MRAMG1

WOW, after reading the article, I know which one will be parked in my driveway a few years from now when it falls like ALL the other MB

Its funny, EVERYTHING car and driver said about why they like the M, is WHY I NO LONGER drive one. NO bottom end Torque, only fun at the limits, and makes you work to enjoy it. For a track car, okay its the one, for an everyday drive, I THINK NOT.

Oh well, THANK YOU AMG engineers for bringing home the bacon, AGAIN

See yeah

ctC230K

that is a pointless test then. why wouldn't they put the c63 in manual mode on highest gear and then try that?

dsb

Exactly. It only makes sense manual vs manual. It is a flawed test, one I disregard. I've often thought of writing a letter to the publication. I think all test should be conducted in the optimal gear. That way Automatic that have no M mode would still be represented correctly.

Slater126

Man, I'm still caught up on this 10 MPG thing. I hope to buy this car in '11 or so (a used one). I'll watch other articles and I hope it's false. Otherwise, the M3/4 is going to be mighty tempting.

bfnnrgn

I don't believe it will be anywhere near 10. In my E55 I could get it down to 9mpg but that was stop, floor it to 60, stop floor it, over and over while screwing around. The E55 sucked gas worse than the E63 does. Even driving aggressively in city streets I still got 15ish. Highways 24. I don't know where they got 10 from but it wasn't driving it on the road.

Slater126

I tend to think the same thing. They probably beat the living snot out of it and got that mileage. I don't think it will be great MPG-wise but I'd expect 15 MPG average. I could tolerate that.

360_iti

I think it's a typo. EPA city is always considered the worst, so why the "700 miles" mpg is even worse than the city ?
Look at the numbers again.

EPA City : 13 mpg
EPA Highway : 20 mpg
700 miles : 10 mpg ????? Something doesn't add up.

I call it

c32used

What a pitty that once again BMW beats the competition with less hp and better suspension.....thank God I care less what those journalist think....C63 rocks!!! 10MPG or not

360_iti

The main reason C&D liked it better because it was "the most sporting and emotionally appealing (whatever), and the relationship it fosters with the driver".
They also said "this latest M3 offers the purest, least diluted, most involving, and best-in-class driver-and-machine relationship

I don't think the C63 is inferior to the M3 in the handling department, and there's no question about performance. So it must be the manual transmission that played a pretty big role in bringing about the conclusion.

gkstar

Sound like a long going love affair to me, Look at the expressions they used .

I could hardly hold my tears

MBNorCal

that's not even the full potential of the 63 engine. bring it up to the 520hp!

MERCaudi

I raised this same point time and time again on another form. The only comparisons that matters in this segment is...

C63 vs. RS4 vs. E90 M3

chiphomme

BMW "cheats"? Who is aiming at whom? Sorry to burst your bubble but Mercedes was aiming the C63 at the iconic M3, not the other way round. So you should really ask why Mercedes didn't make a coupe instead of 4 door?

360_iti

I agree.

MERCaudi

I honestly believe Mercedes true intent is to make the C63 class leader in the small luxury sedan segment. Think about it, the E92 M3 barely outperforms if at all the C63 which offers top notch interior to go with it's amazing performance. Furthermore it would make more sense for Mercedes to try in top the B7 RS4 if anything..

hkycoldrct

I'm thinking these numbers may be fairly optimistic. 3.9/12.2 would make that one fricking hell-of-a-beast on the road. At these posted times you can almost go Z06 hunting. One of the other magazines had the 0-60 and quarter mile times a little higher and more along the lines of what I thougt the car would be -- 4.2 - 4.3 ish in the 0-60 category. If these numbers ring true, the 450 HP avertised is just marketing (closer to 500) to keep the C in check with the E and S class. God forbid the C have more ponies than the E!

hkycoldrct

By that time none of us will be able to afford it at $50.00 a gallon!

kwontumspeed

Hold that thought. Remember, we're in bed with Brazil and they justed discovered an oil field that will place them in the top10 global exporters of petrol. Good for us, I mean the US that is. So by the time our kids get their hands on our preciously driven (ahem) C63s and other V8s (I prefer handing my first born my cherry 500E), maybe barrel prices will be...shuck, who the hell am I trying to kid?!

10MPG, it's an error. Come on, look at all the other real world stats for all V8s from Stutt or across the countryside. And speaking of real world stats in minds, yes, the C63 is an auto, but BMW has got to have a smidget of a complex that a 4 door sedan has been chomping the bit at it's 2door powerhouse. Sure, put 3 passengers & driver in the C63 and 2 in the M3 and you'll watch it creep away from you at a launch, but take that same "real world" scenario with the same set up at speeds and you'll easily have four people in the C63 snickering that a 2door, 2passenger BMW was handed it's tail on a platter. No, I'm not saying that the C63 will smoke the M3, but at least you can show up a 2 door M3, and get to tee time early for four with bags in tow. That's what I admire about what AMG did with this SEDAN.

c32used

No matter what magazines say the C63 will do very well here...it looks better then there competition in my opinion and the power its bringing is something alot of V8s have to worry about.

ash-c32

yes but there is more to life than just power (although it does help)

The m3 is a better drivers car is what the article is telling us.I think it is currently beyond AMG to make a real drivers car but it is getting closer. Maybe the next generation of models will major on lighter weight over the front axle and a more subtle chassis balance.If Audi can do it with the R8 then im sure AMG can.

MRAMG1

AS I said before and I will say it again, since I owned a M3 and a M roadster with the E46 motor.

Yes the M is better on the track and at the limits, ie it MAKES you dirve the car, however for the other 99.99% of the time I will take my C32, or ANY AMG over the M for just that reason.
You can truely enjoy driving a AMG, WITHOUT having to work for the fun. Little things like torque below 4000 rpm is just ONE of my issues here.
Suit yourself, but I will NOT go back to BMW's even with a HIGH reving V-8, COME ON C63, deprecieate already, LIKE ALL AMG's, so I can afford you

See yeah

Improviz

Well, I think that's overstating things a bit....just because they not-at-all-biased editors at C&D picked the M over the AMG doesn't mean that the AMG is not a "real drivers car"....in fact, there have been numerous reviews from overseas rags (including EVO and others that are much better than C&D) that have given the AMG great compliments on its steering, handling dynamics, etc.

gkstar

I would turn the table and say if the world was covered with twisty roads only and I cannot live w/o manual, yeah I may choose the M and feel the lack of under steer at the limits and a better driver's connection.

Step out of that world and C63 rules and difference is not just subtle, IMHO.

ash-c32

so if you live on roads that are only straight an auto car is much better?

Improviz

I wasn't aware that the transmission a vehicle is fitted with affects the maximum speed at which it can corner, or its cornering grip. I was under the impression that this is related to things like tires, suspension, structural rigidity, weight, weight distribution, and weight transfer.