Trade in CLK63 BS for C63 BS??
06-30-2012, 02:49 PM
#27
MBWorld Fanatic!
I just spent the day in a C63 BS with a 100+ miles and here is my observations. I have a CLK63BS so these are first hand impressions not what I read.
Engine- power is a toss up don't see one over the other in spite of factory ratings.
Transmission, C has the advantage with the MCT and newer electornics which is more flexible. In manual mode though, I thought the C would have faster up shift, but it's the same. Electronic control S+ seems to be seemless and you can't feel the intrusion. In the CLK I could trigger limp mode with high speed corners making the yaw sensors thinking I'm going to crash. AMG nailed the electronics for spirited driving. I didn't use the race start.
The tires on my test car had given their best for a video at Willow the day before so the car had no front end grip. Nevertheless, it still didn't feel as planted as the CLK.
The C suspension is much softer which helps the rear grip but hads to the understeer that's not there in the CLK. AMG engineers have softened the spring rates in the C which makes it more livable around town. I'd change out the wheels for wider fronts if I were to track the C.
The C had more control on hard braking most likely due to the change in limited slip diff which is a plus. Brakes were fantastic on the C with 390mm rotors! The CLK brakes aren't bad either.
Interior seating, the CLK has deeper bolstered seats with more lateral support. The C's are ok but are wider obviously to accomodate the gourmet drivers. The alcanta steering wheel had a very slippery feel. I've had alcanta steering wheels on a race porsche and it was ok with driving gloves. The preferated leather on the ClK is a better choice. I did like the red stitching and red belts in the C as well as the dash. The CLK had a more upscale look than the C inspite of the carbon fibre inserts.
Looks, I was driving in Newporsche Beach where exotics are every block and BMW's are like Toyota's everplace else. I got a couple of nice car, and I love your car comments.
Nevertheless, the CLK was voted one of the 100 best automotive designs. Edge to the CLK.
I think AMG took some of the edge out of the C63bs and made it more civilized and given the low production numbers (app 100) it seems less track oriented especially with the glass roof!
If you can get a CLK63bs with a warranty in the 75-80k range that would be a bargin other wise it will cost you $117k for a new C for the same thrill. BTW, my CLK63 BS is for sale.
Engine- power is a toss up don't see one over the other in spite of factory ratings.
Transmission, C has the advantage with the MCT and newer electornics which is more flexible. In manual mode though, I thought the C would have faster up shift, but it's the same. Electronic control S+ seems to be seemless and you can't feel the intrusion. In the CLK I could trigger limp mode with high speed corners making the yaw sensors thinking I'm going to crash. AMG nailed the electronics for spirited driving. I didn't use the race start.
The tires on my test car had given their best for a video at Willow the day before so the car had no front end grip. Nevertheless, it still didn't feel as planted as the CLK.
The C suspension is much softer which helps the rear grip but hads to the understeer that's not there in the CLK. AMG engineers have softened the spring rates in the C which makes it more livable around town. I'd change out the wheels for wider fronts if I were to track the C.
The C had more control on hard braking most likely due to the change in limited slip diff which is a plus. Brakes were fantastic on the C with 390mm rotors! The CLK brakes aren't bad either.
Interior seating, the CLK has deeper bolstered seats with more lateral support. The C's are ok but are wider obviously to accomodate the gourmet drivers. The alcanta steering wheel had a very slippery feel. I've had alcanta steering wheels on a race porsche and it was ok with driving gloves. The preferated leather on the ClK is a better choice. I did like the red stitching and red belts in the C as well as the dash. The CLK had a more upscale look than the C inspite of the carbon fibre inserts.
Looks, I was driving in Newporsche Beach where exotics are every block and BMW's are like Toyota's everplace else. I got a couple of nice car, and I love your car comments.
Nevertheless, the CLK was voted one of the 100 best automotive designs. Edge to the CLK.
I think AMG took some of the edge out of the C63bs and made it more civilized and given the low production numbers (app 100) it seems less track oriented especially with the glass roof!
If you can get a CLK63bs with a warranty in the 75-80k range that would be a bargin other wise it will cost you $117k for a new C for the same thrill. BTW, my CLK63 BS is for sale.
07-01-2012, 10:02 AM
#30
MBWorld Fanatic!
I just spent the day in a C63 BS with a 100+ miles and here is my observations. I have a CLK63BS so these are first hand impressions not what I read.
Engine- power is a toss up don't see one over the other in spite of factory ratings.
