HLG600

In regards to the new M3, the torque bump is only marginal. So while it is an 8 cylinder, it's characteristics are still similar to the I6 found in the E46 (power made rather high in the power band). I am not expecting the V8 M3 to be a torque monster of any kind. However, that does not mean it wouldn't be quick.

In essence, the architecture of the the new V8 is in line with that of the M V10, a gem of automotive engineering. So while an additional 33 ft-lbs is minor, the 89 hp bump will be felt.

What am waiting for with much intrigue is a direct shift gearbox mated to the latest motors from M division. Granted, the purists will prefer a stick shift; still, DSG is the future and will compliment the M3/M5/M6 models.

Roundel

And add two more cylinders.

Improviz

Interestingly enough, two generations after Mercedes first did it in the C43, BMW seems to have realized that this is the correct solution.

Oh, and Mercedes will be offering a limited slip on the C63, so that little disadvantage will be going by the wayside.

Roundel

Actually BMWs 3.2L I6 was all it needed to beat MBs 5.5L V8.

Roundel

Funny MB needs a 6.2L V8 to keep up with BMWs 4L V8. Can't wait.

HLG600

Traditionally, MB has been known for highway power as opposed to the BMW known for its handling agility. Nowadays, this assumption has been left to the nostalgics, as AMG has been pressing very hard to narrow the gap on the track. The M3 has its name, but the C63 will dominate that class. Why? Simply because it now has a better chassis, the limited-slip we've all been anxious about, and enough power to pin Rosie O'Donnell in her seat.

Not to knock the new M3; it is a stellar piece of engineering, probably feels tighter than the C63, and will have that 100hp/liter magic...but the power of the AMG is what will have buyers addicted.

Carl Lassiter

You're forgetting the RS4, which beats the new M3 in every department(interior, straightline, handling, exterior) according to Autocar's full head-to-head road test.

HLG600

The RS4 is undoubtedly a respectable contender, but I don't see it surpassing the C63 in performance. The only things it has over the C63 are the interior fit-and-finish and the Quattro AWD system. However, where Audi will dominate is the mid-size sedan segment of the market with the new RS6. If what I have been reading is true, and they will utilize a TT 550HP V10, then the M5 and E63 are in for some trouble.

Carl Lassiter

What you say about the RS6 is true. They say it'll be morethan 550bhp, the latest I heard was 565bhp but at this point it's just conjecture. What is fact is that I'll be putting down my deposit the minute my dealer will let me.

As regards the RS4 against the C63, you may well be right but we'll have to see. The RS4 is extremely focused with 8-pot brakes, an 8,250 redline and manual gearbox. Of course, the C63 will beat it on the highway, and if the handling is as good as initial reports say, give it a go in the twisties as well. (So long as it's not raining.)

Improviz

Hmm, I've never lost to one. Do you have one? If so, and if you're near DFW, let's hook up, run, and film it. Then we can show everyone how badly my li'l ol' 5.5l V8 stomps the **** out of your M.

But I doubt you have one....you're a newb here, and probably another teen here to troll. You obviously don't know anything about cars, because if you did you wouldn't make such an idiotic statement in the first place.

Improviz

Another idiotic statement. If Mercedes *wanted* to follow the high-rev, low-torque method of building engines that BMW (and Honda, who amazingly enough manage to squeeze every bit as much hp/l out of their VTEC Civics that the mighty BMW does out of their inline sixes, which pretty much destroys your pathetic attempt at an argument for "superiority" based upon hp/l), they would...they don't. It is a different philosophy.

YOU might think it's a wonderful thing to have to rev your car to 8,000 rpm to get good power; some of us don't, and prefer torque down low.

SportyS

Dude, you're the f'in idiot. When you want to post something that says "Mercedes wins" try to actually find fact that supports it instead of posting something that is a "TIE" and "LOSS".

How much more idiotic is that?

When I go buy something, I buy the best. I don't get caught up in this brand loyalty crap.

HLG600

It's all driver preference. Comparing the E46 I6 to the N/A AMG V8, we are talking about two different types of motors. The M I6 is an award-winning design that is more advanced than the 55 V8. However, I'd still take the 8. Why? Because I love the feel of torque under full-throttle acceleration. A buddy of mine, who lives by BMW, enjoys the high-rpm wail of the M3. Back to what I said, each driver has his/her own taste.

HLG600

He's not an idiot, and c'mon pal, you don't think you'll run into some Benz-Bias on a MB forum?

I am a car-guy before a Benz-guy, so here's my take on M3 and MB. As I stated in my prior post, the M division I6 found in the E46 M3 is known among enthusiasts as a stellar piece of work. It has won numerous awards and is more advanced from an engineering standpoint than the N/A 5.4 Liter V8 found in several AMG models. 100hp/liter with an 8K+ redline is impressive. The motor is designed to scream and I have yet to read of one breaking down. Although I prefer torque-monsters over high-revving motors, I still respect the M.

However, the stigma behind the M3 is the street reputation it has (I can only comment on my personal experiences). Many M3 fanatics I have known or come across place the car on a pedestal, claiming it untouchable (think of a higher-class version of the G35: a good car with exaggerative owners tarnishing its name). It is fast, it is grippy, but the E46 is certainly not unbeatable on the street. It would be ignorant to trash the M3 from a mechanical standpoint, since the car has proven itself to be a fine performer. Yet, deeming it untouchable is also nonsensical.

