You and I sure don't ... I never bought a car based on how it will depreciate. Most cars tank and don't hold value ... but there is one car I can think of that did hold it's value: Ford GT ... still goes for what it sold for new. Only drawback, you can't put any miles on it ... but than again, what's the point of owning the car in the first place when you can't drive it.

I'm getting rid of my M6 for the new F10 M5 ... and as usual, in financial terms speaking, will lose my a$$ ... but for the past 3 years, the car was worth every penny for all the fun and excitement it provided!

 

Anyone that thinks $130k is too much for a C63 BS clearly has never driven a CLK BS. Making comparisons to a normal C63 AMG is ridiculous. The 5 year old CLK BS was easily twice the car of a brand new C63 Coupe P31.

As for the GT-R comparisons, laptimes don't mean anything unless you're competing in Solo1/Solo2. I've had GT-R owners drive my CLK BS and jaws were dropping. The fun to drive value isn't even in the same league. Hell, it's not even the same sport.

The C63 BS is more of a comparison to the 997 GT3 (albeit more luxurious), or SLS, which makes it's entry price a bargain.

 

That's because there's a bunch of Porsche luddites who still think an air cooled engine is the way to go.

It sounds like you don't drive your cars much and you worry a lot about depreciation. These cars are not investments unless you get a deal on it and flip it quick.

The reality is, these cars a have a lot of goodies on them (fully adjustable suspension, extra coolers, seam welding [CLK Black], carbon fiber, LSD, HWA engineering, etc) which cost a lot of money. Is it worth an extra $40K? Well, if you want to own the best variants of the cars, you gotta pay for it. I am expecting the C63 Black to give the same or better experience than the CLK63 Black, but with more modern features.

Bingo, rage.

 

As mentioned in a previous post. If the Coupe black series drives anything like the CLK black series, it's worth every penny. One of my favorite cars is the CLK black series. Much more fun than the SL65 black series.

The C63 BS will be the CLK successor pretty much and I'm sure will blow everyone's mind.

Who cares about depreciation if you're truly passionate for the AMG's !

 

LOL at the GT3 compare... You wish...

The only reason I would compare the C63 to the C63 Black Series is in straight line performance and the C63 is the bargan as the C63 P31 is most likely quicker if not equal to the black series. If you are buying a car for the road course of course the Black Series is better than the C63. Not even by a lot though going by nurburgring times. Again, if you are going to sit in traffic then it makes me wonder why you would just get the C63 and save your $$.

Then if you ARE indeed spending 130K on a good road course vehicle there are certainly way better options than the C63 Black Series.

Im sure the Black Series is a great car and I am sure it drives nice. But to me based on the results that the CLK BS came back with its not worth the price. The extreme depreciation is also indicative of that as well. Its simply not worth the asking.

To the other poster I dont buy cars as an investment, but a "Rare" Black Series should hold its value because so few are being made. It doesnt and that speaks volumes about the line.

In the end beauty is in the eye of the beholder so I would never tell anyone their opinion is wrong. If you are in love with it, enjoy it. I buy cars for the results though. I dont think I have ever chosen an inferior vehicle in the same price range just because I loved it more. But thats just me.

 

Nice fleet. With what would seem like a huge amount of capital your options are more like buying a box of corn flakes when buying a 130K vehicle. Not the case for most.

 

TT Supras seem to hold they're value very well along with the GT-R's.

 

Very well....

Even CTSV and GT500's hold their value better than a C63.

Porsche and BMW have great residuals.

 

So, how much time have you spent in a CLK Black Series? Have you driven one? Have you tracked one?

I bought a CLK Black when it first came out, paid MSRP and have not sold it because to me it has been a really fun and special car.

Sure it got hammered in value but I hold Mercedes partly to blame for that. No one really knew what a Black Series was. Many of the people that bought the first ones got something different than they thought and some thought they could flip it and make a buck. Look at how many cars immediately hit the market at the worst time in a long time. Late 2008 and 2009 was about the worst time I can think of to be selling any car including a Ferrari.

Prices have stabilized and those of us that own them rave about them.

