SteveL

The driving dynamics of the CLKBS will always be greater than what can be done with a C until someone with the resources and knowledge puts the same effort into making a C Black Series as AMG did with the CLKBS. The CLKBS was designed to be a track prepped Formula One pace car. The requirements of an F1 pace car are significant as no other form of racing is so dependent on the pace car providing enough speed on a road coarse to keep the brakes and tires warm enough to continue to work on an F1 car during a safety car period. The car was designed to have a professional driver trash it during safety car periods.

This comparison will make sense when and if AMG releases a C class Black Series but not before. The C63 is the pace car for the 2008 DTM season so who knows maybe MB will come up with a C63 Black Series in the next couple of years. However, it will cost a little more than a regular C63.

JDB

The front suspension on the CLK 63 Black Series AMG is a coil-over suspension with double adjustable shock absorbers.

This is different from the production-type suspension that is on the C63 AMG.

JDB

spr

I was not considering that as it was already a moot point of discussion but you are correct.

LZH

Not to mention that if you were to make a C63 drive like a BS, you would have no warranty.

chiphomme

Sorry but I just saw a Sebring and was shocked at how similiar it looked to the C class. It seemed more alike than even those pictures suggest.
In case you forgot Chrysler and Mercedes used to be a related.
I suppose you think the Crossfire looked nothing like a mini SL either?

nrgy

I guess if you pick the least flattering photos possible, you're right...SL, CLK, Crossfire, they all look the same to me!

alexander stemer

[QUOTE=spr;2797511]JR,
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.

All I can say is that I took my car to Tire Rack, about 60 miles down the road from home. There, an engineer asked if they could put my car on a special lift to measure all the components to determine alternate wheel sizes. They had not see a BS before, and had no information. I was interested as well, since there are lots of 18" snow tires, but very few 19" sizes. At that time, I had a favorable offer on a new set of AMG rims, but was deciding which way to go to allow maximal use of the car.
When all was said and done, I was told a steering knuckle would hit an 18" rim rim by 1/4". Afterwards, they washed my car carefully, with amazing attention to the rims, and took it into a photo studio set up for car shots. Then photographed the car for purposes of their web-based ordering process.
One of the owners came down to have a look and chat. Their rec for a steet tire was the Bridgestone, which I aquired and were on the car for the photo session. My Corsas then went on the new BS 19" which arrived subsequently. AS

ET550

[QUOTE=alexander stemer;2799009]Which Bridgestones and what sizes are you using? The only alternative Tire Rack has recommended to me or show on their site are the Yokohama Advans.

Germancar1

Ok so what? What is the point? The Crossfire was based on a Mercedes so it would have more of a reason to look like a SLK. Again, go outside and look at the 2 cars as opposed to pictures. The C and Sebring don't look anything alike. The Sebring has a bathtub look to it, the C doesn't. A lot of cars like similar to each other....my response would be so what, who cares. Long as they aren't identical or look alike so much so as to cloud up what they are, I and most people couldn't care less. I know a MB when I see one and I know a Chrysler when I see one. Let me guess you think because Chrysler and MB used to be joined that they merged their design studios and that is why you think the C and Sebring look similar? Come on guy I know you know better than that, or at least I hope you do. Them being "related" in the past doesn't mean squat.


M

Germancar1

Right, yet in real life they don't, outside of that previous generation SLK-based Crossfire. This "it looks like" discussion is just ridiculous. It is matterless.

M

TMC M5

I think a better analogy than the 911 Carrera vs Boxster is the 911 GT3RS vs a 911 Carrera. The GT3RS is $125K base price vs the base price of 911 Carrera of $73K. Yes, the GT3RS has 415hp vs the 325hp of the regular Carrera. Is that 90hp, better brakes, aerodynamic aids and suspension set-up worth the extra $52K? To the hard core enthusiast with the means to afford it...a resounding YES!!! To someone who is happy to just have a regular run of the mill 911...the answer is NO Way!!! Does that diminish the impressive nature of the GT3RS...it shouldn't. It all goes to what you want in a car...yes the GT3RS has no back seats...if that is what you value....by all means ...go with the Carrera. It shouldn't make you bad mouth the GT3RS....it wasn't intended to be a family...or "convenient" car....it has a very specific purposes.... just like the CLK63 Black Series. Is it the greatest value for those looking to go fastest in a straightline line...no but it is not built for a single purpose.

