A few months down the line? It has been exactly a year between the launch of the BS and the C63. New improvements come out every year. Thats life. In any event, as already reported in this forum, MB is making the software program for the C63 tranny available as a retrofit to BS owners through its dealer network. And the BS wasn't built for the drag strip.

 

People were screaming murder when the cars changed from 10 year cycle to 4-5 and your telling me that i should expect a change every year , little improvements like fixing bugs/glitches yes, but significant performance changes in a year is not a small thing, especially when a car is supposed to be track orientated. Also i was taking about drag race, not strip…all cars go through this test as a performance indicator, you can not simply cross it out .

Any way I’m Happy you guys are getting the 7G plus+ software though, now fight for the sport ESP and ESP off! and you should be all good to go

 

I think you are confusing cross chassis development with per chassis developments. Significant cross chassis developments are much more common than major changes on the same chassis. The SL63 with MCT is a good example. It is available on the SL63 but not on the C63.

However, I agree that the CLK Black should have the ability to completely turn off of the ESP. That is good feedback to AMG. Has anyone asked about this yet? If not, I'll post on the private lounge.

 

What's the distinction?

 

While it is true that a traffic light race is a drag race, which ever way you look at it
A drag trip is to best of my knowledge a line prepped for dragging events VHT , DR tires, traffic lights, ref, water box, timer, deflating tiers, losing weight, getting rid of equipment.. etc, with cars that would have no chance on running on normal roads.

It gives conditions that are not really available or recommended on every day roads.

So in essence a drag strip does share similarities with drag racing on roads, but it is set up to give the best conditions for it.
The ¼ mile has always been a performance indicator for cars
Tracks are also performance indicators to
Both are relevant, but serve different applications

 

You have got to be kidding. Talk about getting caught up in the details. Your original post expressed your concern that the BS is supposed to be an "AMG Track Car" but yet doesn't blow away the competition in a drag race or in 1/4 mile races. So, I will say it again, the BS was built to excell as a track worthy car for a road course, not a drag race or drag strip or 1/4 mile race (pick whichever term you like). The fact is the combined acceleration and handling of the BS allow it to out perform most cars on a road course. Looking strictly at straight line performance in a quarter mile is simply a power game and alot of cars these days are quite capable in a straight line.

 

Yes I agree as it should and it would so even more if it got some of the new goodies as I mentioned before . I really want it to get them!

Not when it is been equalled, or beaten by a lesser variant C, E, previous 55k AMG cars…The CLK DTM did not suffer this dilemma & yes I know it was more expensive but still . I am talking about the MB product cars

Fact remains that most owners will not track them much. What happens when you go head to head at a traffic light, or a rolling start race and are neck and neck with one of them?
Will you say,if we race on a track I will beat you ?

You see am just greedy i want it to own is all

 

Wow, this is quite a thread... I tend to agree w/ the CLK63BS owners that there's more to a car than simply the "numbers" - but I disagree slightly with jrcart's comment above (that I bolded). From what I've read (disclaimer: I've never had the good fortune to drive any of the cars mentioned), I've developed the opinion that there are perhaps dozen(s) ahead of the CLK63BS in the admittedly subjective "street-legal race car" category. Off the top of my head, F40, F50, 360CS, 430Scud., GT3RS, Exige S, Saleen S7, etc.

Now, my opinion is based on a stock CLK63BS... and again, it's admittedly a subjective topic anyway. jrcart's heavily modded car may be an exception

 

F1 Safety Car is as much about sales and raising awareness as it is track capability. The SLK55 also had a stint as F1 Safety Car... most would agree that's probably not the most capable track car - but probably boosted the image and sales of the SLK55BS in Europe. Same for next year - the CLK63 is being replaced as F1 Safety Car by the SL63... ideally raising awareness of the upcoming SL63BS (and, from all accounts, that car sounds like it's going to be a MONSTER)

 

Great thread, asking a question that everyone seems to have asked themselves at one time or another. Here's my thoughts in bulletpoint format:

C63 AMG
* Sporty, small sedan. Great for its nimbleness yet, friendly, daily-driver vibe.
* Good for taking out 1-2 clients, and to the movies, mall, parked in an outside lot.
* Not a Porsche substitute (but then again, what is?) but can hold its own 0-60 and stop light confrontations against most common cars in So Cal.

