C63 vs. M3--Test Drive

[klammer]

Originally Posted by soberin

These were 235/35 19 in front and 255/35 19 in rear, on Yokohama Advan Sports.

Those are my winter wheel sizes and compared to my summers (265/295) the car feels completely different. I think MY car would have the same review if just the tires were switched. Think the impact of rubber not fully appreciated here, but then again I did pick the M

[EdM5]

Originally Posted by gthal

Have you had the 2012 C63 on a track?

It would be hard to come to these conclusions from a "test drive" IMO. Spend a day at the track or a week with the cars and I think your opinion will change a bit. They are different, no doubt, but not to the extent the OP states IMO based on lots of time in each... the pros don't agree either.

Yeah, you're right. I am biased.

[Small Yellow]

OP should just get a Carrera S or GTS and call it a day. But then... price might bring up another debate. Well we all get what we pay for.

[clar]

Originally Posted by gthal

It is a much more fun DD IMO.

I haven't experienced the 3" on centre steering issue either and actually find I get better feedback from the C63 but with less precision. It does feel heavier but the feeling is only slightly more prevalent than on the M3. I also don't agree with the C63 not feeling balanced... as a matter of fact it feels very planted and balanced. Not as balanced as the M3 but not night and day different. Unlike the OP, I would suggest the magazine reviews (all of them) are pretty accurate in that the M3 still has the better feel on the track but the C63 is very close now. The variance the OP is commenting on is quite a bit more than I would have suggested but that is how he saw it. Different than me or most of the magazines who have reviewed it. I wonder how biased/unbiased the OP went into the comparison as his perception is so different than what the pro reviews have said and the experience others (myself included) have had. I guess cars are like that... we each perceive their characteristics in way that has meaning to us and that gives each a character that we like or dislike. Sound, for example, is WAY better in the C63 IMO. The engine sounds great and the exhaust is simply amazing. The only time you ever experience the thrill of the M3 sound wise is >5,000 RPM. The C63 it is all of the time and just gets better the higher it revs. Again, just my take and the OP was clearly different.

In any event, the M3 is the better and more precise car on the track but based on my experience in both (many hours in both on the track), the difference is much more subtle then what the OP suggests. The M3 is better in balance and ability to deal with the track, the C63 is a better car for the street (all IMO obviously).

As mentioned, OP's M3 isn't exactly stock. He mentioned that he improved on the steering feel/feedback with the Dinan Stage 3 kit, so his opinion can't really be compared with those from mag reviews as those were comparing the C63 with a stock M3. Perhaps his M3 is a lot more feelsome, hence the great disparity.

[clar]

Originally Posted by soberin

My main beef with my 2009 E90 M3 has been the lack steering feel and feedback.

I second that! Off centre, there is always that slag that makes the car feel sloppy. It's said that in the regular series cars, BMW engineered that to protect against soccer mums on their grocery runs. I can understand that, but in M cars? I don't think it's necessary at all. I am hoping the new M5 will have a better steering compared to the M3. From what i have read so far, it seems to be the case. The 1M has a better steering rack and if confirmed by the M5, this bodes well for the next M3 as they seem to be getting their act together on the steering front.

[stefan]

I find the DD comments bizarre. What do you guys classify as "daily drivability"? Low end torque? Ok.. How exactly does that look on the street? Are you guys stabbing the throttle to get up to the limit? Dunno.. just.. someone educate me on why it is so much better to have low end torque for DD'ing your vehicle. Furthermore, if you really must accelerate with unnecessary rapidness up to the speed limit, what is wrong with doing so at high rpms?

I x-shopped both, and was attracted mainly by a lot of the comments on this site and videos (particularly the noise) to send me to the Merc dealership. I didn't like the interior, and I felt the car was a quite a bit more "floaty" than the M3. I'm definitely biased to the way the S65 sounds as well... or ended up being biased I suppose.

To the OP: I think BMWs are really no longer the car to get if you're interested in intimate steering feel. It would be time, IMO, to take a look at Lotus or similar smaller, sporty car.

[gthal]

Originally Posted by username11

The comments confuse me as well. M3 is so easy to drive quickly yet smoothly because power delivery is so linear and progressive. How would having the inverse be better for driving to work? Bizarre.

The power delivery in the C63 is also linear and progressive... it isn't a turbo. The reason why it is, IMO only, a better DD is because the power is always there when needed. In the M3, if you were in the wrong gear and wanted to accelerate there wasn't a lot there. You could downshift fairly easily and get power but you needed to raise the RPMs to have power. In the C63, there is power all of the time... it is still linear and builds progressively but much easier to use and much more of it all of the time. This doesn't necessarily make it a better DD for everyone but it is very addictive and fun to have access to a LOT of torque and power all of the time. It is the ease in which you can access the power that is one potential reason why some would call it a more fun and better DD. But, what characteristics someone enjoys in their DD is subjective.

