2008 E63 vs 2013 E63
Discussion
Dropped my W211 E63 off for a service and the nice people at MB Warrington had arranged for me to take out a new E63. A brief review:
I prefer the looks of the older W211 models so didn't expect to be bowled over by the lines and boxiness, which I wasn't. Looked OK in grey with grey leather - first time I've seen an E63 with anything other than black. It looks aggressive on lower profile and slightly wider tyres than the W211, and this together with different suspension settings/components means the basic ride, even in comfort, is pretty harsh. Much harsher than the W211 and on a par with a friend's C63. Inside is new Merc, all angular and sharp - with average built quality. An Audi this is not.
Start it up and it's noisier than the W211 too. This becomes obtrusive almost as soon as you move off - a trait the old car never possessed, thankfully. I love the schizoid nature of the W211 as it's a quiet cruiser one minute and a dragster the next. I've heard E55 owners say the same about their cars. I'm sure all post 2010 cars are like this but be assured a quiet limo the E63 no longer is. Comfortable seats and all the gadgets, this one had B&O.
Disappointing so far to be honest.
Until you put your foot down, when the torque from the first of the two turbos thrusts you forward in a similar manner to the biturbo RS6. It's accompanied by a guttural exhaust note that's very deep and nowhere near the M5/3s tinny rasp. And how it puts the power down is extraordinary for a RWD car. On slightly damp roads just mash the pedal and no fuss - the car takes off. No wheelspin, slither or TC - nothing. Up to 100 about the same as an RS6 as well. It's very, very quick. And it handles very well, with exceptional steering feel. So quick, so much fun, so addictive. The car feels lighter than my W211 and the response from every interactive element of the driving experience is better.
So the E63 is now a racing car that's quite comfortable as opposed to a comfortable car that can race, which kind of pushes the whole concept of the thing into an area I'm not interested in. At the moment anyway.
In summary: It's a fairly ugly car with a poorly designed interior. It handles well, gets its huge power on the tarmac far better than any RWD car has a right to, and it's very, very quick. The one I drove has just been dropped to £67,000. If I had that money to hand would I buy it? No.
I prefer the looks of the older W211 models so didn't expect to be bowled over by the lines and boxiness, which I wasn't. Looked OK in grey with grey leather - first time I've seen an E63 with anything other than black. It looks aggressive on lower profile and slightly wider tyres than the W211, and this together with different suspension settings/components means the basic ride, even in comfort, is pretty harsh. Much harsher than the W211 and on a par with a friend's C63. Inside is new Merc, all angular and sharp - with average built quality. An Audi this is not.
Start it up and it's noisier than the W211 too. This becomes obtrusive almost as soon as you move off - a trait the old car never possessed, thankfully. I love the schizoid nature of the W211 as it's a quiet cruiser one minute and a dragster the next. I've heard E55 owners say the same about their cars. I'm sure all post 2010 cars are like this but be assured a quiet limo the E63 no longer is. Comfortable seats and all the gadgets, this one had B&O.
Disappointing so far to be honest.
Until you put your foot down, when the torque from the first of the two turbos thrusts you forward in a similar manner to the biturbo RS6. It's accompanied by a guttural exhaust note that's very deep and nowhere near the M5/3s tinny rasp. And how it puts the power down is extraordinary for a RWD car. On slightly damp roads just mash the pedal and no fuss - the car takes off. No wheelspin, slither or TC - nothing. Up to 100 about the same as an RS6 as well. It's very, very quick. And it handles very well, with exceptional steering feel. So quick, so much fun, so addictive. The car feels lighter than my W211 and the response from every interactive element of the driving experience is better.
So the E63 is now a racing car that's quite comfortable as opposed to a comfortable car that can race, which kind of pushes the whole concept of the thing into an area I'm not interested in. At the moment anyway.
In summary: It's a fairly ugly car with a poorly designed interior. It handles well, gets its huge power on the tarmac far better than any RWD car has a right to, and it's very, very quick. The one I drove has just been dropped to £67,000. If I had that money to hand would I buy it? No.
Interesting reading. I have a 2013 E63 and agree it's extremely quick but I can't say that I've really clicked with the car, not in the same way I did with my CLK63.
As you say, it's possibly too harsh for its own good and the quality is merely average. I've had mine for 9 months and have covered around 8k miles.
I find the throttle response very poor and am always surprised it doesn't come with a LSD as standard. It's not an easy car to take by the scruff of its neck and I often wish I'd gone for a late 6.2 E63 or even a C63. I think that's probably what I'll go for next time even if it means having an older car.
