E92 M3 and C63 AMG car swappin' and corner weighin'

[Hans Delbruck]

Originally Posted by ///Mantis

shhhhh maybe im jealous no not really.... MB drivers are dicks and they gonna try to smoke me now, and if they do im gonna be pissed and do dangerous things to make them total their cars

Mantis, you're kidding right? I'm not familiar with your style yet.... but...

No way. I drove them back to back, in the heat, on the street. They are VERY even acceleration-wise. swamp may think differently. Don't worry about lining up with one. Just worry about coppers.... and of course the innocent pedestrians. (they will be deafened by the noise from these 2 exhausts)

[WCH]

Swamp and Hans -

Thanks for the great impressions. My 1200 mile service is just around the corner and I can't wait to experience what you described about Swamp's car for myself.

Although I ended up choosing the M3, I know exactly what you are saying Hans. I have drifted through several cars, knowing in my heart of hearts that I have always wanted an M3. The problem is that I didn't realize it until I went through 3 other cars. Now that I have the M3, it's obvious - just like you feel about your C63.

It's possible with gas prices that we should all enjoy these great cars as it may be a while before we see another period where auto companies are putting their research into performance (as opposed to efficiency).

[sayemthree]

Originally Posted by Hans Delbruck

However there are no pics of the scale at that point.

how about the SUpermodel!?!?

[hellrotm]

Great work guys, nice thread.

[kenwelch]

These are the pictures of Swamp's car on the scale.
Important the scale readings are without driver and 1/4 tank of fuel.

Thanks to Hans and Swamp for the "Summer School" lesson.

[kenwelch]

While there is not likely anyone trading their C63 or E92 M3 for an older E36 M3, I thought there might be some interest in the numbers since I weighed my car the same day.
Stock 1995 M3 Automatic with about 7/8 tank of fuel
No driver LF 818 lbs. RF 830 lbs
LR 799 lbs. RR 824 lbs
Total 3271 lbs.

With Driver (184 lbs)
LF 886 lbs RF 849 lbs
LR 870 lbs RR 849 lbs
Total 3455 lbs.


My comments regarding the C63 and E92 M3 as a passenger.
I have taught college level automotive power train (both manual and automatic transmissions) for 32 years, built modified automatics for street and strip use, and many drag strip passes in a SS/DA 1970 Dodge Challenger (426 Hemi w/automatic) 10.50s at 130 MPH, but that was when the Challenger was a new car in 1970.

Both cars can shift “automatically” very smooth and initial movement from a stop is smooth for both cars. What some have written about delay in the M3 is not noticeable to the passenger. The DCT initial movement is much better than riding with most manual transmission drivers that I have experienced as a passenger. I am often diagnosing problem transmissions and clutches and riding with high school or younger college automotive students, which generally has me riding with inexperienced drivers.

Both of these cars have plenty of power to scare the women and children in your neighborhood. Full Throttle shifts are drag race fast with the “neck snap” award going to the M3, but the C63 gets the “scream of the beast” award. To be fair Hans had the C63 loaded with 4 adults (my wife enjoyed the “E” ticket ride also) on a VERY hot evening which was killing the power. We could have had a barbecue under the hood of the C63 when we returned to the shop. Swamp provided a private lesson in the M3 so there were two less passengers.

Thanks again to Hans and Swamp for the education. I learned much about the M-DCT tricks and I’m not far from saying goodbye to my old friend the E36 M3.

[sayemthree]

the scales can not tell you how low is the CG, nor can they measure the moment of inertia. I have read that BMW improved both in the e92 M3.... by moving the wt lower and to the middle of the car thus improving both. so even tho there is more wt. it is in the best places.

[ersin]

Originally Posted by Hans Delbruck

Well... I do like big cheeseburgers. ...

And you're only 100 lbs?

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by sayemthree

the scales can not tell you how low is the CG, nor can they measure the moment of inertia. I have read that BMW improved both in the e92 M3.... by moving the wt lower and to the middle of the car thus improving both. so even tho there is more wt. it is in the best places.

