http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...pe-test-review

A bit faster than the sedan in a straight line, appears to brake and handle about the same (but I have not yet read the fine print ;-)

reporting rattles. shame

that comment section though.

"looks like an accord"

"too expensive, not fast enough"

"shares interior with 42k c300"

Not happy at all about the excessive noise. One of my pet peeves in an $80-$100k car. Wish I could find one around here to test drive.

One of the commentors was correct in saying that the rear is not where near as well designed aesthetically as the front. I cannot agree more. It's of course subjective but having just viewed an iridium silver coupe a few days ago it was the conclusion me and my wife came up with. Spent about 15 mins looking at the rear alone from various angles. A few weeks ago I had a good look at an iridium coupe but hadn't noticed how the rear sticks out so oddly until the other day until my wife highlighted it. GRRRR. Really, really wanted to like it as I am currently looking at options to upgrade my w204 coupe.

I think the "63" addresses that issue, and my guess is that the coupe was designed for that.
The regular coupes had to take a bit of a hit.
And I agree, the regular coupe's rear end does not look right

And the 43

the body on the 63 is SEVERELY more attractive than the 300/43

The widened body, etc. makes everything come together.

I think you're right. The normal coupe just doesnt look right on the rear. It jutts out too much and looks a bit 'thin'. The front is great, especially with the front sport diffuser (which I actually prefer to the C63 'wide mouth' one).