Improviz

Dude, blow me.

Um, someone is an idiot here, but it sure isn't me; I never said "Mercedes wins". Care to try again, idiot? What I did do was to post some track numbers in response to an argument that when the road turned twisty, the M3 would run away, saying that the numbers show this to be false:

Hmm, perhaps you might be able to help me there, Einstein: I don't happen to see the phrase "Mercedes wins" anywhere in that post. I do happen to see my stating something totally different from what you claim I stated, which I was nice enough to put in pretty, shiny red font this time around so that you might now discover it, for the first time.

OK, now, are you seated comfortably? Good, let's begin. Please complete the following sequence:

1. Pull head out of ***;

2. Read what I wrote;

3. Attempt to comprehend what I wrote. If this fails, repeat steps 1. and 2. as necessary, or, failing that;

4. Find someone who has a brain between their ears and have them explain it to you.

Got that there, sparky? My argument was not that "Mercedes wins", it was countering a claim. The fact is that these two vehicles are close enough to where driver skill would be the determinant on a track or, by extension, a twisty road.

I can say with absolute confidence that it is infinitely less idiotic than a silly, sophomoric rant about something that I didn't even claim.

So do I, the best for me. Those two words, for me, are important: what your idotic statement fails to acknowledge is that "best" is subjective, unless you feel that you can somehow quantitatively establish which of these two vehicles is the "best". Best what?

SoCalCLK

CLK55 > M3, in all categories, especially Speed and Looks!

Hakk403

Don't know where you've been...

http://www.tyresmoke.net/ubbthreads/...3879/Main/2976

http://yoy.com/yoy/auto/m3_failmedia.shtml

http://members.roadfly.org/jason/m3engines.htm

There were hundreds of E46 M3's with engine problems.

ProjectC55

Ditto! Supreme engineering and the damn thing spins bearings.The E60 M5 blows up transmissions and has numerous engine problems as well.

HLG600

The links you provided refer to motor issues caused by a defect in a specific group, not the entire series of 3.2 I6's. Compare the hundreds failed to other hundreds of thousands that ran without so much as a hiccup.

Hakk403

Specific group? You mean build date? Even so, you said you never read of a single break down. I was simply educating you.

HLG600

Haha, sounds good. But, to say it is an unreliable problem-prone motor is a bit of an ignorant comment, especially if the flawed group is a fraction of a percent of all the built N52's.

Improviz

He didn't say that it is "an unreliable problem-prone motor". He reported that hundreds of the early-run models had engine problems, in response to your stating that you'd never heard of a single engine failure. Well, now you've heard of hundreds of them.

Contrast this with any AMG or Mercedes motor. You won't find AMG owners setting up a "blown engine page", but the page he cited was set up by BMW owners frustrated by BMW's policy of blaming the owners for the failures. It was only after that page was set up and received some press that they backed down, miraculously discovered that the fault was with them and not the owners, and agreed to fix the cars and extend their warranty.

There is proactive, and then there is BMW.

HLG600

While there may have been no blown AMG motors right from the factory, there have been issues with the first batch of 6.2 V8's...making power well below their ratings. Quirks like this occur, especially when dealing with technologically advanced engines. However, what is important is that they are corrected (looks like AMG quickly solved the problem with the 63's). Hundreds of faulty N52's over the hundreds of thousands reliable ones is impressive, taking into consideration the hairline margin of defective product.

Perhaps I should rephrase my comment to cover the rare bad eggs of N52's:

HLG: "Excluding the motors from which there was a defect sourced at the factory due to a faulty part, the 3.2 I6 is a solid motor designed to take much punishment."

Although I have never owned an M3, a friend of mine had one. After putting it through many hours of very hard driving, including hard launches and doughnuts...the car hadn't even hiccuped. It's one thing to read about something...it's another thing to witness this car take a beating and laugh at it.

Hakk, thanks for the interesting articles...but remember, you can't generalize a motor on a small percentage of bad examples, that was the point I wanted to make to you.

Everything clear?

Edit: Grammar

Hakk403

I don't recall saying that anywhere.

I have nothing against M3's and BMW's, I was at one point a BMW fanboy and MB hater when I was younger. E46 M3 when it first came out was one of my favorite cars.

I was again, simply stating that the car had some problems and was not as bullet proof as you believed and provided sources to back up my argument.

That's just how I roll baby.

Improviz

Maybe, but I consider a blown engine to be a much more serious flaw than an engine making lower-than-advertised horsepower. Further, this is not an isolated case: prior to this, BMW had a problem with the original 540 V8's... subsequent to this, BMW has had problems with the M5. So in terms of driveline and engine reliability with their hipo cars, I'd give the nod to Benz.

If you're speaking of your original point, I think the operative term is "correct", not "rephrase", as you clearly weren't aware of the M3 engine failures when you wrote it, but anyway....

Great, that's one example...but there were hundreds of the engine blowing. Across three different models. That is indicative of some QC problems, no matter how you slice it.

Yes. It's clear that rather than simply admit your original statement was wrong, and that your claim that Hakk had written something he hasn't was wrong, you're instead going to try and muddy the waters a bit....fine.

But the facts still stand.