If all you care about is results or owning the best performing car in the price segment then I expect you have a Radical in your garage or a ZR1 or one of the other niche players out there.

It always amazes me how many people have such strong opinions of cars when all they do it look at numbers and what other people say about them. I wouldn't ever buy a C63 now but I would buy a C Black Series. I can't believe that after 4 years it won't be a better car than the CLK Black and compared to everything else I could buy at 140K, I would take the C Black.

In my opinion the only real car to compare the Black Series to would be the GT3 or GT3 RS and I know it is heresy but not all of us are Porsche guys. I have been there done that and prefer my engines in the front or middle.

My .02

 

Can someone explain why AMGs depreciate more so then others?

 

Frankly I don't understand all the hubbub about price and preceived value of these cars. They are obviously targeted toward enthusiasts who have money and the desire. Especially in regards to black series, the old saying "if you have to ask then you can't afford it" comes to mind.

And where are the pictures? I want to see what this thing looks like.

 

Meh, I tracked the CLK BS twice, but have way more fun on the roads than my C63. If anything, I'd take the long way to the office in the BS just to get some interesting corners into the mix. The car is unbelievably fun in all conditions, road or track. Not terribly fun in the rain tho lol.

Yea, definately not if he laughed at the GT3 reference. I believe he compared it to a turbo in an older thread where he was bringing up Porsches, and let me tell you, my 911TT is boring as ***** compared to the BS. Hell, the TT is boring compared to the C63. Funny though, I can run the roadcourse faster in the 911TT than the BS. The BS was never about the numbers for me.

I can't fault him though, I felt the exact same way as propain did until I bought my BS and drove it for the first time. I used to look at the numbers religiously when choosing cars since I competed in them, so on paper, there's several better cars for less money.

 

I have been in both the GT3 and the CLK63 BS. Trust me.. not even a comparison. The GT3 is worlds beyond what the CLK63 BS dreams to be and will be worlds apart from the C63 BS. Give me a break... You are talking about a 190,000 Porsche.

Yes yes... the BS has amazing torque and HP just like the C63. Sounds and feels like a monster but comparing it to a GT3 is just laughable.

Ever been in a ZR1? Way more fun than a BS or the GT3 and cheaper than both. Also a blast on the street.

My point is its not for me. Your defense would be best to say "I love it" and that would be fine. Saying its on par with the GT3 is why this continues.

My 993 is a better track car than my C63 but I enjoy running my C63 more than the 993 so I can understand your point though. I was simply pointing out bang for the buck, resale and personal preference. Sorry if I offended any BS owners. This is just my opinion.

 

Yea Ive driven the GT3. It's a shame to compare it to the C63 BS. I doubt the Black Series will even be that much faster than the c63. Maybe all those corny add-ons will somehow make it fly, otherwise I'd save my $130k for a real supercar.

 

2007 CLK63 BS Inside Line Test
0-60: 4.4
1/4 mile: 12.6 @115.6
60-0: 108ft
Skipad: .96g
Slalom: 67.8mph

2010 Porsche GT3
0-60:3.9
1/4mile:11.9 @119.4mph
60-0: 99ft
Skipad: .98g
Slalom: 73mph

 

LOL. A lot of strong opinions and all we have are these car mag test results. Maybe the car will depreciate like a turd off a tall moose, but I think a lot of people will be surprised at the performance. After all it's fairly close to the sls ring time, which is a few hundred lbs lighter with more claimed hp.

 

'05-06 Ford GT.

 

I'm curious. Anyone here ever driven a c63 bs? Just want to know where all this expertise is coming from. I've owned a gt3 and it was great but I have never driven a c63 bs let alone seen one.

 

AMG does not go backwards. The C63 Black Series is seriously fast. Faster than CLK63BS and M3 GTS on the Ring, and basically tied with SLS and 458 at Hockenheim. (SuperAuto test data reposted shamelessly from PL).

As far as the C63 Ducati or Black Series or anything else being a waste of money, it is all in the eye of the beholder (or spender of the money). My view on it is this: if you are driving a used Camry, then you can make that statement and I can see your point. If you drive anything else, then I have to believe that you are just trolling.



