ccap41

The one thing here I will give the AMG is that while on paper it is down 70hp.. it is a Merc. It is so underrated it isn't even funny. "The pertinent facts of the case are thus: The 2014 Mercedes-Benz E63 AMG S Model is a monster. Under the bulging hood sits a nicely juiced-up version of the now-familiar M157 AMG engine. It's 5.5 liters in displacement, has two turbochargers fitted directly to the exhaust headers, and fills the combustion chamber with direct-injected gasoline at 2000 psi. Such a motor, especially in the new S Model tune, creates 577 hp and 590 lb-ft of torque. Of course those power numbers are GMFN, or German Minimum Fantasy Numbers. Meaning that we stuck this particular gray example on K&N Engineering's dynamometer and discovered that the M157 in this car churns out 541 wheel-horsepower and 508 lb-ft of torque. As the S Model E63 is AWD, and since you typically factor in a drivetrain loss for AWD cars of 20 percent (the transmission and drive shafts tend to suck a lot of power), the actual crank numbers on this car are much closer to 676 hp and 636 lb-ft of torque. That's enough to propel the 4511-pound sedan to 60 mph in a crazy quick 3.4 seconds and through the quarter mile in 11.6 seconds at 121.8 mph. That's one big hammer." Read more: http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/sedans/1311_2014_mercedes_benz_e63_amg_s_vs_bmw_m5_competition_pack_comparison/#ixzz3eljx98UE Granted, I don't know wha tmotor is propelling the current E63, but I would assume they underrate it quite well like they always have. Them and BMW. Oh, I'm not knocking the performance. The owner of my shop has SL55 AMG that is a beast. You cannot keep those rear wheels planted and it "only" has 550HP. I pointed out the HP numbers because someone else remarked that HP numbers between the AMG and the V were "similar". A 70 HP difference does not make it similar IMO. Agreed that on paper 70hp is not similar, that's a big difference. But acording to the Dyno pull.. it makes more than the V. Have you gotten to drive that SL55??? I'm not a huge SL fan but I would still love to drive a roadster AMG. That's true but I have seen more than advertised HP out the Vette motors too. Oh and no I haven't driven that car. Rode with the boss in it and man it may be a high tech AMG but that back end throws loose like an old school muscle car. Almost too much motor for that car...almost Aren't all of GM's engines SAE rated now though? That's what I hear about AMGs and why I love them so much! They still have that old school muscle and V8(even though those are becoming fewer and fewer now) and nose heavy.. they give the impression of still being a raw straight line car(as raw as 100+k can be lol).

Ooh, a whole $1000. It's actually $83,995 so you are wrong again and there is WAY more than a $10K difference. You even had to add a bunch of frivolous options to the V to get it to the price you had. I added wheels, carbon fiber, Red Brembos, and sunroof and only came out to $95K. Optioning out those same accessories on the AMG pushed it over $120K! The only thing that separates the AMG is the AWD while still having 70HP less than the V. Again there is a $22K difference in base prices and the difference increases when you option them out. The V is not overpriced unless you also think the Z06 is overpriced (which its not). The one thing here I will give the AMG is that while on paper it is down 70hp.. it is a Merc. It is so underrated it isn't even funny. "The pertinent facts of the case are thus: The 2014 Mercedes-Benz E63 AMG S Model is a monster. Under the bulging hood sits a nicely juiced-up version of the now-familiar M157 AMG engine. It's 5.5 liters in displacement, has two turbochargers fitted directly to the exhaust headers, and fills the combustion chamber with direct-injected gasoline at 2000 psi. Such a motor, especially in the new S Model tune, creates 577 hp and 590 lb-ft of torque. Of course those power numbers are GMFN, or German Minimum Fantasy Numbers. Meaning that we stuck this particular gray example on K&N Engineering's dynamometer and discovered that the M157 in this car churns out 541 wheel-horsepower and 508 lb-ft of torque. As the S Model E63 is AWD, and since you typically factor in a drivetrain loss for AWD cars of 20 percent (the transmission and drive shafts tend to suck a lot of power), the actual crank numbers on this car are much closer to 676 hp and 636 lb-ft of torque. That's enough to propel the 4511-pound sedan to 60 mph in a crazy quick 3.4 seconds and through the quarter mile in 11.6 seconds at 121.8 mph. That's one big hammer." Read more: http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/sedans/1311_2014_mercedes_benz_e63_amg_s_vs_bmw_m5_competition_pack_comparison/#ixzz3eljx98UE Granted, I don't know wha tmotor is propelling the current E63, but I would assume they underrate it quite well like they always have. Them and BMW. Oh, I'm not knocking the performance. The owner of my shop has SL55 AMG that is a beast. You cannot keep those rear wheels planted and it "only" has 550HP. I pointed out the HP numbers because someone else remarked that HP numbers between the AMG and the V were "similar". A 70 HP difference does not make it similar IMO. Agreed that on paper 70hp is not similar, that's a big difference. But acording to the Dyno pull.. it makes more than the V. Have you gotten to drive that SL55??? I'm not a huge SL fan but I would still love to drive a roadster AMG.

