Hi Guys

I have always wanted to get a C63 and was looking at purchasing one next year actually (Maybe 507 edition) however with the introduction of the CLA 45 I have been tossing up the idea of perhaps getting a CLA with some fancy extras.

So my main questions are (And i understand not too much is known but numbers should be finalized by now so we have a basic idea of how it will run)

1. Price and bang for your buck. C63's cost about $160000 here in Aus and the CLA 45 $90000 (I think around this price point). Is the CLA45 a very good bang for your buck car? I am leaning towards yes, others peoples thoughts?

2. Interior, I assume they would be pretty much identical with very little differences between them?

3. Specs: Obviously the C63 wins out here but really how much of a difference is there in this department? Is there enough to justify a $60000 price difference? What about smoothness of the drive?

Finally I do not run track days and am interested in a nice daily driver which packs a punch. The c63 was perfect for what I wanted but if there is minimal differences between the two then I would be happy to get a CLA 45

The main issue is given the price difference there must be something im missing? However given that the E 63 and C63 are very identical in my eyes maybe I am not missing anything? Any thoughts?

Sorry for the rambling!

 

1. I don't know about in Australia but in the US the CLA45, even at $60K, is a pretty good bang for the buck...mostly. It's not a cheap car by any stretch of the imagination so it's hard to call any of these cars a great bang for the buck. In terms of 0-60 performance though everything in the press seems to suggests its a pretty good deal; maybe after cars like the Evo and STI.

2. There will be a lot of differences between the C-Class based C63 and the A-Class based CLA45. While the CLA should be nicely appointed the car underpinning it wasn't meant to compete with the C-Class market of competitors so you should expect it to offer a little less. The CLA is also only a 4 seater whereas the C63 has room for 5.

3. As for performance differences, only you can answer that question. Some people will happily drop $10K for a few extra ponies just to shave a tenth of a second off of their performance numbers. As for smoothness, nobody knows yet since all we've seen on the CLA45 has been released from Mercedes. Figure that there will be some turbo lag to pull off those kinds of horsepower and torque numbers. The price difference in the States will be MUCH different so its hard to draw a real comparison from a pricing point of view. Also, the CLA is a FWD based car with a different AWD system than the typical 4MATIC. Dynamically, it will not be the same as a RWD biased 4MATIC. It's like comparing a Haldex based Quattro system in an Audi against the standard bearer Torsen based Quattro.

4. My take is that the CLA will probably be a great car -- but its not going to be a C63; nor does MB want it to be. If the C63 fits your needs and the pricing is right then you should go for it. Then again if the E63 and C63 are identical to you then only you can answer your question. They're both great cars but VERY different. It's like saying an M3 and M5 are identical -- something I don't see at all. Only you know what you want and what's important to you. Ultimately, what any of us thinks doesn't matter. And, unfortunately, at this point in time there simply isn't enough information out there to answer most of your questions. You'll probably be fine with the CLA45 based on what you've written but you really need to wait to see it to find out for yourself.

Just my $.02 and best of luck!!!
-Eric

 

I am considering the same thing. My thoughts are that it comes down to one thing, weight. The C is a heavier car and can handle more horsepower but the tradeoff is in the ability to react to drivers input, meaning take the same situation and apply it to a more extreme example. Say, for instance, the 2200 pound alfa Romeo 4c verses a panamera turbo. They may both have the same 0 to 60 times, but the alfa will handle better albeit much more road feel, good and bad. So there you have it, I believe the C will offer a bit less road feel and a slightly better ride, but potentially lack in handling slightly. Look at the C63 black review, it says the car is still a bit nose heavy. A better example may be to look at the GT-R. The car has to be the weight it is to have the performance numbers. However, drivers say it is a bit numb to experience. Bottom line, the heavier the car, the less connected the driver to the experience. The CLA 45 formula may work very well depending on the sum of the parts used to assemble the vehicle. The reason the BMW 1M is so hot is the combination of relatively low weight, great driver connection, as well as daily driver comfort, and at a decent price. It's always about balancing these three factors.

