RE: New Mercedes-AMG GT 43 arrives with 421hp

[CG2020UK]

Chestrockwell said:

I havent driven anything with the AMG 2.0 but i have driven the MK8 Golf R extensively and its just such a boring experience, its a fast car but once you get used to how quickly it shifts through the gears and gains speed, theres just nothing about it, just a 2.0, rightfully so!

The Golf R is a mundane day to day car with a powerful engine so I dont expect it to light my world on fire.

Surprised to hear this about the Golf R as the Mk8 I drove is a cracker and certainly capable of giving a good laugh. It’s also less than half the price of one of these!

[_ppan]

I understand people want more cylinders. But I'm surprised that except for 1 person noone mentions the weight advantage? Not only 200kg less weight but 200kg less weight in the nose! Feels like handling doesn't matter at all.

[stuart100]

E90_M3Ross said:

Leveret said:

Hoofy said:

Thing is, I'd rather just buy an older sports car in the same category for £30k and suck up the £695 tax and lower MPG.

I mean, I could pick up a DB9 for £20k and shrug off the V12 tick rebuild cost, and still have cash in my pocket vs buying this new AMG GT.

You could also pick up a pre March 2006 A8 SWB sport quattro with a reliable 450hp W12 that won't need rebuilding - and has variable valve timing-and £395 tax - for a mere £10k, if you can actually find one (only about 60 in the UK - and mine's not for sale!)

Who on earth is cross shopping between a 2 seater sports GT car and an Audi A8

Only on Pistonheads

What a ridiculous suggestion.

An 18 year old A8 at that!

[Chestrockwell]

CG2020UK said:

Chestrockwell said:

I havent driven anything with the AMG 2.0 but i have driven the MK8 Golf R extensively and its just such a boring experience, its a fast car but once you get used to how quickly it shifts through the gears and gains speed, theres just nothing about it, just a 2.0, rightfully so!

The Golf R is a mundane day to day car with a powerful engine so I dont expect it to light my world on fire.

Surprised to hear this about the Golf R as the Mk8 I drove is a cracker and certainly capable of giving a good laugh. It’s also less than half the price of one of these!

Well thats just it isnt it, im comparing it to my M240i which in 1 series form, is a direct competitor to the MK7 Golf R (same engine as MK8) and I think anybody who drives both back to back will prefer the BMW because of the engine.

This AMG GT also has 2.0 Turbo, albeit with a bit more power that a simple remap on any EA888 engine can match.

[foxhounduk]

Looks good, decent power output. Let's hope it's £70k.

[matrignano]

foxhounduk said:

Looks good, decent power output. Let's hope it's £70k.

70k gets you a CLE, this is the flagship so over £100k I reckon

[Maxym]

What would you rather have, a four cylinder ICE version or electric? I know what I’d choose.

[biggbn]

_ppan said:

I understand people want more cylinders. But I'm surprised that except for 1 person noone mentions the weight advantage? Not only 200kg less weight but 200kg less weight in the nose! Feels like handling doesn't matter at all.

This was my point earlier. Why have an unnecessarily big, heavy engine in a drivers car when a lighter one will enhance the driving experience? Perhaps people demand bigger engines for different reasons....? Its all a bit 'couldn't afford a 911?' jibe at Boxster owners, isn't it?

That said, there ARE people for whom a six or eight is genuinely preferable because of the noise adding to the experience and that's cool.

[Mysstree]

aarondbs said:

BigChiefmuffinAgain said:

I can understand why Mercedes UK have decided not to import this, given that it would probably cost well into 6 figures and don't think the market is ready to pay that sort of money for a 4 cylinder car.

Not really clear in which countries there would be a market for this, unless it fulfils some sort of tax break brief somewhere...

I think what's going to happen is that folk will buy an electric car (possibly even for BiK reasons) have an older diesel and or 4x4 for longer journeys and a V8 for fun... that's what I've done!

The interior space of those four vehicles must be more than your house if you don’t include the garage.

[Kerniki]

2t and 400hp is not going to be very exciting, adequate i guess but who buys this to be adequate?
as a current owner of the previous model, i find this completely underwhelming and no intention of moving onto it..
Funnily, a better evolution of the old model is the new Vantage imo. slightly more expensive mind..

[JJJ.]

_ppan said:

I understand people want more cylinders. But I'm surprised that except for 1 person noone mentions the weight advantage? Not only 200kg less weight but 200kg less weight in the nose! Feels like handling doesn't matter at all.

