RE: Mercedes C63 AMG

[ShakMan]

Answer these questions ....

What percentage of these cars do you think will be EVER taken on the track ?

- i'd say prob 10% at most. Not many owners are going to risk a £50+ on the track.

Of those few taken to the track, how many times will they go on the track in their lifetime ?

- i'd say on average 1-2 times. Running one of these cars on the track will cost $$$.

So on this basis, performance on the track is less importance to performance on the road. Only cocks are going to go on about how their M3 is 5 sec faster than blah blah ...its irrelevant. Real world road driving is very different to track driving. Overtaking ability and sure-footedness is prob. more important getting A to B in a fast time.

Therefore, the Merc wins in my opinion due to it awesome engine, practicality, build and styling. If it came in manual then I think it be no contest.

Edited by ShakMan on Friday 28th December 14:12

[Fittster]

How much are they going to cost in the UK?

[Wahid]

I think the c63 is a great car - fast(superb engine) and plush with enough sportiness to keep me entertained.

However the stylist that came up with those wing mirrors should sacked! - those indcator are gastly and the overall shape is so boring! They should be ones like on the audi Q7's with a thin bright line for the flash.

Other than that a great car to take advantage of the new M3's wayward styling (including its poor interior).



Wahid.

[jimmyb]

shadowninja said:

But in the RS4 if you drive it at 10 tenths, in the twisties, there's a good chance of an insurance claim... you can accelerate like a bugger in the AMG and it's very unlikely you'll crashed or spin the thing.

You need to go do your homework!!!
Have you honestly got that little idea of the gargantuan difference in handling between the merc and the rs4? The RS4 is four wheel drive which means it has far more traction than the merc which is two wheel drive and which has far more power than its rear wheels can handle.
Trust me of the two I know which one I would feel safer hammering through the twisties and to give you a clue its not the merc.

Mercedes make cruisers aka luxo barges etc which are basically like american cars show em a corner and they will throw a fit.

[Dunk76]

LMAO at you lot with your preconcieved ideas about the C63's handling.

Anyone paying attention during Top Gear, or reading Jan Evo mag will note that the C63 laps at about the same time as the RS4 - which itself is no slouch.

Evo put the M3, RS4, and C63 against each other at Bedford - got the same result as TG - Audi and Merc lapping the same, the BMW miles ahead of the two of them.

[matc]

Dunk76 said:

LMAO at you lot with your preconcieved ideas about the C63's handling.

Anyone paying attention during Top Gear, or reading Jan Evo mag will note that the C63 laps at about the same time as the RS4 - which itself is no slouch.

Evo put the M3, RS4, and C63 against each other at Bedford - got the same result as TG - Audi and Merc lapping the same, the BMW miles ahead of the two of them.

Not one of these cars had the AMG performance pack though, giving the C63 upgraded brakes and the all important LSD. Might not make a great deal of difference but I think it's fantastic that manufacturers are making cars with this sort of power, and this much devotion to handling.

[jimmyb]

matc said:

Dunk76 said:

LMAO at you lot with your preconcieved ideas about the C63's handling.

Anyone paying attention during Top Gear, or reading Jan Evo mag will note that the C63 laps at about the same time as the RS4 - which itself is no slouch.

Evo put the M3, RS4, and C63 against each other at Bedford - got the same result as TG - Audi and Merc lapping the same, the BMW miles ahead of the two of them.

Not one of these cars had the AMG performance pack though, giving the C63 upgraded brakes and the all important LSD. Might not make a great deal of difference but I think it's fantastic that manufacturers are making cars with this sort of power, and this much devotion to handling.

My point being what was shown by top gear when they tried to crush the apple the m3 and in all likelihood rs4 would have no problem pinpoint accuracy on hitting it whereas the merc cant as its simply too lively at the back as it has too much power in true merc fashion they just dont get it. They want the c63 to beat the m3 they have openly made a point of this yet in true merc style its brute force and ignorance over substance and intelligence. I like the rs4 in all respects looks handling etc and i like the m3 in terms of driving experience and handling not so keen on looks though. i however as with all merc products dont get what they are trying to achieve.

