I always known the CLS was heavier than the E-class, by quite a bit. The E63 AMG wagon weighs a claimed 1955kg and the CLS63 weighs a claimed 1905kg. Now obviously that's a 50kg difference, the E63 AMG should be much faster than both seeing as it weighs a claimed 1840kg. That's a weigh explaination, other than that, to be honest Car & Driver's acceleration tests can vary much, sometimes they are terrible, sometimes amazing.

0-60 in 4 seconds flat. OH MY GOD.

That is beyond outrageous - especially for such a heavy station wagon. Keep in mind that this car lacks the torque advantage of the old E55 AMG - and it is still faster.

Could be other conditions too.

Is the E63 AWD or Rear-Wheel Drive? Coz if its AWD, maybe having that extra traction gives it a better start. These 0-60 times fluctuate anyways, depending on conditions, and for Manual Trannies, skill and what not.

Awesome car btw....though I'd take a sedan over it. I guess if I had to be a soccer dad, this would be the car to have.

It's RWD.

I'm just thinking.. maybe C&D 'compensate' for their non-optimal accelerations times by shaving a tenth or two off their recorded time.

As in, in real-life they may have recorded a time of 4.14seconds for the 0-60mph sprint, but maybe they just couldn't get that perfect launch which they think is possible (but just weren't able to achieve) and therefore felt it was ok to minus a tenth or two to publish the time which they believed was attainable.

But I think I remember C&D testing the E55 Touring and it too outsprinted its saloon sibling to the 60mph mark. Like I said, the only explaination I can think of is the weight distribution advantage of the E63 Touring behind the rear axle.

Yes 0-60 is better than the sedan, but lets not over look the looks of this thing, not good. BTW R@T recording 4.1 for the M5 which I think might be a bit of over statement like many of these American car mags do-might be trying to achieve a wow factor.
In fact I would never get the touring over the sedan even with the practicality benefit because its so ugly....Huge overhangs, the window line actually passes the rear axel...shouldnt there be some sort of design rule against that? I mean its a cool car..But give me the sedan because its that much cooler and looks are pertinent.

I know you guys will be like (in car geek voice), Well matt the touring has this much more cargo space and is this much faster in the QTR mile, and bla bla bla. But lets not kid ourselves we love astons because they look good, not because of performance...am i right...I just felt like typing something dont take any of this seriously, seriously

I cant stand the looks of the 5 wagon either!

E63 Estate >>>>>>> E63 sedan

I just don't buy this.
I want to see some EVO and/or Sport Auto times.
I've lost allmost all belief in american magazines.

American car mag are a joke, you are quite right about that.
No way on earth any test here in Europe will have that time for that car.

US-spec Mercedes get different final drive ratios designed to give Americans what they want: quicker 0-60 times and poorer fuel economy.

European-spec Mercedes have the opposite setup: slower acceleration and better fuel economy.