But one of the best things about V12 MBs is their depreciation curves. That outrageously priced V12 MB doesn't stay too outrageously priced for long...

 

A big reason for the lowering of the tq with the NA engine is to mate it to the new 7 speed transmission. The max tq for that unit is 525 lb.-ft. the old SC 5.5 L unit would break that in short order with no place to grow from that. Meanwhile the new unit has 465 lb.-ft. While it won't give you similar grunt off the line, I have heard the new 7 speed unit makes it much better as a daily driver.

The new Sl63 technically doesn't have an automatic, they removed the torque converter & it is a 7 speed psuedo-manual unit

 

^ You're saying the reason that AMG went to all that trouble of designing their first ever ground-up motor was for a transmission??? I highly doubt that; not very sexy, so to speak. The reason the tq. is lower is that an n.a. motor will never have the tq. output of a roughly equivalently-sized blown motor. I suspect that AMG simply wanted to do its own bespoke motor and decided that it should be n.a. The fact that it mates to the 7-spd. auto is likely just a bonus (assuming the 7-spd. auto couldn't handle the tq. of the blown motor...I don't know). Also, why would the 7-spd. auto, alone, make the car "much better as a daily driver?" The tq. production of the blown motor probably makes the 5-spd. auto more than sufficient. Heck, my car is a fine daily driver with a 5-spd. auto, and it has nothing but average tq. The 7-spd. will likely make the car marginally quicker and return better fuel economy, but I just don't see how it greatly affects a car's daily driveability (and, I drove 2 different MBs with 7-spd. autos today).

 

No, I don't think they designed the motor for the transmission, it's that the transmission does not work with the SC'ed V8 as the transmission is rated to 525 lb.ft. & the SC engine delivered more than that in it's stock form.

As you have pointed out probably has to do with fuel economy (though a bit more difficult to tell given the new review method for MPG), but in general the response of the E owners who have gone from the 55 to the 63's on the MBZ board is that they are about the same acceleration wise, but the 63's are a bit smoother as an everyday driver because the gears are closer together and there is a bit less hunting during cruising & moderate acceleration. You can read about it on MBWorld.org.

 

That car looks better in person than on a video screen.



Still, it looks like they had Cadillac design the new car for them.

 

it is sorta ugly... especially the front... why did they do that

 

Losing it's elegance and gaining more EVO.

 

I think it should look better in real life, and in black.

 

That was my reaction, about the front. Similar to the C63, no? I guess it's their new "I'm a monster" look. I think they wanted more visual separation for the AMG version from the SL550.