Talking about touchy ..... I didn't ask for your track resume, just a first hand experience how the CLK "feels" on a road course, to make an intelligent statement that points out in specific what in terms of "feel" needs to be improved. Just a generic "there is always room for improvement" is, for lack of a better word, an internet racer's perspective. And no, it's not a moot point that you have never driven a CLK Black around a road course. It would be the same as claiming a hypothetical 'Ring time number based on gut feeling for the C63 BS. In my opinion, you can only compare the two cars when you actually have driven both.

Not sure where you got that from, but I never denied that the CLK cannot be improved? However, if this is the best after "years" of R&D Mercedes could come up with, they better re-think their involvement in Formula 1. You are telling me that the same transmission, now having a wet start up clutch instead of a torque converter, straight out of an E, SL etc. takes years of R&D? The same engine, besides the forged internals, which is straight out of a standard C63 with performance package took years of R&D? Seriously? Now if the car had the dry sump'ed SLS engine and a DCT transmission made specifically for the Black Series plus some weight saving measures, than it would be a different story.

I agree that 'Ring times are a good indicator what one car does compared to another, but in the end it's nothing but second hand information, unless you as the owner take your car there and try to replicate/beat anyones published lap times.

 

SMPs butt hurts

 

Please, as intelligently as possible, explain why my butt would hurt? If I really wanted to buy a C63 BS, I would go about it just like I did when I bought all my other cars. I want to replace my M6 with something different, and since I bought it new and it had a similar MSRP as the reported price on a C Black, what would make my butt hurt? I currently own 5 cars, 3 of them were over $100K each.

Unless you just wanted to be controversial, I'm looking forward to your reply.

 

If it matters, my eyes hurt from trying to read all those long posts on my phone.

 

From this thread alone you do appear rather worked up and overeager to prove yourself. I'm sure you're not normally like this, just offering observation without prejudice and hopefully this does not also offend you. Member jrcart you raise a good point with regard to pricing & that last posting made me laugh. Great stuff. Your CLK sounds vicious, I'll take a look at it in some of the other threads if I have chance.

I look forward to this 4th generation Black Series offering. I have driven the CLK and it is a great drive, but I could not get in tune with the automatic, never more so than when trying to downshift into turns. It may improve with practice which I lack since I only had a little more than two hours of seat time. The lack of weight saving measures are a disappointment but the CLK had very few of substance and was none the worse for it. It's a great compromise between track and street usability and hopefully the new one can build on that as I currently need to trailer.

 

Back on topic, I'll cross-post what I wrote on the Private Lounge because it applies here.

For those who like short posts the gist is:

It's my opinion, and just my opinion, that the CLK63 Black was interesting because it was like a 200% performance version of the regular CLK63 coupe (not even available in the US) and there was nothing else like it. Whereas, the C63 Black is 110-115% of the C63 Coupe (very little chassis upgrades, fewer track focused additions, non-functional cooling ducts, etc) and there are MB-built alternatives available now you didn't have then. That's a problem with the C63 being so good that what they're offering as the Black Series seems like it shouldn't be more than a performance package tick-box on the order form of the C63 for $10-15k.

I'm mainly disappointed because of how good the idea of a C63 Black with 4 years of development over the CLK seems in my head, and how underwhelming it came out. Now...how about a E63 Coupe Black Series?




For the full story, here's my post from the private lounge:

I agree. The C63 Black's greatest competition is a used CLK63 Black. The scuttlebutt is that Berndt Schneider was lapping the North Loop of the Nurburgring in around 7:45 in a C63 Black last week (according to the people who hang out at the Ring with stopwatches). His fastest recorded CLK63 Black lap time was also around 7:45. I've said it before, but the reason the CLK63 Black was so intriguing was because, at that time, it (arguably) was the most exciting and engaging driver's car Mercedes had made since the 190 Cosworth. There was nothing else like it available at the end of 2007. Fast forward 4 years and AMG's current line up is full of cars that old BMW M fans are lining up to buy. People (like myself) who snickered at AMG efforts to compete with BMW M in the past (1st gen CLK55 vs E46 M3?) and who never considered buying a Mercedes over a BMW. Then BMW went and desecrated the grave of the E30 M3 with abominations like the X5 and X6 M. The torque-less wonder that is the S65 4-liter V8. They lost me (the 1-Series M Coupe is a step in the right direction though). I at one point owned 3 M3's, a 1988 E30, a 2002 E46 SMG, and a 2008 E90. I then test drove a C63 last spring and I subsequently only own the 1988 M3 still. The M156 and M157 engines have ruined me for all other car manufacturers. I have even looked seriously for a R63 as a daily driver before settling on a CPO'd Range Rover Sport SC'd. AMG has me hooked. I got a free AMG Driving Academy day in April at Road Atlanta which convinced me that the only thing I would currently replace my CLK63 Black Series with is a SLS (on order), which I guess is the point of sending you there. Brand evangelism and up selling on the current line up. In that regard, it worked.

