c63 coupe vs cts-v coupe
Thread Starter
Member
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 128
Likes: 6
CLA250
c63 coupe vs cts-v coupe
Anyone else deciding between the two?
C63 pros:
-looks better, very photogenic
-smaller, better visibility, should be easier to maneuver in traffic
-it's a MB
Cts-v pros:
- 100 more hp and torque
- yet 10k cheaper when both loaded
- interior is much nicer (subjective)
C63 pros:
-looks better, very photogenic
-smaller, better visibility, should be easier to maneuver in traffic
-it's a MB
Cts-v pros:
- 100 more hp and torque
- yet 10k cheaper when both loaded
- interior is much nicer (subjective)
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 6,677
Likes: 4
From: Los Angeles
C63
If I had the choice between the 2 id get the C63 coupe, because the CTS-V coupe is just too damn ugly.
If I had a choice between the C63 coupe and a CTS-V sedan, I would get the sedan. Looks better, alot more power then the C63 and it costs less.
If I had a choice between the C63 coupe and a CTS-V sedan, I would get the sedan. Looks better, alot more power then the C63 and it costs less.
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 346
Likes: 0
'11 C63 w/ P31
Both are great cars. I can only compare my 2011 C63 P31 sedan to my brothers 2011 CTS-V Sedan. I test drove a coupe and its very similar
Also unless you have a tune or buy a P31 package the CTS-V will beat the C63 pretty badly.
Also unless you have a tune or buy a P31 package the CTS-V will beat the C63 pretty badly.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,294
Likes: 1
2012 C63 coupe
The 2012 interior on the C63 is WAY nicer than the CTS-V in my opinion. In my view, all of which is subjective, is that the C63 is the better looking car, nicer interior but maybe a tad slower. I would say C63 (which is what I will be doing myself shortly).
Trending Topics
MB World Stories
The Best of Mercedes & AMG
Manual Mercedes? 6 Times Sindelfingen Let Drivers Have All The Fun
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes SLR McLaren 722 S Is Extremely Rare Example Modified by McLaren
Verdad Gallardo
8 Classic Boxy Mercedes Designs That Have Aged Like Fine Wine
Verdad Gallardo
Flawlessly Restored Mercedes 190E Evo II Heads to Auction
Verdad Gallardo
Electric Mercedes C-Class Unveiled: 11 Things You Need to Know
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes EQS Gets A Major Update: Everything You Need to Know
Verdad Gallardo
5 Underrated Mercedes-Benz Models That Don't Get the Love They Deserve
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes 300D Has Pushed Well Past 1 Million Miles and It Ain't Stopping
Verdad Gallardo
10 Most Reliable Mercedes-Benz Models You Can Buy Used
Verdad Gallardo
Junior Member
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
z06
I drove both an M5 and CTS-V before I bought my C63. I loved the fit and finish of the amg even though it was the most underpowered of the group. If I wanted to mod the hell out of a car, the V would have been it, but I wasn't comfortable spending 50K on a caddy. Plus, Ive had my fun spending 40k on mods alone...just got out of a 1000hp Z06 and wanted something I could drive all day, every day. I don't regret my choice one bit (well, except for the fact that finding a set of wheels for the car is impossible bc of the terrible offsets)
Super Member
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 583
Likes: 23
From: Colorado
2021 E63 S Sedan
Both great cars...you can't go wrong. Caddy carries maybe 300 more pounds but has more hp. Great suspension on the caddy also. I'd go with the C63 because I like the smaller size, the better seats, and the engine technology and the transmission.
Banned
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 955
Likes: 1
2008 C63 ,2009 SL 63 AMG, 2011 SLS AMG
but if you must know. I think the cadillac is crap. The C63 by far is a superior car
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,289
Likes: 0
From: Finland
2024 EQE 43 AMG SUV
I think the minimal difference in performance (yes, it has 100 hp more but according to fastestlaps.com 0-200 kph difference to a non-p31 is 0,5 secs), is long outweighed by interior quality exterior looks, at least with the 2012 regarding interior.
Of course it's debatable whether or not 0,5 secs is a lot on a 0-200 run, but for me it's not worth getting a CTS-V all things considering.
Of course it's debatable whether or not 0,5 secs is a lot on a 0-200 run, but for me it's not worth getting a CTS-V all things considering.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 2,493
Likes: 3
MB
Just asking generally, here.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 2,493
Likes: 3
MB
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 346
Likes: 0
'11 C63 w/ P31
The fastest time from 60-130 for a completely stock cts-v is 9.42 (sedan, manual)
I ran 9.79 from 60-130
I believe the CTS-V is on the east coast so assuming 93 octane and colder weather at its advantage.
My friends modded M3 ran one and lost by a bit, when I ran him seemed like he lost by a bit more than the CTS-V.
So I think they are very close. Im going to try and have a friend drive my car C63 P31 sedan auto and Ill drive my brothers CTS-V sedan auto. Would love to get it on camera.
Member
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 107
Likes: 0
03 SL55 AMG
For modding? CTS-V all the way.
Stock for stock performance? CTS-V also is faster/quicker from all speeds UNLESS you have the new C AMG with performance package. Then it should be closer.
Depends if you like Mercedes or Cadillac better. Here, it's a no brainer.
Stock for stock performance? CTS-V also is faster/quicker from all speeds UNLESS you have the new C AMG with performance package. Then it should be closer.
Depends if you like Mercedes or Cadillac better. Here, it's a no brainer.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 2,493
Likes: 3
MB
I think it will be close.
The fastest time from 60-130 for a completely stock cts-v is 9.42 (sedan, manual)
I ran 9.79 from 60-130
I believe the CTS-V is on the east coast so assuming 93 octane and colder weather at its advantage.
My friends modded M3 ran one and lost by a bit, when I ran him seemed like he lost by a bit more than the CTS-V.
So I think they are very close. Im going to try and have a friend drive my car C63 P31 sedan auto and Ill drive my brothers CTS-V sedan auto. Would love to get it on camera.
The fastest time from 60-130 for a completely stock cts-v is 9.42 (sedan, manual)
I ran 9.79 from 60-130
I believe the CTS-V is on the east coast so assuming 93 octane and colder weather at its advantage.
My friends modded M3 ran one and lost by a bit, when I ran him seemed like he lost by a bit more than the CTS-V.
So I think they are very close. Im going to try and have a friend drive my car C63 P31 sedan auto and Ill drive my brothers CTS-V sedan auto. Would love to get it on camera.
If you ever do the runs, please let us know how it goes.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 2,493
Likes: 3
MB
Are you saying that the MCT will make that big of a difference? Otherwise I'm not sure I'm following because what other differences are there in the powertrain that would make things "closer?"
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 2,493
Likes: 3
MB
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 346
Likes: 0
'11 C63 w/ P31
The only complaints I have heard are of some rattling, and loose seats, and sunroof cars get wind noise and rattles over time. Some never experience it and some do quickly. So far my bros car is perfect. But ive seen complain from rattling on our dash board on this forum as well.
1 thing is for sure, our exhausts sounds better
but once you throw and intake and exhaust on the V the blower whine gets louder and sounds amazing!!!! and its faster once modded and cheaper to mod.My brother's V and my C
VS
