Why I went from M3 to C63 to M3, then the C63 again. What about you? Why?

[bmwprince4life]

Originally Posted by ybbiz34

I like this post better than your initial one.

cool I have been waiting for your post lol

[Flyingfart]

Originally Posted by ///M-Turismo

So in the end, I picked to C63. The M3's selling points to me are the ///M badge and the coupe look. I don't go to the track so the handeling doesn't matter to me. The C63's selling points to me are the sound, interior, mean look, four doors, hp, and torque. The hp and torque seems like really fun to play with. I mean just imagin, after five years and you are used to the M3 coupe's look, don't you want a car (C63) that's also nice looking but more fun? The hp and torque would be really fun to play with.

hey! ///M-turismo congrats on the chrysler car

you need to change your name to ///AMG-turismo ... your new friends are now waiting for you in MBworld

enjoy your car we hope you like it

[ybbiz34]

Originally Posted by Flyingfart

hey! ///M-turismo congrats on the chrysler car

you need to change your name to ///AMG-turismo ... your new friends are now waiting for you in MBworld

enjoy your car we hope you like it

[eNCore]

Originally Posted by jm1234

If your engine can rev to 8400 rpm then you can apply a higher rear diff ratio and get more wheel torque for less wheel revolutions per engine rotation. But, since the engine will rev higher you wind up shifting at the same speed with higher torque.

Here's an Example:
Imagine an engine with a redline at 6,000 rpm that produces 200 ft-lb of torque across the entire range. Imagine two drivetrain configurations, neither with any transmission, only a rear diff. One has a rear diff ratio of 2 and the other 3. The car with the rear diff ratio of 2 would produce 400 ft-lbs of rear wheel torque and the rear wheels would spin at a max rate of 3,000 rpm. The car with the rear diff ratio of 3 would produce 600 ft-lbs of rear wheel torque and the rear wheels would spin at a max rate of 2,000 rpm. Now take the engine in the car with the rear diff ratio of 3 and make it have a 9,000 rpm redline. Take the car with the rear diff ratio of 2 and make it have 300 ft-lbs of torque. Now both cars produce the exact same rear wheel torque and max speed but with completely different engines and rear diff ratios.

Car 1
200 ft-lbs and 9,000 rpm redline with rear diff ratio of 3

Car 2
300 ft-lbs and 6,000 rpm redline with rear diff ratio of 2

Same rear wheel performance dynamics.

M3
300 ft-lbs and 8400 rpm redline with rear diff ratio of 3.846
1,153.8 ft-lbs peak rear wheel torque (sans transmission gearing or 5th gear) and 2,184 rear wheel rpm (sans transmission gearing or 5th gear)

C63
443 ft-lbs and 7200 rpm redline with rear diff ratio of 2.83
1,253.9 ft-lbs peak rear wheel torque (sans transmission gearing or 5th gear) and 2,544 rear wheel rpm (sans transmission gearing or 5th gear)

The C63 transmission is geared a little higher in gears 1-4 (compared to the M3) and a little lower in 6 (compared to the M3). Which puts even more torque to the rear wheels in lower gears but moves the per gear redline speeds (in mph) much closer to those in the M3. Sixth gear has much closer torque to the M3 in exchange for greater wheel speed. Not sure that makes sense from a performance standpoint, but that is what they did (or I have the wrong numbers).

I have yet to see the C63 torque curve but from the performance I imagine that the C63 has a much more peaky torque curve which mitigates some of the perceived shift/torque advantage it might seem to have from this simple comparison. Also the M3 has a very flat torque curve which works in it's favor.

I'm sure someone will correct me if I f'd this up.

Wow...thanks for the write up, really appreciate it!!! It seems really complicated though. But it's ok, I will try to get it. One last question though, so what's M3's advantage with the high rpm, and what's C63's with the high torque in real world driving? I am assuming when I gas it on the freeway with the M3 I will feel the little push on the back similar to my 335i right? Since the 335i has got more torque will the push be more noticeable on the M3 or 335i? For the C63 it will be a hard push on the back right?

