When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
2020 GTA; 2022 Audi e-tron GT, 2022 Ford F-150; 1926 Rolls-Royce Springfield 40/50 Playboy roadster
The powers that be in Stuttgart must have thought the AMG GT wasn't soft enough for the Mercedes buyers who can afford them. So they softened them up but made them faster.
I don't like the looks. The engine compartment is 8 inches too short. And the back seat makes these cars look ungainly. I'm sure I'll be outvoted by people spending the large amounts Mercedes is now demanding for these cars. As well as the SL.
Well, it depends on how you look at it. The current GT has been mislabeled for one thing. GT means grand tourer, and ironically the AMG GT has been the least grand tourer of the current AMG models. It lacks proper driver assistance features such as active steering assist for comfortable long distance driving and reducing fatigue, which is what a GT is meant to do and other daily driving creature comforts such as 360 camera etc. Being a two seater limits seat adjustability for taller people due to the lack of space behind the seats, and no extra space to throw additional gear or lower the rear seats for increased trunk space and no way to take more than one passenger. The trunk was oddly shaped for things like suitcases and other boxy items. I couldn't have done my 2 months European Delivery trip in a GT for example, with a large and medium Samsonite in the trunk and room to spare. This is partly why I decided on getting the C63S coupe. It's far more usable as an actual grand tourer. The GT was/is a great track car especially the Black Series, but not a great road car. This seems to be changing with the new GT.
Last edited by superswiss; 08-10-2023 at 08:49 PM.
The GT was/is a great track car especially the Black Series, but not a great road car.
Have you ever driven a GT??? I just returned from a 300 mile round trip to Daytona for a track event and I don't recall any of my past sports cars being as smooth and composed on the highway as the GT. I will grant you this, if the road is paved with imperfections, there may be cars that absorb bumps better, but are they stiff enough for the track?
Have you ever driven a GT??? I just returned from a 300 mile round trip to Daytona for a track event and I don't recall any of my past sports cars being as smooth and composed on the highway as the GT. I will grant you this, if the road is paved with imperfections, there may be cars that absorb bumps better, but are they stiff enough for the track?
I absolutely have driven multiple GTs all the way up to the GT BS, so very familiar with the car. You are just focusing on suspension comfort. A road car goes beyond that. There's the long, low nose which reduces visibility and ground clearance for daily hazards. PFL models of the GT didn't even have a front camera. I'm not saying you can't do long distance driving with a GT, but I've done 12 hours driving in single days, and that becomes much easier with Active Steering Assist in addition to DISTRONIC so the monotone highway cruising is more bearable. It's about the complete package and not just a single aspect that makes a good long distance road car.
Last edited by superswiss; 08-10-2023 at 10:34 PM.
Perhaps with more aggressive bodywork and aero attachments the car might look better, but MB appears to have the pricing all wrong for this series given what they’re charging for the SL.
Perhaps with more aggressive bodywork and aero attachments the car might look better, but MB appears to have the pricing all wrong for this series given what they’re charging for the SL.
The pricing is definitely all wrong and it's evidenced by SLs being on the show floor with negative ADMs. Folks are getting up to 25% discounts on new SLs, so there's that.
EDIT: As I suspected, customers wanted it to be a more usable actual grand tourer, not a car chasing Nürburgring lap times, and AMG delivered. The pics are kinda small, but looks good.
Last edited by superswiss; 08-18-2023 at 12:33 AM.
Car looks better than I had thought it might. Big question now is: how will the more ‘track’ oriented versions perform. With AWD we might just be surprised. But at what cost given the sky high price of the SL!
profile is really pretty IMO. I have some gripes with over design, like the black below the grille would probably looks better body color and the headlight shape from the front is not as aggressive as it might should be. And the rear lights look kinda of cheap. Like budget version of an aston martin vulcan interpretation with the 3D effect and the clear housings. I'd probably prefer the car without aero pack.