Transmission, C has the advantage with the MCT and newer electornics which is more flexible. In manual mode though, I thought the C would have faster up shift, but it's the same. Electronic control S+ seems to be seemless and you can't feel the intrusion. In the CLK I could trigger limp mode with high speed corners making the yaw sensors thinking I'm going to crash. AMG nailed the electronics for spirited driving. I didn't use the race start.
The tires on my test car had given their best for a video at Willow the day before so the car had no front end grip. Nevertheless, it still didn't feel as planted as the CLK.
The C suspension is much softer which helps the rear grip but hads to the understeer that's not there in the CLK. AMG engineers have softened the spring rates in the C which makes it more livable around town. I'd change out the wheels for wider fronts if I were to track the C.
The C had more control on hard braking most likely due to the change in limited slip diff which is a plus. Brakes were fantastic on the C with 390mm rotors! The CLK brakes aren't bad either.
Interior seating, the CLK has deeper bolstered seats with more lateral support. The C's are ok but are wider obviously to accomodate the gourmet drivers. The alcanta steering wheel had a very slippery feel. I've had alcanta steering wheels on a race porsche and it was ok with driving gloves. The preferated leather on the ClK is a better choice. I did like the red stitching and red belts in the C as well as the dash. The CLK had a more upscale look than the C inspite of the carbon fibre inserts.
Looks, I was driving in Newporsche Beach where exotics are every block and BMW's are like Toyota's everplace else. I got a couple of nice car, and I love your car comments.
Nevertheless, the CLK was voted one of the 100 best automotive designs. Edge to the CLK.
I think AMG took some of the edge out of the C63bs and made it more civilized and given the low production numbers (app 100) it seems less track oriented especially with the glass roof!
If you can get a CLK63bs with a warranty in the 75-80k range that would be a bargin other wise it will cost you $117k for a new C for the same thrill. BTW, my CLK63 BS is for sale.
Engine- power is a toss up don't see one over the other in spite of factory ratings.
Transmission, C has the advantage with the MCT and newer electornics which is more flexible. In manual mode though, I thought the C would have faster up shift, but it's the same. Electronic control S+ seems to be seemless and you can't feel the intrusion. In the CLK I could trigger limp mode with high speed corners making the yaw sensors thinking I'm going to crash. AMG nailed the electronics for spirited driving. I didn't use the race start.
The tires on my test car had given their best for a video at Willow the day before so the car had no front end grip. Nevertheless, it still didn't feel as planted as the CLK.
The C suspension is much softer which helps the rear grip but hads to the understeer that's not there in the CLK. AMG engineers have softened the spring rates in the C which makes it more livable around town. I'd change out the wheels for wider fronts if I were to track the C.
The C had more control on hard braking most likely due to the change in limited slip diff which is a plus. Brakes were fantastic on the C with 390mm rotors! The CLK brakes aren't bad either.
Interior seating, the CLK has deeper bolstered seats with more lateral support. The C's are ok but are wider obviously to accomodate the gourmet drivers. The alcanta steering wheel had a very slippery feel. I've had alcanta steering wheels on a race porsche and it was ok with driving gloves. The preferated leather on the ClK is a better choice. I did like the red stitching and red belts in the C as well as the dash. The CLK had a more upscale look than the C inspite of the carbon fibre inserts.
Looks, I was driving in Newporsche Beach where exotics are every block and BMW's are like Toyota's everplace else. I got a couple of nice car, and I love your car comments.
Nevertheless, the CLK was voted one of the 100 best automotive designs. Edge to the CLK.
I think AMG took some of the edge out of the C63bs and made it more civilized and given the low production numbers (app 100) it seems less track oriented especially with the glass roof!
If you can get a CLK63bs with a warranty in the 75-80k range that would be a bargin other wise it will cost you $117k for a new C for the same thrill. BTW, my CLK63 BS is for sale.
07-01-2012, 10:39 AM
#31
Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 79
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
C63 BS & Speciale
i don't agree with the transmission comment, the c63 black gearbox is way more advance and faster than the clk black, the old gearbox has been criticized too sluggish and protective under track condition.
may be neither of them is a track junkie, i don't care, i found my c63 black is a really good DD which can be driven aggressively whenever you want,perhaps i would leave the track duty for the Scuderia/Gt3rs
may be neither of them is a track junkie, i don't care, i found my c63 black is a really good DD which can be driven aggressively whenever you want,perhaps i would leave the track duty for the Scuderia/Gt3rs
07-01-2012, 12:42 PM
#32
MBWorld Fanatic!