Good points, the plastic fenders and CF roof were absolutely efforts to manage weight and reduce moments.

[e46e92love]

Originally Posted by Hans Delbruck

M3 or C63?

Fine dining? or Cheeseburger?

What I admire, appreciate and aspire to? Or what makes me comfortable, content and ultimately satisfied?

(The supermodel? Or the loving wife? )

These are how I'd compare my experience with these two cars, and yes... it's completely subjective. My thoughts aren't really about the numbers and performance figures, it's about why one person would choose one car over another. IMO, while the character of these cars is very different, their performance ability on the street is strikingly similar.

If you don't want to wade through the bs of my mental process, scroll down to the symbol below to see my short "review"

Otherwise:
To be thorough, I should preface my thoughts by rewinding a little bit, to explain how I arrived where I did. Two years ago, in 2006, I was one year into my wait on the M3, and $500 dollars away from sealing the deal on a lightly used C55 (yes an MB!) to drive "while I waited for the M3" (dumb reason to buy a car: "while I'm waiting" but that's yet another story) The dealer finally came to 500 dollars within my asking price on the C55, it was a good deal, but by that time, I'd been negotiating for 2 hours. I'd had too much time to think about laying down that cash, got cold feet, decided I'd rather keep my money, and walked. Interesting parallel to my personality, perhaps. I think when I just have to fight too hard for something... and it becomes frustrating for me... maybe, things aren't meant to go that way.

Two months after I walked on the C55 deal, I bought one of the very first BMW Z4 M Coupes. It's a stunning car, and I love BMWs. I bought it from an out of state dealer and had it shipped... so I'd never test driven one. I sold it 8 months later because ... I didn't like it. That's another story too!

Anyhow... last month I gave up waiting on the M3 and bought the C63 instead. I had been thinking about it, I test drove it, and this particular car, in the color I wanted, just fell into my lap. My gut said this is what I needed to do. Why? I just felt more comfortable going with the C63. I took into account all the cars I've gone through, and why I've enjoyed some, and got rid of others quickly (and lost my money)....
And (this is the important part!) despite the fact I had admired everything the M3 represents (the F1 heritage, the BMW brand, the engineering), appreciated the leading-edge technology and BMW for putting it in the car, and aspired to put myself in driver's seat.... The C63 is the car that appeals to me in ways that in my REALITY, are a better fit. I'm not justifying, or rationalizing. The C63, despite wearing the MB logo, and being 4000 lbs, is more in my automotive comfort zone... yes, even as an enthusiast. While I appreciate and admire the capabilities of the M3, knowing me, and what I've enjoyed in my cars in the past... is simplicity and what I'd call "worry-free" driving. That I feel I have that, in the C63, is what makes it right for me.

Simple stuff like a plain old slushbox and fixed suspension... inferior to the M3 with DCT and EDC? YES. But for me? NO. Instead it makes me feel that this simple car is easier to use, less things to go haywire, and those things affect me every time I get in the car. Perception is reality. I think I have finally figured out what truly makes me happy, and satisfied. I didn't want to make another car-buying mistake.


BUT, I suppose here is where I contradict myself. My impressions of M-DCT were not what I expected. First of all, at takeoff, "around town" ... it felt very "normal." I was not sitting there thinking "oh my gawd this is a high tech piece of machinery and what if it breaks?!" Because DCT feels just like a very smooth automatic. You can't feel the gear changes, it's unreal. And the lag on takeoff people are chattering about? I felt no lag. The only lag might have been my timid foot, fearing that I'd unleash an uncontrollable beast if I dropped the hammer!

swamp put the car in the most aggressive shift mode, and floored it down a nice smooth straight. WOW WOW WOW. This is THE BEST transmission I've ever felt in a street car. It's what I'd think a sportbike was like. That baaHHH baaHHH baaHHH, just accelerating and banging off gears. I can't imagine better acceleration than this DCT is capable of. It puts ALL the power to the ground. This "surge" debate... I won't go there. I'll just say that there was no doubt in my mind that the surge is just a byproduct of INCREASED acceleration, nothing else. It's not there so we can be entertained. It's surging because the car isn't tempering the shifts to keep us comfy, it's putting ALL the power to the ground, in the instant it shifts. IT IS GREAT.