The M3 is very much a great and satisfying DD... however, drive in the C63 for a few days and you will know what I am describing. Cruising along in 4th gear and you need to pass someone... push the gas pedal, the car pushes you back in your seat and you just missile forward. To get the same thing in the M3 at the same street speed, you would need to downshift, get revs to 5,000 +/- and then stab the go pedal... not a bad thing at all, just different.

Anyone who says that a huge amount of almost always available torque isn't fun in a DD hasn't experienced it. Until I did, I would have thought it was not needed too. On the track it is much less relevant but around town, back roads, highway driving... it is very fun and very addictive being pushed back in your seat when the car literally rockets ahead.

[mdosu]

.

[clar]

Originally Posted by gthal

The power delivery in the C63 is also linear and progressive... it isn't a turbo. The reason why it is, IMO only, a better DD is because the power is always there when needed. In the M3, if you were in the wrong gear and wanted to accelerate there wasn't a lot there. You could downshift fairly easily and get power but you needed to raise the RPMs to have power. In the C63, there is power all of the time... it is still linear and builds progressively but much easier to use and much more of it all of the time. This doesn't necessarily make it a better DD for everyone but it is very addictive and fun to have access to a LOT of torque and power all of the time. It is the ease in which you can access the power that is one potential reason why some would call it a more fun and better DD. But, what characteristics someone enjoys in their DD is subjective.

The M3 is very much a great and satisfying DD... however, drive in the C63 for a few days and you will know what I am describing. Cruising along in 4th gear and you need to pass someone... push the gas pedal, the car pushes you back in your seat and you just missile forward. To get the same thing in the M3 at the same street speed, you would need to downshift, get revs to 5,000 +/- and then stab the go pedal... not a bad thing at all, just different.

Anyone who says that a huge amount of almost always available torque isn't fun in a DD hasn't experienced it. Until I did, I would have thought it was not needed too. On the track it is much less relevant but around town, back roads, highway driving... it is very fun and very addictive being pushed back in your seat when the car literally rockets ahead.

I have not driven the C63, but i agree with u on the DD part. Coming from a lightly tuned 135i, i can attest that x35i cars are also more DD friendly due to the low end torque. That's not to say that the M3 is lacking, it's just that to feel that responsive, u need to keep it under boil and that can be quite a riot in city driving due to the sound. You will come across as spoiling for a fight. Again, DD is subjective. If u don't mind keeping the car at high rev even in slow city driving, it's all good. For me, that gets tiring quickly.

[TheKosherStogie]

IMO the C63 has better steering feel than the M3. Its weighted better, as the M3 steering feels very electronically assisted and fake. A friend of mine who owns the M3 comp package agrees and I know a couple car mags did as well.
No question the M3 is the better handling car thou. I have owed both

[soberin]

Originally Posted by stefan

I find the DD comments bizarre. What do you guys classify as "daily drivability"? Low end torque? Ok.. How exactly does that look on the street? Are you guys stabbing the throttle to get up to the limit? Dunno.. just.. someone educate me on why it is so much better to have low end torque for DD'ing your vehicle. Furthermore, if you really must accelerate with unnecessary rapidness up to the speed limit, what is wrong with doing so at high rpms?

I x-shopped both, and was attracted mainly by a lot of the comments on this site and videos (particularly the noise) to send me to the Merc dealership. I didn't like the interior, and I felt the car was a quite a bit more "floaty" than the M3. I'm definitely biased to the way the S65 sounds as well... or ended up being biased I suppose.

To the OP: I think BMWs are really no longer the car to get if you're interested in intimate steering feel. It would be time, IMO, to take a look at Lotus or similar smaller, sporty car.

I would agree. However, we live in a world of compromises and have to go for the best combination of attributes, unless of course you have the luxury of owning multiple cars. As the OP, I was initially frustrated with the M3 steering, as I had come out of a Mitsu EVO VIII MR, which had extraordinary steering feedback and feel.

[soberin]

Originally Posted by gthal

Anyone who says that a huge amount of almost always available torque isn't fun in a DD hasn't experienced it. Until I did, I would have thought it was not needed too. On the track it is much less relevant but around town, back roads, highway driving... it is very fun and very addictive being pushed back in your seat when the car literally rockets ahead.

