Rebellax

Ok, my Dad just traded in his E55 for an E63 amg and I must say it is an awesome vehicle!

I have a Audi S4 and I'm looking to trade it in for an AMG but I want something different than what my Dad has but I want to be just as fast if not faster! Also, I have a friend that has a bmw M5 and a neighbor that has a audi RS4 so obviously I want to be faster than both of them.

Is the new C63 the way to go and keep up with the "Jones" and not be in the $90K price range? Is it faster than the E63, M5 or RS4? Should I go and get my name on the waiting list at Mercedes?

SolidGranite

From what I have read, the C63 will be faster than all of the mentioned cars.

Especially since it will be easily tuned to over 500hp as well. In addition it's a way better looking car than all the others mentioned too.

ProV1

if beating those 'joneses' is your primary concern, and if $ is an issue go get a Z06.. game over..

otherwise 997TT and boost it >650HP+


but seriously, ppl who buy E63 are not just after the speed. it's the total pkg. more room/more luxury/better features than C63.

SoS SWATxV2

There is no way the C63 will be faster than the E63 or M5. At all.

Though the RS4 would probably get beat by C63 as it is in its class of competition.

360_iti

Your post gives us an idea about how old you are. You're longing for a fast car and your benchmark is your neighbor's car and your friend's.
So why don't you get an M3, join their forums and stay there. It fits your age, and I'm sure you'll find a lot more people of your maturity level
Bye nice to meet you.

ProV1

give the n00b a break. he wants his dad to buy him a new ride. let him have some fun.

tjbrum

hilarious bro.

360_iti

Don't be so sure about this.

Rebellax

As far as 4DOOR sport cars are concerned under $95K who has the edge 0-60 and all around performance? What's the car to buy?

ScottW911

How sad. And here I thought the Orange County was all about spoiled rich kids living the "image".

Here's the way I see it. Dad worked hard to earn his E63. So did the neighbors. Before you feel the need to be better than Dad, try out-working him to earn your own E or C or whatever you want. And, it is not "obvious" why you have to be faster than Dad (when he is paying for the car in the first place) or the neighbors/friends.

Hopefully, by the time you earn it, you will have matured to the point you don't suffer from odd form of P-nis envy.

Carl Lassiter

People, ignore the troll.

SoS SWATxV2

And why not? The C63 has 457 Horses at 443 ft lb torque.

The E63 has 507 horsepower at 465 ft lb torque.
Sure the E class may weigh more but according to some stats I read, the E has a slightly better weight to power distribution ratio than the lighter more nimble C.

The C63 weighs 3650 lbs curb. The E63 is at around 4100 lbs curb.
My bet is still on the E. And why would Mercedes make the cheaper lower class of competition C faster than the higher E?

hakaida442

I think everyone agrees that the detuned C63 engine will be able to make the same amount of power as the E63 with mods, thus it will be much faster and will handle better. But there are some people that value the size and features the E class has over the C class.

joemoney415

My feeling has always been nothing says entry level, no matter what trim, like a C-class. This has long been the ******* child of Mercedes-Benz and always will be. Where a company like BMW survives on its 3-series, a company like MB puts as little thought as possible into the C-class and merely attempts to target 20% or less of the market. That being said, a C-class is not a status symbol, so if you want a fast car that will turn heads, you need to find a different tool of choice. This may be hard for some of you to read, but just accept it. My recommendation to achieve what you desire is get a Porsche and mod the S*** out of it.

360_iti

I'm not saying that C63 will be faster than E63. All I'm saying is that a lower class AMG doesn't always have to be slower than its bigger brother. Just to satisfy your curiosity and since we’re not talking about facts, lets go to Mercedes-AMG.com shall we.

E63 = 514 hp – unloaded = 1840 kg = 4057 lbs.
Ratio = 7.89 lb/hp


S63 = 525 hp – unloaded = 2070 kg = 4564 lbs
Ratio = 8.69 lb/hp

Which one is cheaper/lower? which one has a better ratio ? yeah… I rest my case.

360_iti

Yeah it was kinda hard for me to read, because as I recall, nobody mentioned anything about status symbol or panty dropper. The OP was just trying to figure out how to beat his dad, neighbor and friend at speed.

SoS SWATxV2

Just to let you know... there's not even too much competition for the S63 at all. I mean there's no BMW M7... and the Audi S8 is no match...

You get what I'm saying, there's not even too many competeting high end luxury performance sedans like the S63 around. It's almost like the S63 is in a class by itself. Don't count in Maybach and the Rolls Royce Phantom. They're considered Ultra Luxury Sedans.

The E63 on the other hand...has the M5, RS6, CTS-V.

...

If the C63 were to be faster than the E, then people would buy the C and not the E. Buy the E for luxury needs? Hell... I don't even get enough leg room space in my M5 barely even...

You get it?

Toog4me

Using your comparison method, the E has more hps per lb. So why would the C63 be any faster (the subject of this thread)?

pointman

Haha you dirty *****.

E55 KEV

Backwards. The E has more less pounds per HP and therefore faster. 7.89 lb for each 1 HP.

The S63 has more weight per HP at 8.69 pounds for each 1 HP.

E55 KEV

Not any more. C-Class is now Mercedes-Benz volume leader. Years ago Mercedes sold more E-Class but now Mercedes sells more C-Class models. USA Sales:

2006:
E-Class 50,195
C-Class 50,187

2005:
E-Class 50,383
C-Class 60,658

2004:
E-Class 58,954
C-Class 69,251

2003:
E-Class 55,683
C-Class 65,982

2002:
E-Class 42,598
C-Class 64,025

Also, if you add the other chassis' built of C-Class (CLK) and E-Class (CLS) the numbers still favor the C-Class.

360_iti

No, I still don't get it. Please forgive my stupidity. But..
First of all, you are of the opinion that AMG won't let any model to be faster than its higher class. And I've proven to you that AMG has already done so. Period. That's the point.
And now suddenly you're bringing competition with other makes into the equation. Well I'm a little confused here. You just said that there's no way AMG would make any model to be faster than its higher class. But now you're saying that AMG deliberately let S63 to be slower than E63 because S63 doesn't have any competition in its class. I think you just contradicted yourself.


Well, looks like they've figured out that people have various reasons behind their decission in purchasing a particular car. Not just because one is faster than the other. That's why they have 12 - 13 classes in the US. That's why they have 3 different SUVs, 2 different coupes, two different roadsters. Some people don't care if their car is slower than the cheaper models. They bought an E63 because they wanted an E, and they wanted it to be the top model within the series, and fast.
If the market was indeed like what you've described (people wouldn't buy E63 just because C63 was faster), then nobody would buy CL63 because according to AMG stats CLK63 is faster.
Again, I'm not saying that C63 will be faster than E63. There's no proven fact yet, and there's a chance that your intuition turns out to be right at the end of the day. Who knows. But when you said "there's no way", I had to beg to differ because the facts have indicated otherwise.

SoS SWATxV2

Alrighty then. And no, you're stupid in anyway at all... That's not too good to say something like that to yourself.

Let's just wait till the C is released and some people from this board do some races or rolls.

360_iti

Btw E55Kev, I think you got your sales stats backwards there.

Carl Lassiter

E is the same size as the 5 series so confused about your phrasing. I think leg room is fine in the midrange and I think they make the best compromise of luxury and sportiness if rear passengers are a regular thing.