Ooh, a whole $1000. It's actually $83,995 so you are wrong again and there is WAY more than a $10K difference. You even had to add a bunch of frivolous options to the V to get it to the price you had. I added wheels, carbon fiber, Red Brembos, and sunroof and only came out to $95K. Optioning out those same accessories on the AMG pushed it over $120K! The only thing that separates the AMG is the AWD while still having 70HP less than the V. Again there is a $22K difference in base prices and the difference increases when you option them out. The V is not overpriced unless you also think the Z06 is overpriced (which its not). The one thing here I will give the AMG is that while on paper it is down 70hp.. it is a Merc. It is so underrated it isn't even funny. "The pertinent facts of the case are thus: The 2014 Mercedes-Benz E63 AMG S Model is a monster. Under the bulging hood sits a nicely juiced-up version of the now-familiar M157 AMG engine. It's 5.5 liters in displacement, has two turbochargers fitted directly to the exhaust headers, and fills the combustion chamber with direct-injected gasoline at 2000 psi. Such a motor, especially in the new S Model tune, creates 577 hp and 590 lb-ft of torque. Of course those power numbers are GMFN, or German Minimum Fantasy Numbers. Meaning that we stuck this particular gray example on K&N Engineering's dynamometer and discovered that the M157 in this car churns out 541 wheel-horsepower and 508 lb-ft of torque. As the S Model E63 is AWD, and since you typically factor in a drivetrain loss for AWD cars of 20 percent (the transmission and drive shafts tend to suck a lot of power), the actual crank numbers on this car are much closer to 676 hp and 636 lb-ft of torque. That's enough to propel the 4511-pound sedan to 60 mph in a crazy quick 3.4 seconds and through the quarter mile in 11.6 seconds at 121.8 mph. That's one big hammer." Read more: http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/sedans/1311_2014_mercedes_benz_e63_amg_s_vs_bmw_m5_competition_pack_comparison/#ixzz3eljx98UE Granted, I don't know wha tmotor is propelling the current E63, but I would assume they underrate it quite well like they always have. Them and BMW.

Sunroofs aren't that bad. I didn't have one in my Camaro because it ruined the double-bubble roofline. But I've had them in both my trucks and my old HHR and they were dead-nuts reliable. I've never had one fail or leak on me but they are usually just sealed by "rubber" gaskets which if the sunroof was really used I would think would dry up sooner. I've actualll had three vehicles with them(Focus STV, MB C350, and my current Escape that has the panoramic moonroof - which is cool and all but nothing I would optionally pay for) and none of mine had any issues. They just aren't for me. Any I rarely see people use them that have them anyway. I have one friend who is in love with them for some stupid-ass reason. He had one installed on his '06 Altima as a graduation gift.. Stupid if you ask me.

F me, that looks fantastic. All it needs is some tinted windows.. and that's it. There aren't too many vehicles that I can say all they need is tinted windows but this is one. Black wheels, super metalic-y black paint..done. Price is up there, but it is competitive on the poor man's side so that's fine. I pretty sure Benz will up the price on the next E63 because it knows that suckers will ante up when they lay fat pipe in them. To hear Cadillac talk about carbon-ceramic brakes, you'd think the nonmetallic rotors took the engineers' sisters out to a nice seafood dinner and never called them again. (As the company's line goes, there won't be an optional track package because "the CTS-V IS the track package.") Instead, the V makes do with tried-and-true iron brake rotors clasped by six-piston front and four-piston rear Brembo calipers. Car and Driver LOL I thought you were quoting yourself..

The E63 is AWD though.. there is SOME of the 9k.. well in trucks that's usually a 4-5k option. Yes. Don't get the sunroof. lol Sorry I just hate sunroofs.. I see them as one of the largest wastes in automotive history. More things to go wrong, leaks, and added weight to the worst place possible.

I get that way on the months where we don't have an extended weekend for a holiday or something. It is amazing what a 3 day weekend will do mentally. Not just the time off but just having something to look forward to that isn't the same. For instance, this weekend. I'm so stoked for it..yet I have nothing planned or anything.. just won't be working. lol My day job has been taking advantage of me for a couple years now and I am so pinned down by them I don't have much time or energy to make a change. I understand, jobs can have a creeping oppression over us. Very very much so..

