Mercedes-Benz AMG unveils new 5.5-litre twin-turbo V8

By Matt Brogan | March 10th, 2010

Mercedes-Benz AMG has officially unveiled its new 5.5-litre twin-turbo V8 engine in a move that essentially spells the end for large displacement engines at the German tuning division.

The engine, a key part of Mercedes-Benz’ “AMG Performance 2015″ strategy, will feature in most of AMG’s lineup from early next year, making its debut in the 2011 Mercedes-Benz S63 AMG.

In S63 AMG specification the new engine will deliver 419kW of power and 899Nm of torque, while at the same time offering an impressive combined cycle fuel economy figures of just 10.5L/100km and a 0-100km/h time of 4.3 seconds.

The top speed of the new S63 AMG is 300km/h when equipped with the AMG Performance package.

The new 5.5-litre V8 features a number of firsts for the AMG including direct-injection, spray-guided combustion, piezo-electric injectors and automatic start/stop technology.

The engine is mated exclusively to a seven-speed automatic transmission.

ABMPSV

Very nice V8!! 420kW and 900Nm with combined fuel economy of 10.5L/100km!! Just brilliant. When HSV and FPV will make not just more power but lower the fuel economy so you can have fun and still wont pay too much for fuel.

deco

HSV and FPV don’t have the same financial support as AMG to build there own in house V8s. It isn’t proper to compare the brands, even though HSV would like to.

ABMPSV

AMG buys Mercedes engines and tune it.

deco

Wrong wrong wrong. This is an in house AMG engine I’m pretty sure. Same with the curent 6.3l? I could be wrong, but these engines aren’t used in any other Mercedes products.

ABMPSV

Please read wikipedia website about AMG. This is a Mercedes engine look on the top for Mercedes logo.
deco

I realise AMG is partly a tuning brand for Merc, but look at the new gullwing I believe, it’s a car fully developed in house by AMG. AMG has more engineering resources and money then even Holden, let alone HSV.

The Oracle

Generally, I think you are both right. AMG started as a tuner, who signed a partnership and development contract with Mercedes in the 1990s. It is now a wholly owned subsidiary of Daimler. The 6.3L V8 is its own design and is only used in the AMG Mercedes, like C63 and E63 and so on. The earlier 5.5L V8s, N/A and supercharged, were a development of a Mercedes engine as is the V12 twin turbo used in the S65 and others.
Regarding the new 5.5L twin turbo, the article doesn’t state if it is a new design or a high performance version of the existing Mercedes 5.5L engine. Does anyone know?

Karl

Correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t HSV developing a LPG engine?
If so, it would KILL this on running costs.

Shak

You are on the money. They just havent spoken of it lately, because the media has shifted focus onto a possible GTS-R model. Good for HSv to develop a \n LPG mule and let the media think its something else.

deco

Liquid injection dual fuel. Have the low runnign costs of LPG and the possibly range of fuel if needed.

If I was in the market for a HSV and didn’t need a boot, I’d hit it up.

I6orNothing

I think FPV is moving in this (right) direction as well, with the smaller displacement 5.0 litre supercharged v8. Might not quite match the outright power/torque of this unit, but when the twin turbo’d version is released (in ecoboost form) in the future there will be some hope. Smaller dislacement, big power/torque & good emission/economy…all good.

No matter what car brand you follow, you have to tip your hat to those numbers. Would be fun to give that a blat.

deco

I really like the direction FPV is taking with the Coyote, i hope it isn’t a massive let down!

FPV, unlike the AMG engine is only imited to 600NM torque though as that is all the 6-speed ZFtransmission is rated for. This means adding the supercharger they aren’t getting the full benefit of Forced induction which is the torque.

This could lead to fuel economy problems among sub-par performance compared to say Jaguar’s 5.0 supercharged engine.

The Oracle

Ford OZ use two versions of the ZF six speed, one for the N/A engine and another for the turbo and V8, with different torque capacities. The JAG V8s all use the same gearbox and there is a version, 6HP34, that is rated to 850Nm continuous input torque. Whether or not Ford think this is worthwhile validating for a niche model is another thing though.

Andrew M

Yeah I thought that might have been the case.
The FPV’s already knock on the 600nm door as it is let alone the many example out there with a very simple tune that get them easily over 600nm.

If the performance versions only had a ZF capable of 600nm Im sure there would be many stories of them being blown to bits

Shak

Well now its just up to HSv to find a suitable engine in the Gm catalogue. can anyone think of a suitable engine for a HSV application in the GM catalogue.(dont say the LSA, GM says its only for hero models ala CTS-V and ZR1)

Trump

Most manufacturers except Holden have realised that turbo’s are the replacement for displacement.

Ford released the XR6 Turbo about 8 years ago. Holden are so far bedind the game in this respect.

Shak

It’s not that easy. First of all MB’s budget is much greater than Holden and HSV. They probably spend the same amount on the S-Classe door Handle that Holden did on the VE. And secondly Holden cant fully develop and engine in House because of GM’s economies of scale rule. They need to use an engine already in production, in the US. The only ones that i can think of that suitably meet HSV’s power and torque requirements and weight loads, at the moment are the LS2/3.

deco

I have a feeling when GenV is released, the world will be shocked with exactly what pushrods can do .

