Mercedez Benz News Rumorpile - AMG C63 To Lose V8 in Favor of Four-Cylinder Hybrid

[Drew Dowdell]

Rumor has it that the next AMG C63 will be the first of a number of models to ditch their V8 in favor of 4-cylinder hybrid power. According to Autocar, the C63 could also lose a rear-wheel drive option, going instead with standard all-wheel drive. 

The engine would be an electrified version of the new M139 turbocharged 2.0-liter.  In it's most powerful current form, it is the most powerful 4-cylinder in production anywhere putting out 416 horsepower and 369 lb-ft of torque, and that's without any electric boosting.  The engine was engineered to be mounted transversely or longitudinally and also with an eye on hybridization.

For the C63, the M139 engine would adopt a 48 volt starter motor similar to the one used in the CLS 53 4Matic.  On that car, the motor provides an additional 22 hp and 184 lb-ft of torque, however in the C63, it would be tuned for even more power to reach up to a total system horsepower over 500. 

One main advantage to this setup would be a significant reduction in weight over the front axle.  Additionally, the engine/motor combination has a lower center of gravity, that would be expected to improve handling and control. 

Moving the C63 to a hybrid powertrain is consistent with Mercedes' desire to reduce fleet CO2 emissions.

View full article

[ccap41]

Extreme disappointment. 

[G. David Felt]

44 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

Extreme disappointment. 

What?????? No EXCITEMENT at 500 plus horse power in Hybrid form? Some people say that is the ultimate power train.

[ccap41]

12 minutes ago, dfelt said:

What?????? No EXCITEMENT at 500 plus horse power in Hybrid form? Some people say that is the ultimate power train.

Zero.

AMG V8's are glorious. 

[smk4565]

This will be interesting and a gamble if they go this route.  I don’t know if people want to pay $90k for a turbo 4 hybrid.  I think if they use the inline 6 with electric boost for over 500 hp then no one would complain because it is sill 6 cylinders and smoother.  Could pay off if the C63 is a 500 hp car getting 30 mpg.

[ocnblu]

4 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

a 500 hp car getting 30 mpg

Even if that becomes true on paper... it will never happen at the same time.  And V8 noise is nirvana to a car enthusiast.  Anything less is just... less.

[riviera74]

2 hours ago, ocnblu said:

Even if that becomes true on paper... it will never happen at the same time.  And V8 noise is nirvana to a car enthusiast.  Anything less is just... less.

Is an I6 a joke by comparison?  That is what MB/AMG should do instead.

[ocnblu]

9 hours ago, riviera74 said:

Is an I6 a joke by comparison?  That is what MB/AMG should do instead.

I6 engines are great too

[ccap41]

12 hours ago, riviera74 said:

Is an I6 a joke by comparison?  That is what MB/AMG should do instead.

Isn't BMW's M3/4 an inline 6 again? 

Just went to their site and yes, it is an I6 again. 

I'm not a huge fan of any 6 cylinder noise but it is worlds better than any I4. 

I6 isn't terrible but it is no V8. 

[G. David Felt]

Just now, ccap41 said:

Isn't BMW's M3/4 an inline 6 again? 

Just went to their site and yes, it is an I6 again. 

Maybe MB and BMW are about to flip roles of leadership in engines.

 

[ccap41]

5 minutes ago, dfelt said:

Maybe MB and BMW are about to flip roles of leadership in engines.

 

I don't know. They're all going to be turbo 4's and turbo inline 6's, I believe. Every top model engine in this class is pretty spectacular from the TT3.6 in the former ATS-V to the TT4.0 V8 in the Mercedes. 

[smk4565]

V8s are dying every year, and Mercedes is usually a trendsetter not a holder on.   Porsche Boxster/Cayman are 4 cylinder only now and they are still fast.  We will probably see a 4 cylinder is a volume engine of full size crossovers in the next few years.  It is just how it goes.  

Personally I’d rather see an inline six C63, but we don’t know what they will come up with.

[ccap41]

22 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

V8s are dying every year, and Mercedes is usually a trendsetter not a holder on.   Porsche Boxster/Cayman are 4 cylinder only now and they are still fast.  We will probably see a 4 cylinder is a volume engine of full size crossovers in the next few years.  It is just how it goes.  

Personally I’d rather see an inline six C63, but we don’t know what they will come up with.

Not the whole 718 lineup is 4-cylinder-only. Only the two lowest trims. 

[surreal1272]

23 hours ago, smk4565 said:

V8s are dying every year, and Mercedes is usually a trendsetter not a holder on.   Porsche Boxster/Cayman are 4 cylinder only now and they are still fast.  We will probably see a 4 cylinder is a volume engine of full size crossovers in the next few years.  It is just how it goes.  

Personally I’d rather see an inline six C63, but we don’t know what they will come up with.

“Not a holder on”? Is that why they hung on to that V12 for so long (something you were singing praises over not too long ago)?

[smk4565]

6 hours ago, surreal1272 said:

“Not a holder on”? Is that why they hung on to that V12 for so long (something you were singing praises over not too long ago)?

That engine had a longer than usual run from them, due to customer demand.  They could have killed the V12 five years ago but I think it is good that they kept it as an option.  That didn’t stop them from introducing new V8s, since that V12 went into service AMG had the 5.4 supercharged V8, the 6.3 V8, 5.5 liter bi-turbo and the current 4.0 bi-turbo.  They kept moving forward.

[surreal1272]

19 hours ago, smk4565 said:

That engine had a longer than usual run from them, due to customer demand.  They could have killed the V12 five years ago but I think it is good that they kept it as an option.  That didn’t stop them from introducing new V8s, since that V12 went into service AMG had the 5.4 supercharged V8, the 6.3 V8, 5.5 liter bi-turbo and the current 4.0 bi-turbo.  They kept moving forward.

“Demand”. Whatever excuse floats that hollow boat. 
 

 

[USA-1]

On 10/17/2019 at 12:53 PM, ccap41 said:

Extreme disappointment. 

Thought you were a fan of the small displacement engines?  

On 10/11/2019 at 10:23 AM, ccap41 said:

I'm not sure why people are still afraid of a smaller displacement turbo engine. 

Do you remember stating that 10 days ago about the 2.7T in the Silverado that I don't agree with GM for using in it? 

Edited October 21, 2019 by USA-1

[ccap41]

18 hours ago, USA-1 said:

Thought you were a fan of the small displacement engines?  

Do you remember stating that 10 days ago about the 2.7T in the Silverado that I don't agree with GM for using in it? 

I don't care about the displacement and fear of it blowing up on me or not being able to handle the duties it's designed for. 

I just love AMG V8's more than most anything else. 

If you were honest and simply said, "I just want to hear a V8" rather than trying to say the 2.7T can't do truck things, I'd understand. 

[USA-1]

2 hours ago, ccap41 said:

I don't care about the displacement and fear of it blowing up on me or not being able to handle the duties it's designed for. 

I just love AMG V8's more than most anything else. 

If you were honest and simply said, "I just want to hear a V8" rather than trying to say the 2.7T can't do truck things, I'd understand. 

 

Oh I was honest and said exactly what I thought. I never stated that the 2.7T would blow up in the Silverado. I stated that it has to work too hard to pull the weight of a full-size truck, just like the Ford EB engines and they get lack luster fuel mileage because of that. Turbos and the torture they go through are enough in a car, but in a full-size truck is a whole nother level of torture. I do love the sound of both of my LS V8's and I stated that as well

Edited October 22, 2019 by USA-1

[ccap41]

Yeah, turbos have never been designed for serious truck work, have they? 

[balthazar]

Point made about turbos/trucks.... but of course the vehicle pictured also has a massive displacement engine. My brother has an older 6-cyl Mack and it’s a 632 CI.

[Drew Dowdell]

I think we're going to see a bigger and bigger reliance on hybrid technology in order to maintain power figures from smaller engines.  Lincoln is doing this with the Aviator too. 

[USA-1]

1 hour ago, ccap41 said:

Yeah, turbos have never been designed for serious truck work, have they? 

Ha now you're way out in the weeds dude. And talk about a large displacement turbo diesel engine. I'm talking about a very small displacement 2.7T gas I4 in a 6k lb pickup truck, not a tractor trailer with a huge 12L turbo diesel I6. I think you're smart enough to get that. Again, "No Replacement for Displacement".

16 minutes ago, balthazar said:

Point made about turbos/trucks.... but of course the vehicle pictured also has a massive displacement engine. My brother has an older 6-cyl Mack and it’s a 632 CI.

Exactly! Apples to Oranges...

[ccap41]

Massive displacement engine that only has to move ...ohhhh 80,000lbs... 

12L engine is roughly 4.4 times the displacement of a 2.7L engine.

2.7L engine in a 5,000 lb truck

12L in a 20,000 lb truck

The ratio isn't all that far off. 

[USA-1]

Apples and Oranges...huge tractor trailer turbo Diesel that was specifically designed to haul 10's of thousands of lbs. to a 4 banger turbo Gasoline full-size pickup truck that wasn't really designed to haul anything other than it's own two axles. That's why GM makes DMax diesels for all of their trucks Colorado, 1500 and 2500/3500, 4500/5500. The 2.7T gasser is strictly offered to appease the EPA, even GM engineers know it's ridiculous.