So, buy the DCT. It's a winner. As I told swamp and ken afterward, if I'd had the chance to get a ride like the one I just got, I probably would have waited for my M3 Sedan w/DCT. The DCT makes the car, because... the experience is unique and it IMPROVES the performance of the car. I don't want to upset you manual guys though either. I think DCT is having some teething pains according to the board. But at this point, I can say that this "unit" felt very stout. I have full confidence in the hardware and it is already a great piece in its present form. The glitches can be overblown when we start reading about them on the internet. In person, in reality, it feels good.

If I could go back 6 weeks and do it all again, knowing what I know NOW, I still would make the same choice! That might not make sense... but I've had time to live with the C63, and it really is what I'm looking for. The M3 has superior technology as far as performance, but the C63 has the ease of use, and it's the fast German tank I've been seeking for several years.

Everyone wants to know which one is faster. My answer: on the street, they're the same. My car felt a little sluggish yesterday to be honest... and I think the heat affects the AMG (uhh, that's what i've read on the internetss) but I'm sure it affects the M3 as well. All I know swamp... is that as I motored home at almost midnight last night, with the external temp reading 72 degrees... I got serious wheelspin off the line. YAY! The car felt like a different animal. Not THAT much different, but enough to think temperature did hamper our fun in the late afternoon 100 degree sun.

This has been an extensive ramble and I'm sure I left out at least 50% of what I intended to say, and added 50% of boring useless info.. but... there are my intial impressions.

swamp and I are open for further questions! Thanks ken and swamp for the opportunity!

Isn't the answer clear to everyone? Is not the solution smacking you all in the face? Buy the C63 for the nice night out on the town, and long drives with the woman and friends and have the //M3 there for runs at the track/autocross/meets and when you feel like being a hooligan on a cool summer night or beautiful weekend afternoon.

Only problem now is where to find the 140K to get both into the garage

[e46e92love]

Originally Posted by ///Mantis

that's the saddest thing ever

fuck C63, irvine is full of them already. i saw like 5 just yesterday in irvine. they're ugly as shit.

Originally Posted by Hans Delbruck

C'mon man.... can we keep this thread civil? I restrained myself from saying all the great things about the C63 so you little kids wouldn't get your underoos in a bunch. Have fun going out tonight eating sushi with shallow women.....

BTW I love sushi AND cheeseburgers!

Oh AND... "I saw like 20 M3's yesterday"... they were all sitting on a dealer lot, waiting for some sucker to buy them. Two can play this game, so let's not get started. It will only end up at the track, with your Bimmer getting schooled by a Honda with a big ricey wing!

Hate to burst Cali's bubble but there is WAYYYYYY too much money out there and way too many people spending other people's money (cough, cough, Mom and Dad's)....throw in a shallow, look at what I got attitude and what you got is a lot of expensive cars. Course, you guys have the beautiful beaches so if I were you I would be laughing and east coast boys like me and telling us to go f**k ourselves

Anyway, no matter what you buy out there you will see a dozen of them a day (except say for F430's or things along those lines). So just enjoy your car //Mantis, and if you want exclusivity, move east where depsite their being plenty of money in places, it does seem that high end cars are a little bit less common?

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by e46e92love

Isn't the answer clear to everyone? Is not the solution smacking you all in the face? Buy the C63 for the nice night out on the town, and long drives with the woman and friends and have the //M3 there for runs at the track/autocross/meets and when you feel like being a hooligan on a cool summer night or beautiful weekend afternoon.

The only problem with that is the the suspension is quite a bit more comfortable on the M3 than the AMG. Despite producing substantially better slalom and lap times at the same time.

[footie]

I don't agree that the answer is to have both, the answer is to have one - the M3 but to choose the right gearbox - M-DCT. Then you have the relaxed manner of the AMG with the all out ability of the M3 and this is the reason why the M3 has softened it's extreme character, the car can now appeal to a much wider public but to the despair of it's die-hard fan club.

