JetBlack5OC

Yep sounds promising. They really wanted to give the new M3 a run for its money, not just straigh-line performance but an all-around car.

Here is a MotorTrend article about the C63. First few paragraphs talk about AMGs input on the car, especially the suspension detail. Trying to get that 50/50 weight distribution that bimmers always have.

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/sedans...es_benz_c63_amg

xexyus

Who cares about fuel consumption, its more of the quality of the vantage vs the db9. Honestly im not gonna lie, the vantage v8 is basically a xk8 in all honesty. DB9 isnt.

BetterMakeWay

Ok first of all consider other facts than just numbers and how some journalist rated the car at FIRST test-drive. Let's see how others rate it, how does the car perform in tests, or should we consider universal truth what one guy said.

Also related to the C63 AMG, again that engine placed in that car shows the fact that even though as you say, AMG built this car from scratch, they still think "big". This car may be faster than the M3 on straights but let's see in bends how it copes. And here's why i say this:

Consider this:

AMG had a litric power of 75.58hp/liter and torque of 71.45lb-ft/liter

while the M3 has power of 105hp/liter and torque of 73.75lb-ft/liter.

Considering this it seems AMG still has something to learn about engines. THey still use their philosophy of big displacement but their engines are far from the outputs of the M cars. And it's ok, some Americans might dig this. Also keep in mind that M cars use high-rev concept, and their engines rev way further than the AMG ones which coped with a well studied transmission, the gearing becomes a "multiplier" of torque (see 7speed SMG3 form the M5). ALSO keep in mind a smaller engine allows to be fit more in the back and lower to the ground which translates in a lower center of gravity and in a better handling. So figures like that are not enough, not if you search more than just for an "AMG stop light worrior"

PS: Considering this i dunno why everybody wonders how AMG came up with those outputs considering the engine it uses. No wonder here. I'd also like to know the weight of the car and the weight of the engine. It's clear for me which car has the superior engine.

JetBlack5OC

Well if you haven't read all the recent reviews of the new M3, every article I have read has said the new M3 handling is not up to par. It has been quoted as "numb" feeling. Its just not up to M3 standards.

Just one of the reviews of many: http://www.autospies.com/news/Automobile-M...e-E92-M3-17663/

Quote from article: "The biggest letdown - and it's a huge one - is the steering. Whereas other 3-series (and all previous M3s) read the road surface to your fingertips, the M3 is frustratingly numb on center."

M3 weight- 3,700lbs
C63 weight- 3,800lbs

As far as the new C63 goes, it has a near 50/50 weight distribution, which is one thing BMW always brag about.
It has 443 ft-lbs torque which most of which is released at just 2,000 rpms. The new m3 boast only 295 ft-lbs at 3,900 rpms. C63 also has a paddle-shifted 7speed, it bangs off shifts as crisply and quickly as the best SMG/DSG/F1 boxes.

P.S. Not trying to put down the M3 in anyway, it will definitely be an amazing car. I have been a M3 fan since I was a young boy. Part of the reason I believe the M3 handling maybe suffering a little is due the 8-cylinder engine. But BMW can't keep putting out 6-cyclinder M3's when the competition is blowing out huge V8's. I just think the new C63 just shows so much promise.

Postel

Comparing the M3 and C63 is not easy... But why not introducing the new RS4???

In top gear was said that it was one of the best engines ever made...and the new M3 would have to be magnificent to beat the RS4...

But isn't it so that an M3 is an epic car... you will find pictures from M3's on the walls of boy's rooms, on thousands of desktop-backgrouds...

An M3 is an M3 and always will... It is the reference...


So to make a summarize, I think the mean list on this forum is:


1. Audi R8
2. Porsche Carrera 4S
3. BMW M3
4. Aston Martin V8


As I already said, I own an E46 M3 Convertible now, and it is an epic car!!! Do you know how many awards this car has won??? It was the absolute reference... Every year and year, the others try to beat him (Audi launched his new S4 with 344 hp, one more than the M3)...but every year, all the awards went to the M3...

So I am proud and happy that I have / have owned that car... Maybe it is now time for something else...

Has anybody driven the R8???

