transferred

SL65 BS is a bust...auto box and a pig even if it has euro seats.

But no, this car will not come to the US I'm 99.9% sure...heck we never even got the RS6 which is more suited to US roads...

-Rob

HIRO63

Check this out! It sure sounds good and looks fast on track!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cPyLZj6HuLU

yooker

May the biggest budget win, on your mark, get set, MOD!

zivicirl

Well in Europe they have the CLC which they could make into an AMG series.. if they wanted to

VCA_AMG

Perhaps you're referring to the Viper GTS; in which case, I agree

VCA_AMG

+1 Both the GT3 RS and this M3 GTS should in theory smoke a CLK BS.

yooker

Isn't this a better deal than the GT3 or the M3 GTS>?

VCA_AMG

Arguably, yes. That's a badass car.

MikeS54

too much of a handful

soldier2304

It's funny how many infiltrated BMW fanboys we have in this forum (which by the way happen to not even own a benz). So how is it "GAME OVER" for AMG exactly? $110k+ to tackle sharp turns in style with lets see, 30 more horsepower, enhanced BMW "unique" track suspension, different body kit, a huge wing spoiler and a racing interior. If AMG really wanted to develop a track car to actually compete with this(in the same price range) they would of already done so. It seems that M and AMG are still very different in many things and each best at what they are made for and for the type of buyers they aim to attract.

I have a lot of respect for the brand (BMW) but their owners make me sick.

MikeS54

+10000000000000000000000

Stuttgart-UT

+1!!!

just buy a C63 with Performance Packet Plus you have to pay 7000 Euro for 30 Hp more!

C63 PPP= 487hp@1700Kg= 77.000Euro
M3 GTS= 450hp@1500Kg=115.000Euro +38.000Euro!!!!

Than you buy a rollcage and remove the rear seats etc. and i bet you will have the same fun with your C63 PPP as with the M3 Gts for even less money!

and we all know where you can buy this fugly wing @egay....

iftwb

M3 GTS is expected to get a time of ~7:40. Now that is equivalent to LP640, 997 GT3 RS, SLR Mclaren. Can't wait too see its results!

The fact that you let it get to you and the fact that your defending Benz by complaining about BMW fanboys ... is no different to anyone who blatantly professes themselves as a BMW fanboy.

But you are right, it isn't GAMEOVER OR CHECKMATE. It never is for any brand, but at this moment, Benz can be considered in the the situation we so funnily identify as being 'checked'. This car is expected to surpass the E46 M3 CSL (if it didn't, I'd be worried) and ultimately, that should position itself along the lines of the some of the times established by an LP640, SLR and 997 GT3 / GT3 RS. If the old E46 M3 CSL is quicker around a track than 9/10 of the AMG range, this E92 M3 GTS would be almost 99% quicker than all AMGs.

Now where my point about fanboy stands most corrected is where you mention the whole 'If AMG wanted, they could'. A BMW fanboy, like any other fanboy would say the same thing. You just professed it yourself... But lets look at that 'If AMG wanted, they could' remark again. Well guess what? They tried to with the CLK BS and SL BS. They didn't produce it to compete with the M3, obviously; but they produced them as pure, track monsters. They didn't make them to be quicker in a straight line cupcake, it is all about track potential. However, they didn't get very far with it, considering if we compare them to their Italian and American counterparts for which they are comparable to, did it? Quick, but not quick enough for the price you pay for a CLK BS or SL BS.

There are always fanboys everywhere, and I admit, I can be a BMW or Benz fanboy depending on what is being discussed.
Build a bridge and get over it, just discuss and argue your points against. NO brand remains on top and each brand shines with each tide.

Quadcammer

Well, the M3 is already faster around a road course. When you consider the M3 GTS will destroy a stock M3 around a track, I'd say its game over for the C63 on the road course.


That is one HELL of a car, but I would probably also go with a GT3 or a used GT3-RS if you can get one.

Cylinder Head

iTrader: (1)

They did, it's called the CLK63BS and it comes nowhere near even the E46 M3 CSL on a track. Whoopsie!

AMGC60-3

?? The E46 M3 CSL did 7,50 and the CLK 63Black did 7,45 and a note the SLS did 7,40. Whoopsie!!

Quadcammer

the nordschliefe is overused as a performance benchmark. The track is so long, the surface is poor, the conditions are unpredictable, etc.

On a standard track like lets say watkins glen or laguna seca (and maybe even VIR or road america), the CSL should outperform the CLK63BS

tasho3

i thought Halloween was over?! lmfao........ it looks very aggressive and i like it minus the color i think it would look amazing it white

SebringSilver

I wouldn't put too much weight on that 7.45 lap time. It was done by Berndt Schneider, a professional race driver, whereas the 7.50 lap time for the M3 CSL was done independently by Sport Auto magazine with their chief editor at the wheel.

Good point. In fact, if you go here (http://www.fastestlaps.com/track11.html), you can see that Auto Bild magazine posted times for both the CSL and the CLK BS which puts them neck and neck on the Oschersleben circuit in Germany. Quite impressive when you think of the huge power advantage that the Mercedes enjoys over the Bimmer.

tasho3

iftwb

Errrr... real big accomplishment!

3.2L I6 vs 6.2L V8, whole big age difference and not to mention the SLS is sooo much more expensive. It's like comparing GTR to GT3 RS, in this case, CSL to SLS. =]

And FYI, the GTS should produce the same lap time, if not faster. We'll just have to wait and see. Don't forget, the GTS is a 4.4L, still 1.8L displacement difference and it still manages to give the SLS a run for its money.

MikeS54

No offense but people on this board kept mentioning the power/L and how C63 has a 2.2L advantage over M3.

This is non sense cause M156 is a totally different approach in building an engine compare to the S62. High Reving efficiency vs a V8 small block with monterous torque. Both engines have pros and cons but all things said both are awesome engines for a street car.

Now what is really a step beyond M156 and S62 is the engine the in F430 4.3L V8 producing 480+hp and 343ft of torque and revs to 8.5k.

AMGC60-3

Plus 1. Some people use the displacement thing every time and yes MB is highly accomplished.

iftwb

Hands down 458 Italia 4.3L V8 engine.

Well Mike, the 2.2L difference is what gives the M156 that small power/torque benefit over the S62, if I am not mistaken? You brought up the 4.3L V8 in the 458 Italia is a hands-down win approach simply based on the fact that it is only a 4.3L engine, yet it manages to produce oh-so-much power and torque. I think it is fair to say that despite different approaches, based upon high-revving V8 to V8 with monstrous torque based up on extensively large displacement; its fair to say that BMW has accomplished a lot with just 4.0L.

Also, some have complained that despite being stroked from 4.0L to 4.4L M division only managed a ~30kW increase. Well, despite the fact I know there is more to it than just merely quoting displacement differences, a M156 is 6.2L, yet it only manages to produce ~30kW more than the stock E9x M3's S62 output (disregarding massive torque difference).

Quadcammer

engine hp per liter is a dumb argument.

run what you brung. MB and BMW came up with different ways to attack the same market segment.