Agreed. Big torque is not just for stop-light racing, but makes your daily driving much easier. Add that to the automatic tranny---and you've got my Grandpa's Caddy--or a C63.

[stefan]

Originally Posted by Skullbussa

The lack of torque in the M3 engine is very tiring to those of us who are used to engines that can deliver torque. Wringing the engine out from each stoplight as a soccer mom rides your back bumper in her Honda Odyssey is not fun. This is why the DCT (imho) is a must-have for the E9x M3, it helps alleviate the hassle of the aggressive shifting required in daily driving.

In cars like the 335i, C63, Mustang, etc....none of this is required. And it is a much more enjoyable, relaxed experience. I don't want to be bouncing my rev limiter on the way to the grocery store every day.

I have no doubt the M3 is a better driver's car and is superior on the track. But the engine is truly an Achilles heel for a lot of us...I otherwise would not even consider the AMG offering.

First of all, have you even driven an M3?

I'll bite anyway. Our S65 has a generally flat torque curve, of at least 250 lb-ft in most rpms! Not exactly a small amount of torque. Why the heck are you bouncing off your rev limiter driving around the city? Does that strike anyone else as absolutely insane?

I have never had any issues keeping up / politely driving with traffic when driving in appropriate gears. I'm thinking.. maximum of 5000rpm. Nowhere near redline. I just don't get it. Any more thrust in normal driving situations is NOT required. I actually lament that I don't see the high rpm's often enough.

So as I understand it based on the nonsense in this thread, some of you are willing to switch vehicles completely because you are:
- too lazy to shift
- want to be experiencing maximum thrust at all times
- want to achieve said thrust rapidly until reaching the speed limit
- think that Honda Oddysey's are riding your bumper

Seriously?? DO sell your M3s and buy turbocharged car. They provide said cheap thrills and will achieve the jackass-driver look you're going for. You guys will love the 335i. Tune it and you can fit right in with the other DBs I see driving around the city enjoying their gobs of torque. Clearly, the driver-oriented M3 is not for you. All that inconvenient shifting and linear power delivery. Pfft.

All that said, I think the C63 is a cool car. There are plenty of reasons to go to it. But don't say the reason is because you want to feel thrust at all times during traffic situations.

[1Sleeper]

Both great cars. C63 sounds f-ing awesome stock and it feels solid and well put together. Sure there is some difference between the two but how could you possibly go wrong with either? I could have gotten either but it was small detail type stuff that made me go M3. Very happy but I don't think I would have been anything close to unhappy in the C63.

[crabman]

Originally Posted by gthal

The power delivery in the C63 is also linear and progressive... it isn't a turbo. The reason why it is, IMO only, a better DD is because the power is always there when needed. In the M3, if you were in the wrong gear and wanted to accelerate there wasn't a lot there. You could downshift fairly easily and get power but you needed to raise the RPMs to have power. In the C63, there is power all of the time... it is still linear and builds progressively but much easier to use and much more of it all of the time. This doesn't necessarily make it a better DD for everyone but it is very addictive and fun to have access to a LOT of torque and power all of the time. It is the ease in which you can access the power that is one potential reason why some would call it a more fun and better DD. But, what characteristics someone enjoys in their DD is subjective.

The M3 is very much a great and satisfying DD... however, drive in the C63 for a few days and you will know what I am describing. Cruising along in 4th gear and you need to pass someone... push the gas pedal, the car pushes you back in your seat and you just missile forward. To get the same thing in the M3 at the same street speed, you would need to downshift, get revs to 5,000 +/- and then stab the go pedal... not a bad thing at all, just different.

Anyone who says that a huge amount of almost always available torque isn't fun in a DD hasn't experienced it. Until I did, I would have thought it was not needed too. On the track it is much less relevant but around town, back roads, highway driving... it is very fun and very addictive being pushed back in your seat when the car literally rockets ahead.

I agree. I took the C63 for a spin while I was out on test drives myself and I thought it was a pretty nice car. The main reason I chose an M3 over it was because some undefinable quality of the M3 speaks to my inner hooligan in a way that the C63 does not. It may also be because I'm coming from corvettes so being used to a lot of power everywhere I probably didn't find the power of the C as impressive as someone who hasn't driven such a car. On the other side of the coin on my M3 test drive leaving BMW Seattle they take you up on the freeway and I immediately noticed the lack of that instant power everywhere feel and it gave me pause. I guess this leads me back to my original thought in this thread. If Merc should decide to tune toward that thing that the M3 has, that corvettes have, that P cars have, they are going to sell some (more) cars to former M drivers IMO. Think if they do nothing but make a stick an option or a dual clutch and sharpen up the steering a little...

[gthal]

Originally Posted by stefan

First of all, have you even driven an M3?

I'll bite anyway. Our S65 has a generally flat torque curve, of at least 250 lb-ft in most rpms! Not exactly a small amount of torque. Why the heck are you bouncing off your rev limiter driving around the city? Does that strike anyone else as absolutely insane?

I have never had any issues keeping up / politely driving with traffic when driving in appropriate gears. I'm thinking.. maximum of 5000rpm. Nowhere near redline. I just don't get it. Any more thrust in normal driving situations is NOT required. I actually lament that I don't see the high rpm's often enough.

So as I understand it based on the nonsense in this thread, some of you are willing to switch vehicles completely because you are:
- too lazy to shift
- want to be experiencing maximum thrust at all times
- want to achieve said thrust rapidly until reaching the speed limit
- think that Honda Oddysey's are riding your bumper

Seriously?? DO sell your M3s and buy turbocharged car. They provide said cheap thrills and will achieve the jackass-driver look you're going for. You guys will love the 335i. Tune it and you can fit right in with the other DBs I see driving around the city enjoying their gobs of torque. Clearly, the driver-oriented M3 is not for you. All that inconvenient shifting and linear power delivery. Pfft.

All that said, I think the C63 is a cool car. There are plenty of reasons to go to it. But don't say the reason is because you want to feel thrust at all times during traffic situations.

If you drive the M3 like a Camry, why get an M3 unless you spend every week at the track. Saying the M3 is a driver oriented car (which it is) discounts the fact that the C63 is ALSO a driver's oriented car. The issue on this thread, which is expected, is that many draw conclusions based on bias, what they read or VERY limited experience in another car. No one is saying that the M3 isn't an amazing car but to say you don't understand why gobs of instant torque and power that are so easy to get at is a real asset in a car is a little silly. Because the M3 doesn't have it is NOT an insult to the M3. It is not engineered to be a torque monster and that's OK but if you tell me that you wouldn't care to have lots of torque available and that it wouldn't make a car fun around town shouts bias and fanboyism. Back to my original point... if you drive the M3 the way you describe, WHY have an M3? If you drive it more aggressively and in a spirited way, then to say having the torque around town is a waste is just a little silly.

Again... I am NOT saying the M3 doesn't have enough torque around town, it does. I am saying the significant torque available in the C63 is fun, addictive and very useful in DD application. For some people, this is a real plus in a DD.

[Black Gold]

Originally Posted by stefan

So as I understand it based on the nonsense in this thread, some of you are willing to switch vehicles completely because you are:
- too lazy to shift
- want to be experiencing maximum thrust at all times
- want to achieve said thrust rapidly until reaching the speed limit
- think that Honda Oddysey's are riding your bumper

Seriously?? DO sell your M3s and buy turbocharged car. They provide said cheap thrills and will achieve the jackass-driver look you're going for. You guys will love the 335i. Tune it and you can fit right in with the other DBs I see driving around the city enjoying their gobs of torque. Clearly, the driver-oriented M3 is not for you. All that inconvenient shifting and linear power delivery. Pfft..

:facepalm:

Just becuase someone enjoys a high tq car doesn't make them a dbag.

I personally can't wait for the next gen turbo m3. Bring on the tq. And I'll probably tune it too

[gthal]

Originally Posted by username11

The comments about driving the M3 like a Camry/shifting off the limiter are odd. If I floor it and shift off the limiter from a stop, I've created a cloud of tire smoke, caused a huge commotion, probably gotten beamed by everyone behind me, am going over 60mph once I'm into 2nd, and probably 30 car lengths ahead of any one else. The M3 (completely stock) is ridiculously loud and noticeable approaching redline. Speed limit is likely 35mph and I'm at the next light probably about to get pulled over. You can't really do that in the city too often, can you? I mean, you could but you'd look like a complete idiot. Driving like that in traffic/town is the mark of a total asshole; I did that shit when I was 16 and had a Honda which I thought was a supercar.

I get my driving enjoyment around town out of smoothly building the revs, shifting perfectly both quickly and smooth (6MT), and feeling the way the car responds telepathically to every input. Contrary to the "Camry" comment, flooring it everywhere is coarse and misses the point of the car. But hey, I like to shift..