But I do agree, GM does need a newer V8 now, not in over 1 year.

The LS3 is fine for a little while anyway.

Bent 8 Brigade

Why does GM so desperately need a new V8 now?
Dennis

I’ve heard good things about the Gen V.

Apparently there will be 2 versions OHV and DOHC with different capacities (could be wrong) and both will have VVT.

300 kw to 335 Kw are the power figures that are being stated on the net.
Shak

We all know the current V8 crop in Holden/HSV is AFM and E85 capable, so maybe they will up the ante and intro stop/start. They will definetly bring out E85 on their V8′s as they have said numerous times. AFM with E85 would be a nice little marketing tool for Holden, and we all know how good their marketing is.

gman

Boost does the same thing as cubes, economy comes from more efficient spark and fuel atomisation. Remember that it is the combiation of air, fuel and spark that creats the power adding boost ads air to the combustion chamber same as having a 6 or 7 litre engine. Applying efficient spark and fuel atomisation tecniques to a larger engine would yeild simaler results. I belive a move like this is deigned for a marketing image that smaller motors are more efficient. As for fuel economy the biggest factor is the weight of the vehicle, basic fact is that it takes so much energy to shift so much weight.

deco

SO true. Though i do beleive turbo’s help with fuel efficiency when not puhing the car, but fang it a bit and they are every bit as bad, if not worse then a NA V8 1l bigger.
m96

Not that simple.
Boost comes from waste energy that’s why it’s more efficient to use than increased displacement. Increased displacement leads to heavier internal components and more inertia. The friction will also be higher if the pistons are larger.

dan

Wrong…
Energy is still required to rotate the turbocharger.
High boost levels require heavier and stronger or more expensive and stronger engine compoments as a smaller engine generates more power.
A big piston doesnt generate more friction as it depends on the amount of piston that is in contact with the cylinder.

m96

No. Since part of the energy comes from the heat energy the equation will always end on plus.
A big piston generates more friction since the friction area is bigger.

High boost level requires fx a thicker piston.. in the same way as it does if you’re going to get the power from cubics.
On top of that.. a big engine will also need to fill out the cylinder with a bigger piston = more weight and higher inertia.

gman

Turbos rob moters of power before delivering boost due to the fact there is a large object blocking the exhaust. Generally speaking smaller turbos reduce this by staying on boost earlier but dont deliver big horsepower or torque figures larger turbos deliver power but spool up slower ( turbo lag ). Frm experience lag does more to reduce power than more friction in larger bores. Once again economy is weight driven. The only advantage is that it is possible to increase power from a smaller motor ( more compact motor )but put that motor in a vechicle the same weight and the economy figures will generally even out. Mercedes have used the forced induction route before then went to the 6.2 litre v8 perhaps this move is a marketing move based on a public belief that a smaller motor will be more efficient. If its shifting the same weight you will need the same energy to move it

m96

The turbo will rob some of the power as you say, but it will be less than what’s added since some of the energy comes from the heat in the exhaust gases that otherwise would have been wasted.

“If its shifting the same weight you will need the same energy to move it”
Yes, but the same energy after losses. The power from the motor itself will therefore have to be higher. And how much higher depends on the inner losses in the motor.
Bigger engine pistons = larger friction area, higher inertia = bigger losses.

Karl

It’s still not that simple.
Yes, one revolution of a large capacity motor will have more friction compared to a smaller motor, but a larger motor will create more power per revolution.
In REAL WORLD conditions, you change up much earlier in an V8 than small 4 cyclinder.
Basically, resistence is: friction x revs. Small motors have less friction but need more revs to create the same power as a larger motor.

Goodfa

That is amazing.
Economy similar to 3.6 V6 Commodore and more power than a W427.

dan

And….20times the price….Amazing!

MB

When this is slotted into the new SLK & C63 update they will both be rocketships

deco

Imagine it in something as light as a C63! LOL.

Orgasmic.

john

No doubt it will find its way into a C series eventually albeit in a detuned state. These are the same people that fitted a 5 1/2 litre V8 too the SLK!

BK

Why bother mentioning HSV and FPV when they dont come close to the Mercedes benz brand. Mercs are all torque and plenty of traction
Devil666

AMG has done it again! Arguably, BMW’s M series has always had a dynamic edge of their AMG counterpart, but engine wise, I would always take the AMG.

This engine/gearbox combo is potentially one of the best drivetrain setups ever, but 900nm kinda leaves me thinking AWD would help get that torque down, as anyone with a 55AMG will know.
Mal Klein

Heres some real engineering talent on display, believe me, they are just scratching the surface of its performance potential. No way would you get the whole cake, just a slice at a time!

john

Totally agree. I don’t think there is an engine in existence that gets the full monty from the car maker. Car makers have to take into account engine reliability, longevity and long warranties. Look at my previous VE V8 (actually a relatives SSV but same spec as my previous car stock) as an example. Stock 270kw crank, 220kw (thereabouts) wheels dynoed. After a mild tune, intake, new cam and exhaust it was dynoed at 388kw crank, 328kw wheels (actually 328.4kw but whos counting)without forced induction. That is a significant increase on holdens effort without adding the stresses of forced induction. I don’t like too mention holden on an AMG blog but it is the only example I have.
I would safely say that this new AMG engine could easily see more power and torque than in released guise!