|
|
07-05-2007, 07:59 AM | #23 |
Lieutenant General
10199
Rep 14,397
Posts |
I believe the only MT's they offer are in the SLK and the C350.
__________________
Crazy Diamond
|
Appreciate
0
|
07-05-2007, 08:14 AM | #25 |
Lieutenant General
10199
Rep 14,397
Posts |
Benz=thunder BMW=lightning. Torque monster vs screaming bat out of hell. I want both o' genie in the bottle.
__________________
Crazy Diamond
Last edited by gonzo; 08-07-2007 at 11:51 AM.. |
Appreciate
0
|
07-05-2007, 08:16 AM | #26 |
Lieutenant General
10199
Rep 14,397
Posts |
Nor does the 335. Not near as much tq but still. MB will offer as an option.
__________________
Crazy Diamond
|
Appreciate
0
|
07-05-2007, 08:50 AM | #27 | |
Major General
1671
Rep 6,586
Posts |
Quote:
Sounds like Chrysler has too much influence on that GAS GUZZLER! |
|
Appreciate
0
|
07-05-2007, 09:26 AM | #28 |
Lieutenant Colonel
70
Rep 1,565
Posts |
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. |
Appreciate
0
|
07-05-2007, 09:27 AM | #29 |
Lieutenant Colonel
70
Rep 1,565
Posts |
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. |
Appreciate
0
|
07-05-2007, 12:09 PM | #30 |
Captain
196
Rep 657
Posts |
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). |
Appreciate
0
|
07-05-2007, 12:26 PM | #31 |
Major General
2169
Rep 5,364
Posts |
Thats a very good point...
__________________
|
Appreciate
0
|
07-05-2007, 12:48 PM | #32 |
Lieutenant
26
Rep 580
Posts |
|
Appreciate
0
|
07-05-2007, 01:03 PM | #33 |
Captain
196
Rep 657
Posts |
|
Appreciate
0
|
07-05-2007, 01:05 PM | #34 |
Lieutenant
26
Rep 580
Posts |
|
Appreciate
0
|
07-05-2007, 01:14 PM | #35 | |
Captain
196
Rep 657
Posts |
Quote:
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? |
|
Appreciate
0
|
07-05-2007, 01:30 PM | #36 |
Lieutenant
26
Rep 580
Posts |
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).
|
Appreciate
0
|
07-05-2007, 01:58 PM | #37 | |
Major
75
Rep 1,288
Posts |
Quote:
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. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
07-05-2007, 02:08 PM | #38 | |
Lieutenant
26
Rep 580
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
07-05-2007, 03:06 PM | #39 | |
Major
75
Rep 1,288
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
07-05-2007, 03:19 PM | #40 | |
Major General
2169
Rep 5,364
Posts |
Quote:
__________________
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
07-05-2007, 03:24 PM | #41 | |
Private
2
Rep 70
Posts |
Quote:
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. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
07-06-2007, 04:43 AM | #43 |
Private First Class
7
Rep 172
Posts |
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.
|
Appreciate
0
|
07-06-2007, 05:09 AM | #44 |
Major General
414
Rep 6,968
Posts |
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.
|
Appreciate
0
|
Post Reply |
Bookmarks |
|
|