I don't know but was weight a real issue for the V8 buyers?
A straight six, RWD version would probably be only be an extra 50kg, if that, over the four pot. Who's going complain (bar maybe a driving God), nobody would especially when a straight six is a lovely configuration anyway.

I'm in doubt no that Merc are selling this version because they already have the four cylinder engine, thus it's cheap car to make and will assist sales globally. All about maximizing profit, nothing else.

Edited by JJJ. on Wednesday 20th March 10:30

[J4CKO]

Chestrockwell said:

CG2020UK said:

Chestrockwell said:

I havent driven anything with the AMG 2.0 but i have driven the MK8 Golf R extensively and its just such a boring experience, its a fast car but once you get used to how quickly it shifts through the gears and gains speed, theres just nothing about it, just a 2.0, rightfully so!

The Golf R is a mundane day to day car with a powerful engine so I dont expect it to light my world on fire.

Surprised to hear this about the Golf R as the Mk8 I drove is a cracker and certainly capable of giving a good laugh. It’s also less than half the price of one of these!

Well thats just it isnt it, im comparing it to my M240i which in 1 series form, is a direct competitor to the MK7 Golf R (same engine as MK8) and I think anybody who drives both back to back will prefer the BMW because of the engine.

This AMG GT also has 2.0 Turbo, albeit with a bit more power that a simple remap on any EA888 engine can match.

Had an M135i and a Golf 7 R, both a bit meh as drivers cars out of the box.

[smilo996]

Dombilano said:

Looks like a weird 911 from some angles

except that i is about half as wide and doesn't sound like farting in a tin can.

[smilo996]

The interior is pretty nice, especially the square flatscreen which is less intrusive than most. Seems they have borrowed that leather from yesterday's GT-R, not great. Good effort but wonder given hw imposing it looks whether the performance will be commensurate.

[fastfocus]

Nothing against a fast 2.0 version, but if it’s well over 100k that’s going to be a bit hard to swallow.

I still prefer the earlier previous generation model anyway with the smiley grill, all of Mercedes current front end design I think look miserable.

[Davey S2]

This or a lightly used GTR with a 4.0 twin turbo engine?

No brainer for the older car.

[Amanitin]

JJJ. said:

A straight six, RWD version would probably be only be an extra 50kg, if that, over the four pot. Who's going complain (bar maybe a driving God), nobody would especially when a straight six is a lovely configuration anyway.

I am guessing this has to do with the 4 and the V8 being closely related, so the same(ish) ancillaries can be used.

[GeniusOfLove]

biggbn said:

This was my point earlier. Why have an unnecessarily big, heavy engine in a drivers car when a lighter one will enhance the driving experience? Perhaps people demand bigger engines for different reasons....? Its all a bit 'couldn't afford a 911?' jibe at Boxster owners, isn't it?

That said, there ARE people for whom a six or eight is genuinely preferable because of the noise adding to the experience and that's cool.

Genuinely not asking to be a PH knobber, but have you had any cars with a good 8 or 6 (or 12!) cylinder engine?

On paper figures for these heavily boosted four pots look comparable to older and larger engines, and they're a great way to get big power into a car that otherwise couldn't fit a larger engine, but they are utter doglogs to use compared to a V8 or even i6 with the same power. They're only really comparable from a top trumps "well the power/torque/acceleration figures match" way, they loose so much "feel" that was always part of the appeal and value proposition of expensive cars.

[Leveret]

I mean, I could pick up a DB9 for £20k and shrug off the V12 tick rebuild cost, and still have cash in my pocket vs buying this new AMG GT.
[/quote]

You could also pick up a pre March 2006 A8 SWB sport quattro with a reliable 450hp W12 that won't need rebuilding - and has variable valve timing-and £395 tax - for a mere £10k, if you can actually find one (only about 60 in the UK - and mine's not for sale!)
[/quote]

Who on earth is cross shopping between a 2 seater sports GT car and an Audi A8

Only on Pistonheads

What a ridiculous suggestion.
[/quote]

Jeez - prickly lot on here! Don't know the difference between a suggestion and an observation? Don't know a DB9 has four seats? (but only drives two wheels - as does the heavy old barge S -for steel?-600). Sport quattro W12 no way a barge - read the spec!

[GeniusOfLove]

It's quite touching when someone loves their car this much.

Sure your 2 ton 5 metre long smoker Audi with 200KG of engine entirely in the front overhang isn't a barge, it's a veritable sports car. Probably counts as a roadster if the sunroof is open

Edited by GeniusOfLove on Wednesday 20th March 12:05