Car and Driver: C63 AMG v '07 Audi RS 4 v '08 BMW M3
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,466
Likes: 10
From: Southern Cali (Ontario)
The ride seems to be a major issue troubling nearly all journalists. The funny thing is, ride quality was never acknowledged as a positive on the C55 against the E46 M3. Now, it seems that since the C63 is very close to the E92 M3 in handling terms, ride quality seems to be the only factor to separate the two cars - with journalists this time around, oddly, welcoming the M3's more compliant ride!
I always take motoring journalists with a handful of salt (yes, not a grain!) because of the vast subjective differences in their opinion. Does everyone remember the sheer positive press the C63 got when it was first driven compared to the lashing the M3 got? Now, two month later, the M3 wins all the comparison tests?
I can appreciate that ultimate handling requires sacrifices in ride quality, but I wonder if this time around, AMG have sacrificed too much to chase M3 drivers. US drivers need not worry because your quality of roads are far superior to British roads.
In any event, with fast rising fuel prices, environmental propaganda and crappy roads - a hard-riding, 6.3 litre monster may not sell so well in the UK. A great shame considering the development and effort AMG are putting into their cars.
Bilal
I always take motoring journalists with a handful of salt (yes, not a grain!) because of the vast subjective differences in their opinion. Does everyone remember the sheer positive press the C63 got when it was first driven compared to the lashing the M3 got? Now, two month later, the M3 wins all the comparison tests?
I can appreciate that ultimate handling requires sacrifices in ride quality, but I wonder if this time around, AMG have sacrificed too much to chase M3 drivers. US drivers need not worry because your quality of roads are far superior to British roads.
In any event, with fast rising fuel prices, environmental propaganda and crappy roads - a hard-riding, 6.3 litre monster may not sell so well in the UK. A great shame considering the development and effort AMG are putting into their cars.
Bilal
upgrade to 245/40/18's vs 235/40
and upgrade 265/35/18's vs 255/35
with a 9" rim.. you can even go to 275's if you wanted. But don't know if you have the space.
it will make a difference..
I rather have a stiff ride which I can make softer but using a better rubber and thicker rubber..
compared to having a soft ride that I need to install springs, shocks and bigger wheels.
Newbie
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Mercedes C32 AMG
Its a beast ... YOu got too feed it. Do people think its going to go from 0-60 in 3.9 on water or air. You got to pay for power... Im sure it will be fine on highway driving. If you want economy, buy a Honda!!!!
Super Moderator Alumni
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 4,539
Likes: 4
From: Southern Cal
a C32 AMG & S-Works Tarmac
https://mbworld.org/forums/c63-amg-w204/216624-c63-vs-m3-vs-rs4-motor-trend-scans.html
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 7,894
Likes: 8
From: Connecticut
2003 CLK55
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 272
Likes: 0
2002 C32, 2011 VW GTI
0-60 in 3.9 seconds 
1/4 mile at 12.3 seconds @ 116 mph
10 mpg
http://www.caranddriver.com/comparis...08-bmw-m3.html
1/4 mile at 12.3 seconds @ 116 mph
10 mpg
http://www.caranddriver.com/comparis...08-bmw-m3.html
Had a '74 Electra 225 that beat that. They need to do better than that, with modern technology and all. Sheesh. And I though my C32 was a guzzler.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 2,949
Likes: 0
From: Philadelphia, PA
2008 A8L, 2002 996TT X50, 2009 X5
My C32, with a mix of spirited city and highway driving, averages around 20 mpg, which is TWICE the mpg of the C63. Keeps the math easy, as both cars require premium, which means the C63s annual fuel cost would be double my C32... ouch.
Love the car though... and I'm not one to ***** about mpg, but still... 10 mpg is terrible.