This guy does some of the best videos out there, especially with those overlays. I have to say I am impressed with how it came out. I really like the increased width and length and a lot of the GT-R cues. It looks like the car out of the box won’t need a lot of the things that we all do to make our cars better. The stance and ride height looks perfect. The horsepower is is right and the performance parts such as the active suspension are all there. That being said, the thing is a real porker and should be close to 200K, which doesn’t make sense to me. I’ll keep on with my analog GT.
The AMG rep on the Carwow video mentions that it will likely be 200kg heavier than the old one due to the all wheel drive, larger size, rear seats, etc. I do like the way the new one looks but I'm not sure who the market is for an expensive semi-large 2+2. I guess they are taking the fight to the 911 and market research has told them that 4000+lbs is not a big deal. This is the same company now pushing a 4 cylnder C63 that weighs 4700lbs! Oh well.
I think it looks pretty nice styling wise, and I like that the rear seats can be folded to make for a huge cargo area that's very usable thanks to the rear hatch. I do lament the loss of the rear transaxle and the front-mid engine proportions, but I think this would be a more usable as a daily driver or grand tourer. The multi-clutch transmission can skip gears when shifting much more effectively than the DCT, and the AWD should be good for low speed traction. I do wonder how heavy this car will be; sounds like a 450 lb increase from the comments above, but hopefully still a bit lighter than the SL. A 12% weight increase is big enough to be noticeable. I also wonder how the suspension tuning will feel; I heard mixed reviews about the hydraulic suspension on the SL. I'm hoping it'll feel more supple compared to the old GT, but still well controlled and well damped.
I'm guessing this would be a great daily driver to replace my CL class if I could afford it . I don't think I would trade my Porsche for one, but I definitely want to try it out.
I think it looks pretty nice styling wise, and I like that the rear seats can be folded to make for a huge cargo area that's very usable thanks to the rear hatch. I do lament the loss of the rear transaxle and the front-mid engine proportions, but I think this would be a more usable as a daily driver or grand tourer. The multi-clutch transmission can skip gears when shifting much more effectively than the DCT, and the AWD should be good for low speed traction. I do wonder how heavy this car will be; sounds like a 450 lb increase from the comments above, but hopefully still a bit lighter than the SL. A 12% weight increase is big enough to be noticeable. I also wonder how the suspension tuning will feel; I heard mixed reviews about the hydraulic suspension on the SL. I'm hoping it'll feel more supple compared to the old GT, but still well controlled and well damped.
I'm guessing this would be a great daily driver to replace my CL class if I could afford it . I don't think I would trade my Porsche for one, but I definitely want to try it out.
From what documents show, it’s almost 800 lbs heavier than the c190 GT. Somehow weighs a bit more than the new SL
From what documents show, it’s almost 800 lbs heavier than the c190 GT. Somehow weighs a bit more than the new SL
The AMG GT C was 3792 lbs as measured my MotorTrend (plus minus a few pounds depending on options). Are you saying new one weights 4600 lbs? Where did you see that? That seems absurd, almost the same weight as an S class.
In the PDF document, it reports "Kerb weight acc. to EC" as 1970 kg. The EC kerb weight includes a 75 kg driver, in addition to all fluids. Weight without a driver but with fluids is 1895 kg, or 4178 lbs. That's around 386 lbs heavier than the old AMG GT C (roughly a 10% increase), and around 130 lbs lighter than the SL.
EDIT: As I suspected, customers wanted it to be a more usable actual grand tourer, not a car chasing Nürburgring lap times, and AMG delivered. The pics are kinda small, but looks good.
I wanted this exactly, something practical enough to daily, FAST, pretty, and trackable if I want. An S63 Coupe for someone who isn't in their 60's. This could be a car I drive for years. Going to wait for the first year jitters to pass and buy whatever the "S" version is.
At the same time, I can COMPLETELY understand the issues the current GT owners have with it. No DCT, no rear transaxle, no front-mid engine. All of the things that made it badass are gone for you guys.
08-10-2023, 05:10 PM
. I don't think I would trade my Porsche for one, but I definitely want to try it out.
