willamgad

I have an E39 BMW M5 and am looking at selling it and getting something new, obviously I am used to a fast 4 door saloon car and have had the M5 for the last 2 and a half years and loved it, it is time for me to move on. I have a buyer and am just waiting to pull the trigger on the AMG.
Question is will there be a marked difference between the 400bhp M5 and the lighter but lower powered C55 AMG?
I really like the look of the car it seems so light and I suspect very responsive, does it have all the bells and whistles like the M5 Drive Stability Control, Sports button, Satnav etc? Anybody have experience of both cars?
Any assistance will be appreciated. I live in Abu Dhabi btw.
Will

jgsx

Have you looked at the E55? That's a lot closer to the M5

willamgad

Heard some bad reports about the E55, may be wrong but just what I heard.
Will

rpayer

From who...M5 drivers? The E55 is a great car.

willamgad

Not at all haven't spoken to the M5board about this, would be sacrosanct to desertion and I would be shot at dawn .
I just read some reports on the net that there were some problems with the E55, not saying there is anything wrong with them, just seen the one AMG in the merc showroom and that was a C55 I will ask about the E55 though, just need 4 doors for the family and the price seems appealing to me.
Will

jgsx

C55 is a great car, but if you're used to a full size sedan, and plan on frequently using the back seats, the E55 is the car for you.

The C55 has a normally aperated V8. The E55 has a supercharged V8

willamgad

You just said the magic word.......supercharged eh? Hmmmm guess I gotta look further into this AMG thing.
Willamgad

genechien

i'd look at the e55 if you currently have a m5, seems like a much better match. are you sure the bad reports are about the e55 or the new e63?

willamgad

From this board alone there seems to be some dissatisfaction with the E55
https://mbworld.org/forums/w211-amg/172690-i-think-i-m-bored-my-e55.html
That is not something you would ever see on the M5board, but I am looking for a little less zap and more exec stability. They offered me 3 year warranty but only the first 2 services free at 15 and 30k kilometers, seems a bit stingy, bmw are offering full 5 year service free - for a price of course, I am done with BMW for now though, the M5 is a great car but keeping a 6yr old high spec car on the road seems like a silly waste of money when I could buy a new car tax free over here of course. I really liked the look of the C55 reminded me of the M3.
Willamgad

PC Valkyrie

I was/am a big fan of the E39 M5. From a performance point of view, the C55 is the closest thing there is to the E39 M5. Yes, the E39 M5 has a bit more HP, but the C55 is quite a bit lighter too, so the power to weight ratio is almost identical. Both cars have very similar torque values too.

In a straight line, the the C55 and E39 M5 are very close, with a slight edge probably going to the C55 (maybe).

Contrary to popular belief on BMW forums, the C55 handles quite well, especially with the suspension/chassis modifications over the previous C32. On the Nordschleife Nurburgring, the C55 is faster than the E39 M5 (8.22 minutes vs 8.28 minutes), while they are almost dead even on Hockenheim (1.18,6 minutes vs 1.18,5 minutes).

However, the C55 is a smaller car and there is a tighter rear seat compared to the E39 M5. Also, the C55 only comes with a 5 speed automatic transmission (with a proper manual mode if you want to play with steering wheel buttons), while the E39 M5 only came with a 6 speed manual.

When I got the C55, I viewed it as a smaller, cheaper version of the E39 M5 with an automatic transmission that my wife can drive too.

Fifth Ring

I wouldn't make too much of that. It's not like the poster is identifying a specific problem. He's probably just looking for an excuse to get something new (aren't we all). Personally, if I can satisfy my track-car needs with a weekend car, the E55 would be my choice for daily driver. Unlike the C55 or C32, it's a bit of a porker and is not going to be the best vehicle for pure handling. But is is crazy fast, and comfortable.

But to your original question (M5 to C55), I can't help but wonder if you'll feel like you're stepping down. To me, the M5 is a more exciting car. All BMWs are exciting and the M5 is just about the top of the heap. The same cannot be said of Benz and the C55.