[hellrotm]

Originally Posted by M2381

Transmission was a HUGE turnoff for me and its not as good as the DCT. Also the whole thing with the traction control

But both cars are amazing and grats on the new car! Post some vids of you driving so we can hear the sound!

Your crazy.

Its widely considered one of the best, if not the best automatic in the market.

[dechoong]

Originally Posted by consolidated

it's an older crowd, a silver Mercedes sedan is the last car you get before you get a hearse.

MB is desperately trying to change that image with their latest advertising and commercials

[BMWPower06]

I will never understand why people will buy mercedes, Im sorry but I've driven the entire Mercedes line up, C class up to the SL and hated them all except the GL450 which was kinda nice for an SUV.

[jm1234]

Originally Posted by ///M-Turismo

Wow...thanks for the write up, really appreciate it!!! It seems really complicated though. But it's ok, I will try to get it. One last question though, so what's M3's advantage with the high rpm, and what's C63's with the high torque in real world driving? I am assuming when I gas it on the freeway with the M3 I will feel the little push on the back similar to my 335i right? Since the 335i has got more torque will the push be more noticeable on the M3 or 335i? For the C63 it will be a hard push on the back right?

High redline can mean less shifting or can mean higher rear wheel torque, it depends on how the car is geared. High torque can also mean less shifting (lower gear ratios) or higher rear wheel torque, it also depends on how the car is geared. This is why people measure the power of an engine in HP. The real world difference between the two engines is very close to the 8% difference in HP values and not the 43% difference in torque values. Since the C63 is heavier this reduces the advantage to closer to 5% in real world driving.

Don't confuse rear wheel torque with engine torque because there are a lot of gears between the engine and the rear wheels that will increase torque. Peak HP and the width of the torque plateau are the key values.

Attached is a graph (I made some time ago) estimating (minus drivetrain power losses) the rear wheel torque of the C63 and M3 and 335 as well as optimal shift points (for max rear wheel torque and not exceeding redline). I did not have a good torque curve for the C63 so there is some uncertainty with the numbers. According to this graph, there is an average 10% rear wheel torque advantage for the C63 from 0 mph to 165 mph.

The C63 is quoted to produce a peak torque of 443 ft-lbs at 5000 rpm. But, the C63 is quoted to produce "greater than" 369 ft-lbs of torque from 2,000 to 6,000 rpm. That's a 20% drop from peak torque. The same 20% range on the M3 torque means the M3 stays within 20% of peak torque from 2,000 to 8,500 rpm. From roughly 2,700 rpm to 8,000 rpm the M3 stays within 10% of peak torque. Which is why when the M3 shifts at the rev limiter the engine should still be pulling strong. I'd guess the C63 would start to feel "exhausted" when it gets near redline. I'd guess when the C63 shifts it will feel "stronger" and when the M3 shifts it would feel "weaker" (to how each felt pre-shift).

Just drive both cars. These numbers are silly.

[bruce.augenstein@comcast.]

Originally Posted by ///M-Turismo

Wow...thanks for the write up, really appreciate it!!! It seems really complicated though. But it's ok, I will try to get it. One last question though, so what's M3's advantage with the high rpm, and what's C63's with the high torque in real world driving? I am assuming when I gas it on the freeway with the M3 I will feel the little push on the back similar to my 335i right? Since the 335i has got more torque will the push be more noticeable on the M3 or 335i? For the C63 it will be a hard push on the back right?