I still have no desire for anything Mercedes makes besides AMG cars. I drop by my local dealerships every once in a while to see if they have anything interesting and if I don't see an AMG, I don't even stop. The current AMG lineup...worth stopping for.

Back to the C63 Black. The biggest hurdle to me getting interested in the C63 Black (besides the Honda Accord Coupe in Profile similarity) is the CLK Black. We have to wait on direct comparisons but early indications are that its about the same as the CLK as far as performance goes, spec-wise (and if Schneider's lap-time is true, the same on the track). So for me you have a car that looks worse, performs about the same, and is currently about 1.6x the asking price of a low mileage CLK63 Black. I've also said before that it appears the C63 Black was meant to attract new customers, because there's nothing really to get a current CLK Black owner enough cause to trade, besides the new gearbox and interior.

It's my opinion, and just my opinion, that the CLK63 Black was interesting because it was like a 200% performance version of the regular CLK63 (not even available in the US) and there was nothing else like it. Whereas, the C63 Black is 110-115% of the C63 Coupe (very little Carbon Fiber, fewer track focused additions, "NON-FUNCTIONAL" AIR DUCTS) and there are MB-built alternatives available now you didn't have then. That's a problem with the C63 being so good that the Black Series variant seems like it shouldn't be more than a performance package tick-box on the order form of the C63 for $10-15k.

The C63 coupe is the first misstep I've seen since becoming an AMG convert and by extension the C63 Black. The styling of the coupe leaves me underwhelmed and the rear arches of the C63 Black look anemic and misplaced compared to the CLK's. Which I'm going to go out on a limb and say that was because of how damage prone the CLK's rear arches are from gravel and why every owner has to put 3M clear bra on the arches to prevent them from being sand-blasted. The CLS63, SLK55, etc are looking interesting and I would not question why someone would buy one over a CLS550 or SLK350, but I seriously wonder why someone would get a C63 Black over a C63 coupe (if they wanted something new and wanted to save $50k for track mods) or a CLK63 Black (if they didn't mind having something used and saving $50k for mods).

I'm mainly disappointed because of how good the idea of a C63 Black with 4 years of development over the CLK seems in my head, and how underwhelming it came out. Now...how about a E63 Coupe Black Series?

Again, just my opinion.



And to reply to

When tracking the CLK Black, just leave it in sport. Many owners here and track instructors agree...its software is that good.

 

maybe the cost difference is due to less car size and weight, and/or more parts volume shared with the mainstream C series. Anybody verify the dimensions of both cars?

 

Thank you for the advice, I wish I'd had it before my session as it was my only gripe with the car. If I get another chance to go out again in it, I will certainly use this setting. Interesting writeup by you posted above on the two cars too. Appreciated.

 

The lower price is for a base car. Equipment that was standard on the CLK will be optional in the new car. Like aero package, track package, carbon fiber interior and rear seats. But some of the options conflict. If I recall correctly, no rear seats with the aero package.

 

Correct, the added weight of a rear seat and passengers with the downforce of the wing exceeds the weight limit for the rear axle.

Also, its believed that all US-Bound C63 Blacks will have sunroof standard, since that's the only way the C-class coupe been crash tested and DOT-approved. Which is unfortunate since that will add 60+lbs to the highest point on the car.

 

Cut the roof off and install a CF roof for a few grand, I did it to mine and it looks good and drops a few pound from the highest point on the car thus lowering the center of gravity ever so slightly I think it cut 22 pound off mine so that means it would probably cut 75 to 80 pounds off a moonroof equiped C63 which is fairly significant when talking about the center of mass.

 

Carac surely you know that the 745 ring time attributed to the clk was never actually driven ? It was a theoretical time . Berndt said something along the lines of the car could do " around 745 " and it somehow became " car did 745 " .

You can ask at Affalterbach if you doubt .

Time is made up at the ring on the power , yet look at a dtm's times at the ring and look at the oft quoted 745 time for the clk black ( then compare to other tracks ) . look at every single independent lap time for the clk black , compare it to the 745 . Look at the CLK blacks competition , compare times at other tracks then look at the ring time . Its an anomaly .

It never happened , I love the clk black ( its my true hooligan love ) but theres no need for inaccuracy .


Gentlemen , fellow AMG enthusiasts . Its ok to want MORE improvement absolutely , but lets keep things in perspective . I love my CLK Black series as much as my Carrera gt , Ive gone on the record on several forums with this statement . In its own way its as much fun as any car I have ever owned . My track and vehicle ownership experience puts me in a position like you all , that I feel allows me to comment with some validity and as a true enthusiast .

Lets not forget facts however . Its unfair to critique this car ( c coupe black ) so savagely for not being special enough WHEN NONE OF US HAS EVEN DRIVEN IT . Might I remind some of you the CLK Black , ( if you look at JUST the specs , on paper so to speak ) was not that impressive on its release . It was mocked for the price . In fact the worlds press thought mb had gone mad UNTIL THEY DROVE IT . A heavy , auto box shod , pillar less design , vehicle with the same engine as a soon to be released saloon with an INFERIOR gear box was hardly the stuff of wet dreams ( especially here in eu where it cost 50 per cent or so more than the already excellent clk63 amg coupe ) . Yet look what we got , the fantastic , legendary clk amg black .