 

I'd say it's really good bang for the buck. At least the A45 has more BHP per tonne than the C63, plus they're AWD (?). Getting one for my wife

 

C63 has the 6.3 and the noise.

While i do like the A45, its forever going to be seen as a rich yuppie car, while the C63 has definate hoon street cred.

 

I'm not sure "street cred" has anything to do with whether something is also considered "yuppie" car. The e30 3 series was the quintessential '80s yuppie car but few cars, if any, in its price range had better performance credentials; especially compared to its halo car, the M3.

-Eric

P.S. Are there still yuppies? That term sounds so...'80s.

 

i personally think the cla45 looks great. 355 hp out of 2 liters? and a very nice sound from the factory on that 4cylinder, are all impressive. if price difference is that steep between the two models in your location, it may be wise to consider the cla45.. i feel i like the interior of it better that the 2012+ interior of the c63 to be honest, because theyve gotten somewhat bmw 'ish'... the cla interior looks very racey but while staying luxuries and rich in quality and unique to itself.

 

Hi All

Thanks for all the replies, Sue thanks for the detailed answers to each of my points.

obviously it is hard to really know the exact specs, how it drives and handling since it is not released now so i guess the final decision will be made when there are actually models to test drive. At the moment based purely on what we know I am leaning towards the CLA45.

Bang for buck is great (I have come to realise this more and more)
Interior is looking great and the c63 is starting to look a bit dated. The new MY2015 c63 is due out in a few years but I feel like they will probably update it to be similar to that of either the New E Class or the CLA. I do like the CLA interior very nice and sporty.

Not too sure about the sound though especially from a 2L engine? See this was my biggest gripe to be honest, a 2L engine just seems so small they must of really pushed it to its limits, I hope this does not lead to maintenance issues in the near future?

Also in Australia no ones branded a yuppy so its all good =)

 

2.0 liters is about the biggest 4 banger you'll find on the streets from what I've read in the past. It has to do with minimizing vibrations from the engine. Bigger engines require an additional balance shaft and that's more expensive, etc. There's only so much that they can do to a 4cyl engine to "beef up" the sound it emits. It's never going to sound like anything with more cylinders.

Some people say my old Saab's V4 is half of a Ford V8. I think they think that makes it sound sexier or something. In truth, it's 2/3 of a Ford V6 and it still sounds every bit a 4 cyl regardless of its roots (and I've got dual glasspacks on it)! I love the growl it makes but it is by no means 2/3 of what my Porsche sounds like. I don't care what kind of exhaust someone puts on the CLA45 it will never sound like half of an AMG V8. I'm okay with that as long as they haven't isolated the driver from the sounds it DOES make!

There is a video on the web of an AMG drive piloting a CLA45 around a track. If you haven't seen it, I'm pretty sure there are links on these forums if you check around a bit. My guess is that it is probably fairly representative of what we should expect. Non-turbo people might not like the sound of the waste gate dumping (farting) or they might think its a bit juvenile. Personally, I like it. It's just part of a car's personality. What I'm most curious about is what it sounds like inside. I don't expect a gutted racer but I also don't want all of the exhaust noise left outside. Only time will tell.

-Eric

 

its decent looking and has great power from a 4cyl.

however, it sounds pretty bad. no level of modding will ever replace a large displacement v8

 

Ill be honest I took a look at the utube clip, sound overall is ok but that farting. Wow it actually bothers me and I am not a fan of it. Rethinking decisions =(

I know this is probably better suited to the C63 section but since I have time, anyone has feedback on how much of a tyre eater the C63 is? A new set every year or so?

 

That's definitely a question for the C63 folks but tire usage is going to depend on mileage and how aggressively you drive. There's no way a C63 that doesn't spend significant time on a track and doesn't drive excessive mileage in a year uses up a set of tires annually. My C4S might come close but even it doesn't do that and it truly is a tire eater.

