AMG vs M
Thread Starter
Member
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 161
Likes: 0
From: Boston
CL63 030 Blk/Blk
AMG vs M
This should make it clear that AMG beats M for all sedans, coupes, and convertables.
http://bp1.blogger.com/_pMbfBMq7nmU/...h/amgvsm08.jpg
The comparrison is for 2008 models and the source was a BMW board although that doesn't come through.
Please note that the best the M6 can do is to tie the CL63 so when I said that the M6 felt faster off the line but that the CL63 more than made up for it >30mph, maybe I was right!
http://bp1.blogger.com/_pMbfBMq7nmU/...h/amgvsm08.jpg
The comparrison is for 2008 models and the source was a BMW board although that doesn't come through.
Please note that the best the M6 can do is to tie the CL63 so when I said that the M6 felt faster off the line but that the CL63 more than made up for it >30mph, maybe I was right!
Last edited by ieb; Mar 8, 2008 at 11:30 AM.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,271
Likes: 1
From: CA
2010 CL65
Thx for posting the data, ieb
Would argue 0-100KPH data is fairly meaningless for most buyers of $150K+ AMGs (or any other $150K+ commuter cars)....and M's are fairly irrelevant vs AMG S/CL/SL buyers, as evidenced by their <$100K pricing and socio-economically weaker buyer base....
Suspect most useful straight-line perf comparo (though difficult to quantitate accurately) is ?70-100+MPH or 30-60MPH bursts when one is in a cruising gear and suddenly wants accel....e.g., cruising in 70MPH traffic on an urban fwy; talking on Btooth; one sees a gap in traffic and wants instantaneous, effortless accel....
And would argue most relevant comparo cars are S/CL/SL63 and 65 vs 599 vs 997TT Tip and 997GT2...both in dry and wet....and on imperfect CA fwys and on a smooth track or AB pavement....and times for SL63 030 w/MCT in SportPlus mode vs Manual mode...and 599 F-1 in Auto mode vs Manual mode....and would want to see braking dists from 100MPH-0 in dry/wet and smooth/bumpy pavement for each.....
My subjective, qualitative sense of each of these cars (haven't driven SL63/997GT2) is that CL63 030 is currently best overall performer in various straight-line conditions described (65's obviously win on smooth, dry pavement)....would suspect SL63 030 will easily supplant CL63 030, w/300lbs less wt and presumably faster/smarter gearbox....
Would argue 0-100KPH data is fairly meaningless for most buyers of $150K+ AMGs (or any other $150K+ commuter cars)....and M's are fairly irrelevant vs AMG S/CL/SL buyers, as evidenced by their <$100K pricing and socio-economically weaker buyer base....
Suspect most useful straight-line perf comparo (though difficult to quantitate accurately) is ?70-100+MPH or 30-60MPH bursts when one is in a cruising gear and suddenly wants accel....e.g., cruising in 70MPH traffic on an urban fwy; talking on Btooth; one sees a gap in traffic and wants instantaneous, effortless accel....
And would argue most relevant comparo cars are S/CL/SL63 and 65 vs 599 vs 997TT Tip and 997GT2...both in dry and wet....and on imperfect CA fwys and on a smooth track or AB pavement....and times for SL63 030 w/MCT in SportPlus mode vs Manual mode...and 599 F-1 in Auto mode vs Manual mode....and would want to see braking dists from 100MPH-0 in dry/wet and smooth/bumpy pavement for each.....
My subjective, qualitative sense of each of these cars (haven't driven SL63/997GT2) is that CL63 030 is currently best overall performer in various straight-line conditions described (65's obviously win on smooth, dry pavement)....would suspect SL63 030 will easily supplant CL63 030, w/300lbs less wt and presumably faster/smarter gearbox....
Member
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 135
Likes: 0
From: Connecticut
E36 M3, 82 f-150 4x4
Huh? Are you saying that AMG beats M just in the 0-100km or is the overall better, superior car(s)? I am a huge admirer of MB especially AMG, they are great cars. Just curious on what you mean to say.
Thread Starter
Member
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 161
Likes: 0
From: Boston
CL63 030 Blk/Blk
Right, we're not buying these cars for fastest 0-60. If so you can have a Z06 or GT-4 that will smoke anything on the road at a third of the price.
The only valid comparrison for a CL63/5 is not last gen CL but next gen Bentley GT.