Re the new car Im patient , I can wait before I make up my mind . I cannot for one moment believe that after these years and all the improvements that AMG have done ( and knowledge learned ) the new car is no faster than the old car . ( just tyre technology is worth a couple seconds at the ring fgs ). That would mean AMG engineers are stupid and unlike like every other manufacturer ( ie unable to improve with time ) . That is just not the case , believe that if you will but sorry I dont bury my head in the sand .


Sorry for the long post btw .

 

Alright, remove any mention of time in my post and my opinion is the same. My point was that all that Research and Development has gone into making the regular C63 coupe a better car and that the Black Series seems like a relatively underwhelming improvement over the regular C63 (i.e. I expect more than adjustable coilovers, a tune, and a couple of additional radiators for $40-60k).

 

Any videos or pictures of your beast?

 

On paper I actually agree with you but I reserve final judgement until I drive it . Im still excited , I was told the car was massive entertainment ( by AMG ) and I become a 5 year old at the sight of fat arched black series mercs , i cant help it matey !

 

Here's one. Lots of photos and vids of my car in this section of the forum. I will try to find a few of the roof.

http://m.youtube.com/index?desktop_u...?v=KVcHZprNPaQ

 

Can I too join in like some unable to read and not explode; WTH are you talking about the throttle blip being so impressive . Just kidding you . I do want to ask, because I don't know, and the question is with some surprise till I do know, is this throttle blip just a great sound, cool to have happen during downshifts? or is there a functional thing happening that no one has mentioned so I can agree it has functional value too . I don't mind value in a cool sounding thing, so don't get me wrong, just need to know for sure what an owners knows of it Thanks man!

And as to the CLK-BS looks, yea, I get so much looking from people I feel a little self conscience even. I get kids around 5 to 7 years old that stop their playing like right now when they see the car, and pointing (and one smart/quick parent telling theirs if you do good in school one day you can have one too) . Then on the other side, old folks just standing there staring long and smiling at it, the car has vast appeal. It was gorgeous as the base CLK, the style was just pefect, but AMG said; lower it, aero package, rims, there, now it's complete!

Looking at the C63-BS it has a different approach, much bolder statement, way more than the CLK-BS, and if you opt for the spoiler, yea, going to really stand out with a purpose! The CLK-BS has substantial looks, just seem more flowing and refined? And I think that is the purpose with AMG and the Black Series, sort of an image builder series. AMG has been doing more, and substantial efforts in the past few years than it has done over the last 40 years, and its all good so far

 

In theory, there is less mechanical stress on the drive-train components when the engine speed is ideally matched to the transmission output. In the CLK, that would mean (in theory) less wear and tear on components like the torque converter.

 

Excellent, thank you!!!! I believe I understand and can relate, when I paddle down a gear there is a slight jar at times when the next gear goes in (mainly into 1st), does not feel great to me, its not harsh, but not smooth either. So the blip prepares the engine speed to better match what the next lower gear needs to not be such a hit, sure, this makes perfect sense. My wife's Infiniti has rev-matched downshifts (no throttle blip, and no sound there anyways LOL), problem with its programming is it won't decel as a lower gear drop does for you, just revs . This makes me want to see if I can time my foot to bring up some revs as it downshift, my luck the programming will get pissed and make the downshift harsh

Thanks again, great to know now!

 

This man knows what he is talking about. Hordes of people ridiculed the CLK BLK on this very forum before it even came out, for as he stated on paper it did not really offer anything when comparing it to the 63 line up, nevermind the 55k . Most of you are really mimicking the talks that were discussed on this very forum about price, looks, lower end model and so on

but as it has shown, it has become a legend at the track... but not so much in the straight line department for the street / 1/4 mile racers

 

True. And like I said AMG's goal in the past with the Black Series has been great feel and driving enjoyment over pure numbers. My other point was that the CLK63 coupe was not available in the US, just the convertible. Whereas you can buy a regular C63 coupe now so a direct comparison is more apt. Back then you didn't have a choice. If you wanted a coupe, it was Black Series or nothing in the US.

 

You're kidding about the throttle blipping, right? Not olnly does it put much less stress on your trans, torque converter and motor, more importantly it also allows for much smooth entry into a corner when everything is matched up rev wise.

 

Do u get all that while driving by people? Either you are telepathic, or you are driving way too slow. Either way you are missing out on a great car!

 

Exactly right, I though the same thing when I read his post. Rev matching is key, I spent years perfecting my heal and toe technique and now these SMG and dual-clutch boxes on the latest cars have come along and stolen my thunder.

 

Shifting is still a lot of fun... especially when you get it right.