2012 BMW M3 vs. 2012 C63 AMG Coupe

[Judah]

I hope this isn\'t a repost.... enjoy !

http://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons/2012-bmw-m3-coupe-page-3?redirect=no

[Nine]

What is really annoying about the C63AMG lineup is the amount of tires it chews up, buying tires twice a year would annoy the hell out of me.

[991GT3]

^^^yeah big torquey rear wheel drive cars with R compound tires will be expensive. My CLK63 Black Series went through tires every 5000 miles.

[SamS]

Better link: http://www.caranddriver.com/comparis...mparison-tests

[SamS]

If you look at the test sheets, C&D actually drove a MY2011. Not that it's much difference, but still...

http://media.caranddriver.com/files/...-m3-jan-12.pdf

Also, they matched the 6MT M3 to the Merc. Should have used DCT

[TheBingoBalls]

Just read the article and it completely amazes me that the E92 M3 is THAT good compared to the competition even near the end of it's life. What put a grin on my face is that Mercedes can keep adding power but if the chassis isn't there at that level, you're not going to unseat the M3.

[e1000]

C&D is pretty heavily BMW biased IMO. Still good to see the M3 win, for whatever that means.

[mahmud///M]

M3 ftw

[IFX]

lol.. oh boy. here we go..

[Richbot]

Lots of ways it could have come out, they used a low-option M3 so the M3 lost 4 points on features and amenities, would have been a couple tenths quicker if it had the DCT, they didn't have to option the C63 up so high and give it such a big price disadvantage, I thought the styling ding was BS though I do like the M3 better, yada yada. I agree with the end result but it's funny they didn't mention the VIR lap times, I bet the C63 was faster and they didn't want their server to crash from all the indignant internet stupidity over a comparison test. That's a hell of a lot of acceleration deficit to make up for in the corners and braking zones...

[-=Hot|Ice=-]

Originally Posted by CAPSGOD

Haha the C63 lost by 1 point! E92's rear seat space saved the day

Did you honestly expect any other car to actually win a Car&Driver comparo that includes a BMW? I was driving my 3er and I unsubscribed from them because I was tired of reading BMW this, BMW that. I wanted honest reviews...so I subscribed to EVO. They did the same thing with the Porsche 911, M3, GT-R comparo back in 08. The M3 won because it had usable trunk. What does that have to do with the cars performance? Different strokes for different folks.

[Richbot]

The only thing from BMW that CD consistently puts ahead of other stuff is the 3 and most M models. Everything else has been stomped at some point in the past 10 years, including the E46 M3.

I have a feeling they'll like the E63 more than the F10 M5 too...

[Gearhead999s]

Originally Posted by Richbot

Lots of ways it could have come out, they used a low-option M3 so the M3 lost 4 points on features and amenities, would have been a couple tenths quicker if it had the DCT, they didn't have to option the C63 up so high and give it such a big price disadvantage, I thought the styling ding was BS though I do like the M3 better, yada yada. I agree with the end result but it's funny they didn't mention the VIR lap times, I bet the C63 was faster and they didn't want their server to crash from all the indignant internet stupidity over a comparison test. That's a hell of a lot of acceleration deficit to make up for in the corners and braking zones...

I drove a C63 sedan with the performance pack at Mosport as a medical chase car for 2 days at a race bike weekend and there is no way you can compare the handling of that car to a M3.Way harsher & noisy on the street and you feel quite disconnected while trying to throw it around on track and is very reluctant to rotate on corner entry.
The engine is nice but the transmission is quite lethargic compared to the M-DCT in my car.I know for sure an M3 is quicker around any of the race tracks that I lap at even with the extra power as I have passed a few over the last year on the track.They might be quicker in a straight line but in the corners the M3 will reel them in

[alms211]

Originally Posted by -=Hot|Ice=-

Did you honestly expect any other car to actually win a Car&Driver comparo that includes a BMW? I was driving my 3er and I unsubscribed from them because I was tired of reading BMW this, BMW that. I wanted honest reviews...so I subscribed to EVO. They did the same thing with the Porsche 911, M3, GT-R comparo back in 08. The M3 won because it had usable trunk. What does that have to do with the cars performance? Different strokes for different folks.