The only valid comparrison for a CL63/5 is not last gen CL but next gen Bentley GT.
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,760
Likes: 594
From: Seattle
'19 E63S, ‘16 CLS63 RIP, '09 E63 Gone, '06 M5 Gone, '97 Supra TT Gone
0-60 isn't exactly a great measurement of performance, I don't consider this definitive data at all, at highway speeds you'd be hard pressed to beat an M5 in a CL63.
Administrator
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 12,263
Likes: 901
From: THE Orange County, California
2024 C8 Z06- 2025 BMW CS- 2022 Porsche 992 GTS
+1 ... how often does one even get a chance to line up in the "Real World" and do a dig run to only 60? I dont dispute that the AMG's would kick some M butt from a dig. Having owned 3 AMGS including a 65 should give me perspective.
Trending Topics
Thread Starter
Member
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 161
Likes: 0
From: Boston
CL63 030 Blk/Blk
The chart was compiled by a member of a BMW board and the claimed sources are manufacturers and publications. They do look a little slow but are consistent. The reason that I showed this is that there has been some discussion here about how fast the new 63 engine/transmission setup is especially compared to the M and since these numbers, that are supplied by a BWM person who you’d think would want to present M in the best possible light, has some relevance.
If you want to compare a M5/6 to a CL 63 and both have same published 0-60 times and you believe that the M is faster off the line but they both have same 0-60 then I would say that the CL63 out accelerates the M >30 mph and all the way up.
If you want to compare a M5/6 to a CL 63 and both have same published 0-60 times and you believe that the M is faster off the line but they both have same 0-60 then I would say that the CL63 out accelerates the M >30 mph and all the way up.
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
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,760
Likes: 594
From: Seattle
'19 E63S, ‘16 CLS63 RIP, '09 E63 Gone, '06 M5 Gone, '97 Supra TT Gone
I've never, ever raced someone to 60. 99.99999% of all of the races I've had have been on the freeway. Stoplight racing only gets people killed.
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,760
Likes: 594
From: Seattle
'19 E63S, ‘16 CLS63 RIP, '09 E63 Gone, '06 M5 Gone, '97 Supra TT Gone
Where would you be getting that data? Because I've ran a buddy's CL63 and uh, that's REALLY not the case. Far too heavy of a car.
Administrator
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 12,263
Likes: 901
From: THE Orange County, California
2024 C8 Z06- 2025 BMW CS- 2022 Porsche 992 GTS
Ha ha the only time I have ever lined up against an M or an AMG in either of my cars was on the way to a meet in a caravan.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 2,146
Likes: 1
From: L.A., CA
'08 M5, '10 Land Cruiser
The chart was compiled by a member of a BMW board and the claimed sources are manufacturers and publications. They do look a little slow but are consistent. The reason that I showed this is that there has been some discussion here about how fast the new 63 engine/transmission setup is especially compared to the M and since these numbers, that are supplied by a BWM person who you’d think would want to present M in the best possible light, has some relevance.
If you want to compare a M5/6 to a CL 63 and both have same published 0-60 times and you believe that the M is faster off the line but they both have same 0-60 then I would say that the CL63 out accelerates the M >30 mph and all the way up.
If you want to compare a M5/6 to a CL 63 and both have same published 0-60 times and you believe that the M is faster off the line but they both have same 0-60 then I would say that the CL63 out accelerates the M >30 mph and all the way up.
0-62.5 in the M5/M6 is hampered by torque limiting first gear and is a very meaningless number.
CL63 is a very luxurious and powerful car but as a performance tool it's a blunter instrument than the M5/M6.
Thread Starter
Member
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 161
Likes: 0
From: Boston
CL63 030 Blk/Blk
We keep getting off track, what I'm saying is:
"We're not buying these cars for fastest 0-60, or 1/4 mile. If so you can have a Z06 or GT-4 that will smoke anything on the road at a third of the price.
The only valid comparrison for a CL63/5 is not last gen CL but next gen Bentley GT."
"We're not buying these cars for fastest 0-60, or 1/4 mile. If so you can have a Z06 or GT-4 that will smoke anything on the road at a third of the price.
The only valid comparrison for a CL63/5 is not last gen CL but next gen Bentley GT."
