chiphomme

That CLK63 Black weight is from Mercedes-AMG site as a loaded weight. They have the C63s loaded as 2170 KG.
Try getting the basics right.
BTW, the cars aren't as similiar as you seem to think.

SMP

You are a funny man. I don't think you do a lot of reading when you look at those websites (the ones you posted) otherwise you would have noticed a few things. You say brakes are the same. 1st, the brake disc on the BS is a two piece in the front. One piece rotor on C63. 2nd, the brakes are bigger on the BS because C63 comes standard with 18" wheels. You cannot fit 18" wheels on a BS. Won't clear the brakes. You say suspension is the same. Where did you read that? BS comes with coilovers, C63 with struts. I don't have to tell you, but there is a big difference. You say BS weighs 4300 pounds. Where did you come up with that number? If you look at AMG's website, you will see the weight for the BS is listed as 1760 kilos. That includes a driver of 68 kilos, luggage of 7 kilos and almost a full tank of gas. Now when you translate that number to pounds, it equals 3872 pounds. C63 in comparison, 3806 pounds. Those are just a few of the inaccuracies in your comments. You say you are not impressed anymore, well, should I say I am not impressed with your reading skills?

alexander stemer

Agree with everything, but would add the following:
The primary reason 18" wheels won't fit is interference with a steering knuckle. This is according to Tire Rack that carefully measured my car with optical lasers to see if I could fit snow tires on 18 inch rims.
Aside from the coilovers and totally adjustable suspension, handling is significantly impacted by the locking differential. This is what creates the "steer from the rear" feeling of the car.
I wasn't under the impression that the C63 had coolers for the engine oil, rear differential, and the power steering.

Am I the only one that thinks the C63 bodywork is unattractive? AS

GoFastKindaGuy

This whole thread is silly. Drive what you like.

If any car costs too much to be a value to you, drive something you like better. Why the trash talk?

ET550

No. I'm still having a hard time warming up to it as well.

SteveL

I still have no idea why someone who wants a back seat and an SMG/manual transmission would even bother looking at a Black Series. For the price of the Black Series there other cars to choose from, the M6 for example.

It is kind of like saying I want an AWD convertible and then looking an E63.

MACHC5

Mercedes has most times been the leader in automobile styling.
It's 2008 C Klasse has given up that claim and taken on the look of the Nippon vehicles.
In particular the new "C" looks like an ACURA from the rear quarter.
And even the side view has a touch of TL genes also.

"Not that there is anything wrong with that."
MachC5

jrcart

E63 cabrio...no problem

"Relax, all right? My old man is a television repair man, he's got this ultimate set of tools! I can fix it!"- Jeff Spicoli

jrcart

I actually think the C63 is the best looking car in the MB line-up. I think it has the most sinister look. If it were a tad bigger I would have one as a (summer time) dailey driver.

chiphomme

The C class and the Chrysler Sebring look way too similiar.


http://www.chrysler.com/en/2008/sebring/

http://www.mbusa.com/models/gallery/...e=c_class_main

alexander stemer

One of the obvious signs of pride in car ownership is turning to look at it as you walk away in a parking lot. I just can't envision turning to look at a C63. I don't want to seem shallow, as a car is much more than just looks. On the other hand, I don't think I could buy a Pontiac Aztec if its performance equalled a Corvette ZO6. That is a large part of the reason I wouldn't buy a Mitsu Evo.
That may seem shallow, so maybe in this respect, I am. But, I do feel the BS is a very striking car. If it didn't perform, I wouldn't have purchased a BS, but in fact it does, and looks great. AS

Germancar1

Ridiculous. Other than a similar grille opening, the C and Sebring look nothing alike.

M

Rambino951

Ok guys, Im not jet fighter pilot, but the Instructor status is just a way to say that ive done plenty of track events with the Porsche and BMW clubs to rank up in the "I know what im doing" category.

I realize a lot of my comparisons were off, but if you do take a look at the magazine articles I listed, they do say what I wrote.. Im happy though to have learned here that there are bigger differences than I thought.