I would guess that the M5 is a superior handling car (vs. C55) so you may lose some handling rather than gain. If you're looking for a sporty German sedan that is smaller than the M5, the first stop is the M3, and then I'd consider an Audi S4 (which has the nicest interior of all of these cars).

vixapphire

I'll chime in, being a "main offender" on that other thread.

The E55, which I've had for nearly 15 months and almost 10,000 miles now, has been troublefree. Unlike some of the other folks around the forum, I bought rather than leased my car; as a result, I've become somewhat hyper-attuned to the potential perils of post-warranty maintenance costs. If you're considering leasing an E55/63/whatever, you shouldn't be put off by fear of it being a bum steer -- my experience of the car has been wonderful from a build quality and solidity standpoint.

As for driving satisfaction, the speed and ferocity of the car are unbelievable, and should be a real treat for you. The principal difference as I understand it between bimmers and merc's (my wife has a 325 wagon) is the former tend to be high-revvers where you really need to step into the throttle to get the car boogieing, whereas the (supercharged) merc's are like hyperspace from the get-go. the E55 has air suspension, which does a great job of leveling the car even through extreme curves and cornering; it's quite a thrill-ride, although I'll take the seasoned driving freaks' word that the bimmers likely have higher cornering limits/better handling. There's a lot of computer assistance in all these cars now that make them seem an awful lot lighter and more agile than their actual kerb weight would attest.

happy hunting!

v

willamgad

it's quite a thrill-ride, although I'll take the seasoned driving freaks' word that the bimmers likely have higher cornering limits/better handling. There's a lot of computer assistance in all these cars now that make them seem an awful lot lighter and more agile than their actual kerb weight would attest.

NOT sure that I agree with the cornering issue, the M5 is a big car and it is not the best at cornering, tends to lumber up to corners and you have to work the steering hard to get round the bends quickly, although the DSC gets you out of some dangerous situations - so long as it is switched on, the M3 is a different issue visa vis cornering and is I suspect similar to the C55 cornering blisteringly quick.
I cant go with the Audi wannabee's they seem to be attempting and failing to keep up with the M3/5's and AMG's, OK great for cornering with the 4WD, but I just don't like them, too VW cheap looking for me, not really an exec cruiser.
I live in Abu Dhabi and there are not too many corners here, just fast straight roads between the emirates, so it is straight line acceleration and high speed cruising that I looking for, will be buying and not leasing so I am not sure if I can justify the extra cost of the E55 to be honest. Thanks for the input guys, feels very similar to the m5board with helpful and respectful assistance, so there is civilisation after the m5board .
Willamgad

Fifth Ring

> As to blistering cornering, I think even C55 owners will tell you that the C55 is not in the same class as the M3.

> VW has done an awful job positioning the Audi brand. Having owned Audis prior to the C32, I can attest that they have superior interiors in design and materials. Head-to-head, they're competitive (and I've had my fun running with Audi S4s at the track), but VW has butchered the Audi image in an effort to enhance the VW image. You can start with the VW Phaeton, which should never have existed. Then you have the VW Touareg which sold poorly because of the VW label, while Audi suffered with no SUV until this year. There's still a fair bit of platform sharing (TT, A3), and lots of component sharing. That's one thing I respect about Benz. It's 100% Benz (for now).

PC Valkyrie

People who have driven the M3 and C55 (like myself) will tell you that the M3 has better steering feel, better braking feel, and is easier to drive fast around a corner because it is lighter and has a more neutral weight distribution. The mechanical LSD of the M3 also helps with getting its more modest power down when exiting a corner. Yes, the M3 is better than the C55 as a track car from a subjective "driving feel" type of way. Having a manual transmission or fast shifting SMGII also contributes to the superior driving experience of the M3.

