know what you own other than a turbo NSX.... just saying you may have ran against one of these posers....
Always a possibility about the poser CL65 although this was not likely one. On the same street, I ran away from a 996 TT on lower boost so this car had more. I also own a 2000 S500 and am aware of MB's offerings- tailights, badges and all.
Regards,
Danny
Regards,
Danny
Klayton said:
You do realize its actualy a 6208cc motor (a 6.2) and that 63 is marketing?
Klayton said:
Klay I am not trying to argue with you. The fact is no one knows for sure... but you posted "no" and "will not happen" like you knew for sure and the truth is that there has been talk of it. Its a more advanced engine that the current one. It may get turbos in the future should AMG see fit, they stated that can be done. They were specific enough to say that it would NOT be supercharged... but that turbocharging is a possibility.
The fact is that V12's are heavy and they make a car nose heavy... AMG does not like this. It makes more sense to turbo the V8 for ultra high HP levels. I am not giving you my opinion, just telling you what I have read in interviews with AMG officials in magazines.
Klayton said:
From what I have read, this engine is going away.
Klayton said:
Like I said a V12 is heavy.... and AMG modified the 600 motor because it was there already. I agree with you that there is a cache factor for many to have a V12, but from AMG's viewpoint, its not a good performance design. AMG is becoming more independent, and I doubt you will see the 65 engine in many more products down the road.
Klayton said:
The info on this website is incorrect as far as I know. Such an upgrade does not currently exist. Call Kleemann and ask if you do not believe me. I realize that Kleemann even posted such #'s on the website. It may even still be there. But they never were able to get those #'s. That was part of a kit that was to include larger turbochargers. That kit, last I checked about 6 months ago, was shelved. Have you seen any dyno charts from upgraded CL65's? They will clearly show you what I am talking about. The turbos reach max efficiency and power starts to drop off rapidly. The ECU is calling for more boost, but its not there. The intake temps that I have seen also show this clearly.
Klayton said:
I am not implying that, but I am telling you that my sources of info are fact, not my personal opinions. Being that I owned a 600 and was looking into a CL65 before my NSX purchase I researched all of this thoroughly. The current max power that you can extract from a 65 motor is 685. A mild increase over stock. I don't care what Kleemann lists, they are a very optimistic company. And from the ACTUAL real dyno results I have seen on multiple 65's the Renntech upgrade is slightly better and more accurate with their claims.
I got no interest in calling Kleemann or any other tuning company at all. If the numbers from classicdriver are fake as you say Kleemann released wrong info. I'm sorry about that, I think I got beaten by your dyno experience.
To be honest I don't care if the engine got 6208cc or 15000cc it is called 63 for the reason I wrote. You are of course right noone except the AMG managers and maybe the guys who work at the development of new engines know what the feature will bring for AMG and us car enthusiast.
So everything we talk about are presumptions. I personally believe my buddy who works at AMG that there are no plans to FI the 63 V8. Next time you check out a CL65 look under the hood maybe his fingers built the engine youre going to drive around. So far you don't believe me and I don't care, I tried to explain why (to be on the safe side I throw an IN MY OPINION in) the 63 will not be FI, I don't think we get to a common result so I'm out of this discussion.
What pisses me of in almost every of your post relating to what I wrote you're writing you got facts and I'm just babbling. Ok, you brought in facts about your buds CL600, your CL600, the CL65 you wanted to buy, your great many dyno experience with the CL and so on. That got nothing to do with the 63 V8 and why in your opinion it's going to be FI in the near future, ok, the magazine, but like you've seen with classicdrive maybe they made a mistake. With those many many posts you wrote one sentence why you think that, and that's because of 3 times said your safe sources, the guys you've talked to at Merc USA, (I'm 100% sure they got direct access to the AMG managment in germany) and the magazine you've read it in. And if like you wrote noone can look in the future, I doubt that magazine can.
Sorry if the text sounds harsh, I'm in a hurry to get this post done to call it a day. Maybe I just got everything wrong again, I tend to do this when I'm not talking in my mother language.
Greetings
Klayton
To be honest I don't care if the engine got 6208cc or 15000cc it is called 63 for the reason I wrote. You are of course right noone except the AMG managers and maybe the guys who work at the development of new engines know what the feature will bring for AMG and us car enthusiast.
So everything we talk about are presumptions. I personally believe my buddy who works at AMG that there are no plans to FI the 63 V8. Next time you check out a CL65 look under the hood maybe his fingers built the engine youre going to drive around. So far you don't believe me and I don't care, I tried to explain why (to be on the safe side I throw an IN MY OPINION in) the 63 will not be FI, I don't think we get to a common result so I'm out of this discussion.
What pisses me of in almost every of your post relating to what I wrote you're writing you got facts and I'm just babbling. Ok, you brought in facts about your buds CL600, your CL600, the CL65 you wanted to buy, your great many dyno experience with the CL and so on. That got nothing to do with the 63 V8 and why in your opinion it's going to be FI in the near future, ok, the magazine, but like you've seen with classicdrive maybe they made a mistake. With those many many posts you wrote one sentence why you think that, and that's because of 3 times said your safe sources, the guys you've talked to at Merc USA, (I'm 100% sure they got direct access to the AMG managment in germany) and the magazine you've read it in. And if like you wrote noone can look in the future, I doubt that magazine can.
Sorry if the text sounds harsh, I'm in a hurry to get this post done to call it a day. Maybe I just got everything wrong again, I tend to do this when I'm not talking in my mother language.
Greetings
Klayton
Klay, you were very definitive in your statements... I wanted to give my sources so that we can seperate fact and opinion. That is all. I want to know for myself... and that's why I pressed on your sources. It is nothing personal. I am sorry if I have somehow pissed you off, that is not my intention.
This is not a big deal dude, just some conversation regarding a car. If I have offended you somehow, then do accept my apology. I prefer to have your input, opinion or not, than not have it at all.
Lets just do this... over the next 3 years if AMG does not turbocharge their own engine, then you fly here to Boston, and I will buy you Samuel Adams Boston Lager for an entire weekend. If I see so much as a hair dryer on the 63, I will fly there and you buy me some Heffeweizen for an entire weekend. And I want it in those big German mugs where I have to blow off the foam first. :wink:
This is not a big deal dude, just some conversation regarding a car. If I have offended you somehow, then do accept my apology. I prefer to have your input, opinion or not, than not have it at all.
Lets just do this... over the next 3 years if AMG does not turbocharge their own engine, then you fly here to Boston, and I will buy you Samuel Adams Boston Lager for an entire weekend. If I see so much as a hair dryer on the 63, I will fly there and you buy me some Heffeweizen for an entire weekend. And I want it in those big German mugs where I have to blow off the foam first. :wink:
well i got an sl600 with all the power the world 500++ the think it isediddynsx said:
ITS NOT AN NSX i agree its nice but i like better the nsx
HONDA i love it
dimitris