CLK63 AMG Black Series
* Special, sports coupe. The ultimate CLK. The lack of a back seat and the suspension tuning tell you that this car is not meant to seat 1-2 clients in!
* Limited edition, DTM-like street-legal Mercedes. Altough we have seen many cars produced in the W209 bodystyle since the 2003 MY, with incarnations such as the CLK320/350, CLK 500/550, and CLK55 AMG, coupe and cabrio, this car stands out as the ultimate, no compromise CLK in MBUSA's mind. Not meant to be parked in an outside lot at the mall! LOL.
* Seats two comfortable, and is meant as a sports car to rival the Porsche Carrera (996/997). Everyone has an opinion on this, but compared to all the other cars that Mercedes produces at this time, the CLK63 AMG BS is the closest that Benz has to a P-car alternative.

Overall, I would get the CLK63 AMG BS, for weekends and fun times, and an E550 for a daily driver, to take my clients in. My $0.02.

 

Having both a 996ttX50 Porsche and the BS, the BS is more than a rival to the 996/997 tt cars. It is much more responsive, and much more fun, though slightly less practical. My Porsche has become my winter car.
Whatever might be said about the number of C class derivatives, the 996/997 series has been around so long, it has become dated. The shape is timeless, but after all this time, there should have been more technological advancement. It is hard to name a modern car with a more dated gearbox. The absence of low end torque is also increasingly apparant with age. The BS is somewhat spartan by luxury car standards, but feels modern. If you drove both, you would not spend 125K+ for a new tt. The only question is, "What can you buy a new BS for?" AS

 

I always read your posts with interest Alex but the gearbox comment caught my attention. Magazine reviews and some BS owners talk of the slow witted auto box that holds back the BS which is an otherwise very capable car. Having previously owned a 996 GT3 I know P-cars are not technological marvels but their stick-shift and low weight does the job with great control, while other manufactures have dual clutch or SMG. I'd appreciate your thoughts on the matter.

 

Yea, the 997 is so old that all wannabe sport car manufacturers always try to measure themselves against it.

So how advanced is that manual transmission on the CLKBS? Oh that's right, it only comes with an automatic slushbox.

 

Always flattered by comments like above. Let me start with the 996tt, with which I have most familiarity. First, as the car basically has a 200 cubic inch low compression motor pushing 3600 lbs, it is severely handicapped until boost builds. For this reason, it has a very low first gear which, though tricky, does get it launched. But, it hits the rev limiter at a ridiculously low speed (south of 40 mph by recall- could be off by one or two mph), and has a very slow 1-2 upshift. This means almost any car beats a tt across an intersection. When you hit the rev limiter, there is also a momentary lag before power resumes.
The car needs a longer first gear, a higher redline, and a better 1-2 shift. All of the magnificent magazine test times come by brutalizing the drivetrain, taking advantage of the awd and pounding the 1-2 shift, which nobody would consistently do in their own car.
In higher speed ranges on track, the trans is not much of a problem. But in traffic, Porsches must be kept in lower gears with 4000 rpm on the tach to be very responsive. That is again because low speed torque is limited, and a manual downshift in traffic is really quite slow, compared to an auto box downshift on sharp throttle command. On track, you are doing it all the time, but on the highway, you just want to mash the throttle.
The cure is either more bottom end torque (not very likely), or an aided downshift- like a DSG.
The tiptronic isn't a bad box, but it seems to have one or two fewer gears than every other expensive autobox. It also is abysmal in taking commands from the wheel, and is in fact much better when just left in drive. In my opinion, Porsche has rested on its laurels for a few too many years. If you have tried an Audi with DSG recently, you can see the theory is well worked out. It is kind of sad that Porsche lets you have that in a $35,000 turbocharged car, but not a $135,000 turbocharged car. ( Iunderstand the issues about reliability at high loads, but I think F1 has shown it to be possible). Porsche sells you the ridiculous and meaningless ceramic brakes from its racing bin, but no improvements to the driveline.
The BS wipes out all those concerns with torque, and an extra gear.
Hope that explains my position. AS

 

Thank you, Alex. I fully understand your views re. the 996TT from my limited seat time in one. Reports suggest the BS is the more focused machine. However, I think that the new MCT (I believe that's the acronym) box from MB will be a good addition to any future BS. Enjoy the track time- you're a great representative of your vehicle.