-Eric

P.S. The dumping sound is often louder on a turbo when driven hard. Around town it's probably fairly muted...but it also depends on how AMG set up the system. I'm kind of using the term wategate incorrectly or assumptivel since I don't know how AMG set-up the turbo. All turbos need to release air. there are a number of different ways this can be accomplished...whether through a Blowoff Valve, Bypass/Diverter Valve, waste gate etc. Some methods are quieter than others. Have any of the specs now the CLA45 shared that level of detail to date?

 

I've been getting 15K or so out of my rears. I don't track my car but I do drive fairly aggressive. I'm not peeling out at every light or anything though. You might get 4K if you do that!

 

we'll have to see how close pricing is on the two cars comparatively. the cla45 looks awesome and as said several times the stock power out of that little motor is really stunning. the seats look killer to, very race inspired. if i didnt have a c63, id opt for the cla45 perhaps.... the 507 is what really catches my eye though

 

he fart sounds is from the dual clutch transmission. have similar sounds in dsg equipped audi s4's but the manuals dont make it. i have some friends in aus and sucks that you guys have to pay 2-3 times what we pay because of the luxury car taxes etc. $160k for a c63 is ridiculous, i can get a brand new v10 r8 for that money. than again tho, a panny turbo s is rolls royce phantom money over there.

 

That sound is NOT the waste gate, it's the ignition timing cutoff on the ECU between gears (identical systems are used in the lambos and F1 cars as well.). I LOVE the sound, in person it is very addicting, the YouTube videos do not do it justice.

 

i love the interior of the new CLA tho

 

Have pity for us from Finland too: Thanks to the crazy car tax here, the C63 AMG's starting price over here is 132.500 euros, which is over 172 000 USD. Since the car tax is Co2 emmisions based, progressive and price-based (based on jealousy, so expensive cars have higher taxes) as well as progressive, the starting price for example for a 911 Turbo S Coupe PDK is 329 944 euros (429 000 USD) and a Panamera Turbo is "only" 253 948 euros (330 000 USD). http://www.porsche.fi/hinnastot/svhinnasto/#

It gets even better with the high-end AMG's: SLS AMG Coupe is 362 539 euros (471 000 USD) and the SL65 AMG is 446 419 euros (580 344 USD). Remember that these don't include any optional equipment, which will be separately car-taxed as well!

http://www.mercedes-benz.fi/content/...231_030613.pdf

http://www.mercedes-benz.fi/content/...197_030613.pdf

That's why you don't see many nice cars on our roads except in foreign plates such as Russians. Finland is the ***est country in the world to be a high-end car enthusiast.

 

stock for stock, faster than current CLS63 off the line. wow

 

It's faster than the C63 stock. No C63 has 4.1 to 60. Maybe 100mph+ the c63 597 edition would pull away. Anything under 100mpg the CLA45 AMG is tough to beat.

 

You might be right considering it's rated at a higher horsepower than the TT-RS and that car can run 12.2-12.4 @ 111-113 stock. I believe a stock C63 might pull it from a rolling start though.

 

Most car mags have the C63 in the 3.7-3.9 range to 60 and p31 cars have done 11.9 1/4 mile. I don't think the CLA45 would stand a chance at any speed. I still want one though.

 

No c63 has run in the 3s on stock tires. Maybe on drag radials. They have no traction off the line so I know those numbers are bogus. Mid to low 12s at best which is on par with CLA.

 

That sounds more about right.

 

I have a C63 and have plenty of traction off the line but you can't just mash the pedal. 11.9 1/4 mile on stock rubber and trap speed is much higher....check the C63 1/4 mile sticky thread. I guess every car mag is bogus because they pretty much all got to 60 in less than 4 seconds. The best I've gotten is 3.8 and a very average launch will still get me in the 4.1-4.3 range. I also wouldn't be surprised if the A45 weighs a few hundred lbs less than the CLA45 as it's a lot smaller. I'm sure the CLA will be more consistent since it's AWD but with a good launch the C63 would put a hurtin on it. #'s don't lie.

https://mbworld.org/forums/c63-amg-w...rag-strip.html

https://mbworld.org/forums/c63-amg-w...ps-here-7.html