BetterMakeWay

Yes yes, the merc weighs the same as my 535d (which is a diesel, which is heavy). For a car that it's suppose to be high performance oriented 1730kgs is too much, this considering that the C Klasse is not in the same class as a 5 series. Hell the M3 has quite alot with it's 1650 kgs.

Again, i'd like to see the weight difference in engines alone.

BUT

You simply can't understand what a high rev engine is all about do you?! Honestly! No offense but you can't have a high reving engine and a huge low down torque delivery in the same time. You simply can't. For example, for you to understand, i exaggerate a bit saying that not even an F1 engine has the same low down grunt as that AMG. I'm sure in truth it really doesn't but i compared to an F1 engine for you to understand that a high reving engine is designed to work...ummm...well at high revs.

I doubt the merc's automatic tranny is as fast as a SMG 3. Few street car gearboxes in the WORLD can shift faster than 60ms. After all the merc's tranny is still an automatic. As the comparison with F1 boxes that's hilarious. BMW made it's quickest SMG 3, inspired from the williams F1 gearbox (when they used to have also v10s in F1).

You mention 50:50 weight distribution but again you miss some stuff from the equation. While weight distribution is important i bet you, if you struggle alot you can make 50:50 weight distribution in an SUV also. Get my point? High end performance cars should be all about minimum weight (at this chapter), chapter at which even the new M3 let me down a lil bit. I expected slightly less than 1600kgs from the new M3, but the difference between M3 and C63 AMG is like having a fully grown up person with you all the time.

AS for the engines performance you still couldn't give me a response to the litric power of the 2. That shows how much performance engineers can squeeze from an engine. And well...with big displacement everybody can make performant engines. Look at Corvette or Viper. The same is with them versus the V10 from the M5. While the european engineers got the same ho but only with 5 liters the americans got the same hp with 2-3 liters more. That's 60% more capacity, which in truth translates in way bigger torque numbers. Get it? It's all about engine perspective. And the M people have their very own. Audi tried to copy them with their new RS4 v8 and were quite successful as i understood some engineers migrated from bmw to audi. And it shows.

BetterMakeWay

How many awards din the C AMG get over time? Ummm...
Help me i have a memory blackout.

silver bullet

Perhaps the reason you see so many 997S in Begium is because it is a fantastic car. of the lot you have listed I would take the Carrera S. I am biased because I have one, but I was in your shoes not long ago looking for something new. I think the 997S is the most functional. granted the back seats are not ones that are going to transport 4 adults on a weekend trip, but they will transport kids for a good distance, and adults for short distances. In addition the Carrera S has a 20k mile service interval, and I know of no other high performance vehicle that can boast such a reliability and service record. I drive the thing every day, and i drive it hard every day. I also think the old design is a great thing. It is timeless, and you're gauranteed that in a few years time your car will not be "out of style". I could go on and on about the 997S, but I think lots of people having them is a great testament to the car. Everyone in the world had an E46 3 series, but that was because it was one of the most beautiful, functional, reliable and great cars ever made. I think the 997S is in the same category.

silver bullet

here is what I think about the new M3 and this is soley based on mag reports and my perceptions. The new M3 can no longer be as raw as it once was. They have moved the thing up market to the point where at 60-65k the late 20 somethings who are the target for the car now cannot afford it. They are now in the late 30's and early 40's segment of population who can afford the car. By definition of the new target market they are going to have to make the steering and other things a bit less rigid because that is what most of that age segment will want. At the end of the day they have to sell as many cars to as many people as possible. I think this was somewhat a mistake with the M3, but given the 335 they had little choice. They have placed the M3 firmly against the 997S, and IMO it is not going to deliver. I am likely going to be proven very very wrong on this because everything BMW has done the last 10 years has been nothing but money. However, AMG and Audi have both grown weary of being BMW's bitch and seem to be ver serious about surpassing the M3 for entry sedan dominance. The C63 appears to be a very good start. I cannot help but think they are a bit nervous about this at BMW. Maybe not, but is sure seems the initial reaction to the M3 is muted at best.

JetBlack5OC

I agree, BMW should be a little nervous. They could be possibly loosing their top spot in this segment. Especially since the reviews of the new M3 have not been so nice. I want to see a comparison test: New M3 vs. New C63 vs. RS4. It should be very interesting.