[JonRB]

Jimbeaux said:

I find it funny when the "Yank cars are shit around bends" idiots stick their head up over and over.....it just takes some folks so long to get around a stereotype.

It sure does, pardner. I'm sure the "Yank cars are shit around bends" stereotype will die out around the same time as the "TVRs are unreliable bit of plastic" one. I do hope you don't perpetrate the latter whilst denigrating people for the former.

[stemll]

All very interesting but....

I suspect that it's all irrelevant to the buyers. Certainly there are those on here that wouldn't be seen dead in a BMW and plenty that feel the same way about a Mercedes too. I strongly suspect that the buyers for these cars have decided which they want before they step out of their front doors and how they drive is the last thing on their minds. £50k small German saloons are about image, nothing more.

The only car that is likely to pick up waverers is the Audi but badge snobbery will stop that being the number 1 choice for many.

ps, SWMBO works for MB so I'm biased

[Jimbeaux]

JonRB said:

Jimbeaux said:

I find it funny when the "Yank cars are shit around bends" idiots stick their head up over and over.....it just takes some folks so long to get around a stereotype.

It sure does, pardner. I'm sure the "Yank cars are shit around bends" stereotype will die out around the same time as the "TVRs are unreliable bit of plastic" one. I do hope you don't perpetrate the latter whilst denigrating people for the former.

You don't have to worry about that....I have only seen a TVR here a couple of times; I know nothing of its build quality save what I read on PH. ETA: Oh, and the proper redneck stereotypical greeting is....."Padna".

Edited by Jimbeaux on Friday 28th December 21:12

[Dunk76]

jimmyb said:

matc said:

Dunk76 said:

LMAO at you lot with your preconcieved ideas about the C63's handling.

Anyone paying attention during Top Gear, or reading Jan Evo mag will note that the C63 laps at about the same time as the RS4 - which itself is no slouch.

Evo put the M3, RS4, and C63 against each other at Bedford - got the same result as TG - Audi and Merc lapping the same, the BMW miles ahead of the two of them.

Not one of these cars had the AMG performance pack though, giving the C63 upgraded brakes and the all important LSD. Might not make a great deal of difference but I think it's fantastic that manufacturers are making cars with this sort of power, and this much devotion to handling.

My point being what was shown by top gear when they tried to crush the apple the m3 and in all likelihood rs4 would have no problem pinpoint accuracy on hitting it whereas the merc cant as its simply too lively at the back as it has too much power in true merc fashion they just dont get it. They want the c63 to beat the m3 they have openly made a point of this yet in true merc style its brute force and ignorance over substance and intelligence. I like the rs4 in all respects looks handling etc and i like the m3 in terms of driving experience and handling not so keen on looks though. i however as with all merc products dont get what they are trying to achieve.

Aaah, the scientific 'apple on apex crush test' - the benchmark of all handling. TG is a comedy show loosely themed around motor cars, in a similar vein, they (JC) derided the Vectra VXR for it's comedy understeer with the TC off... I've driven one, and you have to want it to have comedy understeer before it does. Similarly, you're making an assumption that the C63 can't put it's power down because Top Gear says so. This is despite the three Traction control devices that come with the car; a) Throttle pedal, b) TCS, c) LSD.

Your statement about the AMG pack is odd - The BMW has an LSD (of sorts) as standard, and it's vaguely irrelevant in a 4WD car. Brakes are neither here nor there, nor indeed are the options either car can or cannot have - they're all £50K(ish) performance saloons.

Have you actually ever driven any AMG C-Class to comment on the dynamics relative to this or any other M3? In fact, have you driven an RS4 properly as well? (I'm presuming you have, given your comment about the above).

Edited by Dunk76 on Friday 28th December 21:48

[jimmyb]

Dunk76 said:

jimmyb said:

matc said:

Dunk76 said:

LMAO at you lot with your preconcieved ideas about the C63's handling.