[Hans Delbruck]

Originally Posted by swamp2

The only problem with that is the the suspension is quite a bit more comfortable on the M3 than the AMG. Despite producing substantially better slalom and lap times at the same time.

I'm gonna guess some of the reason the M3 is lighter is because it has less sound-deadening than the C63. I was suprised at the noticable difference in road noise between the 2 cars. The C63, with its quiet cabin and that big V8 loping along at 2000rpm doing 80mph, cruises very nicely as long as the road isn't horribly bumpy.

As far as lap and slalom times, I wonder what would happen if the C63 wore the M3's larger and stickier Michelin Pilot Sports?

I could never have just one car. I'm crazy. Even when I was much more financially-challenged, I had an MGB to go with my daily driver.

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by Hans Delbruck

I'm gonna guess some of the reason the M3 is lighter is because it has less sound-deadening than the C63. I was suprised at the noticable difference in road noise between the 2 cars. The C63, with its quiet cabin and that big V8 loping along at 2000rpm doing 80mph, cruises very nicely as long as the road isn't horribly bumpy.

As far as lap and slalom times, I wonder what would happen if the C63 wore the M3's larger and stickier Michelin Pilot Sports?

I could never have just one car. I'm crazy. Even when I was much more financially-challenged, I had an MGB to go with my daily driver.

I think by far the largest contributing factor is simply the sheer size difference between the two - larger car = more metal everywhere = heavier. Sound deading materials are not so heavy, absorptive nor damping materials.

I think your ears are better than mine. I didn't really think the C63 was much quieter than the M3 the tested overall SPLs (A weighted) are (from Car and Driver):

Car/Idle/Cruise/WOT
C63/49/68/79
M3/50/74/85

Based on the near 5 second beating the M3 gave the C63 on a 2.7mi track (as tested by Motor Trend) I'm not sure how much the tires would really help the C63 .

[Keto]

This is a good read y'all. The suspension would be the deal-breaker for me (if you've been in my pics thread, you've seen my roads).

FWIW, Hans makes an excellent point when he/she discusses what he/she wants in the car: these cars are not aimed at exactly the same driver. We tend to lose sight of that. Same with the RS4.

[nrgy]

Originally Posted by swamp2

I think your ears are better than mine. I didn't really think the C63 was much quieter than the M3 the tested overall SPLs (A weighted) are (from Car and Driver):

Car/Idle/Cruise/WOT
C63/49/68/79
M3/50/74/85

Based on the near 5 second beating the M3 gave the C63 on a 2.7mi track (as tested by Motor Trend) I'm not sure how much the tires would really help the C63 .

Just thought I'd chime in on the subject in support of the AMG as I have had my C63 for about 6 weeks now, and I too was waiting for the new M3 for nearly 5 years before making my decision last fall.

But anyhow in regards to sound level, at cruise and WOT 6 db is fairly significant. 3 db is clearly noticeable while an increase of 10 db would be twice as loud. Obviously this isn't an issue for most, nor is it for me, but just wanted to point out that while 6 db might not seem like a lot, it is definatley discernable.

Also, regarding lap times that people love to compare, the M crowd is very quick to post times where the M3 is clearly the victor, yet say boo when shown times where the C63 and M3 are nearly identical or very close. Not to mention these former times are posted from magazines that seem to have the least credibility on this site such as Motor Trend and Top Gear, yet seem to always be quoted. I remember before any comparisons were made, folks here were already condeming the upcoming Top Gear review, and said to wait for the Sport Auto times as they were one of the last trustworthy publications. But now nearly 6 months later, rarely are the Sport Auto times or more respected magazines times posted, but rather those of Top Gear and Motor Trend.

These comparisons are rarely mentioned around here:

Autozeitung Test Track
M3 E92 = 1:40.1
M3 E90 = 1:38.7
C63 = 1:40.0

Hockenheim Short Lap (Sport Auto)
M3 E92 = 1:14.3
M3 E90 = 1:15.2
C63 = 1:15.2

Hockenheim GP
M3 E90 = 2:02.7
C63 = 2:04.5

I won't deny that the M3 will post better times more consistently, but a lot of people make the C63 out to be a pig on the track. Obviously it is capable of turning out fast times; it just requires a bit more seat time to learn the car's behavior.