Wow, good work on the numbers. Having them all together and organized. Props to you, sir. Anyway, Not to start a pissing match(even though it probably will), What happened to all the lost market share by Ford and GM gaining it, guys(the one(s) know who I'm talking about ) Also, Go !

I get that way on the months where we don't have an extended weekend for a holiday or something. It is amazing what a 3 day weekend will do mentally. Not just the time off but just having something to look forward to that isn't the same. For instance, this weekend. I'm so stoked for it..yet I have nothing planned or anything.. just won't be working. lol

2103 salesmen should be fired(assuming only one vehicle per salesman). Top 5 ugliest vehicles on the road. ^ I noticed the "E Series" sales as well.. must be fleet style..left overs or something..

Too bad Chevy doesn't have the balls to make it.. Yeah.. but they have the BALLS to make a Camaro RS, SS, Z28, ZL1 and a Corvette and Z06.. an SS.. yeah.. I would take that over what your boys at Ford shovel us any day of the weak.. Well Ford competes with the Camaro(GT/350/350R)..obviously no Corvette competition but they do have a legitimate supercar that Chevy does not have.. Ford offers performance across waaaaay more platforms. Nothing against any of those Chevys. Those three are great in their respective classes and the Corvette fights well out of its weight class. And the SS..I feel is just underrated.. I said it somewhere else yesterday but I wish more were selling so I could pick one up used in a few years for a good price because it is an awesome car. It just depends what market for a car you're in. Ford offers performance variants down to their Fiesta ST and up the the GT and a lot in the middle. To each their own because I would take Ford's lineup of performance cars over Chevy's line of performance cars. Also, isn't the Camaro RS just like an aesthetic package..? Are we comparing Ford vs Chevy.. or Ford vs GM??? Certainly since Ford is only REALLY Ford.. with nothing else.. it should by the numbers have more performance oriented Variants than Chevy which also has Buick and Caddy to share in the performance. What does Ford have right NOW??? Mustang... Focus ST ...Fiesta ST... Taurus SHO.. Raptor??? That's really all they have GM has ATS-V, CTS-V.. CTS-VSport.. XTS-VSport.. Vette,.. SS... Camaro... Regal GS.. Verano Turbo... Shiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiit the who Cadillac ATS and CTS line-up is more performance oriented than most of Ford.. 2.5L ATS included.. Hmmm.. I was only doing Ford Vs Chevy because those two actually compete.. we all know Ford has nothing for Cadillac. Buuuuuuut saying the Regal GS and Verano Turbo are performance cars is like saying the Edge Sport or Explorer Sport or the past Fusion Sport are performance vehicles. We all know they aren't. They just offer top trim with enough power to not be boring. I also don't really consider the VSports in this category. Just because they are faster than any Ford sedan doesn't make them actual performance cars like the true V-Series. Overall, I still don't think they have many more true performance cars than Ford does. YES they definitely offer more cars for the enthusiast such as the whole ATS/CTS/CT6 lineup and they will run circles around the average Ford sedan but they aren't actual performance variants. To me, GM has the ATS-V, CTS-V, Camaro SS, SS, Corvette. The VSports are gnarly and all, super badass having 400+hp. I just don't see them as actual performance variants. They seem like a BMW 550 to the base 535 or a MB E400 to the base E250. Obviously, just my personal opinion on them though.

So I had that typed up when my computer decided to freeze on the internet..(that is why it is also so faded..because it was frozen). Quick thinking, I took a snip of it and saved..otherwise I wasn't going to even retry. To continue.. I love to watch the big dog NHRS guys go at it FOUR WIDE(Top fuel guys, dragsters and funny cars inparticular but I'll watch the pro stock as well). I'll watch them even when they aren't four wide lol. I plan to go to my first NHRA top fuel event at the end of the summer(Sept25-27 they come to STL). When I was a younger lad back in high school I even enjoyed a little stint at our local dirt track watching the late models get after it. That fad faded pretty quick because I wasn't making much money and it was $25/week to go plus if I wanted anything to eat or drink.. The entire TUDOR sports car series would be awesome to watch but that stuff isn't covered..at all..as far as I know. The smaller divisions like; Continental Tire Sportscar Series, Cooper Tires Prototype Lites, Ferrari Challenge, Lamborghini Super Trofeo, and Porsche GT3 Cup. They're shorter races, fairly close to factory cars(other than the prototype series), and not always the same guys occupying 1st or 2nd. Pretty much anything. I just love racing. I'd like to get a toy car some day as just a track car. Wouldn't have to be anyting fancy or expensive, just something I can beat on and drive the hell out of. By the time I could afford something like that I think something like a BRZ would be perfect. Miatas may be better in all aspects but I just can't be attracted to convertibles. Whew.. I kind of went all over the place with that!