Anyone paying attention during Top Gear, or reading Jan Evo mag will note that the C63 laps at about the same time as the RS4 - which itself is no slouch.

Evo put the M3, RS4, and C63 against each other at Bedford - got the same result as TG - Audi and Merc lapping the same, the BMW miles ahead of the two of them.

Not one of these cars had the AMG performance pack though, giving the C63 upgraded brakes and the all important LSD. Might not make a great deal of difference but I think it's fantastic that manufacturers are making cars with this sort of power, and this much devotion to handling.

My point being what was shown by top gear when they tried to crush the apple the m3 and in all likelihood rs4 would have no problem pinpoint accuracy on hitting it whereas the merc cant as its simply too lively at the back as it has too much power in true merc fashion they just dont get it. They want the c63 to beat the m3 they have openly made a point of this yet in true merc style its brute force and ignorance over substance and intelligence. I like the rs4 in all respects looks handling etc and i like the m3 in terms of driving experience and handling not so keen on looks though. i however as with all merc products dont get what they are trying to achieve.

Aaah, the scientific 'apple on apex crush test' - the benchmark of all handling. TG is a comedy show loosely themed around motor cars, in a similar vein, they (JC) derided the Vectra VXR for it's comedy understeer with the TC off... I've driven one, and you have to want it to have comedy understeer before it does. Similarly, you're making an assumption that the C63 can't put it's power down because Top Gear says so. This is despite the three Traction control devices that come with the car; a) Throttle pedal, b) TCS, c) LSD.

Your statement about the AMG pack is odd - The BMW has an LSD (of sorts) as standard, and it's vaguely irrelevant in a 4WD car. Brakes are neither here nor there, nor indeed are the options either car can or cannot have - they're all £50K(ish) performance saloons.

Have you actually ever driven any AMG C-Class to comment on the dynamics relative to this or any other M3? In fact, have you driven an RS4 properly as well? (I'm presuming you have, given your comment about the above).

Edited by Dunk76 on Friday 28th December 21:48

Sorry maybe my understanding of vehicle dynamics and mercs etc is wrong and they do not have huge amounts of torque and obviously bhp which driven through the rear wheels means that on a twisty road not only will the rs4 be faster it will be safer due to its 4wd system keeping it in check and the fact that i am led to believe it is understeer biased versus oversteer all of which means that unless you are really a darwin award winner coming acropper in the rs4 shouldnt happen. The merc on the other hand even with all its gismos and assumingly people will probably switch some if not all of them off will simply throw you off the road as it melts the rear tyres or do you not recall the other excellent scientific tg demo with amg sl500 or whatever it was and the tug of war team.

Yes I know the apple test is not scientific however it is an example of the vehicles handling characteristics versus the other two which without there tc systems would still be able to be "guided" where the mercs overwhelming power cannot be controlled to the same level hence making it unsafe for bendy shenanigans which was what i was trying to convey. Whether its equal to either of the others is for people who are looking to buy any of them and what they want from the car. Cruiser merc. Track machine m3 or safe yet brutally quick RS4.

[shadowninja]

Jimmyb, I don't need to do my homework. I don't care if the Audi corners like an Elise. If I owned a C63 AMG then I would drive within the capabilities of myself and the car, and not try to drive it like an Elise. I also suspect that being RWD and having huge amounts of power, it would be much more entertaining in the corners than the 4WD Audi; going sideways is everything.

Also, it's a psychology thing. If you know your car has super grip and control, you'll drive it harder and faster, which means when it cannot cope, you'll be going a lot quicker and so will make a bigger, more expensive mess. If your car's sliding all over the place at relatively slow speeds, you won't push it as hard and if you do lose it, won't have a problem catching or at least will make a cheap mess.

In fact, all you've done is convinced me that the Mercedes is for me (except I don't actually like the styling).

