Mercedes-Benz E63 AMG specs

@FastestLaps please change:
Mercedes-AMG
E 63 (W212)
2009-2011

I don't think this car had ANY BMW competitors. It was too late for the E60M (which both of the W211 AMGs rivaled), and too early for the F10M (which already was challenged by the Biturbo versions that replaced this one).

Post deleted.

https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/comparison-test/a15390214/2009-cadillac-cts-v-vs-2010-jaguar-xfr-2010-mercedes-benz-e63-amg-comparison-test/

2010 Mercedes-Benz E63 AMG
518-hp V-8, 7-speed automatic, 4167 lb
Base/as-tested price: $88,075/$103,125 (est.)
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 4.0 sec
100 mph: 9.5 sec
1/4 mile: 12.5 sec @ 115 mph
Braking, 70­–0 mph: 168 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.90 g
C/D observed fuel economy: 12 mpg

Sad to see the N/A go

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!

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

Oh sorry haha, I didn't see that

@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.

and Torque is 700Nm

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

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

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?

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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

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

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

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

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

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.

@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

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

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

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

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