PC Valkyrie

From Germany's Autozeitung magazine, and translated from German from another forum.

The M3 won all categories but engine/transmission (which was close 752 for the C63 to 750 for M3), in total: 3131 points M3, 3057 C63.

The M3 is better on track and wins this test since it's the "better one". But the C63 is one of the most dynamic Mercedes models. They didn't like the PP, which adds not much to the performance but worsens the comfort.

0-100 kph|0-200|slalom18m|braking dist|weight|handling course
M3: 5.0s | 15.9s | 66.8kph | 35.6/34.6m | 1655kg | 1:38.7 min
C63: 4.6s | 15.3s | 65.4kph | 36.2/35.4m | 1820kg | 1:40.0 min

M3 was on 18" PS2, Manual gearbox.
C63 had P Zero and the Performance Package (030).

SolidGranite

No surprises here...

jtc55

+1, C63 wins in the straights and M3 in the twisties.

Spartacus700

The only reason the C63 was even close to the M3 in handling is because in this test it DID have the performance pack. If you look at a lot of the comparison videos on YouTube you will see that in most (if not all) cases, they are running the C63 without the PP.... which means NO lomited slip differential. That's why the C63 looks like it's less controllable and "such a beast" as it's been described... especially with the easy ability to spin the rear tires accelerating out of turns due to the high torque.

The nasty rumor that the PP will not be offered for the C63 in the U.S. for the first year (combined with the fact that the M3 now WILL be available with the dual clutch transmission)... are the key factors that are tilting me back to getting the new M3 for now.

I think it's a crime to not have LSD standard on a car like the C63 !?... Can't make sense of this....

GBlansten

kostas

I personally feel that each car is for a different person.. depending on what they want.. if you look at numbers.. yea the M3 wins.. but the C63 is a little more extravagent... has anyone seen the top gear review of the M3 vs C63 vs RS4?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=usQi1peqQOs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g5nzEax87lw

M3 = sublime
RS4 = civilized
C63 = insane

makes sense... id take the C63, if i need that perfection on a track.. ill get a 911

ultraseven

Thanks for the Top Gear links. I'm disappointed at how poorly the C63 competed on that track compared to both the M3 and RS4. It barely beat the RS4 by .4 seconds despite the favorable weight and power advantage, but lost to the M3 by 5 seconds.

5 seconds is an eternity on a track.

It's not to to say that I will drive like I stole the car, but if that car in fact had the PP it's a disappointment to say the least. It seems AMG has got their act together but have a bit to go before putting out a car that can match the M's handling.

Cylinder Head

iTrader: (1)

Considering that AMG just recently changed their paradigm to beating ///M cars at their own game, I'd say they're making some great strides.

Andy7oaks

If the Germans says the PP is too harsh on their smooth roads then it must be really harsh.

What Mercedes should offer is just the LSD on it's own, it's a no brainer, but no they have to tie it in with a rock hard suspension and a steering wheel in materials that make it look too racer boy, go figure.

The Performance package should be something like the following

+30bhp
delimit to 186mph
mechanical LSD
performance driving course.

and they should offer it for ALL markets.



Regards

Andy

Zod

i love how people say track results!!!!!!...like they actuly track these cars or any other luxo car in the ring

also Pzero tires suck! i have them and they give ZERO traction...dont know if these are the new ones but hey

Carl Lassiter

Track results are decent indicator of handling though, no?

Agree on P-zero's. Michelin PS2s are the tire king.

Improviz

Mercedes are idiots, pure and simple. The BMW M cars come w/LSD, standard.

As did Pontiac Trans Ams and Chevy Z28s back in the day....hell, even the new Pontiac G8 GT, which lists for under $30,000, has a friggin' LSD, standard.

That the flagship AMG performance cars offer it ONLY as part of a ridiculously expensive option shows a disregard of customers' wants and needs which borders upon contemptuous.

I for one won't be rushing out to buy a new AMG anytime soon, I can tell you that.

GBlansten

ultraseven

In some sense, yes. A difference of 1 or 2 seconds won't make too much of a difference, but 5 seconds on a 2 min 40 track? That's pretty huge.

2MANYCARS

As Jeremy Clarkson put it, M3 drivers have no friends, but who cares, it's still a better all around car.

GBlansten

What I am looking for a is a review of the C63 with and without the LSD. If it is n't relevant unless you track the car then I wouldn't want one.

Cylinder Head

iTrader: (1)

I'd say an LSD is pretty relevant for anything pumping out more than 400hp. You're wasting power unless you have one.

CynCarvin32

The C63's have the new P-Zero tire which is actually an excellent tire. Older P-Zero version were terrible but this new version I think is "better" than the PS2. The car I rode in had the P-Zero tires and it had very impressive grip levels in both the wet and dry.

Sadly many C63's I think will also be coming with the beautiful Conti SportContact 2 tires. Those will kill the fun.

GBlansten

I agree. I'm just curious on test differences between them. It would be great to see how much of a disparity in performance is present.