So did you then unsubscribe from EVO and take out a subscrition to Nismo Magazine so you could read the results you were hoping for?

[Richbot]

Not saying it handles better, not saying it could do it more than one lap in a row, but I bet the C63 coupe has the ability to turn a quicker lap. If the ISF can get within a couple thousandths with 70 less hp and 150lbs less than the C63, I'm having trouble imagining how the handling could be THAT bad.

Maybe they'll publish that part of the test in the hard copy, this issue is going in the "M3" drawer for sure

[Powerslide]

Originally Posted by Richbot

Lots of ways it could have come out, they used a low-option M3 so the M3 lost 4 points on features and amenities, would have been a couple tenths quicker if it had the DCT, they didn't have to option the C63 up so high and give it such a big price disadvantage, I thought the styling ding was BS though I do like the M3 better, yada yada. I agree with the end result but it's funny they didn't mention the VIR lap times, I bet the C63 was faster and they didn't want their server to crash from all the indignant internet stupidity over a comparison test. That's a hell of a lot of acceleration deficit to make up for in the corners and braking zones...

I was also wondering why they didn't post the lap times. Perhaps the C63 coupe is going to be one of the cars featured in the next, annual lightning lap at VIR (perhaps along with a ZCP M3) - as neither of these specific versions of the C63 and M3 have previously been featured in the first four annual "lightning laps." (?)

[PhillyNate]

Guys and gals, just face it, this car is simply worthy of legend status at this point. Just in time for the end of this generation. I've had a subscription to C&D for about 13 years and is probably one of the biggest aids in getting a feel for BMW's before I'd ever driven or could afford one. THEY ARE BIASED but what about the countless comparos this car has won in other publications. I own an M3, I'M BIASED but honestly there must be a reason this car is mentioned in the same breath of the only car it can't beat amongst enthusiasts. PORSCHE 911. The M3 only trumps that car in practicality. Also you must ask yourself is a 911 $20k to $25k better. I plan on asking myself this very question in a few years.
This M3 is something special folks and not because I say so but because everybody else says so too. At this price point and class in the words of Tina Turner it's "Simply the Best." If it isn't why do so many manufacturers aspire to beat it? Just my observations. My flamesuit is full on.

[Powerslide]

[QUOTE=PhillyNate;10897955]Guys and gals, just face it, this car is simply worthy of legend status at this point. Just in time for the end of this generation. I've had a subscription to C

[-=Hot|Ice=-]

Originally Posted by alms211

This message is hidden because alms211 is on your ignore list.

....

[Ateam]

Not sure why this is such a big surprise given the m3 beat the c63 sedan in a ton of tests. I know there are a bunch of upgrades on the coupe but the chassis is still the chassis and some suspension upgrades cannot change the core balance of the car. I dont think the extra power necessarily makes them favorable in a review or comparo to the m3 because even the original sedan with much less than its current hp was already about as much as the car could put down without smoking tires. Now there is more power but how usable is it in the things they test?

Not surprised. I do not think it has anythin to do with CD. Everyone, like it or not has raved about the m3 from day 1 and its never lost a comparo as far as i know

[clar]

Originally Posted by Ateam

Not sure why this is such a big surprise given the m3 beat the c63 sedan in a ton of tests. I know there are a bunch of upgrades on the coupe but the chassis is still the chassis and some suspension upgrades cannot change the core balance of the car. I dont think the extra power necessarily makes them favorable in a review or comparo to the m3 because even the original sedan with much less than its current hp was already about as much as the car could put down without smoking tires. Now there is more power but how usable is it in the things they test?

Not surprised. I do not think it has anythin to do with CD. Everyone, like it or not has raved about the m3 from day 1 and its never lost a comparo as far as i know

Yeah, in a desperate bid to compete with the M3, AMG has thrown balance into the wind and came up with something with excesive amount of power and weight. M3 threads a fine balance in most of the areas and the end product is sublime balance that can't be easily matched.

[graider]

Originally Posted by 997GT3

^^^yeah big torquey rear wheel drive cars with R compound tires will be expensive. My CLK63 Black Series went through tires every 5000 miles.

that would be awfully annoying.