–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
LAP TIME: The Nurburgring – 7:46 min SCORE: 9
–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
Nissan GT-R: 7:38 min
Audi R8 5.2 V10: 7:44 min
Porsche 911 Turbo S: 7:44 min*
Mercedes C63 AMG Coupe BS: 7:46 min*
BMW M3 GTS: 7:49 min*
Lamborghini Gallardo LP 560-4: 7:52 min*
Mercedes CLK 63 AMG BS: 8:05 min*
–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
LAP TIMES: Short course at Hockenheim SCORE: 10
–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
Nissan GT-R: 1.10, 0 min
Porsche 911 Carrera S: 1.10,4 min
Ferrari 458 ltalia: 1.10,5 min
Mercedes AMG C63BS: 1.10,6 min*
Mercedes SLS AMG: 1.10,8 min
Audi R8 5.2 V10: 1.10,9 min*
BMW M3 GTS: 1:12,5 min*
–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
* denotes cars using Sports/Track tires
–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

 

I don't see how 60 extra horsepower is supposed to make the car worth $130,000. A tuned c63 has the same power as that. In a straight line, I dont think it will do much. In a track, Im sure it's a great car but Im sure you can have a custom wide body kit and a few handling mods that will make it a track car. Save yourself the extra $60k over the regular c63.

 

Wah , I can't stop laughing at you

 

Just like I was when rage compared the BS to the GT3....

Lets break it down....

Engine Performance

510 HP. (A Tuned C63 Coupe)
Dev Pack (C63 P31)
7 speed auto with launch control (C63)
LSD (C63 option or purchase aftermarket for $1200)
Track package: Better rubber and tranny cooler (Cooler might not be able to be purchased or fit. Not sure.)

Suspension
Anti Roll bars (Easily purchased)
adjustable coil-overs (Easily purchased)

Body Work

Flared fenders and quaters (Body kit)
Front wheel vents (Body Kit)
Rear Seat Delete (Easily Done)
Carbon Fiber bits, wing, Aerofoil ect.. (All purchased)

Im sure I am missing a few bits here and there. Please add to my list and convince me how the BS is the better purchase as far as performance goes only. Not personal preference.


When you break it down I dont see why you would be laughing.. A C63 P31 couple can easily be made into BS for probably 20K with the body work. Thats 50K toward another car! LOL

Even without all the body work a tuned C63 coupe with only some small changes to the suspension and shedding the back seat could easily put up the same times as a C63 BS. You would also save yourself about 15K off the above 20K.

Without the body work and the cooling vents the BS would have more lasting power in the breaks (even though the P31 boasts better breaks) as well as the tranny due to a better cooler (track package) but honestly how many of us are going to enter into a 50 lap road course race anytime soon? Even if you are, how many times? Is it worth 50K?

Why they didnt put a DCT in is beyond me. That would have made it worth it beyond the C63 P31 coupe. Throwing in the same tranny turned me off big time. You figured they would have learned from the CLK63 in that decision.

Like I said.. Just my 2 cents.

 

So you have never driven one nor anyone else on this forum. My question stands. Where does all the expertise come from?

 

Just looking at the data that is available for now. Its been built and tested by many mags. Its not like its still in the dev phase.

Why isnt that good enough? The mags will do more testing than the average consumer anyhow and they have more experienced drivers and testers than the average person.

Its a great car and gets rave reviews. Thats not the debate. The debate is if its worth the extra 50K over a P31 C63 Coupe and can you match its performance with much less money. Pure performance perspective. The BS will always be a rare car next to the C63 Coupe. That is without question.

 

You can quote performance numbers all you want, I've already said that my 911 TT is faster than the CLK BS, and the GT3 will run circles around the CLK BS (and most likely, the C63 BS).

I'm talking about sheer entertainment value, that's where my CLK BS vs GT3 comparison stems from.

I've been comparing the GT3 with the CLK BS. Haven't taken delivery of the C63 BS yet, so hence, no comparisons.