[Hans Delbruck]

Originally Posted by swamp2

I think by far the largest contributing factor is simply the sheer size difference between the two - larger car = more metal everywhere = heavier. Sound deading materials are not so heavy, absorptive nor damping materials.
Car/Idle/Cruise/WOT
C63/49/68/79
M3/50/74/85

Here are the dimensions of each car for reference. The C63 is longer, but a little narrower. Maybe what struck you about its size was its "larger than life" presence! j/k!

M3:
181.7 L
71.5 W
55.8 H

C63:
186 L
70.7 W
56.6 H


Road noise of 68 vs 74 (measured in db?) spread is pretty big IMO. I thought the M3 was more around 70. 74 is right up there with my Evo!

Originally Posted by Keto

This is a good read y'all. The suspension would be the deal-breaker for me (if you've been in my pics thread, you've seen my roads).

FWIW, Hans makes an excellent point when he/she discusses what he/she wants in the car: these cars are not aimed at exactly the same driver. We tend to lose sight of that. Same with the RS4.

Yeah, the fact the C63 is heavy and solid seems to exaggerate the stiffness. It's pretty bad on some sections of freeway, but most roads are fine.

Thanks for your support. I agree that the M3 is the best track weapon of the three. Although I am fortunate to be able to have a more dedicated track car.

[ybbiz34]

Originally Posted by nrgy

Just thought I'd chime in on the subject in support of the AMG as I have had my C63 for about 6 weeks now, and I too was waiting for the new M3 for nearly 5 years before making my decision last fall.

But anyhow in regards to sound level, at cruise and WOT 6 db is fairly significant. 3 db is clearly noticeable while an increase of 10 db would be twice as loud. Obviously this isn't an issue for most, nor is it for me, but just wanted to point out that while 6 db might not seem like a lot, it is definatley discernable.

Also, regarding lap times that people love to compare, the M crowd is very quick to post times where the M3 is clearly the victor, yet say boo when shown times where the C63 and M3 are nearly identical or very close. Not to mention these former times are posted from magazines that seem to have the least credibility on this site such as Motor Trend and Top Gear, yet seem to always be quoted. I remember before any comparisons were made, folks here were already condeming the upcoming Top Gear review, and said to wait for the Sport Auto times as they were one of the last trustworthy publications. But now nearly 6 months later, rarely are the Sport Auto times or more respected magazines times posted, but rather those of Top Gear and Motor Trend.

These comparisons are rarely mentioned around here:

Autozeitung Test Track
M3 E92 = 1:40.1
M3 E90 = 1:38.7
C63 = 1:40.0

Hockenheim Short Lap (Sport Auto)
M3 E92 = 1:14.3
M3 E90 = 1:15.2
C63 = 1:15.2

Hockenheim GP
M3 E90 = 2:02.7
C63 = 2:04.5

I won't deny that the M3 will post better times more consistently, but a lot of people make the C63 out to be a pig on the track. Obviously it is capable of turning out fast times; it just requires a bit more seat time to learn the car's behavior.

Nice post! Welcome to the forum.

[Hans Delbruck]

Originally Posted by nrgy

Just thought I'd chime in on the subject in support of the AMG as I have had my C63 for about 6 weeks now, and I too was waiting for the new M3 for nearly 5 years before making my decision last fall.

But anyhow in regards to sound level, at cruise and WOT 6 db is fairly significant. 3 db is clearly noticeable while an increase of 10 db would be twice as loud. Obviously this isn't an issue for most, nor is it for me, but just wanted to point out that while 6 db might not seem like a lot, it is definatley discernable.

Also, regarding lap times that people love to compare, the M crowd is very quick to post times where the M3 is clearly the victor, yet say boo when shown times where the C63 and M3 are nearly identical or very close. Not to mention these former times are posted from magazines that seem to have the least credibility on this site such as Motor Trend and Top Gear, yet seem to always be quoted. I remember before any comparisons were made, folks here were already condeming the upcoming Top Gear review, and said to wait for the Sport Auto times as they were one of the last trustworthy publications. But now nearly 6 months later, rarely are the Sport Auto times or more respected magazines times posted, but rather those of Top Gear and Motor Trend.

