Close

    • W205 C63 AMG 12 months away as 2015 model - 4.0 liter M177/M178 twin turbo V8 engine 'confirmed'

      AutoExpress quoted head of AMG Tobias Moers recently which in a way confirms what we already knew. The upcoming W205 C63 AMG which is expected to debut late this year will have twin turbo V8 power courtesy of a direct injected 4.0 liter V8 with 450-500 horsepower. The quote from Moers is as follows, "You are now familiar with our 2.0-litre four-cylinder engine? Well you can imagine what happens when you put two of those together."


      You may recall BenzBoost reported that the new motor would be a 4.0 liter V8 last year and in one of those reports stated the M177 would have more in common with the M270/M274 four cylinder engine family than it would with the M157 V8 currently used in the new 63 AMG models. The M133 in the new 45 AMG's is based on that four-cylinder engine family.

      One should not expect double the output of say a CLA45 AMG as that would put the C63 at 710 horsepower. One should expect the C63 to hit 710 horsepower with tuning relatively easily though unless Mercedes really undersizes the stock turbos. Regardless, the W205 C63 AMG is going to have plenty of tuning potential.

      To get a preview of the motor, check out the BenzBoost report from last year showing what one should expect out of the new M177 V8 motor. The motor will have Mercedes CAMTRONIC which is an answer to BMW's VALVETRONIC and have top mounted turbos. Basically it will be two M270/M274 four-cylinder engines put together resulting in a top mount turbo configuration. This likely will allow even easier and likely larger turbocharger upgrades than the M157 due to the turbos not being confined to a location with little room. Additionally, the shorter manifolds should reduce lag in a similar manner to the BMW N63/S63 design.

      It's interesting to see how far behind on this topic the mainstream automotive media is but it is nice that AMG has publicly commented on the 4.0 liter motor and what the basis for it will be.

      Source

      This article was originally published in forum thread: Motor Trend: 2015 Mercedes-Benz C63 AMG to Get 4.0L Twin-Turbo V-8 started by TT C6 View original post
      Comments 15 Comments
      1. leveraged sellout's Avatar
        leveraged sellout -
        If they don't call it the C55 I will be a bit upset. I can see why the new 63s are called as such, given that German companies have a tendency for referring to the engine in terms of absolute power levels, not pure displacement. E23 745i, etc. But calling the new one a C63 would be a bit silly, and I really hope they don't do that. Or maybe C60. That's got an interesting ring to it.

        Either way, I'm really excited for this engine. Its going to be a monster right out of the box, and if it takes extra boost like the S63, 700+ crank hp should be a walk in the park. That plus weight loss and RWD should make this thing a serious worry for the M3/4 and whatever Audi is planning on at the moment.
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by leveraged sellout Click here to enlarge
        If they don't call it the C55 I will be a bit upset.
        Calling it a C55 makes a lot of sense but the problem is they think Americans are stupid. Many will see C55 and think it's a step back to the C63 because the numbers are lower.
      1. leveraged sellout's Avatar
        leveraged sellout -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
        Calling it a C55 makes a lot of sense but the problem is they think Americans are stupid. Many will see C55 and think it's a step back to the C63 because the numbers are smaller.
        True...and they might be right. This is why we can't have nice things.
      1. 5soko's Avatar
        5soko -
        NICE! Honestly, this is gonna be badass.. The M3/M4 engine disappointed me, we all got a taste of the I6 direct injected turbo engines from bmw for over 6 years! Give us something new bmw! Sucks.

        They didnt call the 2014 a E55, this for sure wont be either.
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        The S55 at least is a step up from the N55/N54 IMO.

        I find this motor far more exciting though.

        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by 5soko Click here to enlarge
        They didnt call the 2014 a E55
        But it didn't have 5.5 liter of displacement...

        They can't call this a C40 after already doing the 45's. Additionally, 55 makes the most sense since the C63 is no longer sharing the E63 motor.
      1. 5soko's Avatar
        5soko -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
        The S55 at least is a step up from the N55/N54 IMO.

        I find this motor far more exciting though.



        But it didn't have 5.5 liter of displacement...

