gestut

whats the real difference between the new 2012 c63 bs thats coming out soon and 2008 clk 63 bs, the specs look almost the same, besides the looks, and its cheaper then the 2008 clk 63 bs.

DuaneC63

Biggest difference is the tranny. Wet clutch pack instead of TQ converter. I'm sure there are thousand of other differences. A barely used CLK63BS is a screaming bargain compared to a new C63BS

_AMG_

C63 BS has the MCT transmission.

As much as I love the C63 BS I don't think it will be as special as the CLK63 BS.

cigarette1

I'm not sure, but, is the C-Coupe the only Mercedes coupe with a B-pillar?

G

_AMG_

Ya, I believe so.

Carac

As far as I know the main differences are the CLK63's air ducts in the fender are functional, all the body panels are carbon fiber except the hood, roof, and trunk, it has a triangulated and seam welder chassis, has 4 additional radiators (I only know of 2 additional on the C63), it looks a lot better (IMO), its really easy to find one with the options you want...because there is one (a iPod plug), etc, etc.

RBYCC

Pix I saw in a UK mag doesn't show front and rear strut tower bars...

jrcart

There are no carbon fiber body panels on the CLK BS, they are all plastic. The only cf is the rea lip spoiler and front vents on front bumper cover.

Carac

Guess they're GRP (glass/fiber-reinforced plastic) then?

JDB

There's also that carbon fiber lower spoiler piece at the rear between the exhaust pipes.

Not to mention the interior bits on the center console, plus door side panels on the non U.S. versions (but they don't qualify as body panels).

JDB

PJK

How many C63 BS is MB going to make?

jrcart

I think they are TPO

WTDoom

Gents the c63 Black is considerably stiffer than the CLK . The CLK was a pillarless coupe design , it needed seam welding etc to stop it wobbling around like a blancmange under load . The C has " exceeded all stiffness requirements " .
The same can be said for the cooling requirements . These have all been met and you can spec more in one of the track packs .
There are NO CF body panels on the CLK Black .
I love the CLK Black and will keep mine for ever , rarer and requiring more re-engineering than the C63 Black ( as well as better looking ) it will always be a very special bit of kit .

Lets not misunderstand AMG and progress though , dynamically this new C will be several steps ahead of my beloved CLK . Apparently its already " significantly " faster round the Nordschleife and is being touted as potentially the best handling AMG ever (!) thats not something to scoff at ...

WTDoom

Some of the differences off the top of my head :

CLK has :
seam welded chassis and other stiffening techniques
massive re engineering over base car
more bespoke interior ( especially euro cars )
more limited numbers


C Coupe Black :
will be faster ( on track and in a straight line )
have a better gearbox
will be lighter
will have track specific options ( mechanical and aero )
option of 4 seats
better / more up to date electronics / entertainment
traction control and stability management will have multi modes as well as ability to completely defeat BOTH
higher build numbers
more in common with base car

Jim Brady

Rumor mill has the US version of C BS with glass roof like the new C63 coupe big negative for me.

As far as faster, AMG is in the business of improving it's cars so expect improvements. Putting the power down is the way to make it faster as you really can't put the power down in the current Clk bs. So the MCT trans should help, but unless the rear has adjustable links its unlikley to be evolutionary step for the road racing bunch. Currently, the clk bs has the most intrusive esp so they really need to up the sporty level of the esp.

I'm sure the new car will have better numbers for the internet racers that judge a car by the Nurburgring times.

Jimmy

GuppyC63

Just for the look, I will like my CLK B.S. more than whatever newer B.S. out there.

Maverick1975

while i have yet to see the C63 BS in person, i believe the CLK bS to be a better looking car. The CLk BS lacks the transmission and therefore has no throttle blipping a BIG negative, no Sport+ mode which i really enjoy in the SL63, and no ESP sport mode.

Aside from that i love the CLK BS, it gets driven the most of my AMGs..and turns the most heads too!

SMP

I agree with everything .... but it wont be lighter. Especially with the optional rear seats. If they used carbon fiber for the roof, hood and trunk lid, the dry sump'ed engine from the SLS coupled to a DCT gearbox, it would be.

Don't misunderstand me, it's going to be a great car, but it's too much of the same thing to make a ground breaking difference.

WTDoom

Gents dont shoot the messenger re lap times / weight etc .

Just passing on what I was told at Affalterbach ( re eu cars btw ).

Carac

In regards to numbers, I believe their original message with the CLK Black should ring true for the C63 Black as well.

An excerpt from Automobile Magazine's review of the CLK, which mentions AMG's intent with the Black from MBUSA's director of communications, Geoff Day.

Sincity

And it's supercharged!

transferred

Your post was spot on. New tech will certainly result in the C63 BS being a faster car, hopefully feel will be further improved too. Certainly the new trans will be a step forward.

brady- Calling people who reference 'Ring times as "internet racers" is completely asinine. It's a very reliable way to ascertain how well a car handles and transmits its power.

SMP

I wouldn't call it asinine. What I think he was referring to, were people who buy a car solely based on 'Ring times for bragging rights, but will never test the limits themselves at a track. At least he's one of the few people I know who actually tracks his Black Series.

As for "hopefully feel will be further improved too": Have you taken a CLK Black on a road course and can speak of first hand experience to make this statement, or are you just giving us an "internet racer's" perspective?

transferred

You guys are rather touchy and that clouds how you read things...my comment about "improved feel" does not mean the current one is bad at all, but there is always room for improvement. Always. By all accounts the CLK BS is one of the best handling MBs there has been, but to deny that it cannot be improved on after years of R&D is ridiculous. It'd be easy to say I've driven the BS but I haven't, yet it's a moot point, since I was not criticizing the CLK BS's handling.

As regards the 'Ring time comment, if that's how it was meant then I understand it....However, I stand by the fact the 'Ring times are an important indicator of a car's ability minus the enormously varied aspect of driver ability.

I've been improving my skills on road courses for just over 15 years. So, no, while I'm not Aryton Senna I'm hardly what one would call an "internet racer". A Miata (yup, hairdresser special ), followed by a 996 GT3 and now a pared down E46. None are Ariel Atoms, but they do okay for me and I like having 3 pedals even though the new double clutch items are becoming increasingly tempting.

Well that's a long post. Enjoy your car, it's very nice and happy tracking if you're that way inclined.

jrcart

The question I have and am suprised nobody has touched on yet is this, If the new C63 BS is better (which I'm sure it is) how can they do it for nearly $40k less than the 2008 BS under a weaker dollar and stronger Euro? The exchange rate and inflation alone would bump up a 2008's MSRP to over $145k with todays dollar. On paper it appears to be a better car, although I don't buy all the chassis ridgidity garbage so the verdict is still out on that until we get the two of them side by side on a test track.