Like I said before, a similar grille opening and a side cut line, thats it. The 2 cars will never be mistaken for each other on the street by a sighted person. It is easy to find pictures of different cars at similar angles to show how they "look alike" yet in real life they don't. The Sebring is butt ugly in person, the C isn't. I suggest you go outside and actually look at the cars and quit staring at pictures.

M

 

Two totally different types of cars...the CLK63 BS beats a M6 in comparison tests and according to all reviews til today the C63 can't take out in a track setting the new M3 that its being compared to....there is a reason why the CLK63 BS costs so much more...I seriously doubt MB would create a entry level C class AMG to topple their CLK63 BS...detuned or not...

 

Not to mention that the guy trashes the CLK BS because you can get a C63 which in his words has almost the same performance for a lot less money, but then after all his analysis and careful research without any seat time in any of the cars he is discussing, he is going to buy an M6 (which he thinks will make a good weekend track car) but makes no mention of the M3 which actually out performs the M6 for a lot less money. What a joke.

 

This guy obviously does not have a clue and just likes hearing himself talk. What's the going rate on an M6? $109,000 or so? With it's sub par performance compared to an M3, why would he not complain that the M6 is overpriced like he did about the BS compared with a C63?

 

Some of you have probably seen this Top Gear comparison of the M3 , C63, and RS4. They have some nice things to say about the C63 but clearly it is not the track car that the CLKBS is, no surprise because it was not designed to be, but it does expose some of the weakness's of the C63 on a track. Sure, you can compare any car with any other car but I think this was is just as stupid as comparing the CLKBS to an S63, E63, CL63, ML63. There is simply no point.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=__ghLE7QtnA

 

Because M6 has a V10 engine and M3 has a V8 engine. If M3 did have a V10 engine, than M6 would make much less sense to me as consumer. The most expensive car must have the best engine; it is idiotic to use the same engine in both low-end and high-end cars in their lineup and Mercedes is the only car manufacturer that doesn't seem to get this. That is why we don't see BMW M3's with V10's, Porsche Cayman's with 3.8L's, and Ferrari F430's with V12's.

Yes, a lot of people will want a bigger more luxurious car, but not everyone. Some people bought a bigger, more expensive car because it was faster and had a better engine than the smaller low-end car. If you ask someone why they bought an E55 instead of C55, a significant percentage of people (notice I don't say all) would say because E55 is much faster. Would they save money and buy a C55 if it was faster than E55? Many people would, although it is impossible to say how many without doing market research. Remember that engine is the "heart" of the car and is by far the most distinguishable aspect of it. When people ask you about your car, do they ask "what kind of suspension does it have" or "what kind of engine does it have"?

 

Cool youtube

I love the "Practicallity" of the C63!
Its exactly what buyers seek in such cars that why each has a market to begin with.

 

I couldn't agree more.

 

What is idiotic is that you think (i) an M6 makes more sense simply because it has a better engine (V10) even though it is outperformed by the M3 with a V8 and (ii) a majority of the people by an E55 over a C55 because it is faster. And here's a tip for you. Handling is every bit as important to a car enthusiast as horsepower. The person asking me how many cylinders my car has is the same bozo asking me how much it cost.

 

A Boxster S and a 997 Porsche share the same engine, with marginally different ratings. Does that count? From the steering wheel forward, they are also the same car. Seems to be a price difference, though.
AS

 

WHAT?! M6 is outperformed by the M3 WOW this comment literally stunned me for a second. M6 is a low 12 second car capable of running neck to neck with SL55 AMG's, 911 turbo's, and Lamborghini Gallardo's. M3 is absolutely nowhere near M6's level of performance.

P.S. Please point to me where I said that the "majority" of the people buy E55 because it is faster. I clearly said "some" and "significant percentage" of people buy the E55 because it is faster than C55.

Another clueless post. Boxster/Cayman have a 3.4L engine with 11.1 compression ratio, while the 911 has a 3.8L engine with 11.8.1 compression ratio. On the other hand, all 63's are the same displacement and are identical internally (in terms of compression, etc). From the steering wheel forward, 911 and boxster/cayman are also completely different. Not a single body panel is the same.

 

I think a lot of the E guys did buy the 55 due to "the K factor." E500/550 would've sufficed were speed not a primary concern as that's nearly as fast as the C55.

As regards the M6, it is far faster it a straightline and it does make sense to distinguish engines. MB are simply saving money by plumbing the 6.2 up to every chassis in their line up.

 

Spot-on analysis

 

Thanks for the flattering editorial. This is what makes the internet so much fun. Can you see no element of truth in my clueless post?
Porsche made marginal changes in the Boxster engine to preserve the illusion of a 911 power advantage. The underlying engine architecture is identical. I think that is counter point to your contention. Regarding the chassis, the similiarities are more than skin deep.
The point is that the desire to differentiate models can be more of an illusion than reality. While the Boxster S is considered by many to be the superior driving experience when compared to the 997, nobody would consider the C63 to be a better experience than the BS. The engine in the BS is strong enough. The rest of the car was substantially upgraded. The engine does carry a higher power rating, though the underlying basics are unchanged.
If you asked me if I would rather have a modified compression ratio and 400 cc of displacement, versus a locking differential and a suspension sharper than most dedicated track cars, my preference is the latter. AS

 

You elaborate a good point...

