The whole point of SUV is not offroading!!! To get to the offroad you need to drive on the road as well.....lol.

 

I'm just going along with Mr. Thai's strange analysis.

 

I love it how you guys just feed of each other...and twisting my words around!

1. Yes, BMW M made the new M cars heavier...and more luxurious. It's a compromise. I REALIZE THAT EVERYTHING IS A COMPROMISE. However, the DEGREE of compromise is the main point here. Thus, i use "TRY" in my statements.

2. AMG does not include LSD because it's not part of their plan. For them, traction control is good enough. How much does LSD cost?? In the grand picture, it's pennies to MB/AMG. Look at other manufacturers, LSD option is usually under $500 (MSRP). Look at trucks, they come with LSD standard on most of them! It's a relatively cheap handling upgrade.

3. I never said that C55 AMG was a horrible car because of the lack of LSD. I am just defending the BMW M3 (which i owned) from the initial poster's boastings. Like it or not, LSD is an important detail of a sports car...and should be mentioned when M3 vs. C32/55 threads come up.

4. I believe that LSD IMPROVES launching from a stop, in addition to handling bonus.

5. When did i say that the M3 should be a F1 car?? Never did i say this. It is MORE of a sports car in MY EYES. C55 AMG is more of a daily driver. I will admit this...anyone would. The initial poster presented reasons for C55 over M3...i just presented the opposite...what's wrong with that?? And you did mention about OPEN MINDS on the forums, right??? Think of me as a "devil's advocate."

6. Again, when did i say that BMW was pure heritage???!!! I said that BMW TRIES HARDER to stay with it than AMG.

So, when did i flame or spin?? You guys are the one calling me names and twist my words around...geez.

 

When did i say that i like the X5??? I do NOT. Same for Infiniti FX, Cayenne, RX330, etc.. Do i think that they are useless?? More or less. I would rather get an E55 wagon. I just think that the X5 makes slightly more sense than a G55 AMG. Folks, it's not hard to understand!

For me, SUV is a combination of ultility and capability...thus, it is DIFFERENT from a station wagon. Get it??

For example, i appreciate a Toyota 4runner, but not the Toyota Highlander. I appreciate the Lexus GX470, but not the RX330. I appreciate the MB G500, but not the ML500. Get it yet??

A SUV must have off-road capability built-into it. Whether one uses it or not is their business, but i don't see a point in these "SAVs" etc.. A station wagon carries more stuff, handles better, safer, etc..

Like i said above, the G500 is extremely capable. See my link above. I have used my G-wagen to go to places that are too rough for cars...seen sights that a car owner will never see. I bought it because i love it's CAPABILITY...and thus, has opened my eyes to new sights. Military construction just means icing on the cake...thicker steel panels and heavier duty gears so that my baby will last a long long time...thus, many more years of sightseeing and off-roading.

Could i have just rented a Jeep Wrangler?? Yes, i could have...but where's the fun in that??!! I love to drive my own vehicle over a terrain...it's a personal reward. Just like when you guys take your C55 to the track.

Could i have gotten something less, like a 4runner?? Yeah, i could have. However, if you know Colorado trails, then you would know that having LOCKERS front and rear help tremendously. So, is my G-wagen useless?? I don't think so.

Any other question about my G??

 

speaking of compromise, will AMG change their philosophy soon?
What I mean is that will AMG "lean" more towards performance and track than luxury?

The topic of LSD that Thai brought up is very interesting because it is getting very common these days, not only for pure track weapons such as the EVOs and STis, but also luxury sedans. I heard the next Legend will have a yaw-rate sensor inspired LSD.

I am sure electronic chasis and manual are/were on the cards for AMG but for various reasons, they hvn't been able to make their way into cars.

Don't forget that Benz insisted with 3 valves and no VVT was the way to go.

Marketing plays a big part in the car industry, AMG need to put in some new tricks.

If the C55 has a stick and tricky LSD, BMW would be crapping themselves

 

its pretty much guarenteed that they have an R&D section working on just that, whether or not it finds it way into production depends alot on the competition. They'll only do it if they need to.

 

Spoken like a person who doesn't stand their ground. You don't "try" to be a sports car when you make a car heavier and more luxurious - no matter how many ways you try to apologize for them.


Apparently, you know more than Mercedes does about pricing. You should run their company for them. MBZ decided that the cost didn't justify placing it in the car - probably because they would have to raise the price even higher. Every dollar counts, no matter how large the amount.

Clearly in your posts, you claim that AMG is "faking" it to their customers. You say its unacceptable to not have an LSD. I'm still trying to figure out why you have a fixation with an LSD, especially given the fact that the MBZ does pretty damn well on the track compared to an M3 without one. Out of curiousity, have you tracked your car? I drive my car at Thunderhill, Sears Point, Laguna Seca and multiple autocrosses. I install my own brakes, coilovers, sway bars. I corner balance my car. Do you really think that I am that ignorant of what LSD's can do for my car? I can say so many things about what the M3 does not have that it should have for its price - but I won't because that's just plain short-sighted and naive.

