otakki

No worry. Pretty much everything coming out of MB nowadays is an AMG.

stealth.pilot

An interesting alternative that has just appeared is the Mercedes-AMG GLC63S Coupe.

What's interesting about the GLC63S Coupe is that the interior dimensions are very similar to the E-Class. My sense is this car is going to come in around $90k fully loaded. Also it will likely have Designo options too. The car is lighter ~4000lbs and can do 0-60 in 3.7s. Makes a pretty interesting option.

I was originally looking at the E63, however my wife really wanted an SUV. My issue was I couldn't find an SUV which met both our requirements. I have a feeling the GLC63S Coupe will check the box. One of the interesting things is that the GLC Coupe is 2.5" shorter than the GLC Coupe and 2.5" longer than the GLC SUV. This makes it start to seem a little more like a car.

Plus with a Stage 1 tune you could get this up to 605hp.

Vipershade

Yep...agreed, and it should be noted that both the nine-speed multi-clutch transmission and 4MATIC+ have been lifted from the E63 (but no drift mode). This all adds up to what should be a fun vehicle to drive

stealth.pilot

And to **** off E63 buyers even more, it turns out AMG is offering AMG Pepper Red/Black two-tone and AMG Platinum White/Black two-tone nappa leather interiors as an option on the GLC63S, but it still isn't part of the E63S ordering guide.

Vipershade

Ouch... the lack of E63 upholstery choices is mind blowing

gaspam

good points but keep in mind that the engine in the GLC is not the same as in the new e63.... GLC has the single-scroll turbo engine from the AMG GT while the new e63 motor is a new twin-scroll turbo so it will be much more potent in tuned form

stealth.pilot

Good point.

johnichong

I have 2014 E550 white coupe, black hood emblem luminate lights, etc, resonate delete x pipe, muffler changed inside led change to pink, ecu tunning cost $1900 pumping 550 HP...

Benz21

If the E43 was a "fake" AMG then that would mean that AMG had ZERO involvement in the production process of this vehicle and Mercedes just simply threw on some AMG rims, floor mats, a few AMG badges on the seats and then said it's an "AMG". THIS IS NOT THE CASE. The fact is that AMG is HEAVILY involved in the production of this car! From the engine to the transmission to the suspension and software etc.. I have no interest in this car because I already have a 2016 E63 and consider myself an AMG purist. However, to sit here and say the E43 is a fake AMG is simply incorrect, ignorant and NOT TRUE. Is the engine "hand built"? NO! But if people want that then GO BUY THE E63!!! Us purists are the only ones who care about this crap anyway! But the E43 IS an AMG engineered Mercedes, so SUCK IT UP AND QUIT CRYING ABOUT IT.

Benz21

If the E43 was a "fake" AMG then that would mean that AMG had ZERO involvement in the production process of this vehicle and Mercedes just simply threw on some AMG rims, floor mats, a few AMG badges on the seats and then said it's an "AMG". THIS IS NOT THE CASE. The fact is that AMG is HEAVILY involved in the production of this car! From the engine to the transmission to the suspension and software etc.. I have no interest in this car because I already have a 2016 E63 and consider myself an AMG purist. However, to sit here and say the E43 is a fake AMG is simply incorrect, ignorant and NOT TRUE. Is the engine "hand built"? NO! But if people want that then GO BUY THE E63!!! Us purists are the only ones who care about this crap anyway! But the E43 IS an AMG engineered Mercedes, so SUCK IT UP AND QUIT CRYING ABOUT IT.

Shelly401

Geez..... What's your problem ?

I'm not crying about anything....

I think one of the big selling points of the "AMG" brand, is the hand built engine.... not a mass produced engine.....

I think, for what you get, the E43 is way overpriced, but that is to be expected, being a Mercedes....
I know you are going to pay more for a Mercedes.....
Especially when you consider my dealer wouldn't deal at all on the car.....

In the end, I ended up with a better car, for less money....

So not crying here....

Shelly

c4004matic

Since I own an E43 I can comfortably say that even at the 90k I dropped on it, its actually a good deal. It offers 98% of an E63's performance for 30 thousand dollars less and thats without some of the 63's go fast parts like ceramic brakes. Furtheremore, it also plays the part of luxury barge more adroitly than the always racy E 63. Seen in that light its a steal. The 63 is a fabulous car if your aim is to take it to the track, otherwise, the 43 is more than plenty for daily sport luxury transport. 99.999 percent of buyers could care less if "Manfred" or HAL 2000 built their engine.

Benz21

I wasn't directly speaking to you, just in general to all the people who actually think that their "Real AMG" is some handmade unicorn car. ITS NOT. Just the engine, not even the transmission.. They just need to get over it.