 

AS,

Your posts are always well considered.

However, while what you say about the P-cars is true it is less true for say the 599/F430 or M5/M3. Even had Merc just fettered the BS engine (rather than used a completely new one) to produce say 530bhp (not difficult given the displacement) then it would've been another feather in your vehicle's cap. I belive that is Tuskir's main point, though I don't want to put words in his mouth.

 

Of course you are stunned. Your posts reflect an unwillingness to measure performance by anything other than HP and 1/4 mile passes.

 

+1

Shelle Wassup , you should be pro level , track ready , whens our next Willow Springs, Spring Mountain run? Keep me far far away from Parhump

Germancar, great post

 

Boxster is better balanced and cheaper :-)

 

Bingo!

M

 

Hey AS,

Seems like we're in complete agreement regarding previous posts. Isn't it funny how non Pcar guys have no idea that everything for the most part is the same from an S to a 911 . The only thing possibly different is maybe the spring rating and struts given the weight distribution differences, but I cannot say.

I definitely am in agreement about prefering much greater handling and steering feel over marginal power and usually greater weight which offsets it, that's why I went c55 v. e55!

I'm not even going to comment on the 6er comparisons because that's a joke. What he fails to remember is that the BS is compared to the gt3 not a turbo, 997, or even cayman/boxter etc.

However that being said, a c63 with a set of coilovers, the same engine mods, and as much R compound tire as you can fit under it will be interesting to compare the BS to, although of course it will not look the same etc. I think the limiting difference will be the lack of room for tire that will be able to be stuffed under the c which MB correctly limited for it's class.

 

We keep citing the coilovers, etc, but there is actually much more.
I had mentioned earlier that 18" wheels won't fit- that is due to steering knuckles hitting the rim. Clearly, something changed with steering layout for this to happen. The track is wider. The wheels are different.
The locking rear with the associated cooler is a very major part of the handling transformation. Power steering and trans coolers are also significant changes. Removal of the sunroof removes weight up high. Cross bracing in the rear makes handling more consistent.
Plus, don't forget that some talented group of engineers tuned and tuned the car to maximize performance. How many laps do you think you would need to do before you got the spring rates and shock valving right?
Then there are the seats. Anybody think they can drive really fast in a seat that doesn't support you?
Since I'm old (59), and I started competing in cars in 1966 when there were no good manufacturer parts, I have lots of experience trying to improve a car that has been engineered for another purpose. It never turns out as good as this. Can you turn fast times in a modded car? Yes, you can, and I have losts of trophies to show that. Can you live with it every day? Well, maybe when you're 21. When you pull out the back seats, you are left with an ugly mess that transmits tons of noise from vibrating sheet metal. When you change seats, you usually wind up with problems of fitment and adjustment. Reengineering a rear axle takes alot of engineering and fabrication. Widening the track is a real headache. You can make a C63 better, but it won't be the same. And, a *******ized C63 is probably worthless. Just my opinion, after 4 decades of trying everything else. AS

 

You are wasting your breath, I gave up on reasoning with people like this a long time ago. People that have never raced let alone never even been on a road racing course will never get it. They do not understand the dynamics involved and required to drive a car at or near it's limits nor do they understand the stress it places on the mechanical parts of a vehicle. I actually got in an argument with a guy (a Porsche owner) at a bar who was telling me the Black Series is just an over priced body appearence package with little or no mechanical advantage over a regular CLK. Do people think that AMG just went over to the parts bin and threw a bunch of parts on a standard CLK??? Every nut and bolt on this car is there for a reason. Has onyone taken a look at the front and rear strut tower braces? Their huge! As for HP, it is only part of the equation, all the HP in the world is useless unless you can get it to the ground efficiantly. The Black Series is not a race car, but it's about as close as you are going to find that can be driven on the streets legally.

 

I couldn't agree with you more!

 

JR, I definitely agree with you. Most people don't even know what the differences are between a regular MB v. AMG, and definitely not a BS. I wouldn't have even wasted my time further on the conversation but instead told him to read up about before he made himself look so silly.

AS, I find it amazing about the 18's not fitting, as the C is supposed to have the same front end as the BS, same track, but just different fenders and rims/tires no?. Sounds like that's not the case then even though they promote it as such.

I didn't mention the rear diff as it is avail in the 09, however isn't the gearing also lower a tad too? Is there no sunroof delete for the c? I never considered that as you always can with a P car- definitely a good point if not. The strut braces likely could be added or easily fabricated.

I absolutely agree with you regarding the proper coilover setup and the tuning required, it's hard to argue that a scudiera doesn't just handle better mid corner v. a gt3 etc. The w203 c55 coilovers available aren't even specific to that model, but instead cover the class! Are the seats different in the BS v. C63? If so I didn't know that, I thought they were the same.

The best point I think you made is the livability quotient. I made my P car a track car basically with tires/rims, coilovers, brakes, bars, rollcage, gt3 seats and removed the rears, blah blah. It handled amazing but you'd loose a filling and it got old quickly for daily driving. Plus running pagid oranges daily made for an interesting soundtrack when cold All in all it sounds like it would take a lot to make a c be a BS all the way around-

Who has the mars red BS down here in San Diego? Saw it the other day at Ralphs? -quiet the vibrant colour-