Image of Mercedes-Benz E63 AMG

Mercedes-Benz E63 AMG specs

Car type 4-door saloon
Curb weight 1765 kg (3891 lbs)
Power / weight 297 ps (293 bhp) / t
Torque / weight 357 Nm (263 lb-ft) / t
Introduced 2009
Origin country Germany
Views 55.1k
Submitted by 427

Performance

Top speed 250 kph (155 mph)
0 - 40 kph 1.8 s
0 - 50 kph 1.9 s
0 - 100 kph 4.3 s
0 - 130 kph 6.8 s
0 - 200 kph 14.2 s
0 - 250 kph 24.8 s
0 - 60 mph 4.0 s
0 - 100 mph 9.5 s
Est. 1/8 mile 8.3 s @ 92.0 mph
1/4 mile 12.4 s @ 114.3 mph
1000 m 22.7 s @ 245.0 kph
Est. 100 - 200 kph 9.9 s

More acceleration times

Mercedes-Benz E63 AMG acceleration graph
User avatar

User avatar

E63AMG  5m  

The next one will be pumping out close to 600bhp if not more! My dealer told me the new engine could also be based on the AMG GTS or the current one 5.5L TT with extra tweaks if emission is not a problem for some countries in EU region.

Add the FL please!

merc-e63-samg-008.jpg?itok=AznSCSAe


User avatar

Jon  6y  

Did a 1:50.00 on Laguna Seca, with performance package. ESP on.


User avatar

Mike B  6y  

Oh sorry haha, I didn't see that


User avatar

Inline 6 rules  6y  

@Mike B
The car you've linked is the new E 63 AMG with 5,5 l twinturbo engine. This has the "old" 6.2 l n/a engine, so the torque is right.
The 1765 kg is also right, the Mercedes page says 1840 kg and it is mentioned that it includes the +75 kg.


User avatar

Mike B  6y  

and Torque is 700Nm


User avatar

Mike B  6y  

Weight is 1840kg, http://www.mercedes-amg.com/e63.html#/e63-specs

The AMG site doesn't mention weights with 68kg driver and 7kg of luggage


User avatar

benzsl  7y  

0-50kph:1,9
0-100kph:4,3
0-200kph:14,2
0-250kph:24,8
1/4 mile:12,42
Resourc from:AutoBild Sportscar Jan.2011

Please update the data


User avatar

22  7y  

Typical for BMW fans like Babken to talk crap. Its funny how mercedes makes a car sets a lap time then a year later BMW makes a car and they say ˝our car is better˝. A YEAR LATER? Why dont they releas a car on the same day same year?


User avatar

Anonymous  8y  

Displacement should be 6.2l, not 6.3.

Press release first mentions 6.3-liter V8 engine and then later states 6208 cc. To comply with German law, Mercedes-Benz is required to round up the displacement figure to 6.3 when used for marketing purposes.

I think the site should put 6.2l for accuracy.


User avatar

doctor benz  8y  

I think a lot of you guys lost the plot.
Caddy is supercharged! That the only way they can keep up?
Look,M,RS,CTS-V,they all good,just I've driven them all extensively,at the limit,if find AMG's better.
Personal preferance.


User avatar

Babken  8y  

The next generation BMW M5 will turn both the e63 amg and cts-v to ashes.


User avatar

E  8y  

Considering the CTS's power advantage, that .1 second difference speaks a lot about the AMG's cornering. Also note the Mercedes won the figure 8 test. The next gen CTS-V is going to have to step up the game.


User avatar

FastestLaps  8y  

Beating CTS-V by .1 second at Willow Springs is the least of E63's achievements.

It is obvious that CTS-V still gives the biggest bang per buck. But, strangely, I feel that the E63 actually holds more value per buck than the CTS-V. And that is an achievement worth mentioning. And, by the way, I still think the M156 is the best atmospheric V8 on planet.


User avatar

Anonymous  8y  

by .1s Wow, what an achievement...........................


User avatar

Anonymous  8y  

If cost is a big factor (at this price range, it shouldn't be), take the CTS-V. Otherwise, take the M-B E63.

Another magazine article...

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/comparisons/09q4/2009_cadillac_cts-v_vs.2010_jaguar_xfr_2010_mercedes-benz_e63_amg-comparison_tests/2010_mercedes-benz_e63_amg_page_4


User avatar

FastestLaps  8y  

Beat the CTS-V in direct comparison (same conditions/same driver). Was faster on track and had almost identical acceleration figures.

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/sedans/112_1003_2010_cadillac_ctsv_2010_mercedes_benz_e63_amg_comparison/results.html


User avatar

Anonymous  8y  

@Mr. Turbo............HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHhahahahahahahah LOL


User avatar

Mr.Turbo  8y  

Many would becuse of many resons 1st > as long as it contain the name MB its better 2> German made 3> Better Quality .. those are enough


User avatar

PhantomPorsche  8y  

Who would take this over a CTS-V? I would, nothing to do with the emblem just that the shiny trim in the Cadillac is just too much.


User avatar

pw  8y  

@Pavyarden, E63AMG's time to 200km/h is surely above 13 sec, since it's quarter mile time is 12,7 sec and it gained 112,4 mph. It's unlikely that it will gain another 11,6 mph in less than 0,3 sec. Check 2.20:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GINMe7K_aL0&feature=sub


User avatar

pw  8y  

According to Edmunds it weights 4341 pounds, so it shoul be corrected. Check 3.14: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GINMe7K_aL0&feature=sub


User avatar

pw  8y  

Weight datum of this car is wrong. This E63 AMG weights 1840kg according to the official MB website:
http://www.mercedes-benz.de/content/germany/mpc/mpc_germany_website/de/home_mpc/passengercars/home/new_cars/models/e-class/w212/technical_data.html


User avatar

phavyarden  8y  

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/comparisons/09q4/2009_cadillac_cts-v_vs.2010_jaguar_xfr_2010_mercedes-benz_e63_amg-comparison_tests

quarter of mile : 12.5


User avatar

phavyarden  8y  

this time would be corrected in the next months, i'm sure that this car can hit the 200 km/h in less than 13 secs


User avatar

audi r8  8y  

14.6 s to 200km/h ... emm soo slow !!


User avatar

Georg  8y  

dramatical improved Hockenheim shorttrack laptime..


User avatar

Anonymous  8y  

Coming from an Audi Rs fanboy.


User avatar

BaX  8y  

RS6 owns this car including M5.


User avatar

Anonymous  9y  

i think ill take the M5.


User avatar

Babken  9y  

Surely is not worth even the rubber on the M5 tire.....