Drove the C63 AMG again.....Then went to drive the ///M3 again

[lvwirelessguy]

Originally Posted by Congoman775

i dont know about that. ive only test driven both cars and i can say without a doubt the C was a smoother ride.

Drive one with the performance package and you'll see it differently

[Congoman775]

Originally Posted by lvwirelessguy

Drive one with the performance package and you'll see it differently

so your saying the performance package... which is an option... makes the ride harsher?


so shouldnt you have said "if you opt for this option the C63's suspension is tighter"

which btw. its still not , but for the sake of conversation.

[lvwirelessguy]

Originally Posted by Congoman775

so your saying the performance package... which is an option... makes the ride harsher?


so shouldnt you have said "if you opt for this option the C63's suspension is tighter"

which btw. its still not , but for the sake of conversation.

Yes it is much tighter than a stock C63, and harsher than the M3 with EDC set to sport.

I have both cars in my garage and the M3 is the more comfortable car to drive

[Congoman775]

Originally Posted by lvwirelessguy

Yes it is much tighter than a stock C63, and harsher than the M3 with EDC set to sport.

I have both cars in my garage and the M3 is the more comfortable car to drive

why did you buy the c63?

[wuyichao]

Originally Posted by Congoman775

why did you buy the c63?

cuz he likes cars and he can afford them?

[wuyichao]

Originally Posted by Heat00

lol, I'm not bashing the 911 or C63 at all.

Just my opinion here, my partner has a brand new 911 turbo but I have not driven it yet.

however, given the additional $67,000, I would probably take the M3 over the $127,000 911 turbo. how much faster can it possibly be? not $67,000 worth imo. lol

as for the C63, like I said above, until I saw one drive by me, I didn't think twice about it.... but that sound truly is unreal.....

I think all in all if you have a C63, 911 turbo, or M3... you can't lose all great machines!!

Porsche- there is no substitution

and they are right!

i will take a 911 turbo over sl63 or m6 any day any time, and they are in the same price catagory

[wuyichao]

Originally Posted by MikeG_C63_AMG

Well in terms of the maintenance I agree with you the M3 cost less. However I can’t agree with you right now about the resell values. The old C55 Vs E46 M3 comparison is invalid now in terms of resale values. The C63 Vs E92 M3 gap has been narrowed or bridged depending on which car magazine or persons opinion you ask. I would think this will affect resale values along with the fact there are just not as many C63’s being produced when compared to E92 M3 or E90 M3. Even though maybe its possible in time you might be right, but as of now the argument the E92 M3 let alone the E90 M3 (both the coupe and sedan won’t have identical resale values) will resale more then the C63 can be valid. It could be possible a used E92 M3 will be worth more (excluding options) then a C63 but not necessarily an E90 M3. Also don’t forget the 6.2L M156 engine has been around and been production (debuted in ML63 AMG) much longer then the 4.0L S65B40. Just from comparing the threads on this board and the Mercedes forums its seems a lot more M3 owners have experience major problem with there engine compared to C63 owners who for the majority have had small check engine light issues due to cam sensors. Finally I don’t disagree that BMW makes a good product and overall the car should last for sometime.

no offense, i drive a c63 too. c63 has shitty resale value. as a matter of fact, all amg models do. my honda odyssey mini van has better resale value than my c63.

[bruce.augenstein@comcast.]

Originally Posted by wuyichao

no offense, i drive a c63 too. c63 has shitty resale value. as a matter of fact, all amg models do. my honda odyssey mini van has better resale value than my c63.

Can't negate your basic point, as I have no knowledge of depreciation rates of AMG cars - but your Honda also retains its resale value better than practically anything else out there.

Bruce

[footie]

Originally Posted by bruce.augenstein@comcast.

Can't negate your basic point, as I have no knowledge of depreciation rates of AMG cars - but your Honda also retains its resale value better than practically anything else out there.

Bruce

F-ALL retain their value now-a-days. I saw one man hand over his car keys at Tesco (supermarket) for a trolley of groceries.

Sorry times ahead.

[a burrito]

This is a really interesting thread. I enjoyed reading it.

To me, the idea is simple. A GT car will never be a sports car, vice versa. As long as the car has the utilities to take four people around and can handle better than your average set of cars, I'm fine with that. Also, it has to look and have a engine exclusive to the car.

My pick would be the c63... I'd rather have the everyday torque than the 8250 redline and marginally better handling that the m3 provides. The c63 is not THAT bad of a handler and if I was to take a car to the track, I don't think a gt saloon would be my first serious choice. Bottom line is that the C is a better Daily Driver to some people.

[Heat00]

this thread is interesting, but what is interesting is all the praise for the c63...

why aren't these people on the c63 forum?

