Car and Driver 2012 M3 ZCP vs. 2012 C63 AMG coupe

[sarddenso]

Originally Posted by penny31

because car and driver knows that they should test sports cars in 6mt

C&D is the mag with the "Save the manual" campaign!

[sameh]

Originally Posted by JIO

The 6-speed in this test is the fastest ever (including DCT) to 150 mph...23.9 seconds. I have every test ever performed on the M3 on a spreadsheet that confirms faster to 150 than any DCT tested. 0-60 these days is an exercise in launch, so I don't care much about 0-60 anymore. I'm more interested in 0-100 and quarter mile times and trap speed. The C63 is doing 120 mph in the quarter and 8.6 to 100! That is fast. DCT would not have helped much except for possibly the launch.The fastest ever for an M3 to 100 was 9.1 seconds and the fastest ever quarter mile was 12.4 @ 114.8. Trap speeds are almost equal in this test car so it's a great representation of the M3.

Interesting in the test notes they said: "Adjustable suspension made no difference in performance". It does make a difference in performance in ZCP vs non-ZCP. Of all the tests (5) with ZCP, the average skidpad test is .962. On the non-ZCP tests (11), the average is .948.

Not to start an MT DCT thingy here but please don't even think that MT and DCT have same straight line accelerations thru 5th gear assuming same driver and conditions. Who can up shift an MT in 0.2 seconds and right on the correct rpm. Give me a break

[Eau Rouge]

A four year old model is still segment king?

[MKE_M3]

Originally Posted by sameh

Not to start an MT DCT thingy here but please don't even think that MT and DCT have same straight line accelerations thru 5th gear assuming same driver and conditions. Who can up shift an MT in 0.2 seconds and right on the correct rpm. Give me a break

Sorry for the n00b question, but in addition to shift speed (obvious DCT advantage) there are three other transmission factors...

1) Does one have better ratios optimized for 1/4 mile or 150mph runs?
2) Does one need to shift an extra time in the 1/4 to 150?
3) Is the extra weight from the DCT enough to matter?

I don't know the answer, but all these things would matter. Also, before you get too excited about all of the magazine test numbers, I believe most of them apply corrections for atmosphere effects and handle those correctons differantly. Add to that driver skill and differant weight from differant options, and its hard so say whether or not one car in a test is faster than another just based on the 'zines quoted performance stats.

I personally think 0-60 (a stat I obsess over) is irrelavent with today's cars, but for some reason I still get giddy when I think that my car may be able to do it so quickly. I think the only value it has is how incredibly prolific it is, but in the current high HP era, it truely only represents a small part of the engine performance. Look at the Audi TT RS that does 0-60 in 3.x seconds, but was no faster in the 1/4 mile than the 1M Coupe.

[klammer]

Once again.... God I love my car!!!!

[Mr. ///M3 RD]

Quote .... "From the manual gearbox to the higher-revving engine, the M3 is the more involving car." end of Quote

Well done Benz ... just a slice short so the M3 is still King for the day and still ~smiling~ for now as for the BMW looking old ... I disagree with the writers that put that description to paper ... I call it ....

Forever young

I did drive the C63 AMG before I got into my third M3 and I must say for my money ... the M3 is the ticket yes sir it sure is.

[BMoney]

Originally Posted by jdemetry

Look at the Audi TT RS that does 0-60 in 3.x seconds, but was no faster in the 1/4 mile than the 1M Coupe.

The DSG TTRS is what ran 0 to 60 in 3.6 and did the 1/4 mile in 12.1. The manual TTRS ran a 4.0 to 60 and similar 1/4 mile time as the 1M Coupe.


http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...trumented-test

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...ad-test-review

[ChrisK]

Originally Posted by klammer

Once again.... God I love my car!!!!

Ohh I so agree.

[MKE_M3]

I love the M pride on this site. I'm a week away from delivery if my third M car, and I have to say I feel it too. This may be the first car in my life I keepfor more than three years

[sarddenso]

Originally Posted by Rolf-Dieter

Quote .... "From the manual gearbox to the higher-revving engine, the M3 is the more involving car." end of Quote

Well done Benz ... just a slice short so the M3 is still King for the day and still ~smiling~ for now as for the BMW looking old ... I disagree with the writers that put that description to paper ... I call it ....

Forever young

I did drive the C63 AMG before I got into my third M3 and I must say for my money ... the M3 is the ticket yes sir it sure is.

I wonder how magazines would rate the AMG if it had a manual?

But for now, for me, M Power all the way!!!