These comparisons are rarely mentioned around here:

Autozeitung Test Track
M3 E92 = 1:40.1
M3 E90 = 1:38.7
C63 = 1:40.0

Hockenheim Short Lap (Sport Auto)
M3 E92 = 1:14.3
M3 E90 = 1:15.2
C63 = 1:15.2

Hockenheim GP
M3 E90 = 2:02.7
C63 = 2:04.5

I won't deny that the M3 will post better times more consistently, but a lot of people make the C63 out to be a pig on the track. Obviously it is capable of turning out fast times; it just requires a bit more seat time to learn the car's behavior.

Thanks for your informative post, and welcome back to M3post!

IMO, neither of these cars are optimal track cars. They're both heavy, and expensive. They will go thru brakes and tires quickly and repair costs are going to be high. I don't know any serious track folks who take a $70K street car on the track with regularity. OK, maybe a C6 Z06

[JEllis]

Originally Posted by Hans Delbruck

M3 or C63?

Fine dining? or Cheeseburger?

What I admire, appreciate and aspire to? Or what makes me comfortable, content and ultimately satisfied?

(The supermodel? Or the loving wife? )

These are how I'd compare my experience with these two cars, and yes... it's completely subjective. My thoughts aren't really about the numbers and performance figures, it's about why one person would choose one car over another. IMO, while the character of these cars is very different, their performance ability on the street is strikingly similar.

If you don't want to wade through the bs of my mental process, scroll down to the symbol below to see my short "review"

Otherwise:
To be thorough, I should preface my thoughts by rewinding a little bit, to explain how I arrived where I did. Two years ago, in 2006, I was one year into my wait on the M3, and $500 dollars away from sealing the deal on a lightly used C55 (yes an MB!) to drive "while I waited for the M3" (dumb reason to buy a car: "while I'm waiting" but that's yet another story) The dealer finally came to 500 dollars within my asking price on the C55, it was a good deal, but by that time, I'd been negotiating for 2 hours. I'd had too much time to think about laying down that cash, got cold feet, decided I'd rather keep my money, and walked. Interesting parallel to my personality, perhaps. I think when I just have to fight too hard for something... and it becomes frustrating for me... maybe, things aren't meant to go that way.

Two months after I walked on the C55 deal, I bought one of the very first BMW Z4 M Coupes. It's a stunning car, and I love BMWs. I bought it from an out of state dealer and had it shipped... so I'd never test driven one. I sold it 8 months later because ... I didn't like it. That's another story too!

Anyhow... last month I gave up waiting on the M3 and bought the C63 instead. I had been thinking about it, I test drove it, and this particular car, in the color I wanted, just fell into my lap. My gut said this is what I needed to do. Why? I just felt more comfortable going with the C63. I took into account all the cars I've gone through, and why I've enjoyed some, and got rid of others quickly (and lost my money)....
And (this is the important part!) despite the fact I had admired everything the M3 represents (the F1 heritage, the BMW brand, the engineering), appreciated the leading-edge technology and BMW for putting it in the car, and aspired to put myself in driver's seat.... The C63 is the car that appeals to me in ways that in my REALITY, are a better fit. I'm not justifying, or rationalizing. The C63, despite wearing the MB logo, and being 4000 lbs, is more in my automotive comfort zone... yes, even as an enthusiast. While I appreciate and admire the capabilities of the M3, knowing me, and what I've enjoyed in my cars in the past... is simplicity and what I'd call "worry-free" driving. That I feel I have that, in the C63, is what makes it right for me.

Simple stuff like a plain old slushbox and fixed suspension... inferior to the M3 with DCT and EDC? YES. But for me? NO. Instead it makes me feel that this simple car is easier to use, less things to go haywire, and those things affect me every time I get in the car. Perception is reality. I think I have finally figured out what truly makes me happy, and satisfied. I didn't want to make another car-buying mistake.


