Will the new 2008 C63 AMG KILL the e92 M3?

[gonzo]

Originally Posted by bronco

sounds nice, but wtf...no manual gearbox????

I believe the only MT's they offer are in the SLK and the C350.

[E36325is]

Yeah that engine is awesome, but looks like the chassis isn't, with that much torque AMG doesn't even offer a LSD as standard!

[gonzo]

Benz=thunder BMW=lightning. Torque monster vs screaming bat out of hell. I want both o' genie in the bottle.

[gonzo]

Originally Posted by E36325is

Yeah that engine is awesome, but looks like the chassis isn't, with that much torque AMG doesn't even offer a LSD as standard!

Nor does the 335. Not near as much tq but still. MB will offer as an option.

[DFW_M]

Originally Posted by sambonator

Its a 6.2 Liter V8 engine, Normally aspirated, making 451 hp and 443 lb-ft torque. DAYUM!

WOW, 6.2L to get 451 Horses out. M3 takes a "tiny" 4.0L and squeezes 414 HP. With 6.2L, Bimmer would get out 800 HP...
Sounds like Chrysler has too much influence on that GAS GUZZLER!

[techlogik]

What a 6.2L that barely puts the same power out at the smaller V8 of the new M3? How creative Mercedes?!?! Hence, why they are always putting SCs on all of their cars.

Plus, you can only get the typical slush box from them. Albeit one of the best slush boxes on the planer, but still, no options. Hence, they don't get what a driver's car and experience is all about at MB still. Just brute power and refinement with no options for drivers. And they charge a heck of a lot more for them.

BMW all the way, won't ever own a Mercedes personally.

[techlogik]

What a 6.2L that barely puts the same power out at the smaller V8 of the new M3? How creative Mercedes?!?! Hence, why they are always putting SCs on all of their cars.

Plus, you can only get the typical slush box from them. Albeit one of the best slush boxes on the planet, but still, no options. Hence, they don't get what a driver's car and experience is all about at MB still. Just brute power and refinement with no options for drivers. And they charge a heck of a lot more for them.

BMW all the way, won't ever own a Mercedes personally.

[Just_me]

I wont be shock if C63 outperform M3 both on a track and in acceleration. I hope I'm wrong. Its going to be an intresting future.

C63 uses same tires as RS4, Pirelli Corsa tires. Apparently the new C63 done the N-ring in 8.10 min with the Pirelli tires and with the 030 performance package (which include LSD).

[hks786]

Originally Posted by continentalg5

WHOA! I have always believed that competition between different companies always ends up being best for the consumer.

It forces each company not to rest on their laurels and to be one step ahead of their rivals. I say "Go Mercedes Go!"

Thats a very good point...

[ILC32]

Originally Posted by Just_me

C63 uses same tires as RS4, Pirelli Corsa tires. Apparently the new C63 done the N-ring in 8.10 min with the Pirelli tires and with the 030 performance package (which include LSD).

That is not impressive for a car with R tyres and and ~460 hp.

[Just_me]

Originally Posted by ILC32

That is not impressive for a car with R tyres and and ~460 hp.

but still fast for a C-class. If the 8.12 min is true for M3, then its already a lost battle.

I still hope Sportauto will prove me wrong.

[ILC32]

Originally Posted by Just_me

but still fast for a C-class. If the 8.12 min is true for M3, then its already a lost battle.

I still hope Sportauto will prove me wrong.

No, because the 8:12 is reportedly on standard tires. R tires are wroth more than 2 seconds, right?

[Just_me]

Originally Posted by ILC32

No, because the 8:12 is reportedly on standard tires. R tires are wroth more than 2 seconds, right?

AM V8 was 10 seconds faster with R-tires than without. But those Pirelli are semi-R-tires and not as good 100% R-tires.

Regarding the tires, MB and Audi people will taunt the M3 for not beating their precious one. Are you prepare to hear that as long as the M3 E92 exist?

[ILC32]

Originally Posted by Just_me

Regarding the tires, MB and Audi people will taunt the M3 for not beating their precious one. Are you prepare to hear that as long as the M3 E92 exist?

I have always felt that M should offer sport-tires as an option (even if it is a highly limited option) just so that the car could be tested in a confirguration more comparable to that of the RS4 (minus the ceramic brakes of course, which M seemingly is refusing to adopt).