Tom

alexander stemer

To be fair, I think the contention of the contentious poster was that the upgraded model should have a substantially different engine. The GT3 cars share block architecture with the tt's, not with the standard Carrera series. But the BoxsterS has a Carrera engine that was intentionally detuned (slightly). The BS and C63 are more similar to the BoxsterS/Carrera model in terms of motor. But, the Boxster and the Carrera share much more in terms of suspension and dynamics, to the point that the less expensive car may well be the better car. AS

chiphomme

I never said they looked exactly alike but they look close enough that I believe Chrysler took design ideas from Mercedes. Look at an old Sebring versus a new one. The transition is startling.
And the whole basis of my comment was that I just saw a Sebring and thought it looked like the C class, more than any of the pictures that have been posted.
But whatever. You don't think it does, I do.

Germancar1

Pointless guy, pointless. Matterless subject. Most people who know cars aren't going to mistake a Chrysler for a C-Class.

M

chiphomme

I never said they'd mistake the two. I said they looked too much alike.
Get the difference? And if it's so freakin "pointless" why do you continue debating it?

norb

Funny you should mention the GT3RS, its basically a sticker package from the GT3. At least in the US. You pay extra just for the exclusivity of the RS over the GT3. Sounds familiar.

c32used

+1

Schiznick

Here we go again....... Making comments like these really just shows that you don't pay attention to details.

Drive both and I promise that even you will notice a immediate difference.

Sticker Package

Nothing wrong at all with the GT3 as I have owned a few. The GT3 RS is a step up in the right places. The challenge is that you need to be able to enjoy these car to their limit to notice differences.

norb

Really? What mechanical differences will make an RS have a noticeable difference from a garden variety GT3? Do tell.

Is it the engine? Nope. Transmission? Nope. Suspension? A bit wider rear track? Maybe. Lighter weight? Nope, at least not the US spec ones. More aerodynamic? Nope.

Schiznick

You know what, I am tired of un-informed people. Why don't you read it yourself.

http://www.porsche.com/all/media/pdf..._MY08_PCGB.pdf

Since you don't actually drive these cars, none of this would really matter to you anyway so why bother.

Amazing what the web can do for you. You should try it for yourself sometime.

norb

Umm yea dude, thanks for posting the European spec GT3RS brochure. Its nice to see what the US doesn't get on their RS.

Schiznick

No cage and no seats. Everything else we get. Is it really impossible to think that one model has tweaks over another that would justify a cost premium?

Have you ever driven a GT3 and a GT3 RS? If not, you are just talking out your A$$. You have no point of reference other than what you read and that is frankly, worthless.

norb

You guys are hilarious. You BS owners are out in force over at the C63 forum, yet none of you have or have driven the C63, yet feel justified in degrading it. Yet anytime someone tries to argue with you, you come up with the lame, "if you don't own one your comments don't count" comeback. Weak.

And I've driven both. The main appeal with the GT3RS is because its a very limited production run over the almost equally limited run of the GT3. Hmmm, sounds familiar.

Anyway, the only winner hear is Porsche, because they totally raped RS owners by not including all the goodies of a real RS.

And Shiz, list the differences between the GT3 and the RS and tell me how those differences will let you, and I quote "notice a immediate difference". NOT.

Schiznick

No, mostly it is you that comments on cars that you know nothing about. I actually spent the good part of a day driving the C63 at the AMG Challenge. This was a simple thread from a miss-guided sole that needed to be nudged back in the right direction. In case you missed it, this is the CLK Black Series section. Why are you posting here again?

But let's get back to the off topic at hand.

I don't believe that you have driven both. If you had, you would have noticed the difference in the clutch. Then again I may have miss-judged your driving prowess. If this is the case, then none of this matters because it is lost on you.

Here are the differences on paper:

Single-mass flywheel
Special suspension set-up for competition
Split wishbones on rear axle
44mm wider across the rear axle
Modified front lip spoiler
Plastic rear screen
Carbon fiber adjustable rear wing
20 kg lighter
15mm longer overall
wheelbase is 5mm longer

0-62 .1 faster
0-99 .2 faster

The best part about the RS is the personality of the car at the track limits. This is something that you may just never understand and is lost on you.

For some of us that are fortunate to explore the limits of our cars, it does matter.

My job here is done.

Ciao

norb

What am I doing here? Do you limit your posts to only the cars you own? Yea right. Weak.

US versions don't come with the plastic rear screen, btw. And if you can feel the .1 second faster to 62 and .2 seconds to 99 compared to the normal GT3, then bravo to you, you must be an F1 driver.

The rest of the differences are marginally negligible. Nice try. But the facts remain that the engine/transmission/suspension are basically the same. The exclusivity it what makes it more desirable. Not the performance. Anyway the GT3 is already a track monster.

And believe what you want. I've driven both and couldn't tell the difference between the two. And if you frequent rennlist, you'll read the same thing. Oh that's right, you can't post on that forum, unless you own a Porsche.