As you say, it's possibly too harsh for its own good and the quality is merely average. I've had mine for 9 months and have covered around 8k miles.
I find the throttle response very poor and am always surprised it doesn't come with a LSD as standard. It's not an easy car to take by the scruff of its neck and I often wish I'd gone for a late 6.2 E63 or even a C63. I think that's probably what I'll go for next time even if it means having an older car.
Mosdef said:
Interesting reading. I have a 2013 E63 and agree it's extremely quick but I can't say that I've really clicked with the car, not in the same way I did with my CLK63.
As you say, it's possibly too harsh for its own good and the quality is merely average. I've had mine for 9 months and have covered around 8k miles.
I find the throttle response very poor and am always surprised it doesn't come with a LSD as standard. It's not an easy car to take by the scruff of its neck and I often wish I'd gone for a late 6.2 E63 or even a C63. I think that's probably what I'll go for next time even if it means having an older car.
If you fancy swapping let me know! As you say, it's possibly too harsh for its own good and the quality is merely average. I've had mine for 9 months and have covered around 8k miles.
I find the throttle response very poor and am always surprised it doesn't come with a LSD as standard. It's not an easy car to take by the scruff of its neck and I often wish I'd gone for a late 6.2 E63 or even a C63. I think that's probably what I'll go for next time even if it means having an older car.
I was actually thinking about this the other day. We've done 10,000 miles in 8 months in our 2013 E63. Like Mosdef, I've not bonded with it in the same way I did the C63.
I also cannot believe there is no diff on the standard car. I asked Chris Harris what the car would be like without a diff and he said something along the lines of "undriveable". He was right.
Unlike the OP I would have to disagree with its ability to get it's power down. It struggles for traction a lot of the time. Even in 3rd and 4th, though very rarely does it flash the TC warning light at you even though I know power is being cut to the driven wheels. This is something I have noticed more frequently with modern cars; they are increasingly using the electronics to limit torque in certain scenarios. For example you don't get full power if you mash the pedal at a junction with lock applied. You don't get any TC flash or anything, but you don't get full power either. After driving the car for some time you get the feeling that the power output is constantly being decided not by you the driver, but by the electronics. It's left me feeling a bit cold towards the car.
Regarding the build quality: I'll take my 100% reliable C63 (70k miles) and E63 (10k so far) with decent interior over the absolute abortion of a car that was my AudiB7 RS4 Avant. That car was by far the most unreliable, atrociously engineered car I have ever owned. And I used to have an MGF....
I will never buy another VAG product as long as I live (ok, maybe another Porsche or two). Audi might make what some people consider nice feeling interiors (I don't like them personally) but their engineering is seriously lacking in my experience.
And yes, after the peach of an engine in the C63 the E63 does feel a bit laggy.
Jack
I also cannot believe there is no diff on the standard car. I asked Chris Harris what the car would be like without a diff and he said something along the lines of "undriveable". He was right.
Unlike the OP I would have to disagree with its ability to get it's power down. It struggles for traction a lot of the time. Even in 3rd and 4th, though very rarely does it flash the TC warning light at you even though I know power is being cut to the driven wheels. This is something I have noticed more frequently with modern cars; they are increasingly using the electronics to limit torque in certain scenarios. For example you don't get full power if you mash the pedal at a junction with lock applied. You don't get any TC flash or anything, but you don't get full power either. After driving the car for some time you get the feeling that the power output is constantly being decided not by you the driver, but by the electronics. It's left me feeling a bit cold towards the car.
Regarding the build quality: I'll take my 100% reliable C63 (70k miles) and E63 (10k so far) with decent interior over the absolute abortion of a car that was my AudiB7 RS4 Avant. That car was by far the most unreliable, atrociously engineered car I have ever owned. And I used to have an MGF....
I will never buy another VAG product as long as I live (ok, maybe another Porsche or two). Audi might make what some people consider nice feeling interiors (I don't like them personally) but their engineering is seriously lacking in my experience.
And yes, after the peach of an engine in the C63 the E63 does feel a bit laggy.
Jack
jackwood said:
I was actually thinking about this the other day. We've done 10,000 miles in 8 months in our 2013 E63. Like Mosdef, I've not bonded with it in the same way I did the C63.
I also cannot believe there is no diff on the standard car. I asked Chris Harris what the car would be like without a diff and he said something along the lines of "undriveable". He was right.
