Why do Mercedes not do an E63 Coupe/Cab?
Why do Mercedes not do an E63 Coupe/Cab?
Author
Discussion

Walter Sobchak

Original Poster:

5,739 posts

253 months

Monday 20th May 2013
quotequote all
I really don't understand why they haven't bothered doing an AMG version of either, they did with the CLK, I personally would much rather have one than the E class Saloon version, not that I dislike the saloon but the Coupe/Cab is a much better looking car in my opinion.

Lagerlout

1,812 posts

265 months

Monday 20th May 2013
quotequote all
Well, in my experience having owned an E Class Cabriolet (E350 CDI) the scuttle shake in the car would make an AMG version a bit ropey. The roads are so bad these days I got rid of mine as I couldn't live with how flexible the whole car felt. As for the Coupe, I don't understand that either, there should be no reason not to make that car. There was an article on here the other day talking about the facelift Coupe and how Mercedes/AMG admitted not making the E63 Coupe was a mistake.

iluvmercs

7,541 posts

256 months

Monday 20th May 2013
quotequote all
If my memory serves me well, I read somewhere that they didn't make an E63 Coupe/Cab on the back of relatively poor sales of the CLK63 compared to that of the C63/E63 Saloons and Estates.
As said, they now acknowledge this to be a mistake.

Mind you the later E500s with the Twin Turbo 4.7 V8 where rather brisk and I should imagine would handle well with the AMG Sport pack. They are of course no proper match for an AMG model.

Darren

Walter Sobchak

Original Poster:

5,739 posts

253 months

Tuesday 21st May 2013
quotequote all
I know the E500 is fast too but it really seems a mistake not to offer an AMG version, it's a bit gutting really as I would love to have one of them when they get to 3-4 years old, hopefully it's something they correct with the new E Class.

Twincharge

221 posts

207 months

Wednesday 22nd May 2013
quotequote all
I think Mr Clarkson explained it best, simply take a shoe box, try to flex it. Now remove lid, try again.