siu0410

I was never a big fan of mercs except the almighty s-class and the notorious SLR MClaren.
I drove my friend's c63 amg the other day and i just got to say. That thing is a beast.

Pros
-Nice engine/exhaust sounds and fast acceleration. - (yes compare to my 530i, obviously) - I felt like other cars werent really moving
-I like the sport seats
-Navigation is nice

Cons
-The center console looks like a blob of plastic.
-Cornering is a bit inferior to the bimmer.
-Car is too small, backseat isnt spacious enough - feels compact.

My 350z's lease is almost done, time to jump onto another car.
My brother and i are deciding and researching now.

What do you guys think of the c63 amg?
And what other choices would u consider if not the c63 amg (of equivalent or lower price?)

-Leon

siu0410

swajames

If I were in the market right now I think I would prefer the C63 to the E92 M3. Your list of pros and cons is about right, but I think many underestimate just how much AMG has closed the gap on two areas that are key strengths of the M3 - steering and handling. The C63 gets reasonably close to the M3 in these areas (the M3 is still better) but, frankly, the AMG powerplant utterly obliterates the V8 in the M3.

siu0410

Agreed, i must say.
The extra kick of power and cheaper price tag has really closed the gap.

BetterMakeWay

Cheaper???? By what standards or in what country a MERC is CHEAPER than a bimmer????

OMG Mercs come premium over here and frankly any where else on the world. You pay at lest 5k more just because it's a merc.

BetterMakeWay

sswajames...it may get close but it's not IT. The BMW M3 isn't shy of it's power and even torque if you think about the fact that it has like 45% less displacement but only 7% less power. It's no brainer the Merc is quick, especially in a straight line due to especially huge torque. And don't forget please that there is a reason the M division stuck to "just" 4 liters. That allowed them to position the compact v8 further back and lower to the ground. That alone just gives smth to think about...when we talk about the M awesome handling.

As i said countless of times already...everybody can make big engines with big hp and gigantic torque, especially americans. But not everybody can make rather small engines with specific high output at high revs, and still compete with bigger engines, and still come out reliable. That's kudos to the manufacturer...not false hype.

swajames

I take your points BetterMakeWay, but I think the bottom line is that high RPM and displacement are directly interchangeable replacements for one another as they are simply different means to the same net result. The other factor is that the M engines are actually very heavy. It often comes as a surprise to some to realize that the engine in say the M5 is actually heavier (by close to 90lbs) than the 7 liter LS7 engine in the Corvette. The reason is simple - the technology needed to allow and sustain the higher RPM in an M engine does carry a significant weight penalty. A larger engine that may be lighter, despite lower RPM, can be just as elegant a solution and just as effective as a means to the same end.

The other thing about the C63 is that, unlike most earlier AMG output, it was designed from the ground up to be the car it is rather than being a tuned version of the donor model. I really like both cars, and I think the M3 is an awesome, but the powerplant in the AMG would be the reason I'd go for the C63 over the M3. Bigger displacement doesn't necessarily carry any penalty whatsoever in terms of the size or weight of the powerplant, but without forced induction you'll never see AMG-like levels of torque in an M engine.

flyingpuck

At the lofty level of those two cars, I would take the BMW as I simply prefer the handling etc. and honestly, NEITHER one is slow!

SergeyM

I drove C63 on several occasions. Wanted to like it (this is the only AMG car I can easily afford) but did not.
1. Engine sound was great but acceleration was not out of this world. It seemed noticeably faster than my 550 but noting special. I have to admit that I was never allowed to take it over 100 mph.
2. Seats are not good. Too firm (felt like a park bench) with non-adjustable upper backs.
3. Handled more like 3-series but no adjustable suspension available at least not in US. M3 has it
4. Back seat is useless. 3-series has a much better back seat.

So for me it would be either M3 or Dinan 335/535. BTW, when you say it is a beast, what do you actually mean? Did you feel comfortable driving it very, very hard around curves and corners or it just had great straight line acceleration?

JetBlack5OC

Wow, funny how two people can have such different experiences with a car. I went with my sister to test drive both cars, C63 and E90 M3.

1. I thought the acceleration was damn impressive, brutal in fact.
2. The seats are very comfortable and hold you in like a DTM race seat. They far exceed the M3 seats. The one thing in the interior that is better, well the steering wheel is also much better than the M3.
3. Steering is quite responsive. M3 sharpness no, but very good. Only two BMW's that out handle it, Z4M/coupe and M3.
4. Really didn't find the back seat anymore useless than the 3-series.

In the end my sister got the E90 M3 with DCT. In all honesty she thought the C63 was too much car for her. She also thought the M3 look more feminine.