Unlike the OP I would have to disagree with its ability to get it's power down. It struggles for traction a lot of the time. Even in 3rd and 4th, though very rarely does it flash the TC warning light at you even though I know power is being cut to the driven wheels. This is something I have noticed more frequently with modern cars; they are increasingly using the electronics to limit torque in certain scenarios. For example you don't get full power if you mash the pedal at a junction with lock applied. You don't get any TC flash or anything, but you don't get full power either. After driving the car for some time you get the feeling that the power output is constantly being decided not by you the driver, but by the electronics. It's left me feeling a bit cold towards the car.
Regarding the build quality: I'll take my 100% reliable C63 (70k miles) and E63 (10k so far) with decent interior over the absolute abortion of a car that was my AudiB7 RS4 Avant. That car was by far the most unreliable, atrociously engineered car I have ever owned. And I used to have an MGF....
I will never buy another VAG product as long as I live (ok, maybe another Porsche or two). Audi might make what some people consider nice feeling interiors (I don't like them personally) but their engineering is seriously lacking in my experience.
And yes, after the peach of an engine in the C63 the E63 does feel a bit laggy.
Jack
You and I are having the same traction issues; I enjoyed mine last summer when I took delivery, but winter driving has just been a pain in the arse. Frequently the car feels as if it's being strangled and I find the electronics to be quite clumsy. Far too much power gets wasted through inside rear wheelspin, particularly when pulling out of junctions, even in the dry! I find the power delivery so binary that I have little confidence in the car when TC is turned off, which isn't something I've felt before. I wonder whether an M5 would be any better? I also cannot believe there is no diff on the standard car. I asked Chris Harris what the car would be like without a diff and he said something along the lines of "undriveable". He was right.
Unlike the OP I would have to disagree with its ability to get it's power down. It struggles for traction a lot of the time. Even in 3rd and 4th, though very rarely does it flash the TC warning light at you even though I know power is being cut to the driven wheels. This is something I have noticed more frequently with modern cars; they are increasingly using the electronics to limit torque in certain scenarios. For example you don't get full power if you mash the pedal at a junction with lock applied. You don't get any TC flash or anything, but you don't get full power either. After driving the car for some time you get the feeling that the power output is constantly being decided not by you the driver, but by the electronics. It's left me feeling a bit cold towards the car.
Regarding the build quality: I'll take my 100% reliable C63 (70k miles) and E63 (10k so far) with decent interior over the absolute abortion of a car that was my AudiB7 RS4 Avant. That car was by far the most unreliable, atrociously engineered car I have ever owned. And I used to have an MGF....
I will never buy another VAG product as long as I live (ok, maybe another Porsche or two). Audi might make what some people consider nice feeling interiors (I don't like them personally) but their engineering is seriously lacking in my experience.
And yes, after the peach of an engine in the C63 the E63 does feel a bit laggy.
Jack
The only long term VAG experience I have are a 2000 A8 and a 2004 A8, both of which were unbelievably well screwed together. I can't comment much on A4s, A6s etc, but wasn't impressed by the S5 I test drove before I bought my CLK.
Disappointingly, I think most cars in this sector now have too many electronics and quality has generally gone downhill; I went out in an almost new BMW 535i recently and whilst the ride was nicely damped and ride generally good, the build quality was crap and the engine was unremarkable.
jackwood said:
Unlike the OP I would have to disagree with its ability to get it's power down.
Have to admit I was surprised by how good it seemed, but this was in comparison to my 08 E63 on winter tyres. It slithers and flashes the TC at the slightest hint of traction loss. Replacing the winters for Conti sports next week. The new E63 had newish wider summers on roads I'm not familiar with so I won't have quite stamped on the gas with normal ferocity. Possibly.jackwood said:
Regarding the build quality: I'll take my 100% reliable C63 (70k miles) and E63 (10k so far) with decent interior over the absolute abortion of a car that was my AudiB7 RS4 Avant.
I was comparing the interior to the '10 RS6 - a contemporary. The MB was miles behind. Only once been in a B7 RS4 and the interior seemed dated. But then it would, as this was only 2 years ago.jackwood said:
And yes, after the peach of an engine in the C63 the E63 does feel a bit laggy.
Didn't notice much but then I was only out for 40 mins. It does seem consensus so far is it's not that good, why do all the reviews rate it so?
goldblum said:
Didn't notice much but then I was only out for 40 mins.
It does seem consensus so far is it's not that good, why do all the reviews rate it so?