I'll go ahead and defend the M again, against the c63..

a few quick points:

m is way nicer looking
m is way better handling
m is way better ride
m is bmw, c63 is chrysler.. I mean MB... whatever ...
why do all the mags with professional drivers pick the M every time not only over the c63, but over cars like 911's and gt-rs? I didn't even see the c63 in that fight lmao...
maint. covered for 50k, you c63 will cost you a few more pennies over that period, not to mention the terrible gas mileage and tires every week from all the torque.....
ah, I've had enough of this thread... good luck with your c63s people.

[lvwirelessguy]

Originally Posted by Congoman775

why did you buy the c63?

Because it is an awesome car, and more fun in normal traffic than my M3.

Plus I can

[lvwirelessguy]

Originally Posted by Heat00

this thread is interesting, but what is interesting is all the praise for the c63...

why aren't these people on the c63 forum?

I'll go ahead and defend the M again, against the c63..

a few quick points:

m is way nicer looking
m is way better handling
m is way better ride
m is bmw, c63 is chrysler.. I mean MB... whatever ...
why do all the mags with professional drivers pick the M every time not only over the c63, but over cars like 911's and gt-rs? I didn't even see the c63 in that fight lmao...
maint. covered for 50k, you c63 will cost you a few more pennies over that period, not to mention the terrible gas mileage and tires every week from all the torque.....
ah, I've had enough of this thread... good luck with your c63s people.

When you own both cars, you can be on both forums. Cool right?

I am not on here saying the C63 is better than the M3, I am simply saying that people should experience the car first hand before talking out of their asses about it ( sorry but a 5 minute test drive doesn't count ). It is a very worthy competitor to the M3, I still picked my M3 over the C63 when it came time to visit the track this weekend. The M3 is simply better suited for track duty. I will report on the C63's performance at the track when I have had the opportunity to put it thru its paces.

Additionally neither of these cars are for people who are looking to save money, you gotta pay to play. If that includes buying new tires a bit more frequently than with a M3, so be it. I will say this again and I know both cars pretty well since I've driven 10k miles behind the wheel of a E92 M3 and 6k miles behind the wheel of a C63. The C63 has better fuel economy than the M3

[wuyichao]

Originally Posted by lvwirelessguy

When you own both cars, you can be on both forums. Cool right?

I am not on here saying the C63 is better than the M3, I am simply saying that people should experience the car first hand before talking out of their asses about it ( sorry but a 5 minute test drive doesn't count ). It is a very worthy competitor to the M3, I still picked my M3 over the C63 when it came time to visit the track this weekend. The M3 is simply better suited for track duty. I will report on the C63's performance at the track when I have had the opportunity to put it thru its paces.

Additionally neither of these cars are for people who are looking to save money, you gotta pay to play. If that includes buying new tires a bit more frequently than with a M3, so be it. I will say this again and I know both cars pretty well since I've driven 10k miles behind the wheel of a E92 M3 and 6k miles behind the wheel of a C63. The C63 has better fuel economy than the M3

am i misreading this?

a full tank of my c63 yields 200 miles until gas light comes on, thats if i drive it conservatively

my friend's m3 manual gives him AT LEAST 300miles on a full tank.. what he told me..

now the question is if hes lying...

[lvwirelessguy]

Originally Posted by wuyichao

am i misreading this?

a full tank of my c63 yields 200 miles until gas light comes on, thats if i drive it conservatively

my friend's m3 manual gives him AT LEAST 300miles on a full tank.. what he told me..

now the question is if hes lying...

I have gotten 22mpg @ an average speed of 85mph before on long stretches of road

for a 5900 mile trip that lasted almost a month I averaged 19mpg

A big slow motor gets better fuel economy than a smaller higher strung motor

FYI: On my M3 like clockwork the low fuel warning comes on at around 200 miles when I am doing a good mix of city & hwy

[ruff]

Originally Posted by Heat00

this thread is interesting, but what is interesting is all the praise for the c63...

why aren't these people on the c63 forum?

I'll go ahead and defend the M again, against the c63..

a few quick points:

m is way nicer looking
m is way better handling
m is way better ride
m is bmw, c63 is chrysler.. I mean MB... whatever ...
why do all the mags with professional drivers pick the M every time not only over the c63, but over cars like 911's and gt-rs? I didn't even see the c63 in that fight lmao...
maint. covered for 50k, you c63 will cost you a few more pennies over that period, not to mention the terrible gas mileage and tires every week from all the torque.....
ah, I've had enough of this thread... good luck with your c63s people.

Heat, Advskier, and a few others on both sides of the isle.

The primary reason I joined this discussion was because of the fanboism and juvenile like arguments favoring the M3, on a M3 site. The same argument posted on the C63 site would produce the same type of hyperbole about the C63. If it was was the C63 site, I would of made the counter argument favoring the M3.

My hope in participating in these discussions is to stimulate formal thinking rather getting stuck at a concrete level. Anyone who has a strong knowledgeable base of sports cars and comes to the table with the slightest bit of objectivity, understands they are both phenomenal cars, with slightly different missions, that meet the needs of a slightly different sports car enthusiast.