My point wasn't about driving like an idiot really but driving the M3 like a commuter vehicle doesn't allow you to experience the car like it was meant to be experienced. Driving daily for many isn't necessarily a bumper to bumper city experience and you can open up the car (M3 or C63) a bit in a safe, non asshole way. If you can't drive spiritedly frequently, why bother with an M3 unless you track often or like the image of being in the car (not saying either applies to you). But, IMO, driving it in a non spirited way really is a waste of the vehicle and it doesn't get to demonstrate its real strengths.

[JulieDriving]

Originally Posted by Skullbussa

The lack of torque in the M3 engine is very tiring to those of us who are used to engines that can deliver torque. Wringing the engine out from each stoplight as a soccer mom rides your back bumper in her Honda Odyssey is not fun. This is why the DCT (imho) is a must-have for the E9x M3, it helps alleviate the hassle of the aggressive shifting required in daily driving.

In cars like the 335i, C63, Mustang, etc....none of this is required. And it is a much more enjoyable, relaxed experience. I don't want to be bouncing my rev limiter on the way to the grocery store every day.

I have no doubt the M3 is a better driver's car and is superior on the track. But the engine is truly an Achilles heel for a lot of us...I otherwise would not even consider the AMG offering.

I do not get this. A soccer mom Honda Odyssey is impatiently riding an M3 on its rear bumper while the M3 driver is frantically trying to get some distance between him/herself and soccer mom, revving all the way to redline, bouncing off the rev limiter, sweating bullets wondering if he/she can make it...?

Have you ever driven an M3?

[clar]

Originally Posted by username11

So much fail in this post. M3 makes more torque at all in-gear RPMs than the x35 engines.

I don't quite understand that statement when people make it. My M3 certainly doesn't feel as strong at 2000 rpm compared to my prev 135i. The 135i hits max torque way before 2000rpm at 450 NM (power kit). In no way is an M3 as responsive at that rpm.

[Powerslide]

Originally Posted by clar

I don't quite understand that statement when people make it. My M3 certainly doesn't feel as strong at 2000 rpm compared to my prev 135i. The 135i hits max torque way before 2000rpm at 450 NM (power kit). In no way is an M3 as responsive at that rpm.

To reconcile these two statements - keep in mind that the 135i IS going to make more torque AT 2000 RPM compared to an M3 at 2000 rpm assuming they are both in similar ratio gears at a given time. HOWEVER, the S65 engine in the M3 combined with the more aggressive or shorter gear ratios compared with the taller gear ratios on the 135i or 335i means that once the M3 gets up closer to 3500 rpm's and up, a stock M3 will be making more torque AT THE WHEELS than a stock 135i or 335i will be given the same rpm's (3500 or higher)... So - as to which if those scenarios is true - the answer is (like so many other things in life): "it depends.". Bottom line - as long as you're willing to rev the m3 to 3500 rpm or higher - it will make more torque at the wheels (which is more directly related to acceleration than torque at the crankshaft) than a stock 135i or 335i. (see the sticky in the m3 general or vs forum re factoring in torque at the wheels for a direct comparison of the M3 vs other cars with much higher torque at the crankshaft, yet the m3 still has comparable if not better torque at wheels in some instances at given rpm levels).

[Powerslide]

To the DD point - I agree, based upon my experience, that for 95% of the other cars out there, you really don't need to rev that high to pass other cars. I find that from a stoplight that even against "ordinary" cars that are accelerating pretty aggressively, if I'm getting up to about 3500 rpm's before shifting (where I am only about 400 rpm short of the max torque at the crankshaft of 295 ft/lb), I am still easily overtaking the vast majority of other cars on the road - so contrary to some of the posts above - I can easily out-accelerate the most aggressively-driven soccer mom Honda odyssey without having to exceed 4000 rpm's...

Now on the other hand - the same would also be true for cars with more torque such as the c63 - except with the c63, you would be able to do the same thing at a lower rpm compared to the m3...

Bottom line - does one have to rev the m3 higher to get a given rate of acceleration compared to a c63 or 335i? Absolutely. HOWEVER - you certainly do NOT need to rev the crap out of the M3 in order to obtain a very brisk rate of acceleration in DD conditions.

I have driven 335i's and even the 335d which has WAY more torque at the crankshaft (425 ft/lb vs 295 ft/lb). Assuming you do not rev past 3500 rpm - the 335d definitely feels faster. However - I drove my e93 (which is about 300 pounds heavier than a 335d sedan) the day after driving the 335d - and I will say that by 4000 rpm my m3 felt just as quick, and at 5000 tpm or higher - the e93 (even with it's greater weight) was unquestionably faster (so imagine how much greater the difference would be if you're in the M3 sedan or coupe which are both about 450 lbs lighter than my e93)!!