I'm a bit stumped by the reviews but am inclined to think that journalists have short memories and don't spend as much time as they should behind the wheel. Maybe they have lower/more realistic expectations of FI cars?It does seem consensus so far is it's not that good, why do all the reviews rate it so?
Or also that (the majority of) journalists don't actually know what they're talking about. As an Engineer in the automotive industry, it is shocking how wrong journo's can get it. My advice: take reviews with a pinch of salt and try a car for yourself.
ETA - sorry for taking the thread off-topic. I've also driven the later 5.5L TT engined car, albeit in a CLS63. It certainly had lots of go and made a lovely big-V8 woofle at low revs, but it was definitely not as exciting (bombastic is the word I used at the time) as the NA 6.2L V8.
ETA - sorry for taking the thread off-topic. I've also driven the later 5.5L TT engined car, albeit in a CLS63. It certainly had lots of go and made a lovely big-V8 woofle at low revs, but it was definitely not as exciting (bombastic is the word I used at the time) as the NA 6.2L V8.
Edited by ghibbett on Monday 10th March 14:26
ghibbett said:
Or also that (the majority of) journalists don't actually know what they're talking about. As an Engineer in the automotive industry, it is shocking how wrong journo's can get it. My advice: take reviews with a pinch of salt and try a car for yourself.
ETA - sorry for taking the thread off-topic. I've also driven the later 5.5L TT engined car, albeit in a CLS63. It certainly had lots of go and made a lovely big-V8 woofle at low revs, but it was definitely not as exciting (bombastic is the word I used at the time) as the NA 6.2L V8.
^^^^^ This (in general I suspect).ETA - sorry for taking the thread off-topic. I've also driven the later 5.5L TT engined car, albeit in a CLS63. It certainly had lots of go and made a lovely big-V8 woofle at low revs, but it was definitely not as exciting (bombastic is the word I used at the time) as the NA 6.2L V8.
Edited by ghibbett on Monday 10th March 14:26
ghibbett said:
Or also that (the majority of) journalists don't actually know what they're talking about. As an Engineer in the automotive industry, it is shocking how wrong journo's can get it. My advice: take reviews with a pinch of salt and try a car for yourself.
ETA - sorry for taking the thread off-topic. I've also driven the later 5.5L TT engined car, albeit in a CLS63. It certainly had lots of go and made a lovely big-V8 woofle at low revs, but it was definitely not as exciting (bombastic is the word I used at the time) as the NA 6.2L V8.
^^^^^ This (in general I suspect).ETA - sorry for taking the thread off-topic. I've also driven the later 5.5L TT engined car, albeit in a CLS63. It certainly had lots of go and made a lovely big-V8 woofle at low revs, but it was definitely not as exciting (bombastic is the word I used at the time) as the NA 6.2L V8.
Edited by ghibbett on Monday 10th March 14:26
I think it's that the 'feel' and power delivery of the twin turbo are nowhere near as good as the M156 engine. My biggest gripe is the throttle response.
For me, I think the quality of the interior isn't good enough and the ride is a bit harsh compared to previous AMGs I've owned/driven.
Shame really because I've always loved AMGs but think this might be my last.
For me, I think the quality of the interior isn't good enough and the ride is a bit harsh compared to previous AMGs I've owned/driven.
Shame really because I've always loved AMGs but think this might be my last.
Mosdef said:
I think it's that the 'feel' and power delivery of the twin turbo are nowhere near as good as the M156 engine. My biggest gripe is the throttle response.
For me, I think the quality of the interior isn't good enough and the ride is a bit harsh compared to previous AMGs I've owned/driven.
Shame really because I've always loved AMGs but think this might be my last.
Interior on my ML feels really nice and solid - is the E63 that much different or am I being less picky? For me, I think the quality of the interior isn't good enough and the ride is a bit harsh compared to previous AMGs I've owned/driven.
Shame really because I've always loved AMGs but think this might be my last.
I haven't been in an ML for any length of time but when I sat in one it seemed ok. It's only after living with it for a couple of months that I could be sure.
My general comment is that the interior is fine for a £30-40k car but not up to the job on a £70k+ car. The big wheels/poor ride cause too many buzzing noises and rattles. It's certainly not bad enough to reject and I haven't had time to take it to MB but it irritates me every time I get in the car!
My general comment is that the interior is fine for a £30-40k car but not up to the job on a £70k+ car. The big wheels/poor ride cause too many buzzing noises and rattles. It's certainly not bad enough to reject and I haven't had time to take it to MB but it irritates me every time I get in the car!
Gassing Station | Mercedes | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff