Cherokee SRT8 Forum banner

Jeep vs ML63 AMG opinion

9K views 38 replies 18 participants last post by  danman_s 
#1 ·
Saw a black 2007 ML63 on the road today. Beautiful...midsize suv, and comparable in a lot of ways to the SRT. I checked mbusa.com, and was almost disappointed to see it had 503 hp, but then, only 4.8 0-60. I know a little about some of the other amgs, and the car versions tend to run in the low to mid 4s. Is it the weight and the gearing of that 7 speed that limits it. For $86,000 and 503 horses, you'd think it would give us a real run.
 
#3 ·
tommyg said:
Saw a black 2007 ML63 on the road today. Beautiful...midsize suv, and comparable in a lot of ways to the SRT. I checked mbusa.com, and was almost disappointed to see it had 503 hp, but then, only 4.8 0-60. I know a little about some of the other amgs, and the car versions tend to run in the low to mid 4s. Is it the weight and the gearing of that 7 speed that limits it. For $86,000 and 503 horses, you'd think it would give us a real run.

Most definitley the weight - same thing with the Range HSE supercharged - lots of ponies but too much weight.
 
#7 ·
I doubt those are conservative numbers, but we will see. Is this a naturally aspirated, or FI engine? If FI, lag could account for less low end torque and HP and lower 0-60 times. I also agree that gearing, tires, and weight (in that order) will effect the 0-60 times. Regardless, for 83K, think of the permutations....2 SRT8s and change, Heavily modded SRT8 and 20K to spare, an SRT8 and a standard corvette, a Zo6 and a jeep Liberty for off weather, a Viper...need I go on?
 
#8 · (Edited)
Why would you doubt the numbers are conservative? Mercedes has a history of being conservative with their numbers. Look at the facts: The ML500 weighs 4795lbs. The SRT8 weighs 4850lbs. The ML63 will likely end up weighing about the same. Same weight yet the ML63 gets a solid 80hp boost over the SRT8 as well as an extra 45lb ft of torque. It doesn't end there though. The ML63 also gets two more gears to use this power. Net result? ML63 is going to be quicker than the SRT8 and by default the new king of the performance SUV hill. You really think DCX's german leadership would've settled for anything else?

There's nothing wrong with the ML63 being quicker. It is after all much more expensive and hey its still a DCX product.
 
#9 ·
Dave said:
Why would you doubt the numbers are conservative? Mercedes has a history of being conservative with their numbers. The ML weighs the same as the grand cherokee. Add more power and more gears to use that power and you've got a vehicle thats going to be quicker than our vehicles.

There's nothing wrong with that of course as the ML is a great deal more expensive, and hey its still a DCX product.
More gears = sluggish
 
#11 ·
#12 · (Edited)
Black_SRT8 said:
Nice try:rolleyes: You would be a dismal lawyer ;) It saves .3 seconds on the 0-60 when compared to the same base model.

Moreover, the SRT Engineers chose not to implement a 6-speed transmission on the SRT8 GC because it would slow the vehicle. Search the chat sessions, and previous posts on this board, you will find the truth...
Why is that? Because I provide proof whereas you provide only hot air? ;)

It shaves up to .3 seconds compared to the same model with a 5 speed transmission. 6 speed auto huh? To my knowledge DCX has only just now started offering a 6 speed auto transmission and only on 6 cylinder models. I seriously doubt a 6 speed auto was ever in the running for the SRT8. I'll look but I would love it if you would show me these comments you claim were made by a DCX engineer. Perhaps you're referring to a 6 speed manual? That would make more sense but wouldn't be topical in this debate about performance differences between automatic transmissions.

A properly designed 7 speed auto can be made to perform better than a 5 speed. This advantage, along with the 80hp/45lb ft power advantage enjoyed by the ML63, means it will be quicker.
 
#14 ·
Dave said:
Why is that? Because I provide proof whereas you provide only hot air? ;)

It shaves up to .3 seconds compared to the same model with a 5 speed transmission. 6 speed auto huh? To my knowledge DCX has only just now started offering a 6 speed auto transmission and only on 6 cylinder models. I seriously doubt a 6 speed auto was ever in the running for the SRT8. I'll look but I would love it if you would show me these comments you claim were made by a DCX engineer. Perhaps you're referring to a 6 speed manual? That would make more sense but wouldn't be topical in this debate about performance differences between automatic transmissions.

A properly designed 7 speed auto can be made to perform better than a 5 speed. This advantage, along with the 80hp/45lb ft power advantage enjoyed by the ML63, means it will be quicker.
Post hoc ergo propter hoc.

Are you generalizing the ML63's performance results to all vehicles and components? Quite noobish.
 
#15 · (Edited)
Black_SRT8 said:
Post hoc ergo propter hoc.

Are you generalizing the ML63's performance results to all vehicles and components? Quite noobish.
I don't see how "Post hoc ergo propter hoc" applies here. The MLs advantages afford it better performance. There is a corrolation between more power and more opportunity to use that power and rate of acceleration.



What affects a vehicles rate of accleration? Weight, Drag coefficient, Power (hp and torque throughout the rev range), ability to use that power (7 speed auto > 5 speed auto), and ability to put that power to the ground (awd). Agreed?

Vehicle A (ML) and Vehicle B (SRT8):

Both have similar drag coefficients. Both have AWD. Both weigh the same. Vehicle A has more power. Vehicle A has more opportunity to use this power (as evidenced by the mercedes press release and review I posted stating that the 7 speed auto provides superior performance compared to the 5 speed auto - which our vehicles use). It is a perfectly reasonable assumption that Vehicle A will be geared aggressively as Vehicle B has been. Therefore it is reasonable to assume that Vehicle A will be quicker.

Convinced yet?
 
#16 ·
Dave said:
I don't see how "Post hoc ergo propter hoc" applies here. The MLs advantages afford it better performance. There is a corrolation between more power and more opportunity to use that power and rate of acceleration.



What affects a vehicles rate of accleration? Weight, Drag coefficient, Power (hp and torque throughout the rev range), ability to use that power (7 speed auto > 5 speed auto), and ability to put that power to the ground (awd). Agreed?

Vehicle A (ML) and Vehicle B (SRT8):

Both have similar drag coefficients. Both have AWD. Both weigh the same. Vehicle A has more power. Vehicle A has more opportunity to use this power (as evidenced by the mercedes press release and review I posted stating that the 7 speed auto provides superior performance compared to the 5 speed auto - which our vehicles use). It is a perfectly reasonable assumption that Vehicle A will be geared aggressively as Vehicle B has been. Therefore it is reasonable to assume that Vehicle A will be quicker.

Convinced yet?
You are correct, Dave. In fact, you should join the SRT Team, and teach them a thing or two.

Actually, Team SRT has several 6 and 7 speed transmissions at their disposal, and they chose to implement the 5 speed, which results desired ratios, reduced weight, and torque optimization.

Do you know more than the SRT Eng's?
 
#17 · (Edited)
Black_SRT8 said:
You are correct, Dave.
I know.

In fact, you should join the SRT Team, and teach them a thing or two.
Why is that? I think the SRT team did an excellent job. They turned out what is right now the worlds best performance SUV for an excellent price. It only makes sense that their brothers in AMG division would be able to eventually crank out one that will be quicker with a much higher target sale price, better engine, and transmission at their disposal.

Actually, Team SRT has several 6
Is that so? I challenge you to point me towards one 6 speed auto in the DCX parts bin that would've been compatible for the SRT8. The only 6 speed auto that DCX has that I'm aware of is just now available and is only rated for the torque from v6's. I'd have to look into it but I believe its probably a tranverse design as well. No dice there buddy.

and 7 speed transmissions at their disposal,
I seriously doubt that the SRT engineers were given the option of using the mercedes exclusive 7 speed auto. I challenge you to find me something that says otherwise. If you can, well bravo to you. I guess I'd have to eat my words. I'd of course also have to contact AMG and tell them that their brothers at SRT had it right all along, the 5 speed that they developed and used and then discarded in favor of a 7 speed they developed is actually superior. Fact is a 7 speed auto can be made to outperform a 5 speed auto.

and they chose to implement the 5 speed, which results desired ratios, reduced weight, and torque optimization.
Or they chose to implement the 5 speed because it's what was available to them, what fit their budget, and had already been proven by AMG to be stout enough for the power levels produced by the 6.1 hemi.



Do you know more than the SRT Eng's?
Probably not and I never purported to. I do know that the ML63 will likely beat the SRT8 in a straight line. I also know that this is no fault of the SRT engineers. As I stated above, they did a marvelous job with what was available to them. The AMG guys have more resources, much higher target sale price, and better components to work with. I wouldn't be surprised if the 7 speed in the ML63 finds its way into the next iteration of the SRT Grand Cherokee.
 
#18 ·
Dave said:
Why would you doubt the numbers are conservative? Mercedes has a history of being conservative with their numbers. Look at the facts: The ML500 weighs 4795lbs. The SRT8 weighs 4850lbs. The ML63 will likely end up weighing about the same. Same weight yet the ML63 gets a solid 80hp boost over the SRT8 as well as an extra 45lb ft of torque. It doesn't end there though. The ML63 also gets two more gears to use this power. Net result? ML63 is going to be quicker than the SRT8 and by default the new king of the performance SUV hill. You really think DCX's german leadership would've settled for anything else?

There's nothing wrong with the ML63 being quicker. It is after all much more expensive and hey its still a DCX product.
with chrysler being the "little Brother" to mercedes it only makes sense that they would make us (gc srt8) second best. it's only logical that if you paid
86k to the same manufacture you would get a little more. but look at the bright side, 1 they pay twice as much for a fraction more performanc, 2 put another 10 grand or so in performance upgrades and there's nothing in the suv class that can beat us!
 
#19 ·
Dave said:
I do know that the ML63 will likely beat the SRT8 in a straight line.

This epitomizes your myopia.


Currently, the results are 4.8 0-60. Whether Mercedes under/over emphasizes performance numbers cannot be proven, so unless you have a ML63 in your stable with subsequent track times, or an independent review, your conjecture is worthless.

BTW, DCX is a family now, and parts are shared between business units. For example, Mercedes is the first to use the 6.4 engine that will ultimately end up in the Challenger. Please shed your paradigm of autonomous manufacturing.
 
#20 ·
Dave said:
I know.


Why is that? I think the SRT team did an excellent job. They turned out what is right now the worlds best performance SUV for an excellent price. It only makes sense that their brothers in AMG division would be able to eventually crank out one that will be quicker with a much higher target sale price, better engine, and transmission at their disposal.


Is that so? I challenge you to point me towards one 6 speed auto in the DCX parts bin that would've been compatible for the SRT8. The only 6 speed auto that DCX has that I'm aware of is just now available and is only rated for the torque from v6's. I'd have to look into it but I believe its probably a tranverse design as well. No dice there buddy.


I seriously doubt that the SRT engineers were given the option of using the mercedes exclusive 7 speed auto. I challenge you to find me something that says otherwise. If you can, well bravo to you. I guess I'd have to eat my words. I'd of course also have to contact AMG and tell them that their brothers at SRT had it right all along, the 5 speed that they developed and used and then discarded in favor of a 7 speed they developed is actually superior. Fact is a 7 speed auto can be made to outperform a 5 speed auto.


Or they chose to implement the 5 speed because it's what was available to them, what fit their budget, and had already been proven by AMG to be stout enough for the power levels produced by the 6.1 hemi.



Probably not and I never purported to. I do know that the ML63 will likely beat the SRT8 in a straight line. I also know that this is no fault of the SRT engineers. As I stated above, they did a marvelous job with what was available to them. The AMG guys have more resources, much higher target sale price, and better components to work with. I wouldn't be surprised if the 7 speed in the ML63 finds its way into the next iteration of the SRT Grand Cherokee.
thank both you guys for an awsome debate! i truly feel like i've learned something from reading these passages.
 
#22 ·
Black_SRT8 said:
I always thought less gears = more efficient torque usage, less time wasted on shifting, and reduced weight.

Perhaps, I am from the old school, and my paradigms should shift :))). Thanks for the information, Dave.
Pay attention boys, if you are going to admit even the slightest bit of error or the possibility thereof, then this is the way to do it!!! LOL. In all honesty this has been a fabulously civil debate between intellectual performance enthusiasts that makes me feel like that fancy Philosophy degree I paid for might be worth something after all. Post hoc ergo propter hoc .. Never in my life did I expect to see multicollinearity debated on a Jeep forum!!! Just fantastic!!!!! No name calling or personal attacks, just opinions and supporting facts. I applaud your argument. Proceed ...
 
#24 · (Edited)
03AZRoush said:
$86k is way too much.
It's not that much. I paid for mine SRT8 over $81,000 (63,690 Euro). And if I could get a ML63 for $ 86k, I would love to buy it.

Here in germany the ML63 starts with $122,325 (96,164 Euro)

The german car magazine Autobild have had a compare test ML63 vs. Cayenne turbo S ->here

The ML did 4.9s from 0-100km/h (62.13727mph)
the Cayenne turbo S did 5.3s

Video ML 63
 
#25 ·
I'm pretty friendly with my local M-B dealer (wife has an SLK 320 6MT and I bought an E55 AMG from them) so I may be able to get one of the owners or salesmen to engage in a short drag race outside of the dealership grounds. Film @ 11.:D
 
#26 ·
justyli said:
It's not that much. I paid for mine SRT8 over $81,000 (63,690 Euro). And if I could get a ML63 for $ 86k, I would love to buy it.

Here in germany the ML63 starts with $122,325 (96,164 Euro)

The german car magazine Autobild have had a compare test ML63 vs. Cayenne turbo S ->here

The ML did 4.9s from 0-100km/h (62.13727mph)
the Cayenne turbo S did 5.3s

Video ML 63
If it'll take the new turbo s than it will definitley take an srt8...
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top