[bigjae1976]

This has been beaten to death and it seems that everyone comes to the same conclusion. No one best car...each are great...and all very different.

[Ateam]

Originally Posted by Rolf-Dieter

Quote .... "From the manual gearbox to the higher-revving engine, the M3 is the more involving car." end of Quote

Well done Benz ... just a slice short so the M3 is still King for the day and still ~smiling~ for now as for the BMW looking old ... I disagree with the writers that put that description to paper ... I call it ....

Forever young

I did drive the C63 AMG before I got into my third M3 and I must say for my money ... the M3 is the ticket yes sir it sure is.

I can't believe you have owned 3 e92 m3s! Just curious, don't you get bored of the car and ever want to try something new for a couple years? I love my m3 and only have had it this past year but no way I would get another one as I am already itching to try something else. That is a lot of m3s!

[Mr. ///M3 RD]

Originally Posted by Ateam

I can't believe you have owned 3 e92 m3s! Just curious, don't you get bored of the car and ever want to try something new for a couple years? I love my m3 and only have had it this past year but no way I would get another one as I am already itching to try something else. That is a lot of m3s!

You may have got that wrong ... yes 3 m3's that is correct First one in 2004 it was a 2002 e46 sold her last year. This spring I purchased a used m3 e92 AW on FR without options .... the plan was to trade her in once I found a new one on a dealers lot with the options I wanted. Initially I wanted a new AW on FR then I liked the Le Mans Blue Metallic so much that I purchased it last week. My dealer found one for me so I picked her up this week Monday.

One can never get tired of an m3 ... there is nothing out there in it's class ... once an m3 driver always an m3 driver

[Mr. ///M3 RD]

Originally Posted by sarddenso

I wonder how magazines would rate the AMG if it had a manual?

But for now, for me, M Power all the way!!!

That would be a different story, however, still the M3 is lighter, feels better (you can only judge that if you try out both) also still looks better then a MB.

Don't get me wrong, I like Mercedes, my DD is one (C350 4MATIC) I also owned in the past a 300 series AMG and a business car it was a M Class all are good quality cars, as is the C63 just not for me.

[Jarhead]

Looks like it's going to take the F82 M3 to dethrone the E92!

[MKE_M3]

Originally Posted by Jarhead

Looks like it's going to take the F82 M3 to dethrone the E92!

I'm not sure if it will NA FTW!!!!

[Mr. ///M3 RD]

Originally Posted by jdemetry

I'm not sure if it will NA FTW!!!!

I do agree ... the men at the ///M Division will always be a step ahead ... like now working on the secret engine that will be under the hood of the next ///M3 generation.

[LTJohn]

One thing that I found very interesting in the C&D specs.

They now report the "center of gravity" for the vehicle.

I find this very interesting, especially if you track your car. Most of the time, companies claim that they have a low CG, but it is never verified. Lots of haters make fun of the CF roof and bmws claim to lower CG....but it is 1.5 inches lower than the benz, and 5 inches lower than the recent Buicks and volvos!

Also of interest is that it is only 1 inch higher than a cayman R, despite the fact that the M3 is 5 inches taller overall, and is also sedan-like in design. That inch could easily be the lower CG of the Boxer motor.
All I can say is BRAVO to BMW's engineers!

Also, one thing that is nice about the MT M3...it is lighter. The scales seem to suggest that it is 90 LBS lighter than the DCT. I would still pick a dct for the track, but in a car that is marginally too heavy to start with, I like the idea that I don't have those 90 lbs ahead of the midline of the car!

[Rex Heat]

[QUOTE=DocJohn;10911265]All I can say is BRAVO to BMW's engineers!
QUOTE]
+1 and thank you to those folks as well.

[quackman]

Originally Posted by Rex Heat

[Car and Driver:] Unlike the C63 sedan, the coupe feels like it has a soupçon of suspension compliance.

So the sedan has better compliance than the coupe? Any reason why? Different suspension tuning between the two?

[davem3fan]

Car and Driver will never hear the end of bitching about declaring the M3 as the winner again.

I'm fine with that.

[JasonCSU]

Originally Posted by MR///M3

why no DCT M3?? that would have done better the the accelerations testing and is more similar to the mercedes gearbox

It's possible that a DCT M3 press car wasn't available. Magazines and other test groups aren't always able to get the exact test vehicles they want when running comparisons.

Originally Posted by penny31

because car and driver knows that they should test sports cars in 6mt

It could also be that Car and Driver is adhering to their own "Save the Manuals" campaign.