        They can't call this a C40 after already doing the 45's. Additionally, 55 makes the most sense since the C63 is no longer sharing the E63 motor.
        I wrote that wrong... What i meant to say was, they didnt call the 2014 E63 a E55..
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by 5soko Click here to enlarge
        I wrote that wrong... What i meant to say was, they didnt call the 2014 E63 a E55..
        It still made sense and the answer as well as the answer as to why.
      1. 5soko's Avatar
        5soko -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
        It still made sense and the answer as well as the answer as to why.
        2014 E63 being a 5.5L would think the old E55 badge would be back.. Makes no sense...
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by 5soko Click here to enlarge
        2014 E63 being a 5.5L would think the old E55 badge would be back.. Makes no sense...
        Oh I see what you mean with the M157. Yeah the reasoning by Mercedes was that whole people would think it would be a step back and since the hp and torque was up they decided to keep the numbers.

        The thing is with the C and E no longer sharing the motor it's going to get pretty odd now.
      1. 5soko's Avatar
        5soko -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
        Oh I see what you mean with the M157. Yeah the reasoning by Mercedes was that whole people would think it would be a step back and since the hp and torque was up they decided to keep the numbers.

        The thing is with the C and E no longer sharing the motor it's going to get pretty odd now.
        Yea, benz is taking a page from BMW now and making different AMG engines for diff model cars, instead of throwing that 6.3L in everything!
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by 5soko Click here to enlarge
        Yea, benz is taking a page from BMW now and making different AMG engines for diff model cars, instead of throwing that 6.3L in everything!
        It's not that as much as it is the C-Class with the M157 would just be absurd and they need a lighter motor for the GT sports car. Additionally, the M177 likely can now go in the SLK too.
      1. Bozo954's Avatar
        Bozo954 -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
        Oh I see what you mean with the M157. Yeah the reasoning by Mercedes was that whole people would think it would be a step back and since the hp and torque was up they decided to keep the numbers.

        The thing is with the C and E no longer sharing the motor it's going to get pretty odd now.
        Precisely.............that's kinda what I've noticed with the numbers. At some point MB decided to let the 63 be more an indication of the power levels than actual displacement.

        Of course, to that some might say what about the supercharged 5.5s from the early/mid 2000s E55s, for instance, that the 63 replaced? It had similar numbers. Again, the thought process evolved.

        And while we're on the topic of the M156 and AMG 63s' nomenclature, uh, short of gas mileage numbers that don't live up to today's CAFE standards.............was it really that bad to put 'em in all AMGs? Considering it can upgraded to M159 SLS levels, that is, around 620 hp/480 lb.ft.? Bring it on, dawg.

        Also, considering that it was International Performance Engine of the Year in 2009 and 2010, only to be replaced by a Ferrari V8 (2011) and the Berlinetta's V12 (2012)? Answer me that.

        I say we stop being dumbasses, start drilling for more of our own frickin crude, drop gas prices back to January 2009 levels ($1.80 - $1.90) or less, and bring back the damn M156 and M159. Not that $3.50-4.00 a gallon ever scared me; spent too many years in Europe, so wake me when it hits $10/gallon. (About $5 after most of my fellow Americans will $#@!in & moanin, thereby dropping prices right back down. Hah!)

        But I digress. Back to the M156.

        It is the world's and my favorite DTM engine for the street, but way more nasty @ 6.2 liters vs. 4.0 limited displacement in the DTM. Can't wait to drive it later today. I mean, come on.............370 lb.-ft. @ 2000 rpm? Just over 400 @ 3000? Yo, it idles @ 900-950!! Nasty beast.

        Last, but not least, on the new 4.0? My preference is clearly the 6.3, but if the 4.0 (or 5.5 for that matter) sounds right.....like "propa" AMG V8, pulls way way harder, yet can extract even more power and gets better gas mileage?

        I'll get over it. Might be crazy, but I ain't stupid.

        He gone!
      1. ChuckD05's Avatar
        ChuckD05 -
        bro, do u even stick shift? Click here to enlarge c63 would be so $#@!ing nasty if it was offered in manual , i would own one for sure
      1. ezec63's Avatar
        ezec63 -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Bozo954 Click here to enlarge
        Precisely.............that's kinda what I've noticed with the numbers. At some point MB decided to let the 63 be more an indication of the power levels than actual displacement.

        Of course, to that some might say what about the supercharged 5.5s from the early/mid 2000s E55s, for instance, that the 63 replaced? It had similar numbers. Again, the thought process evolved.

        And while we're on the topic of the M156 and AMG 63s' nomenclature, uh, short of gas mileage numbers that don't live up to today's CAFE standards.............was it really that bad to put 'em in all AMGs? Considering it can upgraded to M159 SLS levels, that is, around 620 hp/480 lb.ft.? Bring it on, dawg.

