car and driver has become such a crap mag......whatever is the lastest model out wins regardless

the ZedF shifting quicker than the MCT is just BS....

 

I bought a S8, great car, but I miss my CLS63 with turbo upgrade. ( It is down in S. Fl.)
That changed Thursday, I tuned my new E63S.
Now in regards to this Car & Driver review, I am very skeptical.
If the Quattro system on the RS7 is like the S8, which has a lot of torque steer,
there is no way they could have concluded what they did!
I need to drive a RS7, and separate fact from BS.

 

Thanks for sharing.
Great match up and I was waiting for the comparo.
Obviously not happy that CLS is last but I think that the 3 cars are so closely match that little things will make you lose points and end up third.
-We know that the gearbox is just a tad slower than the competition. They are right on when they say you are better off driving it in S+.
-The hatchback of the Audi makes it a clear winner for space and wins easy points there. However not something that will make me buy a car versus another one.
-The Fit and Finish on the Audi is slightly superior and the overlook of the inside with its tilted larger screen is "cooler". Disagree with BMW scoring the same 10 and more than CLS.
-Exterior styling is subjective but the 2nd gen CLS was never applauded for its design and most view the 1st gen as the better looking car. It is a hate/love relationship with the back. The Audi rear look a bit unfinished and the M6 is just blend typical M styling. The RS and M overall look damn good and I can understand the last place finish. However, and that is a big but, the CLS feels more exclusive as there are really no lower siblings. For the Audi, you can get a base A7 for half the price and for BMW, the rear looks similar to an M-3 or 5 series from far away. There is no mistaking a CLS from front or rear coming from a distance and this makes it special .
-Power wise, you have to give the props to the M for being so close in the 1/4 mile with RWD. RWD starts showing its advantage there with higher trap speed and best time to 130mph + better transmission. However I do not understand the CLS 130 time, It was fastest at 1/4 and lost 1/2 second for 8mph faster. Comparing CLS AWD to 2WD, taking C&D numbers, it is faster by .6 second to 60 and .4 second to 1/4 (1 mph better). Expected with 0-60 due to 4WD but 2WD is slowly catching up at higher speed. Street start at 5-60mph is .3 faster (2WD CLS matches RS7 time at 4.4).
-I know they can't touch on this in the test but the reason why I chose the CLS is because of its larger displacement engine and its tuning potential, With a simple tune, the car will easily beat the others and be in the high tens in the quarter. Buying a Renntech tune keeps the warranty with certain dealers whereas Audi USA will void its "entire warranty" if a tune is found and the M tune has not shown great gains.
-A little skeptical about the 21 versus 23 fun to drive scoring as the 2WD version had scored higher than its competition. Maybe the AWD took some of the fun out.
-Looking at just powertrain and chassis, the CLS matches the Audi for points and the BMW wins. It is only when you add the less important stuff that the Audi wins over. The M trumps the CLS with its chassis points and for those that drive in the twisties, it is worth noting.
-Pricing wise, the RS7 will not be that expensive and is a better contender with the CLS. The grand coupe is outside the price range and I would rather get a Panamera Turbo at that price level.
Bottom line, you can't go wrong with any cars and we live in a great area when you get supercar performance in a 4 door "under the radar" cruiser for half the price.

 

All very closely matched cars... many the M6 coupe guys have tried the GC and said its just a heavier pig and that they would steer toward an M5 over the GC M6. That RS7 and M6 GC price are peak prices and you will hardly see any of those cars with those points. I have a seen only one M6 with that price point (GC) locally but there could be more. The RS7 with a good build is circa 117k and Id like to drive that car to see what all the hype is about but the torque steer comment by Karl concerns me.

As said its a drivers race all day with the RWD GC performing quite well in the quarter no doubt and excellent trap speed (Im sure C and D adjusted it for conditions like they do in their other tests). I do think the AWD Audi's 0-130 is impressive since it doesnt get a DCT and has the AWD power stealer up top. I drove my M6 coupe today- very fast

Did any of you notice that the Audi gets 16.5 inch front rotors!!!!!!!