 

Why would you post by attacking a respected user who is giving honest, real and first hand experience? That certainly is no way to win friends or influence people on this forum.

BTW, the auto trans in the BS is far more sophisticated then the manual box in the 996/997. It also drives very comparably the M5/M6 SMG or the 360/430 F1 box. Even though the shifts are not nearly as quick and precise, the auto box does a good job of finding the correct gear and has no problem getting you to a gear that will easily snap the rear end around with wheel spin (trailing throttle over steer).

Yes, I personally wish that BS had a 6sp Manual option, but it isn't so - so we have to live with that.

Thanks
Brad

 

I just had the opportunity to spend a day at my favorite race track, Road America. It just happened to be a Porsche day. Anyone who knows anything about Road America knows it is a HP track, 4 miles long 14 turns with only a few hard braking sections. There were a number of 996 and 997 Carreras, tt's and even some GT2 and GT3's up there. I know that these track events are not a good gauge because of varying driver skill levels, but I was able to drive around every one of them on the straights. The power discrepency is pretty alarming, even on the turbo cars. Granted my car is far from stock, not sure how well a stock BS would have faired. The only area the P cars had an advantage was on the brakes. They could consitantly go in a bit deeper than me. I assume the weight played a major role in this. Even thought they were out braking me it seemed I could carry more orner speed and usually catch right back up to their rear bumper before the exit of the turn and then just drive right past them and into my rearview mirror they would go. As for the 7 speed auto tranny, I would not call it a hinderance. There was only one section on the entire 4 mile course that I had some difficulties that I could blame on the transmission. It was an area that I wanted to short shift, but could never get to the gear I wanted in the amount of time needed. Furthermore I was turning the fastest lap times of the day in any road going car that was out there (there were a few race cars that were alot faster) and once I made a pass on someone they were gone, never to be seen again. Anyone that says the BS is not a good track car knows not what they speak.

 

i dont know about the tranny on the BS, but mercedes is claiming that the new trans which is debuting on the all-new sl63 is the fastest shifting transmission in the world, and crisper im sure. they claim 100ms shifts, thats pretty fast IMO, maybe they'll drop those transmissions in the newer CLK BS, or do they not plan on manufacturing those anymore?

 

You, or MB, are mistaken. The 3rd incarnation of SMG is faster and the F430 Scud 'box defies belief how fast it is. However, I'm delighted MB have joined the party and reports suggest it's a good effort only hampered by the weight of the launch vehicle (SL63)

 

Nice summary, JR.

 

Haven't read up on the new twin disc clutch system. Looking forward to driving one though. Maybe they meant fastest shifting "automatic" transmission in the world. Just throwing that out there.

 

AS, you make a great point in mentioning the Audi DSG transmission. I test drove the A3 2.0T with this transmission and the shifts are amazing. It is sad that Porsche does not offer this in a sports car such as the 996TT!

 

Brad,
I don't know that I would want the 6 speed manual in a big V8 car. I recently drove an Audi S5, and had the overwhelming sense the car would have been much better with an automatic gearbox of some type. The automatic in the BS is very well suited to the power characteristics of the engine. The M5 is a bit different, as it isn't a big torque engine, and needs to be twisted hard. ASAS

 

I would agree 100% for street driving. However, for the track, I am a purist and prefer the manual.

Like you said, I agree the auto in the BS is a great box for what it is.

thanks
brad

 

Always interesting to get people's thoughts on this. Personally, for $200,000 in two cars (which is what a CLK63BS and E550 would run), I'd much rather have a heavily modded 996tt, a C63, and $25-30k left over... to each his/her own