MB World Stories
The Best of Mercedes & AMG
6 Mercedes Models That Did NOT Age Well (But Are Somehow Still Cool)
Verdad Gallardo
Manual Mercedes? 6 Times Sindelfingen Let Drivers Have All The Fun
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes SLR McLaren 722 S Is Extremely Rare Example Modified by McLaren
Verdad Gallardo
8 Classic Boxy Mercedes Designs That Have Aged Like Fine Wine
Verdad Gallardo
Flawlessly Restored Mercedes 190E Evo II Heads to Auction
Verdad Gallardo
Electric Mercedes C-Class Unveiled: 11 Things You Need to Know
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes EQS Gets A Major Update: Everything You Need to Know
Verdad Gallardo
5 Underrated Mercedes-Benz Models That Don't Get the Love They Deserve
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes 300D Has Pushed Well Past 1 Million Miles and It Ain't Stopping
Verdad Gallardo
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 272
Likes: 0
2002 C32, 2011 VW GTI
+1
My C32, with a mix of spirited city and highway driving, averages around 20 mpg, which is TWICE the mpg of the C63. Keeps the math easy, as both cars require premium, which means the C63s annual fuel cost would be double my C32... ouch.
Love the car though... and I'm not one to ***** about mpg, but still... 10 mpg is terrible.
My C32, with a mix of spirited city and highway driving, averages around 20 mpg, which is TWICE the mpg of the C63. Keeps the math easy, as both cars require premium, which means the C63s annual fuel cost would be double my C32... ouch.
Love the car though... and I'm not one to ***** about mpg, but still... 10 mpg is terrible.
I'm holding out hope that the test car was faulty in some way.
Member
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
From: SoCal
Cars
C&D has always had an unnatural love affair with BMW. For as many years as I can remember Bimmers win just about every comparison regardless of what makes they are pitted against in that magazine.
The mileage at 10 mpg is very distrurbing. Comparable V8s in cars of similar weight are getting much better than 10 mpg. It could be that C&D had their foot in it the whole time they tested the car.
The mileage at 10 mpg is very distrurbing. Comparable V8s in cars of similar weight are getting much better than 10 mpg. It could be that C&D had their foot in it the whole time they tested the car.
Senior Member
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 361
Likes: 0
From: Fargo, North Dakota
2012 Cayenne Turbo
C&D has always had an unnatural love affair with BMW. For as many years as I can remember Bimmers win just about every comparison regardless of what makes they are pitted against in that magazine.
The mileage at 10 mpg is very distrurbing. Comparable V8s in cars of similar weight are getting much better than 10 mpg. It could be that C&D had their foot in it the whole time they tested the car.
The mileage at 10 mpg is very distrurbing. Comparable V8s in cars of similar weight are getting much better than 10 mpg. It could be that C&D had their foot in it the whole time they tested the car.
The C63 is great but its not just Car and Driver that picked the new M3 over it.
Member
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 225
Likes: 0
Dad - CL550, Me C350, Sista B8 A4
how many miles did the C class have? that mkes a difference. was the motor broken in? we all know it gets better as motors get more miles on it. also, werent they driving the car pretty hard? of course your not gonna get good mileage driving a V8 to redline...right?
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 359
Likes: 0
From: MA
the stock values obtained by c/d are almost identical to Brabus Bullit's performance values.
0-60 both 3.9
1/4m both 12.3
only difference AMG has a limiter at 155 and Brabus can do 215+ mph
I am sure Brabus costs 3 times more with the 6.3L V12 TT in it.
either Bullits performance numbers are very conservative or its got too much power(730hp 811 tq) it cant get a good grip.
so i am guessing if the second one is right, detuned 6.3 engine is already optimal for the car. usuall speced 6.3 (518hp) may not be that much benefitial in terms of accelaration.
perhaps someone with more knowledge compare both cars and give a better analysis.
0-60 both 3.9
1/4m both 12.3
only difference AMG has a limiter at 155 and Brabus can do 215+ mph
I am sure Brabus costs 3 times more with the 6.3L V12 TT in it.
either Bullits performance numbers are very conservative or its got too much power(730hp 811 tq) it cant get a good grip.
so i am guessing if the second one is right, detuned 6.3 engine is already optimal for the car. usuall speced 6.3 (518hp) may not be that much benefitial in terms of accelaration.
perhaps someone with more knowledge compare both cars and give a better analysis.
Newbie
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
From: San Diego
996 Turbo, ML320
Sorry if this has been discussed already, I have not read the entire posting very carefully.
