Wednesday 24th June 2009

S-Express: New S63 And S65 AMGs Revealed

Pics and full tech details of Merc's facelifted super-limousines

---

Spot the difference: this is the S63 AMG...

Mercedes revealed pictures of the facelifted S-class back in April, but it has waited until now to reveal details of its AMG siblings - the S63 AMG and the S65 AMG.

Mechanical changes are minimal to both drivetrains, but AMG has squeezed around three per cent better fuel consumption and C02 emissions from both the mighty 6208cc V8 in the S63 and the 5980cc twin-turbo V12 of the S65.

Worry not, though; power and performance are broadly unchanged, so while the AMG boys will leave you with a little more change in your pockets at the pump, the chauffeur still has enough poke under his right foot to cause your glass of Cristal to empty its contents all over your Saville Row suit.

...while this is the S65. Night and day, isn't it?

With 518bhp at 6800rpm and 465lb ft at 5200rpm, the naturally aspirated V8 in the S63 AMG is capable of reaching 60mph in 4.5sec on the way to an electronically limited 155mph.

The twin-turbo V12 kicks somewhat harder, with 603bhp between 4800rpm and 5100rpm and 738lb ft of torque that, as Mercedes rather coyly points out, is 'reduced from 885 to 738lb ft out of consideration for the drivetrain'. Traction issues mean that getting to 60mph still takes 4.4sec, but the S65 will power on to a (still limited) 186mph top end.

Styling changes are discreet, but the AMG S-classes both get the new headlamp and 'arrowhead' grille treatments seen on the rest of the S-class range, while the AMG cars get LED daytime-running lights at the front and restyled rear light clusters (again LED-powered).

Torque in the S65 is 'limited' to 738lb ft

Both cars ride on 20-inch alloys with 255/35 R20 tyres at the front and 275/35 R20s at the rear. The S65 gets the nattier wheels, however, a set of five twin-spoke items in titanium grey with a mirror finish.

Other differences between the two AMG models include subtly different quad exhausts and a more imposing twin-louvre grille on the S65.

The cars go on sale in Germany this month, but won't hit UK dealers until September. German pricing is €115,700 (£99,000) for the S63 AMG and €185,900 (£160,000) for the S65. UK prices are likely to be near-identical.

S63 gets quad exhausts...	...while S65 gets, er, slightly different ones

 

 

[willcrookz]

'738lb ft of torque that, as Mercedes rather coyly points out, is 'reduced from 885 to 738lb ft'

[pSyCoSiS]

I love these motors.

They're huge - but still give impressive 0-60 times!

Quicker than most supercars, and bigger than a house!

Class if it's own.

[jet1987]

Maybe they limited the torque because it was actually turning the world underneath it wheels........

[900T-R]

Um, I used that 'S-Express' headline many moons ago for my very first roadtest - of the 1998 (forgot the W number, but it's the sleek one that came after the W140 'Fat Bertha') S500.

[GTEYE]

Saw an S65 Biturbo on the M11 yesterday - I can certainly vouch for the torque - it was was driving in a spirited fashion - once the traffic cleared it pretty much just disappeared over the horizon. Impressive stuff for one so big!

[GPT]

£61k extra for the S65 compared to the S63? Big bucks.

[Chris-R]

900T-R said:

Um, I used that 'S-Express' headline many moons ago for my very first roadtest - of the 1998 (forgot the W number, but it's the sleek one that came after the W140 'Fat Bertha') S500.

We've recycled it to help PH meet our latest green targets!

[Jenny Tills]

This may be a silly question but why dont Mercedes make the gearboxes etc stronger to take this torque?
It seems to be the same story for the past 6 years at least. I can see the marketing logic (but I don't agree with it) in lesser models eg if you want to go this fast you must spend x amount more on this car but as these are the flagships why limit them like this?
Im sure the 0-60 times wouldn't differ at all but in gear times would be better and maybe it would be better on fuel?

Edited by Jenny Tills on Wednesday 24th June 13:07

[G0ldfysh]

Epic, such impressive cars to watch on the road, had one keep up with me while i was going for a full emergency start from about 30 into a NSL, damn thing stayed welded to my boot lid before pulling out and making me feel like i had found reverse on the dual carriageway. Very impressive bloke driving looked pretty chuffed as well.

[Riggers]

Chris-R said:

900T-R said:

Um, I used that 'S-Express' headline many moons ago for my very first roadtest - of the 1998 (forgot the W number, but it's the sleek one that came after the W140 'Fat Bertha') S500.

We've recycled it to help PH meet our latest green targets!

Besides, who can resist such a cheesy headline?

[ZesPak]

GPT said:

£61k extra for the S65 compared to the S63? Big bucks.

That IS a big premium

Want one tough, in black please, with lots of chrome bits (but maybe black alloys)

[davidpn]

GPT said:

£61k extra for the S65 compared to the S63? Big bucks.

This has always amused me about S63 and S65. Surely the only reason you buy an S65 is because you CAN afford it. The real world difference between the two cars must be negligible. Awesome machines both though.

[Mastiff]

Mastiff said:

Drove an S65 Limo around Thruxton in the pouring rain last year. What a hoot!

Edited because the swear filter missed something.....

[derestrictor]

davidpn said:

The real world difference between the two cars must be negligible.

Nope: anything badged 65AMG and with the mechanicals to back it up will massacre - and I mean pulverise - the V8 siblings; s/c 55 and now, n/a 63s.

[mpm1987]

Savage, what a beast!!
Yet it still amuses me how they build the engine, and limit the torque?
More R&D time must be able to create a box which could hold the power? Surely if youre paying that much for the car, if Merc were to add £10k onto the price, they wouldnt question it?

[tombstone]

funny thing is I work for an MB dealer... I was told that they limited the torque because on dry day, with sticky tyres, 'full bore' standing starts distorted the road wheels!! SL65's were prone to wheels cracking....

[Mr Whippy]

Glad they have kept nice lights on this one!

The E-class looks so turd in comparison... worth going for the S on looks alone... maybe that is their plan

[ZesPak]

derestrictor said:

davidpn said:

The real world difference between the two cars must be negligible.

Nope: anything badged 65AMG and with the mechanicals to back it up will massacre - and I mean pulverise - the V8 siblings; s/c 55 and now, n/a 63s.

hmmm not in 0-60

Wonder what they're both capable of when delimited.

[Henry Hawthorne]

S65 is very expensive.

[900T-R]

Indeed, there are days on which I don't have £160K in my back pocket.