Hey Jim, great review! A few observations from me:
I haven't been able to find the specs on the spring rates on the CBS, but I believe it's very close to the CLKBS. The difference in the ride is compliance, whatever AMG did to the chassis, it eats up the bumps without jarring your spine at speed. When you go slow over speed bumps in the CBS, you'll see what I mean... the spine jarring feel of the CLKBS is exactly the same.
As for the understeer, I posted about this in another thread. The CLKBS was borderline manical in terms of initial turn-in at low speeds. When I first drove the CLKBS, I was oversteering everywhere because I was working the steering way too hard, and took time to adjust to dial it back a little. In the CBS, this feeling is gone at low speeds (especially on cold Track package tires), but still present in high speeds. Once the tires have heat in them from the track, it's better, but nowhere near the sharpness of the CLKBS, even on street tires. You can be as agressive on the steering as you want, it never feels like the CLKBS on low speed turn-in.
The only difference between the 2 steering setups that I found was that the CBS had a more aggressive steering ratio than the CLKBS (surprised), but it was a variable ratio rack. So they dialed out the aggressiveness on large steering angles (low speed turnin) and is more aggressive on small steering angles (high speed turnin). That's my theory anyways. It's definately lost the edge that the CLKBS had that made it so fun on the street, but it makes it a little easier to be consistent at the track.
While I agree the glass roof is a mistake with the car (not helmet friendly at all), the CBS when driven on the track, and tires warmed up, is a much better car to drive than the CLKBS. If anything, my assessment here is backwards, the CLKBS is a little more immature and fun on the street, while the CBS is a little more rewarding at the track.
The civility is dead on though, my gf almost always refused to ride in the CLKBS when we went out. We daily drive the CBS to the office now. Bonus is that the 5 year old can sit in the back and watch movies off COMAND too. Win for everyone.
The tires on my test car had given their best for a video at Willow the day before so the car had no front end grip. Nevertheless, it still didn't feel as planted as the CLK.
The C suspension is much softer which helps the rear grip but hads to the understeer that's not there in the CLK. AMG engineers have softened the spring rates in the C which makes it more livable around town.
The C suspension is much softer which helps the rear grip but hads to the understeer that's not there in the CLK. AMG engineers have softened the spring rates in the C which makes it more livable around town.
As for the understeer, I posted about this in another thread. The CLKBS was borderline manical in terms of initial turn-in at low speeds. When I first drove the CLKBS, I was oversteering everywhere because I was working the steering way too hard, and took time to adjust to dial it back a little. In the CBS, this feeling is gone at low speeds (especially on cold Track package tires), but still present in high speeds. Once the tires have heat in them from the track, it's better, but nowhere near the sharpness of the CLKBS, even on street tires. You can be as agressive on the steering as you want, it never feels like the CLKBS on low speed turn-in.
The only difference between the 2 steering setups that I found was that the CBS had a more aggressive steering ratio than the CLKBS (surprised), but it was a variable ratio rack. So they dialed out the aggressiveness on large steering angles (low speed turnin) and is more aggressive on small steering angles (high speed turnin). That's my theory anyways. It's definately lost the edge that the CLKBS had that made it so fun on the street, but it makes it a little easier to be consistent at the track.
The civility is dead on though, my gf almost always refused to ride in the CLKBS when we went out. We daily drive the CBS to the office now. Bonus is that the 5 year old can sit in the back and watch movies off COMAND too. Win for everyone.
Last edited by rage2; 07-01-2012 at 12:44 PM.
07-03-2012, 12:37 AM
#33
MBWorld Fanatic!
07-03-2012, 12:59 AM
#34
MBWorld Fanatic!
Hey Jim, great review! A few observations from me:
I haven't been able to find the specs on the spring rates on the CBS, but I believe it's very close to the CLKBS. The difference in the ride is compliance, whatever AMG did to the chassis, it eats up the bumps without jarring your spine at speed. When you go slow over speed bumps in the CBS, you'll see what I mean... the spine jarring feel of the CLKBS is exactly the same.
As for the understeer, I posted about this in another thread. The CLKBS was borderline manical in terms of initial turn-in at low speeds. When I first drove the CLKBS, I was oversteering everywhere because I was working the steering way too hard, and took time to adjust to dial it back a little. In the CBS, this feeling is gone at low speeds (especially on cold Track package tires), but still present in high speeds. Once the tires have heat in them from the track, it's better, but nowhere near the sharpness of the CLKBS, even on street tires. You can be as agressive on the steering as you want, it never feels like the CLKBS on low speed turn-in.
