BoBcanada

Here we go again, another M3 vs C63 battle. First 4-door M3 vs C63 comparison from Autozeitung.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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).

Last Emperor

is that all the said about the PP

did they go into more detail???

MikTrebla09

Wow, I'm surprised there's little absolute difference between the 100 to 200mph times (10.9 vs 10.7 AMG's favor). I expected the C63 to blow the M3 out of the water in straight line performance, ceteris paribus.

I wonder how much difference the 7speed DCT tranny will make.

Thanks for the info.

7 speed SMG

Even with Performance package the C63 lost by 1.3sec. The M-DCT should be even faster on the straight line and on the track, since it allows the driver to focus even more.

I would still buy the C63 though. In Brazil they're very expensive:
M3=U$$240.000,00 C63 = U$$195.000,00

Cylinder Head

iTrader: (1)

Good luck racing M5's guys.

Still for a single-generation jump that's very impressive to be biting the heels of the M3. Too bad the PP makes it WORSE for the street. You're probably better off just getting an aftermarket LSD.

Hans Delbruck

.....and whoever thinks either of these cars is a great track car... doesn't go to the track very much. Also, it is going to take driver skill to extract the fastest possible laptime out of each of them. Splitting hairs over a few tenths isn't relevant for bench racers. And true track drivers simply don't choose a car like this for their track car. There are much more viable alternatives in that price range if you want to drop your laptimes, not to mention drop $65-70K on a car that you risk putting in a wall...

Carl Lassiter

But track times are indicative of chassis and suspension competence. There are bends on roads you know.

Familycar

Tires are a huge factor with regards to track times.

Familycar

Get some fat tires on the thing and it will be fun for DEs though.

BoBcanada

you are forgeting one thig guys... C63 comes with narrow tires... m3 with less power wears a 265r 245 f i belive... and those are ps2! C63 235 front! 255 rear....how fair can it get... its also very hevy... slap some decent tires and it will run with m3.

Carl Lassiter

But we are comparing stock to stock, surely? Anyhow, 1cm will not make or break the lap time. If it we 2 or 3cm I'd see your point but this is how MB supply them. You guys are struggling

Cylinder Head

iTrader: (1)

+1

You'll never get truly wide tires in the wells of a C63. Not wide enough for all of that power.

BoBcanada

why all of you M5 boys are so into smashing C63 lol??

I bet if you can and you probably can fit 275r and 245 front you will see waaaay better track times!

Its just i bet Mercedes did that on purpose in order not to outhandle sl63,e63 ETC. Another idiotic Marketing move.

The best part is that for 700 bux you can unlock 530 hp. And then i'll make sure to provide you with videos of me racing M5 because im tired of my friends m5ers picking on me too

Carl Lassiter

We're not smashing the C63 at all. Just saying that factory to factory it it out handled by the M3. It's still a good car and dynamic package. Modding is neither here nor there and bang goes any warranty while at the same weight it's still won't keep up with the 7 perfectly spaced ratios of a stock or lightly modded M5 on the highway, not that it really matters. The fact CH and I have M5s is coincidence. Remember, the M3 is the c63's competition as regards everything from price to size to luxury appointments. All we're doing is checking the sometimes blind support support which crops up on all these sites for the "home team."

Hakk403

What single generation jump?

Nurburgring laptimes:

8:22 --- 147.75 km/h -- Mercedes-Benz C55 (sport auto07/2004)
8:22 --- 147.75 km/h -- BMW M3 E46, 343 PS/1584 kg (sport auto 12/00)

yaymitch

I have had the last two model M3's and m now getting a C63. The new M3 seems kinda boring. It has only 295 lb/ft of torque. Seems like they could have come out with a more powerful car. Heck the last E46 M3 had 262 torque and the 335i has 300 lb/ft of torque. You have to keep the M3 above 5-6k rpm to experience the true fun factor of the car. IMO not much of an improvement over the last M3. The C63 may not be able to hang on the track but it will definitely be more fun to drive.

Carl Lassiter

the dates of the tests are 4 yrs apart. C32 vs M3, C55 vs M3 CS

Familycar

bench racing... Sheesh. Different cars same conversations. Between the C63 & current M3 M5 blah blah the better driver will post the better lap times. Of course the more you move up the less this is true. Calling all M-car drivers: get the fattest R6/R1/nt01/ whatever on your car. I'll do the same. ..let's go have some fun. You'll see how differences btween the cars appear minimal relative to the differences btween drivers. Btw, I think its flattering to see the M cars talked up on the C63 board.

JohnEnglish

I've test driven both and I'm not surprised. Although the MB has the horsepower advantage the BMW is a more nimble car.

Carl Lassiter

I don't think he's guilty of bench racing. Look, track times reflect handling and are done with equal drivers. You could Schumacher in a Cobalt and he'd still pulverize me around the Nurburgring. Of course the C63 is close to the M3; it's a car that handles well, brakes well and accelerates well.

Also, it's not a question of "getting the fattest tires" on our cars. The point is AMG under tire their cars and have done for years. My OEM 255/40 285/35 19" setup allied to LSD does just fine. If I affixed a rocket to my car it may break the sound barrier, but that's besides the point.

Now which track do you have in mind? Laguna Seca? I sure it would be fun win or lose.

Spartacus700

$700 bux to buy what ???

2MANYCARS

Both are great cars. I love my M6 and my wife's C63.

aznAMG07

^I agree! Why can't we all just get a long? Both cars are spectacular! It's like ying and yang, yo!

Hakk403

I know the date difference, but I didn't think the e46 m3 in the U.S changed in performance at all during the cycle.

Carl Lassiter

Not dramatically but enough to give it a little breathing space on the track. MY06 M3 came in optional CS form with brakes that were both bigger and cross drilled, a quicker steering rack and tires up from the regular car's 225/255 to 235/265 (it seems the extra cm makes all the difference around here).