Thoughts: C63 vs CTS-V
Last edited by ericpd; Mar 19, 2009 at 08:56 AM.

If everyone thought like you I guess no one would own an AMG mercedes...
I miss my stick shift too, although there are def some positives about the paddle shifting...
"lap times on a road course dont really have a lot to do with roll on acceleration. my point is simply that i have driven several 6.3 AMG's and thought they felt slow. My seat of the pants is that a stock 6.3 would get destroyed by a stock V. and i dont see a computer upgrade making a 6.3 that much faster. now if you are talking about the 65 V12 twin turbo that is a whole different story. but again, those cars are 2-3 times as expensive as the V."
From the lips (or well fingers) of John Hennessey. A God hovering around the ranks of oh let's say,... Mercury or Apollo. But a god none-the-less in the field.
Sorry guys,... couldn't resist poking ole DaGS in the ribs.
The Best of Mercedes & AMG
That quote right there sums it up, I don’t care who wrote that and what his points are... but anyone who can say that is a FOOL and his opinions mean absolutely nothing to me...
Even I will admit I don’t like the CTS-V but I wouldn’t say its SLOW (it beats the C63 by a HAIR!! LOL)
ANYONE who says the C63 is slow is a F'in idiot, or must drive an LP640 everyday... It’s faster than the M3, IS-F, and it think the M5 at under 100mph...
"Sorry guys,... couldn't resist poking ole DaGS in the ribs."
HAHAHAHA all you did was make me laugh, that was the funniest and most retarded thing I’ve heard all week...that was great.
And YES I know who John Hennessey is, and he is also a fool now and lost all credibility in my eyes, and anyone with a brain on this site who reads that quote should also feel the same way...
You're going to call me ignorant because I say American cars=*****, which is actually true when you clowns think the C63 is slow. I can’t believe you’re stupid enough to post that or even believe it …
C’mon dude that clowns quote shouldn’t make you feel all warm and comfty inside because you actually bought American Crap (Even though I like the CTS better than most of the rest of the worthless line-up)
A couple hwy runs (not me):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=71oVtYI6kDA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BNoh2...x=0&playnext=1
"Fast"
and
"Slow"
I would not place any AMG vehicle in the second category.
Not trying to fight over this - just expressing an opinion.
here is a better comparison between the 2007 MP4-22 F1 Car vs C350 vs CLK63 Black Series vs Mercedes DTM Touring Car
Ok, I lied. I read the first 3 & 1/2 pages then started skipping.
I was impressed though that it went over 3 pages before getting ugly.
If you drive a C63, you must be able to appreciate a performance car. So, how could you not apriciate the latest Caddy? I myself just like all things fast, and I have to admit, I also don't like to pay too much to go fast, so I could see why the OP went with the Caddy. If he plans on modding it to go really fast, it was a no brainer.
Anyway, I never did get to see those pics that the OP was going to post. Hell, it's his thread, post up pics of your CTSV.
Last edited by SebringSilver; Mar 31, 2009 at 10:27 AM.
You obviously know nothing about cars for making a statement like this, and please do not to ashame yourself by posting again.
I believe most of us chose C63 based on our preferences, its overall performance, and etc... not based on its brands, or model compared to other lineup within the same brand.
If you can afford a other 63/65AMG, grats! Too bad, I'm stuck in a "chessy, econobox of benz" C63.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BNoh2...x=0&playnext=1