High rpm has no intrinsic advantage (except perhaps for the spine-tingling sounds the new M3 makes), but gives you the potential to make more power. Today's technology applied to normally aspirated, smog-legal street engines tends to run out of steam at around 85 foot pounds of torque or so per liter of engine displacement, and since torque is what translates to that old belt in the back, making torque at a higher engine speed gives you the ability to gear the car more aggressively, and thus translate the available torque into something much greater at the drive wheels. Torque at rpm (and in the case of the M3, very high rpm) is also the very essence of power. Torque is a force, but power is a measure of the ability to do actual work, which in this case is the ability of the M3 to haul ass, in the vernacular, even though it doesn't make a whole bunch of torque.

The C63 makes more torque and more power by virtue of a larger engine, so it's faster than the M3, even though it's heavier. The M3 narrows the overall performance gap by making more power per liter of engine displacement.

For a more detailed explanation of power and torque, go here to note 31 in that string, and follow up with note 36.

Bruce

[KonigsTiger]

I agree with all your points. I would choose the C63 over the M3 sedan but slightly like the M3 Coupe better than the 63 in terms of looks and general performance (I say general because I have driven both and I like turn in, steering feel, etc… more than the 63 especially at speed but the M could benefit with some of that 63 power). The sound is also certainly magnificent and downshifting is a beauty on the C63 but (you know, that amazing gurgling sound; however, IMO it does not sound louder or better than “new" Ferraris (i.e., F430 and above). Perhaps better than the older ones, yes!! But not even the F360.

[Hans Delbruck]

I took delivery last week on Thursday. I love it.






Here is a video of the startup. It sounds more like an American muscle car than anything. BTW, this car DOES GET LOOKS. I've already gotten a thumbs up from a C230 driver, and looks from 3 series drivers. I only have 230ish miles on the car. I was actually hoping the car would be more stealthy. But it seems people are interested...

[u2b]<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/5fWVuw3PMxE&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/5fWVuw3PMxE&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[/u2b]

[snoopy]

Originally Posted by 440hpe46

What I do not understand are people who say they do not track their car or that the M only wins the comparos due to it's track prowess and then say they do not need the handling aspect of the car but need more HP/Trq for everyday street use where they can never use that much power (unless on a track) and could benefit more from handling...

Why cant you use all that power on the road? Pedal to the metal and zoom off in a straight line.

[440hpe46]

Originally Posted by snoopy

Why cant you use all that power on the road? Pedal to the metal and zoom off in a straight line.

Burnouts at red lights??? Or endangering one's own life as well as others at 100MPH or more on the highway???

You can't use the full HP in either car...thus handling is far more important at lower speeds...

45 MPH in a straightline or in the twisties??? I know which one I prefer...

[hellrotm]

Originally Posted by BMWPower06

I will never understand why people will buy mercedes, Im sorry but I've driven the entire Mercedes line up, C class up to the SL and hated them all except the GL450 which was kinda nice for an SUV.

You need to drive the C63. If you don't understand why someone would buy one, you have problems my friend.

My buddy traded his Dinan 5 for a E63. I said he was crazy. Until I drove it, amazing car.

[hellrotm]

Originally Posted by 440hpe46

Burnouts at red lights??? Or endangering one's own life as well as others at 100MPH or more on the highway???

You can't use the full HP in either car...thus handling is far more important at lower speeds...

45 MPH in a straightline or in the twisties??? I know which one I prefer...

With your theory everyone should be driving Miata's.

The only way to see the M3's peak power, is if you ring out the motor. You simply can't drive at high rpm's all day in the M3.

The C63 is far more suited to be a daily driver. All the torque is delivered around 2,000 to 3,000 rpm.

Unlike the M3 which peak power is at 8,300 rpm.

[ase2dais]

How would one consider a 442 tq 6.2 ltr car a better daily driver?

Do you really need that much tq to pull out off the traffic light ?

Now if you like to drive to impress at every stop light I would agree, but dont tell me its a much better suited DD. These are high end toys like mine which will be a wkend driver

[Irish Bimmer]

The main thing that will make the C63 a better daily driver is that it is offered with only an automatic - most M3's will probably be manuals. The engine in my m coupe delivers it's power pretty much the same way the new M3 does, just less of it - and I've never had an automatic because I've always wanted to have that extra control, until this car.