BACnMercedes

I'm not crying either. I just would not pay $85k for a V6 car that Mercedes AMG enhanced. I mean turned up the turbos. (Noticed I didnt say fake). So like a lot of others said previously in this post about a better car, I purchased a $84k M550i and will try to get a good look at the E43 another day............in my rear view mirror.
(I got tired of waiting on the E63 and for the money the BMW was a better value if you can call it that)

PeterUbers

E43 has 98% of the E63 performance .... ?

well, i guess so does a c43, c300, 535i, 325i....

most of the time I'm driving my e63 no different than I would drive anything else ... even a podantic Camry.

its the 2% of the time factor that I love about the 63.

glad the 43 is working out for you

c4004matic

3.3 sec vs 4.2 sec difference at 60 about a sec on the 1/4 mile mile. Thats 98%! It also means that a 63 will cream a 43 100% of the time! So what? A 43 offers performance stats that on the street you dont use 99% of the time! In effect the 63 offers performance levels that less than 20 years ago were F1 level! Silly... Heck on the 43 getting around a semi on a 2 lane road on eco mode hardly raises the pulse. If someone can afford a 63 and it makes him happy, by all means they should go for it. That doesnt change the fact that 99.99999 % of the time they wont use 3/4 of the capacity it offers, its like having nuclear bomb. It got more power than a Hurracan for Criss sakes. Once you go over 400 HP, the limits of acceleration are dictated by traction rather than power! Even with the 43 and its AWD just a little mist will give the traction control some action during full blown acceleration.

PeterUbers

i would agree with all these other than the "once you go over 400hp" comment

the traction on the 63 is impeccable and I have to really work to have it lose traction on dry pavement ... from a launch ... it won't lose traction. Maybe in dyno mode, but I'm not that brace. Teslas p90D have 700+ whp and they are fun as hell to drive and I didn't feel like I lost traction. We should not drive any of these cars aggressively in the wet

the powerband and whp is really the key here, not as much just going over 400hp; but I'm not trying to make a case for the 63 here ... 98% is entirely in the eyes and soul of the driver, and if that 43 pounds your pulses then you're arguably 100% there!

good discussion

otakki

I see the same with Porsche. The only real Porsche are the 911, Cayman, etc. SUV's are not real Porsche but help Porsche with the funding needed on producing 911's. Same thing applies to MB/AMG. Porsche without the SUV's would probably turn into Lotus.

PeterUbers

good point -- doesn't 70% of Porsche revenue come from cayenne and Macon sales?

RobbieRob

As of right now, the E43 smokes the w213 63 in the States, since none have been released from port yet....lol. I feel for the ones waiting for the new E63's and the AMG GTR's, just sitting at port getting flat spots on the tires amongst other things. MB really put a bad taste in repeat buyers with this mess.
I don't care if it is a real or fake AMG, I love my E43, 100% more than my 14' w212 E63s which was, honestly, the worst car I have ever owned. Not that it wasn't fast, but just plain boring, ugly exterior and one of the worst interiors ever. New w213 E63's will be sick, but since I have a Porsche GT3 and a new .2 GT3 on its way, I'll enjoy my 43 for around town duties.

gengar

It is true that Porsche's justification for diluting their brand with Cayenne/Panamera/Macan has always been that it helps fund sportscar development, but is that really justification now that they are watering down their sportscars?

The reality is that Porsche was profitable pre-Cayenne thanks to Toyota, from which Porsche learned TPS/Kaizen in the 90's. Porsche didn't need the Cayenne to become profitable; they were just greedy. So no way can Porsche be compared to Lotus - which, despite having the right fundamentals and making impressive products considering the company's tiny size, is a horribly managed company with poor dealer support and even worse marketing/outreach.

In 2016, I believe the Porsche SUVs were 70% in terms of numerical sales. Either way, it'll probably be even higher in 2017 since 718/Carrera YTD sales have gone down the toilet since people hate the turbos.

c4004matic

The primary concern of any manufacturer is to make money. If it doesn't it folds and disappears. Though it might sound alien to yo'kos like us the sport car market is actually very small and mostly aspirational given that almost no one can buy a "real" sport car like an E63 or something of that ilk. Given these facts all manufacturers have to build cars that real people will buy. Even an E 43 is a very small market car given its price point, given that you can buy 2.5 very nicely equipped and more than adequately powered V6 Honda Accords for the same price. The E 63 would add an additional Accord to that equation making it even much rarer still. Lets face it if MB sells 500 E63's a year worldwide its going to be a stretch that's why it must sell hundreds of thousands of more their more pedestrian and "cushy" models to justify even offering cars of this level.

gengar

No one is disputing that a company has to make money. The issue being discussed is how much compromise a company (or in AMG's case, a division of a company) is willing to inflict on its core customer base in order just to increase profits.

As I mentioned, Porsche was profitable without the junk SUVs/cars it sells now. Porsche was profitable before they decided to make the Cayenne. So it doesn't make sense at all to argue that Porsche needs the junk SUVs/cars in order to produce its core sportscars.

I have a lot of respect for AMG not least for coming out with cars like the AMG GT, which has a lot of features that Porsche has actually removed from its sportscars as it has watered them down and made them less driver-focused. I just don't want to see AMG going down the same road as Porsche.

c4004matic

In fact, no. Before Porsche started building other cars it was an orphan that bounced from one place to another. The Cayenne and other models saved it.

PeterUbers

So what if amg keeps making softer cars and "dilutes" the brand? Who cares. In this open market someone will start catering to the purists ... OR you can continue to buy the purist-amg car like this e63S and realize it was built for a track and not to be a family haiker and grocery getter WITH a cush old school caddy ride

take your pick