propain

AWD.

/thread

mthis

My c63 with 1/4 tank of gas weight in at 3910lb's WITHOUT DRIVER!
Give the stock c63 457hp like Europe does that's 8.55.

mikekuriger

Wow, I'm shocked at some of these replies. It's really easy to tell the people who know what they are talking about from the fools who brag just to hear themselves talk.

KEMA

Very very few cars will match a GTR from a dig. When it walks a 750 BHP Evotech RS6 I am led to believe it holds a massive gearing advantage:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pv3tdZLQLAQ

Ken

aznkuja328

On figures and numbers, C63 can't be beaten.

Interior and build quality, C63 can't be beaten.

If you are talking about speed and handling, R35 is way different.

R35 is a supercar oriented sport coupe, while C63 is a well-defined premium sports sedan.

Two of them are completely different cars, so I guess if AMG is going to release a C63 DTM with different parts and tune ups, they should then be comparable.

At the time when AMG really has a C63 DTM, the cost of it will be very different. That's why people call the R35 as a budget supercar.

R35 is faster because all the parts it has are race oriented.

LZH

Jons95c36amg

Its the AWD hp.

LZH

Nah, it's gotta be that JET engine they have strapped under the hood

sflgator

0-60mph in 3.2 sec...really? Maybe with DRs, but not on street tires, even with a fully locked diff. Running the 1/4 mi. or racing from a roll is one thing, but those GT-Rs are AWD and run 3.5 sec. on street tires! With DRs, they may run 0-60mph ~ 3.2 sec., and when tuned, they may run 0-60mph ~ 3.0 sec. But, no, I don't think even a fully modded C63 AMG can run 0-60mph in 3.2 sec...still can't get enough power to the rear wheels without spinning for that.

kindafast

Because that's what I saw with my own eyes.

kindafast

haha he mentioned the fastest C63 in the world, not drag radials, but slicks!

vip4uae

Guys, i drive both cars, you cant compare a GTR to a C63... if we talk about mods just take a look at this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LTm8a...eature=related

LZH

Don't forget running race fuel, too...
It's a joke to even compare the 2 cars. Stock for stock there is NO comparison. Start throwing in mods and it gets even worse...

alqamzi

mno tfahm 5layf mayfhmoon shay 5ashom allah!!!

E55AMGGG04

Just for comparison I raced a 2010 E550 4matic and with my tires not being in the best of condition led me to fall behind 1.5 car length. I obviously caught up and passed but its ALL ABOUT PUTTING ALL YOUR POWER TO THE GROUND.

wuyichao

It's funny to see you guys talk about c63 and GTR on paper. If you take them to the track, you'll know how monstrous GTR is, on straight away and corner.

evox44

alqamzi...Turbo cars do have more mid-range TQ, but the HP keeps increasing (at a decreasing rate). Usually FI/Supercharged cars run rich from the factory, so after tuning you get the real potential out of the car + fix the powerband up by reducing TQ loss throughout the power band. You can even Tighten the wastegates to hold boost up better, so you can have 90% boost until 7000rpm for example so their wont be a lot of TQ loss. Basically, easy potential to have a lot more power, quicker, and keeping it much longer.
I would say GT-R wins because of a more track-friendly setup. The tires/width/traction. While the C63 loves to burn rubber. Both cars have a lot of powah!

evox44

Also Dual clutch tranny's have proven to keep boost high while shifting quick.

mthis

check out 6speed it's verified that the c63 did does number.

yeap real slicks and race gas

stock vs stock the c63 will get it's a$ handed to it BAD.
Just sameone mentions a fully modded c63 will do 0-60 in 4.3ish that's y I posted that.
The only way a c63 would win in to be fully modded and the GTR to be stock. If the GTR is worked good bye c63.

mthis

I wounded who's tune/headers that car is kleeman or renntech?
That sux to run does numbers when a tune only car runs faster.

retardedmunk

I own a GTR...Have driven many C63'S and owned one for a short time...currently own 3 AMG'S....

I do not like the C63...unless it is $25k..i think of it as a overpriced rental car with a big motor...sorry but for the guy who blows his wad on a new C63 could of had a GTR for less which gets exotic car attention and will HOLD ITS VALUE..production halts in 2012....

A used C63 can be had for under $40k now..still too high since you can buy a Cl65 FOR THAT and it is 10x the car period....

Ok now back to topic and no more picking on the rental car


GTR does 0-60 in 2.4 sec with $2000 in mods...and will run the 1/4 in 10.8@130mph in 60 degree temps...all day long

NOTHING short of a 1000 cc bike or 9 second drag car can beat a GTR on the street...I have beaten F430's,Gallardos,Z06's and even a Bugatti Veyron to 70mph(he wasnt using launch control..and after 70 my car was toast)

WHY? double clutch tranny....4wd and superior engineering PERIOD...
Oh and by the way the GTR has an identical CD or air drag rating as good as the most aerodynamic Lambo built....so it cuts the wind as good as it hauls ***

the C63 and GTR weigh the same

what is cost to make a C63 turn good times in the 1/4 is ridiculous ......

evox44

What mods do you have that you only spend $2000 in mods?

sflgator

You sound like quite a snob. My bro has a stock '10 GT-R, a Lotus Elise w/ Nitrous and just ordered a Ferrari F430 coming in July. My friend's tuned '10 GT-R is one of the fastest in FL...he has the Cobb AP custom tune, DPs, and a catless exhaust and ran 10.4 sec. @ 132mph! I love and respect the GT-R, and wouldn't challenge one modded or stock, from either a dig or a roll...they are just insanely fast no matter what...gearing, DCT, F/I tt, AWD, etc. make them that way.

However, I wouldn't exactly call a C63 AMG a "overpriced rental car with a big motor." That is reserved for cars such as a Chrysler SRT-8 and such. Some of us have worked very hard for many years to earn the right to own/drive an AMG, C-class or otherwise. So, please get off your high-horse and ditch the MB snobbery.

btw -- haven't seen any C63 AMG's for < $40k, but if you find one w/ low mileage, let me know...maybe I'll buy another.

chief63

You're a douche with that attitude. Anybody with a 40K Shelby Cobra running mid 9s could say the GTR is an overpriced ricer. But they don't because most of them have some class.

The C63 and GTR are simply not the same. I have a family and need 4 doors? Would the GTR suit me? No. Is it faster, yes. But then what sense would it make for me? Anyways would I want to spend big bucks on a damn Nissan? The same company that makes the Sentra? Would I want to bust the transmission and round up paying 30K to replace it because I used their drag feature too many times?

As long as you think of actual comparables, not many 4 door sedans can handle even a 1500$ chipped C63 for under 60K new. Actually the only one I can think of is the Cadillac CTS-V when you think about new cars.

alqamzi

in everything u said.