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.
Some of what is in the article doesn't make a whole lot of sense at least not stateside. Like 19" standard wheels when the 43 comes with 20s standard and GLC63S will only be available in the coupe but it shows the badge on the selenite car which is the SUV.
Any how, the differences between the 43 and 63 seem to be between the 4matic equipped and the power plant, obviously. Wider body work seems to be just a wider lip applied to the front fender.
Who likes the front end? That seems to be the only exterior major change.
Last edited by VET11B; 04-04-2017 at 06:46 PM.
Reason: Changed title.
I'm honestly surprised they built this car. I didn't expect them to make such a powerful SUV; it's not in their regular portfolio in comparison to the other cars that have the higher output powerplants.
Nonetheless, I think it's awesome. And while I normally like the Panamerica grill, there's something about how it blends at the top with the hood line that just doesn't seem to match to me. In pictures, I prefer the look of the 43 grill rather than the new 63 grill.
But 500+ hp in this small-midsize SUV is just nuts
At first glance the Panamericana grill looks better on the GLC, but if one looks at it for a while it does seem to lose a sense of coherence. It just doesn't quite fit in as well as the diamond grill and almost becomes a proud piece on the front of the car. For that matter, it seems that the new front clip does that as well. It looks good, but needs proper fender flares to match, not just "lip extenders".
The power is awesome, but I don't think I would want or use that these days. Not for my intended purposes for the car. However, it does leave me with a slight feeling of want.
my favorite bit is the look of the engine.....all the symmetry and the layout just speak to me:
That power plant!!!! My neighbor just picked up a AMG C63 S coupe with that engine and it sounds sweet. He replaced a BMW M4 that sounded like a air compressor, really bad.
And to those who think GLC63/s are just "a bit more power than the GLC43, beside the 4.0 TT V8:
-LSD either mechanical(63) or E-diff(S)
-4matic+, allows for RWD(same as E63's setup where pure RWD is possible?)
-9sp MCT (as opposed to 9 speed torque converter auto in GLC43)
-Race mode(S)
-larger rotors
-modified rear transxle for wider track
-increased capacity intercoolers(unconfirmed)
So no, these aren't just GLC43 with a hand-built AMG engine
And to those who think GLC63/s are just "a bit more power than the GLC43, beside the 4.0 TT V8:
-LSD either mechanical(63) or E-diff(S)
-4matic+, allows for RWD(same as E63's setup where pure RWD is possible?)
-9sp MCT (as opposed to 9 speed torque converter auto in GLC43)
-Race mode(S)
-larger rotors
-modified rear transxle for wider track
-increased capacity intercoolers(unconfirmed)
So no, these aren't just GLC43 with a hand-built AMG engine
It also seems that the suspension is a proper AMG version versus a calibrated air body control?
Of all those items listed above the LSD is probably the one I would miss most choosing the 43 over the 63. I hate having the traction control handle rear end duties, but then I have to keep reminding myself that this is why the sports car continue to sit in the garage.
Also, other than launch control what advantages do a MCT offer over a torque converter? Autos have come so far since the slush boxes of the 80s and 90s. Shoot, the fastest Vettes and Camaros are proper autos.
It does seem like a substantial upgrade for the marginal upgrade in price. The engine alone could be justified for ~$20K price premium.
It also seems that the suspension is a proper AMG version versus a calibrated air body control?
Of all those items listed above the LSD is probably the one I would miss most choosing the 43 over the 63. I hate having the traction control handle rear end duties, but then I have to keep reminding myself that this is why the sports car continue to sit in the garage.
Also, other than launch control what advantages do a MCT offer over a torque converter? Autos have come so far since the slush boxes of the 80s and 90s. Shoot, the fastest Vettes and Camaros are proper autos.
It does seem like a substantial upgrade for the marginal upgrade in price. The engine alone could be justified for ~$20K price premium.
Not sure about the suspension. Article shows user adjustable air suspension with those settings, but then those appear to be the same as the GLC43? As these are air struts, there is no valving to adjust, so any difference would have to come from the struts/control unit I'm guessing. I know little about the struts, so I could very well be wrong
If you have a sports car in the garage, then there isn't that much reason to go with the GLC63 tbh, since your sports car should be way better at giving you driving enjoyment and perform better in every respect, perhaps only losing in acceleration and luxury appointments. I don't know what your weekend car is, so maybe that's not valid either.
The MCT should theoretically shift quicker than any torque converter auto, simply because the next gear can be pre-engaged. However, I don't know what the actual shift time for the MCT in AMG SUV application is, so it may very well be "only" as fast as the 8L90 in the Z06.
Yeah, price-wise it most likely will be 3-4k more than the C63, judging by how the delta is for C300 4matic vs GLC300 4matic(~4k to get GLC equivalent), and C63 vs C300(~24k to get C63), so around 67-68k. Not cheap by any mean, but then compared to the Macan GTS/Turbo, a pretty good deal IMO.
If you have a sports car in the garage, then there isn't that much reason to go with the GLC63 tbh, since your sports car should be way better at giving you driving enjoyment and perform better in every respect, perhaps only losing in acceleration and luxury appointments. I don't know what your weekend car is, so maybe that's not valid either.
I'd love to have this bad boy in the garage next to my 997.2 GT3. GLC 300 is my daily. I really like the GLC size (not too big), interior and practicality. The power of the 4.0 V8 TT would make the GLC 63 a perfect everyday vehicle for me. I'd take it over the C63.
I'd love to have this bad boy in the garage next to my 997.2 GT3. GLC 300 is my daily. I really like the GLC size (not too big), interior and practicality. The power of the 4.0 V8 TT would make the GLC 63 a perfect everyday vehicle for me. I'd take it over the C63.
Damn. 7.2GT3? Great car. Envy you Wish I got one when they dropped to ~80k a few years back.
FWIW, the GLC63 will likely only get 16/20 mpg(judging by the drop from C43->C63), so I'm not sure if you can stand having that in your daily/long trip vehicle.
Surprised, I figured the current E is appreciably larger. Hmm.
Me too.
"... it's a crossover with a C-Class-architecture front-end, an E-Class-architecture mid-section, and a completely new rear end — all re-jiggered to work in a taller, more capable form factor."
"... it's a crossover with a C-Class-architecture front-end, an E-Class-architecture mid-section, and a completely new rear end — all re-jiggered to work in a taller, more capable form factor."
Who likes the front end? That seems to be the only exterior major change.
Watching MB's intro video yesterday and looking at Motortrend's coverage of the new S-Class and I'm not digging the front end so much any more. I must be getting old because it looks too aggressive to me.
Watching MB's intro video yesterday and looking at Motortrend's coverage of the new S-Class and I'm not digging the front end so much any more. I must be getting old because it looks too aggressive to me.
I prefer the front end to the regular GLC, but I think the new E63 has the best front end of all the Mercedes.
04-04-2017, 06:32 PM