However,

At this point, I think purchasing a C63, and spending maybe 25k on it with aftermarket suspension and brake and engine performance upgrades will yield you close to if not better results than a stock CLK63 BS With an extra seat in the back.

Overall, my choice would still be a CLK BS, because they just have the prestige and the quality and technically tested stamp behind it, not to mention its ultra beautiful looks. However, having a look at the current price tag for that upgraded comparison, I have chosen an M6 for now. An M6 with modification will give me an excellent daily driver, fully transmission control, great weekend track car and enough room to carry some ladies around for the evening.

I think in 2 years, ill make the change over to the CLK63 BS Benz when the price has taken its expected depreciation and I can justify the value for what im getting.. Then again, I may also just go for a 911 TT, modify that and be able to use it for the winter and by then the 2 little back seats will be perfect for retrofitting child seats lol..


Cheers

Ted Baldwin

...........the CLK63 is a special series that has more to do with driving dynamics and pure acceleration. This is not a mystery to those that still question its price and value relative to others in the aMG line up. No need to pound this oint, it is not something we dont understand. The issue is that even when you factor that point into consideration, and add the fact that the newer AMG cars like the C63 are becoming more and more dynamic at half the cost it makes the CLK63 BS more difficult to justify for many. The C63 is a four doe sedan while the CLK63 BS is two door sports car without a back seat. I hope to god that the two door sts car withu a more nimble around the track, other wise the CLK63 BS owners will have the right to ask for their money back.

........If you compare the C63 to another four door sedan like the E63. You will see that the C63 clearly wins. For those that point out that the C63 is smaller than the E63.......wow! What a revelation. You sure did point out something we did not know. It is the C-class. It is smaller than the E-class. Like another forum member has stated, it will be like putting the V10 engine in the M3 and making the M3 faster and coner better than the M5 and hope that people will buy the M5 purely for its size. Unlike the E63, the C63 has rev matching down shift program which the CLK63 BS owbners are petitioning for and it has traction control that can be turned off completely. Both of these making for a more engaging driving experience for the enthusiast.

.............For the snobish growd, you can just hold your fire. Yes, I know that the C63 is still a C-class. If this is the criteria by which you spend your money, you won't have much of it left very soon.


Ted

Germancar1

Oh god Ted please. The E63 isn't going anywhere nor is it obsoleted by the C63. The E is larger, yes....but it also is more confortable, has a better ride and isn't supposed to be as sporty as the smaller C63. Your posts on how MB has just botched this and botched that are just ridiculous and they have no bearing in what people actually buy and do. The E63 will still have its appeal as will the C63. Some people don't want a smaller C and likewise some don't want the larger E it is as simple as that, well that in addition to the other differences each car bring to the table. The C is the superior sports sedan yes, the E is better at the luxury side of the equation. Obviously if one is buying an E, even an AMG model they're not going to be seeing decreasing radius corners like a C AMG buyer would.

M

chiphomme

Look again

spr

I think the main difference asthetically is of course just the look and styling differences. However, that being said, stick a set of coilovers on the c, some R compounds and ....well....

The only limitation I can see for the c is the lack of huge fenderwells to fit some serious rubber. As any AMG owner knows the biggest problem with these cars is putting enough rubber to the ground. With the CLK having presumably more room it should always be able to be faster all around.

What are the largest rims you can stick on the clk63bs? (F&R)

MB should have dropped the new tranny, and ceramic brakes in the BS -at least they're doing a remap for the downshifting blip- that is a slap in the face that the c has it and the black doesn't.

I think MB has somewhat shot themselves in the foot offerering the same motors in all lines. A while back, I was considering the e55 just for the engine. However after driving the e55 v. c55 they e was a pig on rollerskates and you can swap out coilovers on the c-etc. and 10k cheaper at the time. Now e63 v. c63? It's a no brainer. It's a shame the c has gotten so heavy though.

MB will just limit options (keyless go/panaromic roof) to the upper models to try and force you to buy the more expensive model that way.

alexander stemer

Let me be the first to say that I don't want ceramic brakes. I'm not entering any 24 hour enduros, or even doing a 20 lap sprint race. I don't think I will fade the steel brakes, but if I do, I'll happily let them cool. What I really don't want to do is replace ceramic discs.