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 2,146
Likes: 1
From: L.A., CA
'08 M5, '10 Land Cruiser
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,760
Likes: 594
From: Seattle
'19 E63S, ‘16 CLS63 RIP, '09 E63 Gone, '06 M5 Gone, '97 Supra TT Gone
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,760
Likes: 594
From: Seattle
'19 E63S, ‘16 CLS63 RIP, '09 E63 Gone, '06 M5 Gone, '97 Supra TT Gone
Certainly you mean money-wise, because performance-wise you're in for disappointment. If I wanted to drop $140k on a car that I expected to be sporty, it wouldn't be a CL63. At 4900lbs, your car weighs close to 1,000lbs more than an M6. That is a pig by anyone's standards.
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,760
Likes: 594
From: Seattle
'19 E63S, ‘16 CLS63 RIP, '09 E63 Gone, '06 M5 Gone, '97 Supra TT Gone
Enjoy your limo ride, I'll take my roller coaster any day.
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,760
Likes: 594
From: Seattle
'19 E63S, ‘16 CLS63 RIP, '09 E63 Gone, '06 M5 Gone, '97 Supra TT Gone
It's obvious you're not much of a performance guru, you don't race cars, you don't track cars, you're just visiting because you dropped a ton of coin on an AMG and think it gives you the right to weigh in and make sweeping generalizations about vehicles you have no experience with.
The SMGIII is not for everyone, but neither is a manual transmission. It is absolutely user-friendly if you know what to expect, there's no voodoo to it, the left paddle downshifts and the right paddle upshifts, FAST. If you don't learn the right shift points, as with any manual, then you're going to have a crappy time.
It is only not user-friendly if the user is lazy, period.
As for the "sublime CL experience", I had an original CL in the family, and I found it to be a wonderfully refined and comfortable car. But it was huge, fat and ungainly.
But you're comparing apples to oranges here, and while the M5 is a 4-door Ferrari, the CL is a 2-door Bentley. One is all about performance, the other is all about putting the passenger to bed comfortably.
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,760
Likes: 594
From: Seattle
'19 E63S, ‘16 CLS63 RIP, '09 E63 Gone, '06 M5 Gone, '97 Supra TT Gone
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 2,146
Likes: 1
From: L.A., CA
'08 M5, '10 Land Cruiser
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 2,895
Likes: 53
From: Maryland
'14 E63S & '14 Audi SQ5
First of all, in the real world a CL63 can not stay with an M5 or M6. That is nothing to be ashamed of considering the amazing performance prowess of those particular cars.
Secondly, the performance of those M cars are not easily accessible to most drivers. Only a few true enthusiasts wil configure their car for ultimate perfomance. However, if the M5/6 you run across is driven by such a driver, don't expect good results if you are behind the wheel of the CL63. Don't get me wrong, the CL63 is a wonderful car with amazing perfomance for its size and with probably the highest levels of luxury, amenities and technolgy encompassed in one vehicle. I think the CL63 owners understand that their cars are not street dominators (which I am sure was not in their buying decision).
I really don't like the arguments about what "class" of cars each are in. If you want to compare perfomance of an AMG CL63 to an M5/6....you can't be selective in what you want to hear. An M6 convertible is almost at the same price point as a CL63 (close enough where an extra $10-$15K is not going to kill the deal).
I know the OP was looking at the chart as unbiased as it originated from a BMW board. However, the information contained really is not a relevant representation of the performance capabilities of each vehicle.
Tom
Secondly, the performance of those M cars are not easily accessible to most drivers. Only a few true enthusiasts wil configure their car for ultimate perfomance. However, if the M5/6 you run across is driven by such a driver, don't expect good results if you are behind the wheel of the CL63. Don't get me wrong, the CL63 is a wonderful car with amazing perfomance for its size and with probably the highest levels of luxury, amenities and technolgy encompassed in one vehicle. I think the CL63 owners understand that their cars are not street dominators (which I am sure was not in their buying decision).
I really don't like the arguments about what "class" of cars each are in. If you want to compare perfomance of an AMG CL63 to an M5/6....you can't be selective in what you want to hear. An M6 convertible is almost at the same price point as a CL63 (close enough where an extra $10-$15K is not going to kill the deal).
I know the OP was looking at the chart as unbiased as it originated from a BMW board. However, the information contained really is not a relevant representation of the performance capabilities of each vehicle.
Tom
Last edited by TMC M5; Mar 10, 2008 at 03:50 PM.