The only difference between the 2 steering setups that I found was that the CBS had a more aggressive steering ratio than the CLKBS (surprised), but it was a variable ratio rack. So they dialed out the aggressiveness on large steering angles (low speed turnin) and is more aggressive on small steering angles (high speed turnin). That's my theory anyways. It's definately lost the edge that the CLKBS had that made it so fun on the street, but it makes it a little easier to be consistent at the track.
While I agree the glass roof is a mistake with the car (not helmet friendly at all), the CBS when driven on the track, and tires warmed up, is a much better car to drive than the CLKBS. If anything, my assessment here is backwards, the CLKBS is a little more immature and fun on the street, while the CBS is a little more rewarding at the track.
The civility is dead on though, my gf almost always refused to ride in the CLKBS when we went out. We daily drive the CBS to the office now. Bonus is that the 5 year old can sit in the back and watch movies off COMAND too. Win for everyone.
I haven't been able to find the specs on the spring rates on the CBS, but I believe it's very close to the CLKBS. The difference in the ride is compliance, whatever AMG did to the chassis, it eats up the bumps without jarring your spine at speed. When you go slow over speed bumps in the CBS, you'll see what I mean... the spine jarring feel of the CLKBS is exactly the same.
As for the understeer, I posted about this in another thread. The CLKBS was borderline manical in terms of initial turn-in at low speeds. When I first drove the CLKBS, I was oversteering everywhere because I was working the steering way too hard, and took time to adjust to dial it back a little. In the CBS, this feeling is gone at low speeds (especially on cold Track package tires), but still present in high speeds. Once the tires have heat in them from the track, it's better, but nowhere near the sharpness of the CLKBS, even on street tires. You can be as agressive on the steering as you want, it never feels like the CLKBS on low speed turn-in.
The only difference between the 2 steering setups that I found was that the CBS had a more aggressive steering ratio than the CLKBS (surprised), but it was a variable ratio rack. So they dialed out the aggressiveness on large steering angles (low speed turnin) and is more aggressive on small steering angles (high speed turnin). That's my theory anyways. It's definately lost the edge that the CLKBS had that made it so fun on the street, but it makes it a little easier to be consistent at the track.
While I agree the glass roof is a mistake with the car (not helmet friendly at all), the CBS when driven on the track, and tires warmed up, is a much better car to drive than the CLKBS. If anything, my assessment here is backwards, the CLKBS is a little more immature and fun on the street, while the CBS is a little more rewarding at the track.
The civility is dead on though, my gf almost always refused to ride in the CLKBS when we went out. We daily drive the CBS to the office now. Bonus is that the 5 year old can sit in the back and watch movies off COMAND too. Win for everyone.
Thks, haven't spent enough time as one day isn't enough to analyze the suspension in the new CBS, my new theory is to soften the springs and with the latest generation shocks which react quicker helps compliance and ride. The AMG engineers did a good job especially after the flak they got on the SL65bs.
My CLK has the benefit of a competition alignment which has dialed the over steer out but not the harshness. It would help if the Germans did the development on our roads not the smooth roads in the Fatherland but it seems that they improved the ride tremendously. May get some head to head track time in the next few days and I'll post the observatons.
Jim
07-04-2012, 10:18 AM
#35
Super Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: UG
Posts: 999
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2013 ML63 AMG PP
Seeing the original poster has two 458s amongst many others I would suggest he goes the route of Maverick1975 and keep the CLKBS and buy the C63BS. I heard of one customer in Qatar buying two C63BS's one for tuning and one for stock. :-)
07-04-2012, 11:48 AM
#36
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 411
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
c63
Thanks for the great review.....I know C63BS is way much better than clk63bs but the thing is no more RHD c63bss available in Hong Kong..
from now i am thinking of getting an F10 M5 ...what do u guys think?
from now i am thinking of getting an F10 M5 ...what do u guys think?
07-10-2012, 12:34 AM
#38
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 411
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
c63
07-10-2012, 01:57 AM
#39
Junior Member
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
F458
07-10-2012, 07:00 AM
#40
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 411
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
c63
07-10-2012, 08:19 AM
#41
Junior Member
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
F458
07-10-2012, 08:30 AM
#42
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 411
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
c63
09-11-2012, 09:16 PM
#46
btw Hi Simon.
Best Regards,
09-12-2012, 09:32 AM
#49
MBWorld Fanatic!
Then one should simply buy the C63 BS and see which one he likes better.
Edit: Ahh this was an older thread. Good choice keeping the CLK63 and getting the M5. The M5 looks really hot.
09-12-2012, 10:10 AM
#50
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 411
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
c63