However, I would argue that the C55 is very close to the M3 in terms of actual speed around a track, if you look at published laptimes, slalom speeds, etc. I've posted these this data many times in the past (I can post them again if you want).

One thing is certain, the C55 is a huge improvement over the C32 when it comes to handling using objective test data, such that the conclusions one makes with the C32 vs M3 cannot be assumed to be the same as C55 vs M3.

So the bottom line is this: the C55 can be almost as fast as an M3 around corners, whlile the C32 and S4 are noticeably slower. There is no doubt the the M3 offers the driver the most satisfying driving experience on a track. The only price is a harsh ride for daily driving.

DMC'S AMG

My opinion is that you TEST DRIVE the C55 since you are making the purchase decision, you have an M5 so you know what it drives and feels like you also know its strengths and weakness so driving the C55 would let you know and feel the differences between the two cars. Like PC Valkyrie said it the best the C55 is closest to your M5 in straight-line performance and if you want better than that then get the E55.

Fifth Ring

This same position gets posted about every two weeks. Then you post the track times, which are imperfect because you have varying drivers, tires, conditions, horsepower and torque (yes, the C55 might be faster due to HP, which is unrelated to handling).

I can post magazine test that show a C55 running 0-60 in 5.6 seconds, and other tests showing a C32 running it in 4.9 seconds. But I know that with all things being equal, the C55 is quicker.

I'd be sold if someone showed me a same day, same driver, same tires, same track, test of the cars. Or if someone could describe the suspension differences in some detail (i.e. variations in geometry and hardware).

And if you think I'm hot on this point because I'm a C32 owner, then let me just say.... of course!

PC Valkyrie

I've done this before, explaining that Sport Auto uses the same driver AND the same tracks and testing procedure everytime. Yes, they test different cars on different days, so that is the only variable. They try their best to test cars stock as they come from the factory. You know the C55 and M3 have identical times around Nurburgring, while the S4 and C32 were slower.

To me, the best comparison data comes from head to head comparison tests such that they test the same cars on the same day and on the same track.

Evo tested the RS4, M3 CS (competition package), and C55 in a head to head competition around their benchmark 1.8 mile track. The M3 CS and C55 were separated by only 0.3 seconds, while the RS4 was clearly the fastest being 1.2 seconds faster than the M3 CS. I've posted this before, but the message never seems to get through that the C55 is indeed very close to the M3 when it comes to lap times. You can view it here by clicking on the "Compare cars" button:
http://www.evo.co.uk/cargrouptests/c...edes_c55.html#

The only other time I know of where the M3 was tested against the C55 in a head to head way on a track was here:
http://motoring.iafrica.com/carsinac...out/956527.htm

Again, the C55 was only 0.2 seconds behind the M3, while the RS4 was 0.7 seconds faster than the M3.

In other words, there is more than one source which shows the C55 can achieve laptimes very similar to the E46 M3. Not faster, but pretty close. Unfortunately, no one has ever published a direct head to head comparision between the C55 and C32. Sport auto, with the same driver and the same tracks is the next best thing, and we all know that the C32 was significantly slower according to their published laptimes.

If you're interested, here is Evo's single car review of the C55. Read it. It nicely summarizes the improvements they made to the C55 compared to the C32. They conclude the car is much more sporty than the C32, but the M3 is still the benchmark.
http://www.evo.co.uk/carreviews/evoc...s_c55_amg.html

AMG_55

keep the m5 or get a c55

after an m5 you wont be happy w/ either a c32(too slow) or e55(doesnt handle worth ****)

Fifth Ring

Keep in mind that the length of the Nurburgring is going to give a decided advantage to the higher-HP car - the C55. Depending on configuration, you could be talking about 20 miles. Take two equal handling cars, but give one a 15-20 hp advantage, and you'll have a spread after 20 miles.

