Top Gear: BMW 760Li vs Mercedes S63 AMG

[Tave]

Backwerdzzzzzz.

Whatever. The point is that you have to look at the total package to get a good idea of how the car behaves. Looking at two almost identical HP numbers and ignoring the fact that one car makes 150ft-lbs more than they other is s00per st00pid.

[MrH]

Whatever. The point is that you have to look at the total package to get a good idea of how the car behaves. Looking at two almost identical HP numbers and ignoring the fact that one car makes 150ft-lbs more than they other is s00per st00pid.

It's torque at the wheels that matters if you want to break traction.  The extra torque of the S600 might make it easier to break traction off idle, but not necessarily when moving.  The fact that it has 2 more gears, and makes the same amount of power, if you're able to keep the revs up near peak power, it probably makes more torque at the wheels.

[Tave]

I wasn't even talking about spinning the wheels so much as I was responding to the comment that the it was underpowered compared to the S63 and 760. My point was that it is the logical competitor to the 760. I don't really care that Top Gear chose the S63 instead, but I just wanted to throw that out there. Yeesh.


As to YOUR point (which, frankly, I don't really care about), look at the dyno graphs I posted. The S600 makes more torque between 1500 rpm and peak power than the S63 makes at ANY point on it's powerband.


Finally, and FWIW, the 1/4 mile times and trap of the 600 are better than the 63, leading me to believe, since the 0-60s are close, that the 600 isn't wanting for umph when they get up to speed.

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/comparisons/06q2/2007_mercedes-benz_s600_vs._2006_rolls-royce_phantom-comparison_tests/2007_mercedes-benz_s600_page_2
12.6 @ 115
9.7sec 0-100
2.7 50-70

http://www.germancarzone.com/s-class/19792-car-driver-2008-mercedes-benz-s63-amg-short-take.html
13.0 @ 110
10.8sec 0-100
3.4 50-70

[TBR]

I've just watched the whole episode. Man, what a cool show. These 3 guys have the best jobs in the world. Did you see them driving through Romania? I've just decided to make a road trip with some buddies there.

The 760 vs. S 63 "comparison" was a lot of fun, too. I must say after watching this, I want the Bimmer badly. I don't know why this car fascinates me more than the Benz, but it just does.

I agree with everything you just said.

Unfortunately a road trip to Romania isn't feasible for me.

[TBR]

BTW, seems pretty apparent to me that the S63 was out there because it has a new drive train for the S-class while the S600 has had the same 5.5l bi-turbo V12 combined with the 5AT for going on 5 years.

It seems likely that MB just happened to send a S63 there way at the same time they had the 760li.

[Tave]

Proly. Sounds reasonable.

[AltinD]

BTW, seems pretty apparent to me that the S63 was out there because it has a new drive train for the S-class while the S600 has had the same 5.5l bi-turbo V12 combined with the 5AT for going on 5 years.

It seems likely that MB just happened to send a S63 there way at the same time they had the 760li.

Didn't they say the S63 AMG is on the same price and power range to the 760iL? That makes it clear why it was chosen.

[Tave]

If the past 2 pages of me bitching hasn't made it clear, the 760 is in between the S63 and S600 in terms of power.

As for price, in the US at least, the S63 goes for $133,000; the 760 for $136,000; and the 600 for $149,000; so it can hardly be said to matter much, although maybe the pricing in Europe makes a difference.

[the Teuton]

A completely loaded 760Li only costs $155k. That's even with the Individual package.

I'm not completely sure the BMW is an S600 competitor.

[Tave]

A completely loaded 760Li only costs $155k. That's even with the Individual package.

A completely loaded S600 only costs $163k. That's even with 3 types of baby seats.

I'm not completely sure the BMW is an S600 competitor.

I'm not completely sure you're firing on all cylinders.

[BimmerM3]

A completely loaded S600 only costs $163k. That's even with 3 types of baby seats.

I'm not completely sure you're firing on all cylinders.

The S600 only has $14,000 with of options? That surprises me.

[Tave]

I guess they allow you to buy every extra set of wheel options if you want them (and the "car cover" in addition to the "dust cover") I just priced it according to the most expensive choice.


It's very well-equiped to start with, presumably because the 600 is the flagship model, so buyers will want the fully-optioned vehicle. There are no option packages, only various accessories.

[Submariner]

I guess they allow you to buy every extra set of wheel options if you want them (and the "car cover" in addition to the "dust cover") I just priced it according to the most expensive choice.


It's very well-equiped to start with, presumably because the 600 is the flagship model, so buyers will want the fully-optioned vehicle. There are no option packages, only various accessories.

The S-600 has no options.  For starters, it comes with:

4-Zone climate control
Heated and cooled front and rear seats
Power front and rear seats with massage
Stitched leather on all seats, dashboard, doors, center console, etc
Suede headliner
Active Body Control
Distronic Plus
Night Vision
Parktronic
Rear and side window sunshades
Lane departure assist
etc.