I have 4 cars with over 500hp, so I am certainly used to the results of more power and less weight. From my perspective, I don't think the BS needs any more power, and it carries the weight just fine. So, I don't think the common engine architecture is a problem.

Personally, I think the BS handles its weight better than a stock Porsche tt, and doesn't wash out the front end when it's doing it.

The E series is definitely better for taking business clients to dinner, or relaxed cruising. It just isn't as much fun for an enthusiast. Even if performance was indistinguishable for a C63, I would not be a customer, based on looks.

It is logical to sit out of the market in hopes of snagging one at C63 prices in a few years. AS

transferred

Agreed. C63 looks cheaply done.

As for all the same engines, AMG have indeed made a big mistake. The M3 and M5 are simply not going to be cross shopped and offer different experiences with unique personalities. It was good for AMG to develop their first new engine but no one thought that the 6.2 would be their only engine.

adam28

well said

Even though it's a C class, I'm probably going to get one of these bad boys because of the way they look, it looks mean and sounds as loud as my G55!!!! And it has so much power!!!


That being said the C63 and the black series are two different cars period, you can't compare them!

spr

[QUOTE=alexander stemer;2792788]Let me be the first to say that I don't want ceramic brakes. I'm not entering any 24 hour enduros, or even doing a 20 lap sprint race. I don't think I will fade the steel brakes, but if I do, I'll happily let them cool. What I really don't want to do is replace ceramic discs.

Personally, I think the BS handles its weight better than a stock Porsche tt, and doesn't wash out the front end when it's doing it.


Ceramic brakes are to reduce unsprung weight not fade. A well designed steel rotor and alum. hat works just fine. If you're getting fade - get brake cooling ducts, change pads, fluid, or driving style. I hear you with the Gen 1 P car cracking rotors, however they were replaced albeit bedrudgingly under warranty.

P TT's camber can be adjusted to not be so understeer happy quite easily and gt3 bars are cheap. Are there camber adjustments on the BS or are they B.S. like the other AMG's?? This is also a serious flaw in their designing.

alexander stemer

[QUOTE=spr;2792888]Your reply is valid but not relevant to me or my needs. I fully understand unsprung weight, and I would never endeavor to run an F1 or Indy car with excessive mass outside the spring towers(obviously, I will never run either of those car types). But, when we are talking about 3500+/- pound street cars, I'm not a good enough driver to feel or measure that difference in ceramic weights vs steel rotors. Doesn't mean the theory is wrong, it means that the theoretic ?.1 seconds difference in lap times is meaningless in a world of amateur drivers. What matters is stopping distance and fade, and here the ceramics don't add anything, at least to my driving.

As far as the Gen1 Porsche ceramics being the only ones impacted, my friend and neighbor with a 997GT3 would differ. He has just been hit with the 5 figure replacement bill for his ceramic rotors- he is converting to steel instead.

As far as the camber adjustment and GT3 rear bar, you are also correct. I have both on my 996ttX50. These make a significant difference. It still doesn't turn like a BS. You can see the difference in the first fast corner.

Camber adjustment is a nice feature, but the BS doesn't seem to need it, at least for my intended purpose. You are aware of the very high tire pressures recommended. The car does not roll the contact patch onto the shoulder.

Anyway, this isn't meant to be a contest. I do think the BS is a unique vehicle, but maybe I'm getting too strident. AS

transferred

Also, on an endurance race tires will go before ceramic brakes. And ceramics crack if touched by a tire iron at those temps.

[QUOTE=alexander stemer;2793311]

ET550

Sounds like you got it all figured out. An M6 should solve all of your depreciation and value concerns.

ET550

Im sure all of the current and potential CL 63, CLK 63 BS, SL 63, S63 and E63 buyers will be immediately switching to the C63 because it has the same engine and costs less. I assume the same rationale applies to any of the 350 and 550 models also. Lets just all buy the cheapest model regardless of any other attributes or features, because otherwise we are wasting our money. Thanks for the concern Ted. Im sure all of us should move to cheaper neighborhoods and buy the same house for less money also. It would be snobbish to do otherwise.