C63newdude

This must be the worst comparo I have seen as far is acceleration. Here is the link:

http://www.m3post.com/forums/showthread.php?p=10422019

kent426

Looks like traction on the puny tires that MB puts on its cars always is the Achilles heel.

SonnyakaPig

Very interesting comparo numbers. We know the C63 has more in it. Even equipped with an lsd it isn't easy to stick off the line without DR's or heated street tires on a prepped track.

I asked a question in another forum not too long ago about the ability of the new race/start to put the power down. I guess it still may not be as easy as we would hope.

The C63's trap should have resulted in a lower ET with a better launch, considering it was the highest of the bunch.

Edit: Also, those delectable wheels likely do not aid traction as much as the 18's. Also, I later noticed this C63 had an lsd.

Thanks for sharing, C63newdude.

Kaiba

Show me 1 guy doing a 4.3 0-62mph in a M3 .....
You can do 4.4 in a C63 any day....

JeffDL

pictures were of a performance pack c63.

either way damn that rs5 is sooooo nice.

SonnyakaPig

The writer was saying that 4.3 is not the typical time; you would have to do many attempts to hit that low of a number.

SonnyakaPig

Agreed, the C63 was PP equipped. It's strange the trap wasn't higher.

Das Geld 2

The tool who posted the thread is on MBWORLD too.

Guy has buyers remorse and cognitive dissonance out of the ***, he needs constant verification of his car.

So the test got 4.3 once out of say 20 times? Maybe it was a V-Box error, which happens all the time.

This guy thinks BMW is building some kind of intergalactic space crafts aha

JeffDL

it is what it is. different cars run different times on different days. mag numbers really mean ****. that rs5 looks sick though.

ZephyrAMG

Both of them do. HotIce and Gblansten. But then again they have "been there and done that".

CZ55

What's the difference between GT500 and Boss 302?

They should put the new 4.0 S8 engine in the RS5. Then it would be an incredible car.

LawRens

lol @ all those kids saying "power is nothing without control." they don't know how to control torque so they drive an m3 instead.

SMP

The M3 was equipped with a DCT. With the DCT, or the previous SMG, you can select "launch control". You don't need any experience, other than pushing a few buttons and keeping your foot in it. With good tires and on dry pavement, you'll be able to replicate that time not just once, but every time. Mercedes offers "race start" in the 2012 C63. Basically the same thing.

I don't recommend doing it too often. I did it a few times with my M's, but it's quite hard on the car.

JM

I have this magazine at the moment... I really question it because it shows a P31 C63 but the stats shows its a 451 hp C63.....

strange

SonnyakaPig

I think in the GT-R manual it says to only use launch control like 3 times for the life of the car. I think I remember reading that somewhere. I don't know... could be wrong, but I get it: its probably not the greatest thing for a car longterm.

I do expect some drivers in good conditions to get 3.9-4.2 second 0-60 times in the new C63, especially when the cars have P31.

C63newdude

You are not thinking about the awesome DCT on the beemers. Also, the way the power is delivered it is more ideal than on a C63 which gives you an avalanche of torque at very low RPMS. The M156 power delivery is very touchy, it puts a lot of power/torque very soon which makes the tires to spin.

The M-3 with DCT already tested a 3.9 sec 0-60 mph on a previous test so it is not imposible, it has been done before...

C63newdude

The GT500 is S/C and the Boss is just N/A putting 444hp (I think). The Boss is very very impressive, it runs 12.5@114 in other tests.

GBlansten

I enjoyed the C63 but would have liked to have had an LSD. I am really liking the M3 right now. That's about it.

PC Valkyrie

Although most of you are interested in the straight line acceleration numbers, what interested me the most were the laptimes around the 1.8 mile Bedford Autodrome (the Evo benchmark) in this head to head test.

Despite the facelifted C63 coupe getting the MCT and revised suspension, the M3 was still the king when it came to its pace around this track.

M3: 1:25.1 (peak speed 109.1mph)
RS5: 1:25.4 (peak speed 108.8mph)
C63: 1:27.7 (peak speed 110.0mph)
Boss Mustang: 1:29.0 (peak speed 108.4mph)

I was hoping the facelifted C63 would narrow that performance gap on a track, but it remains about the same (at least in Evo's hands).

Previously, Evo tested the E90 M3 sedan against the pre-facelifted C63 sedan (with PP) in another head to head test and these were the results:
E90 M3: 1:26.2
C63: 1:28.8

hhughes1

I have 7 words to reply to that;

Tires Tires Tires Tires Tires Tires Tires

Size and Selection

C63newdude

^^ I totally agree with you on that. For the mean time we will have to pull our pants down everytime against other cars that are slower but because of the ridiculous,inexplicable choice of tires the C63 AMG will always compromise the performance.

Seriously, what is so difficult about making a 2-3" wider rear fender/wheelwell and properly fit a 10" rim with some 285 or maybe 295 rubber? That would solve many issues and put the C63 AMG into steady a sub 4 sec 0-60mph.

Just like I said a dozen times thorugh out the two years that I have been on this forum I think the C63 AMG is not a complete finished sports car, we lack LSD and wider rear quarter panels, rims and tires. my .2c

Das Geld 2

So what tires were used for the test?

Let me guess BMW had R-Compounds.

02Drunkenup

is anyone surprised that the overrated Mustang Boss came last?

6.3AMG

GMW

I have read quite a few magazines where the photographed car is not the one tested, so maybe the car actually tested was a non pp car as per the hp ratings they gave?