At what point did I ever contest this? LIke I said, I agree with you that LSD's are a good thing.

You brought this onto yourself by self-righteously proclaiming that every car needs an LSD. You did not present the opposite argument. You simply decided to make a single point about the C55 not having an LSD. CNTLAW gave five reasons - none of which you addressed. Its almost as if you conveniently forgot the rest of his post and decided this was a great time to criticize the C55. Clearly, you don't understand what having an "open mind" means. To you, it means that everyone should be tolerant of your posts. To me, it means you recognize that other people have opposing viewpoints and that you take time and reflect on that.

Again, trying to cover your *** with this "TRIES HARDER" business. Either you do or you don't. I have a lot of respect for BMW's M division, but only because I know that they are doing what AMG does - they put out extremely high performing cars based on platforms not meant to be a sports car. Neither division is trying harder than the other to be a Porsche or a Ferrari. They're just tuning the cars to the best of their potential - while retaining a reasonable price and level of comfort.

Every post you've made is a spin job. You're the one who told me to buy a DeVille. You're the one who talked about Frank and referenced another post. I'm just confronting your points, and clearly you can't do anything better than to sit their and repeat yourself with the same arguments.

 

neoprufrok

I say it for the rest of the group, thanks taking time to clarify a few things.
Nevertheless , I was shocked and pleased to see number of responses to this thread grew for whatever reasons

cntlaw
p.s. C55 and M3 are truly regarded as "sports cars" that are designed to be as practical as a normal car as wells as for occasional casual racing drivers. My wife once tried to get into the driver seat of the Lotus Elise, her feet could not even reach the fuel pedal because it is so deep; neither the Elise comes with an air condition system and the soft top is not automatic. I guess the Elise is a true sport cars and if that is what we wanted ; we would not be talking to each other here in MBWorld.

 

so we all agree that the M3 and C55 both make comprimises in slightly different areas, and that both are great cars and we are privalleged to be able to enjoy them.

 

Neo,

Isn't the Lambo getting softer these days with better interior appointments, heavier, and adaptive suspension?? Isn't the new Porsche 911 getting softer too?? In your argument, every car should have carbon fiber seats, rock hard suspension, feather weight, etc.. What's wrong with my argument about the "degree" of compromise??? Everything is a compromise, even the Lambos, Porsches, and Ferraris. However, they compromise far less than a Toyota Camry in terms of performance and handling, right?? Thus, my point with C55 and M3.

Neoprufrok, you are too close minded to my argument. It's YOU that can't see the picture. All you see is black & white. Look in the mirror before posting and criticizing. Geez.

IMO, for a $60K sports car from a racing branch of MB, the lack of LSD is a significant lack of detail. Does the CTS-V have one over the normal CTS?? yes. BMW M3 has one over the regular 3-series. That's just part of the sports package these days...and should come with a car costing that much and with a racing heritage. Like a poster above, even the new Acura RL has a sophisticated LSD. And with so much power from AMG engines, i sincerely believe that LSD will improve AMG cars. Think about it...it's a great feature to have when you autocross or race someone at a stoplight (not that i support those things). Think how different it would feel than the traction control.

BTW, YOU said that LSD was only good at extreme handling...i disagree by saying that LSD does more than that.

If you don't believe me about the cost of LSD, then just check out any other car manufacturer's option list. It's not my opinion, it's fact. Remember, if LSD costs $400, then it's truly pennies to the manufacturer. You should know this considering what you claim your knowledge level is.

I do believe that AMG is faking it MORE than BMW M. If you are gonna argue this, then RE-read my first paragraph. Remember, it was a member of this forum who brought up heritage of AMG...NOT me. To help support my point, i gave the example of G55 AMG, which in my opinion, is a useless contraption.

What's there to argue about CNTLAW's five points?? They are true for his needs. I won't argue about his need to please his mother-in-law. I agree with 4 doors vs. 2 doors practicality...who doesn't??

He listed points for C55 superiority...thus, becoming a C55 vs. M3 thread (damn it, just look at the title!)...and i listed ONE of BMW M3 superiority. Is that wrong on this forum?? It looks like you guys get your panties all twisted if anyone criticizes your car. And you say that I am close-minded??!!

I never thought that i had to repeat myself this many times...rather simple arguments i thought. You guys prove me wrong.

 

I see where ur coming from, the simple mechanical LSDs found in older cars are not expensive. BUT, LSDs are becoming common and simply putting a LSD will surely improve handling but for the sake of marketing, it should be linked to other electronics like the ones found in EVOs AYC.