I'm not saying I'm right and you're wrong. I'm just saying that I've not seen evidence to establish it.

jgsx

I'm not just saying this because I have a C32, but I test drove a few C55s before I got my 32, and the difference in power between the stock C32 and stock C55 was not very noticeable.

gkstar

I think the above review summarized well what C55 (or C32) have been after, which is not to resemble an M3 in every way:

"So would you have one over an M3? For 95 per cent of the time the C55 makes a better road car for most people. But on those odd occasions when you really want to feel alive, the C55 fails to involve you like an M3. The new AMG C-class is an improvement alright, but not the fundamental step-change that would tempt enthusiasts out of their M-cars."

Another review said it well - M3 is for the roller-coaster junkies, while C55/32 is more of a gentlemen's car (sorry, cannot recall the review source). Reviews have said it, M3 has a harsh ride. I had people that know the M3 well comment that my C32 feels a lot more civilized. Again, different goal.

For the tad more practical people, they will rather be in a better car 95% of the time and then be at the 95% of the M3 performance/handling for the remaining 5% of the time. I think the C32 is right there, stock. C55 more so, it seems.

Another interesting comparison would be to set the cars at similar price points, relative to today's prices. That would alllow C32 to throw in an upgrade to 400+ HP and then the results will be more interesting... or who knows. Just speculating...

PC Valkyrie

Come on Fifth, almost all the straight line accleration figures from European and American magazines suggest that the C55 is NOT SIGNIFICANTLY faster in a straight line than the C32. Many people here will attest to that. If the C55 is faster, it is faster by a marginal amount.

No, the C55 is a better overall performance car because it HANDLES better, not because it is faster in a straight line. And the price is a harsher ride in the C55 compared to the C32 (another thing that people can attest to).

Sport auto doesn't just test cars on the Nurburgring when they do their Supertest. They also test cars on the much shorter and tighter Hockenheim track. It is on this short track where handling prowess is much more important than straight line speed. You're right that the Nurburgring track can reward cars with higher straight line speeds because there are long straights and sweeping not so tight corners.

Here are Sport auto test results for the C55/C32:

Test date: July 2004/Sept 2001
Weight/power ratio (kg/PS): 4.6/4.66
Tires used: Pirelli P Zero Rosso for both cars
Transverse Acceleration (g): 1.1/1.0
Slalom course 36m (km/h): 122/118
Slalom course 110m (km/h): 134/132
Nurburgring laptime (min): 8.22/8.37
Hockenheim laptime (min): 1.18,6/1.20,6

The C55 was a full 2 seconds faster on the short tight Hockenheim track. That's a very big difference. Unless Mr. Horst von Saurma (pro driver who does all of Sport Auto's testing on the track) had a REALLY bad day with the C32, I think those numbers are very revealing.

Unfortunately, most car enthusiasts (and many Mercedes fans) just assume that the C55 is nothing but a C32 with a big V8 in the nose. Mercedes actually made the C55 a much better handling car than the C32 in stock form but hardly anyone took notice. In part, it was because the C32 was clearly inferior to the M3 from a handling point of view, and the C55 was viewed simply as a facelift with no significant changes underneath. The impression that MB's have crappy handling is a hard one to shake, as the previous C36/C43/C32 all had signficantly worse handling numbers than the almighty M3. The C55 is the closest MB has ever come to matching the M3, but it still came up short, especially from a driver enjoyment point of view.

vixapphire

From my admittedly different but vaguely parallel experience of testdriving a 2001 SLK 230 vs. a 2001 SLK 320, I would think that notwithstanding whatever power differences one feels between the C32 and C55, the lighter front-end of the C32 would make for a somewhat less ponderous, more agile-feeling steering/handling characteristic than in the C55 with its heavier V8 mill.

But it's just a guess not based on direct experience, although my SLK comparo revealed very different rides: the 230 was a point-and-shoot affair, while the 320 had a far more solid straight-line onroad feel to it - definitely a grand touring car to the 230's "sporty/nifty-ness".

Eurosport

i think it'll be a little step down
but that shouldn't matter, since you're selling the M5, you want something new and different in some ways