I thought the most impressive and convincing test from this article were the acceleration from 30-70 and 50-70. The MB was nearly three time faster from 30-70 and twice as fast from 50-70 compared to the other two cars. That is real world usefullness, accelerating on freeway on-ramps. Although the MB beats in the 0-100 and 0-150 test the other tests I thought were very impressive.
I was almost convinced to purchase an RS4 Wagon when it arrives, but now I think I may have to wait for the C63 wagon.
I thought the most impressive and convincing test from this article were the acceleration from 30-70 and 50-70. The MB was nearly three time faster from 30-70 and twice as fast from 50-70 compared to the other two cars. That is real world usefullness, accelerating on freeway on-ramps. Although the MB beats in the 0-100 and 0-150 test the other tests I thought were very impressive.
I was almost convinced to purchase an RS4 Wagon when it arrives, but now I think I may have to wait for the C63 wagon.
Junior Member
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
From: Tampa Bay Area, FL
13 ML63, 13 GTR, 16 Tesla X
Sorry if this has been discussed already, I have not read the entire posting very carefully.
I thought the most impressive and convincing test from this article were the acceleration from 30-70 and 50-70. The MB was nearly three time faster from 30-70 and twice as fast from 50-70 compared to the other two cars. That is real world usefullness, accelerating on freeway on-ramps. Although the MB beats in the 0-100 and 0-150 test the other tests I thought were very impressive.
I was almost convinced to purchase an RS4 Wagon when it arrives, but now I think I may have to wait for the C63 wagon.
I thought the most impressive and convincing test from this article were the acceleration from 30-70 and 50-70. The MB was nearly three time faster from 30-70 and twice as fast from 50-70 compared to the other two cars. That is real world usefullness, accelerating on freeway on-ramps. Although the MB beats in the 0-100 and 0-150 test the other tests I thought were very impressive.
I was almost convinced to purchase an RS4 Wagon when it arrives, but now I think I may have to wait for the C63 wagon.
Member
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 170
Likes: 0
From: Vancouver B.C.
slk32(gone), 08 c63.
wow..i just downloaded the test sheets now that u guys are talking about the acc. for 30-50 and 50-70. damn man, c63 is gonna blow the m3's door right off on free way lol
C63
30-50 = 2.3seconds
50-70 = 3 seconds
M3
30-50 = 6.8seconds
50-70 = 5.9seconds
can't wait to see those faces on those future m3 (or procedes 335i's) owners on freeway in vancouvermoahah
C63
30-50 = 2.3seconds
50-70 = 3 seconds
M3
30-50 = 6.8seconds
50-70 = 5.9seconds
can't wait to see those faces on those future m3 (or procedes 335i's) owners on freeway in vancouver
moahah
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,679
Likes: 0
CLS55 AMG
I thought the most impressive and convincing test from this article were the acceleration from 30-70 and 50-70. The MB was nearly three time faster from 30-70 and twice as fast from 50-70 compared to the other two cars. That is real world usefullness, accelerating on freeway on-ramps. Although the MB beats in the 0-100 and 0-150 test the other tests I thought were very impressive.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 2,146
Likes: 1
From: L.A., CA
'08 M5, '10 Land Cruiser
Your understanding is spot on.
Unfortunately though, we have to wait until next fall. Europe gets the Avant version in early spring. It's going to be along wait but I'm very hopeful it'll be worth it.
Super Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 560
Likes: 0
C43, SLK32, CLK63 Black Series
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,319
Likes: 3
From: Thick Ascending Limb
2017 BMW X5M DG/AB
wow..i just downloaded the test sheets now that u guys are talking about the acc. for 30-50 and 50-70. damn man, c63 is gonna blow the m3's door right off on free way lol
C63
30-50 = 2.3seconds
50-70 = 3 seconds
M3
30-50 = 6.8seconds
50-70 = 5.9seconds
can't wait to see those faces on those future m3 (or procedes 335i's) owners on freeway in vancouvermoahah
C63
30-50 = 2.3seconds
50-70 = 3 seconds
M3
30-50 = 6.8seconds
50-70 = 5.9seconds
can't wait to see those faces on those future m3 (or procedes 335i's) owners on freeway in vancouver
moahah
Senior Member
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 361
Likes: 0
From: Fargo, North Dakota
2012 Cayenne Turbo