PS. I used to own a Chimaera that wore Avon ZZ1s... I did many track days in it and only span it a handful of times despite trying to go sideways everywhere. I did not give a toss about lap times.

PPS. You're confusing traction and handling.

Edited by shadowninja on Saturday 29th December 00:28

[stemll]

jimmyb said:

Yes I know the apple test is not scientific however it is an example of the vehicles handling characteristics versus the other two which without there tc systems would still be able to be "guided" where the mercs overwhelming power cannot be controlled to the same level hence making it unsafe for bendy shenanigans which was what i was trying to convey.

Biggest difference in the apple test?

AMG has JC driving, M3 doesn't. Nuff said. He's probably (almost certainly) a better driver than I am but he is no racing driver.

[jimmyb]

shadowninja said:

But in the RS4 if you drive it at 10 tenths, in the twisties, there's a good chance of an insurance claim... you can accelerate like a bugger in the AMG and it's very unlikely you'll crashed or spin the thing.

? ? ? This is what i was responding to which unless i am reading it wrong you believe the merc will have better traction and more chance of staying on the road than the 4wd audi rs4??????????????????????????????????????????

[C2HYM]

Jimmyb by your rekoning the 500Hp E60 M5 should be near impossible to drive then with 50hp more than the C63 going through the same number of wheels. Correct?

And, all the stupid apple test shows, is that the Stig is a far superior driver to Clarkson does it not?

[shadowninja]

jimmyb said:

shadowninja said:

But in the RS4 if you drive it at 10 tenths, in the twisties, there's a good chance of an insurance claim... you can accelerate like a bugger in the AMG and it's very unlikely you'll crashed or spin the thing.

? ? ? This is what i was responding to which unless i am reading it wrong you believe the merc will have better traction and more chance of staying on the road than the 4wd audi rs4??????????????????????????????????????????

Ah, sorry I meant in a straight line; just before, I had mentioned traffic light drag racing and acceleration lanes, which is where most people would benefit from the power in an AMG.

[jimmyb]

C2HYM said:

Jimmyb by your rekoning the 500Hp E60 M5 should be near impossible to drive then with 50hp more than the C63 going through the same number of wheels. Correct?

And, all the stupid apple test shows, is that the Stig is a far superior driver to Clarkson does it not?

No both the m5 and c63 would be fine/brilliant in the straight bits but the m3/m5 is designed and set up from the word go as a sports saloon car whereas the merc is set up as a cruiser as are all mercs. Its the difference between the two manufacturers. BMW build sports saloon cars merc build cruising cars hence why mercs only come in auto (and yes i know you can specify a manual but no one does and thats for a reason).For this reason merc is at a disadvantage from the beginning as they have to make a cruising car into a sports car bmw dont. From what i understand from chatting to a guy who is a complete bmw nut each bmw ordered has a variety of suspension setups depending on how you spec the car although most people dont know about it apparently.

Anyway my point was that shadowninja seemed to think the c63 would thrash the rs4 on TWISTY bits which it wouldnt and couldnt unless merc have come up with some form of anti gravity device as 2wd is never going to be as sure footed as 4wd in the twisty bits or are you going to tell me that they use 4wd in rallying because they havent realised rwd of fwd is going to be better at keeping the car on the road and moving fast

[shadowninja]

No, I didn't. Read my last reply. Try reading it slower.

I think I stated a few times that it's more about going sideways. I don't know why I bother if you're not going to read my replies or just read every 5th word.

Edited by shadowninja on Saturday 29th December 16:12

[jimmyb]

ETA So your argument is that pushed to the limit in the twisties the rs4 would come off the road faster and more spectacularly? Hmmm
Let me see...
RS4 4WD traction control systems you cant fully de activate and understeer biased is going to come off the road faster and more spectacularly than a c63 where you can de activate all electronic aids in a car which is oversteer biased and rear wheel drive and which has more power than god??????

Ok well if thats what you want to believe

Edited by jimmyb on Saturday 29th December 16:36