The EVOs had this sort of technology way back in 1997.

btw Thai, what exactly did the M-differential do in ur M3? Did it split torque between left and right wheels?

 

If you want to continue this argument further, I'd suggest giving me a ring via my PM. I don't think that we've benefitted the community in any way by posting our differences on the internet.

I really don't need to look in the mirror. I'm confident in my qualifications as a person and a car enthusiast. If you feel that its necessary to make personal remarks and rather crude criticism - I don't feel its necessary to engage in conversation anymore. Frankly, I'm too busy to care about what you have to say on this matter.

 

M-variable differential is clutch-based and electronically linked to ESP. It can transfer torque to one wheel from 0-100% lock. Unlike Torsen LSDs, it will function in zero traction surfaces. But, the other potential problem is that it's clutch-based instead of a true gear-driven system. Otherwise, it works as advertised when i had my M3.

 

Good for ya!

 

As the saying goes..."you can't argue with idiots, they'll just drag you down with nonsense."

 

I know...geez, these people! :p

BTW, you should not call these members on this forum, "idiots." That's just not nice.

 

why is this thread still alive?!?!?!

 

...I'd rather have a car with an all-aluminum 5.5L V8 with 390 lb-ft of torque and no LSD than a car with a cast iron 3.6L I6 with only 262 lb-ft of torque and LSD. It's nice to actually feel something happening below 4,000 rpm. It's also nice to know that the manufacturer of my car took the time to perform adequate QA and ensure that production samples weren't blowing engines left and right.

So, while it would definitely be nice and avantageous to have an LSD, given the choice, I think I can happily live without it, or get one installed if I feel inclined; it is a helluvalot less expensive to install an LSD than to install a V8, after all. And given the alternative, well...there are worse things than no LSD...

 

V8+367hp+52kgm RULES !!

 

ease it up guys, IMHO at least this is a balanced argument

unlike some other trolls who come in here and post AMG killing stories and claim their cars have the biggest *****

 

Remind me...what's all that power when C32/55 is no faster than M3's puny engine??!!

And remind me also...doesn't the C32 supercharger have some issues also??

 

who says the C32/C55 arent faster than the M3??!


the a few of the AMG superchargers suffer from a "chirp", which i have yet to experience.

doesnt the S54 have a reputation of blowing up?

 

Well, according to Car & Driver, Road & Track, Automobile, Autocar, etc....i lost count.

I think that it's more than just a "chirp." You better do a search on this forum.

 

schlagen Sie den Nagel auf dem Kopf (hit the nail on the head)

 

Well, for starters, there is no C55/CLK55 blown engine page, but there damn sure is one for the M3, now isn't there?! And oh, in reading that blown engine page for the mighty M3, I see it's had *two* recalls now...great engine, that little sewing machine!! Yeah, I'd bank on *that* holding up long-term...not.

No faster?? Well, since you wimped out and never took me up on my challenge to come up here and run me in your little sewing machine before you sold it, I guess you wouldn't know on that one, would you? But the guy I pulled three times in a row from 80-140 last week knew it. Three lengths every time.

These M3 and M5 owners knew it, too:
E46 M3 owner vs. his Dad's CLK55: four races, four wins for CLK55

E46 M3 owner: two races, two wins for CLK55

E46 M3 owner: multiple races, M5 vs. M3 vs. CLK55; CLK55 wins all

CLK55 owner vs M3: two races, one win for CLK55, one tie, both on video

CLK55 owner vs his brother's M5: multiple runs, dead even (M5s are faster than M3s)

M5 owner who switched to CLK55 reports CLK55 is just as quick

M3 owner reports runs with W210 E55: dead even race

(note that W210 E55 is about 300 pounds heavier than W208 CLK55, with same HP and gearing, so from a roll CLK should be quicker, i.e., based upon these results it would pull M3)

add another E46 M3 owner to the list:

add still another E46 M3 owner to the list:

And here are four more for you:
Motorweek's test of CLK55 AMG: 13.4@107

Motorweek's test of E46 M3: 13.5@107

Edmunds's test of CLK55 AMG: 13.48@106.3

Edmunds's test of M3: 13.5@105

Finally, a few C32 stories:

C32 vs M3: guess who won?

Another C32 vs Another M3: guess who won?

Not faster?? BMW owners disagree with you. And how many CLK55's/C55's did you run in your M3? My guess would be a big, fat zero on that one.

One might remind you that the title of the thread, and hence its topic, is C55 vs M3, not "C32 vs. M3"...but then, you already knew that; you are simply engaging yet again in your time-tested tactic of changing the subject when you're losing, which you've done throughout the thread.

Finally, if the M3 is the be-all, end-all car you seem to think it is (particularly given the endless hours you spend here trolling about it), then why did you sell yours?? Or did you ever have one? You sure weren't in any hurry to come up here and put your money where your mouth was, that's for sure.