[Hans Delbruck]

Originally Posted by ILC32

No, because the 8:12 is reportedly on standard tires. R tires are wroth more than 2 seconds, right?

On a course as long as the 'ring.... R compound tires are worth a lot more than 2 seconds!

I can't wait to see the comparos.

Me, I'll still take the M3 no matter what kind of numbers the Benz produces. I looked at getting a used C55 very closely -- I really liked it. In the process, I became familiar with the market for a $60K+ C-class. There's isn't much of one! If you really like the C63, don't stand in line for one. Wait a year for a used one, or buy a new one then, with a big discount. If I find I don't like the E92 M3, and want to waste some more money... that's what I might do.

[ILC32]

Originally Posted by Hans Delbruck

On a course as long as the 'ring.... R compound tires are worth a lot more than 2 seconds!

I can't wait to see the comparos.

Me, I'll still take the M3 no matter what kind of numbers the Benz produces. I looked at getting a used C55 very closely -- I really liked it. In the process, I became familiar with the market for a $60K+ C-class. There's isn't much of one! If you really like the C63, don't stand in line for one. Wait a year for a used one, or buy a new one then, with a big discount. If I find I don't like the E92 M3, and want to waste some more money... that's what I might do.

I bought my C32 when it was one year old, and took advantage of the huge first year depreciation hit all cars take. But I took a huge hit also when I sold it to buy the M3. Unlike M cars, AMG cars depreciate like mad even after the first year -- especially the C class AMG because it is so expensive in comparison to the standard models which look almost identical. The fact that MB introduced the bargain basement C230 sport package that looked identical to the C32 (except for the wheels and exhaust) also killed the resale.

[Hans Delbruck]

Originally Posted by ILC32

I bought my C32 when it was one year old, and took advantage of the huge first year depreciation hit all cars take. But I took a huge hit also when I sold it to buy the M3. Unlike M cars, AMG cars depreciate like mad even after the first year -- especially the C class AMG because it is so expensive in comparison to the standard models which look almost identical. The fact that MB introduced the bargain basement C230 sport package that looked identical to the C32 (except for the wheels and exhaust) also killed the resale.

Yeah.... & from everything I have read/heard, the AMG engines are bulletproof, another plus for buying one used with peace of mind. Also, for some reason, I feel that a one year old C63 is less likely to have been abused than say, a used M3 -- different buyer demographics for the cars. Two reasons to consider used on the AMG's

[hks786]

Originally Posted by Hans Delbruck

Yeah.... & from everything I have read/heard, the AMG engines are bulletproof, another plus for buying one used with peace of mind. Also, for some reason, I feel that a one year old C63 is less likely to have been abused than say, a used M3 -- different buyer demographics for the cars. Two reasons to consider used on the AMG's

Hmmmm, good points. Yeah you're right about AMG engines. Each engine is handbuilt by one engineer I think...

[Breyton E36]

Originally Posted by dr325i

WOW, 6.2L to get 451 Horses out. M3 takes a "tiny" 4.0L and squeezes 414 HP. With 6.2L, Bimmer would get out 800 HP...
Sounds like Chrysler has too much influence on that GAS GUZZLER!

Don't be ignorant. 800hp out of a naturaly aspirated 6.2 liter V8 might not be so reliable as a street car.

Reason BMW makes 414hp or 420hp (depending on where you are) from their 4.0L is because it revs to makes it's HP with a sacrifice in TQ due to low displacement. Mercedes on the other hand uses high displacement to make a lot of TQ and the 6.2L going into the C class is actually detuned otherwise it makes 500hp+ like in the E63, CLS63. Reason the Merc motor isn't making 100+ hp per liter is because it cannot rev as high cause it has a long stroke.

Yes BMW could make a 6L Making 600hp+ but it would have to be a V12, so it could retain the short stroke the M3 V8 & M5/M6 V10 use.

It's going to be tough to call which car will have the advanage on the street and which will own on the track. BMW has the weight advantage but the Merc has emough power to have a better power to weight ratio than the M. The Merc wont handle as good im sure.

[M3onTwomps]

Originally Posted by bobbo

Most likely, take your side now.

Can I wait until I've driven both?

[RussianM3_dude]

Well, AMG seem to have significantly upped their game and the new M3 in early reports seems to have gone soft, so I would definetly look out for the Benz.

[Robert]

For daily commuting I take the C63 over the M3 but the M3 has always been a good compromise between a weekday commuter and a weekend trackstar.