507 more fun after buying 911 TTS?
07-01-2014, 04:27 PM
#26
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C63
Todays cars are very well engineered and stupid fast. They hide their weight and are very well balanced even at the limit. My 997.2 TT was a great car. It was just too easy to drive fast. No skills required from me. I like to be involved, be a part of the package, not let the car take care of "almost" everything. For a relative small displacement turbo the engine was very responsive. The PDK is one of the best transmissions and was very well suited to the engine characteristics. Same as the DCT on my F10 M5. A perfect package. The auto box in my CLK is crap compared to it. So is an MCT. No comparison. Silly argument. But my CLK makes you feel alive when driven fast.... I have to "earn" it. The 997 was just too good in what is does. Not a problem for most people, just didn't do it for me. I owned a few Porsche's over the years. Steering feel on the 997, considering it's still a rear engine layout, was excellent. Even at triple digits there was plenty of feedback on the wheel. Not as good of a turn in as my CLK, but both cars need to be driven differently anyway for obvious reasons.
The M156 is a great engine ... but it has it's limitations as well. It is very responsive and produces a lot of torque relative early in the rev range. It has good midrange as well, but is thin up top. Can't compare it to any TT ... not a fair comparison ... but there are other great naturally aspirated engines out there. The V10 in my E63 M6 for instance. No torque, ok midrange, but monster top end. My favorite thing was to roll into the throttle in 4th ... the sound it produced and the way it pulled all the way to 8200 was insane. The speedo moved almost at the same rate as the tach.
At the end, it depends on your personal preference which car "does" it for you, and which "does not".
The M156 is a great engine ... but it has it's limitations as well. It is very responsive and produces a lot of torque relative early in the rev range. It has good midrange as well, but is thin up top. Can't compare it to any TT ... not a fair comparison ... but there are other great naturally aspirated engines out there. The V10 in my E63 M6 for instance. No torque, ok midrange, but monster top end. My favorite thing was to roll into the throttle in 4th ... the sound it produced and the way it pulled all the way to 8200 was insane. The speedo moved almost at the same rate as the tach.
At the end, it depends on your personal preference which car "does" it for you, and which "does not".
The newer PDK is better though. I had a Panamera GTS, which has an updated PDK, and it was lightning responsive and quick. Great car, but I felt it was way too big, could not tell by driving it, only parking it. I was considering a F10 M5, but I thought they wasted an opportunity to make it more aggressive looking. The E63 M5 looked liked a mean b*tch, which was awesome.
07-01-2014, 07:36 PM
#27
MBWorld Fanatic!
Yeah, the E63 engine is a great one, if they only had the DCT then...
The newer PDK is better though. I had a Panamera GTS, which has an updated PDK, and it was lightning responsive and quick. Great car, but I felt it was way too big, could not tell by driving it, only parking it. I was considering a F10 M5, but I thought they wasted an opportunity to make it more aggressive looking. The E63 M5 looked liked a mean b*tch, which was awesome.
The newer PDK is better though. I had a Panamera GTS, which has an updated PDK, and it was lightning responsive and quick. Great car, but I felt it was way too big, could not tell by driving it, only parking it. I was considering a F10 M5, but I thought they wasted an opportunity to make it more aggressive looking. The E63 M5 looked liked a mean b*tch, which was awesome.
... looks of the F10 M5 are subjective. It's a very good looking car to me ... it blends in, which I like since it is my daily. I didn't particularly care for the looks of the E60 M5 ... but my M6 wasn't the "prettiest" car I ever owned either. I got used to it ... but never looked at it and said to myself "what a great looking car". The interior was beautiful though. Nothing but leather and carbon fiber.
07-03-2014, 02:54 AM
#28
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 8,050
Received 2,823 Likes
on
1,669 Posts
2012 P31 C63 Coupe Trackrat, 2019 GLE63S Coupe Beast
Funny
This is a great thread. It's like a Recovering Porsche Addict convention. My last car before the C63 coupe I just picked up, was a fairly modified 996TT (pic below). Raced all around Europe - tracks, Ring, strip, and Vmax - and really enjoyed the time spent building it up and honing my own skills. I sold it in 09 when I left the UK, and have been car-less since. The AMGs always appealed to me for the engine tech, even though I had always been an AWD turbo guy before. I wanted to try something new with a bit more challenge, which I would find more rewarding to try and master. I would agree with the guys above that the AWD TT even when tuned heavily and pushed hard was almost too clinical. If I could do that over again I would have bought a GT2 instead for sure. For what it's worth, I feel like the C63 is so far giving me that experience.
07-03-2014, 03:20 PM
#29
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C63
This is a great thread. It's like a Recovering Porsche Addict convention. My last car before the C63 coupe I just picked up, was a fairly modified 996TT (pic below). Raced all around Europe - tracks, Ring, strip, and Vmax - and really enjoyed the time spent building it up and honing my own skills. I sold it in 09 when I left the UK, and have been car-less since. The AMGs always appealed to me for the engine tech, even though I had always been an AWD turbo guy before. I wanted to try something new with a bit more challenge, which I would find more rewarding to try and master. I would agree with the guys above that the AWD TT even when tuned heavily and pushed hard was almost too clinical. If I could do that over again I would have bought a GT2 instead for sure. For what it's worth, I feel like the C63 is so far giving me that experience.