 

Indeed very closely matched. They are all GT cars that are mostly for straights rather than twisties. All three perform well are are likely near the top three amongst the crop of automotive GT class vehicles. But of course, mags and journals still need to rank them from 1 to 3. Personally, I would still choose the CLS. However, I do like the DCT on the M6 GC.

 

I'm pretty darn happy with third place: thanx for removing my pictures.......



.

 

I didn't remove your pictures but someone with good taste did.

 

damn the '14 drivers get the LSD with the PP......

 

This was an interesting review. First off, these are three great cars and they all offer their owners a special driving experience. The objective results of this comparison test show a dead even battle. It was the subjective reviews that really separated the automobiles. To be honest, I am not surprised that the CLS finished third. I agree that the chassis is a let down and the computer driven transmission really detaches the operator from the ultimate driving experience. After sitting in the new M6 and driving my brother's 2013 S8, I regret having to say that Mercedes needs to work on their interiors. The fit and finish as well as material selection is a step or two behind the others.

I still love my CLS but I'm man enough to admit when I don't have the biggest package.

 

ive heard and read differently about the GC.....some say its tuned better to fit the chassis than the M5 was....dunno...i havent driven it. Its not too bad looking either..
The rear end of the audi is fugly., make the cls uber lips attactive

 

The M5 Army (who I all know and have met) took the GC on one of those drive days and said it was just heavy in feel and true in its weight. Some cars feel lighter than they really are. I trust these guys as they all are track and road drivers like me. I think the GC looks better than the M5 no doubt and the Audi rear is an acquired taste, slightly less than lets say a Panamera but maybe more like the Bangle Butt of the E60 M5 which became quite a venerable car IMHO.

 

it's just psychological. they get it in there heads head a 6 series is a grand tourer and the longer overhangs make it look like it's significantly heavier and just more substantive than the 5. once they get that in there heads, they're consequently going to think that the m5 feels sportier when they drive both cars. in reality they're dynamically so similar (the 6 is just a stylized 5 series) that unless those people are professional race car drivers, they'd never be able to differentiate whether one is "sportier" than the other. psychology can completely overpower or cloud the actual facts of the matter; this is the reason why clinical trials require a placebo group.

 

It's too bad it's impossible to have the journal's test drivers drive the cars without knowing the makers of the cars. Hmm, what about having test drivers wear ear plugs, glove, and wear some type of headgear so all they see is the road and nothing else. That will make the rating more un-biased.

Again, this type of contest is like awarding gold/silver/broze metals to a group that is creme de la creme. I'm not bothered by the rankings at all since a large part of it is so subjective.

 

all very subjective in differentiating the three, truth is I'd be happy with any one of them, however I prefer the look of the benz

 

At the end of the day, I still pick the CLS63 among the others...
None of that cars can beat the GROWL of CLS63, especially
when the the upshift or downshift... you just forget all the other things, cuz
your main focus is driving that Beast!!!

 

I agree, "a straight line assassin" lol

 

M157 the easiest, cheapest, tunable engine. HP boast blows them all away.

 

 

+1000, cls is the best to me hands down. who cares what a magazine review says

 

Except when the car you own wins!!!!!! LOL.

 

lmao no again ! u have to be a complete idiot to even consider most of these magazines bias opinions. I guess u are a believer of the test were the tesla S
out runs an m5 which btw I thought u got rid of but still see it listed in ur sig ?

 

It was a joke.... the Tesla S has tq from zero rpm so any swingin dick can mash and go with that car. As for that exact race; it was a manual f10 m5 so it was not going to win. So was the test real? I think so; was it fair who cares. The Tesla is a unique car with advantages and the looks are not all too bad IMHO.

Mags provide me with perspective while I drink beer.

 

haha I know u were joking buddy, just bustin ur chops. as far as beers go hopefully u are an IPA man

 

stock M5 showed 452rwhp on a heavy mainline dyno where CLS63 Performance Package showed about 464rwhp.

Ms are faster on street rolling stock to stock with 63TT even though dyno umbers are less, that DCT is something else

but when both are tuned or modded, M157 just like to brag and showoff .