Sorry for the late 'welcome'! I guess better late than never! Welcome!

Sorry for your loss, buddy..

http://www.imsa.com/sites/default/files/race_result_files/2015_TUSC_WGI_ProvisionalResults.pdf I believe that is correct. I remember the top three and they are the same as that list so hopefully it is correct. thanx. No probby!

http://www.imsa.com/sites/default/files/race_result_files/2015_TUSC_WGI_ProvisionalResults.pdf I believe that is correct. I remember the top three and they are the same as that list so hopefully it is correct.

That would probably be a hard car to beat, I wasn't thinking of non-American cars. That might have to be another rule change. What is great about the other 3800 cars is all have a flaw. The Camaro/Firebird should have the best handling, but are the slowest. Every car has a trade off, the Regal GS might be fastest in a straight line but would handle the worst. Another good oddball would be the 3800 powered Cutlass Ciera International. The answer to your Regal GS quandary is the Grand Prix GTP coupe. Exactly my pick would be the Grand Prix GTP, and because it'll be raced the coupe it would be.

On Fox Sports, right? There's a channel here called Motors TV that's been airing "streams" from the Fox Sports coverage live. Just wish they did the same with the NASCAR. Yeah it was on FS1 and I think the final hour went to FS2. Do you not get to watch NASCAR or you wish they covered the Tudor Series better like NASCAR? The 6rs at the Glen actually kind of sucked..the rain was soooo bad. Usually I enjor watching races in the rain but this was such a heavy downpour there were constantl cars sliding off course. They even red Flagged the race due to rain. Now that is impressive for a series that races in the rain. It finished the last 35 minutes under a yellow flag..

It's amazing to me that the 24hrs of Le Mans had absolutely terrible coverage yet the 6hrs at Watkins Glen are completely covered.

You're kidding... They can't fit a 255/65R17? Does it rub or something? On the current generation of Escape? Not a chance. Somebody has some 255/55r17s I think and they rub at full lock. I'll try and find the pic he posted of it. Okay it was 255/50r18 not 255/55r17s

You're kidding... They can't fit a 255/65R17? Does it rub or something? On the current generation of Escape? Not a chance. Somebody has some 255/55r17s I think and they rub at full lock. I'll try and find the pic he posted of it.

^ For being a little guy, That thing looks tough! Too bad if something like that actually got produced they'd probably make the brakes too large to put a reasonable sized wheel on to therefore put a nice knobby tire like pictured. That is the situation the Escape owners are in(the forum i'm on). They want ^ look but you can't get a smaller wheel than a 17 to fit over the caliper so the "tallest" tire that can fit is a 235/55R17(I believe).

granted.. but THIS is now seriously asking for the 2.0L T Too bad Chevy doesn't have the balls to make it.. Yeah.. but they have the BALLS to make a Camaro RS, SS, Z28, ZL1 and a Corvette and Z06.. an SS.. yeah.. I would take that over what your boys at Ford shovel us any day of the weak.. Well Ford competes with the Camaro(GT/350/350R)..obviously no Corvette competition but they do have a legitimate supercar that Chevy does not have.. Ford offers performance across waaaaay more platforms. Nothing against any of those Chevys. Those three are great in their respective classes and the Corvette fights well out of its weight class. And the SS..I feel is just underrated.. I said it somewhere else yesterday but I wish more were selling so I could pick one up used in a few years for a good price because it is an awesome car. It just depends what market for a car you're in. Ford offers performance variants down to their Fiesta ST and up the the GT and a lot in the middle. To each their own because I would take Ford's lineup of performance cars over Chevy's line of performance cars. Also, isn't the Camaro RS just like an aesthetic package..?

I remember reading that actually.. And the two engines we're talking about deliever power almost completely opposite. One is a small turbo 4 making a lot of low end power and it loses steam up top and the other is a good size V6 that builds and builds power till redline. I know tuning can fix A LOT of issues an ower has with their car but if we get in to the aftermarket world.. all of this new car talk means almost nothing because if you have enough money to modify a car..you can do anything you want. But, nonetheless, is your ability to tune your car less awesome. I love the aftermarket. It is just hard to talk about that and new cars.. hopefully I'm making sense..lol

Just for comparison sake.. Ford's 2.0T