The 16000 in options comes from selecting multiple similar objects (i.e. 4 sets of wheels)

[Tave]

The 16000 in options comes from selecting multiple similar objects (i.e. 4 sets of wheels)

No it doesn't. As I said, that would drive up the cost a little higher (but still not out of 760-range, IMO).

Like I said, the $16,000 premium is accessories--crome inserts, bigger wheels, child seats, ski rack, floor mats, trunk handle, car cover, luggage net, metalic white paint (only paint option that costs extra), etc...

[Cookie Monster]

I loved those wheels on the 760 in the episode.

Made it looks mean and menacing. I love that car.

[the Teuton]

Interesting...

[CJ]

I'd still rather have the Mercedes.  Why?  It's a Mercedes.

[68_427]

The S63 sounded delicious.

[BimmerM3]

I'd still rather have the Mercedes.  Why?  It's a Mercedes.

I think I'd rather have the BMW for the same reason.

[CJ]

I really like that the Benz has a KEY.  You can take out the starter button and actually turn a key.  I like that.

[the Teuton]

This one has me conflicted. I've always liked this generation of S Class, and an AMG is just that much cooler, but from what I can see on how BMW corrected all of the problems from the E66, I really like what they did.

At the end of the day, I'd probably go with the BMW.

[Tave]

I'd go with the Benz, but I'd rather have the 600.

[SVT_Power]

Bah. Fuck y'all. Give me a last gen S65.

[GoCougs]

Oh, Jeez...

MrH is correct - peak engine torque is irrelevant; one has to look at drive wheel thrust force vs. road speed to determine which car will be the better performer.

[Tave]

I haven't mentioned peak torque since my first post. I provided the dyno charts for the 600 displaying the entire powerband. I also provided the performance figures for both cars, which is a much simpler measure of "which car will be the better performer."

Did you read the whole thread?

[GoCougs]

I haven't mentioned peak torque since my first post. I provided the dyno charts for the 600 displaying the entire powerband. I also provided the performance figures for both cars, which is a much simpler measure of "which car will be the better performer."

Did you read the whole thread?

I didn't - once I saw OMG MORE TORX = FASTER CARZ I b-lined to 'quick reply.'

Even the engine power band won't tell us near the whole story; it is thrust force per unit road speed that is the story, or more descriptively, power band + gearing + final drive ratio (including tire diameter). And we must not forget the practicalities such as traction, transmission type and electronic goodies such as launch control.

[Tave]

I think you enginerds are stumbling around the obvious: it's objectively faster.

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/comparisons/06q2/2007_mercedes-benz_s600_vs._2006_rolls-royce_phantom-comparison_tests/2007_mercedes-benz_s600_page_2
12.6 @ 115
9.7sec 0-100
2.7 50-70

http://www.germancarzone.com/s-class/19792-car-driver-2008-mercedes-benz-s63-amg-short-take.html
13.0 @ 110
10.8sec 0-100
3.4 50-70

The whole argument was started by these assertions:

The S600 (517hp) is less powerful than the S63 (525hp), which are both less powerful than the 760iL (535hp).

The S63 couldn't keep up with the 760, so I don't see why the S600 would be a better choice.

You guys can sqwak about "thrust force per unit road speed," "power bad + gearing + final drive ratio," "seven speed transmissions," etc...all you want. At the end of the day, the 600 is simply a faster car, which leads me to believe that the v12 twin turbo is the more powerful engine (imagine that!). At the very least it isn't a step down from the AMG in terms of straight line thrust, which is what those initial posts seemed to imply.

[MrH]

The initial post was Sporty saying the S600 would spin the tires even more, which isn't necessarily the case.

[Tave]

Not the initial posts I responded to. If you don't believe me, go back and read the beginning of the thread.


I will admit, your argument got roped in with the rest of it.


Speaking of your argument, I have given you several concrete facts to support the opposite, while all you have done is posit a bunch of vague generalities like, "Oh, well, it depends on a lot of things, we don't really know," "We can't be certain until we know the exact gear ratios," and " We won't know for sure until we depose a seven generation family history of the third tire technician who checked the tread depth," etc...

Since YOU were the person who suggested the S63 would spin its wheels more easily, why don't YOU come up with some concrete arguments to support your position? Preferably some that rely on real world data.

So far, the only objective facts at hand support MY conclusion. I will admit that, yes, it is physically possible that you are right. Then again anything is possible, but some things are a hell of a lot more likely.

[MrH]

You responded directly after my post, saying they don't make anywhere near the same amount of power.  You didn't quote anyone else.  There were no posts between that post, and your previous one that related to anyone else but me.  The only thing said between that and your previous post was mine, and Col. Caddy saying the S63 probably handles better.

Who were you talking to then?