The C63 in this last version seems to be a sweet spot for me as a road car. Yes, it could be a little lighter, yes, a 6 speed would be fun, but as is, it is a great car for everyday driving. Too bad they won't or can't keep this engine for the next model.
01-22-2015, 09:05 AM
#30
Member
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: So Cal
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C63 507 Coupe , Cayman GTS
Check out the Cayman GTS it's a wonderful sports car.
It's not nearly as powerful as the C63 but makes up for it
In the driving involvement. I owned a 996 C4S for 7 years
and the Cayman is just the better car imho.
If the Cayman had another 50 HP and 50 lbs of Torque it would be
a beast... There isn't a replacement for the M156 engine sound which will be missed when AMG pulls the plug this year.
It's not nearly as powerful as the C63 but makes up for it
In the driving involvement. I owned a 996 C4S for 7 years
and the Cayman is just the better car imho.
If the Cayman had another 50 HP and 50 lbs of Torque it would be
a beast... There isn't a replacement for the M156 engine sound which will be missed when AMG pulls the plug this year.
01-22-2015, 11:48 AM
#31
MBWorld Fanatic!
Common story, so it seems. I was debating whether to get a pre-owned Porsche Turbo Cab or a barely used 507. When I ran the question by a friend who restores VW's and Porsches for a living he said that he knew many people who dumped their TTS's after 6 months because the reality just didn't live up to the dream. What about those cars leads to this? What about these 63 motors leads to the opposite experience?
01-22-2015, 02:10 PM
#32
MBWorld Fanatic!
I thought the MCT was introduced to the C63 in 2012. The torque convertor and MCT transmissions respond quite differently. It's not dual-clutch, of course, but it seems to shift quickly enough in S+ or M. My complaints are with some of the programming decisions, like not being able to start in 2nd in M mode and letting the revs drop way too low without downshifting under light load in S and S+.
The '12+ cars (the LCI models) have the MCT, which, unlike a conventional automatic, does not have a torque converter.
Instead, the MCT utilizes a wet start-up clutch. Shift times are 100 milliseconds or less. Believe it or not but the Lexus LFA actually has slower shift times (tenths of seconds) as it utilizes a single clutch.
Where the MCT shines is in the automatic modes. It is not as quick as the M-DCT or the PDK when it comes to full "manual" mode.
01-31-2015, 02:35 PM
#33
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: washington, DC
Posts: 476
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
2013 Fiat Abarth
i feel you, i have a 991 turbo S, traded my edition 1 C63 for it a year ago.. now i am about to pull the trigger on a 507 coupe as a daily, that will be a car i hope i never have to sell, maybe my kid can take it when he graduates :P
01-31-2015, 02:42 PM
#34
MBWorld Fanatic!
The '08-'11 C63s had traditional automatic transmissions with torque converters.
The '12+ cars (the LCI models) have the MCT, which, unlike a conventional automatic, does not have a torque converter.
Instead, the MCT utilizes a wet start-up clutch. Shift times are 100 milliseconds or less. Believe it or not but the Lexus LFA actually has slower shift times (tenths of seconds) as it utilizes a single clutch.
Where the MCT shines is in the automatic modes. It is not as quick as the M-DCT or the PDK when it comes to full "manual" mode.
The '12+ cars (the LCI models) have the MCT, which, unlike a conventional automatic, does not have a torque converter.
Instead, the MCT utilizes a wet start-up clutch. Shift times are 100 milliseconds or less. Believe it or not but the Lexus LFA actually has slower shift times (tenths of seconds) as it utilizes a single clutch.
Where the MCT shines is in the automatic modes. It is not as quick as the M-DCT or the PDK when it comes to full "manual" mode.
I must admit, I was looking at 997's again not too long ago. I miss the just raw speed that car had. Seriously fast. But again nothing compares to the fun I've had in my AMGs so far.
01-31-2015, 09:56 PM
#35
Add my name to the group of former TT owner that moved to a C63.
I had a lightly modded 996TT X50, that pushed 550hp and 600lbs.ft. Car was crazy quick/fast. I would hit triple digit speeds almost every time I would drive as it was just so easy to do it. Crazy fast.
But the C63 is much more fun. RWD is way more entertaining. Great low end torque, easy drifting, burnouts and God almighty, THE SOUND! No 911TT will ever sound as good as a good old stock C63!
Sure the C63 is slow(ish) compared to the TT, but it is much more fun overall.
I had a lightly modded 996TT X50, that pushed 550hp and 600lbs.ft. Car was crazy quick/fast. I would hit triple digit speeds almost every time I would drive as it was just so easy to do it. Crazy fast.
But the C63 is much more fun. RWD is way more entertaining. Great low end torque, easy drifting, burnouts and God almighty, THE SOUND! No 911TT will ever sound as good as a good old stock C63!
Sure the C63 is slow(ish) compared to the TT, but it is much more fun overall.