If the Roundel was on the C63 and the star was on the M, the M fanboys would be yaking about the amazing horsepower, torque, and acceleration. Likewise, the C63 fanboys would be yaking about the amazing engine, high rev line, and handling prowess.

Bias is a fascinating phenomena. No need to get caught up in it or take it too serious. What these type discussions reveal is the thought process of the people behind the discussion and competency of their arguments.

[Advskier]

Originally Posted by ruff

Heat, Advskier, and a few others on both sides of the isle.

The primary reason I joined this discussion was because of the fanboism and juvenile like arguments favoring the M3, on a M3 site. The same argument posted on the C63 site would produce the same type of hyperbole about the C63. If it was was the C63 site, I would of made the counter argument favoring the M3.

My hope in participating in these discussions is to stimulate formal thinking rather getting stuck at a concrete level. Anyone who has a strong knowledgeable base of sports cars and comes to the table with the slightest bit of objectivity, understands they are both phenomenal cars, with slightly different missions, that meet the needs of a slightly different sports car enthusiast.

If the Roundel was on the C63 and the star was on the M, the M fanboys would be yaking about the amazing horsepower, torque, and acceleration. Likewise, the C63 fanboys would be yaking about the amazing engine, high rev line, and handling prowess.

Bias is a fascinating phenomena. No need to get caught up in it or take it too serious. What these type discussions reveal is the thought process of the people behind the discussion and competency of their arguments.

My first new car (in L.A.) was a BMW 320I. It was the biggest piece of crap ever, and I didn't buy another BMW until 18 months ago. Between then and now, I have owned 5 Porsches, 2 Z's, a Maserati, a Ferrari, and a smattering of other cars.
I am not blind, or loyal to any brand.
I decided to buy another BMW when the X3 met my needs better than any car in it's class. It was a big gamble for me, because of my prior experience. As it turned out, the BMW dealer here is the best dealer I have ever worked with.
My comparisons between the Mercedes and M3 aren't out of brand loyalty, but from observations driving both.
I think the Mercedes is a great sedan, but in my region I don't like the dealer. I think the E92 M3 is a totally different sports oriented car, with a better local dealer.

I don't worship the roundel. As a matter of fact, I ride motorcycles, and don't have a single BMW in my garage.

[Congoman775]

Originally Posted by lvwirelessguy

Because it is an awesome car, and more fun in normal traffic than my M3.

Plus I can

thank you, thats all i wanted to get out.

the M3 is a better car for a track and "MORE FUN IN NORMAL TRAFFIC THAN MY M3"

so for the 99% of the population who dont track their car and can appreciate large amounts of torque it can be very appealing

[ruff]

Originally Posted by Advskier

My first new car (in L.A.) was a BMW 320I. It was the biggest piece of crap ever, and I didn't buy another BMW until 18 months ago. Between then and now, I have owned 5 Porsches, 2 Z's, a Maserati, a Ferrari, and a smattering of other cars.
I am not blind, or loyal to any brand.
I decided to buy another BMW when the X3 met my needs better than any car in it's class. It was a big gamble for me, because of my prior experience. As it turned out, the BMW dealer here is the best dealer I have ever worked with.
My comparisons between the Mercedes and M3 aren't out of brand loyalty, but from observations driving both.
I think the Mercedes is a great sedan, but in my region I don't like the dealer. I think the E92 M3 is a totally different sports oriented car, with a better local dealer.

I don't worship the roundel. As a matter of fact, I ride motorcycles, and don't have a single BMW in my garage.

Ducatista?

[kennethcho1337]

Originally Posted by Heat00

this thread is interesting, but what is interesting is all the praise for the c63...

why aren't these people on the c63 forum?

I'll go ahead and defend the M again, against the c63..

a few quick points:

m is way nicer looking
m is way better handling
m is way better ride
m is bmw, c63 is chrysler.. I mean MB... whatever ...
why do all the mags with professional drivers pick the M every time not only over the c63, but over cars like 911's and gt-rs? I didn't even see the c63 in that fight lmao...
maint. covered for 50k, you c63 will cost you a few more pennies over that period, not to mention the terrible gas mileage and tires every week from all the torque.....
ah, I've had enough of this thread... good luck with your c63s people.

You, sir, are an idiot.

[Heat00]

this thread and responding to the people here are a complete waste of time.
i'm sorry I even bothered to read about a piece of crap MB on the M3 forum.
I have owned MB so I am not speaking from my "ass"...

as for you Kennethcho1337...... stuff it pal, and to boot, you're driving a miata? so that qualifies you to call me an idiot, why? care to elaborate a bit??????

[Advskier]

Originally Posted by ruff

Ducatista?

I rode a GSXR1K as my race bike, but my 1098 and MS seem to work better for me on the track and on the road.