The characteristics of this engine require you to wring it out to redline to get the most out of it - otherwise it really doesn't feel that great. Which in all honesty, when 2nd gear ends at 74 MPH, you are already over most speed limits, do that in 3rd and now you're at take me to jail speeds. The problem is that any of these cars are crazy fast for the street and that as soon as you get on them you're breaking the speed limit.

However, I now have a greater appreciation for automatics and high torque engines after having this car. This is mostly noticeable when on the highway and wanting to pass someone, or to make an emergency lane change, etc. To do this in the M coupe you have to downshift to build up some revs and wind it out. The C63 has enough power to just stay in gear and use it's torque, or if you need more power you just floor it and it will let you go as fast as possible. No drama at all.

Maybe I'm just getting older, and am now having to deal with daily traffic on my morning and afternoon commutes, or I'm remembering why I liked my old VW GTI over my older Honda Si..... same comparison (GTI = C63 ; Si = M3) in the way they deliver their power. Either way I love my car, but can appreciate the C63 for what it does as well.

[jm1234]

Can you floor the gas pedal and get the rear tires to break at any speed in first gear (any speed under redline)?

How about second?

[Keto]

Originally Posted by BlackJetE90

With your theory everyone should be driving Miata's.

The only way to see the M3's peak power, is if you ring out the motor. You simply can't drive at high rpm's all day in the M3.

The C63 is far more suited to be a daily driver. All the torque is delivered around 2,000 to 3,000 rpm.

Unlike the M3 which peak power is at 8,300 rpm.

Sorry, but you are crazy. You need nowhere near the amount of torque for daily driving that the C63 provides, and the ride on the C63 is way too stiff for a daily driver.

"Daily Driving" never requires peak power from any of these cars.

[ihyln]

Hans, I read that you already have a CEL with 60miles on the odo. That's gotta take the buzz out of your new car. I sincerely hope that MB reliability is a lot better than it used to be. That was the final reason for me not going with a C63 initially.

[KonigsTiger]

Originally Posted by ihyln

Hans, I read that you already have a CEL with 60miles on the odo. That's gotta take the buzz out of your new car. I sincerely hope that MB reliability is a lot better than it used to be. That was the final reason for me not going with a C63 initially.

My feeling is that Mercedes has huge reliability issues particularly between 2000 and still 2004/2005ish. They have come a long way very quickly since and I should also add that AMG was never part of the reliability issues. I've been lucky enough to own severl MBs and BMW's and believe reliability is really about the same. Have had no issues with AMG a very, very small issues with BMW M. If you don't buy an AMG, it should not be because you worry about reliability.

[BM3W!]

I love the C63. That and the Audi RS4 were the two other cars I considered before finally ordering my 08 M3 Coupe.

The C63 will pull the M3 slightly in a straight line. This is fact, however the M3 will over take it in the first turn. This was proven (for all intensive purposes) in the shootout between the M3, C63 and IS-F where by the end the M3 was over 8 seconds ahead of both cars.

The thing that made the M3 my final choice was: (and in no particular order)
The looks
The EDC which allows my M3 to go from 335 like comfort, to a bit stiffer than an E46, to a setting meant for tracking your car. This alone is a huge benefit.
Handling
Stability and Traction controls are light years ahead
6 speed manual - I simply would never want an AT in a sports car. How fun is mashing the gas... I prefer driver skill.
etc.

At the same time, the C63 is one hell of a beast, and I love the sound. Either car is awesome. Enjoy the hell out of that thing, I think its an incredible car and more than worthy of that AMG badge.

Does anyone know if you can chip the car and unlock the 65 or so HP (I think thats what it was if I recall correctly) thats there, but AMG detuned it so it wouldnt beat its highr echelon cars? That would be sweet assuming the AT and drive train can handle the extra power.