The Best ///M/Barge/General Rant/Look at this/O/T(Vol XIX)

[ATM]

Crook said:

One difference would appear to be an absence of E63 estates for sale.

Yes

I occasionally look for an E63 estate and there is often not many for sale. C63 cars are very common by comparison. So ether no one is selling their E63 or there were a lot less sold.

I think the E class is a much much bigger car. The C class doesn't loo that big to Me. Might only be a few inches in it but we all know that matters, a lot. Also you see quite a few C63 cars which have had LSD added. I have never seen an ad for an E63 where it mentions an after market LSD added. So probably tells you a lot more about the buyers of the 2 cars.

[braddo]

Other than the obvious size aspect I think the biggest difference is that the E is on active/air suspension and the C isn't, so a much less forgiving ride in the C.

I think the W111 has 500hp (507?) out of the box compared to 457(ish?) in the C, so 50hp more for 200ish kg extra?

Lots of '??' as I'm only writing what I can recall reading. No firsthand experience! If the other half didn't hate estates I would have been in AMG wagon years ago.

[Crook]

Thanks, and looking a bit more I think the C63 6.2L had a longer manufacturing run too. First Gen W212 had the 6.2 and the second had the twin turbo.

I'll keep my eyes open and if one appears in the trade and its not too far go and have a look. My old place of work had a diesel W212 estate as a pool car and it was a useful size. I should go and size up a C class - one guy gets all his race kit, tools, spare wheels etc in the back of his estate.

Interesting about the suspension - no doubt the forums will be rife with tails of woe and despair...

[ATM]

I believe the 6.2 is absolutely evil in terms of mpg. 5.5 therefore much better probably. Difference between bad and really bad.

[braddo]

I think the W212 6.2s are very thin on the ground. They might have moved to the 5.5T after only a couple of years and well before the main facelift.

[Blown2CV]

ATM said:

I believe the 6.2 is absolutely evil in terms of mpg. 5.5 therefore much better probably. Difference between bad and really bad.

whilst clearly a giant V8 is like PH nirvana, if we're talking C-class then the W205 with it's 4L TT is both faster and a lot better on fuel... and whilst it doesn't sound quite as good it still sounds phenomenal.

[Crook]

ATM said:

I believe the 6.2 is absolutely evil in terms of mpg. 5.5 therefore much better probably. Difference between bad and really bad.

I've been breaking myself in with the Audi, yesterday was about 14mpg and generally around 25mpg on a good day.

[Crook]

braddo said:

I think the W212 6.2s are very thin on the ground. They might have moved to the 5.5T after only a couple of years and well before the main facelift.

I think that's pretty much the case from what I can see.

[Crook]

Blown2CV said:

whilst clearly a giant V8 is like PH nirvana, if we're talking C-class then the W205 with it's 4L TT is both faster and a lot better on fuel... and whilst it doesn't sound quite as good it still sounds phenomenal.

There's an element of (at this time of fact finding / next car daydreaming) the 6.2 being the target. At some point single digit mpg will start to make me consider the more sensible options of the least sensible car I don't doubt.

I think Cactussed got around 30mpg in his!

[Blown2CV]

Crook said:

Blown2CV said:

whilst clearly a giant V8 is like PH nirvana, if we're talking C-class then the W205 with it's 4L TT is both faster and a lot better on fuel... and whilst it doesn't sound quite as good it still sounds phenomenal.

There's an element of (at this time of fact finding / next car daydreaming) the 6.2 being the target. At some point single digit mpg will start to make me consider the more sensible options of the least sensible car I don't doubt.

I think Cactussed got around 30mpg in his!

yea i've seen 30+ quite a few times on long runs. Eco friendly it is not but in terms of performance per fuel tank, pretty good.

[Fast Bug]

30mpg is amazing! The best I've got out of my 6 pot E53 was 31.5, and that was on a 200 + mile trip up North was the cruise control set for 75mph. I was chuffed with that as well

[Crook]

That's very good all things considered.

Having had a quick look, the newer turbo cars are a bit of a jump up in cost which may be prohibitive.

I think I'll keep my eyes open and see how 2023 develops and how my back is!

[Blown2CV]

all that said about economy i've got my eye on a M760iL!

[Crook]

Blown2CV said:

all that said about economy i've got my eye on a M760iL!

[Fast Bug]

Blown2CV said:

all that said about economy i've got my eye on a M760iL!

Just think of the BP points you'll get

[rejn]

Great to see the C63 vs E63 debate on here - it's a question I've considered in the past.

In fact, I've had my Yaris 2 years in April, and all of the paperwork from Toyota keeps coming through (service plan expires, etc.), so I seriously thought about moving to a x63. In the end I think I'd go for a C63 because there is so much more choice - but the ride is a bit rough in them. I'd also be quite nervous about buying one with the 6.2 engine, as they're so old now, and I'd worry about reliability (not based on any facts or know issues). On balance I'd probably go for a more recent 4.0 turbo C63.

Having said all of that, I've put the Yaris on winter tyres and really been enjoying hooning around on icy roads - it's made me start to really like the car again (which was missing for a while), so I'm going to keep it a while longer.

[Pflanzgarten]

My best mate had the 6.3 when they were chucking out the cheap lease deals on them, he had a fuel card through his business and even he said it was unacceptable

[ATM]

Pflanzgarten said:

My best mate had the 6.3 when they were chucking out the cheap lease deals on them, he had a fuel card through his business and even he said it was unacceptable

This

I think the range is less than most EV's

[ATM]

rejn said:

Great to see the C63 vs E63 debate on here - it's a question I've considered in the past.

In fact, I've had my Yaris 2 years in April, and all of the paperwork from Toyota keeps coming through (service plan expires, etc.), so I seriously thought about moving to a x63. In the end I think I'd go for a C63 because there is so much more choice - but the ride is a bit rough in them. I'd also be quite nervous about buying one with the 6.2 engine, as they're so old now, and I'd worry about reliability (not based on any facts or know issues). On balance I'd probably go for a more recent 4.0 turbo C63.

Having said all of that, I've put the Yaris on winter tyres and really been enjoying hooning around on icy roads - it's made me start to really like the car again (which was missing for a while), so I'm going to keep it a while longer.

Maybe the answer is less grippy tyres. Counter intuitive I know and feels like you're going backwards - or will end up going backwards into a ditch.

[ferrisbueller]

rejn said:

Great to see the C63 vs E63 debate on here - it's a question I've considered in the past.

In fact, I've had my Yaris 2 years in April, and all of the paperwork from Toyota keeps coming through (service plan expires, etc.), so I seriously thought about moving to a x63. In the end I think I'd go for a C63 because there is so much more choice - but the ride is a bit rough in them. I'd also be quite nervous about buying one with the 6.2 engine, as they're so old now, and I'd worry about reliability (not based on any facts or know issues). On balance I'd probably go for a more recent 4.0 turbo C63.

Having said all of that, I've put the Yaris on winter tyres and really been enjoying hooning around on icy roads - it's made me start to really like the car again (which was missing for a while), so I'm going to keep it a while longer.

The AMG E-Wagens appear to be pretty sought after at present - the prices suggest so at least. The rare non-AMG 8-pots are hard to come by, too. I think these are in a subset of vehicles where demand still outsrips supply. Perhaps a population of kindred spirits seeking one last hurrah before being consigned to a fate of electrical gloom.

Coming to it from a similar lack of facts or knowledge, I tend to think older, simpler, engines will likely be more robust than their newer counterparts, not to mention more characterful. And thirsty, though that issue is very much proportionate to the mileage you want to do in it.