BUT, I suppose here is where I contradict myself. My impressions of M-DCT were not what I expected. First of all, at takeoff, "around town" ... it felt very "normal." I was not sitting there thinking "oh my gawd this is a high tech piece of machinery and what if it breaks?!" Because DCT feels just like a very smooth automatic. You can't feel the gear changes, it's unreal. And the lag on takeoff people are chattering about? I felt no lag. The only lag might have been my timid foot, fearing that I'd unleash an uncontrollable beast if I dropped the hammer!

swamp put the car in the most aggressive shift mode, and floored it down a nice smooth straight. WOW WOW WOW. This is THE BEST transmission I've ever felt in a street car. It's what I'd think a sportbike was like. That baaHHH baaHHH baaHHH, just accelerating and banging off gears. I can't imagine better acceleration than this DCT is capable of. It puts ALL the power to the ground. This "surge" debate... I won't go there. I'll just say that there was no doubt in my mind that the surge is just a byproduct of INCREASED acceleration, nothing else. It's not there so we can be entertained. It's surging because the car isn't tempering the shifts to keep us comfy, it's putting ALL the power to the ground, in the instant it shifts. IT IS GREAT.

So, buy the DCT. It's a winner. As I told swamp and ken afterward, if I'd had the chance to get a ride like the one I just got, I probably would have waited for my M3 Sedan w/DCT. The DCT makes the car, because... the experience is unique and it IMPROVES the performance of the car. I don't want to upset you manual guys though either. I think DCT is having some teething pains according to the board. But at this point, I can say that this "unit" felt very stout. I have full confidence in the hardware and it is already a great piece in its present form. The glitches can be overblown when we start reading about them on the internet. In person, in reality, it feels good.

If I could go back 6 weeks and do it all again, knowing what I know NOW, I still would make the same choice! That might not make sense... but I've had time to live with the C63, and it really is what I'm looking for. The M3 has superior technology as far as performance, but the C63 has the ease of use, and it's the fast German tank I've been seeking for several years.

Everyone wants to know which one is faster. My answer: on the street, they're the same. My car felt a little sluggish yesterday to be honest... and I think the heat affects the AMG (uhh, that's what i've read on the internetss) but I'm sure it affects the M3 as well. All I know swamp... is that as I motored home at almost midnight last night, with the external temp reading 72 degrees... I got serious wheelspin off the line. YAY! The car felt like a different animal. Not THAT much different, but enough to think temperature did hamper our fun in the late afternoon 100 degree sun.

This has been an extensive ramble and I'm sure I left out at least 50% of what I intended to say, and added 50% of boring useless info.. but... there are my intial impressions.

swamp and I are open for further questions! Thanks ken and swamp for the opportunity!

Great write up... Swamp is a great guy for showing off his ride and DCT for some us.

For those of you sitting on the fence in regards to DCT, heed the words of Hans, Swamp, and I. The Lags/glitches talked about on the forums are very knitpicky things that appear like big deals because we have long threads addressing them....

Jason

[footie]

I'm not totally sure on this but I thought every 3dbs was double the volume. Maybe one of our sound engineering nerds could tell us if this is true.

On the matter of whether the M3 is that much better of a track animal, does it really matter that much anyway, like who here has solely bought the M3 for track work and at that how often will it be there in percentage of time compared to normal driving. Some manufacturers use track times and stuff to pormo their cars but the reality is that daily driving and how the thing performs there is the most important.

As a daily drive the C63 may prove to be the more enjoyable of the two, it's quiter as Hans said, it's get the better interior and seats (personal opinion), the steering wheel is a tactile delight, an engine better suited to normal traffic demanding performance and it got slightly more space. On the M3's defence it's slightly more enjoyable to drive in spirited motoring, it's now has a gearbox which can compete with the auto in the C63 in auto mode and performs much better in manual, it's residuals should be better and it's slightly cheaper.

It's more a case of picking the brand and looks that appeal to you more than just picking purely on their ability around a track, that's the kind of thing a total dick does.