        Also, considering that it was International Performance Engine of the Year in 2009 and 2010, only to be replaced by a Ferrari V8 (2011) and the Berlinetta's V12 (2012)? Answer me that.

        I say we stop being dumbasses, start drilling for more of our own frickin crude, drop gas prices back to January 2009 levels ($1.80 - $1.90) or less, and bring back the damn M156 and M159. Not that $3.50-4.00 a gallon ever scared me; spent too many years in Europe, so wake me when it hits $10/gallon. (About $5 after most of my fellow Americans will $#@!in & moanin, thereby dropping prices right back down. Hah!)

        But I digress. Back to the M156.

        It is the world's and my favorite DTM engine for the street, but way more nasty @ 6.2 liters vs. 4.0 limited displacement in the DTM. Can't wait to drive it later today. I mean, come on.............370 lb.-ft. @ 2000 rpm? Just over 400 @ 3000? Yo, it idles @ 900-950!! Nasty beast.

        Last, but not least, on the new 4.0? My preference is clearly the 6.3, but if the 4.0 (or 5.5 for that matter) sounds right.....like "propa" AMG V8, pulls way way harder, yet can extract even more power and gets better gas mileage?

        I'll get over it. Might be crazy, but I ain't stupid.

        He gone!
        Lmao great post ! But really the m156 is a beast N/A when properly uncorked ! Really the only engine that can compare is the ls7 and other exotics for straight out N/A power. The s65 was a great motor for Motorsport but for the street the m156 takes the cake. Great throttle response, big torque everywhere, high redline for a big displacement motor and that sound !!

        I'm sure AMG will get this motor sounding right though can't be better then a n/a 11.3 compression v8. Power wise potential from bolt ons will most likely destroy the m156 we've seen what the 2.0 has done in the 45 with 400 hp with a stage 1 piggyback. If they use the same range of turbos this thing will be an absolute monster combined with lighter weight and a better chassis don't be surprised if this thing is considerably faster in everyway then the w204 c63. It's evolution it's supposed to get better from what they've learned in the 7+ years since it's been released. I wasn't considering this as a next car but the rwd announcement put it back in the running. I wouldn't mind if they kept the MCT as long as they figure out that stupid paddle delay. We shall see once everything is official and tested all speculation until then but it looks good
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Bozo954 Click here to enlarge
        Precisely.............that's kinda what I've noticed with the numbers. At some point MB decided to let the 63 be more an indication of the power levels than actual displacement.

        Of course, to that some might say what about the supercharged 5.5s from the early/mid 2000s E55s, for instance, that the 63 replaced? It had similar numbers. Again, the thought process evolved.

        And while we're on the topic of the M156 and AMG 63s' nomenclature, uh, short of gas mileage numbers that don't live up to today's CAFE standards.............was it really that bad to put 'em in all AMGs? Considering it can upgraded to M159 SLS levels, that is, around 620 hp/480 lb.ft.? Bring it on, dawg.

        Also, considering that it was International Performance Engine of the Year in 2009 and 2010, only to be replaced by a Ferrari V8 (2011) and the Berlinetta's V12 (2012)? Answer me that.

        I say we stop being dumbasses, start drilling for more of our own frickin crude, drop gas prices back to January 2009 levels ($1.80 - $1.90) or less, and bring back the damn M156 and M159. Not that $3.50-4.00 a gallon ever scared me; spent too many years in Europe, so wake me when it hits $10/gallon. (About $5 after most of my fellow Americans will $#@!in & moanin, thereby dropping prices right back down. Hah!)

        But I digress. Back to the M156.

        It is the world's and my favorite DTM engine for the street, but way more nasty @ 6.2 liters vs. 4.0 limited displacement in the DTM. Can't wait to drive it later today. I mean, come on.............370 lb.-ft. @ 2000 rpm? Just over 400 @ 3000? Yo, it idles @ 900-950!! Nasty beast.

        Last, but not least, on the new 4.0? My preference is clearly the 6.3, but if the 4.0 (or 5.5 for that matter) sounds right.....like "propa" AMG V8, pulls way way harder, yet can extract even more power and gets better gas mileage?

        I'll get over it. Might be crazy, but I ain't stupid.

        He gone!
        I hate to break it to you but the DTM 4.0 liter V8 has nothing in common with the M156 street motor other than being a V8. DTM is German Nascar.

        I agree the M156 is awesome.

        This M177 has a ton of potential to be great too.